Encouraged by their mental health professionals, otherwise rational human beings from coast to coast, suddenly began dredging up primordial recollections of atrocities committed upon them. These accounts of ritual abuse were given even greater credence, when accompanied by some semblance of parental occult worship. Californians believed it wholeheartedly. Lord only knows what had been going on in Calif. But again, lives were destroyed. Once a suspect; always suspect. What happened was so egregious, such a deliberate and willful mischaracterization of justice, as to provoke ire in a reasonable person decades later.

If it’s taken this long to expose Ms. Coakley, I say give the woman her comeuppance. Justice demands no less.

“When a teacher in the school saw him in action with the knife, she asked him what he was doing, and then told him not to do it again, a child said.”

AWG’s theory that the children were terrified into thinking a knife was being used on them doesn’t square with the testimony.

What a ridiculous theory indeed; kind of like supposing the crop circles were caused by aliens from outer space.

I looked at more articles on S.M.A.R.T. as well, including rebuttals of… Wiki freaking pedia. Do you realize how pathetic your case needs to be if you feel the need to debate Wikipedia? Oh, and there’s a “Press Release” claiming the Wikipedia article promotes pedophilia simply because the (sane) writers of the article don’t buy into SMART’s garbage.

Yet another site cited Jeffery “Dalmer”. As an example of ritual abuse. Despite the fact that their very definition of ritual abuse bears no similarity to “Dalmer’s” actions. Oh, and his name is spelled Dahmer. Morons. But hey, why shouldn’t I trust a website that can’t even get the basic details and name of one of the most infamous serial killers correct.

And no, there never were any McMartin tunnels despite what lies your paranoid friends have told you. Try reading an article by someone who is actually sane. http://www.ipt-forensics.com/journal/volume7/j7_2_1_16.htm

Look, it has actual citations! How novel.

In reply to W.N., the point is that children can be terrified into thinking a knife is being used on them, when they are being raped by something else. They were shown a knife, but then something else was used. Hence, no knife wounds.

The real witch hunt is against survivors of child abuse and the lies that are being repeated as “fact” are the ones against the victims in this
case.

Clearly the knife would have left some sign of damage, like bleeding to death. So it had to be something else. But what would that be? It would have to be small as no physical damage was apparent. If somebody said it was a knife, and that is impossible, what credence should be given to the story.

In the Little Rascals case, a child swore that she was penetrated by Mr. Bob. When the doctor said her hymen was intact, the woman prosecutor then said that rape did not require penetration, completely ignoring the fact that the child was definite about an impossible act.

AWG depressed me.