Donna Bassett

[Gene Steinberg]

The key is that her name doesn't show a "banned" label does it?

Emma is also in the unique position of making a big effort to make herself into a public persona. So she needs to be treated differently from a regular forum member.

 

[paraschtick]

The key is that her name doesn't show a "banned" label does it?

Emma is also in the unique position of making a big effort to make herself into a public persona. So she needs to be treated differently from a regular forum member.

Funny that ... since I don't get that impression at all. If she was trying to "make herself into a public persona", don't you think she would have done more than the one interview she has made on one podcast? I think she is just stating her case ... admittedly she may go a little bit too far with the length of some of her posts but thats understandable considering she was tampered with by Dr Jacobs (who admitted doing so, remember) and is probably still in a vulnerable state of mind and feeling agrieved. I have absolutely no problem with that.

 

[Keiko]

Funny that ... since I don't get that impression at all. If she was trying to "make herself into a public persona", don't you think she would have done more than the one interview she has made on one podcast?

Perhaps because she hasn’t been asked…

IMO Gene made the right call here. This situation has been discussed at length and at this point can go no further on a public forum. It seems like Emma, for whatever reasons, is only focused on discussing her problems vis-à-vis Jacobs and if anyone is still interested they can visit her website. There are a lot of people out there that would like to hijack internet forums for their own personal agendas. The Paracast forum hosts a lot of genuinely interesting and informative discussions…I think Gene is only trying to protect that.

 

[Jonah]

Just a few observations...

I would feel less sympathetic towards the actions taken towards Ms. Woods if she had simply joined the Paracast forum offensively rather than defensively. Her story seemed like it garnered the interest of many here and so was discussed, as it should have been -BECAUSE THIS IS A DISCUSSION FORUM.

It was only after sides were taken and her state of mind was questioned (by a Paracast mod no less) that she entered the discussion, again, DEFENSIVELY. What should she have done?

AFAIK, she violated no Forum guidelines, she has represented herself quite well, and is undeserving of the treatment she has received here. The notion that a person can be censored here without having violated any form of Forum etiquette is somewhat baffling. We are all free to ignore and/or disengage.

The notion that she must reveal her true identity in order to speak here is something I find distasteful in that it is a form of blackmail. In essence, she must put herself at personal risk (ask David B. how his public revelations has gone for him professionally) in order to gain a voice here at "The Gold Standard".

I know what I'd say and I'm fairly certain it's what Emma's saying with her silence..."Fuck Off".

Although I'm sure she would say it more politely.

Jacobs already hung himself with his public statement and has proven Emma's complaint. It's now simply a case study IMO...one that should continue to be DISCUSSED with input from anyone who cares to join that discussion. That includes Ms. Woods.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

I am sympathetic towards anyone who has been unfairly treated. But I am not comfortable with the way Emma has gone out of the way to make herself into a public personality yet hide the truth about herself.

She is welcome to write to me to discuss the issue, but the fact that she vanished as soon as issue was raised only increases my concerns.

As I said, Jacobs can't be let off the hook either. But there are lots of other things to talk about now.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

One more thing: The moderator who became downright insulting towards Emma is no longer a moderator.

I don't treat people that way unless they absolutely deserve a "special response."

 

[paraschtick]

Just a few observations...

I would feel less sympathetic towards the actions taken towards Ms. Woods if she had simply joined the Paracast forum offensively rather than defensively. Her story seemed like it garnered the interest of many here and so was discussed, as it should have been -BECAUSE THIS IS A DISCUSSION FORUM ...

What I truly don't understand about all this David Jacobs/Emma Woods business is the lack of consistency, and the strange (dare I say it) whiff of hypocrisy.

We have the Paracast having an entire show on showing how Bill Knell is a crook, and how he rips people off. But when we have someone showing that another person is just as crooked. Possibly more so since that person tampered with someone's mind, we're not really supposed to criticise him too much. But attacks against the person coming out and showing that that said person is dodgy are allowed.

It makes the whole UFO Watchdog thing into something of a joke, and the somewhat lack of consistency, in my mind, casts grave doubt on the "gold standard" label, the Paracast tries to portray itself as having.

Oh and Emma Woods has been asked to do more shows ... but she won't since the one she did took so much out of her that she will not do another (and I got that from the source herself). So ... again the idea that she is trying to promote herself as some sort of celebrity doesn't bear any weight whatsoever.

[Damn ... of course ... she might have misled me. Gosh darn ... still at least she's not on the run from the alien hybrids ]

 

[Gene Steinberg]

It is pretty clear what Knell is doing.

As to Emma Woods, or whoever she is, are you her spokesperson or something?

I have my share of serious concerns about Jacobs, and, since Emma Woods hides behind her own mask and provides nothing more than edited recordings that cannot be independently verified, I still regard it as he said/she said.

This issue has been covered thoroughly. It does nothing to help us figure out what's behind UFO abductions.

Next.

 

[The Pair of Cats]

Oh and Emma Woods has been asked to do more shows ... but she won't since the one she did took so much out of her that she will not do another (and I got that from the source herself). So ... again the idea that she is trying to promote herself as some sort of celebrity doesn't bear any weight whatsoever.

But she seems to have enough energy to write extremely lengthy and detailed posts on our forums!!! And if one interview took so much out of her, what will become of her if she has her day in court with Jacobs!!!

 

[Tom From Hong Kong]

Gene, I think an interesting follow-up episode on the abduction phenomenon would be an interview of a few credible, well balanced abduction experiencers. You could explore the possible existence of physical trace evidence, conscious memories, and if they have undergone hypnosis, any uncovered memories. My sense is that there are a number of Forum members who fit the bill and would be great guests. Let the Paracast listeners get firsthand exposure to what these individuals have encountered and see to what degree hypnosis has actually influenced their own personal conclusions about the phenomenon. My own sense is that hypnosis has actually had less of an effect in driving some experiencers' viewpoints than many Forum members may argue.

We are not going to solve anything by continuing to debate Ms. Woods' claims until she takes Dr. Jacobs to court, which is where the claim should have been brought from the very beginning. The above suggestion is one means of trying to get to some of the underlying the facts surrounding abductions, with all of us contributing to what the potential conclusions may be based upon what we hear.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Gene, I think an interesting follow-up episode on the abduction phenomenon would be an interview of a few credible, well balanced abduction experiencers. You could explore the possible existence of physical trace evidence, conscious memories, and if they have undergone hypnosis, any uncovered memories. My sense is that there are a number of Forum members who fit the bill and would be great guests. Let the Paracast listeners get firsthand exposure to what these individuals have encountered and see to what degree hypnosis has actually influenced their own personal conclusions about the phenomenon. My own sense is that hypnosis has actually had less of an effect in driving some experiencers' viewpoints than many Forum members may argue.

We are not going to solve anything by continuing to debate Ms. Woods' claims until she takes Dr. Jacobs to court, which is where the claim should have been brought from the very beginning. The above suggestion is one means of trying to get to some of the underlying the facts surrounding abductions, with all of us contributing to what the potential conclusions may be based upon what we hear.

We actually did a show with "Doug," an abductee with some frightening encounters, and this is certainly something worthy of further consideration. It's a really good idea. We have to focus more on how the evidence is collected and the case histories, and get past the sideshows.

 

[Tom From Hong Kong]

We actually did a show with "Doug," an abductee with some frightening encounters, and this is certainly something worthy of further consideration. It's a really good idea. We have to focus more on how the evidence is collected and the case histories, and get past the sideshows.

Gene, thanks. I remember the show with Doug, which was quite interesting but almost left more questions than it answered. In my view, Doug seemed uncertain and tentative in his statements, although David did state he thought Doug was telling the truth based upon their one-on-one telephone calls. It didn't appear that Budd Hopkins did follow-up interviews with Doug's family members to confirm the UFO sighting and missing time (Mr. Hopkins remained quiet on these topics), and it seemed too convenient that the roll of film in question was lost by the developer.

I suspect people will continue to agree-to-disagree on the validity of hypnosis as a tool until they actually hear some real cases involving credible experiencers who do not have an agenda. My personal view is that hypnosis, when combined with other evidence (physical, conscious recollections), actually assists in filling in pieces of the puzzle, recognizing its shortfalls. I have actually now met three individuals who claim to be experiencers (quite a few for someone who has never investigated this formally and who himself has never had anything funny happen to him), and am fairly convinced that there is indeed something to this beyond a few researchers implanting ideas in troubled people's minds.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Listeners, if Emma wants to come clean, she knows where to find me.

Case closed.