Exposé outfit murders its own credibility

Another day, another hysteric – sorry, historic – enquiry in Britain. The police complaints body has launched an investigation into, oh, load and loads of vaguely rumoured “child sex offences” in London from as far back as the 1970s.
The big excitement, though, was on the BBC’s Newsnight on 16 March, which trumpeted a claim that police were forced to abandon a cast-iron case against a VIP “paedophile ring” in 1981 after they had obtained video footage of the men in question actually engaging in hot action with teenage boys at a flat in Coronation Buildings, Lambeth, less than a mile away from parliament. An order had come from on high that the matter should be dropped “in the national interest”. Among those caught in the act was said to have been the Liberal MP Cyril Smith and a “senior member of Britain’s intelligence agencies”; there was also evidence against “two senior police officers”.
My hunch, having seen the Newsnight programme, is that this is more than just the usual hype, and that properly sourced police testimony may in due course be forthcoming from officers involved in the Coronation Buildings operation, especially if they can be assured that the Official Secrets Act will not be used against them. Never mind that the BBC’s information came from a single unnamed police source whom they have never seen because he spoke through an intermediary; never mind that this informant was said merely to have been “familiar with the original investigation” rather than a part of it; never mind that dozens of other officers on the case could have come forward to spill the beans but so far have not; never mind the apparent absence of “victims” making complaints at this point.
All these good reasons for scepticism can reasonably be put aside. Those of us who are old enough will recall that teenage rent boys and members of parliament (especially Tory ones) were an accepted item in those days. Everyone knew they went together: not as respectably as love and marriage, perhaps, but as routinely as a horse and carriage. And so did cover-ups: a Tory chief whip even went on record to say part of his job was in effect to blackmail MPs who had things to hide, letting it be known he would keep quiet about their extra-marital affairs, or penchant for “small boys”, in return for them towing the party line.
All very scandalous, no doubt; but the real scandal these days is not sexual at all. Rather, it is the dangerous perversion of truth to which sensationalist journalism is now giving rise, driven on by our debased victim culture and populist politics. Convinced by nothing more than relentless empty propaganda that Jimmy Savile was guilty of crimes worse than Islamic State beheadings, the public also seemed receptive to claims late last year that boys were murdered some decades ago by powerful Establishment figures.
Such claims lack credibility unless they can be tied to particular youngsters who went permanently missing from that time onwards and who might have taken part in the alleged “sex parties”. No such individuals have been suggested. Also, as I said recently, another factor that makes me doubt the credibility of the “allegators”, as blogger Anna Raccoon aptly dubs them, is that one of them made what to me were obviously false claims about sadistic abuse by my old friends Charles Napier and Peter Righton.
That was in January, in an Exaro News report featuring a source they called “Darren”, who appears to be an ex-rent boy. Apparently Exaro liked his story so much they asked him for more, and Darren obligingly came up the following month with an even stronger yarn against Peter. This time he remembered a murder that had somehow slipped his mind in January: in this new version, Darren had personally seen Peter Righton brutally attack a man called Andrew, leaving him fatally wounded.
It wasn’t just any old attack, either. Oh, no. The unfortunate Andrew was torn apart when tied between two vehicles that slowly reversed away from each other, one driven by Righton the other by “another man”! The demonic Righton had even made Andrew dig his own grave beforehand!
I kid you not, Exaro is inviting everyone to take this fanciful bullshit seriously, and it seems plenty of people are buying into it.
So who are these people, Exaro News? Set up in 2011 by a city tycoon, this exposé outfit now has former Guardian journalist David Hencke on its core staff. It was Henke who is said to have passed Tom Watson MP evidence of “child abuse” at the Elm Guest House, leading to a police investigation, “Operation Fernbridge”. Exaro and its journalists have been nominated for a number of top awards and actually won a few as well. Editor-in-chief Mark Watts has been profiled in the Guardian.
With all this kudos, one might expect standards to be high. But that is not how it works, alas. Fortunately, scepticism over claims like those of “Darren” remains strong in significant areas of public life, including the legal profession and academia.
Criminal law barrister Matthew Scott, for instance, blogged about his misgivings last year in “Exaro News Is Playing A Dangerous Game With Its Paedophile Murder Story”.
This was in response to the agency’s earlier VIP murder “investigation”, based on allegations made by another anonymous source, dubbed “Nick”.
Exaro, in collaboration with the Sunday People, alleged, in the words of the blog, that “a Tory MP strangled a 12-year-old brown haired boy in a central London town house in 1980. Apparently, 18 months to two years later two other men murdered a second boy in front of another Tory MP, ‘a cabinet minister’. Both MPs are ‘still alive’. Its source is a man in his 40s to whom they have given the pseudonym ‘Nick’. Exaro even mentions rumours of a third child murdered by being run over in the street, though I don’t think Nick claims to have actually seen more than one murder.”
Scott suggests that Exaro, along with the Sunday People and also the BBC, who aired an interview with “Nick”, acted “extremely unwisely by catapulting him into the public domain”.
These interviews had given extremely detailed accounts, which ran the risk of wrecking any police investigation because the testimony of any witnesses who might later come forward would have greatly reduced value: they could easily just be copy cats. This would inevitably play a part in the defence of any accused person, and a guilty person might escape justice because any good and true evidence would be seen as contaminated and unsafe.
Scott continues in this lawyerly vein for quite a while, and rightly so, but it is the commonsense scepticism in the latter part of his article that really takes the eye, beginning with the story of Carol Felstead:

There is nothing new about allegations being made against Tory politicians of the period, and they are not necessarily truthful. A not dissimilar account of Conservative Party MPs being involved in sexual abuse was given in the 1990s by someone called Carol Felstead and it provides a cautionary tale for anyone who might wish to rush to judgement. According to Carol’s therapists, she was anally raped in Conservative Central Office by a Tory MP with a claw hammer, and raped by not one but two members of Mrs Thatcher’s cabinet.
Just like Nick, Carol supposedly said she was abused first by her parents. She had been “ritually reborn out of a bull’s stomach, placed in a grave ‘on top of her dead sister’ and rescued by her father who was dressed as the Devil.” She later claimed to have given birth to six children who were then aborted and ritually sacrificed.

Felstead had told this story not to Exaro but to the notorious Dr Valerie Sinason, who incorporated some of it (changing Carol’s name to “Rita”) into the work that made her name: Treating Survivors of Satanist Abuse.
Sinason’s work has since been widely discredited, along with the entire satanic abuse fad, as I pointed out in “Compared to Sinason, Savile was a saint”. Likewise, Scott takes her down a peg or three and adds a truly scandalous bit of information, telling us she specialised, and is still paid by the NHS to specialise, in the treatment of Dissociative Identity Disorder, itself a controversial diagnosis.
So much for Sinason. As for Carol Felstead, Scott leaves us in no doubt what her story amounted to:

Now, despite the detailed and distressing history supposedly given by Carol to her therapists, her accounts of abuse at the hands of her parents were demonstrable nonsense. The family house had indeed burned down, but it did so a year before she was born so she could not possibly have remembered it as she said. She did have a sister who died in infancy, a girl who suffered from Down’s syndrome and died in hospital from natural causes; again she did so before Carol was even born. As for the Satanic abuse, her four surviving brothers all agree that nothing of the sort took place and there is no evidence of it whatever from any other source. There was no coven, no witch-craft and no murdered babies: indeed her medical records show that she had never been pregnant. Her extraordinary story of being raped by politicians was likewise fantasy of a high order.

Likewise, Scott is admirably sceptical about even the sex parties at Dolphin Square, never mind the murders:

The reasons to doubt the existence of such a ring are legion. What were these boys doing when they were not at Dolphin Square sex parties? Were they kept in complete isolation? Did they stop going to school, for example, or never speak to anybody outside the paedophile ring? The Exaro line seems to be that they were so terrified by the fact that the men in question were powerful that they did not expose the ring while it was active. Are we really to believe that these “powerful people” were so sure that their affairs could be kept secret from the press and, still more, from their political rivals, that they kept returning to the orgies? When even a tame affair like that of Cecil Parkinson with his secretary could lead to political disgrace; when journalists were constantly scouring Westminster for a whiff of scandal and when political rivals would have been delighted to ditch the dirt on their enemies it seems – as Exaro themselves acknowledge – very unlikely indeed.

Quite so, although, as I said at the outset, I am not so sceptical about the sex side: even the most intelligent and rational of men often think with their dick: just ask Bill Clinton or, even better, Hillary. What they would definitely not do, I suggest, is be so reckless as to murder anyone in the devil-may-care manner suggested by both “Nick” and “Darren”, casually leaving witnesses like them who might at any time tell the tale.
If Matthew Scott is a good example of sensible scepticism in legal circles, what about one from the academic world? News has just reached me from an unlikely source, the Lancashire Magazine, of a very encouraging show of academic good sense at Edinburgh University, where a research project is underway in connection with the allegations against Jimmy Savile.
The article in question, “Jimmy Savile ‘Moral Panic’ Tracked By Computer In Dordogne”, is based on an archive of private social media discussions between the women who later came forward to claim they were sexually abused by the late entertainer. Forty years ago the women had been teenagers at the Duncroft Approved School, an experimental boarding school opened by the Home Office to give a second chance of education for girls of above-average intelligence who had been taken into care.
The owner of the archive was a retired English lawyer living in the Dordogne region of France. She lived in care at Duncroft in 1965 and 1966. Her name was Susanne Cameron-Blackie, better known to many heretics here as – wait for it – the blogger Anna Raccoon!
Yes, Anna, or Susanne, is right at the heart of this story. Her wonderful, detailed, sceptical analyses of the claims against Savile have been highlighted here at Heretic TOC on several occasions, so I am sure we will all be delighted to hear that her work has won academic appreciation and government funding for a follow-up project.
It was a serious illness that first prompted Susanne to contact Edinburgh University. In 2013, fearing she might not survive a forthcoming cancer operation in France, she sent an email to Professor Viviene Cree at the Edinburgh University School of Social and Political Science, explaining the situation and saying she hoped the university would provide a good home for her archive. That summer the Economic and Social Research Council activated its Urgency Grants Mechanism to form a research team for the recovery and collation of documents and the information stored on Anna Raccoon’s computer in the Dordogne. The full story of the research team and its project are set out in the Lancashire Magazine’s article and is recommended reading.
It really is splendid news. Sadly, though, we also learn that Susanne is still suffering from cancer. She continues to blog as Anna Raccoon but says her doctors have not given her long to live. In the circumstances, it might be a nice gesture if readers could tweet their congratulations on her academic triumph, and/or more general appreciation and best wishes, to her at @AnnaRaccoon1, or email annaraccoon2010@gmail.com.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
45 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

[…] So, remember, you heard it here first! In The pencil is mightier than the sword, and then Exposé outfit murders its own credibility a couple of months later, this blog focused on allegations made by “Darren”, whose yarns, in […]

[…] has long been sceptical of the crazy murder claims made by “Nick” and “Darren” via Exaggero (sorry, Exaro) News, and nonsense about Edward […]

[…] the late Peter Righton was accused of a particularly brutal murder. The victim had allegedly been torn apart when roped by his wrists and ankles to a car and a pick-up truck that slowly reversed away from […]

[…] background is mainly in two Heretic TOC pieces, Hi, this is Charles. I’ve been a naughty boy and Exposé outfit murders its own credibility, so I won’t labour the details of what I told 60 Minutes about […]

Ethanic

Rather OT, but it seems that both BC and GC are under some kind of script kiddie assault.
Girl Chat is “not found” since the first of the month, and right now BC is inaccessible too.

A.

This is a bit off-topic, but I was struck by this sentence:
“Those of us who are old enough will recall that teenage rent boys and members of parliament (especially Tory ones) were an accepted item in those days.”
On Metafilter, someone recently posted an article by Jenny Diski, who at age fifteen with nowhere to go was taken in by Doris Lessing. Here it is: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v37/n01/jenny-diski/doris-and-me One reader was shocked by the story towards the article’s end, and remarked that the sixties were another country: “…the idea that a serious intellectual grown-up in left and psychologically adroit circles would accuse an abandoned, depressed 16-year-old of trying ’emotional blackmail’ – I can believe that someone would do it, but I find it hard to believe that such a person could just go around to friends, talk about the whole thing and get sent home to write a nasty letter to the kid. Also, I feel like RD Laing and AS O’Neill and all of those sixties guys, while on the one hand it was good that they introduced new ideas about young people and their complexity and capacity, seem to have tripped a lot of intellectual types over into treating teens as just smaller versions of themselves – not even small adults, but pint-sized well-established left intellectuals.”
Not trying to make any particular point there, just ruminating.
Interestingly, Diski comments that at the time she had a pronounced taste for much older men and when Robert Graves, then in his later sixties, came to supper, she was very attracted to him and completely tongue-tied.
It’s also interesting to compare the 1983 US Congressional page sex scandals with the 2006 one. 1983: Both congressmen were censured. Dan Crane, forty-seven and married with kids, had had had sex with a seventeen-year-old girl page three years previously. He apologised, and lost the next election. Gerry Studds, forty-six, had had sex with a seventeen-year-old boy page ten years previously. He admitted that his actions had constituted a serious error in judgement but held his head high, turned his back on the House as the motion to censure him was read, and kept being elected until he retired in 1997. When Studds died in 2006, by then married to a much younger man, obituaries celebrated him as the first openly gay congressman. In 1983, the former page who’d had sex with Crane told the papers that it had been her decision just as much as his, while the former page who’d had sex with Studds told the papers that while he’d been “somewhat uncomfortable” with the sex, their two-week trip to Portugal had been “one of the more wonderful experiences of my life”. He also appeared publicly with Studds to show his support.
The Mark Foley scandal in the same year Studds died was a different kettle of fish. By then, twenty-three years later, child sex hysteria had hit hard, and Foley was one of its foremost proponents. He had tried to have child model photo sites banned and had succeeded in getting organisations such as the Boy Scouts and Boys and Girls Clubs access to FBI fingerprint background checks on their adult volunteers. He’d written to the governer and attorney general of Florida asking them to review the legality of a programme for teenagers at a nudist resort. When it was discovered that he’d had sexy IM chats — not even any sex! — with sixteen- and seventeen-year-old male Congressional pages, he was immediately forced to resign. Trying to excuse himself, he claimed a drinking problem, and also claimed a relationship with a Roman Catholic priest when he was aged 13-15. The priest confirmed that the two had been close friends but said that sexually things had not gone beyond some nakedness and light touching. An article with the details: http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?p=1&tc=pg&AID=/20061019/NEWS/610190725
Very sorry to hear about Anna Raccoon’s diagnosis.

Jasmine

Wow. I’m shocked to learn that so much gay sex was happening so…. publicly. Publicly enough that it could cause a scandal. Where I live, we recently had a huge scandal over the fact that one of our MP is an atheist. If any of them were known to be screwing boys, I can’t imagine them holding any public office ever again.

Dissident

It never fails to both amaze and distress me that so many people can applaud adults for treating adolescents with more respect, but then disparage these same adults for recognizing them as equals. Adolescents are fully capable of blackmailing adults, and many of them are more than intelligent to accomplish this. Moreover, many of them are fully capable of showing great intellectual prowess and standing on even ground in this capacity with any adults. Do we have good reason, for instance, to treat Jasmine as anything less than a fully realized intellectual who is capable of holding her own with us? No, because we accept Jasmine on her proven merits, rather than automatically treating her as inherently inferior simply because of her age. That’s adhering to a common cultural narrative over that of readily available evidence, and it’s nothing more than a form of bigotry. Of course, Jasmine is a good person who puts her great intellect into productive directions, but an intelligent person can be good or bad, so I hope everyone gets the gist here.
Did the writer of that complaint even know the adolescent in question who was accused of blackmailing the adult intellectual? No, she didn’t, yet she makes an arbitrary assumption based on the fact that the accused happened to have been a teen. That type of protectionist attitude is not only unjust to the adult in this particular instance, but it was utterly condescending to teens in general. For anyone who thinks a teen is not intelligent enough to blackmail even very intellectual adults, then they need to read about a recent case in the U.K. directly related to this topic that I discussed in the following article I wrote for Newgon:
https://www.newgon.com/wiki/Essay:Minors_Can_Be_Victimizers–A_Brief_Analysis_Of_An_Incident_Showing_Us_Who_Truly_Has_The_Power_In_An_Intergenerational_Relationship

Jasmine

I hardly ever blush noticeably because my skin is too dark to display any but the most extreme inflow of blood – but you managed it! I really don’t know what to say. I don’t think I’ve ever been this flattered in my life and I can’t help but feel undeserving.
However, if we’re talking about hypothetical intelligent teens, I can certainly endorse your assessment. Of course, I think it’s a mixture of factors – resources, intelligence, and how manipulative a person naturally is. The Slytherin instinct. For example: I’m pretty sure I can (and at times have) outsmart many adults but I’m generally an extremely honest and straight-forward person. It would hardly ever occur to me that I could or should manipulate someone and harm them to get myself something. On the other hand, I know many people whose first instinct would be to manipulate. Your milage may vary.
Also, WRT treating someone as an inferior, something I came across on Tumblr:
“Sometimes people use “respect” to mean “treating someone like a person” and sometimes they use “respect” to mean “treating someone like an authority”.
And sometimes people who are used to being treated like an authority say “if you won’t respect me I won’t respect you” and they mean “if you won’t treat me like an authority I won’t treat you like a person”
They think they’re being fair but they aren’t, and it’s not okay.”

Dissident

It’s too bad you can’t see yourself as your colleagues and friends do, Jasmine 🙂 You certainly deserve those accolades, and it’s cool that you don’t let them go to your head, so to speak.
There are most definitely many scrupulous tweens and teens of great intelligence like yourself, who focus their intellect into positive and productive directions rather than manipulating others. For instance, they may do what this intelligent and positively motivated 9-year-old girl recently did:
http://www.upworthy.com/a-9-year-old-goes-in-on-standardized-tests-and-ends-with-the-best-mic-drop-of-all-time?c=huf1
I must confess my suspicion that several, if not most, of this amazing girl’s all-adult audience at the meeting were actually seething with envious contempt on the inside despite applauding on the outside. It makes me wonder if her local school board bothered to listen to her at all.
Anyway, since tweens and teens are human beings, many of them can indeed be unscrupulous manipulators who use their intelligence and cunning in very negative ways. A major problem with the ongoing victimology trend that coddles them alongside society’s oppression of them is that it encourages many of the less scrupulous among them to use this mass sentiment to their advantage in very negative ways. This is a major factor taken up by Roger Lancaster in his book SEX PANIC AND THE PUNITIVE STATE. He was largely motivated to boldly confront this problem due to the manner in which a group of such unscrupulous teens basically wrecked the career of a close friend of his who happened to be a teacher. It didn’t take much intelligence to hatch the scheme that they did, so I can only imagine what a teen of low character but high intelligence could accomplish if so inclined!

mr pedo-man

Interesting link: I shall post it further afield; Here’s one that may interest people who have not already seen it:
http://drrobertepstein.com/pdf/Epstein-THE_MYTH_OF_THE_TEEN_BRAIN-Scientific_American_Mind-4-07.pdf?lbisphpreq=1

mr pedo-man

They call it ‘duty of care’ at all costs it seems. There was a film I saw the other night which exemplifies the double standard regarding youths today.
The film is GOD BLESS AMERICA 2011…About a depressed guy whose just been informed by his Doctor, That his tumour has enlarged, And he hasn’t got long left — And he hates the consumer society that he lives in — Sees this spoilt teenager on the MTV doc sweet 16, and decides to blow her head off, on a killing spree — While doing that he befriends a hard done by 17yo, who accompanies him on the killing spree — She said are we like Bonnie and Clyde?
he answered — “No…your a child” Are we platonic lovers then, In a sarcastic voice — Funny that; He’s happy to go around wasting people — But unethical to have sex with a fully developed ‘child’!

A.

To be fair to the writer of that quote, they say that when they were young, they was accused of emotional manipulation that was beyond them at the time, and that it really messed them up. Of course, we should all be careful not to extrapolate too much from our own experiences.
I was capable of emotional manipulation at four, which I understand is about the typical age to develop the capacity. On the other hand, I don’t feel that my judgement and general capacity to deal with life were mature until I was about twenty-four or so (I daresay I will look back at seventy and laugh at that statement). Not that that means I wasn’t capable of living a full adult life before then: on the contrary, I had been earning my living for some time previously. Development’s a continuum, we all develop at different rates, etc. My thoughts on this subject are fairly unformed. As I say, just ruminating.

A.

…they WERE accused…

Lensman

The Sinason, Felstead and the Exaro stories illustrate why there has to be, in the popular discourse, visible and available counter-narratives which can prevent imagination becoming an unchecked means of generating ‘facts’ and news stories.
We’ve seen it happen before with the Satanic Abuse scandals, and we know only too well how the popular account given of us has everything to do with the creativity of the public discourse’s collective imagination and little to do with facts, statistics or research (all of which exist, but don’t seem to impinge on a narrative which the public and the media are determined to keep unsullied by facts and reason).
Goya seems to encapsulate this in his print “The Sleep of Reason brings forth Monsters”
http://payload74.cargocollective.com/1/8/264987/3788012/goya_sleep_of_reason.jpg
Indeed the whole of his series of prints – ‘Los Caprichos’ (http://dac-collection.wesleyan.edu/prt28) – of which the above is a kind of centre piece – seems full of resonances with what’s happening today, when imagination trumps reason in public – and indeed private – affairs and the shadows seem populated by half-seen, nebulous monsters. See his “Here Comes the Bogeyman” –comment image
Which has led me, in an incoherent and chaotic way, into thinking about the contribution made by Anna Racoon, your own good blog, Tom, and the other Heretical and non-Orthodox blogs out there – all of which act as quiet, but articulate and powerful generators, of essential counter-narratives.
My limited experience is that these blogs make a difference and are allowing our ideas, experiences and knowledge get ‘out there’ and reach people.
A friend and colleague recently confided in me (at a time before he became aware of my sexual orientation) that through following blogs like those of Anna Racoon and Moor Larkin he’d become sceptical about the narratives being played-out in the press around Saville, Rolf Harris et al. And that his interest in these cases had eventually led him to look at Heretic TOC and confirmed his deep doubts, that had till then remained unanalysed, over society’s position on child sexuality and paedophilia. He’s not a paedophile himself – but he is entirely heretical
.
Another instance: an ‘argument’ on a comment-board, which started as more of a one-sided flow of insults, with myself, as recipient, desperately trying to civilise the exchange. After he’d made some disparaging remarks I posted a link to your blog. He came back a day or so later saying something like ‘I’ve read Tom’s blog and must confess that I’ve come away surprised at what a good impression I’ve got of him, he seems like a nice guy and he writes well and has made me think…’. And the ‘argument’ became a ‘discussion’ . He took back the disparaging remarks he’d made, and took seriously those arguments and nuances which before he’d been entirely resistant to.
So I think that blogs do make a difference – though if weighed against all the blogs that reinforce the orthodoxy I don’t doubt that we’re still out-gunned and out-numbered.
Are blogs the way forwards – uncensored, universally-available means of making public and available our message? There does seem to be quite a lot of Heretical or ‘Pro’ blogs out there. Am I right in thinking that even blogs less frequented and less respected than Heretic TOC make can make a difference?

Jasmine

Maybe I’ll be able to pass as cultured and civilised if I keep viewing art on this blog 😀
It’s good to know that someone who was defiant enough to be engaging in “argument” through insults could still be persuaded by anything. The fact that he was persuaded by a pro-paedophile blog is downright remarkable. Clearly Tom’s writing is having some positive effect – regardless of what Nick may have said to you on Sexnet.

Jasmine

Indeed I do see it. I find about 10% very fascinating, 40% very dull, and half to be just worth reading.
WRT you and Nick: I feel like what you said to him was unnecessarily harsh/mean since he didn’t seem to be acting maliciously. However, I’m aware that there are years of context there so I refrain from judgement.

Dissident

I would certainly like to see an excerpt of the discussion in question, if it’s at all permissible. I do, of course, understand the context of your past exchanges with Nick.

Dissident

Not a problem! 🙂

Lensman

Tom, there’s a lot of mention of sexnet on your site, and from what you and others say it seems like an interesting place. However I can’t find any links to it (that could be down to my digital incompetence) even in an earlier article consecrated to it.
When I type ‘sexnet’ into a search engine I keep finding myself at sites that distract my attention and delay me in pursuing my search…
Which is a long-winded way of asking if you could give a link to sexnet or include it in the ‘Blogroll’ side bar.

Lensman

“Anyone can apply, but to be accepted one would need to be have credentials other than MAP status. ”
I once got strangely aroused when being trundled through the town centre whilst sitting in a bath-full of cassoulet beans. Do you think that would get me in…?

sugarboy

I wonder what Freud would have said about that…

Ethanic

…or W.C. Fields?

Lensman

“I wonder what Freud would have said about that…’ – sugarboy
If he had any idea how enjoyable it was I’m pretty sure he’d have said ‘moof eau-ffa, herr Lenssman, unt make zum room vor mee!’.

Lensman

Well, I wouldn’t quite award myself the laurels of having persuaded him, Jasmine. But I like to think he came away from our exchange with a much more nuanced and complex understanding of the issues, and maybe an acknowledgment that we’re not necessarily the libidinous, out-of-control monsters that the popular discourse presents us as.
As for Art – I’m an unapologetic over-fed culture-vulture. My faith in Reason extends to the modes of thinking and experience offered by Art, poetry, music, the novel &c – Art, in the broadest sense of the word, at its best seems to offer a kind of thought that is too complex to be paraphrased into words (and that, paradoxically, includes poetry).
I hope you found the Goya stimulating!

A.

Loving the Goyas!

FAccused

Great analysis of current nonsense that it’s currently featured in TV and print media on a daily basis. Regarding Hencke , this article featured on Ms Raccoon’s blog last month http://annaraccoon.com/2015/02/27/say-you-want-a-revolution-you-know-we-all-wanna-change-the-world/ Maybe of interest. Is anything published in the media what it seems ?

Girllover

I think many people are so eager to believe any bad thing about “powerful establishment figures” that they accept these tabloid tales without an ounce of skepticism. They think it makes them subversive but in reality they are just gullible idiots who are just as bad as the corrupted politicians they elect. David Ike makes a living by telling people that establishment politicians are actually alien lizard men from another dimension who want to enslave humanity and people believe it. While there is plenty of real corruption by establishment figures, it’s just not evil or inhuman enough for them – they need to be murderous satanic pedophiles too. Unfairly demonizing anybody, even powerful rich people, is wrong. Also I would highly question whether these people are really “powerful” if they are being attacked this way by the media.

Dissident

It seems to me that these days you have to go to extremes in order to take a powerful politician down. Back in the 1990s, the conservatives in America found out that accusing Bill Clinton of what amounted to infidelity with a woman over 18 years old just wasn’t enough in today’s day and age to sufficiently besmirch his image in the eyes of everyone in the American public. Not even when their claims were proven did it result in impeachment. Luckily for Clinton, the Republican establishment journalists didn’t do what the U.K. media has since turned into an art form: Accusing Slick Willie of some type of sexual liaison with an underage girl. That would have done the trick!
Accusing a politician of being gay these days also won’t do it, of course. It’s been several decades since a high-ranking politician caught – or at least accused of – engaging in infidelity or same gender fiddling was sufficient to take them down. Values have thankfully progressed in various directions since then, so something new had to replace these archaic hot button societal tropes in regards to being an irredeemable moral offense to accuse someone of. The idea of underage sexuality, especially with adults, however, fits that bill today.
Mix the issue with accusations of murder and other forms of serious violence, and it becomes even more compelling!
Making outrageous claims by accusing these politicians of being reptilian aliens won’t work, of course. Aliens, or the concept of such, do not offend our sensibilities in a major way. But the connection of Satan to Western religion makes our favorite Lord of Hell a much different story, which is why mixing the pedophile/sexual abuse hysteria with claims of “Satanic” ritual works wonders for those who want to mortify the Western mind into accepting some incredibly outrageous claims and accusations. We may question the existence of aliens, but not Satan!
The outrageous conspiracy theorists like David Icke must be very jealous of his counterparts in the fundamentalist Christian Right.

A.

About Bill Clinton: *her* image got pretty well besmirched, I gather. In recent years there’s been a swing-round from viewing Lewinsky as some dumb slut to viewing her as a victim of a relationship that cannot possibly have been consensual, given the power differential. To her credit, she wrote in a recent Vanity Fair article: “Sure, my boss took advantage of me, but I will always remain firm on this point: it was a consensual relationship. Any ‘abuse’ came in the aftermath, when I was made a scapegoat in order to protect his powerful position.”
(Hello all, have been up to my neck in work lately.)

Dissident

Hello again, A! No doubt Lewinsky’s image got besmirched as well, but she wasn’t a powerful politician. She was what amounted to a groupie turned intern of one such politician. It’s unfortunate that she became a scapegoat in the whole thing, and that Clinton’s position of power was considered more important than the ethical matters connected to the whole situation. She does indeed deserve credit for refusing to accept the label of “victim,” of course.
My point is, though, that had she been underage, Clinton would have been impeached successfully if he didn’t first resign in shame (he would have most likely resigned at the advice of his cabinet). Moreover, had she been underage during her dalliance with Clinton, Lewinsky would not have had her image dragged through the mud but would have been considered nothing but a victim by all sides of the political spectrum, and likely her identity wouldn’t have even been mentioned in the media.
Once her identity did come out a few years later, you can rest assured she would be approached by many profit-seeking publishers and journalists asking her to write a “tell-all” book where she presented herself as a victim and bashed Clinton accordingly, likely accusing him of all sorts of horrific abuse perpetrated towards her (no one would ever find real evidence of that personal torture chamber hidden deep below the White House with the still chained skeletons of several deceased teen girls, though, but if it would help sell the book, why not put it in there anyway, right?). If she showed the same degree of integrity as you pointed out under these alternate circumstances, she would have had too much pride to claim to be a victim when she honestly felt she wasn’t, and would have told them exactly which orifice they could shove those offers. However, if she suffered a re-conceptualization of the incident due to a combination of years of unscrupulous “therapy” and a large amount of $$$ thrown in her face for this book deal, then after it was published not only would it have become a guaranteed best seller, but it would convince the media and the public that there is an “epidemic of pedophilia” in American politics, “including in the Oval Office itself.”
That would have preceded another book or series of news articles reporting with horror how barber shops and hair salons across the nation were infiltrated by “pedophiles” using such vocations as an excuse to get close to child clients (several “experts” from the wonderful world of forensics would be quoted as alleging that “many ‘pedophiles’ are known to have a hair fetish”).

Jasmine

Or maybe it’s an adultophile thing? One of the more “feminine” or “gay” things that my friends point out about me is that I love playing with people’s hair.
I actually laughed outloud at the white house torture chamber thing. The real problem is with the torture chambers offshore (*cough* Guantanamo *cough*) not the imaginary ones in DC.
I wonder how much most people would be willing to sell their integrity for? At least in my case there’s a counteracting force – I’m bad at lying. Not so much incapable as really disgusted by it and avoiding it wherever possible. It’s taking pretty much all my willpower just to stay in the closet and that’s a place where I have a very good incentive – the threat of violence. I can’t see myself writing a dishonest tell all and sticking with it.

Dissident

As noted above, Jasmine, you’re a person of scruples. That’s why lying doesn’t come easy to you, I’m happy to say. Others, however, so much enjoy the sympathetic attention and tolerance for any type of negative behavior they may exhibit that comes with being categorized as what Tom has aptly called a “professional victim” that they are more than willing to perpetuate such a monumental lie. Offering them heaps of lucre and even more widespread sympathy and attention with the prospect of a tell-all book adds a further huge incentive to that. They know that in the current pro-victimology climate where sentiment trumps reasoning, most people will consider it an act of insensitive cruelty to challenge even their most outrageous stories, or to simply point out an inconvenient lack of evidence. It takes a lot of courage and exceptional character to stand up for truth over emotionally charged sentiment and risk the type of social backlash that can likely result. Alas, in this day and age people like Debbie Nathan and Anna Raccoon are a rare breed.
Also, let’s keep another fact in mind: you’re clinically sane. With others, however, they aren’t so much people of low scruples as they are deluded, often encouraged by truly unscrupulous and agenda-driven therapists who nurture and foster elaborate lurid and emotional button-pushing fantasies that they know will appeal to the masses. If someone is obviously emotionally ill, it’s considered a similar act of insensitive cruelty to deride their stories, or their therapists, since the latter are presented as caring people who are trying to help the Victim; they embody another cherished paradigm, the Victim’s Savior. The type of emotional reactions triggered by such stories and claims, no matter how bizarre or lacking in evidence, stifle logical reasoning and critical thinking to a mass extent. Both the subject and the masses are distracted from realizing that the therapist is actually manipulating their patient and pulling a fast one on the public for personal gain on many levels.
In today’s mindset, the Victim/Survivor is the most beloved of all paradigms, either trumping the paradigm of Hero or being united with it.

A.

Completely agree. And I really doubt that, had she been underage, she’d have been able to withstand the onslaught of therapy telling her she was a victim.

Christian

“According to Carol’s therapists, she was anally raped in Conservative Central Office by a Tory MP with a claw hammer, and raped by not one but two members of Mrs Thatcher’s cabinet.”
It is like in the Inquisition 21st century page http://www.inquisition21.com/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=74 I read
“There is one searing, indelible image to be found in the pages of the Dublin diocesan report on clerical child abuse. It is that of Fr Noel Reynolds, who admitted sexually abusing dozens of children, towering over a small girl as he brutally inserts an object into her vagina and then her back passage.
That object is his crucifix.”
It seems that these people are desperately craving for gore SM porn under the guise of righteousness and victim-making. As written in the page I quote:
“The salvationist insists on purity and innocence by means of endlessly manufacturing a pious and lurid misery porn, like the little girl with a crucifix in her minge. Righteousness porn actively elicits imaginary depictions of child sexual defilement – and it reaches far more people than a handful of grubby peados sharing nasty pictures with one another (a description which is itself an effect of the misery porn I am referring to – only ‘Others’ find child and adolescent sensuality sublimely beautiful and erotically enchanting).”

feinmann0

And this posted by Flo in the Calling All Survivors piece on Annaraccoon.com:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaUkt59vY1Q – Monkey Dust: Paedofinder General
Apologies if this has been posted on TOC previously.

45
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
Scroll to Top