Pizzagate. Plus, Ex-FBI Undercover Agent Bob Hamer |357|

I try to look at his sources. Sometimes he has stories or guests you don't see anywhere else. I can't watch the show live, but some of the clips on youtube I find interesting.

Oh yeah..'interesting'... as in entertainment. I'm always downloading paranormal podcast to listen to while falling asleep. Not saying there's no such thing as cryptoids, ghosts, ufo's, aliens, ect ect. However I listen to this stuff as storytelling. And that's what it really boils down to..... humans are storytellers.... and people like listening to stories. I know i do, be they true or fiction. I'm pretty sure your Art Bell types admit that...it's all entertainment, folks.

Thing is, some take it to the con/scam artist level. Like psychics... most are frauds but some are legit.
That's not to say people don't experience paranormal phenomena. i do believe such events take place. I've experienced such a thing first hand. However these podcasts run constantly so they need content so much of that consists of 'cranks' as the saying goes.

In short, Alex Jones is a fraud, phony, scam artist, con man and a crank, lol
 
Oh yeah..'interesting'... as in entertainment. I'm always downloading paranormal podcast to listen to while falling asleep. Not saying there's no such thing as cryptoids, ghosts, ufo's, aliens, ect ect. However I listen to this stuff as storytelling. And that's what it really boils down to..... humans are storytellers.... and people like listening to stories. I know i do, be they true or fiction. I'm pretty sure your Art Bell types admit that...it's all entertainment, folks.

Thing is, some take it to the con/scam artist level. Like psychics... most are frauds but some are legit.
That's not to say people don't experience paranormal phenomena. i do believe such events take place. I've experienced such a thing first hand. However these podcasts run constantly so they need content so much of that consists of 'cranks' as the saying goes.

In short, Alex Jones is a fraud, phony, scam artist, con man and a crank, lol
This was linked to before, so I'm assuming you didn't listen to it . . .

But watch this Joe Rogan episode as entertainment:


Or you can listen to the podcast: episode #911 . . .
 
Are there evil spirits, in the sense of spiritual entities that think and do stuff I would regard as evil – yes I think there are.
Just as consciousness does not die, evil does not die; so the same range of good and evil (however you wish to calibrate it) exists in the extended realms or spirit realms as exists here.

Finally, yes I think spiritual entities can influence human beings in this world.
I don’t know the technical (scientific) details of how that functions, but my best estimate is that birds of a feather can flock together.
I think there is ample evidence of contact and influence between the spirit realms and this realm throughout human history.
agreed. and I think some of the mystical Christians were right in their understanding of this... except that it seems to be a cross-cultural thing beyond any one tradition. I suspect it's both-and rather than either-or.
 
Another interesting find was Jasun's link to a book I hadn't heard of, The Witchhunt Narrative: Politics, Psychology, and the Sexual Abuse of Children (by Ross Cheit, a Brown University professor), addressing the false mainstream belief/mantra that all of those satanic child abuse cases in the 1980's were baseless witchhunts fueled by Christian-fundie "satanic panic" and overzealous psychologists.

"In the 1980s, a series of child sex abuse cases rocked the United States. The most famous case was the 1984 McMartin preschool case, but there were a number of others as well. By the latter part of the decade, the assumption was widespread that child sex abuse had become a serious problem in America. Yet within a few years, the concern about it died down considerably. The failure to convict anyone in the McMartin case and a widely publicized appellate decision in New Jersey that freed an accused molester had turned the dominant narrative on its head. In the early 1990s, a new narrative with remarkable staying power emerged: the child sex abuse cases were symptomatic of a “moral panic” that had produced a witch hunt. A central claim in this new witch hunt narrative was that the children who testified were not reliable and easily swayed by prosecutorial suggestion. In time, the notion that child sex abuse was a product of sensationalized over-reporting and far less endemic than originally thought became the new common sense. But did the new witch hunt narrative accurately represent reality? As Ross Cheit demonstrates in his exhaustive account of child sex abuse cases in the past two and a half decades, purveyors of the witch hunt narrative never did the hard work of examining court records in the many cases that reached the courts throughout the nation. Instead, they treated a couple of cases as representative and concluded that the issue was blown far out of proportion. Drawing on years of research into cases in a number of states, Cheit shows that the issue had not been blown out of proportion at all. In fact, child sex abuse convictions were regular occurrences, and the crime occurred far more frequently than conventional wisdom would have us believe. Cheit’s aim is not to simply prove the narrative wrong, however. He also shows how a narrative based on empirically thin evidence became a theory with real social force, and how that theory stood at odds with a far more grim reality. The belief that the charge of child sex abuse was typically a hoax also left us unprepared to deal with the far greater scandal of child sex abuse in the Catholic Church, which, incidentally, has served to substantiate Cheit’s thesis about the pervasiveness of the problem. In sum, The Witch-Hunt Narrative is a magisterial and empirically powerful account of the social dynamics that led to the denial of widespread human tragedy."

https://www.amazon.ca/Witch-Hunt-Narrative-Politics-Psychology-Children/dp/0199931224

It always makes me angry when people use the thoughtless propaganda phrase "Satanic Panic" when they have no idea what they are talking about.
so glad you brought this up. of course it's almost impossible to get folks to look at this unless they're pretty far down the rabbit hole. If you do a google search on the McMartin case you'll find all sorts of data points support what yr saying.
 
He also thas these to "bolster his claim!"
excellent. thx. more on McMartin and SRA:

===========
Cheit doesn’t claim that everybody hauled into court on sexual abuse charges has always been guilty. No doubt about it: many of those implicated in the McMartin Preschool (California) affair of 1983-90, the most notorious and long-running of the sex-abuse cases, were innocents whose lives and reputations were unjustly trashed. But he makes a powerful argument that there was real sexual abuse at McMartin, and that to dismiss it and the other cases that arose in its wake as “witch hunts” and “moral hysteria” is a shameful distortion of history and reality.

Nor does he shy away from some of the more bizarre instances of abuse, those claimed to involve satanic ritual. True, “[t]he idea that a network of organized pedophiles infiltrated day-care centers in the 1980s deserves to be dismissed.” Yet Cheit distinguishes “between conspiratorial claims involving networks of perpetrators that had infiltrated daycare centers and claims of individual cases involving satanic or ritualistic elements … children have been sexually abused in ritualistic or satanic ways, and therefore claims involving such elements should not automatically be written off as ‘fantastic’ and unrelated to reality” (page 160).
===========
 
Well, I've had a few beers myself just now, and I've got to say, it seems like some folks are being obstinate in their refusal to admit there is something really screwy about this whole mess. If you look at all the pieces of this puzzle - screw the conversation about whether they all fit into the bigger picture some people have tried to make of it - and you deny that some of those pieces are deeply disturbing at face value, I don't know what kind of productive conversation can be had about this.
yep. this is big takeaway/skeptiko-moment. it's another litmus test... like psi, or NDE or any of the rest... ultimately it's not really about the data. it's about people not wanting to change their beliefs. this is a perfect example... most of us don't want to live in a world where this stuff is real, but I think it's better to follow the data where it leads.
 
I have wondered about recovered memories too but do think it's possible to compartmentalize like that -- isn't that what MKUltra and projects like that were/are all about?
agreed. also, look into the "false memory syndrome" and you'll see that it was largely pushed and promoted by NAMBLA type groups/individuals. but it's complicated because both false memories and suppressed memories seem to be real phenomena. but the narrative we're left with is -- don't trust repressed memories. and that's a really bad/wrong/dangerous conclusion.
 
yep. this is big takeaway/skeptiko-moment. it's another litmus test... like psi, or NDE or any of the rest... ultimately it's not really about the data. it's about people not wanting to change their beliefs. this is a perfect example... most of us don't want to live in a world where this stuff is real, but I think it's better to follow the data where it leads.

and human beings neeeeeever pick and choose 'data'. :D

Weird. You don't go with GW... especially if helped along by man... despite a preponderance of evidence and consensus (but that's all conspiracy of course). However, the reverse conditions provide you with enough to go with the pizzagate thing. .
 
Last edited:
I guess the normalizing question has been answered:
https://www.inverse.com/amp/article/35065-sex-doll-pedophile-law

(note this is not a joke... well, it's kind of a joke, but not a joke... you get what I mean)

Juliet Grayson, chair at StopSO, told Metro UK, “Society needs to reach a point where a teenager can say to his [mother], ‘I am a pedophile’, and she will get him the right kind of help to manage his behaviors in pro-social ways.” David Davies, a member of parliament in Wales, spoke out with some vitriol in response to Grayson’s comments, saying, “Anyone with an ounce of common sense can see these things are quite obscene and should not be allowed into the country, and there is not much I can add to that.”
 
I guess the normalizing question has been answered:
https://www.inverse.com/amp/article/35065-sex-doll-pedophile-law

(note this is not a joke... well, it's kind of a joke, but not a joke... you get what I mean)

Juliet Grayson, chair at StopSO, told Metro UK, “Society needs to reach a point where a teenager can say to his [mother], ‘I am a pedophile’, and she will get him the right kind of help to manage his behaviors in pro-social ways.” David Davies, a member of parliament in Wales, spoke out with some vitriol in response to Grayson’s comments, saying, “Anyone with an ounce of common sense can see these things are quite obscene and should not be allowed into the country, and there is not much I can add to that.”
If a doll saved just one kid from abuse it would be worth it, but the data would be hard to establish I guess.
 
If a doll saved just one kid from abuse it would be worth it, but the data would be hard to establish I guess.

This sort of reminds me of the ongoing debate about violent video games increasing tendencies toward violence in gamers... the arguments would likely go on forever.

*EDIT*

You know, a thought comes to mind regarding this whole idea. I recognize that this is an unpopular and increasingly rare POV, but I think there is something to be said for recognizing that some impulses or urges or proclivities or what have you are simply unacceptable. They are unacceptable even if they are only in one's mind and never acted out...

This is not to say that anyone should beat the shit out of themselves and become incapacitated due to shame for one's thoughts and urges - but the standard modern/post-modern worldview leaves one in poverty as regards self-understanding. The standard fare we are given to work with and understand ourselves sets us immediately off in an unhelpful (if not altogether incorrect) course.

For many years I smoked cigarettes. I hated myself for it. I was so ashamed of myself and I imagined that everyone who saw me smoking thought of me as trash. The energy I put into hating myself and being ashamed, however, only seemed to strengthen the compulsion to smoke. What I had to learn in order to grow beyond that conundrum was that I was not my thoughts and urges. Shortly afterward, I was able to observe the desire to smoke and the related thoughts that triggered the desire to smoke and I became increasingly able to watch the urges pass over me until they were no more.

It is right to value health over short-term pleasure. That is wise. It is good that I continued to acknowledge this truth and not to discard it - but holding that value while behaving contrary to it caused me pain. Cognitive dissonance can help a person to find the energy to move in the right direction, but only if one holds to what is right and comes to disidentify with the aspects that lead them astray - and ultimately disidentification must come to encompass the entire personality structure. This is entirely foreign to modern/post-modern, western thinking.

What many people do instead of the above seems to me to often fall into two other camps. The first camp is the readily observable one of doing things that are at odds with what one knows to be right and constantly being in a state of agitation and dis-ease. That's why so many people talk all the time - more than half of what they are saying or doing is something to distract themselves from the pain of the cognitive dissonance they're trapped in. Like St. Paul they don't do what they know is right and they do what they hate. That's hell on earth.

A common second approach is to (at least attempt) to discard values that one knows to be right and true and replace them with a value system that endorses the thoughts/urges/behaviors. This only truly works if the impulses are enslaving enough because the impulse ultimately usurps the personality - the urges BECOME the person.

Fortunately it seems this doesn't happen all that often, but often enough to be vigilant about.

In our culture, since we identify with our proclivities so much, many of us get edgy when our wants and desires aren't accommodated by our environment. Then we act against dharma. And, again, channeling St. Paul - it is hard to kick against the pricks.

Dharma, man. Do your dharma and you get set free from the prison of wants, desires, and the whole shoddy shitshow of one's personality - which is really just a ramshackle shithole that, once you crawl out of it, you are glad to leave behind.

Or embrace your lusts and petty desires and wants and shrink down to a bunch of compulsions that ultimately strangle you and turn you into worse than nothing. Your choice.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
agreed. and I think some of the mystical Christians were right in their understanding of this... except that it seems to be a cross-cultural thing beyond any one tradition. I suspect it's both-and rather than either-or.

Yes I agree
From what I know all the religious traditions acknowledge the reality of evil spiritual entities and their influence on living human beings
In my view Reality transcends any one spiritual or religious culture
Each religion is a localised partial attempt to understand and manage spiritual Reality
As you know I think Reality itself is objective and Real and thus it can be scientifically studied
That possibility is obstructed today by materialist monistic scientism
Materialist monistic scientism is more like a religion than true science
All the best Alex
David
 
Yes I agree
From what I know all the religious traditions acknowledge the reality of evil spiritual entities and their influence on living human beings

David

It depends on what you mean by evil. If you mean Satan spawn that are born evil and will always be evil then Spiritualism does not recognize evil in that way.
When I was taking classes at a Spiritualist church they said that what people call "evil spirits" are just undeveloped or ignorant spirits. Spiritualists believe that all spirits eventually evolve to the highest levels.

But actually, I assume that by "evil" you mean "does nasty things" in which case some ignorant spirits could be considered evil in that sense. I use the term that way myself because it is convenient.
 
This was linked to before, so I'm assuming you didn't listen to it . . .

But watch this Joe Rogan episode as entertainment:


Or you can listen to the podcast: episode #911 . . .


I played it when I went back to lie in bed. I drifted in and out of sleep. I'm convinced the guy is on crystal meth. :D
 
A common second approach is to (at least attempt) to discard values that one knows to be right and true and replace them with a value system that endorses the thoughts/urges/behaviors. This only truly works if the impulses are enslaving enough because the impulse ultimately usurps the personality - the urges BECOME the person.
like maybe NAMBLA? like maybe some flavors of Satanism? like maybe some groups within DynCorp?
 
Back
Top