> Michael A. Aquino, Ph.D. > Lt. Colonel, Military Intelligence, USAR-Ret. Alas, he is retired only in a PR sense. Aquino was processed out of the Army, according to official documents posted on the Web by Curio. Aquino was a psyops officer, trained in the use of propaganda to mold public opinion, and so here come the shaggy dogs (who let them out?) ... > Following the publication of the "recovered memories > of Satanic ritual abuse" book _Michelle Remembers_ > in 1980, the United States and other Anglo-American > countries went through a decade of "SRA" scares and > witch-hunts. I don't recall one university study, a thesis, a news article or even a subway scrawl linking this book to exposures of SRA in the '80s. This is but an allegation, and by Aquino's own rigorous standard of evidence has no relevance. Elsewhere, Aquino has dismissed ALL allegations as "hysteria" kindled by the publication of Pazder's book, as if this is proof of his own innocence. Robert D. Hicks, a criminal justice analyst at the Law Enforcement Section Department of Criminal Justice Services during the Bush regime, is the source of the "hysteria" argument (which denies even that animal mutilations take place), bruited on the West Coast by Paul and Shirley Eberle. Perhaps Hicks didn't know, but the Eberles ran an appalling pornographic publication for pedophiles in Los Angeles, dubbed FINGER, under the noses of his criminal justice system, so perhaps we are not so "hysterical," after all. Ralph Underwager, a known pedophile sympathizer and RA revisionist, and the FMSF have also made much of this one comment from Hicks, who could teach Gerald Pozner a thing or two about distorting evidence to arrive at a pre-determined conclusion. >After the 1984 McMartin Preschool became > internationally publicized in one such scare, day-care > facilities generally became targets of "SRA" witch- > hunt instigators. "Witch-hunt." The jurors stated unanimously after the fact that they believed children were molested at McMartin (and so did the jurors at Presidio, for that matter). But identifying the perps beyond reasonable doubt was, they found, not possible because they were working with young, frightened children who could not even tell time, a necessity in a criminal case of this seriousness. McMartin was not a "witch-hunt." The chidren still insist that ritual abuse occurred. Cover stories, propaganda, revisionist tactics and flimsy excuses do not count as evidence to the contrary. > > The epidemic extended to U.S. military services as well, > including 15 U.S. Army day-care centers and elementary > schools by 1987. In late 1986 it was the turn of the > Presidio of San Francisco. > On 9/28/86 the _San Francisco Examiner_ began a series > of 8 front-page stories sensationalizing the witch-hunts. The stories were as factual as one might expect from the Examiner. It is Aquino's life that is "sensational," and that came through the reporting. > Approximately a month later one set of Presidio parents > claimed that their son might have been anally raped by > one of the day-care teachers, Gary Hambright, and the > scare was off and running, with scores of children being > "abuse-diagnosed" by a "play-therapist" despite not a > single published confirmation of actual physical harm to > any child. Hambright denied any "abusing" whatever, and > all of the other teachers and staff supported him. The medical evidence supported the children's allegations � unless chlamydia, a sexually-transmitted disease, contracted by five or six of the children, is not to be considered evidence or to cause physical harm. > As in other witch-hunts it made no difference: As in other RA cases, that is. >Over > the next year Hambright was suspended, indicted, charges > dropped, reindicted, charges redropped amidst a massive > media frenzy. Parents rushed to file over $84 million in > claims, as was also routine in such witch-hunts. [The > previous year a similar, highly-publicized witch-hunt at > West Point had resulted in $110 million claims.] Correct. At Presidio, the Army settled quietly with some of the parents. The Pentagon announced it would tear down the preschool and organize "strike teams" to investigate future cases of organized abuse � why go to the trouble if there was no problem? Why settle with the "greedy" parents if nothing occurred at the base? > No news article that I have ever read indicated that there was a > shred of *physical* evidence showing that *any* child at the > Presidio had been sexually abused in connection with that scam... Chlamydia has been reported. The San Jose Mercury-News published details of the of the medical exams in 1988. Professional physicians threw their weight behind the children. > The *only* "evidence" against Hambright thus consisted of > parental hearsay allegations and the allegations of "therapist" > Debbie Hickey, the Army psychiatrist who conducted the "play > therapy" indoctrination sessions for the children once the scam > got underway. And the toys that police found scattered about the Aquino apartment, some bearing names that the children recognized? One might call that evidence, unless the Aquinos whiles away evenings with stuffed animals when not worshipping the God of Confusion. Yet Aquino denies there is evidence. > > Later on, after Lilith and I had been attacked by Chaplain Adams- > Thompson, I met with Hambright's public defenders in their S.F. > office to see what documents they might provide which might > help us. An "attack" took place? Did the chaplain didn't injure the Anti-Christ. >During that meeting (which occurred after the second > dropping of all charges against Hambright), I bluntly asked the > two lawyers if there were *any* actual evidence - not just > accusations - that Hambright had committed any abuse crime > whatever. They both said, "None at all." [They didn't say "no > comment" or "we can't discuss that".] Please post the tape of that conference, Aquino. Otherwise, it's only your allegation and does not count as evidence. Academics say that children are more honest when providing testimony than adults. And they are not to be ignored because a Satanic cultist � one who has written in praise of nazism and advocated affecting brainwaves en masse with mind control satellites � contends they are tiny liars. I'm snipping the remainder of Aquino's statements because I've heard them before so often I could recite them myself. He claims he is not a Satanist, for example. But a visit to his Web site should convince anyone that he is indeed a Satanist. The ToS answering machine has reported that it is a "Satanic religion." If he cannot concede this elementary fact, there is no point in debating. He will not give ground because to do so would be to admit that he has been lying all along. � Alex Constantine
