by Dreams End » Sat Dec 24, 2005 9:50 pm
I think we are better off leaving it to Jews to sniff out "fake Jews". This business of non-Jews attempting to define who is a real Jew and who is not whether by race (Kazars) or by actions, is a pretty dangerous slippery slope. It also has no real historical foundation as the Kazar kingdom converted long ago and I'm pretty sure that "fake" Jews and "real" Jews have been intermarrying since then. It also makes some uncomfortable assumptions about Jews as a race as opposed to a religious or ethnic group.<br><br>Primarily, however, it's simply a way (not necessarily for Floyd personally) to nuance anti-Semitic theory. I'm not blaming Jews, just the "fake Jews." <br><br>And please let's not go into the whole "Oh, so we can't criticize Jews just because they are Jewish" b.s. The point is that I'm critical of theories that suggest a Jewish conspiracy at the heart of all the world's events. This is different from saying Sharon is an asshole.<br><br>I'd also like to reiterate that there is an important point that I've been remiss in not emphasizing. Anti-Semitic conspiracy theory has had a very large and negative impact on the search for truth of conspiratorial activities in history (which surely do exist.) But it's not just negative because of prejudice behind it, it's also negative because those with little understanding of the origin of these theories will buy into them because on the surface they seem to have some explanatory value. Folks in this camp do not necessarily hate Jews, but they are falling for anti-Semitic theory. <br><br>And since this is a site about conspiracy...I tend to bring it up a lot. <br><br>I'd like to use Floyd's link as exhibit A. Nevermind the views that Earley has about Jews as a people, go back and have a look at that link. Read the entire article. <br><br>Now, those of you such as Floyd who found it compelling...why? What about this article gave it an air of authenticity? For me, even without anti-Semitic content, I'd steer clear of it because absolutely nothing is sourced. And the idea that it contains SOME truth is actual harmful to research. That is, how do you determine which items are true and which are lies...and why bother going to a site that has at least SOME lies. It's like the saying I found from a UFO researcher, "If I told you that this champagne was only PARTLY horse piss, would you drink it?"<br><br>Rounding my way back to this important topic, I note that Larouche was very big into pushing the SRA story. His organization was distributing pamphlets like "Satan in your School yard" or something like that. Personally, it seems to me that the strategy here is not to cover up mc type activities or child slavery networks as much as it is to immediately sic disinformation artists on it to contaminate the credibility of such stories right off the bat. <br><br>I get nervous about so much of the SRA business because so much seems contrived to fit prevailing theory. <br><br>Here's how it might work. Local elite, Bill Smith, is accused by fairly credible witnesses of Satanic abuse. The evidence is there. So send in some kind of intel operative, we'll call him, oh, I don't know, Red Hunderson. Red investigates and publishes his findings. Bill Smith is not only involved in SRA but so is the entire CITY COUNCIL!!! In fact, Bill Clinton was seen at one event and Hillary was seen making out with Angelina Jolie at another. Red has uncovered a secret plan by this group to take over the city and turn the entire town into a hub for Satanic activity. It turns out they are to become the new headquarters for an ancient cult called the Balloonimati.<br><br>Now, not to completely discount such extensive conspiracies, (Ponchatoula comes to mind...clearly somebody is stepping in to f&*^k up that investigation) but most would dismiss this story as being too grandiose. So while we might suggest that Hunderson at least has SOME of the story correct, folks outside this research will dismiss the whole thing now. It does more harm than good and such "investigative" tactics should be criticized MOST ADAMENTLY by those who accept the reality of such activities. HONEST debunking, or at least skepticism (as opposed to CSICOP a priori b.s.) should be welcome and encouraged. <br><br>After all, if someone's mind can be completely controlled and alters created at will, surely it is not so tough to implant false cover stories that are far more elaborate than the truth. <br><br>I've seen this happen in the UFO community repeatedly. There's even one UFO researcher, Bill Moore, who admitted to passing exactly this sort of disinfo onto a prominent researcher. And the disinfo they passed along is quite familiar, about an alliance between the grays and the US government. The victim, Paul Bennewitz, ended up in a psychiatric hospital by the time it was done. Why Bill Moore is allowed in ANY UFO research organizations is beyond me. Oh yeah, he was part of the release of the "mj-12" documents as well. <br><br>They are doing this for a reason...probably more than one reason. And I think this is true in the SRA area as well. What SRA activists need to do (and if I ever find someone around this area who fits this criteria, I'd be the one to try it.) is find a case of a victim who is rather fearless and will go (eventually) public. Research the hell out of the case, but from an OBJECTIVE point of view. Think like a prosecutor. What are the weaknesses of this case? What would a debunker go after first? <br><br>Then go get evidence. Family testimony. Medical records. Look for the secret locations that are often a part of this. Go talk to people on the periphery...(low level masons, say) before interviewing those alleged to be directly involved. Get a neutral psychologist involved. Is the victim being stalked? Get hidden surveillance cameras (really easy to get now). If it's a time of high activity, get a team of...ahem...skilled secutiy folks to watch the premises. Etc. Etc. It can be done, though at some risk to victim and investigator, so I realize that this isn't as easy as I make it sound.<br><br>There may be some written accounts that have done the above and I'd love to read them. So point me in that direction if there are. Nothing so far in my own wife's story is pointing in this direction...it all seems to point toward "simple" family abuse. However, I'm constantly making note of little things she remembers...in case there turns out to be more to it.<br><br>Victim memoirs really offer nothing as far as evidence. That's not saying I simply disbelieve all purported victims, but just that without corroboration they prove nothing. <br><br>So this is the main reason I harp on the anti-Semitic stuff. It's not just hateful and dangerous, it also throws us off the track. <br><br> <p></p><i></i>
