Sunday, April 24, 2005

The Wicked Wikipedians -- What they are saying and doing today

Just a little Sunday afternoon diversion in case you wondered what the wicked Wikipedians are up to. We all know our "friend" SqueakBox who likes to come over here and post and has his own blogs:

These guys (provided there is more than one of them and provided that they are truthful, which is probably debatable) are saying some interesting things. First of all, Hierarchypedia (David?) has claimed that he is a member in good standing of the Bohemian Grove -- Hierarchypedia is either SqueakBox's sockpuppet, or they are VERY GOOD FRIENDS?? At any rate, since these fine guys are into 'illumination,' I thought I would shed a little more light on them than they sought by cut and pasting their online boastings about how they are getting the best of Yours Truly by not enticing her fully into their wicked wikipedia process -- is this something like saying "rubber baby buggy bumpers" 5 times real fast, or "how many chips could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck chips?"

"You could try Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Cumbey; someone wanted to take it to arbcom a week back but then withdrew, and since then it is off the burner. In someone ways Cumbey is a pretty harmless nut. She can't be bothered to learn how to use the system, hence she never looked at your and my contribs, from which I am sure anyone could work out you are not my sockpuppet (if you made your first edit before 19/10/04 I would strictly be your sockpuppet) but it also means she doesn't know how to set up an Rfc herself alleging that you are my sockpuppet, without which noone will listen to her. Interestingly even if you were my sockpuppet that would have been okay by wikipedia rules before today because our paths have not crossed and I could not be accused of using you to unjustly affect wikipedia process. The idea that i would use you as a sockpuppet to influence a vote that doesn't need influencing in the keep direction (Constance E. Cumbey) is ridicuklous. I would describe Cumbey as a very lazy user who will never be capable of anything much, and that she just has to be tolerated. But if you want to take it to arbcom by all means have a go! --SqueakBox 22:02, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)
Retrieved from ""

The following is from Hierarchypedia's user page:

> I removed some of the names you put up as Bohemian Club members. They were only atendees of > Bohemian Grove (members of their respective camps). Not everyone who goes to Bohemian Grove is > a member of the club. --Hierarchypedia 13:11, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Could you provide a source for your claims?
In order to become a member of a camp, you have to be a member of the club, which owns the grove. You can be a guest to the encampment, but you do not become a member of a camp by becoming a guest.
My source of the members is the membership roster that is distributed among members only of which I am one. For example, Colin Powell is a Non-Resident member of the club, and is a member of the Mandalay Camp. Donald Rumsfeld and Walter Cronkite are also Non-Resident members of the club, while George H.W. Bush is an Honorary Member, while Robert Weir is a Professional Member. All four are members of the Hillbillies Camp. The late Herbert Hoover and Richard Nixon were members of the Caveman Camp, and both were long-time members of the club.

Have fun boys! When you are ready to become adults, please let us all know!


Cumbey, you are slowing down. You missed SqueakBox's #3 gem of a kneepad homage to Solana at In his profile there he states he likes Dennis Wheatley novels. Wheatley is a heavy duty occult writer. One poster at had this to say
Many years ago I bought and read several novels authored by a guy named Dennis Wheatly. Althought they are all fictional works, in each and every one, on the opening page, he placed the following warning:

I desire to state that I, personally, have never assisted at, or participated in, any ceremony connected with Magic—Black or White.

The literature of occultism is so immense that any conscientious writer can obtain from it abundant material for the background of a romance such as this.

In the present case I have spared no pains- to secure accuracy of detail from existing accounts when describing magical rites or formulas for protection against evil, and these have been verified in conversation with certain persons, sought out for that purpose who are actual practitioners of the Art.

All the characters and situations in this book are entirely imaginary but, in the inquiry necessary to the writing of it, I found ample evidence that Black Magic is still practiced in London, and other cities, at the present day.

Should any of my readers incline to a serious study of the subject, and thus come into contact with a man or a woman of Power, I feel that it is only right to urge them, most strongly, to refrain from being drawn into the practice of the Secret Art in any way. My own observations have led me to an absolute conviction that to do so would bring them into dangers of a very real and concrete nature.

Dennis Wheatley
and at we find the comment: If you’ve ever enjoyed those lurid Dennis Wheatly or Sax Rohmer novels from the early 20th century, but winced at the racism, sexism, and creedism embedded in them.....

So now we get to know more about Squeakbox by knowing which books he likes.
I would suggest that no one with a sense of decency go to the link posted in comment #2. Whoever posted the link enjoys pornography.
English thrillers are what I like. Not all Wheatley's books were occult, and the occult does not interest me at all. I can't figure out the hierarchypedia connection Connie is going on about at all?
SqueakBox, at this point your reputation as one who can be trusted to tell the truth is very, very tattered. If your reputation was a dropcloth, it couldn't catch elephants.
I'm going to disagree with you on this one, Constance.

Hierarchypedia is not a member of the Bohemian Club. I have regular communications with him. He lives meakly in England and does extraordinary work in geneaology and publishes his results on the net. He is the creator of
Hierarchypedia is just an extension of the work he has unconcovered in his peerage investigations.

The guy who said that he was a member of BC quoted Hierarchypedia, and his edit of the entry. No username is giving, so it kind of funny. But if you look at the excerpt you produced it is plain to see that it is someone else who is peeved at Hierarchypedia, and explaining why he disagrees with him by claiming membership himself.
Terry, Note at the website you :
Due to lack of interest this site will not be updated. It will remain online until the domain expires in May 2006.

Although geneologies on the website look like a lot of hard work, they always appear to me like homeopathic medicine where something that is diluted down to almost nothing is thought to be the most powerful.

I guess between SqueakBox and the peerage he isn't picky and does cover the range of human nature.
The author of blue-blood is compiling a book of his investigations. The website certainly has had a lack of interest and maintaining and updating a website costs money.

It may very well appear like "homeopathic medicine" to some people, but Geneology is hard work and he has indeed uncovered some startling facts.

As far as the User talk:Hierarchypedia page. There is only one entry that is attibuted to Hierarchypedia himself. The rest has been written by others, and it is present on his "user page" for the mere fact that his name is mentioned in the entries of these people. I'm certainly not an expert on Wikis, but I am a web professional and use the technology and programming behind the Wiki on a daily basis. The keyword "Hierarchypedia" is simply searched on throughout the whole site and the results are displayed. It's not any more sinister that that.
Hello. Thanks Terry for the clarification on who I am. I have however decided to work on again, and hope to update it soon. It also says I will shut down Hierarchypedia down without donations, but I cannot do this either, it will be here for good.
I do hope you continue the sites. I know Hierarchypedia has become quite popular lately but I still think your blue-blood project is phenomenal. I have linked both sites, and they are invaluable.

I think it needs clarification, though: Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the Bohemian Club?
Wikipedia has a trade off relationship with Hierarchypedia.
"Hierarchypedia is a free-content encyclopaedia that was launched on 6 October 2004. Our aim is to provide reliable information relating to power structures and ideology. See the relevant articles page to see topics covered by Hierarchypedia. It is run by ( and hosted by WebsiteUnited ("

Based on H's post on SqueakBox's talk page at Wiki, it is obvious he was in contact with SB prior to the post and had jumped to some very nasty conclusions based on nothing but hot air, publicly creating rumors. There is no excuse for this no matter how much you appreciate his research.

It is totally impossible to keep up with all of the behind the scenes websites of Wikipedia. Not only are there dozens of paaages meant only for administrators and editors that are found by chance, there are many mirror sites which are hidden behind website names that have no apparent connection with Wikipedia. In addition, Wiki has offshoots of the organization itself. For the unwary, Wikipedia is a real danger.
On my frequent trips to San Francisco I do enjoy popping into see my friends at the Bohemian Club, Father Bush, Rumsfeld and Co.

Only joking. I don't think I am even old enough to be a member. I have never been to San Francisco, and don't have the $10,000 to be inducted. I do however posses five of their internal publications, the Annals, Vol. 5, 6 and 7, a history and a 1957 club book with full membership up to that time.

Cumbey has either misread my talk page or has deliberately fingered me as a Bohemian, when it is clear that the person who contacted me is the Bohemian.

As for my association with SqueakBox. I was first drawn into this fiasco when I politely informed the global elite wiki that they need to have a license at the bottom on pages from Wikipedia. Cumbey accused me of threatening the site with copyright infringement, and posted unfavourably about SqueakBox. So I at first thought that SqueakBox was up to no good. I latter found out about the harassment and vandalism of Cumbey, and further false accusations, and recent vandalism on Hierarchypedia, which I believe to be the work of Cumbey.

The reason I have been in contact with him is that he has been level headed, while Cumbey has been anything but. It is not because we are Wiki conspirators against Cumbey.
Hierarchypedia has no connection with Wikipedia. It uses the same script that is all. I do however model the site on Wikipedia, most importantly no point of view, such as Solana being the anti-christ.

Thanks for the links Terry. They are one of the biggest links in. I will add you at some point.
Full name: David Jonathan Hopkins
Date of Birth: 14 June 1986
From the Website.

David you are excused as being wet behind the ears. You need more than a few years to understand how the conspiracy industry networks and to learn how the big boys operate. Right now you are at the level of the sweeties in the peace movement who carry peace signs and hit women. (See littlegreenfootballs today.)
At least I do not hide myself. I don't spesificly research conspiracy and have never said I do. I rather do factual research and let others make their own judgements. Being young doesn't mean you do not have knowledge and I am very good at what I do.

PS: I don't appreciate you pasting my details here. Especially as you do not reveal yourself.
David Wrote:
"I was first drawn into this fiasco when I politely informed the global elite wiki that they need to have a license at the bottom on pages from Wikipedia."

I really hate mudslinging, but the Global Elite site (not to be confused with their wiki site, though they are run by the same people) uses PostNuke, and they don't follow the the PostNuke license either. Now I could be wrong, they could have indeed paid for their own copy to the guy who made the tool (thus allowing them to omit the copyright notice). It's only a measily 15 or 20 bucks so it's possible.

Last year, I went to the Global Elite forum and noticed they had posted an article that I had written on Lucis Trust without attributing my site. So, I had to sign up for a membership to post to the forums and ask for a correction and at least put a link to the source. I wisely made a new email account and signed up with that one. Within a few minutes, literally, the spam started rolling in and continued for months until I deleted the account. I had only just made the thing and no one on the planet even knew that the address existed.

That's my testimony, from that day on I have always been weary of that site. Perhaps the email was harvested by spam bots in a matter of minutes after I posted to the forums. Could be. Highly unlikely, though.

Constance, you might want to inform the "The Revolutionist", the author of this piece on the Skull and Bones, that his entire entry is plagiarized from Kris Millegan's seminal work: Everything You Wanted to Know About the Skull & Bones But Were Afraid to Ask. It's an internet classic and has stood the test of time since 1996. Anyone who knows anything about the Skull and Bones will recognize that "The Revolutionist" has lifted his entire Global Elite entry from Kris' work, word-for-word.

Now if any malice is perceived from my comment, so be it. None was intended and I could care less about all the bickering between the "Wikipedians" and their arch enemies! I thought I should at least relate the story about Global Elite, my email and the spam I received. The most important thing is that the Skull and Bones entry needs to be corrected. Many have reposted his essay throughout various sites over the years, myself included. I asked permission back in 2000 - when I had a Geocities site - to repost his piece. His name has always been cited as the author, and in the beginning I even had his email posted with it ... no doubt, he had received much spam because of it and has since deleted the account :)
I agree that a lot of the content from global elite wiki is simply copy and pasted, and that any site that does so is'nt a valuable resource. Also a lot of the articles on Disinfopedia (now Sourcewatch) are simply copy and pasted. As far as I'm concerned they aren't even worth reading. On Hierarchypedia I have made sure articles are of a high standard, althought some of the older ones could do with a re-write.

As for what you say about the spam. Unless the email is displayed in the forum you shouldn't get spam.

And as for the wikipedia fiasco, can we not put it to rest?
David Hopkins, hasn't your contact with the aristocracy taught you any manners? You come to Cumbey's blog, slander her, slander her at Wiki and then say let's forget about it. Shameful. The experience reflects poorly on your research skills as well as your ability to judge your friends.
I have not slandered Cumbey here. If anyone is being slandered it is me, being labeled as Wicked, a member of the Bohemian Club, and vandalism of Hierarchypedia, which I believe to be by Cumbey, as it is in line with her accusations that SqueakBox loves the pot. My only involvement in this is that I told to admin at global elite wiki that they needed to liscence the article. Ever since then I have been attacked as being the same person as SqueakBox. I am simply trying to end this whole fiasco.
Also I would like to point out that I haven't made any negative comments about Cumbey until I recently described her as crazy in a message to SqueakBox. I think it is warranted that I should say this after she has:

*falsely accused me of threats at global elite wiki
*falsely accused me of hacking into the Wikipedia database
*repeatedly falsely accused me of being SqueakBoxe's sock puppet
*falsely accused me of being a member of the Bohemian Club
*labelling me a wicked Wikipedian
*vandalising Hierarchypedia

Despite this I have never taken any action against her. I saw it better to stay out of such a stupid matter.

I had opportunities to take action against her but declined them. I was invited to comment on her accusation that I am a Sock puppet to Jimbo Wales and declined to comment on the comment on Cumbey page. This was simply as I wished to stay out of this, but she persists that I am wicked etc. So this has prompted me to make her recognise that I am not SqueakBox and for her to stop dragging my name through the mud.

Your defence of Cumbey against me is based on no facts, but your friendship.
Also where is my slander of Cumbey here?

There is none. You made it up. So it is you who has poor research skills.
For the record. I have never committed any "vandalism" whatsoever, either at Wikipedia or at any other site. There has been massive vandalism by SqueakBox (Billy Weiss?) who unfortunately was teamed up and ratified by two young men who by seeing his big lie so often took it for gospel. One names himself "One Salient Oversight' and the other "Hierarchypedia." I was NEVER to Hierarchypedia's website in any form whatsoever, indeed I did not know it existed. I thought he was what SqueakBox represented him to be -- a person of great editorial standing at Wiki Global Elite. I think the whole thing needs to cool and that both One Salient Oversight and Hierarchypedia need to learn discernment. Use common sense -- Would I really have an army of IP numbers such as SqueakBox claims? Would I really be able to get to your site under SqueakBox's names and use the obscene language that SqueakBox claims was posted there. Read SqueakBox's near idolatrous pages on Javier Solana and you will learn his only god is not "Haile Selassie" as he claims -- he obviously also must worship Solana himself! I never want to kill a young spirit -- but learn to look before you leap! That's all.
You are just feeding their egos.
Don't feed the trolls.
Ah littie David, for someone who claims to want to leave the wiki problem behind, you certainly have gone to stir up the pot at another page on Wiki today. You are one creepy little kid.
need better research
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]