Anomalous Gosch comments on recent post

by **glubglubglub** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 2:07 am

It looks from the comments thread that some or all of the following were going on: a) someone attempting to play mindgames with you b) someone attempting to drop hints about a line of inquiry you might investigate c) someone attempting to send a message to Johnny Gosch (or someone else entirely, for that matter) and not running a blogspot blog I've no clue how much information about any of the anonymous posters you're actually privy to as admin of the blog. That said, if you do any investigating and get any results you care to share with us, I'd be curious; not sure how far down someone's rabbithole I want to get personally dragged but do have some investigative suggestions: i) running traceroute and whois against any ip addresses will yield a rough idea of the location of the computers used to send the posts to your blog; seeing if any of the ip's are known anonymous proxies ( there's plenty of lists of such proxies out there ) should give you a clearer sense of what exactly it's safe to conclude from the ips... ii) it should be easy enough to email Ms. McNamara and state that someone appears to have been impersonating her on your blog, and you'd just like to clear up whether or not it's really her ( a throwaway sentence or two about being a big fan of her work will make this go down smoothly, I'd guess ). iii) the info gained from i) and ii) should go some ways towards figuring out which if any of the scenarios above are closer to what's going on. --- These are just suggestions, of course, and offered more as 'things that could be done' than 'things that should be done'; as a readr + sometimes commentator being active on a board/forum that's getting used for intrigues makes me a tad nervous, though, so I'm a bit uneasy in anticipation of what further weridness, if any, arrives on scene in the upcoming weeks, hence the curiousity and suggestions.

by **Rigorous Intuition** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 3:11 am

They were curious comments. Blogger comments are absolutely anonymous, so I log no IPs from them. And partly on account of that I have to take such remarks with many grains of salt. I'm inclined to presume mind games.

by **km artlu** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 7:54 am

i'm glad this is being revisited. it sort of stayed with me. if i'm not mistaken, that birthday comment was on the day of 11/12 and also was posted at 11:12. that little bit of extra effort for symmetry stood out. somehow goofy and serious business all in one.

by **glubglubglub** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 12:38 pm

but it's been my experience that things go downhill quickly once places start getting used for purposes not their original intent -- in this case, the risk of transforming from 'Cheers' to the sort of dive bar used for finding folks to arrange dubious schemes. As a practical matter, too, boards, etc., that get coopted for use as message-passing locales tend to attract the notice of more-mundane but more-active authorities, too -- ie, if a music board starts also hosting conversations arranging drug transactions, sooner or later it'll come to the notice of ordinay (ie, non shadow-gov) law enforcement -- and that's an entirely separate dynamic than the just-us-and-the-spooks-and-the-nutters dynamic we've got going now. So I hope nothing comes of it, but it's got my nervous meter a pit pegged at the moment for what it might herald, not for its contents directly.

by **Dreams End** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 2:57 pm

If Johnny Gosch is alive and has internet access, it would be very likely he reads this site. He wouldn't post under his own name and he might not post at all. I'm not even COMPLETELY convinced that the young man Noreen Gosch met ten years or so ago really was her son. This would make her the victim of a very cruel game indeed, if it's true. However, I think it is possible (not saying it's so) that much of the Franklin stuff got twisted by deCamp (friend of former CIA director Colby) and stuff got added on, like the connections to Monarch and the Bonnaci connection to Gosch. If this is true, then the man who came to see her was not her son and spun the story to her to get her caught up in this large plot to use real events (he really was kidnaped, kids really were abused in Nebraska Boys Town) to put out this disinfo cover story. She may have written in her book or elsewhere the confirming signs that the man she saw a decade ago was her son for sure, no doubt. So this is just speculation, but this KIND of disinformation surely takes place, contaminating the most fertile ground of investigation. (My morning tutoring student cancelled, so you all get the benefit of my disjointed rambling...lucky you.) Before I continue this line of thought, let me hasten to add that this disinformation is intentional, in my view. AS SUCH, this means it is intended to hide something, so the presence of disinformation does not suggest to me that nothing is going on, just that the real story is not yet being told correctly. When the alleged "Eileen McNamara" posted, I looked up the Fells Acres daycare abuse thing again. Despite media reports, it sure does look like those kids were abuse...but that's an OLD story. We understand that around here. But I also went to a link about RA abuse and started checking it out. (Interestingly, Isaac Bonewits has an article about determining the level of danger a "cult" represents. Maybe only HH and Avalon even know who he is. My wife has met him and was really impressed and said I would like him. Anyway, I thought his cult assessment tool looked valid. Check it out if you want: <a href="http://www.ra-info.org/library/programming/Bonewits.shtml">www.ra-info.org/library/p...wits.shtml</a> ) Anyway, another woman on that site who has an article about the commonalities of SRA (really more like the commonalities of MC programming, from the look of it) was also on that Los Angeles Commission that put out a report that SRA is real. Here's the article I'm talking about <a href="http://www.ra-info.org/library/programming/com_prog.shtml">www.ra-info.org/library/p...prog.shtml</a> Here's what bothered me. Numerous people on the commission were complaining that they were being "poisoned" by Satanists' pumping diazinon , a bug spray ingedient, into air ducts or getting it into water. yet no one had really bad symptoms and no evidence was offered as to why this particular poison was the one suspected. In short, they sounded like loonies. No matter that this may have been the result of real games being played...you simply don't come out with elaborate poisoning theories with no evidence. Here's that article and notice that my last sentence is echoed by one of the SRA survivors on that very board: <blockquote>Quote:<hr> Ritual Abuse Taskforce Alleges Poisoning LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Several members of a county task force on satanic abuse say devil worshippers are using a bug spray chemical to poison them and others, including abuse survivors and their psychotherapists. The county's chief toxicologist says he doubts the claims by some members of the Ritual Abuse Task Force, which is a subcommittee of the Los Angeles County Commission for Women. "I can't believe I'm sitting here listening to this," Paul J. Papanek said as task force members expressed their fears during a Monday meeting. "This is outrageous." Therapists, religious leaders and people who say they were abused during satanic rituals belong to the 14-member task force, which was formed in 1988. The group has financed its own operations since 1989 by selling more than 17,000 copies of a $1 handbook describing signs of satanic abuse. Some task force members, including psychologist Vicki Graham-Costain, said a satanic conspiracy is trying to silence anti-devil forces by poisoning up to 43 people with the toxic pesticide diazinon, which is used in bug sprays and powders. She and the others didn't say how many of the 43 are task force members. At their quarterly meetings since March, several task force members and others have complained of nausea, dizziness and numbness, which they blame on the pesticide. Some purported abuse survivors, who didn't identify themselves during the latest meeting, claimed they were being poisoned in their homes, cars and offices, and that the pesticide was slipped into air conditioning or heating vents. One woman claimed she was poisoned during a task force meeting. "I certainly did not hear any evidence of diazinon poisoning," Papanek said afterward. Task force member Stephanie Sheppard, who said she was a survivor of satanic ritual abuse, said the group's credibility was "severely on the line" because of the poisoning claims. "If people are making those statements, they need to back them up," she said. Task force member Catherine A. Gould, a clinical psychologist, claimed she was poisoned after she raised the matter at the March board meeting. She said her blurred vision and failed memory weren't psychosomatic, but she admitted she never visited a doctor to be tested for the pesticide. Myra Riddell, chairwoman of the women's commission, requested formation of the task force, which she also chairs. She said she had noticed more patients were claiming that, as children, they were victims of abuse during satanic rituals. <a href="http://www.holysmoke.org/sdhok/sat25.htm">www.holysmoke.org/sdhok/sat25.htm</a> <hr></blockquote> Longer article here: <a href="http://www.reflectionsinthenight.com/times.htm">www.reflectionsinthenight.com/times.htm</a> This longer article says that Sheppherd was the one to call in the media: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Task force member Stephanie Sheppard had asked Papanek-and members of the media-to attend Monday's meeting. Sheppard then called on the alleged victims to prove their bizarre claims or keep quiet and stop wasting taxpayers' time and money".<hr></blockquote> So maybe Shepphard was really a victim or maybe she was put there to discredit the thing...I don't know. So does this mean that their study was useless? Not necessarily. Another interpretation is that their study found some real abuse but attempts were being made on various levels to discredit this information. Maybe someone on the commission was planted. Maybe that person started the poisoning fears, making others hypervigilant for vague symptoms and then maybe that person was the one to tip off the press. Who knows? However, they ended up looking batty. As a classic example, I always go back to the "aviary" and UFO's. Two of those guys with bird code names (long story...google "aviary" and "UFO" for more info) evidently took Linda Molton Howe into a back room on an airforce base and gave her a document that outlined alien involvement throughout human history. Although I think she believed the document to be real, she was aware, if I recall, that they seemed to be trying to gauge her reaction above all else. One of these men was the same one who went on a nationwide UFO "expose" in 1982 and revealed that there were live aliens on a base somewhere. And they like Tibetan music. And, oh yeah, they like strawberry ice cream. In fact, in my own mind, when such games are being played where genuine information is deliberately injected with discrediting misinformation, I simply call it "strawberry ice cream." There's a LOT of that out there. That's why I'm so pissy about sources...and really....also why I'm so much into the "anti-Semitic" theme, because I think much of the disinfo assumes this form. For example, I see Fritz Springmeier's "bloodlines of the illuminati" all over the place. No sources...and Jews are at the heart of it. Nevermind the moral issues here, this is clearly misdirection. I use these anti-Semitic themes as caution flags. They help us spot disinformation. Here's a link to the LA Commission report, though I'm not sure if it's the whole report or not. It has comments from "K.S." (Kathleen Sullivan) and if you notice ONLY focuses on SRA and nothing on MC. Notes from K.S. indicate this shortcoming. Another shortcoming is that, in this excerpt anyway, there's no indication of how this data was arrived at. Interviews? With how many victims? What effort was made to corroborate these stories, etc. But since I mentioned this report, I wanted to link to it: <a href="http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/slvn-rab.htm">www.mindcontrolforums.com/slvn-rab.htm</a> Here's a final link that has a very large number of other links. yeah, Fritz Springmeier and David Icke are both on there, but so are TONS of other links for me and anyone interested to start digging through. I'll bet many no longer work, though. <a href="http://www.nemasys.com/~ghstwolf/rahome/related/articles.shtml">www.nemasys.com/~ghstwolf...cles.shtml</a>

by **Homeless Halo** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 9:37 pm

DE: Utterly suggest Bonnewitz's book "Real Magic" for anyone attempting to study the cults/occult/SRA/MC linkages in a "scholarly" manner, although IB is sometimes a little "over-the-top", I think enough of his information is "true" (dogma among some occult groups) that he is definitely worth more than a passing mention. ABCDEF is a "general" method for determining whether or not YOU are in a cult, but if applied TOO loosely could implicate non-cults (like the church I go to). Can't speak for Avalon, but I'm very familiar with IB personally, as his was among the first documents linking MY personal interests to those of the "mainstream" here (altough I'm loathe to use THAT term describing ANY of you wonderful blessed people). His study is in-depth, and he rolls over a LOT of stones. I tend to agree that the "bug spray" is probably just a "scare", that is a psy-op by a "plant" of some sort. It just isn't the TYPE of thing you'd use to really harm/kill someone, unless they were ants. Strawberry Ice Cream is excellent. At least we know the aliens have good taste.

by **Dreams End** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 11:41 pm

Bonewits comes out here for some sort of gathering my wife goes to. If he comes out again, I'll buy him dinner and pick his brain. I think it's usually in the summer though.

by **Homeless Halo** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 11:42 pm

Tell him I said hello.

by **Avalon** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 1:36 am

Isaac's respected in the Pagan community. I don't personally know him, and we so far haven't attended the same gatherings. I was going to recommend his book Real Magic in the thread on whether magick works, but never got around to commenting on that thread. It's the best I've seen so far on the mechanisms behind magick. His cult evaluation checklist is useful no matter what philosophic underpinnings a group may have. His website gets a bit "curmudgeonly" at times (in his words), but he knows his stuff and he's paid his dues.

Anomalous Gosch comments on recent post

Anomalous Gosch comments on recent post

Re: Anomalous Gosch comments on recent post

anomalous gosch comments...

my concern is less the content/intent

Re: my concern is less the content/intent

re: SRA, cults, bug spray etc.

Re: re: SRA, cults, bug spray etc.

de:

Bonewits

Who is online