The CyberBullies: How Far Will They Go. 1
One of the problems that the Cyberharrasers always face is credibility. They tell so many lies and misrepresent things in such an obvious way that they are constantly getting caught in their own webs of deceit.
This motivates them to go further and further in their deceptions and will often go as far as actually framing people in a desperate bid to prove their false allegations.
Here is one example of the lengths that they will go to in order to deceive people.
Michael Babcock likes to pick up free or purchased domain names using some of our names.
He's done this to me and two other people that I know of.
He then creates a web site under the targets name to either post defamatory libel, lies and other deceptive information on or to engage in a deception by impersonating the person he's targeted.
In my case and in one other persons case the web site contained defamatory libel, lies, and other deceptions.
The sites were hosted on his hosting sites. One was hosted on an anti-pedophilia activists site after he got conned by Antonio aka Kree into believing the lies he was spreading. He eventually saw reason and shut it down. All of the other sites were shut down for Abuse of TOS including the following one listed using my name.
There is only one site remaining where he used the third person's name.
On this site, he iFramed it to point to a pro-Pedophile site which had been created by a completely independent party unknown to any of us, and then distributed it around Facebook as his so-called evidence that this person was a pedophile. He and others continue to use this fabricated evidence to attack this person.
Since most people being approached don't know this person, it's not obvious to them that it isn't his site. This gives Babcock and the others a vehicle which has shock value, with which to spread their lies and drum up hysteria not only against this person but against all of us who associate with him. Guilt by association.
So, the deception goes like this: 'we've proven he's a pedo therefore everything else we're saying must be true and anyone who associates with him is a pedo enabler and defender'.
Now I can't give you the link because it uses the targeted persons name and he has asked that I not use his name in blogs that I write on this topic. So I can't direct you to the actual site so that you can see the evidence for yourself.
It's unfortunate that people don't realize that their best defense is to have information out there under their name that counters the lies that are already out there under their name, since everyone does use Google to fact-check.
However, I am respecting his request.
So what I will show you is a screenshot of how it was done with his name removed. Essentially what is happening here is that the website which uses the target's name as the domain is loading a web site from a completely different location and displaying it here. Anyone going to this site will think that the site is actually located here. It isn't.
Since Babcock has an established pattern of doing this in the past and we have been able to prove the sites were registered to him through a WhoIs, he has now started using DomainByProxy, a service which is normally used as security to protect business sites from domain spammers, amongst other things, and is abusing this service to engage in this deception.
This deception doesn't change the fact that Babcock is the one who has a demonstrated and proven history of doing this. So, there is no other logical conclusion one can come to other than Babcock also created this one because it appeared at the same time as Babcock's blogs and other escalations of this cyberharassment campaign targeting an entire group of individuals, most of whom don't know each other or just know each other casually.
Note that the original web site (the second image below) was created in May, 2012 and the fake web site which was iframed below wasn't created until October, 2013. You can see this by looking for the Creation Date label in the images below which appear in the typed section under the map and main information.
The same search on the site that has been iFramed produces this result:
The real owner is also using a private domain but uses a completely different company and hosting site.
In the US, a site like this which doesn't contain child pornography but advocates for pedophiles and pedophilia is protected under the First Amendment so it can't be shut down through abuse complaints. Privatizing the domain hides the person who is paying for hosting amongst other things.
So, why would a person pay for hosting twice just to iFrame a site like this under their real name after ensuring their identity is protected on both sites? Does that even make sense?
Of course, it doesn't. Babcock never makes sense. He just expects us all to drink the kool-aid.