I Am Kathleen Seidel

If you are an aspie, an autie, a blogger or just an informed citizen with a desire to inform the public about an issue you are familiar with against the wishes of some powerful interests, then the SLAPP supoena against Kathleen Seidel and her site, Neurodiversity, might as well have been aimed at you.

Yes, I'm on about this again. And about Zazzle. So it's doubly annoying - but what part of "aspie" was unclear to you?

Therefore, I'm suggesting that all interested parties express their interest. The idea came from discussion at Aspies for Freedom, who suggested we take a hint from the classic movie "Sparticus," declaring "I Am Kathleen Seidel" for reasons parallel to the reasons captured slaves stood up to declare "I Am Sparticus."

How about an I am Spartacus type thing with loads of people buying up domain names I-am-Kathleen-Seidel-1.com, I-am-Kathleen-Seidel-2.com, I-am-Kathleen-Seidel-3.com, I-am-Kathleen-Seidel-4.com, I-am-Kathleen-Seidel-5.com, I-am-Kathleen-Seidel-6.com, etc etc etc etc etc etc?

That's a great idea, well worth doing and I wish I could afford to. If you do it, you don't need to create a whole new blog - just alias the url to your own blog. I use godaddy.com, and it takes just a few minutes to do, and a couple more to go live, typically. Pretty painless.

The precedent of permitting this action against Seidel by a firm that stands to profit greatly should she and other contrary voices be silenced should be every bit as worrying to "pro cure" activists. Consider what happens if this action works.

There are a LOT of deep pockets on all sides here. And while it seems wildly improbable that Merck or Bayer is funding Seidel, it's certain that if it becomes needful to keep people who support their view of the evidence online, they will be forced to do so. And then the bullshit will really pile up, and I suggest that to refer to that as "counterproductive" would be rather an understatement.

This is not about supporting what Kathleen has to say. This is about her right and YOUR right to share an informed, supportable opinion in public without fear of frivolous and abusive litigation aimed at shutting you up. Now, one part of the SLAPP subpoena was to try and get Kathleen to cough up all correspondence to everyone on her blogroll, and any related documentation about her relationship to them. It was literally aimed at everyone who'd ever linked to her and could even be read as aimed at anyone who's IP address showed up in her logs.

So, yes, YOU are Kathleen Seidel. I am Kathleen Seidel. We are all Kathleen Seidel. So put the graphic on your blog, or make your own. Make a t-shirt if you walk about in public (kind of pointless for me to do that, but obviously it's going onto my blog.)

Seriously though, I'm not asking you to buy this. If you do - since for some reason I cannot set a zero profit - I'm going to send the proceeds to Kathleen anyhow, but I ask you to send her five bucks via the donation button in her right sidebar.

Now, we are going to do a little tutorial on how to link to this and use it purely as a blog graphic (with proper credit) even if you are morally opposed to my sort of semi-successful capitalist piggery.

First - observe the deliberate choice of model and shirt color. You see, when people click thru, they have their choice with this particular design - they can link to the "product image" - as shown in this case - or they can link to the design. And with a white t-shirt, it ends up looking like this:

Now, mouse over that. There's no affiliate link there, at all. Why?

Well, it's because Zazzle provides a naked image code for you to use, in case your platform doesn't like embedding the full html link, or what-have you. Go to the product page, and look for "link to this" - it will summon a popup, so you have to permit that, and that popup contains all the link codes.

You can of course download the graphic from that link if you like.

There's a catch, of course. You must have registered with Zazzle to be an affiliate in order to get these codes. (Absent me handing them out, to be sure.) Ideally, you will set up your own store. But there are serious advantages to this - not the least of which being that it allows you to create a blog graphic as good as this with licensed type fonts in less then twenty minutes, on the fly. If it's a compelling design, you might just sell a few. My "No whining" graphic does quite well, but that is beside the point here. What you are setting up is a graphic that is keyworded and categorized to link to an issue. It will start appearing in Google Image searches, and if you use it in a post - that graphic will refer to your post, not to the Google-discounted sales page. I'm not sure if that's true if you use MY product image, so I would actually suggest that you take the time to set up a Zazzle store of your own. I find it incredibly handy as a way of combining graphics and text quickly, without having to be on any particular computer.

And if I don't happen to have time to do that, I just have to do a quick search to have my choice of images. For instance - keyword "Diversity" results in a ton of images, all neatly set up for me to use. I always use the full html, and then try to remember to kick the text link down to the bottom of the post as a credit line. It's only fair, remember you are getting the use of some dazzlingly expert images (see diversity.) And if you are looking for horrible counterexamples - well, you can show the "other side" without linking to 'em, because of the "image only" code capability.

It would be great if Kathleen Siedel was an equally broad category. And don't forget SLAPP and "Clifford Shoemaker"

Credit: Illustrations above: I am Kathleen Seidel - Onsie by webcarve

And here's another:

Credit: I am Kathleen Siedel T-Shirt by graphictruth

In the matter of Shoemaker v. Seidel; Court of public opinion; The Hon. Bugs Bunny Presiding.

Thanks in part to it being April, Autism Awareness Month, the Neurodiversity Weblog has managed to set of a minor firestorm, both within and increasingly outside of the core Autism blogging community. But not all by themselves.

They had help from an unlikely source in bringing wider attention to the post which in the normal course of events, would have remained unnoticed by the great majority and certainly widely ignored within the blogging community of the Law, though the author, Kathleen Seidel is well-known within the Autism community.

The story itself is about a particular settlement in vaccine court, which is being cited by "mercury moms" as being "proof" that mercury really does cause autism, though it was judged as being possible in this quite particular case and Vaccine Court standards do not rise to even the "balance of probability" standards of ordinary civil court.

neurodiversity weblog: The Commerce in Causation:

"News outlets have been brimming with the story of Poling v. HHS — the first Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) claim included in the Omnibus Autism Proceeding (OAP) that has resulted in an award to petitioners. The case first attracted widespread attention on February 25, when Evidence of Harm author David Kirby issued a triumphant proclamation of the award on the Huffington Post. This was followed the next day by Mr. Kirby’s publication of the partially-redacted text of a theretofore confidential U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) report, which recommended compensation to Miss Hannah Poling due to the likelihood that a vaccine reaction aggravated a maternally-inherited metabolic disorder and led to development of a seizure disorder."

The article goes on to examine the economic motives of one particular player in this somewhat sad and misleading tale in the usual dispassionate impersonally merciless way Neurodiversity is known for. The article reveals that there is another peculiartity of Vaccine Court - council is paid regardless of outcome.

And the council in this case is the same as in many, many, MANY other cases.

This storm of publicity surrounding Poling v. HHS has prominently featured career vaccine-injury attorney Mr. Clifford Shoemaker — a founding member of the Omnibus Autism Proceeding Petitioners’ Steering Committee, counsel to the Poling family, and long-time business associate of Dr. Mark Geier.

Now, this would not embarrass any ordinary attorney; a specialty is something that you get rewarded for doing because you are very, very good at it. It's what lets you eat steak instead of rice and beans, and that's something worth having known, even if you are very very good at something that many folks would consider kind of - well, grasping, opportunistic and mercenary, like say, "Ambulance Chasing."

But Seidel 's article reveals that if Mr. Clifford Shoemaker had to rely on making successful personal injury tort claims in a court of law with the usual standards of evidence, and on a contingency fee - he'd probably need a second job.

Over the last 18 months, he's 7 for 15, but either way, he gets paid. Now, you might wonder if that is because he doesn't feel the need to be selective - considering he gets paid either way. That was my initial thought. Cynical, perhaps; opportunistic, of course - but not presumptive of incompetence.

But to "deal with" Seidel he decided a quick and dirty variant of a SLAPP suit was in order.

He had Seidel served with a subpoena that - well aside from it's obvious tactical and punitive character, also serves to inadvertently, but clearly demonstrate the reason he's working in this "sheltered workshop" of the Law. If you don't wish to read the whole, Paragraph 9 is a howler; while paragraph five clearly indicates that he has at least mastered the copy function in a browser - it's contents being neurodiversity's blogroll!

In the inimitable words and tones of Tweety Bird: "He don't KNOW me vewwy well, DO he?"

Siedel's response is a masterpiece of classic aspergean reasoning - and demonstrates a far better grasp of both the relevant law and the relevant political climate than that of the supposed professional

Compare the subpoena to Sidel's pro se "motion to quash." It's the difference between an elegant and spare recorder solo - and a TAPE recorder solo.

Quite aside from your position regarding the causation of autism and who may be responsible for it, which person would you want drafting a brief in support of your cause?

Indeed, which person would you want working at your law firm? I raise a toast to the imaginary firm of "Dawson And Seidel"

It's not an entirely silly idea, is it?

Related Reading Update:
New York Personal Injury Law Blog: Abuse of Process: Blogger, Unrelated to Action, Hit With Subpoena

Great article and links to other blog reactions.