Christian Ritual Abuse

by **biaothanatoi** » Mon Aug 21, 2006 3:16 am

Your argument doesn't make sense. I don't "join" the Jews if I hang a Star of David around my neck. I don't become royalty if I put a tiara on. I don't become Native American if I paint stripes on my face. This argument is more then just nonsensical when it's used in RA - it is dangerous because, implicitly, there is an attribution of responsibility. Talking about "Christian ritual abuse" (because the perpetrators refer to Satan and Satan is part of the judeo-christian tradition) legitimises some kind of causal relationship or association between Christianity and ritual abuse that does not exist. We know that ritual abuse occurs within Hindu, Muslim and other frameworks, so the argument that there is something specific to Christian doctrine that encourages ritual abuse is an ideological statement, not an evidence-based one.

by **blanc** » Mon Aug 21, 2006 3:34 am

imagine what kind of atrocities? we don't need to imagine. the X's testimony (Dutroux) gave us details. atrocities allegedly committed by the Lippens bros amongst others, are beyond the sickest imagination. Its at this point that any semblance of a belief system explaining these acts breaks down. only self gratification, entirely divorced from sensibility can 'explain' such degrees of constantly elaborated violence. the term 'satanic' added to ra is problematic. but it can be an adjective, like diabolic, meaning very evil. I agree its best to drop it, and just use ra as a shorthand for organised group sadistic and sexual abuse.

by **biaothanatoi** » Mon Aug 21, 2006 5:28 am

Personally, I think we need to move away from "ritual abuse" altogether and start talking about "organised sexual exploitation" and the different things that occur within it, like sado-ritualistic torture, prostitution, pornography, drug trafficking, and so on. Terminology is important - it structures our cognition, our capacity to think clearly. We have to be as clear as possible with this stuff, and I think the use of "ritual abuse" as an umbrella term prioritises the ritual violence over and above a set of other human rights abuses (prostitution, pornography, etc) and clogs up the synapses somewhat. But a move away from "ritual abuse" will be a slow one - we have to convince people that the ritual violence is real before we can start getting more sophisticated about how we look at it. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=biaothanatoi@rigorousintuition>biaothanatoi</A> at: 8/21/06 3:29 am

by **blanc** » Mon Aug 21, 2006 6:41 am

biao - good point. if we had a shorthand which didn't lead the mind down fuggy histrionic paths it might help, but what exactly? something that differentiates this 'modern' version of ra from its generational antecedents ? which is inclusive enough to incorporate its m/c generator? which allows us to consider its imitators, hangers on, and useful subgroups? anotherdrew - thanks for the specifics. this does not on the face of it tie in to the org I know of, churches in different states in US. nevertheless it sounds like another offshoot of the same rampant weed, the religious bit covering the nasty stuff. in so far as I have been able to investigate over the last 6 years, I am constantly struck by the universality of methods, and when (rarely) one gets close enough to real info, the ties between individual perps across large distances. one should be cautious about assuming that case a. has nothing to do with case b. , separated by geography alone.

by **biaothanatoi** » Mon Aug 21, 2006 7:54 am

Blanc - I think we have to position RA within a legal/human rights framework. It's why I don't like Goodwin's "organised sadistic abuse" - where does it sit? It's not a psychological term, not a criminological one, not a sociological one, not a legal one, not a human rights one. It has no discourse, no "home". As a result, it hasn't been picked up. (Google "organised sadistic abuse" and you mainly get sites explaining that it is synonymous with "ritual abuse".) Personally, I'm a fan of the phrase "organised sexual exploitation", within which there can be "ritual acts" etc.

by **Gouda** » Mon Aug 21, 2006 10:26 am

Sending out loads of gratitude for this thread - what is being discussed and how it is being discussed. These distinctions need to be made. Following with interest, and learning lots. Thanks all. Here are some of my thoughts and questions based on about one year of slowly learning what is going on out there... Perhaps both "Satanic" and "Christian" RA are misleading qualifiers used to muddy what is, in my view, a wider, politically-involved phenomena. The so-called christians and satanists and christians posing as satanists or vice-versa are, it seems to me, usually exposed (to the extent they can be) in the context of, or linked to, higher rings of earthly power which (paradoxically?) transcend religious identity. Earthly power and elite political goals trump the useful labels these stage-players must don for the seated audience (and sometimes for themselves, ie. cognitive dissonance.) Furthermore, ritual abuse transcends religious barriers, does it not? There is “Muslim” ritual abuse too, no? Surely a few atheists out there indulge. Most, if not all though, are tied to earthly power or are trying to get within that realm. Anyway, what with all the political-connections, -agendas, -implications linked-in with ritual abuse and the credible reality of a "Pedophocracy" operating out there and wielding extraordinary political, legal, or other coercive power (as they always have) shouldn't the reality of “ritual abuse” be set apart with higher priority? Old Ed down the street, a real single pervert, getting caught making kiddie porn can’t possibly be the same as Ed’s mayor, good Christian that he is, running a cross-state ring of perps, victims and materials to maintain power, inter alia. Even more so if the mayor is part of a ritual-based exploitation ring. His sentencing might be equal to that of a convicted non-ra, non-mc based human trafficker, but the investigation and pursuit thereof should be greater for the ritual-based perps because they are probably linked-into something older, deeper, more widespread and dangerous. There is something about the ritualistic dimension to this sexual exploitation which assumes, in my mind at least, a more troubling relation to Power itself. A mayor running child prostitutes like drugs is horrible enough, but when a ritual aspect is added, there is something older, deeper, more organized and sinister involved, something harder to tap into, crack, expose, and stop. It attacks, manipulates, and controls our psyche on more levels than regular porn. It goes beyond dirty business in the back room; it is exploiting the most human and fragile and important parts of us all: our minds. I think, if I am correct, that Blanc and Biao are proposing to reframe sexual abuse to encompass a wider range of acts under "organised sexual exploitation." Biao: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>I think the use of "ritual abuse" as an umbrella term prioritises the ritual violence over and above a set of other human rights abuses (prostitution, pornography, etc)<hr></blockquote> I agree, to an extent - abuse is abuse - but have a few thoughts and questions. I think that because the ritual aspect of this abuse is regularly tied to the more powerful movers and shakers of society basking in positions of high responsibility over very large numbers of people, perhaps it should be given priority - at least in the sense of exposure, if not prosecution. I am not aware of any (sucessful) legal precedents if there are any. These guys do not simply run their perversions in a pedestrian manner, they ritualize it. Ritualizers see themselves as elect, above, and thus entitled to use their own system to supercede our system. Ritual feeds that self-fulfilling prophesy of entitlement to domination. There are also corporations (Enron) and politicians (Cunningham) who see themselves as elect, above, and thus feel entitled to abuse the system and run pornographic scams on our trust for their own enrichment - but they are also sanctifying a greater ritual that is corrupt to its core: corporate capitalism (but that for another thread). What I am getting at: in the parapolitical school of investigation, should not the ritual aspect be given priority over other subsets of organized abuse if it almost invariably leads to the head of the stinking fish? Bush may have been into porn, coke, prostitution and all, but that only (only, huh!) denotes systemic HUMAN corruption. However, when Bush is likely tied to organized ritual abuse involving mind control victims and its sinister entourage of black budgets, secrecy, blackmail, trafficking and mafia hits leading to wars, war crimes, and a permanent trafficking institution, then we have systemic ELITE corruption of a far more organized and dangerous nature, which beyond getting a few perp's rocks off, advances an ordering of the world to their liking - one which further traumatizes and facilitates corruption of the entire human community, perpetuating all other forms of exploitation, ritualized or not. Their rituals (sexual or otherwise) affect more people and more processes on a global scale. I worry that elite ritual exploitation bleeds down and gets encoded consciously or not into the wider global psyche which is manifested in every type of sexual dysfunction, which is then channeled back up the pyramid for further sustainance. All that, and how do we categorize ritual abuse when it is enhanced with the added dimension of mind control and Manchurian-like political/sex slaves? I know the difference between mc and ra has been discussed on other threads, but I am still a bit hazy on the working relationship between the two. blanc: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>only self gratification, entirely divorced from sensibility can 'explain' such degrees of constantly elaborated violence.<hr></blockquote> Yet are not some aspects of ritual abuse (and, related or not, the specific reality of mind control, designing alters and controlling agents) useful not only for indulging sick personal fantasies, but also to indulge wider political agendas? I am interested in the aspect of rational political calculation involved in those groups/societies relying on generations of carefully-constructed and handed-down rituals. Perhaps most of these crimes are of the sloppier, undisciplined, senseless, purely self-gratifying variety - but are not the highest-level organized ritual abusers acting quite sensibly in using such means to achieve certain political/financial/power/control goals? As such, ritual acts may be highly-disciplined, well-structured, well-protected and not necessarily concerned primarily with personal gratification as an end-in-itself, but rather as a means to something else. Perhaps the highest-level crimes got so high and stay high because of their highly-controlled ritual aspect - which may even require, from time to time, highly disciplined abstenance from particular indulgences. Kinda like what it takes to make it into the inner realms of the intelligence complex. Ok, it might be clarifying to drop the "christian" and/or "satanic" modifiers from "ritual abuse" and put it within the category "organised sexual exploitation." (Though I think this category may be too broad - heck, commercial advertising comes to mind and could be included under this rubric - though I suppose it could be argued that commercial advertising is just as dangerous and insidious as ritual abuse.) So I would suggest a special qualifier for Ritual Abuse, something like: "There are many sets and subsets of organised sexual exploitation, the most dangerous and far-reaching being organized ritual abuse." In an ideal world, sociologists, human rights professionals, legal professionals and journalists will have to come around to the reality of "ritual abuse", or "ritual acts" committed in a context of sexual abuse/exploitation if ritual abuse does in fact occur in reality. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=gouda@rigorousintuition>Gouda</A> at: 8/21/06 9:00 am

by **yathrib** » Mon Aug 21, 2006 10:38 am

One of the posts referred to "RA org" and I thought it was a site. On closer examination i recognize that it was just an abbreviation for organization. I thought the poster was saying Christian.org and ra.org were owned by the same people...

by **biaothanatoi** » Tue Aug 22, 2006 5:05 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>the investigation and pursuit thereof should be greater for the ritual-based perps because they are probably linked-into something older, deeper, more widespread and dangerous.<hr></blockquote> Have to disagree. The only way that organised crime can exist - in any form - is through corruption. The more higher the corruption goes, the more successful and profitable the criminal operation can be. The power structures that we see in RA are identical to those that enable drug trafficking and so on. They aren't special. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>There is something about the ritualistic dimension to this sexual exploitation which assumes, in my mind at least, a more troubling relation to Power itself. <hr></blockquote> Agreed, but i think it's not so much a MORE troubling relation as much as it reveals THE troubling relations that underpin broader issues like paedophilia, rape, child porn, and so on. That's why the denial mechanism is so strong in people - the wider ramifications. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>I am not aware of any (sucessful) legal precedents if there are any. <hr></blockquote> There are successful prosecutions of ritually abusive perpetrators in America and elsewhere. It is common for the ritual elements of cases to be excised, or simply made invisible by the instruments of law because the ritual acts aren't specifically illegal. You can't actually pursue "ritual abuse" because, outside of a few American states, it's not recognised as a crime in and of itself. The violations that constitue ritual abuse (torture, sexual assault) are what goes before a court of law. The issue is not that "ritual abuse" is not believed/pursued. The real problem is that our societies are crisscrossed by networks of people that have organised themselves in such a way that enables members to have nonconsensual sex with adults and children. This is a form of crime - and criminal organisation - that is not recognised by the law, by the community, or by the police - and they use slavery techniques (like RA) that are not recognised as well. I don't think it's accurate to talk about "organised ritual abuse". A small minority of the acts that occur in these networks are ritual acts. The majority of crimes involve day-to-day incest in the abusive families that constitute the networks, as well as sadistic group events and opportunistic offences by individual procurers and perpetrators. Last Dec, I spoke to a perpetrator who was calling my friend - he had hired out a hotel room for the night and was demanding that she come and do what he wanted. (It may have been a set-up for an abduction, but he may have been looking to enjoy his "privileges" as a member of the perp group.) Most offences against her involved large sadistic groups, sometimes ritually structured, but usually not. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>What I am getting at: in the parapolitical school of investigation, should not the ritual aspect be given priority over other subsets of organized abuse if it almost invariably leads to the head of the stinking fish? <hr></blockquote> Firstly, this isn't a "parapolitical" issue. It's a very real, international human rights issue. It may be a "crime of the powerful", it may speak to a perverse culture of entitlement and impunity amongst some elites, but that doesn't make it any more "parapolitical" then drug trafficking, fraud, money laundering, lying about wars and funnelling contracts to multinationals that pay you a pension. "Political" is an adjective with a number of different applications, but I think you are overplaying it here. All organised crime involves the corruption of people in positions of power. That doesn't make "politics" the most cogent lens on organised crime. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>I worry that elite ritual exploitation bleeds down and gets encoded consciously or not into the wider global psyche which is manifested in every type of sexual dysfunction, which is then channeled back up the pyramid for further sustainance. <hr></blockquote> Ritual abuse has always been with us - it has shaped our culture in many subtle ways - and the urges that drive ritual abuse will always be with us. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>All that, and how do we categorize ritual abuse when it is enhanced with the added dimension of mind control and Manchurian-like political/sex slaves? <hr></blockquote> By keeping our thinking discrete and the issues seperate. The RA-MC nexus is largely an American one, for a whole set of reasons, and I find it frustrating to (for instance) be speaking about ritual abuse in Melbourne, Australia, and to be constantly confronted with a black CIA operation from the 50s. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>are not the highest-level organized ritual abusers acting quite sensibly in using such means to achieve certain political/financial/power/control goals? <hr></blockquote> Ritual involves a performance and perpetuation of a set of pre-existing values and norms - it is the enactment of a worldview, how can it "achieve" a political or financial goal? <blockquote>Quote:<hr>As such, ritual acts may be highly-disciplined, well-structured, well-protected and not necessarily concerned primarily with personal gratification as an end-in-itself, but rather as a means to something else. <hr></blockquote> Not following your logic here. A ritual is an embodied experience - it involves bodily action, the body as the location of knowledge and action. In these rituals, the perpetrators (and victims) move into incredibly visceral, sadistic, bodily experiences. I think you are forgetting the body and intersection of overwhelming pleasure/pain in the moment of ritual abuse and overplaying the strategic cerebral aspect. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>"There are many sets and subsets of organised sexual exploitation, the most dangerous and far-reaching being organized ritual abuse." <hr></blockquote> Ritual abuse isn't a category, it's an act. We can consider it a "marker" of sorts - given that a group that is ritually abusive is very likely to be involved in torture, child porn, child prostitution - but that takes us back into the realm of organised sexual exploitation. Organised sexual exploitation is a site of many different crimes, including ritual violence. Some groups are ritually abusive, some are not, and most victims are trafficked between sites/groups that involve ritual abuse and those that do not. So treating "ritual abuse" as a discrete category doesn't speak to the reality of the victims or the diversity of criminal environments in which it takes place.

by **Gouda** » Tue Aug 22, 2006 10:35 am

Thanks for the considered response Biao. There is a lot of food for thought and debate here. Just a couple of quick replies; hopefully more later... <blockquote>Quote:<hr> The power structures that we see in RA are identical to those that enable drug trafficking and so on. They aren't special.<hr></blockquote> I would agree that the power structures enabling both RA and drug trafficking are identical and equally corrupt(ing), but I can't quite buy the idea that the quality (the loaded content, the specific meaning imbued in the acts) and implications/ramifications of RA are the same as drug trafficking, or even prostitution. I can imagine that some of those at the top tiers of organized drug/human trafficking not privy to RA might, like most of the rest of society, find RA quite "special" - if even believable, if not too far beyond the realm of their experience. Though you are quite right in saying "Some groups are ritually abusive, some are not, and most victims are trafficked between sites/groups that involve ritual abuse and those that do not." While I tend to think it would be unwise to discount the power of ritual violence in furthering certain agendas (political, financial, world orders etc) and the reliance these (especially elite) perps have on these acts to further their agendas, I can also see a debate to be had on whether these acts are organized purely as a lewd sideshow to their power romp, or as something integral to how they go about acquiring and maintaining power. Perps, elite or otherwise, rely on many tools to further agendas - most of it machiavellian, corrupt, and pedestrian - but I am really curious as to the horrific role RA plays in their power games. Do they believe, beyond perverse self-gratification, that the practice of RA is essential to their quest for power and control, not only over victims, but also over society as a whole? <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Ritual abuse isn't a category, it's an act. We can consider it a "marker" of sorts - given that a group that is ritually abusive is very likely to be involved in torture, child porn, child prostitution - but that takes us back into the realm of organised sexual exploitation.<hr></blockquote> I completely agree, though I certainly did not want to convey that I considered ritual abuse a mere abstract category - but we were talking terminology and frameworks after all. I think we are coming at this from different angles - me as a neophyte "lay" observer (admittedly from the more political side of things, interested in education and exposure) and you as more of an expert working with the legal/human rights issues (also, interested in education and exposure) which I know are, in the end, the most important in seeking justice. You are in greater contact with the victims of abuse, while I am one of those laptop warriors only able to sharpshoot at the perps. Ultimately though, I think we are dovetailing at exposure, justice - and healing.

by **blanc** » Tue Aug 22, 2006 3:05 pm

I find these discussions difficult, because as soon as ritual abuse is mentioned, in the context of the powerful elite, an extra dimension hovers above and around the arguments, even when not expressed. There are, undeniably, numbers of people who assert that rituals of a sado/sexual and/or satanic nature have been used for a long time in connection with power. And some of those assertions make reference to secret groups, who have supposedly passed down both rituals and power through the ages. I have yet to read or hear from a reliable source anything which confirms that the ritual element in ritually abusive set-ups, regardless of the status of perpetrators, is anything but a fairly modern ad hoc invention. Some of the powerful who allegedly perpetrate, do not have interesting ancestors, and some of the world's powerful don't feature in stories of sadistic sexual abuse. The other difficulty which clogs discussion IMO, is the 'mind of the perpetrator' element. Its linked to the 'fake history' problem, usually, because of speculations about whether the mental make up of people whose idea of fun is extreme violence are natural born leaders. Both of these elements are depressingly disempowering. They seem to be saying - hey, bad guys have always been with us, they get to the top, its human nature, nothing we can do about it. I think of these avenues as blind alleys- they are not without interest, but they tend to lead away from what I can say I know about, and I want to mention them, in order to explain what I am not talking about. Based to some extent on personal experience, to some extent on witness accounts I trust, and to some extent on reading, I do think that mc and ra in its current form are linked, and that it is in the political arena where those links are most obvious. The mental picture I have is that abusive set ups, sometimes quite organised and sometimes hitching on to one or other religion or making one up to fit the bill, have probably existed for a long time, catering for and creating sociopathic individuals at all levels of society. But I think there has been a bastard offspring of the military mind control experiments, themselves to a certain extent progeny of paperclip nazis ideas ( which brings us in touch with dabbling in occultism, and unethical 'medical' experimentation.) So it is not to deny that there has been cross pollinations of ideas, techniques and esoteric rituals or beliefs, at least from the late 19th cent early 20th, but rather to set this aside, as being too difficult to research satisfactorily. The expansion of the crimes associated with and involved in ritual abuse is, I think, a direct result of the involvement of the secret services; experiments which may have initiated as a panic response to the idea that an enemy had developed brainwashing to a level which could pose a security threat, then rapidly assimilated criminal elements who found the spin offs highly interesting. If security services had abandoned things there, in those early experiments, we should not be seeing the elaborate cover-ups (epitomised in Dutroux case). And we should not be seeing the appalling expansion of paedophile crime. It is because the political dimension that is specifically of crime committed under the umbrella of government, which uses the bonding bribery and blackmail of ra to keep rolling, that the humble victim of much humbler perpetrators, so rarely gets justice. Criminal groups provide a resource for the larger criminal conspiracies which shelter in governments, and its simply been much more convenient to trash the victims than risk even a small limited exposure. I think what Dutroux indicated, that above him there were others and above them others also, was a literal description of the way it works. The Dutroux case had to be limited because there was a direct line back to the cover-up of illegal arms deals to proscibed regimes, and kickbacks to politicians, civil servants and fixers. To manage such a damage limitation exercise, democracy and justice have to be ditched. I feel that matters are reaching a tipping point, and that soon a new kind of cover up will have to be developed, because the old meme that there are a few isolated perverts in the world who attackchildren, and who are dealt with by the justice system, and that stories of ritual abuse and murder are the product of fantasists is getting too faded and tatty to keep dragging out.

by **biaothanatoi** » Wed Aug 23, 2006 12:31 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>I can't quite buy the idea that the quality (the loaded content, the specific meaning imbued in the acts) and implications/ramifications of RA are the same as drug trafficking, or even prostitution.<hr></blockquote> But RA, drug trafficking and prostitution are not discrete categories. Ritually abusive groups are usually active in all of these areas. Some drug trafficking groups have developed into ritually abusive groups - I've read an account of a former addict who was ritualistically raped and tortured by a circle of drug dealers because she couldn't pay a debt. So RA is part of a criminal subculture, alongside and interpenetrated by other crimes like prostitution and drug trafficking. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Do they believe, beyond perverse self-gratification, that the practice of RA is essential to their quest for power and control, not only over victims, but also over society as a whole?<hr></blockquote> I've learnt that you can't generalise about perps. Some are rich, some are poor, some believe in Satan, some don't, some are preferential paedophiles, some are just in it for kicks, etc. Agreed that we are looking for frameworks are categories - what I'm saying is that I reject "ritual abuse" as a category per se. As a trace marker - OK, I can buy that, research demonstrates that a group that practices RA is involved also in torture, porn, snuff, etc. But ritual abuse doesn't define those crimes - it's just that, if RA is present, the others probably will be as well. So using RA as a category makes a whole set of other crimes invisible without clarifying the issue at all.

by **biaothanatoi** » Wed Aug 23, 2006 12:39 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>I have yet to read or hear from a reliable source anything which confirms that the ritual element in ritually abusive set-ups, regardless of the status of perpetrators, is anything but a fairly modern ad hoc invention.<hr></blockquote> I really agree with you on this one. The vast majority of RA survivors stories are concerned with the mundane, everyday, appalling abuses that characterised their childhood. The conspiracy/"parapolitically"-minded want to hear about Bush and Cheney and mind-controlled presidential sex slaves and that is how they frame RA - but they only do so by ignoring the stories that are coming up from the ground. <blockquote>Quote:<hr> that stories of ritual abuse and murder are the product of fantasists is getting too faded and tatty to keep dragging out.<hr></blockquote> Agreed - I think we've reached a tipping point as well. Things are changing. It's why we have to keep talking to the evidence - not speculating endlessly about connections we can't possibly prove, or making generalisations about perps whom we don't really know. If our stance is evidence-based then we can make our own "story" to counter theirs - but ours will have some guts behind it.

by **havanagilla** » Wed Aug 23, 2006 12:44 am

agree with you blanc. perhaps biao is searching for structural patterns in society, family and community which allow for the entire phenomenon to occur, without getting too much into the external sources of those crimes (government, etc.). In the same way, one can confront an individual drug user on the reasons, family patterns, psychoanalytic ones -why that person resorted to narcotics and how to stop it. this does not invalidate the source of the drugs reaching him or her (namely, whether the drugs were pushed by gov or mafia etc.), but chooses another angle to attack the problem and perhaps devise ways to deal with it. that's assuming there will always be someone pushing something, how do you devise a better communal, social, family structure to be able to ward it off. This is a good strategy as long as it doesn't engage in denial. for instance, any person, or community will not be able to ward off intentional drugging by a very strong and sophisticated pusher-org, because some drugs if administered covertly/unwittingtly bypass the usual biological and psychological "immune" systems. and possibly the same goes for RA technologies. i tend to think that any person, community, family, will fall into the pattern if targetted by pros who are operating with gov powers.

by **blanc** » Wed Aug 23, 2006 5:27 am

I certainly believe that any person/family can be targeted, and have little chance of evading, if the attack is from pros operating under govt powers. falling into the pattern however, might be seen to imply going along with it and becoming at one with the perpetrating community. that isn't the case - probably you didn't mean that. people emerge, not unscathed, but strongly opposing. part of the reason any person can fall foul of this system is that it is capable of adaptation, mutation, and manipulation. so the search for structural patterns in society and family - is not pos. without having at least one eye on where it is all coming from.

by **havanagilla** » Wed Aug 23, 2006 6:25 am

its a good question, namely, whether and to what extent statistically, families/communities can refuse going along with it. so far, failures in both drugs/organized crime and possibly ra as well (no figures, but feels like a flood). community sounds big, but is actually small compared to large institutional powers, with lots of expertise. so, biao kind of research, one little step towards addressing the strengths (?) of community/family/indiv to deal with same. political action ? we are far from that stage, IMHO, but eventually will happen if one is optimistic.

Christian Ritual Abuse

Re: is it the Christianity, the Ritualism or the Satanism?

atrocities

Re: atrocities

terms and places

Re: terms and places

Re: atrocities

Sorry...

Re: atrocities

Re: atrocities

what we know

Re: atrocities

Re: what we know

Re: what we know

targeting

Re: targeting

Who is online