Opinion, fact, complaint

General foreword: statement of meaning

All sites and publications, quotations from persons and Institutions and publications are endorsed coming from direct advices as well as from alert surveys. But on working on a so tangled field every assunption has to be continually revised: to be better informed any way each suggestion must be thanked even if faced WITH RESERVATION. As site the book does NOT be a fount of notices but an ENCYCLOPEDIC gather of different subjects: one another to be read time by time, or better to be CONSULTED even for learning: to secure this informing aim, the Web site will always be maintained under speedy and diligently revised re-construction, also and perhaps mostly helped by directly received suggestion and/or readers' criticism. Really time by time people had to lament hindrances on looking through, not only asking to be better orientated. A compelling remark: the site is continually up-graded by novelties that the book can't follow: the readers of the book should check almost often the site at least controlling the dedicated file Novelties on the site. Any way the aims of this site and the books deriving from it are NOT to supply facts purely for the sake of curiosity, but to AGITATE against the more evil and sinister workings of human cruelty: within the site and books lie therefore not only “theory” but “FACTS” and as such conflict is not only theoretical. The true “facts” and the information collected are not immutable “symbols” but are in a constant state of flux: successive sites and books must therefore act as reflective witnesses to this ever-changing information.
As a consequence often – and COINCIDING with events taking place in concrete facts, site and individual files are mishandled if not cancelled: the present file has been damaged more than once as can be seen by the presence of more “frames” and in a more serious way recently. Consolidated by the files/chapters evidencing the Author's personal knowledge by showing preliminary excerpts of the message and the sources of scientific teaching references, the essential meaning of this work, its main purposes are to straight emphasize the "fourth dimension" of human life, moving from childhood and its obliged passages of development to their everlasting presence into memory either conscious and meaningful or "removed": unconscious and often damaging, These concepts however are forcefully dynamic and then these topics must ever precisely and timely be enabled by continual basic adds and conceptual revision. Therefore it is not adequate to read them only on a static book: the real relevance of such lively - not theoretic - subjects has to be reached and considered often confronting the book with the Web site continually in touch with many sources of information, and so alike continually up-dated. Time by time everyone can find the searched subject or reach the more cogent subjective problems on picking the term in the main Search Engines or on going in the site itself to open its huge lot of links; but on reverse every one can - and this is well agreed -  suggest other arguments and/or present unresolved problems.
Talking on regard of such matters, an interlocutor gave us a good opportunity to undermine a possible operational - and then seriously misleading - misunderstanding. On reading emotively the texts on the files/chapters Imbroglio è il contrario di sviluppo, Delgado & Skinner, Totem and Taboo revisited: awful and fertile rise of new superstitions etc. he believed that a precise evil will and purposes are acting whensover to damage the normal children's development and rearing. But UNFORTUNATELY - I repeat: unfortunately - the widespread share of faulty ways to rear children doesn't pertain ever and by itself to a deliberate active program: unfortunately since a wicked demeanor could be struggled on a parallel, adverse open fight. The worldwide parental behavior mirrors instead a NORMAL Gauss curve: at which extremes are - here - the "very good" ones with their good Masters and - there - the wicked ones triggered by evil Masters as Delgado and his cronies. But so actually in the large middle of the curve there is a bulk of passive lay-people: selfish, idle, superstitious, adults not really grown, bad lived infancies, people lacking or removing founding experiences. To summarize: lacking of INTEGRITY and then - in the proper meaning of the term - castrated of parental instinct.
Any way it is not Science Fiction nor Urban Legend hoaxes what a lot of written references explains on regard of method to adopt and crimes to comply for "using" families to be a wicked ground for improving Secret Societies and fostering new and new accomplices. But if these quotations regard only referred texts, the main content of them is widely confirmed also by some sure FIRST HAND supported testimonies and documents,

Tyrants don't devour you: they devour your FEAR.... lI libro dei senza paura - the book for fearless little people - by Joseph P. Orwell Giunti (gruppo editoriale)

"Fear" believes to keep safe on building barricades: and then narrows spaces, knowledge, relationship and understanding... and widens on return new fearfulness and dependency. On return again and again it widens new fearfulness and more and more intrusive dependency: who is easily deceived or cheated: FOOL

Warn: never the simplest solution is the best.

All sites and publications, persons and Institutions are endorsed coming from direct advice as well as from alert surveys. But this is a tangled field to be continually revised: each suggestion must be thanked even if also faced often not only WITH RESERVATION, but when necessary openly and immediately DISPROVED. The awareness of information presented and endorsed, quoted sites and publications and names and Institutions come preferably from DIRECT EXPERIENCE and surveys, merely sometimes admitted from others suggestion. Besides on a so tangled field every data should be continually revised: every suggestion must be thanked even if also faced with CAUTION.
Therefore in other words does again and again be stated that the aims of this endeavor are NOT to supply data purely for the sake of curiosity: within lies not only “theory” but “FACTS” and conflicting facts which sometimes become not only "theoretical" fights . So it is to be forever stated that this work does NOT be a mere fount of "second hand" advices but an ENCYCLOPEDIC gather of different original subjects: one another to be read time by time, or better to be CONSULTED even for learning. We hope to can be enough cautious to select only sure ones: but we solicit everyone to send us every comment or - moreover - criticism. To secure this informing aim, the Web site will always be maintained under speedy and diligently revised re-construction, also and perhaps mostly helped by directly received suggestion and/or readers' criticism thanking also erroneous arguments which any way can stimulate to more competently deeming about. The main aim of our work and then of our site is THE MORE to hold and suggest the maximum possible of awareness also with not so common place references. The whole work's aim is primarily to share data and knowledge the most timely and largely: and this purpose is widely obtained by our largest submission of LINKS; but our source not only profits by published scripts and articles: instead sets up the most on FIRST-HAND knowledge of facts as well by direct advice or at least to debate suggestion given by personal interlocutors. But "first hand" does not mean a simple definition: our basic aim is to work with precise PERSONS sincerely witnessing facts. It is again to say and assume thoroughly that at any case our care prefers to keep away from general questions for going instead on in PERSONAL behalf any way hoping to offer and consolidate this knowledge to the most possible wide extent of people. But a large share of similarities does not mean that this majority endorses the TRUTH. To recognize the reality of stabilized biological rules on the psycho-social development not only on the morphological field does not flattened similarities into a bunch of carelessly assorted differences: how damaging confusion can mix-up similarities narrow sighted as equalities! We don't like and strongly reject subjective THEORIES usurping the value of precise OBSERVATIONS, as well every invite to simplify and coerce different deeds and different causes into an unified bunch, needlessly assuming very ancient and/or biased Authors quotations to reinforce a personal presumption:

Occam's razor (sometimes spelled Ockham's razor) is a principle attributed to the 14th-century English logician and Franciscan friar , William of Ockham. The principle states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis  or theory. The principle is often expressed in Latin as the lex parsimoniae ("law of parsimony" or "law of succinctness"): "entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem", roughly translated as "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity". An alternative version "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate" translates "plurality should not be posited without necessity".
... Karl Popper  argues that a preference for simple theories need not appeal to practical or aesthetic considerations

Explanation and purpose

Who do be "slaves"? What is the Slave morality? Irrational of "mass psychology" or more precisely: allowed sadism? What do I have in common with all this? Without any mystifying call to “eradicate their presumed irrational” a doctor can communicate, exchange information and feelings to can promote a true “liberation” - of whom wishes it. What to partake with slaves? Furthermore as doctor the possibility to promote their deliverance. Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate?

But while this perspective accepts the assortment of so multifarious and in progress documentation, it does not accept to deny the reality of the variety of different contexts and cases - sometimes utterly disparate. Site and books are so composing an Encyclopedic miscellaneous entirety, not a smoothly fluent "esay-to-read" novel-like story: then this justifies the large amount of files/chapters, each one belonging and referring to a very different situations and a very diffeent way to document - see the "first hand" quotes into many files/chapters and the assortment of totally "foreign guests files/chapters" put on-line and printed into books. Every input of comments or of debates does be every time the most welcome to aid on focusing bettere and more incisively the attention even on forgotten details: but if we don't like "stars" nor "heroes", besides more strongly we reject THEORIES instead of OBSERVATIONS, as well every invite to simplify and coerce different deeds and different causes of them into an unified bunch, even if assuming very ancient and/or biased Authors quotations:
But if as a rule this sentence sounds right, such a proposal should NOT be accepted when more or less unfair "opinions" are displayed, instead of DOCUMENTS and real DEEDS having their factual place. This file/chapter - as well the file of another site Opinion or accusation? - tries to explain the meaning to openly have shared this "lack of tolerance". In fact the knowledge of this whole site/book, but mostly of this file/chapter, has to be completed by the whole site/book - It's Abuse NOT Science fiction - where also a file Opinioni o peggio, accuse? / Opinion or accusation? is worthy to complete and precise the present Opinion, fact, complaint. Examples, quotations - and more... - are to be considered to better understand their real meaning; the different naming of URLs explains and settles and integrates the utter purpose of both files and sites/books: /controversy.htm alludes to content and occasion, /method.htm furthermore states also additional politic topics and establishes argumenting patterns of way to work.
Therefore if this work doesn't be a static gather of documentation and description, it requests to develop its knowledge by other people's asks and doubts and testimony: so it can become an open windows on largest scenarios, in a continually in progress communication based more on observed changing sight of FACTS than on an interchange of WORDS. So this means to wish a serious and profitable support of sure, authenticated, scientifically probed shared knowledge, but it is necessary to add again an explanatory codicil here to highlight the fundamental principles which underlie the approach to this work, in order to avoid at the outset not criticism – which is welcomed! – but misunderstandings and ambiguities.
Any way even  if these basics are founded on a philosophic upbringing, the background of this work pertains to and comes from a very factual field: its aim is less to explain, to propose, to point out but the more to act when possible to protect and to care, to build and rebuild: surely NOT to accuse. This not in the name of a something as a "charitable goodness": as much as for a real critical attention to consider PROPORTION at disposal of the means and their - presumed -  outcomes, of the presumed causes and the presumed consequences.
This is also persistently and repeatedly brought to readers attention in every other file/chapter; it lends itself to being presented as typical of the main point of view, or better still the methodological approach on which this work is realized. Its primary aim is not to discuss presumed opinions in an ideological way, nor MUCH LESS to throw out at random hypothetical accusations: but rather to work in such a way that each assertion could be constituted as a document able to be corroborated and enhanced. Utterly only a document itself, which can clearly signal factual data could develop into information fruitful for further, better observations, as well for further doubts and for further searches. In this way it becomes an “open window” not to offer explanations but merely DESCRIPTIONS, documented and elucidated in an iconographic and incontrovertible way, since also confirmed by checkable - every time renewed - sources and authoritative even - or better: for preference - first hand data.

Well-documented historical events resemble terrible facts of the present: for example that of the 15th century Gilles de Rais and the hundreds of children raped and killed by him alongside the troops he chose and supplied to Joan of Arc. But instead how easy it is to be CONTRO on the immdiate! How easy to focus on every single case in an exclusive and sensationalist manner, creating an almost fairy-tale villain of the presumed guilty! How many successive Bluebeards have there been, committing absolutely similar crimes, yet – and here they differ from Gilles de Rais e Dutroux - in full impunity? And on the contrary how many, maybe innocent, have been charged with witchcraft, put to death or, more currently been monsters making headline news in unredeemable ways? While how many other authentic “monsters” live and have lived – well and long – quiet and honoured lives? 
The risk is to sliding into a culture of resentment:
As another "password" Sleeping reason breeding monsters accompanies many files in this site and the slightly modified world-famous Goya's table gives impact to the cover of the book It's Abuse NOT Science fiction, and as well another phrase what do I have in common with slaves, often cited in this site, stays at the base of the principal proposals of our research. But like to resolve a pronounced amnesia not only the unsaid should be unveiled but furthermore also bare words as themselves should be too often rejected: to know and discern how the false can hide underneath. Thus to be a victim is not an indubitable certificate of merit: to be or to have been a victim does not mean a personal characteristic of someone but merely that to this someone have happened or are happening damaging things. Unfortunately if to be or to have been “victims”  does not mean to be heroes, even more “unfortunately” to be “heroes” does not automatically indicate integrity: on the contrary victims and heroes are often categories in which “slaves” typically are placed, those who - however they are – confuse the internal with the external, who live and believe to live within a system that does not stem from themselves but comes from the other/others: a people not only seeking dependence, but approval, consideration, admiration, seduction, dogma, belonging to, guide, prescription, predominance till seeing all this thereafter to switch on offence and PERSECUTION.


With almost embarassment and fear of being taken as “negationists”, or as followers of Nietzsche or - very worse -  Spengler we have cited the above aphorism about the outpouring of polemic and argument directed also at victims as well at their true or false helpers or on good or bad faith defenders. It is instead our conviction that “slave morality” and “superman” are two sides of the same coin and of the same category, like that of the masses and the "refined minds".
Nevertheless the emotional flattening of servile condescension and admiring exaltation or esecration don't belong to "sanity", then two moments of the same... neurosis if not psychosis or of the same perversion... But even if highs and lows of myth-making and intense sentimentalism only take place occasionally it is ALWAYS SADISM and can produce or permit disastrous consequences.

Titles should not prevail over the content

In fact not in a personal private form rather - then: worse unfortunatly - more often the most banal solutions are put forward by confused and ill-informed interviewers; appeals to generic "good feelings" (!!!) do not so much hush the deafening silence as instead unfold and give incentive to the repressed sadistic instinct: expressing itself through the lynch-mob – perhaps not always merely ideological. Choices of the facile and populist road, important reports made public in a slipshod and imprecise way etc. risk the nullifying of the otherwise serious and difficult process of documentation, of testing evidence: thus seriously damaging again and again the actual victim.
There is no need to believe in (pseudo) heroes struggling against evil: on the contrary an interior lack of well-being, together with a sense of widespread injustice, makes the risk to increase and validate feelings of inferiority/dependence as a fixed reality. But it is in response to such feelings that grows the desire to seek for absolutes – in which to believe in - and guides on which to rely on. The absolutes are however unilateral and the trust in a guide becomes exclusive and excluding with the inevitable malevolence and discord. The - presumed – good citizens face each other on either side of opposing views instead of collaborating; and it is in this climate of confusion that the slave morality tends to prevail, with the taking up of hostile positions if not “appeals” to lynch the presumed guilty less difficult than to support and listen the real victims with precise witness and solidarity.
This proposal should not undervalue and discard who wherever and at any age suffers for inexplicable "disorders". It is not necessary any accord to the banal parameters of a banal “culture of slavery”: just a real  experience – gradual over the years and of clinical concreteness – in the field of “reliving” previous childhood trauma, started other site and task built to offer an address to whom seek for a better - neither mainstream nor "counter information" - knowledge, but also for finding a place where confirm and validate and exchange "strange experiences". But this knowledge resulted in a wider and wider aspects facing with numerous other international testimonies: not only by to relive past childhood harms and undergone unusual abuses, but also by adults suddenly afflicted with suffering unexpected and absolutely not customary. Ascertained and verified on a planetary scale, now as in the past, the abuse of children revealed to be part of an infinite mass of differentiated abuse of every genre – mental abuse, physical (and sexual) and also economical and technological - carried out on human beings by other wicked human beings; a lot of odd evil actions maybe on return financed (?) by the “business” of films using minors with an unheard sexual as much as also not only sexual cruelty and violence.
Resulting problems and responsibilities are therefore enormous: they require a secure connection and a solid and effective collaboration amongst those diverse realities, favoring everywhere and in whatever way the exchange of different experiences above all based on the impartial and un-programmed hearing of victims of every age, on the accurately selected credibility of each one: of each child now, but also of whoever - for however many years after - manifests through reliving the then “violated child”. Actual children, grown-up reliving their abused childhood, adults suffering for very "mysterious" harms become so allowed to heal from violation conserved within the interior, like a “cancer” which should have continued to impede the person from living a normal life: then so allowed to speak they can develop into faithful witness on regard of those experiences, no more at risk to be mistaken as mere "delusions". Unfortunately there is again and again a strong sense of CONTRO/ AGAINST "guilty" rather than a paying of attention to “victims”, “against” being an exaggeration - which takes in the naïve - of current events which are soon forgotten to be replaced by others. This phenomenon has almost forced to add a most recent file on the Association's site – unfortunately after the publication of the derived book. We wish to make reference to title Opinions or accusations? and draw attention to the URL /method.htm, indicating clearly the methodology used - not hypothetic but concrete.
Instead it is so far easy to appeal to impromptu, immediate “higher sentiments” in favor of single “victims” or to refer to single and contingent “monsters” in order to hit the headlines. In a cascade of worsening, caution and doubts are coursed for encouraging discord and disorganization amongst those who seek or believe to act in good faith. But this carries on more and more worse consequences: at first instigating and fostering paranoid fantasies in the victims themselves locks them in a vicious circle where the reliability as witness questioned becomes make faithless. But vicious circles don't stop: screaming “higher sentiments” and/or appeals against "monsters" allure to protagonism a lot of idle people victims of very scanty damages or willing to appear as heroic helper, if not a lot of fake victims when even of disguised perpetrators. To consider also that who wishes to join victims and their – also presumed and so-calling - defenders are often only exhibitionists seeking attention by calling public with clamorous appeals; but ever these clamorous campaigns, time after time demonizing single event and single nations, tend to forget them soon after and substituting with others. In fact working too often and too many in this field are those who propose and agitate along one single line of thought: taking up positions and “appeals” they are proud to incite the “lynching” of the presumed guilty, instead of giving solidarity and sustenance to the real victims: then victims real or fake or real or fake helpers and accusers considering from one aspect only the facts relevant to themselves, clash and thus unload their tensions in petty vindications.
For example many “authoritative experts” consider in exclusivity only one restricted sector: in the combating of paedophilia, only one aspect of sexuality involving minors; other "defenders" who opposes the more generalized abuse of innocent citizens as “guinea pigs” don't recognize who tries to act against believed colluders of "bad medicine" or against “weapons of energy”. In sum up whoever wish to work in these important fields risks to finds himself branching off in a mass of separate groupings: in addition tending to confuse science, technology and the bad use of these with subjective conclusions passed off as absolutes. Individual groups acting more or less in good faith attack with disparaging campaigns the “competitors” and with appeals to the “cleansing of public conscience” promote – uselessly? – requests for signatures for eventual – and in their turn criminal – proposals for laws promoting "to geld" etc. In place of a serious and patient search for the truth and real PROTECTION of the victims, damage on damage, cruelty on cruelty widen more and more the wild circle of wickedness.

Opinions or worse: accusations? /controversy?

Perhaps it is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to provisions against danger, real or pretended, from abroad.  James Madison to Thomas Jefferson, May 13, 1798 The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding. Justice Louis Brandeis, 1928

Chicken or eggs? Which is the first problem?