McMartin - Were Tunnels Found? Was evidence of abuse found?

WhoCountsTheVotes · Post by **WhoCountsTheVotes** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 1:26 pm

I just read RI's latest article on McMartin. I have heard so many conflicting reports I find it impossible to tell truth from fiction anymore. Were tunnels found? Who found them? Was physical evidence of abuse found by doctors? If so, which doctors found it, and are their reports available in the court record? I have heard it said that often "Satanism" is invoked to make "run of the mill" abuse cases seem incredible and unbelievable. Was this the case at McMartin? Was there "run of the mill" sexual abuse going on, and "Satanism" invoked to muddy the waters? And on a related note - one of the great "debunkers" of SRA is <a href="http://www.religioustolerance.org">www.religioustolerance.org</a> - the Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance. Their main focus seems to be debunking claims of SRA - does anyone know anything about these people, and are they connected to FMF?

Rigorous Intuition · Post by **Rigorous Intuition** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 3:02 pm

I know what you mean. Until a few years ago, when I started paying attention to other, similar cases, like most people I'd presumed that McMartin was a matter of unfounded hysteria. I didn't know there was a contrary body of evidence, nor that the jury was persuaded children had been abused but that the prosecution hadn't made their case. I expect Jackie will cover some of this material in an forthcoming part of the interview, but here are links to the archaeological survey of the tunnels and to seemingly informed perspectives that run contrary to conventional wisdom on McMartin: <a href="http://www.whale.to/b/stickel.html" target="top">Archaeological Investigations of the McMartin Preschool site </a> by E. Gary Stickel, Ph.D <a href="http://www.geocities.com/kidhistory/mcmartin.htm" target="top">The Dark Tunnels of McMartin</a> by Dr Roland Summit (caution: it's poorly formatted on this site, and it's hard sometimes to distinguish quoted material from Summit's own remarks). <a href="http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/Pedophocracy/child_sexual_abuse_at_McMartin_pre-school.htm" target="top">The Pedophacracy, Part IV: McMolestation</a> by David McGowan <a href="http://educate-yourself.org/tg/mcmartinpreschoolrevisited1996.shtml" target="top">McMartin Preschool Revisited</a> by Alex Constantine <a href="http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/NudistHallofShame/Eberle.html" target="top">Paul and Shirley Eberle: a Strange Pair of Experts</a> - a revealing overview of two of McMartin's principal debunkers. About religioustolerance.org, afraid I don't know how it's connected, and to who.

slimmouse · Post by **slimmouse** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 3:06 pm

Have a read of the Pedo series by Dave Mcgowan, under the thread below. <a href="http://p097.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm7.showMessage?topicID=509.topic">p097.ezboard.com/frigorou...=509.topic</a> A quick snippet to do some checking on ; <blockquote>Quote:<hr>A former Hermosa Beach police officer named Paul Bynum, who had been hired by the parents of victims as a private investigator, turned up dead on the eve of his scheduled testimony as well. His death by gunshot was ruled a suicide, though those close to Bynum dispute that finding to this day. Among other things, Bynum may have testified about his examination of the tunnel excavation project conducted at the school site. This was, of course, the object of much derision by the media. The fact that the children repeatedly told stories of tunnels under the property by which they could be secretly transported to and from the school, and in which they were subjected to unspeakable abuse in a secret room, was frequently cited as ‘proof’ that the children's stories were fabrications. It was universally accepted that the tunnels did not actually exist, that being the consensus view of the media and law enforcement authorities. But while it is true that the investigation commissioned by the District Attorney's office found no evidence of tunnels, one of the dirty little secrets of the McMartin case is that the tunnels did, in fact, exist. Many of the parents were not satisfied with the ridiculously superficial examination by the DA’s office, and commissioned another investigation of the site when the property was sold in April of 1990. To lead the project, they hired E. Gary Stickel, Ph.D., a highly regarded archeologist recommended to them by the Chair of the Interdisciplinary Program of the Archeology Department at UCLA. Stickel had served as a consultant to Lucasfilms on the Indiana Jones movies. Also brought on board were several other technical specialists. As Stickel wrote in his report on the excavation: “By engaging a highly recommended professional archeological team, [the parents] hoped to bring scientific authority to whatever might be found or a definitive resolution for whatever was not to be found.” And what the team found was precisely what the children had been telling them they would find for the previous seven years: “The project unearthed not one but two tunnel complexes as well as previously unrecognized structural features which defied logical explanation. Both tunnel complexes conformed to locations and functional descriptions established by children's reports. One had been described as providing undetected access to an adjacent building on the east. The other provided outside access under the west wall of the building and contained within it an enlarged, cavernous artifact corresponding to children's descriptions of a ‘secret room.’ “Both the contour signature of the walls and the nature of recovered artifacts indicated that the tunnels had been dug by hand under the concrete slab floor after the construction of the building ... Not only did the discovered features fulfill the research prequalifications as tunnels designed for human traffic, there was also no alternative or natural explanation for the presence of such features ... “If the stories of the children were bogus fantasies, there is no excuse for the tunnels discovered under the school. If there really were tunnels, there is no excuse for the glib dismissal of any and all of the complaints of the children and their parents.”<hr></blockquote> This taken from article 4. I cannot reccomend reading the series enough. One of the most striking REPETETIVE and hence most worrying instances of this entire series, starting with Detroux,and common right throughout, is the frequency of such ridiculously lenient sentences to these animals - That is those found guilty who actually serve any kind of sentence - So many of them simply walk !

Project Willow · Post by **Project Willow** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 3:38 pm

I'm glad you connected with Jackie. About religious tolerance, that's an investigation that needs to be done. Everytime I bring up McMartin someone throws that website at me. PW

tabasco1776 · Post by **tabasco1776** » Wed Jul 06, 2005 9:20 am

I've seen religioustolerance.org on lists of Scientology fronts and shills, and also on pro-Scientology groups' lists of links. <a href="http://www.perthimc.asn.au/index.php?action=newswire&parentview=3383#9230">www.perthimc.asn.au/index...=3383#9230</a>

Rigorous Intuition · Post by **Rigorous Intuition** » Wed Jul 06, 2005 9:29 am

Thanks tabasco, I'll see what more I can find out about religioustolerance.org.

slimmouse · Post by **slimmouse** » Wed Jul 06, 2005 10:07 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Thanks tabasco, I'll see what more I can find out about religioustolerance.org.<hr></blockquote> There should be something interesting in there. I went to the site, which insists that tunnels werent foundin the McMartin case; strangely enough providing a link for such claims to E Gary Stickel Phd - which when I tried to access was (naturally ?) unavailable <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/ohwell.gif ALT=":\"> A site which also links to the writings of Paul and Shirley Eberle amongst others as the case for "the defence"

Avalon · Post by **Avalon** » Wed Jul 06, 2005 2:10 pm

I see no reason to consider religioustolerance.org as being connected to Scientology, without some reasonable and responsible information to back up the claim. Whenever I am looking for information on a religion's perspective on an issue, I've generally found them fair and objective, which requires them to be as careful as they can to use only neutral language. If they are to keep that neutrality, they have to remember that one person's cult is another person's religion. Given that the poster who offers the Scientology linkage with no evidence to back it up considers a page which reports such things as "One web site refers to what it describes as 'the Unification Church's years of deceptive recruitment, destructive mind control practices, unethical fundraising practices, and manipulative religious abuse that has disrupted and destroyed many lives around the world" "According to the SPLC, the Washington TImes has published articles taken from white supremacist hate groups, anti-Semitic ads for a book called "For Fear of the Jews," and an ad from a key Holocaust denial group. " to be "favorable slant and support," I don't think that suggestion is the slightest bit reliable or accurate.

Col Quisp · Post by **Col Quisp** » Wed Jul 06, 2005 3:20 pm

I checked it out -- the site has this quote from an article about Scientology and Homosexuality : <a href="http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_scie.htm">www.religioustolerance.org/hom_scie.htm</a> <blockquote>Quote:<hr>"One of Hubbard's solutions to homosexuality was quarantine; the other was counseling with the goal of raising the individual's rating above 1.1. It is important to realize that L.R. Hubbard's beliefs matched those of mainstream psychiatry and psychology at the time -- that homosexuals were suffering from a mental illness."<hr></blockquote> ...thereby offering an "explanation" of Hubbard's erroneous position. I don't think that mainstream psychs in the 1950s ever promoted quarantine as a solution to the dreaded "disease" of homosexuality. Pretty interesting website!

Col Quisp · Post by **Col Quisp** » Wed Jul 06, 2005 3:27 pm

Here's another interesting quote about Scientology from religioustolerance.org: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Many anti-cult groups accuse the Church of Scientology (and hundreds other religious groups with which they disagree on theological grounds) of not allowing members to leave the church, or of endlessly harassing them in an attempt to force them back into the fold. We have found these claims to be false with other religious groups, and we believe that it is also untrue in the case of Scientology. The church's official position is that if a person leaves and asks to be taken off the membership/mailing lists, they are not contacted. Otherwise they might expect to get a phone call or letter of inquiry.<hr></blockquote> <a href="http://www.religioustolerance.org/scientol1.htm">www.religioustolerance.org/scientol1.htm</a>

tabasco1776 · Post by **tabasco1776** » Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:10 pm

This was taken from: <a href="http://groups-beta.google.com/group/misc.activism.militia/msg/e0a4c79c0e76cb9c?hl=en">groups-beta.google.com/group/misc.activism.militia/</a> ...because its original site, networkusa.org, is no longer online. Although it's written from a right-wing Christian militia perspective, it does some good investigating. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-= INTRODUCTION In "the world of the bizarre," nothing is as it appears -- deception lies at every turn. It is a world every bit as unpredictable as those explored by Alice in the adventure Alice in Wonderland, or Sarah in The Labyrinth. Many of the groups mentioned herein have "front" organizations, each of which serves a specific purpose in furtherance of the goals of the parent and affiliate organizations. They also help deflect and neutralize the opposition. One technique used often by the "fronts" is to take on the facade of their adversary, sometimes even quoting from their adversary's own material with a "twist" in order to distort it. The adversary's own words are then used against them. Some of the "fronts" have been identified through documentation, others can be only speculated about. As you will see, all of the individuals and groups reviewed in this study are linked and tied to other individuals and groups (including government agencies), and even events which impacted the entire nation -- none of which can possibly be explained by mere coincidence. They all appear to be working within the same circles of influence! If these people and their affiliate organization had impeccable, or even "clean," records, these ties would not be of concern. Such is not the case however as you will plainly see. This report only scratches the surface into the subjects discussed herein. Its purpose is to begin to expose the very dark, bizarre connections between the FBI Project Megiddo (PM) report and some very strange bedfellows. This report is merely a cursory overview of the subject matter; it is only a primer into the study. The other purpose for this short report is to get YOU to THINK! ...and to NOT take everything you read at face value! And, the final purpose is to get you, the reader to do further research! You need the Adobe Acrobat Reader to open and view the PM report. MAKING THE CONNECTION The FBI PM report has ONE SINGLE URL HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE in the entire report and it is to the web site of the Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance (OCRT). You MUST research that site and the links provided there, and the sources mentioned there, to see the deception that lies behind the Project Megiddo report. There is a reason that single URL is highlighted in blue. Figure it out! It's to get you to go to the link and read the material posted there! So, do that -- go to the URL listed in the report: http://www.religioustolerance.org/cultsign.htm You are at the web site owned and hosted by B.A. Robinson who is also credited by name in the PM report. The focus of this particular page is a grouping of (what are referred to as) "cult check lists." These lists are supposedly intended to be used to "identify" what are considered (in the minds of the various respective authors) to be "bad" or "dangerous religious groups." Five links are provided under the heading "Factors commonly found in destructive Groups," and this is arguably the main focus of the page. These five links take you to other sites and articles on the subject of cults and religion. RESEARCH THESE SOURCES TO UNCOVER THE MIND-SET OF THE AUTHORS AND SOURCES BEHIND THE PROJECT MEGIDDO REPORT! Without this research, you cannot possibly understand what is going on. This can be a huge mistake. ENTER THE WORLD OF THE BIZARRE The first link on the OCRT web page is to the American Family Foundation (AFF). One of the AFF board members, Margaret Thaler Singer, is also credited by name three times in the Project Megiddo report. Note that the AFF "groups" pages have NO information on any "Satanic" cults, nothing about "Witchcraft," and Paganism (for which there is tons of information available elsewhere) is not even listed. The AFF site does list over ONE HUNDRED "bible-based" groups which it believes exhibit "cult-like" traits. The focus of Margaret Singer's past life work has been in the field of psychology and particularly with regard to the study of mind control. Another (former) member of the AFF board, Dr. Louis Joylon "Jolly" West, is a long-time professional associate and acquaintance of Singer. Early in his career as a psychologist, Jolly West engaged in mind control experiments funded by the Central Intelligence Agency in the 1950s. West's involvement in the CIA's MK-ULTRA program, and his connection to Singer, and both of their connections to the Cult Awareness Network (CAN) and to the AFF are important in this discussion. It is also relevant to mention here that the CAN organization engaged in a nearly 20-year legal battle with the Church of Scientology (CoS). AFF and CAN both alleged that CoS was using brainwashing techniques to keep members. One of the goals of the MK-ULTRA study was to see whether an individual could be controlled to the point where he will do the handler's bidding against his will, even against such fundamental laws of nature such as self-preservation? This was in direct Margaret Singer and Jolly West were also long time enemies of the Church of Scientology, and vise versa. (The word "were" is used here because it is not certain that they are still enemies of one another.) On the surface, it appears that the Church of Scientology had begun to "uncover" some of the "secret" research engaged in by West. In particular, they focused on his involvement with government research into the use of mind control techniques (such as the CIA's Artichoke and Bluebird programs). The CoS was also making this information public. West spearheaded a study where US soldiers were given LSD to see what "useful" "mind-altering" effects the drug might have, and whether this would be of benefit to the government. West is perhaps best (worst) known for giving a lethal dose of LSD to a popular zoo elephant in California while working under a research grant. West was also implicated in the death of tennis pro Harold Blauer in a drug experiment in New York City in 1953. And, investigation by the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, chaired by Senator Frank Church, in the mid-1970s, revealed West's involvement in programs which included the drugging of unsuspecting targets, electric shocking to destroy memory, and â€œprogrammingâ€

Col Quisp · Post by **Col Quisp** » Wed Jul 06, 2005 5:39 pm

Over at the Cult Awareness Network site (the NEW and IMPROVED site!) they say that brainwashing does not exist: <a href="http://www.thefamily.org/dossier/statements/brainwashing.htm">www.thefamily.org/dossier...ashing.htm</a> It claims that psychiatrists and psychologists are no better than laypersons when giving expert testimony in court. As we know from Tom Cruise, Scientologists hate the psychiatric profession. I quote the summary, as a fair use meant to educate: <blockquote>Quote:<hr> Summary The "mind control" myth ranks among the greatest hoaxes perpetrated on the public in modern times. The present prosperity of the ACM leans heavily on the pillar of "mind control" theories for support. The myth serves many purposes: 1. It creates fear and concern, especially among parents of members of a new religion whom the ACM targets, enjoining them to support the anti-cult network or hire exit counselors. 2. It enables ex-members and their parents alike to save face and avoid having to take personal responsibility for their actions. 3. It "medicalizes" ideological differences in order to sidestep the obvious issue of violations of human and religious rights by anti-cult organization activists. 4. It creates a set of accusations so nebulous that much effort and expense is needed to disprove the "experts," since their conclusions are based on highly speculative, theoretical, abstract, and subjective personal opinions and values. 5. The "mind control" myth is the basis of many legislative efforts around the world, to curb, control, and limit the free practice of religion. The ACM has discovered that the most effective and lucrative way to attack new religions is through attaining government support for their anti-religious programs, along with sensationalizing the issue to attain media attention, which further highlights the need for "experts" on the issue. "Mind crimes" are impossible to substantiate with real and tangible evidence or eyewitness accounts. No one has ever actually seen a person's mind being kidnapped, especially without the person involved even noticing it. The simple fact is that although people can be bullied, bribed, intimidated, tortured, blackmailed, blinded by love and emotions, tricked, etc., still none of these can produce mind-controlled zombies who happily abdicate all power of reason and personal choice to others. It just doesn't happen. People can be influenced, coaxed, coerced, pressured, persuaded, convinced, and even converted and indoctrinated, providing they voluntarily decide to go along with or accept the ideas and suggestions being given them. However, this still does not produce selfless "brainwashed" zombies. Actually, the term "brainwashing" doesn't describe a real condition at all, but is used as a demeaning bias-evoking pejorative for any transfer of beliefs, influence, conformity, indoctrination, socialization, conversion, or change of attitude that doesn't meet with the accuser's approval. Brainwashing in the original Communist sense does not exist, and brainwashing in the popular sense is, at most, coercive persuasion, which in the absence of imprisonment and torture "cannot be distinguished from mainstream religions and other conventional social influences" (Amicus Brief 21). Devotees of the "mind control" theory are not able to disprove the adage "A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still."26 Even if "brainwashing" were possiblewhich it is not without torture, coercion, and total control, and even then many social scientists and mental health experts are skeptical of any sustained effect27 that does not change or alter the fact that people have the right to associate with and be members of a religious faith of their choice. As Lifton points out, "Some people understandably prefer to live within self-sufficient religious communes characterized by regimentation and uniformity of opinion rather than in the atomistic alienation which characterizes a pluralistic secular society" (Amicus brief, 20, citing Robbins, Shepherd, and McBride 59, 61, 67-6<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/glasses.gif ALT="8)"> . In attempting to negate the inherent right of individual freedom of religion through arguments of mind control or coercive persuasion, anti-religious organizations insidiously promote religious intolerance, which can eventually lead to the curbing of the rights of all members of society, regardless of their religious beliefs or creeds. As such, it is clear that the "mind control" argument is not merely an academic debate, but the cornerstone of anti-religious activism. By allowing such anti-religious activities to proceed unchecked, a dangerous precedent is set that will eventually have serious repercussions for all faiths. <hr></blockquote>

Jerky · Post by **Jerky** » Wed Jul 06, 2005 6:26 pm

A mysterious Kubrickean puzzle piece slides closer towards a hole that fits... <img src="http://www.dailydirt.com/newsimages/20050707/shining_creepy.jpg" style="border:0;"/>

rigorousintuition.ca

McMartin - Were Tunnels Found? Was evidence of abuse found?

McMartin - Were Tunnels Found? Was evidence of abuse found?

Re: McMartin - Were Tunnels Found? Was evidence of abuse fou

Were tunnels found.

Thanks for the Interview

Re: Thanks for the Interview

that's interesting

Have a good dig.

religioustolerance.org

Re: religioustolerance.org

Re: religioustolerance.org

religioustolerance.org, Scientology, and McMartin PreSchool

Re: religioustolerance.org, Scientology, and McMartin PreSch

On seeing the zippers...