The Shill-Shaming of Danielle la Verite

There's a lot of bad feeling in the air at the moment. In the world of the Rendlesham Forest Incident Col. Charles Halt has told the world on live radio that Larry Warren is a "substance abuser", see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=6YxS56Aa-tI. This is false and Larry is understandably enraged with Halt about it. That very same day I discovered Trystan Swale's critique of my views on Prof. Brian Cox, against which I had to strike back, see: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/trystan-swale-on-ben-emlyn-jones.html. Then this came to my attention on the website of the Kent Freedom Movement: http://kentfreedommovement.com/profiles/blogs/omg. It concerns Danielle la Verite, a relative newcomer to the Truth movement who has nevertheless made a big impression with her popular YouTube vlog, see: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChUnNa1m57uu8v05wMPkcIw. Here's her website: http://www.daniellelaverite.com/. Her style is a simple talking-head narration, usually from a corner of her bedroom, but she is very intelligent, perceptive and witty, albeit in a rather X-rated way. Like Chris Spivy she is plain-speaking and doesn't hold back from swearing. I admire her creativity in that respect; she has popularized unusual profanities like "cuntwaffle", even if she didn't invent them herself. In her radio interviews she comes across as very dedicated and concerned about the New World Order, and that she takes what she does seriously, but she has a clever sense of humour too. In this world, having a laugh can be the only way for some people, including me, to maintain our sanity. For this reason the article on the Kent Freedom Movement made me sit up and read. The title itself sets the tone straight away; I've spoken before about the misuse of rhetoric, see here in the introduction: http://hpanwo-tv.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/dr-jonathan-reed-at-rendlesham-forest.html. Of course the KFM blog's author is entitled personally to regard Danielle and what she does as "degenerate filth" if they like but the leading illustration is a still from Danielle's Dear Forum Haters video with the word "SHILL" embossed over the colander. Shill is conspiratorial jargon for a government agent who has been inserted into the conspiratorial movement by the intelligence services to do it damage. Accusing somebody of being a shill is a very serious matter.

The Kent Freedom Movement author deeply dislikes Danielle's style, her foul language and anomalous frolics. The video in which she appears in a rabbit costume supposedly makes us Truthers "appear like idiots!" I've watched that video myself and I disagree. To me it just looks like a rather avant-garde comedy piece; I don't see any harm in it myself. I don't think it makes people in the Truth movement look like idiots at all; it's simply Danielle's chosen expression of satire and fun. Naturally it doesn't appeal to everybody; it's even bound to offend some people, like the KFM author. I'm afraid that's life! The author then compiles a highly detailed dossier of all the expletives Danielle uses, complete with time-stamps, and claims that they are good at "spotting cointelpro" (government psychological operations agents). They state that if they'd feel awkward or embarrassed about showing this material to their mother then it's suspicious. No, it's just that it doesn't appeal to the author's taste, or their mother's; nothing more, nothing less. There are people I myself would not show Danielle's videos to because I know they'd be upset by them. This does not mean that Danielle is therefore automatically an undercover infiltrator from the Frankfurt School; it might just mean that different people like and dislike different things. There are those who are repelled by bad language and certain kinds of humour; again, that's just life. The author might feel that Danielle is driving people away from the Truth movement because of her style, but they are actually only putting themselves in the shoes of everybody coming into contact with the Truth movement for the first time; they cannot possibly speak for all those people. If the author prefers, there is plenty of promotional material out there which is far more family orientated; why not try HPANWO TV? I hardly ever swear in my own output. The author also objects to Danielle's posts on Facebook in which she gets into bitter and aggressive arguments with other people... well, hold the front page!... As somebody once perceptively said, logging into Facebook is like stepping into a nightclub; almost everybody is constantly battling with everybody else using a rudeness of tone they'd never stoop to in face-to-face conversation. I could show you some of the comments posted on my own wall, and more so the HPANWO Forum, which make Danielle's look like passages from a Ladybird book. The internet is a place where trolls and cyber-bullies trawl like sharks. If you get attacked by one there are several ways of defending yourself, but this has to involve biting back in some way if it's to be effective. The author suggests that Danielle herself initiated a series of publicized keyboard duels, but the small screen-captured comments boxes illustrating that passage don't contain enough information to prove this. In these arguments, both sides will invariably blame the other, and only they themselves will know who is lying and who is telling the truth. The KFM author then refers to a video in which Danielle and Thomas Sheridan pretend to channel the ghost of Jimmy Savile with a third individual, off camera, imitating Savile's voice. I don't particularly appreciate that video either. It is rather facetious and this time I can sympathize with the author's feelings; but does this mean that Danielle, and presumably Thomas Sheridan too, are shills because they've made a video we dislike?

Rhetoric like the kind in the KFM blog article makes it difficult to analyze the text rationally. As I said in my Dr Jonathan Reed video, excessive use of rhetoric is effectively threatening the reader; it's saying: "You have to agree with me, or else!..." This is an insult to our intellectual sovereignty and it's often used as a substitute for a reasonable argument where none exists. I really am not interested in knowing if the KFM member who wrote that article feels offended by a few four letter words or doesn't see the funny side of certain off-beat jokes. If they are going to make a specific accusation against another person then I want to see their reasoning. What evidence do they have that Danielle la Verite is a shill? Do they mean her name? La Verite is not Danielle's real surname; it simply means "truth" in French. I'm not sure how that is significant; I know several people who use more than one name, especially in cyberspace; and pseudonyms are perfectly acceptable. I have used them myself several times. No, you need to give us more than that. The author first encountered Danielle via a contact in a group called The Reset. This is an issue of legitimate concern; I've heard of The Reset a few times already and it appears to be similar to the cartel of organizations that were behind the controlled Occupy camp in London, see: http://hpanwo-tv.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/whatever-happened-to-occupy.html. The author links to another KFM article about The Reset and quite rightly exposes what looks like connections to Agenda 21, the manipulated environmental tendency and New Age mind control, see: http://kentfreedommovement.com/profiles/blogs/the-reset-but-reset-what. However Danielle's alleged links to The Reset, according to the same author's report, are very tenuous indeed. Danielle knew somebody who was in The Reset, that's it. Is she involved more deeply in The Reset? If so there should be documentary data like text and video etc. Danielle became interested in the Truth movement during her study of serial killers and how they tended to have links to military mind control projects; this is a legitimate subject which many researchers have covered, yet the KFM pours scorn on Danielle doing it because apparently she has no written works currently available. Well maybe she was just reading and thinking; again, is this a case for the prosecution in a shillhood trial? The same goes for Danielle's own experience of the social services and her children's school; so what if she's reluctant to talk about it? I've been in a similar situation myself with my daughter and I don't bring it up in every radio interview. What's the author's point here? I put Danielle's comments about the discredited Hollie Greig case down to inexperience; she's only been involved in this business for four months after all. The author also believes that Danielle's "affiliation" to the UK Column is evidence for her being cointelpro because the author believes UK Column are such as well. However they don't explain exactly what form this "affiliation" takes; does Danielle work for the UK Column or what? This is something I've heard a lot about too. The UK Column is a newspaper and website featuring several people I respect including Brian Gerrish, Lou Collins, Ian R Crane and Bill Maloney, but in recent years they've been accused of being a government-run psychological operation to derail the Truth movement. However when I looked into this issue and began talking to people about it I came across a very similar mindset to that of the Kent Freedom Movement towards Danielle la Verite, and also the community in UFOlogy which is opposed to Darren Perks. They may well have a genuine gripe, but it's impossible to know because nobody wants to have a rational civilized discussion about it. What you have instead are a collection of warring tribes with whom you are either for or against. If you raise a single word of doubt or even inquiry you will be instantly and reflexively denounced as a shill yourself. Either that or you'll be patronized with emasculating platitudes like being called a dupe and a weakling. Here's a good example quote from the KFM article: "...whereby she has her Facebook and YouTube sycophants supporting her day and night to cuss and curse at anyone that might question their precious Danielle." That well and truly puts me in my place doesn't it? When it comes to these factions you're either with them or against them. You cannot disagree! It's not permitted! You'll be told that the evidence against the accused exists... but you won't be allowed to examine it because it will never be shown to you. Instead what will happen is you'll have a package that supposedly contains the evidence contemptuously hurled in your face, with a wrapping paper consisting of insults, threats, rhetoric and moral blackmail, see here for more details: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/miragemengate.html. I think one of the reasons I'm writing about this case is because I myself have been in the same position as Danielle and feel sorry for her as a result. The irony is that no real shill could ever hope to achieve the level of discord, mutual hostility and suspicion that currently exists in the Truth movement, thanks to the Shill Squad. I think real shills exist; there's no doubt about that. There are people I myself suspect of being shills, either knowing informants or "useful idiots"; but if these accusations are going to progress anywhere beyond my private doubts and wariness, then I will need to have proper evidence, it's as simple as that. There are a particular group of people within the conspiratorial community who have appointed themselves the armchair policemen of the Truth movement. Some of them literally do nothing else except constantly pontificate over the character of other personalities in our community. They will judge and condemn individuals and organizations without hesitation and regard any appeal from third parties as being inductions into the very same guilt they have so single-handedly dispensed. Sadly some members of the Kent Freedom Movement area a part of this tendency. This is a great pity because the KFM has also done such brilliant research and activism work; it was they who first joined forces with Nick Kollerstrom to expose the false flag sham that was the Woolwich incident, see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGWkuyc3MpM. I have good friends who are members of the KFM and I've travelled with them to attend KFM meetings. I regret that after this article is published I'll probably never be invited back again. I'll miss that. I've seen very little reason to think Danielle la Verite is no more than a genuine person who wants to take action against the New World Order. She is eccentric in her delivery, but then so am I in my own way. We are individuals and proud of it! The last thing the Truth movement needs is its own brand of political correctness; on the contrary, a bit of Wilsonian Discordianism could do us a lot of good. Danielle's manner is uninhibited and blunt; she likes satire, adult humour and black comedy which many viewers will find personally distasteful. There are some vague suggestions that she's encountered some dubious individuals and organizations in the course of her brief career in the world of conspiracy; these matters are worth keeping an eye on, but there are no signs that she has decisively planted her flag on any of them. The Kent Freedom Movement have presented no case at all to suggest that Danielle la Verite is shill. They have expressed a profound personal dislike for her, and that's all. I know very well that I'm losing friends by writing this article, but so be it. I've learnt that this is a price we all have to pay for speaking our minds. If an issue is important enough to write about and people don't like it, tough! And as I've said many times before, especially over this past year, a friend to all is a friend to none.

See here for more information: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/a-friend-to-all.html.