Bryant's Franklin Book Released

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

hey

Postby sw » Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:13 pm

Whether people believe or don't believe does not change the truth of it all. It just allows more time for more generations of children to be tortured and destroyed.

The government's only hope is for people to remain skeptical. They count on that. People are skeptical of things that the govt already admitted to doing in Senate testimony.

You skeptical people may not have the blood of the children and soul warriors on your hands but the blood is none the less spattered all over your faces.

I consider all survivors as sacred. The ones who dare to come forward are soul warriors. Thus, the sw. PW, you are the strongest soul warrior I have ever had the grace to draft off of.

Thank you for getting up each day and going to work, giving a face to the faceless.
sw
 
Posts: 764
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 2:08 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby American Dream » Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:35 pm

OP ED, could you please explain why you chose to poste such a link to the Michael Aquino Wikipedia page, when that page has been deleted?
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby OP ED » Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:50 pm

to point out that he or his friend have probably had it deleted again, IMO. he covers his tracks. i don't like him.

i've been avoiding this thread, per PW's former request, and kept my insertion to an absolute minimum when i felt compelled to poke, having caught his name being spoken. as i said, i donnae like 'im.

[or his droogies]

i think presidio is worth considering closely.

[you people are strange]
User avatar
OP ED
 
Posts: 4673
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Detroit
Blog: View Blog (0)

wow

Postby sw » Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:51 pm

Can't prove anything but my hunch on the Aquino by OP ED is that it was a jab at me. Or maybe a threat. Maybe there is no connection, so I apologize if there is none, op ed. But, my gut says that was a threat related to me back to 2005 as it related to Jeff and RI.

No one else knew about that but ATF, me and Jeff.
sw
 
Posts: 764
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 2:08 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby OP ED » Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:52 pm

Project Willow wrote:Op Ed, that is the most evil act I have ever seen on this board, ever.


really?

cause you've been here like four years and i've done way more evil things than post wiki links here.

(by which i mean my act was utterly innocent)

[and this is getting ridiculous]
Last edited by OP ED on Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
OP ED
 
Posts: 4673
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Detroit
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby nathan28 » Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:52 pm

This is the other reason my faith is waning.

Project Willow wrote:Op Ed, that is the most evil act I have ever seen on this board, ever.

On edit, ok, I saw that Aquino link thrown in here out of context and without comment, a link to a perpetrator of (which I thought was common knowledge, but apparently isn't) someone whom you have had some contention. I saw it as an attack of the worst sort. I see some context now.


American Dream wrote:the Michael Aquino Wikipedia page [] has been deleted


it's like there's an actual infowar, or something.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Michael_Aquino&action=history

Marginal notability, not really a public figure, BLP issues in the past, plus subject requests deletion ([[WP:OTRS...



Why are you suppressing details that would support the case you make? That suggests to me that rather than actually care about it, you simply care about controlling discussion, which here is largely in your favor.
„MAN MUSS BEFUERCHTEN, DASS DAS GANZE IN GOTTES HAND IST"

THE JEERLEADER
User avatar
nathan28
 
Posts: 2957
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 6:48 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby American Dream » Sun Sep 27, 2009 8:02 pm

American Dream wrote:
OP ED, could you please explain why you chose to poste such a link to the Michael Aquino Wikipedia page, when that page has been deleted?

OP ED wrote:
to point out that he or his friend have probably had it deleted again, IMO. he covers his tracks. i don't like him.
Huh???

This doesn't make sense.


.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby OP ED » Sun Sep 27, 2009 9:29 pm

only because you are apparently not as smart as i thought you were.

when i try to talk about things i get accused of bullshit and when i don't say enough i'm, suprise, accused of bullshit.

bullshit.

all of it.

you cannot have it both ways people.

28 mentioned Presidio, and Aquino magically skating free. i think how guilty he looked coupled with how clearly his tracks are covered for him makes him look like an obvious weak link in the chain of oppression.

i mean it was the post directly above mine in a thread that devolved into a discussion of suspected perps (v. skepticism), in general, several pages ago, i mean geez, how much more in context can it be?

i actually, mistakenly obviously, assumed that clicking my link would make my intent (to point out its been deleted -- again) really obvious to anyone with a little bit of memory and familiarity with Aquino's connections.

jesus christ.
User avatar
OP ED
 
Posts: 4673
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Detroit
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby OP ED » Sun Sep 27, 2009 9:31 pm

lightningBugout wrote:
nathan28 wrote: Why are you suppressing details that would support the case you make? That suggests to me that rather than actually care about it, you simply care about controlling discussion, which here is largely in your favor.


Do you mean me? I thought I'd pointed out exactly that -- that MA had requested deletion? Confused....



no, lbo, he quoted the wiki page. my point. why would MA suppress his own case if he is innocent of all charges?

why sacrafice his celebrity?
User avatar
OP ED
 
Posts: 4673
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Detroit
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby psynapz » Sun Sep 27, 2009 9:50 pm

nathan28 wrote:
American Dream wrote:the Michael Aquino Wikipedia page [] has been deleted


it's like there's an actual infowar, or something.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Michael_Aquino&action=history

Marginal notability, not really a public figure, BLP issues in the past, plus subject requests deletion ([[WP:OTRS...


They even deleted it off the Internet Wayback Machine at web.archive.org after Dec 2007, but the the last time they have content for it was Nov 5, 2005.
“blunting the idealism of youth is a national security project” - Hugh Manatee Wins
User avatar
psynapz
 
Posts: 1090
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:01 pm
Location: In the Flow, In the Now, Forever
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby OP ED » Sun Sep 27, 2009 10:05 pm

thanks psy.

During the Satanic Panic of the 1980s and 1990s, Aquino was accused of child sexual abuse on a United States Army base near Presidio, California. Many speculate that due to Aquino's military connections in the higher echelons of the Department of Defense the charges were dropped against him, under the guise of "lack of evidence". Controversy still surrounds the charges -- as a result, the Temple has attracted criticism and condemnation from not only Christian fundamentalists, but also from other Satanic and Left Hand Path organizations. Many former members of the Temple of Set claim that Aquino has an apparently unhealthy fascination with young children.


he has many enemies.
User avatar
OP ED
 
Posts: 4673
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Detroit
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: wow

Postby OP ED » Sun Sep 27, 2009 10:52 pm

sw wrote:Can't prove anything but my hunch on the Aquino by OP ED is that it was a jab at me. Or maybe a threat. Maybe there is no connection, so I apologize if there is none, op ed. But, my gut says that was a threat related to me back to 2005 as it related to Jeff and RI.

No one else knew about that but ATF, me and Jeff.


your gut is wrong, btw. hunches are overrated.

although i am amazed at the extent of your arrogance, and by amazed, i mean impressed, as such an assumption is almost worthy of my own ego, which is massive. but, no friend, i do not come to this board for you.

i'm pretty sure if we've had any interaction its been severely limited. i certainly haven't wasted five years of my life here just so i could post a link to nothing, that i somehow psychically knew would upset you. that would be retarded.


fwiw, i was highly suspect of you specifically, sw, for specific reasons until one or two of my clearer headed friends here vouched for you and alleviated my concerns. i try never to apply my skepticism to specific allegations made by members here, because frankly, i don't know who is honest and who is not and/or etc. and btw, my suspicions were entirely unrelated to your narratives, more behavioral, and were a product of my own paranoia, which i often think is infectious, memetically speaking, in places like this.

i know this sort of thing is real, which is enough that i assume that enough of the survivor crowd are being honest as to make it worth treating all of them as if they're telling the absolute truth.

(try and find a statement by me where i call a survivor here a liar for their testimony, really, try)

[hopefully you'll feel better when you don't find any]
...

my detestation of Aquino in specific and his droogies in general (and a few of them in specific) has been something i've discussed here before, as LBO will recall if he gives a few moments to consider.

28's statement caught my attention. You might say it triggered a response in me, to use accepted language.

the bones i have to pick with him and his destructive little cult are quite personal. and i tend to jump at almost any opportunity to warn others about him or to attract the attenions of advocates towards him, both because he is vulnerable [having looked really guilty before his salvation appeared] and because i do not like him.
...

i agree with AD, that something is out of place in the culture here. There is something wrong with any culture that interprets any movement as a threat, especially as personal threats. a little paranoia goes a long way to breaking down lines of communication entirely.

The government's only hope is for people to remain skeptical.


indeed. who's skeptical?
User avatar
OP ED
 
Posts: 4673
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Detroit
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby OP ED » Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:02 pm

put it on a tshirt if you like. and feel free to ask me questions when i'm unclear.

i only object to insinuations that i'm an accomplice to crimes against humanity.

[isn't that normal?]
User avatar
OP ED
 
Posts: 4673
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Detroit
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Project Willow » Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:23 pm

No, SW, I believe it is I who has had the fortune of drafting off you. Thanks for the pithy reminder of reality and your encouraging example.
User avatar
Project Willow
 
Posts: 4793
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 9:37 pm
Location: Seattle
Blog: View Blog (1)

Postby barracuda » Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:23 pm

Since my comments on pages five and six of this thread...

    I've been told to fuck off,

    lightningBugout wrote: And fuck you if you don't agree.


    My evil next moves have been presaged and telegraphed,

    lightningBugout wrote:'cuda will surely retort with some sort of attack or another.


    I've been accused of conspiring to "smash survivors",

    lightningBugout wrote:the follow up here is likely to include that triumvirate coterie of three particular regulars who like to smash survivors


    I've been mocked as a fraud,

    lightningBugout wrote:all the while masquerading as wonderful libertines.


    And derided as a pervert.

    lightningBugout wrote:i suppose if i posted real, real graphic details you would be sated. am i right?


    Most if not all of the sentiments above were roundly seconded by American Dream.

    American Dream wrote: Thank you so much, LightningBugout.


    LilyPatToo was kind enough to assess my knowledge level,

    LilyPatToo wrote:I don't know how many survivor statements Bryant had read at that point, but anyone who's a longtime poster to this board has most likely read dozens or even hundreds of them. So it seems logical to me that we could expect many (if not most) of our hearers to already have a fairly extensive knowledge base when it comes to RA and mind control.


    And imply that I was baiting survivors.

    LilyPatToo wrote:If survivors are subtly (and often not so subtly) baited and invalidated here, where the fuck are we supposed to go?


    Hava1 said something which I didn't really understand, but I took to be uncomplementary. (Sorry hava, but I'd hate to leave anyone out.)

    hava1 wrote:THere has been a great deal of spin/asessing process here, so as to mount a "counter fundie" anti MK campaign. I would be wary of that as well


    American Dream once again intuited my complicity in a nefarious and wide reaching game.

    American Dream wrote:Critical thinking is very important, but it seems we are dealing with much, much more than that here...


    Then Project Willow came in and stated here desire to do some beating down.

    Project Willow wrote:would like to kick your asses. And believe me, she fucking could,
Meanwhile, one of the survivor supporters on this board sent an email to Alex Constantine, accusing OP ED of a variety of misdeamenors, including basically disrupting discussions of R.A. while championing satanism. Which seems to bother no one here. It doesn't seem to matter to the group that the forum has now been publicly portrayed in the worst possible light by dint of false suggestions and accusations, twisting of actualities, misattribution, and straight up telling tales out of school. I'm sure the three thousand daily readers who were blessed to read this screed on Constantine's front page have formed a new-found appreciation for the site generally. And at least one of the respondants on this thread, lightningBugout, seemed to think this was a pretty good thing, for which I accused him of sending Constantine the email in the first place, and which I still pretty much think he did.

The work of Sara Scott was referenced by lightningBugout in his first denunciation of my question to sw on this thread as exemplary. But as she states in "Here Be Dragons",

Sara Scott wrote:When I had first encountered newspaper reports of a case involving allegations of ritual abuse my reaction had been irritation - not dissimilar to that expressed by other feminist correspondents in the national and social work press:

...what had been fairly clearly established - that child sexual abuse happens mainly at home, and is overwhelmingly perpetrated by men - is now being obscured in the public consciousness by the idea that it is carried out by some god hating weirdo devil worshippers who do it at the behest of their satanic master.


Imagine that. Sara Scott was once an irritated skeptic of ritual abuse. It was the introduction into her life of her abused eventual foster daughter which changed her mind. I guess she and I have at least one thing in common - irritation. It's been several years since I've taken the fact of ritual abuse as anything other than a given, if I ever did. I would say I've easily read and thought about the subject to a greater extent than 99% of the population of this country. But that doesn't mean I've read "dozens or even hundreds of" survivor reports, LilyPat. I'm not a professional abuse counselor like Ms. Scott, nor am I a professional writer and researcher like Nick Bryant. To be honest, I have very little idea about the background reports of any of the survivors on this board, other than a smattering of details. At this point the report by sw is the most complete and centrally located. I have neither the time nor inclination to piece together these smatterings into a coherent record even if that were possible, which I doubt. But the idea - the stupidity - of the implication that I form part of a group of individuals on this board with an interest in devaluing or invalidating the cause of survivors of ritual abuse here is one of the most misguided and assinine thoughtforms to coalese above a sentient head that I have ever heard of in my time here.

I understand now, in review, that all of you who spit your spite my way live in a world in which having two perfectly familiar aquaintances mention in all sincerity that they have been ritually and sexually abused by Doctor Henry Kissinger himself is in no way extraordinary. I did not and will not make any judgement about those statements. But you cannot tell me that ANY of you live in a world where the people you live and work with - the people who wait on you at restaurants, the guy behind the front desk at the library - would greet that statement with anything less than astonishment and incredulity. Because you just don't. I'd be somewhat surprised if even Ms. Scott would register any different reaction. And I am completely confident that a statement like this one:

sw wrote:You skeptical people may not have the blood of the children and soul warriors on your hands but the blood is none the less spattered all over your faces.


would elicit the same revulsion from her as it did from myself.

The survivors on the board and elsewhere have been through horrific things. I can't change that. And I can't change who I am or how I think about these things, either. I guess I should probably simply avoid these threads, or avoid commenting on the subject altogether until I can discover a way to do so that would be less offensive to you all as a group. But I probably won't. The subject interests me, and this is where I live right now, and I want to empathise.

But for a group of people who basically demand consideration, you people are among the least sympathetic individuals I've encountered in my entire two years of interaction on this forum. Especially you, American Dream. You really are a fucking choad sometimes, even if you mean well.

American Dream wrote:For example, do we believe all details of any account offered to us by someone who says they are a "targeted individual"? Accepting that CIA mind control exists does not rule out lying, delusion, or mind-control influencing these accounts.
The most dangerous traps are the ones you set for yourself. - Phillip Marlowe
User avatar
barracuda
 
Posts: 12890
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:58 pm
Location: Niles, California
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to Franklin Scandal

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests