Friday, February 12, 2010

Who is this Karmafish and Why?

Today, I'm going to write about a DailyKos and MyLeftWing participant who goes by the name of "Karmafish." I am only going to write about him because my Truth About Kos Site Meter tells me that people are Googling "Karmafish" and coming to my Truth About Kos blog looking for information about him.

I can only tell you about my contact with this screenname, whoever he is, and you can learn more by Googling for "francislholland" and "Karmafish" at Google and reviewing the nature of my interaction, over a couple of years, with this screenname.

Karmafish said at MyLeftWing, in comments to a blog post called, "If Francis is Right About Markos,"which post was written by Isaiah58:1-12:
I did not come here [MLF] to silence Holland. (9.00 / 2)
I came here to fight with him, to argue with him, to point out as many of his lies and obfuscations and insinuations and exaggerations as I could, because I believe he is dishonest.Photobucket

Lord of the Karmafishes

[ Parent ] (Red emphasis added.)
Why would Karmafish want to fight with a person like me, when I played a crucial rule in exposing MAMZ's connection to the CIA, and that connection was then reported as news by at least five dozen blogs (see links in ride sidebar to articles published at other blogs and citing Truth About Kos)? Now there are almost 1.5 MILLION hits at Google for the search "Kos" and "CIA."

Once MAMZ attacked in the pages of the Washington Post the only 2008 presidential candidate who was not a white man (Hillary Clinton) , I found myself on a mission to combat MAMZ' and his minions' attacks on Hillary Clinton and to spread the truth (good and bad) about Hillary Clinton at DailyKos and elsewhere.

That's when I discovered that my proposed activities were not considered a legitimate part of the whitosphere's discussion of the 2008 presidential race. The conversation in the comments between Karmafish and Socrates at this Karmafish blog post is illustrative of the response I got to the investigation and discrediting of MAMZ as a political figure.

When I discovered that leader of the DailyKos "Kossacks" had served at the CIA, the news was disseminated far and wide by bloggers who found this troubling, to say the very least. Karmafish disagreed with me and at least five dozen other bloggers about the importance of whether or not one of the ostensible leaders of the whitosphere is "a CIA operative or not." He said in a post entitled, "If Francis is Right About Markos,"

Whether Markos is a CIA operative or not, it will not keep me from working on progressive causes or making connections with progressive people I meet on his site or anyone elses.

So, what are the implications if Francis is right about Markos. For me there aren't any that could affect my work on progressive causes. "If Francis is Right About Markos,"
So, Karmafish can comfortably continue participating at a blog even if he knows that the owner and strategist is "an operative" of the CIA? How can the Left effective rise up against imperialism and foreign adventures effectuated by the CIA if the man leading the charge against the CIA is actually working for the CIA. The man proposing to "crash the gates" is actually in the employ of the Government that owns the gates. The real question is the degree to which the whitosphere, afrosphere and latinosphere have been infiltrated and manipulated by the federal government.

I really have to admit that I couldn't care less about whoever Karmafish is and I am not going to investigate his motives. His arguments against me at MyLeftWing often invited and prompted me to search for additional avenues in my investigation of the history, politics and family of Markos C. Alberto Moulitsas Zúñiga (whom I call MAMZ because (a) those are his initials, and (b) it is easier to write MAMZ "than" to write "Markos C. Alberto Moulitsas Zúñiga"). If MAMZ's initials are insulting, then I believe that's something his parents should have addressed when they were writing his name on his birth certificate.

With research of documents written in Spanish and available through Salvadoran Government websites, commercial websites and online newspapers, I was able to discover and explain why MAMZ is so adamant that "ZÙÑIGA" is not an appropriate part of his name to be used in referring to him. The initials "MAMZ," in turn, remind the public why it is essential to keep the remember MAMZ's second surname in order to research and understand his background. "The Indictment of Markos C. Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA by Justice and History (Updated with Additional Information and Counts)"

Yes, Karmafish's arguments against me at MyLeftWing gave me more avenues to follow in my investigation of MAMZ. For example, when Karmafish said that MAMZ did not say he was engaged in "work" at the CIA and only that he was "a trainee," I researched a CIA description of "training" at the CIA which said that trainees "work" alongside experienced CIA personnel. So, if MAMZ was training at the CIA between 2001 and 2003, as is the only conclusion that can be drawn from his own words, then--at least as the CIA defines what "training" means, MAMZ training necessarily included "work."

I am not going to include many links here because they can be found in the column to the right and/or in a distilled investigative piece called, "The Indictment of Markos C. Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA by Justice and History (Updated with Additional Information and Counts)"

You get the picture. I provided facts and links while Karmafish publicly doubted my "credibility" but could not punch a single hole in the citations I presented, which is why we ended up arguing over the semantic difference between MAMZ's "working" and "training" at the CIA for two years. Others such as Conceptual Guerrilla agreed with the inevitable conclusion that MAMZ worked for the CIA at some or all times between 2001 and 2003, and that it was a logical question to ask whether he continues to work for the CIA. The news spread to all corners of the blogosphere, except the mainstream media blogs, where outing CIA agents remains forbidden.

Since so many whitosphere commenters questioned whether "training" constituted or included "work," I wrote an entire article about this silly question of semantics, posting it here and at MyLeftWing.

The truth of the matter is for the "Jury of the Left" to decide. In my opinion, anyone who trusts a once-undercover CIA trainee (2001 until his confession in 2006) is ineligible to participate on a "Jury of the Left." The fact that people at DailyKos and MyLeftWing want to argue over whether "working" and "training" with the CIA are equally suspect makes these blogs themselves suspect.

It's like asserting that 5-year Al Quaeda trainee is more trustworthy than a five-year Al Queda worker. I don't think most Americans would trust either one, and members of both classes would be subjected to "enhanced questioning."

So, if you want to know how Karmafish is, he is a blogger who hounded Francis L. Holland at DailyKos and then followed Francis L. Holland to MyLeftWing with the admitted purpose of defending Markos C. A. Moulitsas Zúñiga from MAMZ's own admission that the trained at the CIA for two years, while starting a "leftist" blog, and did so undercover. Why would Karmafish want to dedicate himself to arguing against this investigation? Why would Karmafish effectively act as a MAMZ-minion, with seemingly unlimited time to devote to defending MAMZ?

This blog is not about Karmafish and so I will leave those questions to someone else to answer. Perhaps someone will start a Truth About Karmafish" blog. But that someone will not be me. Karmafish is just one of many hundreds or thousands of people in the blog world whose purpose is, in broad terms, to prevent the blogosphere from becoming an organizing tool for "radical" groups and demonstrations of the sort that we saw in the 1960's. That's my theory.

It's obvious that I was reporting on something that was news to the blogosphere--including the whitosphere, the afrosphere and even the latinosphere.

My argument with Karmafish, who really stood as a representative of a lot of other people in the whitosphere centered on this: 'Does it matter that the foremost recognized leader of anti-war leftists in the blogosphere was training and working at the CIA simultaneous with starting his DailyKos blog, and while helping to develop strategies to stop the war in Iraq?'

'Does it matter that MAMZ did not see fit to include this two-year training period in his resume (by talking about it at an obscure interview at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco on June 2, 2006), until fully five years after beginning to sell himself to the left as a "leftist"?'

Or is Karmafish correct that it really doesn't matter whether someone is associated with the CIA and seeks to "crash the gates" of the Democratic Party? The entire affair seems more like the script to a silly movie than the demonstrable reality that is DailyKos (see "The Indictment of Markos C. Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA by Justice and History (Updated with Additional Information and Counts)") and much of the whitosphere.

Everyone has a right to an opinion, but I simply don't trust anyone who would train at the CIA without telling the public about it, while selling himself to the public as a leftist and an "outsider" candidate for leader of the Left. There are 262 thousand hits at Google that show a keen public interest in the "Moulitsas" and "CIA" queton.

It seems to me, based on all that I have researched about MAMZ, that he has not been forthcoming about what he was doing at the CIA and why, and the relationship between that "work" and his simultaneous decision to start DailyKos. The public is Googling the same question every day, looking for a straight answer.

Karmafish is what I call a MAMZ-minion. MAMZ minions are people who harrass and try like hell to exile anyone who "bashes" or questions MAMZ, his political past, his family's corporations and political participation in Salvador's oligarchy, including the group ANEP. "The Indictment of Markos C. Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA by Justice and History (Updated with Additional Information and Counts)"

I keep my focus on the big picture. I went to DailyKos in 2006 to argue against the 43-term white male monopoly of the presidency, which initially took the form of advocating for Hillary Clinton, because she was the only candidate who was obviously not a white man. Later, I saw the end of the 43-term white male monopoly of the presidency when Senator Barack Obama was elected president. Whatever Karmafish was trying to accomplish from 2006 until 2008 pales in comparison. Screw him.

I don't know, and I have few facts other than those published here to support my theory, but I believe the US Government will eventually admit that it had more Government-paid bloggers in the whitosphere than there were people who were just there to organize with others and express their opinions. This is a prediction, like my prognostication that the year 2008 would be "time to end the 43-term white male monopoly of the presidency.

The whitosphere squealed like stuck pigs when I told them that neither Al Gore nor John Edwards would make it. I don't expect them to agree today that they are infested with Government agents, but the truth will eventually come out, just as it did about the Co-Intel-Pro campaign to infiltrate, disrupt and jail and/or assassinate members of the Black Panther Party.

I wonder if the truth about the gas chambers in Poland was completely clear worldwide when it was happening? It's clear now!

Correction: Above I stated that the first Karmafish comment excerped here was from a blog written by Karmafish. In fact, as Socrates has pointed out, that blog post was written by Isaiah58:1-12
and then Karmafish (whoever he is)wrote a substantial number of comments pushing a Kos Minion point of view about MAMZ's at least two-year service at the CIA.


socrates said...

Francis, hope you're doing well.

This is an important entry you just made. However, you missed that the diary was written by Isaiah58:1-12 not Karmafish.

I'll probably have more to say. For now, I remember going to MyLeftWing having no idea of its history or how its meltdown led to the creation of Peeder's Political Flesh Feast.

I remember when I first got there, I was aware that Karmafish had been in flame wars with the pro-Palestinian side in the IP debate. But I wasn't sure if he was to blame. I have been vocal about growing anti-semitism on the web but have also pointed out my vigilant opposition to Israeli actions in regards to Palestine.

I am someone who has liked to pour through archives and figure out "meta" after the fact. I was disgusted to see that Karmafish turned out to be a historic troll. And it is beyond disgusting how many in that thread you linked to were spinning you as a possible cointelpro agent. Ridiculous. And then the jackass had the nerve to mention Frantz Fanon in some lame attempt to portray yourself as a disruptor. Progressives do not support the CIA, period. Even if Markos didn't work for the CIA, I think he did or still does or the FBI or something like that and most definitely for rightwing Democratics, the man said the CIA is a liberal institution with its heart in the right place. That makes Markos Moulitsas a first-rate creep and not a progressive. To use a cliche, thanks for all you do.

socrates said...

Hey Francis, thanks for linking to my showdown with KarmaStench. I kicked his ass! It took me a while. I've considered myself a trollbuster since 2006.

It's a big, wide web, so there's always going to be a leaning curve. I never really got into your stuff before that. I didn't start blogging in the soapblox world until the beginning of 2009.

Too bad DaveFromQueens died. He was probably our best bet to eventually get a super forum in place.

I'll give Maryscott a bit of credit for not deleting our posts. But that's about it.

I may be the first person in history to be permanently banned from MLW. I think you could return. That would be kind of funny. Maybe just don't say Kos worked for the CIA or was tied to death squads. Just put up all the facts which explain that on their own. I wouldn't blame you, if you don't consider it.

Man, I think I done good on pointing out the sick number of posts that KarmaFish had made over only a few years, well over 10,000 posts, not sure. I don't think I could post 3,000 in a year if I tried, unless most of them were chit-chat like.

Also, he made a big deal out of you saying someone called you the N word. But you clearly were called a monkey. With that and other points I made, no one debunked my content. The beautiful thing about this is that the reader decides.

Of course the internet is rigged. It's been proven. I won't spam your forum with my finds. But it's the truth. To quote Arthur Gilroy, "Bet on it."

Francis L. Holland Blog said...


I continue to believe, based on what someone said in comments, that in the invisible chat room that only TU's can see, somebody called me the "N" word. I believe that because someone who had access to those private comments said so.

Like you said, the difference between "monkey" and the "N" word is like the difference between training and getting paid for two years service at the CIA (MAMZ) and "working" for the CIA.

Exiling someone because of his belief that he was called the "N" word seems perverse. When they started to call me Chris, they were referring to another Black lawyer who had been exiled from DailyKos, and that was basically a dog-whistle for everyone to pile on and endeavor to get rid of me on the theory that I had already been banned once and shouldn't have been posting there at all.

You said,

And then the jackass had the nerve to mention Frantz Fanon

That was the jackass's way of saying that he doesn't dislike all Black people, and he even admires some Black revolutionaries, but he dislikes me,and it's not because of the color of my skin.

Maybe he disliked me because he and many more people in the whitosphere realized that the fact of MAMZ's having worked for the CIA was becoming common knowledge among liberal and leftist blogs.

There are 262,000 hits at Google for "Moulitsas" and "CIA".

I know that's in large part because of my efforts to uncover MAMZ, because the first hit is the article I wrote at MyLeftWing, entitled, "Markos Moulitsas Admits WANTING TO Work for the CIA"

MyLeftWing acknowledged that MAMZ was at the CIA for two years, but said that it was a "lie" to say the he "worked" there. In MAMZ own speech at the Commonwealth Club, he said he went to the CIA because he was "unemployed, underemployed." If it was the lack of money that sent MAMZ to the CIA for TWO YEARS, we have to assume that part of his reason for going the fact that they would pay him for his time. Otherwise it is inexplicable that he said that he went there because he was "unemployed, underemployed."

The fact is that all of the information we have about this comes out of the mouth of MAMZ himself. If MAMZ doesn't want to be misinterpreted, then should personally explain what he was doing at the CIA for TWO YEARS, whether he was paid for his "work", and if he wasn't paid then we need to know how he paid for him room and board during those two years.

socrates said...

Thanks for the response.

I don't think Maryscott O'Connor is a paid fake as in cointelpro. I think she simply got in over her head. Her schtick was somewhat entertaining when it first developed, but she never evolved as a writer. She also made horrible administrative decisions, especially with the banning of yourself. Ironically, at the same time you were getting gang trolled on at MLW, a poster named ThereIsNoSpoon was getting a free ride from MSOC. By the way, his nickname evolved into ThereIsNoRape, for good reason, but that's probably a topic for another day.

Karmafish, Curmudgette, City Duck, and others, on the other hand, give reason to believe they may indeed be receiving a paycheck for their postings. I could see some sincerity, even if wrong, in people arguing against your diaries on Kos at that time, 2007ish. However, the extent those folks were going to attack you crossed the line.

There's that Shakespearean phrase I think, methinks you doth protest too much. That kind of thing.

I do agree with you that it's quite possible the "N" word can be found in the hidden section or has since been deleted completely. Anyway, it's not like you kept talking about that too much. And the use of the monkey word, I saw that. A bunch of folks had the gall to act like it didn't mean anything racist. Puhleeze. Give me a break.

Granted, Kos is fairly cool in that he doesn't make wholesale deletions. Of course, as you saw with some of my zombie account threads promoting your work, 99% of all comments were ridicule, even though nothing I posted was malicious or untrue. So it's nothing too admirable that there isn't a lot of censorship. There doesn't need to be much scrubbing. The illusion that it is community moderated and nothing ever gets deleted gives Kos a bit of gravitas in comparison to blogs that do scrub and prune. Though no need for any of us to worry about DKos having any credibility. It has really tanked in popularity over the years. You deserve a lot of credit for that. And a whole website was created precisely because MSOC banned you, called the Political Flesh Feast. That should make you a bit happy that not all us whiteys were blind to the awful treatment you received at DKos and MLW. Though I came on the scene much later, as one can tell by reading the evolution of that thread you linked to. One can see I was figuring a lot of the backstory out in real time.

I did notice that reference to a Chris person.


socrates said...

I see there is a Chris at this link. Is that the same dude? So I take it Kos "minions" were trying to astroturf that Chris was your sock puppet? His subscription page is still available. If that's the same guy, it appears he wasn't banned. He even wrote a diary in 2009. I'm not trying to make you look bad, just watching your back, so to speak.

Idi Amin had one of those "Frantz Fanon" moments. He said some of his best friends were Jewish. That didn't stop him from taking all those hostages at Entebbe.

I think part of the reason you got knocked out of DKos was because you supported Hillary. It didn't fit their model. In their racist minds, an African-American would be supporting Obama. I fell for the Obama schtick. He sold me on that hope model. Though a bit before the election, I started to see he was kind of old-school in regards to illegal wars and his ideas about FISA were unsettling.

Plus, you also wrote some good stuff singling out the white bread nature of DKos and the strange amount of atheists participating there.

Karmafish's single-minded pursuit of you was very odd. If he wasn't being paid to do that, he fits into the useful idiot category.

As for your ideas about it is on Kos to explain himself, not yourself, that is 100% the truth. I think he simply messed up with the Commonwealth Club interview. I don't think he realised that folks would have such access to it, or that it would prove to be his undoing. Progressives do not support the CIA, period.

I busted an internet personality named Tinoire. While it wasn't near the finds you have come up with, I found a post of hers at an obscure Ronald Reagan forum admitting to having been in military intelligence. That didn't stop her from astroturfing the idea that she was far left while supporting a right wing fascist named Michael Rivero and Republican Ron Paul.

Anyway, sorry if I rambled too much. Your work has been appreciated by many, has made a big difference in white-o-sphere history, and you should feel very proud of yourself. Excellent job. You've been vindicated. You won. They lost.

Francis L. Holland Blog said...

One of my first diaries at DailyKos was called, "Whacking the Hive: A Hillary Supporter at DK",or something to that effect.

It attracted a few hundred comments, which was one of my goals. (Saying something intelligent doesn't mean much unless somebody hears it.)

You said,

"Your work has been appreciated by many, has made a big difference in white-o-sphere history, and you should feel very proud of yourself. Excellent job. You've been vindicated. You won. They lost."

Thanks for the encouragement.

socrates said...

Francis, remember Ormond Otvos who sent you that strange email warning you about getting banned from DKos?

I looked into his past. He used to run something called Hippie Mission in Spokane in 1967. He said they weren't into protesting, that their main function would be to spread information about drugs. He said the Vietnam War wasn't a war.

You wouldn't believe the amount of nonsense he has blogged. He loves atheism and eugenics. He also has made racist comments. I can give you a link to my finds.

I think you got banned from DKos more because of skin colour than for supporting Hillary. The time he wrote you was when you had been called a monkey.

No matter how much I reread his email to you, I can't figure it out. He implied that your blogging was making it worse for Hillary, and even more bizarre, that you were doing it on purpose, like Ormond was playing mind games with you. He said you were risking the appearance of being a Republican infiltrator. He even used the word agent, if I'm not mistaken. I'm not exactly sure what he was trying to accomplish with the drivel he sent you. This was before you exposed Kos at MLW. Maybe it was his job to try to create a relationship with you and influence your blogging. Good thing you didn't develop a relationship with him. He could very well be a disinfo writer.

I think he might have also been a poster named kidneystones, but I admit I have no proof of that. Both of them prefer the word coloured over African-American. Their writing styles are somewhat similar.

His Dad was a bigwig in the Navy. I think what got you into trouble was standing up proud as an African-American in the whiteosphere. And it wasn't like they could say you were being racist, otherwise you wouldn't have been promoting Hillary's candidacy over Obama's. Take it easy.

Francis L. Holland Blog said...


Again, thanks for the encouragement and the and for telling us what you've found when you look into the backgrounds of people in the whitosphere. It's obvious by now that a whole lot of (previously?) very conservative people are participating in the whitosphere and assuring that the whitosphere never does anything like what we Blacks did when we encouraged some 30,000 Blacks to go to Jena, Louisiana to oppose handing nooses on public property and to prevent five Black adolescents from spending twenty years or more in jail because the eventually beat up one the kids known to be associated with the kids who hung the nooses, if not one of them himself.

It's obvious to me now that white and Black blogger communities have been infiltrated and many bloggers are CIA agents or assets. One of the branches of the US Armed Forces even acknowledges that they have "300,000" enlisted people trained and participating in the blog world to provide "truthful" information and oppose those who disseminate other information that discredits US Government efforts. (I wrote about this here before and anyone can find it by Googling something like "Defense Department" + "blogger" together.

Trying to discover and fight everyone who a CIA agent or asset is like trying to fight all of the weeds in America and all of the weeds oversees. We can't accomplish that. But if we can encourage people not to automatically believe everything they read, here or anywhere else, but instead to do some critical thinking of their own, then we have done what we could, I think.

For example, why did MAMZ attack Hillary Clinton in an op-ed in the Washington Post in 2006 (see google)? Was it because the most likely and powerful candidate was a woman, or was it because MAMZ wanted to sabotage the election, regardless of who the candidate was.

Or, most likely, was MAMZ trying to establish his credibility as a "leftist" by attacking someone and calling them too conservative? If you look at MAMZ's history of attacking and challenging others, you can perceive it all as any attempt to convince the American Left that he's a leftist himself, in spite of his two years training with the CIA and all of the other holes that we've punched in his cover story.