The problem of disinformation and shills.

Milennial_Falcon | 16 points | Nov 14 2016 03:14:43

The problem of disinformation and shills.

Everyone (except shills), thank you for what you are doing. We need to address the problem of disinformation, including jumping to conclusions about things that may be nothing. By all means, investigate, but tailor your degree of suspicion/certainty to how much evidence there is. Disinformation is a huge problem, because if we become associated with a SINGLE claim that turns out to be false, it can be used to discredit everything else we say. That's why the people we're fighting use disinformation as a primary counter-tactic.

The solution: BE SKEPTICAL about new claims and leads. Research. Only be as suspicious as the evidence allows. One example is the McMartin Preschool case, which is promoted as a real Illuminate Satanic abuse case by retired FBI chief Ted Gunderson(huge red flag!). Read the wikipedia article about the case. If anyone has actual evidence that the facts of the case are not accurately discussed on wikipedia, please share it. For now, I believe the McMartin case is fake. The so-called Franklin "coverup," also promoted by Gunderson, also seems suspect. Disclaimer: I haven't researched either one extensively, so I'm open to new information about them.

Finally, let's be careful about accusing others of being shills. If someone is trying to downplay obvious evidence, that's one thing. If someone shows a pattern of posting disinformation, that's also suspect. But there are also those of us who are very keen on the problem of disinformation and the risk of being labeled "conspiracy nuts." Don't call someone a shill just for suggesting more evidence is needed, or for asking you to look at the facts of a case.

Thank you, and keep digging!

drainthepizzaria | 3 points | Nov 14 2016 04:32:14

If you haven't read about it before, here is a link detailing an archeological dig organized to find evidence of tunnels at McMartin preschool:

http://earthops.net/cult/mcmartin_tunnels.html#L108

It should be noted that there is a lack of photographic evidence taken of the findings.

taxtaxtaxtaxtax | 2 points | Nov 14 2016 04:38:20

I found this pretty compelling when I read it a few days ago. They found a McDonald's wrapper and a few other items that dated the tunnel being filled in after the child abuse allegations. The government's position is that the "tunnels" are from the construction of the building in 1966, and rats or other rodents brought those items in while making burrows. That sounds pretty sketchy to me. There are quite a few kids that still insist that they were molested.

drainthepizzaria | 3 points | Nov 14 2016 04:44:39

Yes, to expand on that, a professional tree surgeon commented on the severed roots, one which he could identify as being removed with a handsaw and could be dated by its stage in the healing process along with the presence of feeder roots.

edited to fix wording

Milennial_Falcon | 2 points | Nov 14 2016 05:05:55

There are quite a few kids that still insist that they were molested.

They would be adults now. Source?

taxtaxtaxtaxtax | 1 points | Nov 14 2016 05:30:02

https://ritualabuse.us/ritualabuse/articles/mcmartin-preschool-case-what-really-happened-and-the-coverup/

There's a fairly recent interview with the mother of a victim talking about her daughter and other children. I'm pretty sure that I read something over the last few days from a child (speaking as an adult) that was at the daycare, but I can't find it now.

Milennial_Falcon | 3 points | Nov 14 2016 14:55:45

but I can't find it now.

Then, I can't reject the possibility that you made it up. There are shills on this subreddit pushing disinformation.

Here is one of the kids apologizing as an adult.

Milennial_Falcon | 1 points | Nov 14 2016 04:56:00

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial#Continued_allegations_of_secret_tunnels

"Others have disagreed with Stickel's conclusions. John Earl wrote in 1995 that the concrete slab floor was undisturbed except for a small patch where the sewer line was tapped into. Once the slab was removed, there was no sign of any materials to line or hold up any tunnels, and the concrete floor would have made it impossible for the defendants to fill in any tunnels once the abuse investigation began. The article concluded that disturbed soil under the slab was from the sewer line and construction fill buried under the slab before it was poured. Further, Earl noted that some fill from beneath the concrete slab was dated to the year 1940.[15]

W. Joseph Wyatt's 2002 report concluded that the "tunnels" under the preschool were more plausibly explained as a rubbish pit used by the owners of the site before the preschool's construction in 1966. Materials found during the excavation included bottles, tin cans, plywood, inner tubes, as well as the former owner's old mail box. Only three small items found near the edge of the concrete slab were dated after 1966, which Wyatt suggested were most likely dragged into the pit by rats or other scavengers. Moreover, Wyatt speculated that Stickel's conclusions were colored by his collaboration with the parents of the McMartin children.[39]"

Also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial#Interviewing_and_examining_the_children

"Transcripts and recordings of the interviews contained far more speech from adults than children and demonstrated that, despite the highly coercive interviewing techniques used, initially the children were resistant to interviewers' attempts to elicit disclosures. Recordings of these interviews were instrumental in the jury's refusal to convict, by demonstrating how children could be coerced to giving vivid and dramatic testimonies without having experienced the abuse.[18] The techniques used were contrary to the existing guidelines in California for the investigation of cases involving children and child witnesses.[19]"

drainthepizzaria | 1 points | Nov 14 2016 04:58:23

Thank you for this, however, I am already familiar with the wikipedia article on the case.

nobstruthseeker | 1 points | Nov 14 2016 04:20:53

How is Ted Gunderson dishonest?

wrathofheaven1111 | 2 points | Nov 14 2016 10:47:53

"Los Angeles–Shocking proof has surfaced to indict a former FBI Division 5 director for lying about his marriage to Church of Satan heiress, Diana Rively, Anton LaVey’s ex-wife, to keep a secret child-trafficking sex-slavery network hidden."

"The letter, signed with kisses and hugs, was sent to Gunderson’s professional associate, Barbara Hartwell, who was programmed to serve in the CIA’s psychological operations unit. She trained in psychological profiling and in debriefing military and intelligence personnel, and later toured with Gunderson to “disseminate intelligence on government corruption,” according to Hartwell. Their assignments included a child-trafficking operation linked to officials of the CIA, U.S. military, Church of Satan, and Justice Department."

"why mind-control inductees are assigned to operate as enemies of State, even embracing satanism, to disseminate indicting intelligence on U.S. government corruption on behalf of the CIA?

One reason involves undermining “dissident activism” by generating “controlled opposition.” Fake dissidents provide cover for criminal operations, and deter real grassroots activism from sparking revolutions. Another explanation involves globalization, and propaganda intended to undermine nationalism to embrace governance through the United Nations."

"Sterling concluded, “The most effective form of disinformation is that which blurs the truth with fiction so effectively that they become impossible to differentiate.” He noted that at the time Taylor, and other alleged victims of the CIA’s Project Monarch MKULTRA sex slavery operation, such as Cathy O’Brien, hit the lecture circuit, “some powerful research was starting to circulate in alternative circles involving Satanic pedophilia operations.”

http://archive.is/st9Vy http://www.waronwethepeople.com/child-sex-trafficking-scandal-exposes-ciafbi-justice-department-cover-crime-network/

Please note Just because I post this doesnt neccesarily mean I agree with this conclusion. Gunderson is either legit and been targetted by every trick in the book or there is something else to it. Im still deciding. I did look into the hartwell stuff and she has also been targetted by every trick in the book so its very confusing. Hope this helps-

Milennial_Falcon | 1 points | Nov 14 2016 15:08:17

Read the wiki on the McMartin case, which is the one Gunderson talks about in the youtube video. Anyone who actually objectively reads the facts on it will quickly realize it's probably fake. I even wonder if it was an operation by the elite government pedo/abuse network to intentionally create a fake case, so they could then use it for "controlled opposition" as discussed in your post. Again, I'm open to new information, but so far it's just one user with very little comment history who claims one of the victims still says they were abused, yet somehow he can't find the source where he supposedly read that.

nobstruthseeker | 1 points | Nov 15 2016 14:52:17

Thanks a lot, I will look into it

Milennial_Falcon | 1 points | Nov 14 2016 04:36:25

First off, the author of this post claims to be an abuse victim, and says Gunderson is a disinformant. I'm not saying that I KNOW he is. I'm saying we need to look into it. Red flag: He was an FBI chief (apparently involved in COINTELPRO), and he promotes the McMartin case, which from my quick research sounds like nonsense (the kids were basically pressured into saying they were abused, and they made some obviously impossible claims). I am also seeing claims Gunderson is associated with Temple of Set and Michael Aquino (Presidio military base abuse case).