Was Episode 84 reviewed by LE before it was shown online?
What if Mayotte had, even if unknown to her, said something important that LE did not want publicly known?
How, and by whom, were editing decisions made? Was law enforcement involved in this editing?
If Tim and Lance knew LE requested certain parts edited out, then are Tim and Lance, in effect, working for LE? If so, for how long have they been working for LE?
Didn't Tim and Lance, by Lance's own admission, turn over to law enforcement a list of names of those who attended one of their Somerville appearances?
Have Tim and/or Lance and/or Josh Leonard signed confidentiality agreements with any law enforcement agency?
If LE requested certain parts of the interview edited out, then would that not clue in Tim and Lance to something important?
What might be inferred had law enforcement told Tim and Lance, after reviewing the entire interview, that there was nothing in the interview that could not be seen?
Also, how many college educated women in Massachusetts with advanced degrees, who are roughly 30 years old (when Renner interviewed her), have 4-5 kids? IMO, statistically speaking, Karen is yet another person involved in this case who's more than likely pro-life/religious. In fact, the kidney thing Karen mentions near the end of the episode is a popular debating tactic used in the abortion wars.
Regardless of Mayotte's beliefs, which I would almost certainly respect, there sure are a surprising group of pro-life, Christian Church, anti-Muslim, trigger-happy, truther extremists hanging around this case, including a few cops and ex-cops. Not to mention a lot of liberal, pro-choice (for lack of a better term) pro-fems.
These two groups are normally at each other's throats, but there are times, and maybe the Maura Murray case is one of them, when they make for strange bedfellows.
As Debbie Nathan and Michael Snedeker write in the their book, Satan's Silence:ritual abuse and the making of a modern American witch hunt:
Feminists were particularly susceptible to sex-abuse conspiracy theories. Indeed, the alliances women's activists struck with conservatives around these claims often turned bizarre: as when Gloria Steinem contributed money and public support to a ritual-abuse proponents' group whose coordinator later claimed that it was the U.S. government, and not an ultraright militia movement devotee, who bombed Oklahoma City's federal building in 1995.
This is why people like Maggie Freleng, for example, might be found working from time to time with someone like John Smith.
 |
| Have any other groups, such as those speculated to exist by "FalconsClaw0002," signed confidentiality agreements with law enforcement? |
All of this, of course, brings up a much larger issue: to what extent are apparently civilian/journalistic efforts actually a clever front for law enforcement? Sound far-fetched? Just read Anna Funder's (Stasiland) interview with former East Germany's (GDR/DDR) leading "journalist" Karl-Eduard von Schnitzler. Read how all governments use so-called journalists to further both criminal and political aims. They are not all journalists; they are too often cheap propagandists.
The problem with this is, especially in the age of social media, that the line between objectively presented information and the corrupt aims of authoritarian (overt or Trumpian) become blurred. Podcasts become not the voice of the people, or just a section of the people, or just a couple of ordinary guys; they become the mouthpieces for an increasingly corrupt and authoritarian government - whether left, right, or even both.
They become lowlife snitches, which always furthers authoritarianism more than anything else.
No comments:
Post a Comment