Regular readers might remember my recent post about Matt Barber's suggestions for Bush's State of the Union speech. I'm on the guy's mailing list (I don't know why), and I have attempted to address some of his concerns in this blog.

His latest couple of mailings concern a death threat incident at Pam Spaulding's House Blend. The story has been considered newsworthy enough to have been written up at WorldNetDaily, and the Dakota Voice.

Because there's nothing about the threat at the cited Pam's House Blend post to indicate what happened, I thought I should attempt to address this in chronological order.

Here's how the Concerned Women for America first reported the threat:

In what was, at the very least, an apparent attempt to intimidate and frighten LaBarbera, who is married with children, "House Blend" published his home address in a January 13, 2007, thread titled, "Saturday this and that." Shortly thereafter, someone identified as "Barry G. Wick" posted the following comments: "It's across from a park in an area with cul de sacs. I'd bet it's a residence ... and across from a park. Snipers take note." (emphasis ours)

As it turned out, she never did publish the home address; a commenter did. In a later column, Matt Barber -- who is CWFA's Policy Director for Cultural Issues -- noted that it was "someone" named "Barry G. Wick":

In what was, at the very least, an apparent attempt to intimidate and frighten Americans for Truth president Peter LaBarbera, who is married with children, someone on House Blend published his home address in a January 13, 2007, thread. Shortly thereafter, someone identified as "Barry G. Wick" suggested that "snipers take note" of LaBarbera's address. Wick also suggested that shooting LaBarbera would amount to an act of self defense and stated that, "[LaBarbera] and others like him ought to know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, what future awaits them from a cadre of selected defenders willing to give up everything in order to protect the lives of gay and lesbian citizens."

Spaulding and other members of her blog so frequently foment hatred toward Christians that it's no real surprise that one of her posts culminated in this chilling and ostensibly illegal threat to LaBarbera's life.

You shouldn't blame Spaulding for this since one of her commenters, who was later banned, was responsible, but it is worth noting that this isn't the first time liberals have posted addresses of their political enemies online and have encouraged violence towards them.

This isn't really all that different from what happened to Michelle Malkin back in April of last year. The death threats towards Malkin's family back then got so bad that she had to remove one of her kids from school and move.

Again, I'm not blaming Spaulding for this, but I will say this about the whole left side of the blogosphere: when liberals constantly tell their audiences that conservatives are evil Nazis, who want to form a theocracy and may have been behind 9/11, is it a big surprise that you have someone posting a conservative's address and suggesting that, "Snipers take note?"

Any reputable blogger making such accusations against another blogger would have preserved a screen shot as evidence so that readers could distinguish between comments and posts, and draw their own conclusions. Instead, a clear attempt was made to insinuate that Pam Spaulding posted the address, which she simply did not.

As I keep saying, anyone can leave a comment. Anyone means anyone. Names mean nothing, and claims about political leanings (or, in "Wick's" case, sexual leanings) are completely unverifiable. Comments thus provide a golden opportunity for sock puppets or agents provocateur to pretend they're from the other "side" in the hope of discrediting whoever they might want to discredit.

What I find especially fascinating about this is that the alleged commenter, "Barry G. Wick" (routinely taken at his word as being a "homosexual activist"), has issued an apology which has not been independently verified, in which he goes out of his way to blame the Spaulding blog for his threatening comments:

There had been some good-natured joking about a very hurtful song posted on that website...and thinking my words would also be taken as so much hyperbole...well, they were not. As a new member of Ms. Spaulding\'s blog community, I got carried away with the atmosphere. I shall not return there.

We live in America. A land governed by law. We have differences about what the civil law ought to provide it's citizens....but we are in agreement....that violence in any form is not the answer. I, too, have been threatened in my activist work of past years. I knew there was no serious substance to them and did not report them. You have used your vast power to swat a fly...and as that fly I feel swatted. I apologize to your wife and family for any fears they may have had. There was never any danger and I stand apologetic and humbled by my misadventurous writing style that has made a wrong turn. Please accept this as a sincere apology on all levels and that I hope this letter will put an end to who is responsible.

I heard your thoughts that perhaps the person writing the words was not a real person. Sadly, I am real...the words were wrong and were not taken in a hyperbolic, humorous context. Such "manifestos" are of a period that no longer exists in American social action. Further, I apologize to CWA for having to use its airtime and resources to tell this story to its audience. Nobody in the "gay" community would ever take what I said seriously. Trust me, any friends I may have made by my writing have now deserted me. I hope CWA will report this letter and its true sincerity to the same audience. I have truly supported non-violence in the gay community and continue to do so to this day.

I found another comment by the alleged-alleged "perp" which couldn't possibly sound more contrite, and even refers to the "New Tower of Babel":

Barry G. Wick says:

I can genuinely see that some of my comments on Pam's Blog could have seemed as a threat...and I didn't really want that. I never meant to threaten Mr. LaBarbera. I've sent him an apology...a deep honest apology. And he's made some hay from my hyperbolic language. Fine. One has to admit that gay folk have used the hyperbolic and threatening language of the "homo-haters" to make their points. We all live in the day and age of the New Tower of Babel....we're all yelling at each other....we're all talking at each other...demanding to be heard...demanding to have our side of the argument accepted. We're not trying to find common ground, common things to discuss...we're all trying to find the things we disagree on immediately. I don't have the answer, sorry, but if I get the chance to apologize to Mr. LaBarbera with my own voice, I shall. If he understood some of my language to be a threat...I want to put his mind, the minds of his family and friends at ease. I know we're going to disagree on a whole range of issues. But I will listen. And I hope we'll find something to talk about besides our differences.
And if he should choose to blast me for the perceived threat...I'll listen and acknowledge that.

I'm certain there are a number of people who think I'm a wacko. Fair. There are sometimes I wonder about myself. I live a bit of an isolated life except for my internet connection. If all I had to judge the world of humans by was the internet, and that's about what's happening in my life, after a while one would have to think the whole world mad. So many voices, so much confusion. Yes, some people don't want to listen. There are times I haven't listened. The older I get...the more I want to listen because there may be a time I won't be able to listen any longer. I would love to bring the voices back to me of my friends of dieds of AIDS complications.

I'd love to have my good friends, gay and straight, those who've gone...I'd love to listen again. It's not possible.

So maybe I'll listen to Mr. LaBarbera...and I'll read more of his websites...and try to hear what he's saying. I know we'll disagree. But just perhaps we can find some things to talk about. The militant gay part of me says:
"you're nuts Wick. " The 55 year old bearded man in mirror says: "listen and try to understand."

For those of you who are angry at my words and for "taking-on" Mr. LaBarbera or for even apologizing to Mr. LaBarbera...I apologize to you as well.
I have some kind of path to follow here. I don't know where it's leading me. Give an old queer this rocky path to stumble on, wish me well...and let's hope I'll find some answers.

February 10, 2007 3:29 AM

Whatever happened to "trust but verify"?

I realize that in the normal course of blogging there's no way to verify anyone's identity, but once there's been a death threat, and once that crime has been reported to the FBI, doesn't there come a point where we ought to be able to verify the facts?

Why couldn't the Dakota Voice get hold of Mr. Wick or Mr. LaBarbera? Has the FBI been contacted about the results of their investigation? Is there any such person? Or has the "homosexual activist movement" found it's own "George Harleigh"?

All things considered, I have to say that this time I agree with Matt Barber. At least on this:

LaBarbera indicated that he has been in touch with both the FBI and the North Carolina Attorney General's Office. He's anticipating a full criminal investigation. "I'm a big boy. It's not so much that I'm worried about myself," said LaBarbera, "but the effect this could have on my wife and children ... that has me extremely upset."

Concerned Women for America is deeply disturbed by this apparent threat to Peter LaBarbera's life. Matt Barber, CWA's Policy Director for Cultural Issues said, "This is nothing short of cyber-terrorism. There should be a thorough criminal investigation, and if it's determined that a crime has occurred, the perpetrators should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law."

The bottom line here is that while I'm not in the habit of defending leftie or gay activist blogs, unless Pam Spaulding wrote the post, she is not to blame for her commenters -- any more than I am here. But beyond that, the idea that Pam's "homosexual activist" commenter would first issue death threats, then later blame her "atmosphere" cannot but raise common-sense suspicions.

This person either exists or he does not. He is either a "homosexual activist" or he is not.

(I mean, sock puppets can't play games with the FBI, can they?)

MORE: According to Peter LaBarbera, a police investigator in Rapid City, South Dakota has refused to prosecute "Barry Wick":

Update on the "sniper" story: an investigator with the Rapid City, S.D., police department has contacted Americans For Truth and told us that South Dakota "gay" activist Barry Wick will not be prosecuted for his "Snipers, take note" comment against this writer, posted on lesbian Pam Spaulding's blog, because the threat was "too vague." We have received and accepted a heartfelt apology from Mr. Wick.

It's tough to know what or whom to believe. Determining the facts online is not easy.

MORE: Here's more evidence confirming the genuine nature of Barry G. Wick, in the form of a comment purporting to be ffrom him:

Sad to say...you're the first to get this news...the Rapid City South Dakota Police Department wants to talk to me tomorrow 2/12/07 though I've been told I won't be arrested. As for facts, I decided to resign from Pam's House Blend on my own. She gave me the sense that her rules were violated. I took myself off the blog permanently so as not to add confusion. My apologies have been accepted by Mr. LaBarbera, but that doesn't mean the police agencies or other conservative bloggers involved will leave me alone. I'm hoping for the best. Thanks for the mention. I'd just as soon go back to a quiet life without downing anyone for any reason. At 55 years of age, I'd just as soon live a little quieter.
I thought my comments on Pam's blog would have been taken as outrageous, but the outrage was of a different kind. I'm looking forward to this being Over Over Over.
B. G. Wick

AND MORE: Reading this, I conclude that Barry G. Wick exists, and lives in Rapid City, SD.

My suspicions and doubts about his existence therefore appear to have been quite groundless. As to what his motivations might have been or are now, I have no idea.

There is no excuse for what he said, and I think commenters who cross that line should be held accountable.