Net Censorship and Terrorism (NCAT) other acronyms

Latest Update June 7, 2003

by Dan Kettler © 1999-2003


Some of us have been taking action to thwart the efforts of Net Censorship and Terrorism.     Pete Stapleton, in his way, contributes to that by filing a complaint in the Superior Court of the State of California for Libelous Defamation.

Who is doing Net Censorship and Terrorism?
The dictionary definition of the words "censor" and "terrorism" relating to NCAT
The facts about the Newsgroups -- proven through the Dejanews archives.
Edmond H. Wollmann has a web site which at one time showed examples of censorship.
Who's who in alt.paranormal    Overview of the Newsgroup situation
Read debate about whether censorship happens, the definition of "censor," and who does it.

For postings found on linked pages which are noted as having DEJA links, go to  and enter the "From:" address in the space designated author.Enter one of the newsgroups shown in the message header, and some of the text of the posting in the "with the exact phrase" area.    Then, you should find the correct message. Later on, will refine their search procedure.  Google has recently added a "message ID" area.

has acquired the archives of  DEJA, and have committed themselves to restoring user access all the way back to the year 1995.  For more information, click here.

Hate Crimes On The Internet, and the laws that protect people from them

See this page to find out what is abuse of the Net, and abuse on the Net?  What would you sue someone for, or complain to an ISP or the FBI about?

Outline for the information on this page

A      Censorship

    1.  Intimidation

    2.  Deception to Admins

    3.  Filter URLs

    4. Defamation

    5. Cancelled Posts

    6. Charters and FAQs

    7. Thrashing Newsgroups

B      Terrorism

    1. Intimidation Tactics

    2. Lawsuits

    3. Violated Privacy

    4. Harassment

    5. Forged Posts

    6. Threats

The following is the brief description for what is written below in greater detail.

A. Censorship   1.   Censorship by intimidation with ridicule, insults, etc.
                                   This causes people to discontinue writing to

                             2.  Censorship by deception to Admins and the
                                   Internet Service Providers about individuals
                                   This brings temporary or permanent
                                   discontinuation of service.

                                   During the year 2000, numerous bogus complaints
                                   appeared in newsgroups from PSF.  Some are
                                   recorded on this page, asking readers to complain
                                   to INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS (ISPS).
                                   See DEJA NEWS for the archiving of additional
                                   posts not linked at the above page.

Again, in November 2000, complaints
                                   in newsgroups this time turned to complaints to
                                   my INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER.

                                   The Compuserve reference.

                             3.  Censorship by influencing providers of service
                                  to filter out references to URLs, or certain text.

                             4.   Censorship by defamation, causing people who
                                   read the newsgroups to not believe, or read
                                   the writing of the targeted person.  There are
                                   many examples of defamation on the blackmail
                                   page.  The defamation, particularly of Raymond
                        Karczewski and his wife, is nasty.

                                   During March 2000, the fanatics brought a new
                                   intensity to the defamation, and the USENET
                        posts from me clearly illustrate that fact.

                             5.  Censorship by cancellation of posts.

                             6.  Censorship by the writing of lies in charters
                                  and faqs, causing some to be pressured by
                                  others to comply with non-existent rules that
                                  censor one's writing.

                             7.  Censorship by the complete trashing of newsgroups
                                  so that advocates do not want to particpate, bringing
                                  the newsgroups to a condition of being overrun by
                                  fanatics.  It's discussed on this linked page.

In all the above examples, I am referring to unlawful acts.  If posts are cancelled because of legitimate violations, if one insults/ridicules another in retaliation with the
truth, or there are legitimate complaints to Internet Service Providers so that a person must discontinue violations, that is not censorship.

Then, of course, Net Terrorism as documented with proven examples here, is also censorship.

Some of the 7 types of Censorship are not conclusively proven as having taken place from the activities of Pseudo-Skeptic-Fanatics.  The same is true of Net Terrorism with the 6 types shown.  However, the proofs presented for certain important points are enough to show that Net Censorship and Terrorism (NCAT) from Pseudo-Skeptic-Fantics is a proven fact.

Part A    Censorship

Item 1

This shows what people have written about being discouraged from participation in the alt.paranormal newsgroup.

Item 2:

       There were written complaints to PCI Systems and net abuse newsgroups from Blaine
        Henry (aka "digger") of alleged "spam."  It was proven false by the combination of PCI's
        communication to me denying that his accusations had any merit, and the agreement of posters to NANAU,

       Other censorship attempts with PCI Systems occurred by multiple posters bogus complaints, in 1997.
       All complaints were ignored by PCI Systems, except to notify me that they considered them bogus.  See
   this link  for examples of other posts with complaints about alleged violations, asking readers to complain
       to ISPS.

     Again, in November 2000, bogus complaints in newsgroups this time turned to e-mail to my
     INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER from Blaine Henry and others.   Here are copies of the
     correspondence, and the discussion that came about afterward in newsgroups.

Again, in May 2003, bogus complaints in newsgroups this time turned to e-mail to my
     INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER from Widdershins and others.   Here are copies
     of the discussion that came about afterward in newsgroups.

    This is the Compuserve reference.

Item 3

E-mail was written to RemarQ, claiming commercial purposes for my posting references to my web pages.  I contacted RemarQ and they eventually removed the filters (and sent an e-mail message to me confirming that fact) which had automatically banned my mention of "" or any variation of it.  Then, I resumed posting references to my web page which exposes the deceptive, cult-like, activites of these censors.  Bob Officer wrote repeatedly to the newsgroup: (NANAU) to have me censored and prevent my telling of that web page and another with advice for others to repost.  On Aug. 10, 1999, I wrote to NANAU, and showed how the twisted "rules" of Bob Officer were complete nonsense.  There was a reply from Bob Officer, and a short dialogue continued, but the points I proved with facts and logic are shown correct by the continued policy of posts not being legally cancellable.  See this link and this for details.

Other pages, not entirely related to the censorship issue,  show examples that give insight into the character of Bob Officer.

Item 4:

Defamation is a form of censorship, since those reading about the person will tend to either not believe that person, or they will not read what
the person has written. The defamation I refer to, here, consists of lies.  If I find that the writing of another is, obviously, bigotry, and I call it that, it is not censorship.  As an example, If someone writes that supposedly my "peers" voted me as "kook," and  the fact is that pseudo-skeptic fanatics (not my "peers") did, then this is a form of censorship.

If someone writes that I was "elected" by Usenet as a "kook" when less than 1/100 of 1 percent of Usenet said I was a "kook," that that is lying defamation and a form of censorship.  I have been repeatedly defamed on Usenet with lies, such as false accusations of "spam" and "pornography," all proven untrue.

Accusations of fraud, on my part, abounded in newsgroups. The reader can see how I confronted the accusers, and defeated them with law, logic, and provable facts. GOOGLE's search filter shows the use of the word "fraud" in my most recent posts.

Alleged pornography

The incoherency accusation has been repeated many times, each time proven false, yet repeated again and again.

                       Alleged incoherence

For other accusations about me not covered on this page, consult thearchives of  my past posts by selecting these addresses as "author."  Then, to find the truth or falsehood of certain accusations, find other appropriate USENET postings in

I was accused of being bigoted against the Irish because I addressed someone named "Mick" by name.  "Mick" is a derogatory term for Irish people.

I was accused of hating blind people because I spoke of someone being spiritually "blind," and what I'd written previously was obviously figurative.

Even though I corrected the persons making the accusations a number of times, proving each time that such allegations were obviously
false, they repeated the lies.

Repeated accusations of Edmond H. Wollmann and I as
"kooks" is defamation, and therefore a form of censorship.

This is an example from Lou Minatti, using "kook" as a censoring tool

During March 2000, the intensity of defamation is clearly illustrated in these references.

Item 5:

Another form of censorship is the cancellation of posts.   Cancellation is not always purposeful censorship.

Item 6:

The DEJANEWS archives also show these censorship attempts in "digger's" writing about an alleged charter.
This is about the alt.astrology.metapsych charter, and this link from the referenced page gives one example
of how such phony charters are used as tools of censorship.   This debate reveals deception on the part
of FAQ writers, and writers of alleged charters.

Item 7:

The manner that fanatics ruin the appearance, and appeal, of newsgroups is discussed on this linked page.

During September 1999, an Admin, Howard Goldstein publicly discussed preventing certain postings from appearing, particularly reposts.  This was to affect not only me, but others as well.  He wrote of automatically cancelling posts.

In Usenet Posts, Howard Goldstein twisted what this NCAT page says.  Here are some of his words, and mine too.


Part B     Net Terrorism --- another form of censorship

Net terrorism consists of one or more of the following...
1. Intimidation Tactics

        a. These are threats of, and/or actually exposing a person's real or false
             past if/when they do not change Internet activity.  This may include a
             person's criminal, motor vehicle, or financial history including bankruptcy.

        b. These are threats of, and/or actually addressing law enforcement
             authorities, financial institutions, or employers, telling them of alleged
             suspicions, or actual facts that could be investigated, and attempting
             to get the person to lose their bank's confidence, or their employment,.
These threats can also be about people losing their freedom because
             of committment to a mental institution, or incarceration in prison.

c. E-mail spamming as a threat, and a method of attempting control.

2.  Threats of, or actual frivolous lawsuits over net activity
      (to sue a person without a substantial case)

These are called "harassment" suits.  In the USA, suits can be initiated which
cause great hardship to the person defending, and there is little cost to the person
initiating them.

3.   Repeatedly posting or placing unwanted home addresses and phone numbers on
       the Internet (Usenet and the World Wide Web) for the implied, or stated purpose
       of intimidation.

       Here is a comment about such activity.

4.   Harassing/threatening telephone calls, e-mail, or regular mail about Net activity

5.Forged posts which falsely depict people as against a particular group.

      Though the examples given are not of particularly dangerous groups, people
      who have written or stated public opposition to the activities of other groups
      have been murdered.  A talk-show host was shot and killed decades ago, and
      that gave good cause for other talk-show hosts to excercize care with their

   Other forged posts depict the person's alleged writing as stupid,
      crude, or excessively hostile.  This can also be false accusations that
      a person is the illegal canceller of posts.

6. Threats of, or actual physical violence/murder to prevent a person from
      posting, or for revenge.

Who is doing this Net Censorship and Terrorism?

A discussion about the above described activities took place in Usenet Newsgroups.  It was alleged that
proponents of the paranormal/astrology such as Edmond H. Wollmann, Lucianarchy, and Raymond Karczewski
had taken part in the above described censorship and terrorism.  I refuted those allegations on this linked page.
The activities described above are from pseudo-skeptic-fanatics.  I imagine some proponents have done the
above, as there are fanatics from every point of view.  In alt.paranormal/alt.astrology, however, the major activity
described above is from these particular fanatics, the pseudo-skeptic variety.