Now I understand. (I* think I do.)
There are two hypothesis:
First of all, we must see the obvious: Alfred Webre only interviews borderline personalities, and semi-professional charlatans.
The interviewed individuals are slanderous and totally unreliable. They can contradict themselves openly. They can write that the Pope sacrifices children in horrendous satanic rituals with the help of the Queen of England. They can lie about impossible conspiracies or promote the biggest monstrosities.
Anything goes in Alfred's interviews,but why?
 |
| Leo Taxil |
1) Alfred channelizes his old resentment against the world, and perhaps behind this hate we could find self-denial or a sense of failure.
2) Alfred is a new Leo Taxil. (Please see link below about Taxil.)
If this is so, sooner or latter, Webre will recognize the big joke, and will deny his theories and his "friends"
hoaxes and slanders.
hoaxes and slanders.
3) I do not think that Alfred Webre is a professional disinformer. These look for some reliability, some rationality, and this is NOT Alfred's style. He doesn't care about credibility at all.
Ilse Goldman
