crusade

In this book we paint an unprecedented portrait of Britain__ first __alse memory_ retraction and show that, like other __alse memory_ cases which appeared in the public domain, memory itself was always a false trail _ these women never forgot. We are not challenging people__ right to tell their own story and then to change it. But we do assert that the chance should be interpreted in the context that created it.Thousands of accounts of sexual and physical abuse in childhood cannot be explained by a pseudo-scientific __yndrome_. We have been shifted to the wrong debate, a debate about the malignancy of survivors and their allies, rather than those who have hurt them. That__ why the arguments have become so elusive. [_]

Another preoccupation fed into this dynamic relationship between discovery and denial: does sexual abuse actually matter? Should it, in fact, be allowed? After all, it was only in the 19070s that the Paedophile Information Exchange had argued for adults_ right to have sex with children _ or rather by a slippery sleight of word, PIE inverted the imperative by arguing that children should have the right to have sex with adults. This group had been disbanded after the imprisonment of Tom O__arroll, its leader, with some of its activists bunkered in Holland__ paedophile enclaves, only to re-appear over the parapets in the sex crime controversies of the 1990s. How recent it was, then, that paedophilia was fielded as one of the liberation movements, how many of those on the left and right of the political firmament, were _ and still are _ persuaded that sex with children is merely another case for individual freedom?Few people in Britain at the turn of the century publicly defend adults_ rights to sex with children. But some do, and they are to be found nesting in the coalition crusading against evidence of sexual suffering. They have learned from the 1970s, masked their intentions and diverted attention on to __he system_. Others may not have come out for paedophilia but they are apparently content to enter into political alliances with those who have. We believe that this makes their critique of survivors and their allies unreliable. Others genuinely believe in false memories, but may not be aware of the credentials of some of their advisors.

(Talking about the movement to deny the prevalence and effects of adult sexual exploitation of children)So what does this movement consist of? Who are the movers and shakers? Well molesters are in it, of course. There are web pages telling them how to defend themselves against accusations, to retain confidence about their __oving and natural_ feelings for children, with advice on what lawyers to approach, how to complain, how to harass those helping their children. Then there__ the Men__ Movements, their web pages throbbing with excitement if they find __roof_ of conspiracy between feminists, divorcing wives and therapists to victimise men, fathers and husbands.Then there are journalists. A few have been vitally important in the US and Britain in establishing the fightback, using their power and influence to distort the work of child protection professionals and campaign against children__ testimony. Then there are other journalists who dance in and out of the debates waggling their columns behind them, rarely observing basic journalistic manners, but who use this debate to service something else _ a crack at the welfare state, standards, feminism, __ouchy, feely, post-Diana victimhood_. Then there is the academic voice, landing in the middle of court cases or inquiries, offering __ational authority_. Then there is the government. During the entire period of discovery and denial, not one Cabinet minister made a statement about the prevalence of sexual abuse or the harm it caused.Finally there are the __etractors_. For this movement to take off, it had to have __uman interest_ victims _ the accused _ and then a happy ending _ the __etractors_. We are aware that those __etractors_ whose parents trail them to newspapers, television studios and conferences are struggling. Lest we forget, they recanted under palpable pressure.

Reflective learning provokes critical thinking, enabling us to pose relevant questions, revealing the profound oceans of ignorance that surround even the most learned scholars in our fields of modern knowledge, invoking us to be active participants in the crusade for equality, representation, and social justice.

What is the truth?_ he asked. __e place faith in ourselves,_ replied Altaïr (...) __e see the world as it really is, and hope that one day all mankind might see the same.___hat is the world, then?___n illusion,_ replied Altaïr. __ne we can either submit to _ as most do _ or transcend.___nd what is it to transcend?_'To recognize that laws arise not from divinity, but reason. I understand now that our Creed does not command us to be free._ And suddenly he really did understand. __t commands us to be wise

Only a mind free of impediment is capable of grasping the chaotic beauty of the world. This is our greatest asset.

These bits of paper are covered with lies. They poison your minds. And so long as they exist, you cannot hope to see the world as it truly is.(...)You turn to them for answers and salvation. (...) You rely more upon them than upon yourselves. This makes you weak and stupid. You trust in words. Drops of ink. Do you ever stop to think of who put them there? Or why? No. You simply accept their words without question. And what if those words speak falsely, as they often do? This is dangerous.

Religion is the most powerful entity on earth. A phenomenon that has conscripted millions to give or sacrifice their lives without so much as a minuscule query about their chosen beliefs or particular ideology. And today thousands of years on despite the huge advent, discovery and the advance of science forensic or otherwise, millions are still prepared and equipped to fall or kill in the name of their God, their Holy Scriptures, their messengers, their prophets and their faith_.