RA perp set-ups

biaothanatoi · Post by **biaothanatoi** » Mon May 23, 2005 3:54 am

Skepticism I can handle. In fact, I can appreciate it. Being underestimated – that really pisses me off. Psychopathology is the most OBVIOUS explanation available in this situation. Do you think I wouldn’t have considered it ONE HUNDRED TIMES OVER before publicly committing to these conclusions? Before risking public ridicule like this? Do you think that RA advocates hold the points of view that we do because we are bleeding-hearted losers without any critical faculties? Do you have any idea how patronizing the statement “Skepticism is healthy” is? Are we RA advocates so low in your estimation that you feel we need the benefit of self-evident aphorisms? Everyone – EVERYONE – who first engages with this issue pulls you back to the obvious, as though they are doing you a favor. Quietly, they point out that maybe ritual abuse survivors are delusion. Or manipulative. Or clingy. Or lying. And, although they are insulting my intelligence, and smearing a woman that they have never met (and who, in my estimation, they look fairly poor in comparison to), I’m not supposed to get pissed off. Oh, no. I’m supposed to understand their point of view and appreciate the fruits of their ‘skepticism’. Apparently they have a privileged point of view on ritual abuse by having no knowledge of it or any experience with it. With all “due” respect – with all the respect that you and Tabasco are giving me – you want the “details”? Would that be the bestiality, the necrophilia or the blood drinking – “details” which, I’m sure, you will dismiss out of hand as schizoid bullshit when I don’t have the luxury of disbelief? Oh yeah, I can give you “details”. Her face and hands going pale and then blue as she is trapped in the memory of being submerged in freezing water in a coffin with the corpse of a dead girl, and I’m watching her heart and breathing rate drop, and I can’t get her temperature back up even though I’ve turned on all the heating and covered her with blankets and eventually I have to get into the bed just to hold her to keep her warm and try and stop her system from shutting down. And she’s gasping and choking and speaking to the corpse of a dead child and it goes on for hours and hours and hours … Yep. I can give you ‘details’. To “facilitate sharing concern, suggestions and awareness.” What a joke.

rain · Post by **rain** » Mon May 23, 2005 4:20 am

well, actually, it used to be in France, but that's a whole 'nuther story. meanwhile, it's about 4 o'clock in the afternoon in Sydney, Australia. but first, a little history. so, Jeff starts writing about some of this stuff, and, 'naturally', it's gonna get some attention. one may surmise it'll particularly get attention from two directions, one being those who want to get the message out and the other, those who want to keep the lid on it or railroad it or whatever - aka 'cointelpro'. with regard to R.A. and it's many co-related phenomena, from the highly structured 'project', to the common garden variety, the point is, it IS real and it IS important. in fact, I'd go so far as to say, that if you hear that little phrase 'when a butterfly flaps it's wings...', you'll sit up and take notice. however, in view of recent developments, particularly in Victoria and South Australia, you'll have to excuse some of us older hacks from doing a little fence-sitting and maybe even a little prodding. it's not that we think someone is 'making it up'; nor that, at least some of us, can't comprehend just how seemingly 'freaky' things can get; not to discount how stressful it can be, but 'freaky' may just be a perceptual phase; nor is it that we don't have compassion. we do. that would, also, be the point.

biaothanatoi · Post by **biaothanatoi** » Mon May 23, 2005 4:49 am

however, in view of recent developments, particularly in Victoria and South Australia, you'll have to excuse some of us older hacks from doing a little fence-sitting and maybe even a little prodding. My friends stuff happened in Victoria, Australia, and we now live in Sydney. The same 'deterrents' used against the woman driving the Victorian investigation were used against me - but they occured three years apart. This is stuff as specific as mysterious phone calls with a ticking clock on the end. Survivors that my friend has never met gave unprompted, corroborating evidence as specific as the colour of a bathroom in one of the RA houses. So what you 'older hacks' need to realise is that other people's expertise in this ritual abuse comes about through direct experience, and that experience has come with a price, and it should be respected. I'm one of the good guys, and I've seen things and been through things that will never leave me. Nobody here has the right to tell me to "prove" myself - I do that every goddam day - and if you think "details" will do the trick, you are damn naive.

tabasco1776 · Post by **tabasco1776** » Mon May 23, 2005 12:21 pm

I was not asking you to "prove" yourself, nor was I doubting anything you were saying. I figured you were probably jumping to that conclusion. No, unlike someone else's recent rude post to someone that went along the lines of "sorry, but I'm going to have to see some more proof before I can believe your story", I was not expressing doubt or ridicule. If I disbelieved you, I wouldn't have bothered asking for more information. Are you hearing me? If you absorb nothing else from this post, absorb this: I believe you. I am not challenging you for "proof". The reason for the slightly exasperated tone of my original post is that it wasn't informational about the crucial parts of the story. These are the parts that I would think you would want to focus on, since you're taking the trouble to make the post and tell the story in the first place. Indeed, without details on the specifics of what happened, I can't understand what the purpose of making the post was in the first place. I take the subject of ritual abuse cults very seriously. If you wanted to expose these occurrences with full disclosure, I would applaud that. If you feared the far-reaching power of these evil cults and chose not to post on the matter at all for fear of repercussion, I would respect that too. But you did neither. Sound too anal? Maybe, maybe not. But we're not shooting the shit over a bottle of wine here. This is a worldwide network of ritual abuse cults we're trying to combat, and I personally feel that's a tad too important to fuck around with in middling chit-chatty terms. I am not one of the doubters here who would accuse you of living in a delusional fantasy world and telling titillating campfire stories. Rather, I am one of your supporters by urging you to be factual, detailed and organized in your presentation, in order to prevent others from making that same assumption. And if you say you don't care what anyone thinks, that loops us back to the question of why you bothered to bring up the subject in the first place.

sw · Post by sw » Mon May 23, 2005 12:51 pm

lilorphant · Post by **lilorphant** » Mon May 23, 2005 1:14 pm

I think some of us here are basically interested in various topics, RA being one of many. But as for myself, I am interested in quantitative facts, not qualitative, and Jeff does an amazing job of taking the emotional stuff out of it so the focus becomes clear. I suggested in a previous topic a qualitative method for correlating victims surveys, but the suggestion was discounted because I was not drawn into the emotional sensational aspect of the situation, simply because my take is that researchers should NOT be couselors, or get into subjective situations, perhaps not even doing the actual interviews at all. Case studies are important, but there will never be serious work done in this area until the some objectivity is applied. Karate is great for mental strength and discipline, so too, with all Asian martial arts. even if one never uses defensive techniques the mental exercises will become invaluable to the victim in asserting him/herself. My take is that when the mind is damaged, such exercises in mental discipline are called for. Other mental discipline focuses can be used, and should be investigated. Focus for the victim should be on safety, and health, physical and emotional. What actions are healthy? should I interact with someone I just met? If someone truly wants to help-some work with codependency issues may be necessary.

sw · Post by sw » Mon May 23, 2005 1:25 pm

Starman · Post by **Starman** » Mon May 23, 2005 1:37 pm

WoW -- VERY lucid and eye-opening -- That's a GREAT description of different 'kinds' of love. Quite moving, too. Blessin's. Starman

Starman · Post by **Starman** » Mon May 23, 2005 3:56 pm

Biaothanatoi; I took care that my post couldn't possibly be taken as rude or personally offensive. I rewrote it 2 or 3 times. Accordingly, I wrote it from a very broad POV. You lost me with your reference to 'public ridicule', and then your post went seriously awry. I'm REALLY sorry my post raised your hackles. I don't doubt your sincerity or the seriousness of the issue. I was puzzled why you jumped all over Tabasco when all he was really asking for was a bit more elaboration. That's all I meant by speaking about details. I tend to be pretty generous with giving folks my benefit of doubt, and so I'm almost always taken aback when I'm accused of being rude or insulting, or insensitive, which I take is your key objection to my post. Funny, cuz I TRIED to be sensitive to the chance you'd misinterpret my post, seeing as how vigorously you resented several other apparantly casual comments. I just don't get why you'd take such issue with my post to become adversarial -- like with taking personal offense at my subject header. Perhaps it was insensitive of me to point out an often-overlooked basic premise -- but I genuinely didn't mean to impugn your credibility. I was simply stuck for what to say that would announce the 'subject' of my comments, a generalized acknowledgement of skepticism as an information gatekeeper, and it just kind of suggested itself. Obviously I underestimated it being taken as an insult. I guess the thing is how ackward this whole issue of talking about RA can be -- where there's a sense of needing to 'walk on tenderhooks' so as to not offend somebody or step-on emotional toes. There sure seems to be a lot of opportunity for misunderstandings and unintended insults in the 'topic' of RA -- exacerbated by the pitfalls of the cyberscape medium. Perhaps, due to your experience of too-often having your observations and advocacy pooh-poohed, you're overly sensitive to perceived slights -- and so prone to seeing insults where none were intended. I assure you -- I DO have a sense of what an enormous burden it must be to find your comments re: RA advocacy continuously challenged, and I didn't mean to belittle it -- as you said, "Everyone – EVERYONE – who first engages with this issue pulls you back to the obvious, as though they are doing you a favor. Quietly, they point out that maybe ritual abuse survivors are delusion. Or manipulative. Or clingy. Or lying." I've found the same thing when I try to discuss the issue with friends and acquaintences -- it is terribly offputting and tedious. IMO-- That's precisely the point, and which I, perhaps clumsily, tried to address in speaking about the benefit of details to address latent skepticism. And what I (and I believe also Tabasco) was specifically talking about, was further elaboration on the 2 incidents you posted about -- NOT the entire history of your friend's abuse. I mean, if you weren't interested in elaborating further when asked, then what was the point of your post? Why turn it into a pissing-contest over the difference of 'details' vs 'elaboration'? You said: "Do you have any idea how patronizing the statement “Skepticism is healthy” is?" The statement wasn't intended to be patronizing. But if you're already very keenly aware of the skepticism that people bring to the issue of RA, why would you glibly trivialize the circumstances or dismiss questions re: the conclusion your friend was being set-up by a cult? Replying with more information would have been a helluva more constructive, wouldn't it? You also said: "Are we RA advocates so low in your estimation that you feel we need the benefit of self-evident aphorisms?" I'm completely stumped HOW or WHY anything I said would lead you to make such a deprecating inference. What is it that prompts you to put the most insidious spin on relatively innocuous comments? Are you aware of how this comes across as drama-queen theatrics? Why impugn my motives? I wasn't impugning yours. Specifically, to answer: NO. I don't have ANY pre-conceived value-judgement opinions about RA advocates -- not as individuals and certainly not as any kind of group, & esp. not 'low'. Your 'question' is insulting, sir. My comments weren't made to 'benefit' RA advocates, but were said in an effort to lend some greater perspective in context to this discussion thread, and to hopefully encourage greater respect and reflection in order to keep the discussion civil. In retrospect, seems I really put my foot in it. The real kicker is your implication that I'm NOT an RA advocate because I posted 'skepticism is healthy'. Perhaps your feathers wouldn't get so ruffled and this issue would receive more attention --as it certainly deserves-- if the role of skepticism as a fickle and demanding gatekeeper was better kept in mind -- and not dismissed as a 'self-evident aphorism.' Starman BTW: I'm not the 'bad guy' here either -- Can't we get beyond such pettiness? After all, it's not 'about' you or me anyway.

biaothanatoi · Post by **biaothanatoi** » Thu May 26, 2005 12:34 am

Let this one slip, so I'm just bumping it up. Which I may regret later. Starman: > I was puzzled why you jumped all over Tabasco when all he was really asking for was a bit more elaboration. Read his post. The word "elaboration" doesn't show up. The word "vague" occurs twice and the phrase "glossed over" has a prominent place. > I'm accused of being rude or insulting, or insensitive, which I take is your key objection to my post. Nope, not at all. It's a fairly generalised and undirected rant - hell, you might even say that I live under a lot of pressure - and I do apologise that you caught the brunt of it. > Perhaps it was insensitive of me to point out an often-overlooked basic premise People are dying out there - dying - and that includes me sometimes - and RA debate never leaves first principles. "Does it exist? Does it not exist? Prove it." We are constantly back at basic premises and so the debate never moves forward. Nobody discusses (and not here, I mean anywhere) ritual abuse prevention, treatment or care because we are too busy with these basic premises... and we have been for thirty years. Meanwhile, those who don't want to believe will never believe unless they are forced to. My "details" don't have the leverage to change anything over the net. And those "details" are incredibly difficult for me to write down - do you really want to hear about a young child being raped by a dog? Because, guess what? I don't want to write about it, particularly when it can never constitute "verification". > I've found the same thing when I try to discuss the issue with friends and acquaintences -- it is terribly offputting and tedious. In your life, yes. In my life, it means that we have no access to law enforcement or medical assistance, it means that we are vulnerable, it means that our house gets broken into and my friend gets raped and I stay up every night till 2am trying to get her to eat and sleep. If you find it tedious, you can bet that I'm exhausted. > What is it that prompts you to put the most insidious spin on relatively innocuous comments? Because I know where they lead. I've seen it happen a hundred times before - in emergency rooms, in police stations, in doctors officers. I don't have the time for "drama-queen theatrics", nor do I have time for demands made from arm-chair self-proclaimed "skeptics". Tabasco: I was not asking you to "prove" yourself, nor was I doubting anything you were saying. I figured you were probably jumping to that conclusion. Oh, OK. Ummm ... sorry. Indeed, without details on the specifics of what happened, I can't understand what the purpose of making the post was in the first place. Because I don't have anywhere else to go. I'm walking through Auschwitz here and there's nobody to talk to except other victims. Where we came from, in Melbourne, sexual assault services dealt really well with ritual abuse and we had a lot of support. Up here, they called her a liar and diagnosed me with Munchausen's By Proxy. There is one agency in Sydney funded to work with ritual abuse survivors, and they only work with women. I tried going to a shrink to talk about vicarious trauma but she told me to stop caring for my friend and move out. I personally feel that's a tad too important to fuck around with in middling chit-chatty terms. My "supporters" don't call me vague and accuse me of "glossing over" a "story". If that's what you call "support", you can keep it to yourself. I posted here because something really messed up happened last week and I don't have anyone to talk to about it except the woman that it happened to. I posted here because there are people who know what I'm talking about and might be able to help me understand it all better. I posted here because I live with this everyday, and if I didn't talk about it, I would not survive it.

GDN01 · Post by **GDN01** » Thu May 26, 2005 1:01 am

I hope things have quieted down this week for you and your friend. I can't imagine the pain and trauma you both continue to experience. I wish there were something more we could do here to help. I understand what you mean by the writing helping. This is the first place I have been able to share some of my story and have some people accept it - without asking me to prove myself, or suggesting I've made it all up somehow. There are many here who understand. I know I feel helpless to be of any real assistance to you. But don't think no one cares. I do - and I have wondered how you are. Please take care of yourself.

tabasco1776 · Post by **tabasco1776** » Thu May 26, 2005 9:58 am

"Because I don't have anywhere else to go. I'm walking through Auschwitz here and there's nobody to talk to except other victims." Then by all means, talk. That's what I've been trying to get you to do for the entirety of this thread. But you dont seem to want any back-talk. You seem to want to talk at us, not with us. Like we're just a sounding board for sympathy on demand. "they called her a liar and diagnosed me with Munchausen's By Proxy." As I said already, this is precisely why I'm urging you to be factual, detailed and organized as possible in your presentation, in order to prevent others from making that same assumption and that same diagnosis. And this isn't just about you - you're affecting the believability factor of all RA victim's stories in the eyes of people who are 'on the fence'. I really can't put it any plainer than this: Every incomplete unsubstantiated less-than-coherent claim of ritual cult abuse is another nail in the coffin of the chances of this subject being taken seriously by the general public.

Project Willow · Post by **Project Willow** » Fri May 27, 2005 3:05 am

You're right Baio, it's just insane, people are dying and RA never gets off first principles. I am living it too, the threats, the invasions, no access to the usual resources, utter isolation. Like you said, it's like living in a parallel world, invisibly suffering whilst surrounded by people who enjoy all manner of rights and protections to which you are denied access. I like Linda and Jeanne's description also, ra is a hidden "co-culture". I don't think anything is going to change until they start suffering in the dominant co-culture, and that suffering is specifically linked. I was going to write a long rant, but the words won't come. Sometimes I just want to scream, somebody please do something!!! But I don't want my saying that to be construed as being hard on folks here, many of whom are also survivors and others, well it's difficult enough to get here as it is. And, what could any one do really? I guess a lot of things, but first principles still need a lot of work too. Please keep posting, in moments of clarity I am here listening and comiserating, as are others.

rigorousintuition.ca

RA perp set-ups

Re: Skepticism is healthy

denial is not a river in Aegypt,

Re: denial is not a river in Aegypt,

Re: denial is not a river in Aegypt,

just a thought

Not much into emotional aspects.

parts

Re: Colours of love ...

Re: 'Public Ridicule'

Re: RA perp set-ups

Re: RA perp set-ups

Re: RA perp set-ups

This Maddening Life