Recently Updated Posts

From Wikipedia about Keith Raniere-- both an AMWAY kook and like Charles Manson a Scientologist. And like in the SOS case where wheatie carr was a dispatcher for the police, (am I right on this?) Raniere has access to criminal files and inmates.

QUOTE:
Multi-level marketing career
Through the 1980s, Raniere was involved with the multi-level marketing company Amway.[13][10] Heidi Hutchinson recalled that during the late '80s, Raniere was fascinated by Amway, Scientology, and neuro-linguistic programming.[28][10] Raniere also worked as a computer programmer for New York State's Division of Parole.

Karis said:

So true! Or you start Making Up evidence to fit the crime rather than letting the crime fit evidence.

If Marilyn gave DNA in 2015 then by the time she was interviewed by the FBI in 2016 they certainly should have known if her DNA was at the scene. And if they really believed (as Dmac has said) that she was involved in these murders then why in the world did they exit after this interview without constantly bringing her in for questioning? The snippets we've seen only implies they were trying to make her believe they thought she was involved so they could extract from her anything Justin may have told her. Justin's DNA was found and Justin is who they were interested in.

Also if the FBI were still "involved" in the "investigation" by 2019 then why would the PCSO have let Mike go knowing he had the help of the FBI and a meeting with VIDOCQ? Makes no sense. The only thing that makes sense is that Mike wasted a lot of time going down the "Marty Smartt" and "Mafia" pig trails. There is absolutely nothing wrong with him checking out everything - but he should have checked out EVERYTHING whether it led back to Marty or not. Instead he jumped on board with Dmac for the ID Show, People Magazine, Plumas News, and any other news outlet he could always insinuating Marty was the killer without any real evidence. And where, 4 years later, has all that corruption and mafia "talk" taken this case? Absolutely nowhere.

Now here we are in 2020 with Mike handing over his case files in exchange for Doug Thomas "secret files" and Vickie on standby to report the latest findings in the Plumas County News. Maybe Vickie could write an article on "Doug's Secret Files" and all those psychics that Dmac said Doug Thomas sought the help of when he supposedly already knew who the killers were. Aw, she can't do that because then it might appear that he had no idea who committed these murders.

Wow, Mike and Vickie really backed themselves into a corner.

Well, you are obviously not crazy. You are a highly intelligent and particularly insightful person.

There are simply, more problematic and less problematic interpretations of what "data" exists, about the 149 CIA 'sponsored' projects conducted under auspices of MKUltra.
Entire books could be, and have been, filled with speculation on this subject - to varying degrees, driven by personal agendas or desire to prove an agenda driven hypothesis.

In my opinion, the best evidence relates to the death of Frank Olson and the problems posed by the possibility that "another Frank Olson" could arise in the future. Because, they didn't WANT to throw Olson out of a hotel window. They liked him, they respected him, he was ONE OF THEM. But he was clearly "going rogue" on them, he no longer believed what they were doing was "right" and wanted out. But he knew things, secret stuff they just couldn't risk him disclosing to someone, someday, and they ultimately concluded that they had no choice but to kill him to prevent that.
Excellent resources for this include; H.P. Albarelli's "A Terrible Mistake" and the Netflix documentary about Olson starring his son Eric. 

So, the #1 problem they hoped to resolve with MKUltra was - how could they wipe out a colleague's memories of the secrets they carried, without having to kill him (or her), if it was ever necessary to do that. (Especially because, they realized that someday "it could be you-or me!") and there is a direct parallel to one part of Ewan Cameron's work, in this. 
This is not, and never has been, a secret. As Colin Ross demonstrates quite convincingly in "The CIA Doctors", all of the psychiatrists involved in experimentation that was (unwittingly in most cases) financially sponsored by CIA fronts, published papers in professional journals of their day, about THAT work. They weren't trying to hide it.
Nor was Cameron. So a lot IS known about Cameron's attempts to relieve chronically suicidal depressive patients of the PTSD memories that plagued them and seemed to be the basis of their desire to end their lives. 

This first part of his work, involved wiping their memories entirely, and he was successful in doing this in some cases. (I live in Canada, where much of Cameron's work was carried out. We have/ had many living examples of Cameron's work, and 22 of them were even successful in suing the CIA for the wreckage of their lives that resulted, so we don't need to speculate about it. We KNOW what happened to them).
The second part involved attempting to generate a new "personality" - (just ONE, not multiple ones as many people have speculated) - and a personality based on underlying positive self-worth, so they could not become suicidal in the future. This was his "psychic-driving" experiments. These were, frankly, abysmal and horrific FAILURES! The best he could manage, was a zombie like, reflexive automaton with no internally driven personal characteristics, desires, interests. When they we not interacting with others, they would just sit there staring into space. Absolutely COULD NOT have been exploited as assassins, nor anything else of importance to intelligence agencies or their black ops projects.


In any case, it's obviously not necessary to expend millions of dollars and vast scientific resources, to generate sociopathic personalities. Military basic training of most countries seems to accomplish this, in some cases, quite efficiently! And none of these terrifying sociopathic murderers in this database needed to be "created";


www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/139364NCJRS.pdf

The legal hair, concerning Rules of Evidence (which I preach relentlessly myself,) that law enforcement splits is this: Yes, there are films and videos taken into police custody that LOOK like "snuff" films. We know SOME of them are faked (often rather crudely,) some of them may be genuine, some of them may be genuine mutilations of already dead bodies, but police never found a body to match the film, and most of them we can't get two photo experts to agree on. That of course does NOT count the all-too-many photos and films etc of children (and adults) being injured or sexually abused. The closest to an actual "snuff" film that was used as evidence at a trial in Europe is a very young boy who is being orally raped and he literally choked to death, and is clearly unconscious on camera, but the defendant claimed that was an accident. It does appear to be so on the video. But that's still murder in most jurisdictions. That is, if a person dies as a result of a violent criminal action, accidentally or not, that's murder.

The ONLY "snuff" films/videos ever offered as evidence in a US court are the ones shown to the jury at Charles Ng's trial, and they show NO actual injuries of any kind. Jackasses like the ones who made the re-enacted Lake/Ng videos for entertainment purposes don't help, either.

I have serious doubts that we will be able to discuss this topic, let alone the history of religions, in any adult, rational way on this website or the podcast. So, I will try with the Lake/Ng, and JonBenet Ramsey. But if there aren't at least a minority of people who can discuss those two cases without losing their marbles all over my sites, they will be the last ones on that subject area.

And in answer (sort of) to your question, IF there is such a thing as a "snuff" film, then there HAS to be customers. There is no selling without buying. And however important it is to find out who is selling, it is even more important to find out who is BUYING.

Now...Anatoly Slivko. Here's where definitions for "snuff" seem confusing to me.

"Anatoly Yemelianovich Slivko (Russian: Анатолий Емельянович Сливко; December 28, 1938 – September 16, 1989) was a Soviet serial killer, sexual predator, and necrophile. He was convicted of killing seven teenage boys in and around Nevinnomyssk, Stavropol Krai, Russian SFSR, between 1964 and 1985.[1]
Over a two decade-long period, Slivko molested young boys at his youth club after tricking them into unconsciousness, killing some of them in an attempt to recreate the violent death of a teenage boy he had witnessed in 1961, which had sexually aroused him.[2]
Slivko was executed by shooting on 16 September 1989" - (Wikipedia)
Hooray, to that!

"In 1961, Slivko witnessed a traffic accident in which a drunken motorcyclist had swerved into a group of pedestrians, fatally injuring a boy in his early teens who was wearing a Young Pioneers uniform.[6] For reasons Slivko would later insist he never could explain, this scene had sexually excited him. He later recalled the accident vividly: "The boy had experienced convulsions in his death throes as the smell of gasoline and fire permeated the air."[7]
Beginning in 1963, Slivko exploited his position at a children's club he ran to relive the fantasies of this accident.[8] Once or twice a year, he would form a close friendship with a boy who was usually aged between 12 and 15 and never older than 17.[n 1] The boy would be short for his age and would be wearing a Young Pioneers uniform - just like the boy Slivko had seen die in the traffic accident. Slivko would gain the boy's confidence and tell him of an experiment he knew which involved a controlled hanging to stretch the spine, and that he would reenact the scene of a partisan executed by Nazi soldiers for his children's club in order to film this scene,[10] after which, the boy was assured, Slivko would revive him from his state of unconsciousness.[11]
Prior to each boy undertaking this "experiment", Slivko would purchase a new uniform for the victim to wear and shine his shoes. In addition, to prevent any vomiting, the victim was required not to eat for several hours before the experiment.[12] Once the boy was unconscious, Slivko would strip him naked, caress and fondle him, take films in which he would arrange the body in suggestive positions, and repeatedly masturbate" - (Wikipedia)

"Over the course of 22 years, Slivko persuaded 43 boys to take part in this contrived experiment. In 36 cases, following his established ritual of photography, filming and repeated masturbation, Slivko revived these boys. Cautioned by Slivko into silence, these individuals resumed their lives unaware of what had happened to them whilst they had been unconscious.[14] However, in seven cases, Slivko's behavior became violent: once these victims were unconscious, he dismembered their bodies, poured gasoline on their limbs and torso, and set the remains on fire to remind himself of the traffic accident which had sparked his arousal. Slivko typically retained the victim's shoes as a memento, as well as the photographs and films which he developed in a home laboratory.[15] The pictures and films served as stimuli for Slivko's masturbatory fantasies for months or years until he needed fresher stimuli and killed again" - (Wikipedia)

I'm aware that there are clips "out there", recording portions of Slivko's ritualized, murderous acts with these boys. I'm not going to watch them, I think I "get it" from reading Reddit users comments. Some of the boys might have died during these clips, like after he "helps" them to hang themselves. He's not performing sex acts on them, before or during that step in his ritualized process - nevertheless, the WHOLE process was sexually stimulating for him we are told, and he may have been masturbating (off camera) during the filming. Does that mean, these are "child snuff films" then?

I haven't seen anything so far, about Slivko selling copies of these 'homemade and developed' clips, or distributing them in any other way. If there is no commercial/financial motivation, is it still "snuff"? Is it still snuff, if Slivko's collection of clips is truly private and no one else even viewed them before his arrest & demise? It matters not, to me, either way - call these "child snuff films" if you wish.
Because, the point isn't that such a thing is NOT POSSIBLE. It is, that there was no secret underground child snuff industry