Sunday, 18 February 2018

Shill Tribunal

A few days ago I had a long telephone conversation with somebody I know in the UFO/paranormal/conspiracy theory movement, a man I like and respect. Somebody who is doing a lot of good for many people and whom I have endeavoured to support; and I will continue to do so. However the bulk of our discussion was about his dislike for another prominent member of the UFO/paranormal/conspiracy theory community and his suspicions that this person is a disinformation agent. As I talked on the phone it struck me that the target of his accusations had no recourse. There was no due process by which he could defend himself, nor was there any way I would even hear his side of the story unless I knew him well enough to ask him privately. It is an all too familiar situation, one which is breaking out in one form or another all over our community and I've addressed it many times before, see the background links below. Recent developments have made me more acutely aware and more frustrated, see: and: This problem has even recently entered the realm of the Bigfoot research community, see: We're in a predicament similar to the witch hunts of the Middle Ages, however instead of red hot iron and ducking stools we now have trial-by-hashtag. A person's shillhood is determined by whoever has the loudest voice, or is with the largest YouTube following, simply declaring that they are shills. Sadly a significant proportion of those within the UFO/paranormal/conspiracy theory community will embrace these indictments without question. These masses will split into a pair of factions, clustering around their chosen ayatollah and so begins another tedious Facebook-like-button war. In the above links you will sense my outrage at this perverse situation. It's time for us to search for a way out if the UFO/paranormal/conspiracy theory movement is not to implode through infighting, leaving the fortress defenceless against occupation by the omnicidal tyranny of the Illuminati.

It was soon after the phonecall to my friend that the idea came to me: why not establish some kind of tribunal? I posted the idea as a short sentence on Facebook: "Thought experiment: a tribunal to decide who is or is not a SHILL..." and it had a mixed response. It seems nonsensical on the surface; after all how could we petition the existing state legal systems to get involved in the squabbles of "a bunch of tin foil hat-wearing loonies!"? Well, of course we couldn't; we'd have to arrange it independently, but it is feasible. You might be surprised how many independent non-state legal systems there are in the world, ones that are run privately and have zero legislative power, but they function through the willing cooperation of those involved. The majority of these are organized by close-knit religious communities such as the Beth Din network of Jewish courts and the qadi or the councils of the Shari'a, the orthodox law of Islam. The people who cooperate with these courts often do so because they believe their legal system is divine, a gift to humanity from God. However there is no way the ruling of these courts can ever be enforced by the law of the land; with the exception of those in theocracies like Saudi Arabia. We in the UFO/paranormal/conspiracy theory movement have mixed religious beliefs yet can we not all agree that philosophical justice is something divine even if we don't believe in God? What would happen in this hypothetical situation is that any member of the UFO/paranormal/conspiracy theory movement who believed that somebody else in the UFO/paranormal/conspiracy theory movement was a shill, or indeed had committed any other offence against the mission of the movement and the people within it, could present their case to the tribunal in the form of a prosecution. The accused could defend themselves in the same way and a verdict could be reached. It would all be very civilized and formal. The details of how the system would work fairly and effectively will have to be hashed out by a long and difficult process involving many people, and I will not suggest anymore notions at this juncture; I just want to consider the principle of the basic idea. Would it not be preferable to the kind of violent summary condemnation and disorganized and manipulative hysterical screeching that I discuss in the background links above and below? A formal tribunal system would mean that Eddie Boyce or Sacha Christie or Marie K etc could prove their allegations in a calm, professional atmosphere where actually real evidence could be tabled and debated rationally; as opposed to insults, lies and threats being tossed around on social media. I might ask the advice of Kevin Annett because he is the one member of the Truth community who has established a tribunal, albeit for another purpose, see: Of course, I am well aware that what I have suggested is nothing more than what I said it was when I first voiced my idea: a thought experiment. The establishment of our own system of "Truth law" will need everybody in our community to respect it and cooperate with it willingly; and that would be an extraordinarily difficult task. The age of the Truth mob will continue for some time to come. However a need might arise in the immediate post-Illuminati period when we will desperately require some method of preventing total societal collapse, and we in the Truth movement might be expected to take a lead by designing some form of organized judiciary and law enforcement process. It could be a choice between that or lynch mobs on the streets. When that time comes nobody will be quibbling in blog comments boxes about whether Larry Warren is a real UFO witness; our priorities will be about acquiring enough food, water and shelter to stay alive. As I've said before, when the Illuminati are gone, we won't all wake up suddenly one morning as priests of High Atlantis. We've become addicted to the Illuminati, like a drug or an abusive partner. There are no rehab clinics for us to check into, no domestic violence helplines; we'll have to do cold turkey. So why not start experimenting with ways of maintaining law-and-order now with ourselves, within our own community? See it as practice if you like; a trial run for when it will be needed on a larger scale. Think it over.


gordonissocoollike said...

You’re spot on substitute Troll for Shill it’s a label all to often applied to people disagreeing over when some UFO story is accurate or a fantastic tale . Almost everything has motives sells out or isxa publicity seeking narsisist X not me or you though . What is truth and who would define it . Especially when human emotion and Ego are involved . The idiot of today is the David Icke of tommorrow. It’s not plain sailing. . But yes. Let’s say that some people could be peace makers .

The Pheonix said...

Dear Sir, would you except an MBE if it were offered to you for services to Alternative Thinking? I am just curious so please excuse my flippancy. No, I think you are spot on with this blog as you are with every blog. Pleased you have started the final book in your Roswell Trilogy and I can't wait until you release it to the world.

All the very best for you good sir.

The Pheonix (Ego oriri. Ego dormivi. Et resurrexit.)

Ben Emlyn-Jones said...

Thanks, Gordon :-)

Ben Emlyn-Jones said...

Phoenix, thanks very much, but I can't see the Windsor Lizard sword-slapping the shoulders of people like me!

Flashing Blade said...

Hiya Ben. Congratulations my dear chap on the East Anglian UFO best ever speaker award. You must be thoroughly delighted. It is well earned I can tell you. I should imagine that you have a veritable mountain of similar accolades. It's only a matter of time before you have your own TV show presenting a show on the paranormal and UFOs. The demand is there, of that there is no doubt. I have some contacts in the higher echelons of the media and I shall be banging your drum very loudly indeed.

Well done you, very well done indeed dear chap