Johnny Gosch update

[Roy Harrold]

Well, that was all wonderfully amusing! I'm delighted to have been made into a character in the collaborative fantasy a segment of conspiracy theorists have been creating (although I'm a bit disappointed that you didn't make me a CSIS or CIA secret agent). <br><br>I suppose it comes with the territory, but there's a lot of hunting for complex explanations for things that are really quite simple, ordinary, mundane. <br><br>"Son Of Gaia" is the login code for our blogger blog. There are three people who have the password to use it. A posting by "Son Of Gaia" could be by any one of the three collaborators who are "Surreality Times". <br><br>Robin is a physically separate person from myself, but you are welcome to believe whatever you wish to. If you really wanted to, you could come here and meet us both in person. <br>There is a simple explanation for Robin and I describing the same event, of being sexually exploited, but you will probably enjoy this more if I'm obtuse about it and give you clues.<br>- Robin & I have been friends since elementary school<br>- We are both describing the same event, occurring at the same point in time, but I was 16 and he was 15. <br>- We were both deeply closeted gay youth, but today we share a residence.<br><br>The PO BOX address was a good spotting on someone's part, though not that hard to figure out. I suspect it has expired, it hasn't been used by us since we stopped publishing The Prairie Plain Speaker but it was legitimately our address - mailing, not residence. <br><br>The most perceptive thing posted about me, or Robin, or Son Of Gaia or whoever & whatever we really are, in this thread was posted by "biaothanatoi". The psychological theorizing is largely inaccurate, but at least biao... was able to "hear" what we've actually said very plainly many times in many ways:<br><br>Lots of people in our society are victims of childhood sexual abuse/ exploitation, and only a tiny fraction of those people are represented by SRA/Mind Control abuse claimants. When people involved in promoting conspiracy theories claim to be or proclaim themselves "THE voice of abuse victims", "THE defenders of sexually victimized children", this is offensive to large numbers of 'ordinary' abuse victims. Many people I've talked to feel their own abuse is trivialized by the sensationalism and outlandish claims made by some SRA/MC claimants - particularly when very public SRA/MC claimants are legitimately debunked and exposed as frauds. <br><br>That is not intended to be an attack on any persons who hang out here. I really have no wish to offend individuals here, so if something I say offends you please know that is not by intent. <br><br>And even people here understand that there have been fraudulent abuse claimants in the SRA/MC crowd - I see others from the same crowd denouncing them all the time on various sites. We all know Gunderson is a crank and everything he's been involved in becomes suspect. Barb Hartwell seems to be a non-person these days for many people who once accepted her at face value. On & on it goes. You can't deny that people have been suckered and that actual frauds have been unmasked. So, when people like that, who have been publicly claiming to be the voice of the abused and defenders of the victimized turn out to be con-artists, yes legitimate abuse victims get very angry. <br><br>How do you expect people to react, then, when one of the most high-profile missing and presumed abduction child cases - Johnny Gosch - has all these theories attached to it that make heroes out of not one, not two, but three convicted sex offenders. Sex offenders! Not only that, but these theories contain blanket slanders against a wide range of law enforcement personnel. How do you think that makes abuse victims that were heroically assisted by local or national law enforcement, feel? Sex offenders are heroes, somehow, but heroic cops are all secretly part of satanic child-rape and murder conspiracies? <br><br>My friends and I became aware of that disgusting gosch=gannon farce too late to confront it, but we've been waiting for the next inevitable round of Gosch-related headlines and this time we were prepared. Oh yes! Prepared to jump right onto it and force the reality of the convicted sex offender status of Gosch-conspiracy "celebrities" to the forefront - at least for awhile. <br><br>That's what it's about. Very simple, really. <br>Do carry on theorizing about me. I look forward to being further "exposed" (but please consider declaring me a black-ops or disinformation secret agent - I'd really enjoy that)<br> <p></p><i></i>

[Dreams End]

Glad you find this all so amusing. Small groups of people posting under the same name makes people suspicious...what can we say? Call us paranoid.<br><br>Just like people pretending to be Johnny Gosch and visiting his bereaved mom suggests that maybe somebody at least wants us to think he's alive. Why would someone do that, do you imagine?<br><br>And how are you so sure Gosch is dead? Where do you think child prostitutes and child porn comes from? Where did you even get that "dead within 48 hours" thing anyway? If crimes aren't solved, how do we know they are dead?<br><br>You are surely familiar with the Dutroux case? Some killed but most were imprisoned...and sold. Or is that all an elaborate fantasy as well? <br><br>I'm sorry, there is absolutely nothing you say that sheds any light on why you are so adament about this. Why is it so important to you that the small group of conspiracy theorists who follow this not believe Gosch was simply abducted and killed in the first 48 hours or that Boystown abused its charges. It's not like anything other than Gosch/Gannon made the mainstream. <br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[FourthBase]

I suggest the first responders to Roy be the following: baio, sw, hava, and whoever else has first-hand experience as a RA/MC victim. I'm personally willing to give Roy the benefit of the doubt, to the extent that a sincere discussion occurs first between him and the aforesaid RI posters. Let's exercise some self-restraint and please hold off on the probably inevitable antagonism. <p></p><i></i>

[Dreams End]

But I'm genuinely interested. For example, if we are going to use Bonnaci's own words to "convict him" of the Gosch case, should we not use his other words as well, the ones about Boystown and King, etc? <br><br>Oh, and I was also curious about Gary Coradori's plane. Did Bonnaci sabotage that plane or was that also just a coincidence? <br><br>We agree about Gunderson...well I do anyway. What do you think his motivation is, though? Why do you imagine a bigtime FBI boss is running around dealing with this stuff? <br><br>Why do you think William Colby went on record to (sort of) confirm the gist of these allegations?<br><br>As for the photos, if they are both not Gosch, they are both from the same source for sure. Look how they are tied. Who made those, do you think? <p></p><i></i>

[sunny]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>We agree about Gunderson...well I do anyway. What do you think his motivation is, though? Why do you imagine a bigtime FBI boss is running around dealing with this stuff?<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <br><br>I agree as well. I don't think Roy has noticed that every time Gunderson shows up in a case, the whole thing gets discredited by people like...Roy. Why <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>would</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> a former FBI agent so usefully serve that purpose?<br><br>Roy suggests that by believing SRA/MC victims, we somehow hurt and ignore victims of "real" abuse. Why do the two have to be mutually exclusive, at least in Roy's mind? Believing one set of survivors doesn't negate the pain and horror of the other-except in Roy's mind. <p></p><i></i>

[godzorphan]

We agree about Gunderson...well I do anyway. What do you think his motivation is, though? Why do you imagine a bigtime FBI boss is running around dealing with this stuff? <br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>It's about the money, honey.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> <p></p><i></i>

[blanc]

I have 1st and 2nd hand experience of ra 4thB. I read Roy's post and could not at all understand why he seemed to think that people having been abused in ra or mc set ups, and saying so, detracted from the claims of people who say they were abused in other types of situations. <br><br>The Gosch case is one I only know from the media. nevertheless it has in common with cases I know from direct testimony of survivors a surprising fudge over the guilt of perps, a lack of enthusiasm to collect all evidence.<br><br>However, I have no idea, and neither does Roy unless he was involved, whether or not this young person was killed within 48 hours of abduction or not, and can't see what that speculation woud have to do with the photographs.<br><br>What can be told from the photos? that there were 3 youngsters bound and gagged on a bed. If gags were necessary, that bed must have been in earshot of someone who might react to cries for help. It looks like a normal room, not a cellar or dungeon. If the 3 children were being held together in that situation, it would seem most likely to be a halfway house, and the photo taken for advertisement - but this is speculation. police (interpol) have bemoaned to me the prob. of identifying a room from a photo - and I know that groups who use children to produce pornography, change the 'set' frequently. this, i base on knowledge through experience. <br><br>lots of pos. reasons why the photos were sent, how can we know?<br><br>speculation about 'staged' photos is pointless and potentially offensive to both carers and surviving victims. such photos must be taken at face value until proved otherwise - only safe response.<br><br>don't know which exposed as a fake cases Roy is referring to, but do know of many many cases which don't get beyond the first complaint - rapid case closure, or 'no crime'. probably this happens in 'ordinary' abuse cases too - but I don't access info on those. any comments I have made about shortcomings of police, judiciary or other agencies are based on experience, and testimony. <p></p><i></i>

[LilyPatToo]

If Gunderson is dirty, then my first suspicion would be COINTELPRO--discrediting/disrupting from within.<br><br>I've mostly stayed out of this discussion due to the way it upsets me on a very deep level. I've encountered some debunker types before and, while I understand where they're probably coming from (and I DO get why it's important to get them past their denial, believe me!), I simply find it too distressing to cope with them myself. For most of you it's just frustrating, but for me it's invalidating, too. Personally, painfully invalidating. <br><br>When something has happened to you that most of the society in which you live would very much like you to forget and shut up about, it's hard to keep putting yourself forward in spite of the mass denial. It can actually be easier to do it for someone else--like Noreen Gosch is doing. When you're the damaged result of organized pedophilia, yourself, it becomes much, much harder to put yourself out there and let the deniers and the professional naysayers take potshots at you.<br><br>LilyPat <p></p><i></i>

[streeb]

On crimeblog.us, Roy argues that McMartin was exposed as being faked.<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://crimeblog.us/?p=80#comments">crimeblog.us/?p=80#comments</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>(added link on edit) <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=streeb>streeb</A> at: 9/11/06 12:55 pm<br></i>

[godzorphan]

On crimeblog.us, Roy argues that McMartin was exposed as being faked.<br><br>Just for the record, I had a call from a now-grown McMartin child a few years ago...said he still cannot deal with what happened, the nightmares, flashbacks etc. How long has it been? <br><br>There's always four sides...those who are victims of these kinds of abuses, those who help them, those who discuss them and those who debunk them. <p></p><i></i>

[chiggerbit]

Roy, didn't one of you claim at the other site to have been sexually abused at age 16? Not to get technical, but in many states, trading sex for drugs (I think that's what one of you said) at age 16 and up is not a sex crime unless coersion is involved. I don't know about the laws with regards to porn. <p></p><i></i>

[Roy Harrold]

Not that I have anything against this board or its related site - I don't - but I don't intend to enter into long debates with people here. I only came back today because I realized I'd left something out of my earlier posting, but while I'm here I'll address another concern someone has raised. <br><br>I have never said that SRA/MC claimants could not be legitimate victims of abuse. As a matter of fact, I think it is highly probable that many really were victims of sexual abuse, physical abuse, neglect...as children. I think it is also likely that some of them were re-victimized and exploited by poorly trained, incompetent therapists in various ways, and then victimized and exploited yet again by people like Gunderson and personalities in the radio/ conference circuit, who seem obsessed with recruiting converts to their personal vision of "the grand conspiracy" while simultaneously exploiting new 'recruits' as cannon fodder in their ongoing wars with competing visions of "what really happened" and "what's really going on. <br><br>I'm very skeptical of the satanic cult and supernatural "spin" some SRA/MU claimants put on their experiences, but they may not be 'responsible' for that spin (they may have absorbed it, or been put in situations where caring was withdraw by therapists or church support people if they didn't go along with it). But, people are entitled to their beliefs and I won't call anyone a fraud or a liar unless I have evidence that they personally have engaged in deceptions. <br><br>I think that entire communities of people, who may not neccesarily be abuse victims themselves, have been victimized by the fraudulent publicity seekers. Have I noticed that a given situation gets discredited as soon as Gunderson shows up? I've noticed that situations where there might have been legitimate concerns about abuse often become poisoned and hopelessly entangled in allegations that can never lead to successful prosecutions, once the "professional conspiracy investigators" (whether focused on supernatural or governmental agency conspiracies) worm their way into them, and I think that's tragic! <br><br>I sometimes think about how much time, effort and money has been squandered out of religious conservative communities by people who turned out to be "wild goose-chases". I think about how much these communities of people could have accomplished, how much good they could have done, how much further they could have advanced whatever goals they have for their community - if they weren't being distracted by a parade of sirens calling them to focus on and chase phantoms. <br><br>The same goes for the "Patriot" community. I was shocked when I saw that Bo Gritz had almost gotten put away for 15 years because he got suckered into wasting his time, effort and money to help someone that was eventually declared a fraud by members of that community. How much further could the Patriots have progressed toward tangible projects like The Free State, if they weren't distracted by various conspiracy sideshows? <br><br>I prefer to focus on indisputable facts and concrete approaches to problems. Bonacci's allegations have not produced arrests, let alone convictions, in the disappearance of Johnny Gosch - for whatever reasons, they remain allegations and not facts. It is a fact however, that Bonacci confessed to participating in the abduction and to sexually assaulting the boy - so I can focus on the need for him to prove his repentance and take responsibility for that. <br><br>Who knows what the FBI is or is not involved in...but I do know that real child victims have been rescued from child rapist-pornographers through a variety of operations they've been involved in. Where should I, as an abuse victim, invest my time, energy or money - working to discredit & undermine the FBI because of allegations about what they might have been involved in, or supporting the very real work they ARE doing that is provably saving victims from their abusers?<br> <p></p><i></i>

[blanc]

It hurts survivors that their experience is dismissed. it is a denial of human rights by the state when that process of denial becomes embedded in the practice of the judicial system, and when that denial impedes their access to appropriate therapy. The debunk industry is looking pretty dog-eared now, hence the increasingly shrill interventions.<br><br> Leaving aside the denial of justice and healthcare, on an individual basis, I couldn't give 2 hoots if a person chooses to say "ritual abuse does not happen". It is such an absurd position to hold. let them join the flat earthers for drinks<br> and swapping insights.<br><br>If anyone honestly wants to understand, and has questions - ok, thats different. <br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[godzorphan]

I don't have much confidence in most debunkers' willingness to look at the facts. They mainly hide behind bromides and broadbrush strokes like "satanic panic", "village folklore" or "moneymaking conference speakers." It reminds me of the mind-demon character in The Cell: "It's not REEAL! It's not REEAL!" Well, people can sprinkle all the fairy dust they want on this issue to tell people it's not real, but it will not erase twenty some odd years of hardcore casework that spans the nation and several countries. My friends and I just scratch our head that people so readily believe the debunkers, but in a way I understand: People's pain threshold isn't very high when it comes to evil and hurting children, so this stuff is undeniably easier NOT to believe, no? All my friends and I have ever done is say, "Here's what we got." And let the facts speak for themselves. If it turns out to be nothing, great. All the better. But we're kind of way beyond our own denial on all this now. But after years of throwing out tidbit case info on, say, ritual murder to the debunkers to see if they were willing to look at it - and having them turn themselves inside out to find a way to explain it as anything BUT a ritual crime, I realized most of them were just not interested in facts. So that door is closed. But, I'm thinking I may yet live long enough to see the debunker view become irrelevant. <p></p><i></i>

[Dreams End]

Patriots? Bo Gritz? Hmmm....<br><br>The fact that Gunderson goes around mucking up cases has only a few interpretations.<br><br>1. He's sincere but incompetent.<br><br>2. He is trying to discredit real cases.<br><br>3. He is deliberately trying to instill a false idea into public consciousness. <br><br>I don't accept that its money. I guess he gets some, but the way he's ripping off survivors for small time sums...I don't think that could be it. When you've headed 800 or so employees as an FBI agent, you can easily get some kinda security consulting gig that pays lots more.<br><br>I've toyed with the idea of number 3 before. Looking at it as someone with no firsthand experience, it's a possibility to consider. It means discounting a lot of people's testimony but I confess, I don't think Bonnaci's testimony is completely accurate. And the way deCamp questioned him and recognized that it was one of Bonnaci's alters speaking, etc...it made me suspicious. Bonnaci was everywhere...DC, Bohemian Grove, Offut, at Gosch's kidnapping. It's too neat, to me.<br><br>But the fact that people show up who discredit the case does not mean there is no case. In fact, if there really is a case and number one above is not the correct interpretation of Gunderson, then one must assume they are intentionally trying to discredit the information by adding in less believable information or making ill supported leaps.<br><br>So I vote for door number 2. I have pretty direct experience with the type who do door number 2...that would be Christic and Danny Sheehan. He took on some high profile, slam dunk cases...tried to make a bigger "secret team" style case than legal evidence would support and lost the case...and lost a backer one million bucks in the process. <br><br>Christic strikes me as operating a bit like the Larouchians in this regard..lots of real information (and if you are careful sometimes you can even use it...but geez...back it up with corroboration first) and then the odd twist here and there which messes up the credibility.<br><br>In fact, Christic used some larouchians though they claim they never used the info they gained from them. <br><br>I don't know what to say about our new friend here, who wants to engage in driveby debunking...putting out unsupported certainties about the average time it takes for kidnapped kids to be murdered but doesn't want to "engage in debate." <br><br>I guess that's one way to go about convincing people of "the truth". Not a very good way, but a way.<br><br>As for the pics. I notice this. First off, I make some assumptions that a mother can recognize a picture of her son when no time has passed. (i.e. he's the same age as when he was abducted.) <br><br>Secondly, there are two pics. One in black and white and one in color. So likely two different cameras. Looks to be two different locations as well...and of course two different sets of clothes. That seems to suggest a bit more than 48 hours has passed. Meanwhile, the pics are definitely connected as the manner of tying them up is exactly the same. also, the "gags" are not soundproof..they could make plenty of noise...but what they could not do is talk in words to each other. So they are in somewhat secure locations...or perhaps just guarded. And there is, in fact, a mark of some kind on the boy's arm. <br><br>If our new friend is sincere.......he will go and learn about the Dutroux case...the most solid case I've ever seen in terms of evidence. Missing kids. Bodies. Confessions. Escaped victims. (Despite all the evidence...many don't actually believe the victims...but their testimony has the most evidence of any case I know about as far as widespread networks which penetrate into government etc. )He can also visit our data dump and read about the Finders and their clear government connections. No one...NO ONE has ever even bothered to debunk that one. CIA said..yeah, they were one of ours, but they went bad....<br><br>The Finders kinda shifted their operation to Asia, says one anonymous tipster. Taiwan to be specific..ensconcing themselves in orphanages. Like Boystown maybe, only they speak Chinese instead.<br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>