Wednesday, August 17, 2011

(Slight edit) Emma Woods Responds to Paracast and Gene Steinberg's Defamations

Excellent and highly, as always, articulate response by Emma Woods to the recent lies by many on the Paracast forum, including of course the one responsible for what goes on there, Gene Steinberg. UFO Magazine - UFO Magazine Blog - Response to Paracast Defamation

Not to hijack Emma's case here, but it is time to stop. It's time for others to stop accusing people they simply dislike of being child molesters, or liars, or making threats where none were made, or of being mentally ill. Just fucking stop it. (Slight update here: I am referring to a thankfully very small handful of writers, pundits, researchers, etc. -- which doesn't lessen their crimes any --  who have done one or some of the previous mentioned reprehensible things. Like this, for example.)

And I've never said it publicly, but it's long overdue: thank you Paul Kimball for stepping up and refusing to participate in such a place where these kinds of things are said on a daily basis.

28 comments:

Brownie said...

I think what drives men like Steinberg and O'Brien nuts is that 'Emma' has consistently been articulate and in control of her emotions when she posts. She doesn't get off-task nor allow her enemies (and they are indeed her enemies) to detour her into side arguments or flaming.

But why they would bring her up in a podcast, yet again....well, why?
Not much activity in the San Luis Valley to discuss? ;-)

Steinberg wanted to put the Woods/Jacobs subject to rest yet dredges it up once again. Someone makes a post questioning their podcast and that thread gets locked and Steinberg bans the person. Moderator Schuler defames Emma in the thread and yes-yes men
O'Brien, Steinberg and a couple of others are right there to give their public 'thankyou' button a twitch of their fingers.

Definitely good for Paul Kimball for leaving Paracast as a moderator and member when he did and explaining why. He could have stuck it out to use Paracast podcast as a publicity vehicle for his production company but took the high road and cut ties.

And underlying all this claptrap on Paracast is the weirdness of Steinberg's money-begging. Yikes....the stories he sent out - like something from a soap opera. Friends hacking into his savings acct., a sick relative in need of moolah....OMG! I know that Kimball and Vaeni have alluded to it. When I read the begging, I could not believe it! But, Steinberg must get people to feel sorry for him and send him money so he can continue stylin' in a toney suburb in Arizona.

~ Susan Brown

Gene Steinberg said...

It is unfortunate people continue to spread falsehoods about what we say and do.

To answer your silly allegations:

1. We haven't lied about "Emma Woods." She has given her real name to the people at Paratopia and UFO Magazine, and we'd be happy to accept that information in confidence, as she knows full well. Pro and con opinions have been expressed about her claims in our forums, but she displayed evidence of deceit when she began to post messages in support of herself under an assumed name. That only validates our decision to block her posts. But she has always known what she has to do to get her posting privileges back.

2. Nobody who claims to have had the experiences she claims to have had is free of serious emotional scars.

3. She has spent several years doing nothing but attacking Dr. David Jacobs. That rises way above the issue of whether any of her complaints are valid. That shows an unfortunate obsession with the issue.

4. We did not accuse her of being a child molester. Where do you get this stuff?

5. We do not like or dislike "Emma Woods."

6. Kimball's complaint, as he knows full well, is bogus. He has my response, but refused to publish that response.

Feel free to actually visit our forums or listen to the show to see what we really do, not what people imagine we do.

Gene Steinberg
Host/Producer
The Paracast

Regan Lee said...

To GS: you seem to have missed my point, particularly re: revealing one's name.

"We did not accuse her of being a child molester. Where do you get this stuff?"
I did not say you or Paracast accused Woods of being a child molester. I was referring to a completely other case entirely that has nothing to do with you. It's not all about you, though it is all about those who attack others.

As to your point re: Kimball, his "complaints" are not "bogus" they are how he feels and what he thinks about the whole ugly mess. One can disagree with him on that, but to say it's "bogus" doesn't mean a thing, other than your ego is bruised and he takes issue with your behavior.

: "Feel free to actually visit our forums or listen to the show to see what we really do, not what people imagine we do."

Sigh. How do you think I've come to the conclusions I have re: you, and your forum and show? Der.

"She has spent several years doing nothing but attacking Dr. David Jacobs. That rises way above the issue of whether any of her complaints are valid. That shows an unfortunate obsession with the issue."

"Several years?" Facts are, as can be heard on tape, Jacobs asked for her underwear, suggested she wear a chastity belt, planted the suggestion while she was hypnosis she has MPD, and much more... these are "complaints" that may or may not be "valid"-- they are valid! -- frankly, you appear to be someone deeply obsessed by his own need to deny these facts, -- and whose ego is clearly affronted because Woods hasn't played by your rules -- as well as being something of a misogynist.

"Nobody who claims to have had the experiences she claims to have had is free of serious emotional scars."
I don't know what to say to this, it's so astounding. Of course she would have "serious emotional scars" who the hell wouldn't? What does that mean? Your not so subtle implication and intention seems to be one of dismissal and trivialization: Woods is not to be believed/supported because she has 'serious emotional scars" which, caused by Jacobs, has caused her to take a strong stand and speak out, yet she is vilified for doing so, because she has "severe emotional scars" -- what an amazing and contorted loop of thinking that statement is!

Your thoughts are well known, since you go around making sure everyone knows what they are, arguing endlessly with others about this. I get it. I got it a long time ago.

It gets down to one very, very simple fact: Jacobs had no business doing any of the things he did re: Woods, and those actions have hurt, firstly, Emma Woods, and also UFO research. There's nothing to defend. If you can't understand that, that's too bad.

It's clear you do not understand, and probably never will. So back to your forum with you GS, where you no doubt will carry on, defending the truly indefensible.

You are done here, and have been given more time than is deserved.

Regan Lee said...

Brownie, I agree with you! All excellent points and sums it up well...

Lesley said...

"It is unfortunate people continue to spread falsehoods about what we say and do."

What falsehoods? Emma quoted directly what was said on their show.

"3. She has spent several years doing nothing but attacking Dr. David Jacobs. That rises way above the issue of whether any of her complaints are valid. That shows an unfortunate obsession with the issue."

And what what kind of obsession is continually bringing her up on your show and engaging in forum posts about her?

Seems to me she has spent several years trying to defend herself from obsessive people that can't let it go.

Alfred Lehmberg said...

W000000000000000t! Way to _sail_ Regs! Smoked Slimeberg's disingenuous, intemperate, and duplicitous ass like a cheap cigar! Standing Ovation over here and up _in_ here! [g].

Alfred Lehmberg said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Arvin Hill said...

"Jacobs asked for her underwear, suggested she wear a chastity belt, planted the suggestion while she was hypnosis she has MPD, and much more..."

I have yet to hear Ms. Woods' critics actually address these and other concerns. Much simpler to flatly declare, and reiterate at every opportunity, That bitch is crazy.

The conspicuous silence from most of ufology's ostensible luminaries - especially, but not exclusively, the menfolk; they who, not coincidentally, rely on sales from a rotation of books, DVDs and presentations - has been extremely telling. Beware the book blurbers.

Jacobs, for all practical purposes, is so closely identified with the abduction phenomenon, he is largely insulated from personal criticism and accountability... but not entirely so, thanks to Ms. Woods' commitment to self-defense and public caution.

Apparently, the UFO Police have something in common with their official counterparts: the blue wall of silence

Emma@ufoalienabductee.com said...

Thank you Regan, and everyone for your supportive comments. It is much appreciated.

Regan, I think that your response to Gene Steinberg pretty much said it all. (I notice too that he did not make any comment on my actual post itself.)

Jack Brewer said...

Very clear and valid points, Regan. Emma did indeed quote directly from the show, as she has directly quoted Jacobs.

The entire counter argument has become silly. Suggesting a person should not discuss their own case AND while others discuss it is just unreasonable by any definition.

Absurd as that is, it is not as absurd as implying someone with emotional trauma should not be allowed to participate on a UFO forum or that their sincerity is lessened in and of itself. Grasping at straws indeed... Just silly... If we exclude all the traumatized people from the UFO community, there will be no community.

Regan Lee said...

Emma, you are welcome and as always, thank you for being so clear and strong concerning your experiences.

Regan Lee said...

Jack said: " If we exclude all the traumatized people from the UFO community, there will be no community."

Yes, very true!

Brownie said...

Y/W Regan! I'm just gobsmacked now reading Gene Steinberg's post to your essay. Wow!

~ Susan

Gene Steinberg said...

Five years later, what I said has been proven by disclosures from a new site that clarifies the reasoning behind Jacobs' "peculiar" requests of "Emma Woods." It also posts the full transcripts of sessions that she has withheld from her followers, particularly with regard to the reasoning behind the MPD deception.

As I've said on The Paracast, I do not approve of Jacobs' research methods, but I have problems with "Emma Woods." The latest evidence of her penchant to deceive was posting under yet another false name on our forums. I also see she has withdrawn most of her material from her site, leaving labels of "Coming Soon" in their place.

I suggest you look over the new site, from Jacobs and Sean Meers, with an open mind. You'll find a lot of material of concern about both sides.

http://emmawoodstherealstory.com

Peace,
Gene

Regan Lee said...

GS: "I suggest you look over the new site, . . . Sean Meers, with an open mind…"

Sean Meers. That is rich! I can't take anyone who cites Meers as a valid source seriously.

Alfred Lehmberg said...

"Open Mind..." That provokes all manner of squirty giggles, eh? Squirty because the explosive laughter provokes incontinence one and two where that may prevail after Mexican at Steinberg's house. Snurk.

Gene Steinberg said...

As I expected, the chronic offenders will not pay attention to the new site, or how it blows the entire question of what Emma Woods really did out of the water. They are incapable of anything beyond childish insults.

The latest update at the new site demonstrates how Woods used yet another fake name to post support messages, then exposes herself in a review of a book at Amazon.

Now back to more fact-free posts.

Peace,
Gene

emmawoodsfiles.com said...

Thank you so much for your support, Regan and Alfred.

I think that Gene is referring to the latest claim that Jacobs, apparently with Meers' help, has now made on his defamatory website about me, which is that Harvey Price is not a real person, but a "sockpuppet" made up by me and that everything that Harvey has posted has really been me.

I have responded to Jacobs' accusation on my website.

https://emmawoodsfiles.com/home-4/dr-david-m-jacobs-2/sockpuppeting-claims/

I understand that Harvey Price is also going to post an audio response to it.

It seems as though the combination of Jacobs and Meers keeps hitting new lows.

I am surprised that Gene fell for it though, considering that Harvey Price had been posting on the Paracast forum for years. I guess Gene just swallows everything Jacobs/Meers put out.

Gene Steinberg said...

So to disprove that this person, whoever he is, is not a put up job, or someone who posted her messages on her behalf, she becomes the means of distribution of a fact-free statement that also misstates the years of participation in our forums.

Unfortunately that doesn't prove anything at all. Anyone can make a recording. A female can imitate a male and vice versa.

I was about to just leave this nonsense behind, but I have since requested a photo ID. And even if this "Harvey Jacobs" exists as a separate person, that doesn't disprove motive and intent.

I'm so sick of all this, and I hope the thinking people in this blog are finally convinced it's time to move on.

Gene Steinberg

Regan Lee said...

GS: "I'm so sick of all this…" says the man who's posted comments on this post four times.

Gene Steinberg said...

Just wanted to set the record straight, which I have.

Do you actually have something real to discuss?

Gene Steinberg

Regan Lee said...

GS: you haven't set anything "straight" you've merely stated links and opinions. As to my having "something real to discuss " I have been discussing it -- and it should be obvious it is my blog not your forum, so it isn't up to you.

Okay, my fun is over. I'm done. So are you.

Lesley Gunter said...

Some people really should "move on" instead of searching out blog posts to disagree with. Hey, here's an idea - get a job!

JR said...

What amazes me about this exchange being revived after years, is that anyone would care what Steinberg promotes, presents, recommends, or thinks about anything. As far as I can tell, the only reason he partakes of this 'entertainment' is as a vehicle for his incessant internet panhandling. Anytime he feels his voice in this subject has waned (don't tell him his moment has long passed) he pulls some ridiculous controversy out thin air so people look.

With this latest attention grab, yet another plea for more donations to his hapless financial situation can't be far behind - if it's not out already.

Steinberg is like the party guest who stays long after the buffet is wreckage and everyone else has left. If you ignore them long enough, they find the door.

Jack Brewer said...

When you're an MPD expert named Aloha Norton, everything looks like a sockpuppet.

brownie said...

The Harvey Price, being referenced, I assume is aka 'Paraschtick' and another handle 'Curious Egypt' (not sure on the accuracy of that one but have seen it or something close to it still ragging on Jacobs and Hopkins on JayVay's blog).

Well, five years later now, I wish I had kept the slew of private messages between Paraschtick and me on the Paracast. He was a virulent anti-Semite and he enjoyed making fun of Steinberg and Jacobs. His outlook was that typical paranoia of all the world's problems being caused by Jews. But because, at the time, I was banned from Paracast (and probably still am) and I was then kneejerk anti-Jacobs and anti-Hopkins, I didn't call him on it. Shame on me.

emmawoodsfiles.com said...

There has been a new development in regard to Jacobs' sockpuppeting accusation. Gene Steinberg contacted Harvey Price and asked him to provide photo ID to prove it was him in the audio statement.

Price provided Steinberg with the photo ID, and Steinberg emailed me and told me. Steinberg said that he would urge Jacobs to remove the sockpuppeting article on his website.

Jacobs has now retracted the accusation on his website.

I have updated my website page about the issue here:

https://emmawoodsfiles.com/home-4/dr-david-m-jacobs-2/sockpuppeting-claims/

I am relieved that at least this issue has been resolved.

Thank you also Regan, Jack, and Alfred for your support. It is greatly appreciated.

Alfred Lehmberg said...

I have to laugh out loud at Steinberg's meepy whining above. Meers and Steinberg show that they are but duplicitous _swine_ surpassing all reasonable effulgency. I'd offer that this entirely unnecessary reopening of old wounds must be the herald of another round of shameless begging and humiliating panhandling from Steinberg and, perhaps, a furtive sandpaper reach-around for Meers, Jacobs' "Sancho Panza," who must languish beneath the festering yoke of David Jacobs' odious reputation, insentient schtick, and toxic practice. Moreover, Meers "hatemail" section (I hope I make it with this one!) at his robin's egg and bat quano (if Jacobs fluffing) website performs the inverse of what was desired, a stalwart defense of Jacobs, and is instead a record of reasonable talking points demonstrating just how egregious Jacobs', and his orcish following, actually are... right in the foaming center of the whirling cess-pool that is Jacobs' lack-wit camp of capering imps. Step off, Steinberg. Step down and away, Meers. ...'K? ...'K.