[damien] and the blighting of bp part 1

Foreword This series of five posts may seem long and arduous but not nearly as long and arduous as the research for them. If you knew how many words, how many mails, how many posts I’ve read from beginning to end, trying to decide on the veracity of the material … It’s a fair question why I’d wish to do this. Well, the simple answer is that I have to. The issue has become so polarized now and has effectively split into three camps - those under Damien’s spell, those who won’t have a bar of him and those who have already compromised themselves and can’t afford to back out now. Longrider made the point that unless it affects real life, ignore it. Well yeah, that’s right but it’s still not nice to have a stalker who is, in the words of a fellow blogger this morning “gunning for you”. Polarizing individuals whose pleasure is to divide and rule do what they do best – to divide and rule and as this is now a fair accompli, the only thing left is to “out” the sordid mess. It was also communicated to me by a blogmate: “If you don’t do it now, the window of opportunity will pass.” So let’s do it. Introduction Another blogger recently wrote that it was going to take Damien actually killing someone for BP members [and the sphere as a whole] to wake up to what they have on their hands. Then they will run for cover, as it was they who kept him closely guarded within the group and defended him to the hilt, crying, “How was I to know?” It’s the same with anyone exposed in any organization, such as Jonathan Ross. Who then comes under the hammer for condoning his actions? His colleagues, bosses and supporters, of course. What is the process whereby people flatly refuse to believe what is before their eyes? Why did no one speak up in Nazi Germany’s early years? Why did they not speak up about Blair for so long? Why does no one say: “Hey, we were wrong. Let’s make amends”? The answer is that most people, not being politically obsessive, having their own agenda in life, wish to minimize someone else’s conflict in their lives and being basically both indifferent and trusting, leave themselves open to a fanatic, adept at presenting himself as a “regular guy”. In Damien’s own words: D---- calls me polished. Polished, because he knows me. Because he knows underneath that layer, I CAN be pretty cold booded and ruthless. Hey, I'm a salesman. Of COURSE I'm good. Think about it. Would a company pay me what they pay me if I wasn't???? Look, I'm good. Don't deny it. Damn good salesman. And I can't teach what I do. I can't. Of COURSE I have a strategy- the attack and lull strategy- but no matter how hard I try, no trainee can pick it up, you can either do what I do- you was born to do it- or you can't. What wins is walking in thinking 'I'm going to close you down, mate. I'm going to cut off your options and you WILL do what I want.' I'm fairly blatant in my work. It;s WHY I'm the best. 'EVERYONE can be cozened or cowed, just pick your tool, but don't fuck up, because it really is, either or.' Damien plays the Lothario with middle-aged woman who like to be pampered and then he plays the all round John Bull with the English blogger. He’s the super-intelligent philosopher with young girls who know little of life, a messianic figure whose turn of phrase they admire. The reason he can’t be stopped is partly that but also that anyone who blows the whistle on such a person usually does so in the early stages, when the evidence is still sketchy, though the indicators are loud and clear. It gives him a chance to counterattack and start his own vilification campaign behind the scenes. With the onus entirely on the accuser, with the accusation seemingly unbelievable and weird, with Damien able to play the injured innocent, claiming he is the victim of “a bizarre vendetta”, in his own words, he can make the accuser look like a most unpleasant person with a chip on his shoulder or at the very least, someone who’s taken leave of his senses. It must happen in police work all the time. On top of this, if one of the accusers is prone to writing from the heart instead of her head, when she has been subject to emotional abuse, [and I have seen all the material on this from both sides], then she can be seen to be [by outsiders] her own worst enemy in the way she goes about it, however justified she is. She attacks with righteous anger but the Damiens of the world can sit back, secure in the knowledge that she will alienate the people she most needs to convince. What she says could well be true but most people will shut it out. Only certain people will think [and I’m sorry to employ the cliché] out of the box and look further. The others will become deaf to any evidence, any argument. They will side with the party who seems the most “reasonable”. That is human nature. They’ll look at the selection of material against her and draw immediate conclusions, supported by Damien’s own reinforcement techniques, key words, key repeated phrases and though he is obsessed, they don’t reach that critical knife edge necessary to fully evaluate ALL the evidence on both sides. There is one other factor. As he is forever going back and removing things from posts which could incriminate him, it’s like trying to pin down fluid. As a fellow blogger said today: “So you will never see the bit about getting someone to kill himself or about his friends must be subservient to him. It’s all been removed. What you will see is his niceness to other bloggers.” It’s hard to explain.