The Liminalist # 102: Everything Happens at Night (with Alison Miller)

Conversation with Alison Miller, therapist and author of Healing the Unimaginable, on discovering ritual abuse, meeting inner children, dissociative identity disorders, False Memory Syndrome, how widespread is ritual abuse, the therapeutic community’s awareness of organized abuse, psychologically sophisticated organized crime, Elizabeth Loftus & the agenda to discredit memory, Lori Handrahan & the child porn industry, liminal realities, an innate resistance to unpleasant realities, more than Jesus suffered, compartmentalization of awareness, popular media & violence, MKULTRA children, Ewen Cameron’s babies, Nazi Luciferians, concentration camp experimentation, Mengele in the US, unbonded children, rewiring the brain, creating new circuits, Kabbalah-based groups, electricity, drugs & birth induction, the false impression of a memory continuum, everything happens at night, a place of fragmented identity, cult camps, Daycare Center abuse, multigenerational abuse, altered states of perception, conscious perpetrators, what Lucifer wants, high-level politicians, Wendy Hoffman, Ann Diamond & Leonard Cohen, mass media triggers, The Wizard of Oz and Walt Disney as mind control aids, Shirley Temple & pedophile porn, screen memories, deception-embedded experiences, staged alien abductions, healing process, internal informants, how deep can memories be buried, parallel interpretations of events, dream revelations, the failure of Jungian dream analysis, programmed other worlds, David Icke’s reptilians, intelligence agencies & occult fraternities, natural psychism, mind control & psychic abilities, hijacking people’s inherent abilities, the dreams of the elite, a sense of isolation, the spice of life.

Songs:  “The Kommema and his Religion” & “Of the Lakes,” by SunWalker; “Escort Mission” by Art of Flying

34 thoughts on “The Liminalist # 102: Everything Happens at Night (with Alison Miller)”

  1. @ 26:56

    Alison Miller: I wanted to believe the world is a good place. When I run into this, it blew my mind. It was so horrible the kind of things that happened to these children. … He suffered more than Jesus did. … It shocks you. It changes your world view to know that stuff like this happens.


    Ok. Great. Excellent interview. I guess data mining the crimes perpetuated on this planet at any given 24 hours period suffices to keep us busy for the rest of our lives. Spicing life up by researching into people’s miseries as holding the existential middle ground between boredom and despair, I guess that’s what it’s all about?! Right? “It does have flavor”. (A. Miller’s final words) A kind of vampiric analogy! I am unfair here, for sure, but I wonder, is this what it all comes down to?!

    Here a juicy bone for the hungry:

    @ 5:00

    Mike Clelland: And Peter Levenda got some of the most dark bleak outlooks on the human, on the American psyche – it is just one step away from drinking babies’ blood kind of stuff.

    • What the hammer? what the chain,
      In what furnace was thy brain?
      What the anvil? what dread grasp,
      Dare its deadly terrors clasp!

      — William Blake (from: Tyger)

      I didn’t mean to be mean. I am simply having a blue pill moment. This research goes nowhere. Unless there is Objective Morality, Divine Order, Universal Justice all is lost! But referring back to ‘God’ doesn’t help either!

      “In this pathbreaking work, Michael Gillespie argues that Nietzsche, in fact, misunderstood nihilism, and that his misunderstanding has misled nearly all succeeding thought about the subject. … His analysis shows that nihilism is not the result of the death of God, as Nietzsche believed; but the consequence of a new idea of God as an omnipotent God of will who overturns all eternal standards of truth and justice.”

      God is the Overpowering Tyrant (al-jabbar), and a human being who manifests this name will be a monster. What is a human being? Anything at all, … What should a human being be? This is a very different question, …

      • “This research goes nowhere.”

        This seems to be a misnomer. If no one took the time to work with dissociated people, we wouldn’t know that mind control and deliberate and designed torture was the cause. This information is deliberately kept secret (or non-mainstream more accurately), so without someone to disseminate it, even fewer people would know. As long as this kind of abuse is kept out of view it can continue.

        I agree that cataloguing the plots of the elites is in the end a pointless task, but recognizing the patterns and modes of operation that they use helps one combat those forces, even if only to combat them from influencing your own mind (as Jasun more concisely put it “implant removal”). Without dissemination of this information, our society becomes unintelligible and unfixable, because conscious effort is needed to combat the all out assault that mainstream culture has become. If we ignore the conscious effort that is put into controlling us (which is supported with huge sums of money), how could we stand a chance against it?

        Personally I know I sometimes feel I don’t want to give these “elites” my time by investigating their crimes. If simply ignoring the “mind-controllers” was an option, I would advocate for it, but these people put tremendous money and effort into controlling everyone. How can one ignore these operations when they influence your family and friends? To ignore it is to become part of it. To escape requires someone to come with you, and then you’ll need this research more than ever – without it, how could you convince anyone you weren’t just crazy?

        We shouldn’t give the elite’s plots all our time, we must have our own ideas, but we can’t ignore the entire society and culture we live in – we’re a social animal.

        “Unless there is Objective Morality, Divine Order, Universal Justice all is lost!”

        I’m curious if you’d like to elaborate on this. Not sure how this effects the research.

        “In this pathbreaking work, Michael Gillespie argues that Nietzsche, in fact, misunderstood nihilism, and that his misunderstanding has misled nearly all succeeding thought about the subject.”

        Have you actually read this book? Just curious, it looks interesting, but would like to know a bit more about it.

        I’ve always found Nietzsche’s relation to nihilism to be essentially a smear campaign. Nietzsche most often seemed to use nihilist as an insult for people who put all their faith in non-existent things (believing in nothing) or who nullified their lives, even if the person believed it was for a purpose (striving for nothing). To my knowledge his only affiliation with nihilism was acknowledging that it’s a rather necessary step in rejecting the voluminous BS that society and culture has imagined and deemed real (god, morals, etc.), but he felt one would be trapped in nihilism, and that values must be created even if they don’t exist – not a nihilistic idea at all.

        The amazon reviews intrigued me though, on the idea of nihilism’s origins possible relating to a sect of Christianity. Nihilism has always interested me, though to even believe in nothing always seemed like too much belief for me.

          • I’m getting ready for your book “Prisoners of Infinity” – read the beginning then got sidetracked with neuroscience, psychology, philosophy etc – real life stuff.

            But in a certain sense, this stuff is realer than real life, isn’t it? I find it draining reading the books of poorly educated people like Whitley Streiber or Jeffrey Kripal; not merely because they both seem like mythologists crafting their own mythology, but because I have a very distinct sense that they are manipulating their readers – and even more disturbingly, child-rapists who hide behind the veneer of a happy (in the case of Kripal) face. This applies to other new-age thinkers who write from the perspective of the occult like Mitch Horowitz; people who are frankly sex-obsessed maniacs who think “love” means ‘nothing matters, because love is the only thing that’s real’. It reminds of a verse from Isaiah (I think) which says something to the effect of “woe are those who make what’s bad good, and whats good bad”. Have you heard of the latest Ellen faux-pas? Did you read her obnoxious pseudo-educational recommendation to her cult followers, “when I say be kind, I mean be kind to everyone”. Apparently she’s never heard of the dictum from the Mishnah (not that this rudimentary moral logic requires a Talmudic rabbi to teach us), that “he who is kind to those who do evil are cruel to those he does evil to.” Ellen clearly expresses something essential about human beings: we’re monstrously self-serving. I don’t expect someone operating at her level in society to express any high-level of free-will for the simple reason that “free-will” only applies to what contexts we ‘plant’ ourselves in. Once there, social processes take over and we reproduce the spiritual ‘culture’ (just like bacteria) that moves between us and those we attach to. The obnoxiousness is how righteous they are about it. Clearly, and morally speaking, you can’t be nice to George W. Bush without not caring a lick about the horrendous suffering he – as a leader of the most powerful country on Earth – has had on millions of people. But again: maybe Ellen is little more than a mind-slave dimwit. Given my understanding of development, homosexuality isn’t at all random, but archetypal: following the more basic pattern of ‘self-other recognition, it takes a negative object-relation (that repeats again and again) with maleness (or femaleness) to come to prefer females. Either relation can have that effect, overall. Point is, it really can be taken as a sort of forensic evidence for ones early-life relations (although that claim would be so deeply and profoundly attacked in mainstream culture, which worships at the alter of randomness and the ‘freedom of the mind’).

            Have you heard of Tracy Twyman? I suffered through two books of hers – Baphomet, than read the less painful and much shorter, “Money Grows on the Tree of Knowledge”. The picture she paints of how these cults operate seems very plausible to me – and even she, if you are attuned enough to recognize it, gives away the presence of a profoundly dissociatively constructed mind (i.e. DID). The end of Baphomet pretty much amounts to a promotion of worshipping the ‘egregore’ that organizes the social world we live in, because, well, if you want power and pleasure that’s the only true way you can get it. On the other hand, it is satisfying to read a portrait that actually touches the truth and doesn’t beat around the bush. “Reversing the flow” – the left hand path prerogative – is really about enacting everything that goes against your conscience: its about being as asymmetrical as possible – so the theory goes – in order to generate your own “crystal body” and become a “dragon-sorcerer”, etc etc.

            For some odd reason, the idea of egregores being anything more than idealizations-used-for-regulating-a-humans-affect doesn’t occur to them. They want to believe – or NEED to believe – that the egregores power extends into the afterlife (which probably doesn’t even exist in the first place). People who are amoral, for no psychodynamically implausible reason (they need it to regulate a guilt conscience) always seem to posit things which truly loving people don’t find at all necessary to posit. The mark of the guilty person may be the tendency to exaggerate and make grandiose statements i.e. Whitley Streiber. It’s pathetic, actually.

            In my mind, they are captured by the biological equivalent of viruses – in this case, psychodynamically generated thought-forms (in theosophical parlance), or what could more maturely be termed “symmetry sinks” which regulate biological processes between human beings (as a shared attractor). The virus perverts their minds and rationality as severely as a virus coopts the genome of a cell to reproduce the viruses own hardware. In the end, the virus kills the host, and then returns to its hyper-needy virus form.

            If you follow this logic, you can imagine what the tremendously intelligent organizers of society would probably infer about their own situations – and in fact, are probably fully aware of (if unbelievably underestimating the intensity of the suffering that awaits them). Generation after generation succumbs to this confusion largely because of the social-structure that exists around us.

      • This is what’s wrong. Mythology. Nietzsche was a mythologist, Kant, a mythologist, etc, etc, mythologists…That is, dualists who subscribe to an imaginary, traumatogenic metaphysics. And what persuades people? Other people. And why? Because people – or their prereflective experience – is structurally tuned to know the world in the ways that the world has structured them i.e. rewarded them or punished them.

        Metaphysics is a direct result of intersubjectivity i.e. how you posit the world as being as an adult feeds upon the metaphorical cognates of early life. Thus, if you subscribe to gnostic delusions of ‘two realms’, or have a sloppy, disorganized understanding of reality while still imagining yourself to hold to a “non-dual” or monistic ontology, simply because you edit out your being-as-a-body-in-the-world, and therefore don’t realize that your being includes, or is an integral of, your body’s developmental relationship to other human bodies (and their cues), objects in the world, and the light and sounds which brings it all together into a meaningful whole.

        If you were raised in a cult, and hold to the imaginary fictions of ‘special’ mystical philosophies, like hermeticism, alchemy, Gnosticism, etc etc, going all the way back in history, amounting to nothing more than the lust for social power which ironically derives from you being an ecological being – and hence, categorically makes it an impossibility for you to be ‘beyond good and evil’ i.e. to have some special, superhuman perspective vis-à-vis reality. But that’s it: the fiction: that there is a part of you that is beyond the world. You can’t see that your idealization processes are correlated to dissociation processes: you have to ignore all those intersubjective events of your-being-in-the-world which has made you structurally asymmetrical, or dissonant, or asynchronized, with other humans.

        Language confuses you, as it does everyone in this world. Social convention trumps actual reality, so the ultimate organizational rule, the golden rule, has probably been so regularly violated in your day to day being-in-the-world (notice the ecological emphasis of the dashes; we are never being outside of our complementary engagement with other humans and objects) that your prereflective, unconscious and implicit ‘feelings’ are just negative, irritable, bitter – apparently a positive trait of the ‘magician’ – another “virtue” of the occult: it makes what in fact is a sign of disease, into a good thing.

        Really, for the healthy minded person with a scientific bent, the human penchant for confabulation, and for idealization – i.e. the general need to “always be good”, even if your behavior is insanely abnormal, is incredible. How do people fall for this belief – that evil is good, that evil should be integrated into the self, and the “coincidence of opposites” will make you into a superman? Simple answer: people who accept this view are by definition too ignorant to know how horribly it will hurt them. Because it is as impossible to ‘succeed’ in this way of being (i.e. avoid ultimate suffering and the ‘karmic’ reequilibration that entails) as it is for a fish to live on a mountaintop. And would a fish even want that? No. Fish are spared the sort of confusion that the human eccentric position creates for us.

        Knowledge is as essential to humans-in-interaction as DNA is for organizing cell processes. Just as a robust metabolism structures a healthy genome, a healthy i.e. loving society, bootstraps knowledge. But love can be a confused, difficult and sometimes ‘fuzzy’ concept, just as metabolism involves nucleic acids and proteins (enzymes). Knowledge i.e. reason, needs to reconstruct its development in order for humans to know what it means to love – as love sometimes entails constriction, limitations, just as braking a car at a roundabout to yield to others is constructive, so to do humans have to know when to yield, and to know that yielding is a form of loving i.e. accepting. Other times, criticizing, and letting another know – albeit, in a loving tone (tones of voice are fundamental) – communicates love.

        In short, Gnosticism – i.e. the stupidity behind all this ritual abuse stuff – establishes all sorts of ridiculous dualities which evade empirical justification: good vs. evil is mapped onto ‘mind vs. body’, which is mapped onto ‘day vs. night’, which is mapped onto ‘man vs. women’. Why else is the western world subject to this habit of referring to humanity as a whole as ‘man’, and ‘mankind’? Oh yes, and ‘man vs. nature’. Such metaphors are practically endless, but all refer back to the original trauma of “other vs. the self”. If your intersubjective life began on a negative foot (as cults are wont to do according to survivors), then they literally are caught up within a circularity which begins in early life intersubjectivity, evolves into the reflective-prereflective experience we all live within (i.e. the circularity of thinking with reference to a feeling) which then pervades all our object-relations in our day to day thinking ABOUT things, with the origin of our feeling states essentially ignored and effaced by pretentious fantasies of ‘specialness’. So often I simply gasp at the discrepancy between the moral horrendousness of the claims being made, and the mythologically murky and fuzzy nonsense that mystics find to meaningful i.e. Tracy R Twyman’s “Baphomet: The Temple Mystery Unveiled” is a good example.

        DID is prevalent because non-empirical narratives and belief systems control the minds of people who have power and are too stupid to realize that these narratives are about power-hungriness and not about how reality works.

          • I do though (continuing from the wrongly quoted post above) like the thesis of the book: that the experience of infinity derives from the inability to metabolize a traumatic experience, and thus be caught up in a condition of feeling “too much”.

            On the other hand, there is a definite feeling of love having the quality of ‘eternity’ or ‘infinity’, insomuch as it appears to stand at the base of the entire structure of the cosmos. Contemplating the facticity of how powerful love is, then considering its eternal, never-changing nature, may be part and parcel of this experience of being a “prisoner of infinity”. Its my own theory, in fact, that a person who has suffered early life trauma has an insufficiently integrated and differentiated brain, and therefore, will experience the awe that arises from contemplating the eternal nature of your being with an intense feeling of dread i.e. it seems to cast upon the world of our senses a feeling of it being “unreal”. In a very real way, this is an accurate portrayal, insomuch as the feeling of the external worlds “unrealness” would be a reflection of the Other (caregivers) own devaluation of the reality of your (as an infant) own experience, which thus set-up a negative expectancy towards the environment, and hence, feeling an ‘absence’ where there should be a deep feeling of presence.

            But do they go through this logic? Do they seek to resolve their traumas through an allo-centric focus i.e. a care for others, understanding that your own disturbed existential experience derives from the others preoccupation with their own needs? I live by this rule – and it gives me great pleasure, even if I am still a very sensitive body-mind that is weaker because of the early-life conditions I grew through (we never outgrow our brain; our brain is the medium – organ – which expresses the mind we have).

            I do find reincarnation to be a no-brainer (given loves remarkable power). I therefore believe Jesus when he says “give and you shall receive”. I love life. I love living. I desire a life where my body doesn’t represent the world as being a harmful place. Don’t you? Don’t you wish you could have had a life – from infancy onwards, that shaped you to experience others with greater enlivenment? What you do with this website is a public good, and a very conscientious act – but I’m sure you know that this good will feedback – as all things feedback – upon you, and perhaps, hopefully, give you a more satisfying being in a future existence.

          • you juxtapose the unlikeliness of an afterlife with reincarnation as a no-brainer…. I am sure about the afterlife & less sure about reincarnation as it seems to be contradicted by the ancestral presence of the dead – if they are here with us now, could they also be reincarnated among us?

            as for the good we do here translated into rewards in the hereafter, i see it more as a crumb-trail – if I have to come back to this realm in the future, when things will presumably be even more firmly ensconced in a techno-disembodied quasi-infinity machine world of reified egos without bodies or souls, maybe my lost future self will discover an old copy of this website and hence some clues to what life was once! the more seeds we plant in the desert of the unreal, the more chance there will still be the odd plant life to sustain us when we come around again.

          • To comment on your comment:

            My feelings are actually the reverse of yours: I see reincarnation as the real deal, whereas the “ancestors” seem to be the epiphenomenal ‘automata’ which exist within the ontological flow of human becoming over 315,000 years of evolution.

            Your experience in the world is profoundly different from mine – indeed, you have good reason, far better than me, to suspect that your early life has been marred by the influence of elitist culture – and hence, on that ground, I can understand and appreciate your preference for an other worldly reality that is truer than the one you live i.e. a dissociation and ‘unreality’ over the reality of the time that the universe gifts (or at times, curses) us with.

            Reincarnation to me is a matter of the ontological linkages that form between the being of living in and through the ecological tensegrities of a body – itself deriving from the entirety of the causal relations forming within spacetime – and the eternal witness that we all ultimately are. Death brings with it an unknowability. I believe far less in an afterlife reality than I do in the certainty that my attachments to living and being mean (necessarily) that the presence of this influence within me will find an abode, or vessel, or ecological set of parameters, that corresponds to the information embodied in my physical system – as genes and as epigenetic factors.

            Of course, this claim entails that the Earth must exist (at the very least; not that its impossible, given the sheer size of the universe, that there may be earth like planets with comparable human-like creatures), and that human beings must perpetuate themselves down the generations.

            When you die, your body will be done, but the information of what you are will still have left some sort of imprint on the people and beings you’ve left your influence upon. Whatever ‘you’ are – say, an emergent property of the love processes embodied in the ecological dynamics of self and other recognition dynamics – you, or your being, may be connected, or attached, to the world in that form. Therefore, there may be some virtual or higher dimensional model of reality that is linked with reality, but still epiphenomenal in the sense that what’s real is what’s causally efficacious. You could the being I have when I die is a being that is simply witnessing the effects I left upon the world. It’s not a world where I can be made relevant, unless, that is, the world in its causal – or temporal – structure, brings me in some way back into it.

            In any case, I am perfectly attached to the world of time and space, and I believe he effort we’re all making right now will be well worth the effort – that is, that we’ll benefit in some future incarnation.

            To think that we exist only exist once is as absurd as being more impressed by the universe around us (as Neils DeGrasse Tyson would impress upon you) then the trillions upon trillions of correlated atoms and molecules that make up the 50 trillion cells of our bodies, directed and guided by the magic of 86 billion neurons, 16 billion of which are cortical, and one of which is organized by some 100 billion molecules.

            The numbers should simply shatter the myth that we’re embroiled within – that life isn’t magical, and that existence isn’t an incredibly interesting process of metaphysical discovery.

          • for me the ancestor-reincarnation question is less either-or than both-and, which of course also makes it neither; the problem is literalizaton of models generated from a perspective (the trauma generated false identity) that itself precludes understanding of the continuous nature of consciousness/existence. All models based on a false premise will be false. The ancestors seems less subjective to falsification by the ego because at least it is backward rather than forward looking, ie, can at least be somewhat checked by reference to the evidential body.

  2. It comes down to healing.

    Words I wrote to Tom Mellet yesterday:

    what you’re pinpointing is the “more things change, the more they stay the same” syndrome of cultural regeneration, how every fissure quickly seals itself up because culture is a self-regulating organism and not dependent on any one program or conspiracy to maintain its hegemony over human awareness. It’s the conspiracy within!

    that’s why my approach is different and maybe why PL doesnt grok it…?

    the only value in exposing hidden machinations of the elite, human or otherwise, is as a surgical mirror for self-examination and “implant removal”

    but that’s a helluva payoff for those who persist, all the way to the (horrible) self-unveiling

  3. Who knows , maybe Jung is right and there is some merit in the abstract term ” collective unconscious “. A small group of people holding in the light of consciousness a festering pile of hitherto concealed slime sends ripples out that comfort the victims and help to drive the perpetrators deeper into insanity .

    Michael Shrimpton in “Spyhunter” tells of a pedophile ring in Tasmania where 120 men had sex with a 12 year old girl , including senior civil servants , police and politicians . In the end only one politician was named and ” sacrificed “, the ABC reports that the DPP down there slammed a lid on it , saying that ” it would be too distressing for the girl to testify 120 times ” and ” the financial cost would be enormous “, much to the disgust of victims support groups who are outraged that these mens names are being protected .
    The girl was being pimped by her drug addicted mother , though Shrimpton asserts that the ring was being operated by a shadowy Germanic foreign intelligence service , the DVD or Deutsche Vieterdigungs Dienst , that seeks to entrap prominent public services who then will do their bidding .
    What staggers me is how many sick puppies there are that get caught in these webs .

  4. Another fascinating talk, Jasun. Much thanks.

    I really wish you’d gotten Alison to say at least a few names of the groups (particularly the occult groups) in question. Seeing the internal literature (if there is any) regarding TBMC would be highly educational.

    And Egyptian Book of the Dead as trauma-based mind control handbook?!? Mind blown! I’ll see for myself sooner or later, but are there any sections in particular that you know of that detail this?

  5. I was very interested to hear that Allison has worked with child survivors of Dr Cameron’s experiments, and would like to know more details (or compare notes). Will there be another interview? This was excellent and I know it will help many people – particularly the “how-they-do-it” information, including the fake aliens.

    I knew a hypnotherapist — the same one who told me that mucus is congealed emotion, which could even be from past lives (!) — who had regressed 600 clients – 300 in Vermont, and the next 300 in Montreal, of which I was one. She was from Glasgow, very gifted, and claimed that a large majority of her Vermont clients who came to her with various problems, such as anxiety, regressed to an alien abduction experience. Whereas her Montreal clients often had respiratory problems, although they came for other reasons: and under hypnosis relived their death in the gas chamber.

    • Do you think the gas chamber memories were also screens? Fascinating possibility, it’s sort of my view of past-life stuff, at least insofar as those impersonal “memories” can provide a buffer for the more impactful and deranging childhood memories (once-removed life-events, so to speak, keep the others at arm’s length). But I’d never thought about the possibility of those memories being implanted.

      I do wonder about some of the Nazi element in ritual abuse memories; not that I doubt Nazi influence and even presence (Mengele et al.), but the way Nazis have been mythologized into a real boogeyman, makes it easy to imagine modern operatives dressing up like Nazis in the same way they dress up as aliens or witches, and for the same reason…?

      • My inner jury is out on the PL question. Could the memories be screens? Yes, I think they could…

        Are you familiar with with Rabbi Yonasson Gershom’s book BEYOND THE ASHES?

        Before I started investigating my “real” childhood memories i.e. memories and fragments from this lifetime, I had spontaneous flashbacks to a PL in Poland where I died in Auschwitz but was not Jewish. Under hypnosis I had such a powerful experience, I find it hard to think of it as anything but real. Way, way beyond anything I had imagined — and even worse than the underground laboratory experience that I tried to talk about at age 4 — Some of us are just holocaust-prone, I guess.

        I think all scenarios are possible on a continuum of real-to-fake. I think memories be implanted but I’m also receptive to stories that the Nazis were experimenting with “soul theft” and had mastered techniques of controlling reincarnation.

  6. Yes, Jerry , The Hun , The DVD , good guys versus bad guys , white hats vs black hats , all very binary and pat …..conceals a multitude of morally ambiguous sins and provides a plausible foe or SPECTER ….
    Makes for entertaining reading though !

  7. Much of this reminds me of a film called The Montauk Chronicles and Peck’s Glimpses of The Devil even though Garetano’s film is a bit sensationalist at times but still has enough nuggets of truth within it to be worth mentioning.

  8. Hi Jasun,

    This episode was very interesting. Is there a way I could get in contact with Alison? Happy to elaborate via email or skype 🙂


  9. Thanks Jasun

    A very significant podcast – I liked how you asked about her feelings towards what she had learnt. I doubt she would get to express them often in something like this.

    This should be given to anyone who flat out denies SRA and/or parrots the standard denial rhetoric.

    Have you inquired if confirmed victims have the same issues/symptoms you have previously described? itchy bum, late to sexual experiences etc?

  10. Just finished the episode and thought it was one the best on here. Her comments on the invasion of “false memory” promoters was frighteningly illuminating.

    Not sure if this is old news, but a lot of what she says, especially the connection to Kabbala and nazi Germany, corroborates what Corydon Hammond said in this speech on the subject of MPD, SRA, mind control and their connections/purposes.


Leave a Comment