Sunday, June 2, 2013

Douglas Misicko alias Douglas Mesner update 6 – article

Douglas Misicko alias Douglas Mesner update 6 – article

We recommend you read these pages before reading this page:
These pages will give readers the full background on this subject as well as a rebuttal to Mesner’s comments about ritual abuse and our conference. These pages list many of the comments posted by Douglas Mesner as well as other aliases. These pages will show connections between Mesner and websites like process, and the book “Might is Right.”

Douglas Mesner has continued using insults and attacks against survivors of ritual abuse and the professionals that work with them.  He has harassed and followed survivors and survivor advocates around the Internet for the last several years. Aliases have been used adding additional insults and name calling against survivors. article

On approximately May 25, 2013, Mr. Mesner published an article on the about the Castlewood Treatment Center and its founder Mark Schwartz. This article originally contained another attack against Neil Brick and S.M.A.R.T.

In the original article at the in 2009, Mr. Mesner wrote about 2009 S.M.A.R.T. conference he attended. He attended without telling S.M.A.R.T. he was a reporter. The media is not allowed into the presentations at the S.M.A.R.T. conference for the safety of the conference participants, who are survivors of child abuse and their supporters. He cancelled his conference check immediately after attending the conference without notifying S.M.A.R.T.

In 2011, in written correspondence with the, Mr. Brick was notified by the that Mr. Mesner had agreed to stop writing about Mr. Brick and his organization.

In the original 2013 examiner article, Mr. Mesner  repeated the fact that one display table out of many at the conference had a hat (as well as many other items) used to protect the wearer from electromagnetism. He took this one thing totally out of proportion to attack the conference. He repeated the fact that one woman at the conference talked about supernatural occurrences in her abuse story. He used these two occurrences at our conference to attack and insult our conference and our work, ignoring the strong research base backing the reality of ritual abuse and the many presentations at our conference verifying the reality of ritual abuse. In the original article, he used the terms “lunacy” and “delusional assertions” to further insult the work of S.M.A.R.T.  Mr. Mesner continues taking facts out of context and using these to disparage Neil Brick and S.M.A.R.T.

S.M.A.R.T. has written rebuttals about different parts of Mesner’s conference report.

Neil Brick called the to request removal of the section of the article about S.M.A.R.T., due to its misrepresenting and insulting the work of S.M.A.R.T. The article was taken down temporarily pending further discussion.

Before this could occur, it is believed Mr. Mesner put the article back up under a different url. Mesner had apparently removed the name “Neil Brick” and “S.M.A.R.T”, and instead had the word “Censored” with hyperlinks which go directly to his article about the 2009 S.M.A.R.T. conference. In the one paragraph about S.M.A.R.T., Mr. Mesner links six times to his articles, either about the S.M.A.R.T. conference or the law suit. Furthermore, Mr. Mesner mentions who and what is censored in the comment section below the article.

Mesner writes in the comment section, “If ever there are factual disputes with any of my articles, I am happy to correct any error.” S.M.A.R.T. believes this not to be the case. Mr. Mesner has been notified of factual errors and has not changed these. One example was the title of his examiner article itself, “Mark Schwartz, accused of malpractice, removed from Castlewood clinic staff.” There is no evidence presented that Dr. Schwartz was “removed” from the Castlewood Clinical Staff. The two articles Mr. Mesner links to in the comment section state Dr. Schwartz “stepped down.” To the best of our knowledge, this was never corrected before the article was taken down.

In the comment section, Mr Mesner stated that Mr. Brick made “incessant phone calls” to the examiner. This is not true also and is another exaggeration of Mr. Mesner’s. He states the “Examiner pulled the article out of convenience.” No, the examiner pulled the article pending further investigation.


Later, the paragraphs in the examiner article mentioning Neil Brick and S.M.A.R.T were deleted, but the comment in the comment section about Neil Brick and S.M.A.R.T. remained.  After this, the entire article was deleted from the .  Then it appears he was terminated as an editor by the (by his account at a new Internet article).

At a new article about all this, he wrote about a woman called Julaine, who spoke at our conference.

This is what she wrote for us in rebuttal to him previously:

“As a speaker at the conference as well as “named” throughout this commentary, I am amazed and appalled at the inclusion of a seriously flawed “report” from a man who canceled his check that was to pay for his attendance….and then failed to check his “facts” about not only myself but others in attendance as well.  His errors include such small details as my age and health, reason for sitting at a table (too many papers to juggle standing up), and larger ones such as misquoting and putting words in my mouth.  My presentation is on tape, and it would have been easy for him to verify any of his shaky “facts”, but he chose to make fun of our pain, as well.”

In the new article about his no longer being at the, he writes about his interactions with the  Neil Brick did send the correspondence indicating errors in Mr. Mesner’s article about Castlewood, which included information about Mr. Brick and S.M.A.R.T.
In the new article, Mr. Mesner writes “In fact, Brick was just awarded some type of honors from an organization that (a former member of the Castlewood clinical staff) is a board member of…”  Neil Brick is unaware of receiving any award from anywhere.  This appears to be a total fabrication.

In the new article, Mr. Mesner quotes his private correspondence with the  and some of their replies. As a general rule, private correspondence is kept private.

In the new article, Mr. Mesner keeps mentioning the word “harassment.” S.M.A.R.T. believes this is not true.  Some correspondence was made as needed to let the examiner know about the problems with the article.

Douglas Mesner also writes “Remarkably, Examiner never questioned what the facts were…”  The examiner did request Neil Brick to send them information about problems with the article, and this was sent.

Other Internet Information

Other supporters of Mr. Mesner also wrote about Neil Brick and S.M.A.R.T. in regard to Mesner’s Castlewood article.

A supporter states Mr. Brick promotes harmful and inaccurate information to the public.  This is obviously not true. Everything published by Neil Brick and S.M.A.R.T. is primarily from scientific and mainstream media sources. The information published by S.M.A.R.T. has helped many trauma survivors and their helpers

The harassment of trauma survivors and their supporters continues, but survivors and their helpers still continue to publish their research and work. They continue to speak out for themselves and other survivors.  The most important thing is to not be silenced, regardless of the harassment, insults and inaccurate statements made by the false memory syndrome proponents.

copied with permission from: