Wednesday, April 08, 2015

Innocence Is Innocence, And Honor? Honor!

Innocence Is Innocence, And Honor?  Honor!


As if they themselves were the victims of a coercive telepath, people I otherwise respect want to give Dr. David Jacobs a forgiving *by*—a get out of jail free card—for some pretty turbid professional transgressions.  Moreover, they would treat Ms "Emma Woods" as an "obsessive nut-ball" or "shrill and psychotic harridan," a woman only grasping for attention and smearing the "good Doctor's" name... and by extension the memory of the even more revered Budd Hopkins.  Seems nothing could be further from the truth.

Firstly, my problems with Mr. Hopkins included his stuffy authoritarianism plus his steadfast and unwavering support of David Jacobs, even after the fact of Jacobs' revealed chicanery. His rejection of ready science on his "Intruders" board contributed to my unease, but it is Hopkins' inexplicable support where Jacobs was so profoundly—so demonstrably reader—dirty, you know?   I also offer also that not much is lost vis a vis Hopkins' legacy, given Hopkins big three cases, Copley Woods, Linda Cortile and finally Jim Mortellaro, were all wild blueberry horse muffins wholly discredited by adjacent researchers George Hansen, Raymond Fowler, Carol Rainy... et sig al!

These are quality observers, intrepid documentarians, adroit writer/researchers—folks not associated with the mal-gravid and reflex debunkery of a tanked "CSI."  In other words, these are persons not so hardwired to the sometimes errant and reflexive "prosaic/mundane." No, they are named persons of good reputation reasonably open to complicating a hypothesis where required—finding zebras in the place of horses where appropriate! These Doyens shoot massive holes in the narrative and veracity of Hopkins "Big Three" cases!  In the third case referenced above, Mortellaro, I was at ground zero for that fiasco and I can report that it, and Mortellaro, turned out to be a real steaming pile of diseased yak heave, personally, not the Mushroom Cloud of enlightenment proposed, but I digress.  More on this "case" in my next post...

The preceding remains an eye-opener for me ...and cold winds blow through dreaded halls lit only by flickering exit signs in the dead of night... See, it remains that history would show Hopkins' "big three cases" are all entirely bupkis as pointed out.  Insult to injury, David Jacobs exposes himself as a self-admitted monster (no really, not so stealthily self-admitted to George Knapp on Coast To Coast AM) as pointed out previously.
.
Additionally, I have been speaking with Emma Woods for many years now and she invariably strikes me as a remarkably sane, ironically demure, inordinately strong, and a very intelligent woman who just won't suffer a flaccid psychopath's cheesy foot on her throat. A karmic pox on David Jacobs, eh, and too bad about the "memory" of Bud Hopkins.  He drew that card, himself.

Sadly, I perceive that David Jacobs and his sullen old authoritarian mentor, Budd Hopkins, have an idiosyncratic credit with persons apart from myself—credit I once shared—that plunges to worthlessness for me when Jacobs is observed "committing" the betraying "crime" that he perpetrated on a reasonably trusting Woods, in full view and for the record extant!... and walking blithely away without regard or concern... while Hopkins, thinking only of his own legacy apparently, doubles down for him in an intellectually insulting defense beneath concern, apart from consideration, and beyond all contempt... for this writer anyway.

I say this having once loved Hopkins and Jacobs, myself, as bona fide—so intrepid—explorers and relevant warriors... verily... ...but Jacobs made his own "bed of record." ...And for the ardent supporter of Hopkins?  Well, I submit they themselves never travailed to sail South of Uncle Budd in respectful disagreement like I did in an issue of UFO Magazine. He could get, angrydismissive and nasty, eh, when you didn't hold to party line.

You know what I'm betting?  Jacobs' supporters have never, no, not one time, ever, talked with Emma Woods—listened to her—heard her story!  Moreover, they must errantly disregard the massive and well vetted recorded evidentiary pathway freely provided.  This audit trail of Jacobs' malfeasance is not faked, confabulated and contrived as is accused by the. Given the preceding, how can these "supporters" of an errant Jacobs then speak to her "obsessiveness"... and "stalking behavior"?!?  

Forget for a moment she's on the other side of the freaking world and can be wholly, and very safely, ignored!  Reader, the evidence convinces me that Jacobs intellectually "raped" her, he mind-f**ked her actually, and when she caught wise of what he was doing?  She balked!

It was then the good doctor decided he couldn't otherwise profit from her... he could be argued to cut his loses and then betray her with professional malfeasance, whisper campaigning, and the seeming antithesis of professional best practice... Think, reader, how convenient it would have been for "Emma Woods" to have actually taken the psychotropic drugs Jacobs suggested she take "of needs.". Then she could be a shrill psychotic and grasping harridan... on psychotropic drugs.  This seems abundantly clear to any person willing to see trees for forest, eh?

Consider... Over the long haul, I've come to understand Emma Woods. And she's not that hard to understand... See, a similar slanderous kind of thing happened to me vis a vis one Rich Reynolds and his baseless libel of me... and does anybody want to discuss my "obsessiveness" and "stalking behavior" in a public forum as regards Rich Reynolds and his egregious and unrepentant crimes effecting me?   Mmmmmm-no?   

Good... because I'll happily eat your literary face.

No! I will pursue and responsibly harass Rich Reynolds until I get effusive and unabashed apologies and seven figures in "slander per se" damages! Remember he smeared my reputation and the reputation of my son of the same name... ...maybe a future embarrassment to my granddaughters! In a more enlightened time I would have cut him to pieces in a duel!  The "court of public opinion" remains the only tool for the remotest recompense regarding that affair... I digress too far.

Still, "Emma Woods," I offer, is cut from a similar if more refined yard of cloth. There is nothing obsessive in even diligent activity leading to the righteous restoration of your own self-respect and sense of self, personal attributes stolen by a legion seeming psychopaths in "Emma's" case, "well meaning" or not. It's not stalking behavior campaigning to right an egregious wrong... ...this is important!  Innocence Is Innocence!  Honor is honor restored!

Is it important enough to risk ones place in the history, valued friendships, even banishment and expulsion from a "respected" community... which has already occurred.  Where it comes to justice for just one of the innocent and hugely wronged, the valued memory of Budd Hopkins or extended idiosyncratic credit for David Jacobs is not worth the price of a pissant's shoeshine.  Hopkins is deceased and can be remembered for his contribution to art, frankly (a good thing), where Jacobs has his pension, any savings, and social security partly funded by an erstwhile corrosive publishing initiative.  He's done Culture no favors.  He might consider his luck, now, stepping down, off, and away.  Why, he might just drop out of sight while the dropping's good.

For myself, I'm driven to this expressed opinion by the observed self-interested cruelties of the late Budd Hopkins and a presently smirking David Jacobs with his legion of hoodwinked, biased, and conflicted supporters.  I see myself in Emma Woods.  My literary sword leaves its scabbard compelled and of needs.  I'd appreciate it done for me.

To those with panties inordinately wadded by the criticism of a deceased person unable to speak in their own defense: there's no dearth of dauntless defenders!  Step up!  Provide your "defense." Justify your blithe, burdensome and banal psychopathy to me.

Read on.

.,¸¸,.»§«,¸¸,.·´¯`·.,¸¸,.»§«***»§«,¸¸,.·´¯`·.,¸¸,.»§«·.,¸¸,.

"Perforce we are plagued with an odious ignorance... the sordid results of those faults all our own, as some lack respect for the folk shoved beneath them... and lacking compassion draws blood from a stone!"

2 comments:

Alfred Lehmberg said...

"- During a 2014 presentation, Jacobs asserted that he does not conduct hypnosis with alleged alien abductees, but uses relaxation techniques. This is in direct contradiction to the facts he has frequently discussed hypnosis as an investigative tool during his presentations, repeatedly written about its implementation as a memory enhancer, claimed to have been composing a book on the use of hypnosis with abductees and, earlier in literally the same presentation, stated that he began doing hypnosis in 1986. " Jack Brewer

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2015/04/david-jacobs-and-insults-to-intelligence.html

Did everybody catch "...[Jacobs reports] he does not conduct hypnosis with alleged alien abductees, but uses relaxation techniques. "

What is that but an artful dodge from the problematic aspects of his... we can only call it "activity." I would offer that he discovered a legitimate certificate was not a free ride to same!

Additionally, during the presentation alluded to, he made up a whole new taxonomy coining the word "humbrid." What is _that_ but a dodge from the requirement to, one, be able to provide physical evidence in the first place and two, perform any testing on said physical evidence which would come up human anyway because they were, well, more human than hybrid. See? No proof possible, extant, or available... you kinda have to take the Doctor's word. That's just insulting, as Jack Brewer points out.

Anonymous said...

Thank you so much. I really appreciate your understanding and support.

In regard to Dr. Jacobs now claiming that he does not do hypnosis, I think that you are absolutely right about it being an artful dodge. It shows how easily he resorts to lying, even when it is blatantly obvious. He has no shame.

The hubrid development is such a useful way avoid issues of genetic testing too.

Emma