True Believers, Hoaxtead, and moral outrage: When belief becomes exceptionalism

For those of us who don’t automatically believe in every troofer fantasy that floats past on the internet, one of the biggest and most imponderable questions is “Why?”

Why do some people seem inclined, nay, compelled to believe in things like the latest wackadoo story about Satanic baby-killers who kidnap children and ship them to their secret base on Mars, where they serve as sex slaves to depraved plutocrats, who then slaughter them in order to harvest and consume their blood? (Yes, this is a real conspiracy rumour, most recently and famously put about by Alex Jones. We shit you not.) Why, indeed, do people believe in Hoaxtead?

Who are the True Believers?

Today we’re not going to talk about the people who created and initially pushed the Hampstead SRA hoax—those we refer to as the Hoaxtead mobsters. They are a cynical lot, who built the hoax specifically to appeal to a certain group—the ones we call the True Believers.

The True Believers are the people who keep the thing alive online, posting and reposting videos, “liking” and gasping and “OMIGOD-ing”. It’s easy to assume that the True Believers are a) insane, b) mentally deficient, c) unbelievably gullible, d) religious fanatics of one stripe or another, e) uneducated, or f) all of the above.

And maybe that’s true for at least some of the True Believers we’ve encountered. But it doesn’t account for the massive viralisation of cockamamie stories like “Satanic baby-killers on Mars”, Hoaxtead, or Pizzagate, which contain so many logical and logistical flaws that it’s difficult to know where to even start debunking them.

That’s why we were fascinated to come across an article on the Slacktivist blog yesterday. Fred Clark’s post, “Alex Jones & the kitten-burners”, looks at the phenomenon of why some people believe in conspiracy theories, through a lens we hadn’t really considered. In Mr Clark’s view, True Believers are not motivated by an inability to process facts or evidence. They are driven by a sense of righteousness and a need for moral authority.

Speaking of the “child sex-slaves on Mars” story, Mr Clark asks,

People don’t really believe this, do they? Yes. Yes they do.

Well … they want to believe it, and they try their hardest to do so. And they’ve all-but completely convinced themselves that they do. If you ask them, “Do you really believe this?” they won’t be lying when they say yes, because they’ve been convinced that being a good person on the side of good requires them to say yes and to dutifully avoid entertaining any thoughts about any of the obvious evidence or scientific/logistical impossibilities that cause the rest of us to gape at their apparent credulity.

In other words, for True Believers in the Hampstead SRA hoax (or the child sex-slaves on Mars), it’s not a question of believing something that’s patently ridiculous and impossible—it’s about the believer’s need to see himself or herself as a “righteous person”.

People believe such things because they have come to need to believe them. They need to believe them because they need to think of themselves as righteous. Or, at least, they need to feel something like what they imagine it must feel like to be able to think of themselves as righteous.

So to someone who believes in Hoaxtead, the details are immaterial: it doesn’t matter how many times we explain why it’s not possible to (just for example) store 8,000 baby skulls in a vestment drawer in a smallish Victorian-era church, or how RD’s children are not speaking or behaving an a manner consistent with known examples of children who’ve been interviewed about their experiences of sexual abuse. None of the evidence we have meticulously gathered matters one single iota to a true believer, because to them, evidence is not important.

What’s important to them is that this all gives them the opportunity to express their disapproval of such things — the opportunity to perform that disapproval….

(Alex) Jones takes a phone call from a listener, and they congratulate one another on their agreement that pedophilia and Satanic human sacrifice are just plain wrong. “This issue about pedophile rings,” the caller says, “it infuriates me. It’s one of my hot-button issues.”

Jones agrees. “I don’t like violence,” he responds, “but I fantasize about jabbing daggers in their eyes, stuff like that. I mean, I’m being honest, I can’t help it. When I think about pedophiles torturing kids, I want to kill.”

That’s a vivid way of expressing his ethical stance, but the basic underlying point is not wrong. Pedophilia is wrong — on any planet. But note that this is not the main point that either Jones or his caller feels compelled to express. Their message here is not “X is bad,” but “I, personally and heroically, disapprove of X.”

“I, personally and heroically, disapprove of X”: this, for many, is the nub of the issue.

The point, for the average Hoaxtead True Believer, is not that 22± children were systematically raped hundreds of times per week by members of a (death cult/satanic cult/MK Ultra mind programming cult) (pick one), but never suffered more injury than one might expect if they’d passed a large, solid poo. The point is that raping 22± children hundreds of times per week is BAD, and what’s more, it’s critically important that we all understand that the Hoaxtead True Believer is aware of the fundamental badness of it.

It’s not a point we can argue with: we all know that raping children is a despicable and terrible thing. But to the Hoaxtead True Believer, simply knowing that isn’t enough. They must demonstrate to the world at large that they know it, as loudly and emphatically as possible. Furthermore, they fully believe that their disapproval of child-raping, baby-murdering, cannibalism, and so forth makes them somehow exceptional. In order to feel truly virtuous and morally upright, it’s important to these people that they be able to compare their own moral stance favourably with the immorality of the rest of us.

They do this by contrasting their belief with the disbelief of the rest of the world: those of us who don’t agree the Hampstead SRA hoax or the child sex-slaves on Mars are real are unable to agree that they are BAD, which makes us, at least in the eyes of the True Believers, bad people. Paedo-enablers. Shills. Sinners who will burn in hell for eternity.

The anti-kitten-burning crusade

Mr Clark compares this kind of virtue signalling writ large to an extremely nasty incident which happened a few years ago:

Just a few miles from the newspaper where I then worked, some messed-up teenagers did something really messed-up. They put a live kitten on a backyard barbecue grill. And they recorded themselves doing it on cell-phone video.

This was stomach-turning and utterly deplorable. The story of what happened to that poor kitten was appalling.

It was also incredibly popular, quickly becoming one of the most-read, most-shared, and most-commented-on stories in the history of our paper. Readers hated that story, and so readers loved that story. They loved hating that story.

And, far more than that, they loved declaring that they hated that story. They loved performing their hatred of that story.

The mass-condemnation of this cruel act — in the thousands of comments online and the scores of letters-to-the-editor received over the following weeks — was in one sense reassuring. It was comforting to receive such confirmation that the people of our community, unanimously, disapproved of cruelly torturing sweet, adorable little kittens.

But it was also unnerving, because nearly all of these condemnations seemed to be made by people who assumed they were saying something exceptional — something brave, controversial, and heroic. Most didn’t confine themselves to merely condemning the teenagers who actually committed this act of kitten-burning, but also harshly condemned the mass of people they somehow imagined approved of it. If any such defenders of kitten-burning existed, none of them was speaking up publicly or expressing such views in the comments on our article, and yet a huge share of the anti-kitten-burning comments being left were phrased as though they were a response to such non-existent defenses.

Many of these anti-kitten-burning declarations expressed this claim of exceptionalism by including a weird sort of apology. “I’m sorry, but I just don’t approve of this.” “I’m sorry, but I just think this is wrong!” I could never figure out who it was they were apologizing to.

Just as we’re quite certain that there is not a constituency of people out there who approve of torturing kittens, we’re pretty sure that almost no one approves of torturing, sexually abusing, and murdering children (whether in a London suburb or on a secret base on Mars). And yet, to hear the True Believers talk, you’d think that everyone who doesn’t buy the same wacky stories they do is an unrepentant child rape and torture enthusiast, against whom the True Believers must take a heroic, principled stand.

In the final analysis, belief in things like Hoaxtead, Pizzagate, child sex-slaves on Mars, and the like isn’t about just “feeling good”—it’s about feeling “better-than”. It’s about assuming a stance of moral superiority which sets them apart from the rest of us, who seem to feel less need to define ourselves as exceptional via condemnation of things that everyone should disapprove of anyway.

Like child abuse, infanticide, and cannibalism, kitten-burning is horrible and morally reprehensible. We don’t get extra virtue points for believing that.

The fact that so many people feel the need to perform their moral outrage as a means of feeling better than everyone else, though? That should worry us all.

Advertisements

56 thoughts on “True Believers, Hoaxtead, and moral outrage: When belief becomes exceptionalism

  1. “I, personally and heroically, disapprove of X”: this, for many, is the nub of the issue.

    BINGO BINGO BINGO!
    (A rare triple – congratulations)

    “Just as we’re quite certain that there is not a constituency of people out there who approve of torturing kittens, we’re pretty sure that almost no one approves of torturing, sexually abusing, and murdering children (whether in a London suburb or on a secret base on Mars)”.

    Yes – but in order to sustain the delusion that their disapproval is heroic, rather than simply normal, they need to imagine such a constituency. If necessary, they will invent totally a totally imaginary one, but its more satisfying for them to falsely label some community of real persons. And therefore…

    “And yet, to hear the True Believers talk, you’d think that everyone who doesn’t buy the same wacky stories they do is an unrepentant child rape and torture enthusiast, against whom the True Believers must take a heroic, principled stand”.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Thanks, Justin. The question of why the True Believers think as they do has plagued me since this thing began. This seems to come closest so far to an explanatory theory, so I was happy to stumble across it. 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

      • It’s a more encompassing phenomenon than “why they think/act as they do”.
        SV is hinting, (below) at a bigger truth – I think. There may be occasions when “THEY” (some this day, perhaps others another day) perform the same role for US (some this day, perhaps others another day).

        Although – we have some specific albeit unofficial goals, an informal set of self-imposed boundaries. If those goals all came to pass, I don’t think the Hoaxtead community would have any problem with walking away and letting go, (perhaps with a sentinel or two keeping watch to sound alarms, should fires flare again), especially letting go of any need to look down at THEM from our own morally righteous hilltop. So, not quite the same scenario.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Yes, very good point. I do think it’s important to keep an eye on our own motivations, and do our best to be clear with ourselves about why we’re doing this and what we hope to achieve.

          Liked by 1 person

    • The positive news if Dave is correct is it might just put an end to his pointless you tube ramblings and he wont get the opportunity to interminably gloat about actually getting something right for once either.

      Still trying to fathom other ways the world can end other than badly?Any ideas most welcome on a post card,but get them in sharpish,just in case.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Well on an astronomical scale, he is right….
      The age of the earth is 4.543 billion years and in 3.5 billion years “the Sun will shine almost 40 percent brighter, which will boil Earth’s oceans, melt its ice caps, and strip all of the moisture from its atmosphere” and in 5 billion years will expand in its red giant stage and extend out past Mars orbit, swallowing the earth entirely

      If it was a car, most people would be looking at new car adds and thinking about trade in values….

      So yes, its is `about to end’

      Liked by 2 people

  2. Good article and links.
    And people thought the Salem witch burners were fanatics? Scary to think they are still lurking among us in the 10,000s and can now all link up via the internet.

    Liked by 3 people

  3. The psychology is so spot on. Every group needs a scapegoat in which to hang its mass anger, hate and fear upon. How many examples in communities and societies suffering extreme stress does the individual who is different become the scapegoat, the bucket upon which everyone can dump their fears and hatreds into, to humiliate, degrade and then destroy.

    Who is the hubristic fool who came into our troubled society, who is different from us, who pulled all our psychological strings, all our hates, our fears and anger? After near three years of extreme distress, who shall become the Jesus who will carry all our anger, hate, fear and outrage upon their cross? The wickerman standing waiting on Hampstead Heath for them? Someone is going to fall, someone is going to get it. The opportunity for that moment is still to come. But we are all open to this human fault, them and us. And in some ways it is neccessary for both sides that someone becomes the scapegoat, so that all can psychologically move on. A scapegoat, a Jesus, is required to bring closure to Hampstead SRA hoax.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Flippin’ heck Mr Satanic, that’s a bit scary! I was rather hoping that the Hampstead SRA hoax would go out with a whimper rather than a bang. It does seem to be losing its puff right now.

      Liked by 2 people

      • It’s definitely losing steam now, but our experience has been that whenever it does that, we can expect a redoubling of effort from the other side within days or weeks. That said, each new sally seems to be a bit less forceful than the last, so eventually the thing will wind down to a dull roar, most likely as the Holliehoax has done. Still there, but in a shadowy, ineffectual form.

        Liked by 1 person

    • @SV – I’d like to nominate Dipstick Shyster for jesus-goat. He has already claimed to be the Second Coming, after all, and also the Anti-Christ – so he can fulfill the role from either perspective 🙂

      Liked by 4 people

      • Abe and Ella being brought back to the UK to face charges and having to admit it was all a hoax will be a great moment, long overdue. There should be a huge level of hatred aimed at those two child abusers, which is only just starting to increase with the troofer crowd coming round to what Abe and Ella are really like.
        I mean they could have read the court documents, listened to Abraham’s own words, used common sense, read the many MSM and independent articles on the internet, read this blog etc, but hey, better late than never.

        Liked by 3 people

    • If perchance one found oneself nailed to a cross on the edge of Hampstead Heath with an ugly mob baying for blood,it is hard to imagine what one would say but it wouldnt be, “Forgive them,for they know not what they do”.If they dont know what they are doing they wouldnt be doing it and if they do know what they are doing they deserve all the shit thats coming.Fairs,fair.

      I havent exactly rehearsed which words I would utter should I wind up in the final throes of crucifiixion but I very much doubt they would be broadcastable before the watershed,well probably anytime really.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Why is this so difficult for them? To be so blinded?

      If you take what they believe away, this is what they have left…….

      …………….. nothing.

      And that, be it right or wrong, is one of the most scariest places to find oneself, though at that same place can be life changing in a positive way.

      Of which can take months and years to transend.

      Liked by 3 people

  4. There are lots of papers being published now and also lectures being given about the psychology of conspiracy theorists. The above, however, is really spot on. It explains the arrogance of certain people too – the ‘I’m right and you’re just a sheep’ attitude.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Hi Sheva!
      I think I listened to that one, too, awhile ago(?) – it sounded familiar.

      I’ve only recently been actively exploring in pizzagator-ish youtube channels. I have limited patience for dredging through “information” that I know is false & fraudulent, repeated over & over – as you probably know from my whining about certain unpleasant people’s propensity for multiple-hour long rants 🙂 Aaaargh!

      Anyway, I was looking for signs that SOME of these people might actually be sincere, and genuinely care more about the hypothetical CHILD ABUSE than the political slander gossip, the quest for easy money, the fantasy storytelling or the sheer “hits”. I thought I’d spotted a couple of possibilities, but further “inquiries” have pretty much left me -unsurprisingly – with little evidence for sincerity.
      I don’t know why, since that’s what I expected to find, I have found that depressing. 😦

      Liked by 2 people

      • The following observation is not aimed at any particular person, nor is it intended to offend anyone.
        I didn’t know what to make of persons, who claim to understand that Kevin Annuss and his ITCC scam are entirely fraudulent, but nonetheless profess to “totally believe in the Ninth Circle stuff”.
        That could just be lack of knowledge, they might genuinely be unaware that the WHOLE “Ninth Circle” narrative is a mythology cooked up BY KEVIN ANNUSS and his “freeloaders on the land” scamming buddies.
        But maybe it is as simple as this: “People believe such things because they have come to need to believe them. They need to believe them because they need to think of themselves as righteous. Or, at least, they need to feel something like what they imagine it must feel like to be able to think of themselves as righteous”.
        Perhaps they really know better, but just can’t let go of the parts of Kevin’s BS that others are still interested in discussing. I dunno

        Liked by 3 people

      • I’ve hardly listened to many pedogators either, it is depressing, for me too. Unfortunately, the ninth circle myth has legs, because the hollie hoaxers managed to viralise it, mixed with Savile to keep their followers clicking….. For many it’s become a catch phrase…. helped too, by some FMOL types who profess to be anti child abuse campaigners, they gained ‘credibility’, at some of the rallies in recent years.

        Liked by 1 person

  5. This is a fair analysis, although I think drilling more deeply and cynically is warranted.

    “The True Believers are the people who keep the thing alive online, posting and reposting videos, “liking” and gasping and “OMIGOD-ing”. It’s easy to assume that the True Believers are a) insane, b) mentally deficient, c) unbelievably gullible, d) religious fanatics of one stripe or another, e) uneducated, or f) all of the above.”

    In most cases, it’s almost-certain that options a,b,c and e apply and often this comes in the foil-wrap of d. But to some extent I must disagree with Mr Clark when he writes…

    “Well … they want to believe it, and they try their hardest to do so. And they’ve all-but completely convinced themselves that they do. If you ask them, “Do you really believe this?” they won’t be lying when they say yes, because they’ve been convinced that being a good person on the side of good requires them to say yes and to dutifully avoid entertaining any thoughts about any of the obvious evidence or scientific/logistical impossibilities that cause the rest of us to gape at their apparent credulity.”

    That analysis is almost certainly valid when we’re considering the ‘more harmless’ bizarre tales that cross the blurry line between the ‘entertaining unexplained’ (i.e. modern folklore) and stupidly-childish fairy stories generated by the feeble-minded, which they present as some sort of reality – as opposed to the fiction a rational person might. But there is surely something further to be said about the ‘health’ and nature of the fantasies that people generate and embrace?

    There are lines which, if crossed, indicate that the subject might be a danger to other people even if they are expressed as ‘just fantasies’.

    For example, some years ago there was an individual – a computer expert – caught ‘PhotoShopping’ the heads of his friends and neighbours’ children onto images of children being abused, with his own face superimposed in the position of abuser. There is no evidence he actually physically harmed any child himself; and that was his argument in defence both online and in court. Of course, it didn’t wash and rightly so, he done time and lost his position in society. This individual was by no means unintelligent or uneducated, in fact the position they held in life was not only one of trust but required an advanced graduate level education.
    Elsewhere, consider the self righteous claptrap of Nigel Leigh Oldfield as he (ab)uses his intellect to justify his disgusting and harmful agenda. The ‘tack’ taken by him being in many ways very similar to my first example. – Both claim to be ‘mere fantasists’ who had never actually harmed a child.

    …And there’s the issue; fantasising about sexually abusing children; that’s the line.

    We can easily find evidence of how those who do that thing seek to circumvent the law which prevents them making or possessing images of child abuse. These include the production of ‘textual’ material featuring child abuse. And, as noted by the judge in the Hampstead case, video material of these two children repeating these sick sexual fantasies is likely to have been found ‘stimulating’ to those of that particular bent.

    Outside of law enforcement or clinical study, I can think of no legitimate situation where someone might dwell at length on the minutia of sexual abuse.

    Therefore, rather than being any kind of ‘good person’ exhibiting sheep-like compliance with the party line of ‘good’, these people are far more likely to be wallowing in and obtaining ‘satisfaction’ from the fantasy itself. Which is one reason why they are so resistant to it being ‘killed off’ and so desperate to keep the pot boiling.

    – This is their ‘pornography’.

    A reasonable (if eccentric) person might enjoy watching Yvette Fielding running around an allegedly haunted house or spend time on the shores of Loch Ness staring hopefully at the waters. They may even purchase a fridge magnet and a stuffed tartan Nessie. In extreme cases a subscription to the Fortean Times might be in order… Or perhaps a conviction that the Timecube was a thing of much merit and profound meaning.

    But these sick fantasies are a whole different genre of conspiracy/horror story. Then there are the links to organised crime, drug abuse and ‘drug culture’ (an oxymoron if ever there was one!) general fraud, deception and grifting; criminal enterprise. It’s all far beyond even the very whitest shade of pale.

    So, rather than being driven “by a sense of righteousness and a need for moral authority” I suggest that this façade is a shell for their own moral bankruptcy. That to enjoy wallowing in this filth and ‘wanting to believe’ is a sickness in itself. An attempt to deflect from their own culpability and project the guilt elsewhere.

    In closing I leave the following morsel of food for thought. We are currently experiencing another ‘wave’ of exposure of the abuse that did take place within various institutions; getting there has been hard work. The press are now (necessarily) walking a knife-edge with it. And what is now rising to the surface might otherwise have been brought to light years ago were it not for the interference of hoaxers. Legitimate grass-roots concern about child abuse, and even the plight of genuine victims is lost among the chatter of fraudsters and idiots. Sorting the wheat from the chaff is a thousand times more difficult than it was a decade ago… It’s a bad result all round.

    It’s very difficult to believe that anyone _ even the looniest of loons – who truly believes themselves to be a ‘good person’ can actually believe that outcome is remotely ‘right’.

    Liked by 3 people

    • You should have a good look at an edition of Fortean Times. Very often they investigate and thoroughly debunk urban myths and conspiracy theories.

      Liked by 2 people

      • I’d assume AVT was speaking with a sense of irony when he mentioned FT as I think he’s helped debunk UFO hoaxes in the past for them I’m pretty much in agreement if these people “want to beleive” they should stick to flying saucers and shape-shifting “Tran-sit Vaaaans” and knitting jumpers out of seaweed. Child abuse just isn’t fantasy fan-fiction territory.

        Liked by 3 people

    • Human beings are at their core machines who operate on a hormonal level: adrenaline; dopamine; oxytocin. Paedophiles who hunt child porn are motivated by dopamine, their need to hunt and collect stuff, those same people are likely also to be collecting other stuff like stamps and coins. Those paedophiles involved in contact crime, the molestation of children, are motivated by oxytocin. The hormone oxytocin encourages intimacy, sharing, trust and touching. Paedophiles and most of the Satan Hunters have mental and psychological defects that acts as a social barrier to their being able relate with others, hence limits their access to oxytocin, but like most human beings they need oxytocin, and so they get it where they can at the points of least resistance such as children. Satan Hunters and paedophiles involved in contact crime are no different from each other in that they focus on children and have a burning need for oxytocin. Thanks to the internet all these groups create a tribal bonding creating a culture of normality around their ideas and activities, thus gain oxytocin from it. Neither paedophile or Satan Hunter is going to be easily persuaded away from their tribal culture of ideas and deeds focussed on children when they are getting oxytocin from it which they desperately crave.

      Liked by 2 people

    • I have been keeping an eye on stuff that is being released. For example, Stuart Syvret, ex Jersey senator, linked to John Hemming, wanted the Jersey Care Enquiry to be all about him as far as I can see, didn’t give evidence, even though he was minister for health for years.

      This type of rubbish has been going on for years. I’ve been watching for years.

      All this posturing and grandstanding and the people who lived it are ignored over someone being butt hurt they weren’t at a meeting, or whatever.

      Liked by 2 people

  6. Re:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-40497162

    Different topic to this post, but a side comment on BBC arti cle today about a demand for paedophile hunters to be recruited by the police. This is all unnecessary, as usual everyone are unable to think outside of the box.

    Prevention is better than cure.
    If there was no under 18’s on these adult chat sites, there would be no grooming crimes on them. Lets take Grindr, an online service for gay men like David Shurter to pick up men to have a sexual relationship with ( he needs a man in his life and bed to ground him and get him away from the unreality of Facebook.)

    Firstly, a simple check of taking a £1/$1 from a credit card to use the service. Most under 18’s have no access to credit cards, so it will stop many of them using the site.

    Secondly, AI working in the background:
    1. to monitor chats as they haven, the moment someone says they are under 18, it suspends the account.
    2. to monitor for patterns and ways of writing indicative of under 18’s, and act accordingly.
    3. to create pseudo-people to chat with and ask people how old they are, suspending any who say they are under 18.

    Problem solved.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. I noticed that Nathan Stolpman of LTV accidentally flicked onto a communication between he and Ella during one of his videos. A video published within the last day but now appears to be deleted. It was a communication via Skype text. Ella appears to use the name of the boy as her handle (Gareev Gxxxxxx). Nathan was apologising for not answering one of her calls.
    Ella left a message of text informing Nathan that Abraham would not be available to join them for an interview they must have been planning. Nathan responded by stating that he really wanted it to be both Ella and Abraham, and mentioned that people have been describing Abraham as a bad guy. The call and responses were from Friday, Saturday and Sunday.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Interesting, thanks Dave. I find it telling that Nathan is now demanding that Abe participate in the interview. He’s been conspicuously absent lately, I expect because they’ve realised he “doesn’t play well in Peoria”—even the most dedicated Hoaxtead follower finds him intolerable. If they allow him to go on one of his “stimulating the pineal gland via the rite of sodomy in pre-three-year-olds”, I suspect they are acutely aware that they’ll lose more supporters than they’ll gain.

      Liked by 1 person

    • The only child abuser is Deborah herself, who chooses to keep mentioning the childrens names, clearly derives pleasure from talking about CSA in very graphic terms , and has outed herself as a fraud by continuing to promote the Hampstead case which was an obvious hoax from the start to any sane person who has any knowledge of genuine cases of child abuse.
      Anyone who promoted the hoax has outed themselves as fantasists and con-artists, none of them should be allowed to work with children for fear they may get it into their heads that a child is possessed or under the control of a cult and go onto cause harm to the child with their demented views and Hemp based cures.

      Liked by 3 people

  8. Best Mad-Moo meltdown ever. It starts building from 12:10. Stick with it – and pity the poor microphone that no doubt died under the vocal hurricane to which it was inflicted…

    Liked by 1 person

  9. OK, fess up – which one of you is running an after-school Satan club?

    Matron will be most upset – she was hoping to book that room for the school’s annual Ritual Sacrifice Society dinner and dance.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Someone’s been listening to Dave Shouter.
      And thank fuck for that. I mean, God forbid Angie should shout accusations about people without checking them with a reliable source first.

      Liked by 2 people

    • And here we see a rather nice illustration of the post above: a woman who is no better than she ought to be, performing her rage at a non-existent group of child molesters, and attempting to assert her moral superiority in a way that she hopes will cause people to view her as better-than. Thanks, Angie!

      Liked by 1 person

    • Has she posted this one ? Angie, read the bloody description, The satanic panic of the 80s effected our campaigns in the 90s, just as #HorribleSatanicHoaxers are today, Listening to Lucien really helped me to understand, because most of us, get on with working for real change, truthfully, supporting others, often secretly, so they can make choices, seek help/justice which is still too thin on the ground….. I blame the SRA myth tellers and those profiting, those whom it helps prosper, including many paedophiles/rings/colluders, You are a disgrace ! I humbly suggest, that you have no right to claim anything at all, not on any subject, but especially childrens or survivors experiences or rights.

      Liked by 2 people

  10. Pingback: What motivates True Believers? More thoughts from our readers | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  11. What a thoroughly thought-provoking analysis!
    It has left me feeling that the ‘nutters’ are ‘nuttier’ than I had first thought, though.
    Brilliant post! Respect.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Pingback: Why Kristie Sue Costa won’t admit that Ella trashed her theory | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

We welcome comments!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s