Monday, September 28, 2015

West Point Cadet Accuses ClassMate of Rape 30 Years After

Susan Shannon first alleged that she was sexually assaulted by Army Colonel Wil Riggins in 1986 while they were both cadets on her blog in 2013

Colonel sues West Point classmate who claims he raped her 30 years ago in blog that led to end of his career

  • Susan Shannon claims she was raped by army Colonel Wil Riggins in 1986
  • Former cadet waited 30 years to speak because of army's 'code of silence'
  • She made the allegations against her former classmate on a blog in 2013
  • But Riggins denies claims saying they've cost him a promotion to general
  • He has now launched a multi-million defamation lawsuit to clear his name
from Daily Mail online 
27 September 2015
A retired army colonel is suing his former West Point classmate for more than $2million after he says her 30-year-old rape claims cost him a promotion.
Susan Shannon first alleged that she was sexually assaulted by Army Colonel Wil Riggins in 1986, while they were both cadets, on her blog in 2013. She says she waited three decades to come forward about her experience because of the army's 'code of silence'.
But Riggins, who vehemently denies the claims, said the 'false' allegations had cost him a sparkling military career.
Army Colonel Wil Riggins (right) is suing his former West Point classmate Susan Shannon (left) for more than $2million after he says her claims that he raped her 30 years ago cost him a promotion
The combat veteran from Alexandria had been on the cusp of being appointed to general in 2013, when Army leaders saw Shannon's rape allegation on her blog.

His promotion was snatched away and Riggins says his name was dragged through the mud after 'Susan Shannon decided to play judge and jury on her own.'

The decorated colonel denies all claims, telling ABC 7 On Your Side: 'I did not rape Susan Shannon. I did not sexually assault Susan Shannon. Every aspect of (her) story is verifiably false.'

This is a very strong denial.  He not only issues the singular Reliable Denial, but in the case where "rape" may be debated, or changed to another allegation, he goes on to clarify:  "I did not sexually assault Susan Shannon."

this is to deny even an altered allegation.   


Now he is mounting a multi-million dollar cases against his accuser -  which experts on survivors of sexual assault warn could have a 'chilling' effect on whether future victims come forward.
Riggins is seeking more than $2million in damages to his career and reputation after he says he 'never got a day in court' to defend himself. 
However, Shannon's attorney Ben Trichilo said his client had one, simple defense - 'the truth.'
Susan Shannon (pictured, as a cadet) alleges that she was sexually assaulted by Army Colonel Wil Riggins in 1986 while they were both cadets at West Point
Susan Shannon alleges that she was sexually assaulted by Army Colonel Wil Riggins (pictured as a cadet) in 1986 while they were both cadets at West Point
Susan Shannon (left, as a cadet) alleges that she was sexually assaulted by Army Colonel Wil Riggins (right, as a cadet) in 1986 while they were both cadets at West Point
Shannon said she had finally been inspired to speak about her alleged experience after reading about several high profile convictions for sexual assaults in the military.
Despite the law suit she now faces, she said she does not regret coming forward.
'Frankly the day I started saying his name was the day I started blaming him instead of myself, she told ABC 7 On Your Side
'I didn't ask for this day. I'm being forced into a courtroom,' Shannon said, 'It's costing me and my family pretty much all that we have saved. I knew that risk when I wrote it and I don't regret it a day.'
She says she is planning to fight the law suit, not only for herself, but for all other victims of sexual assault.
Shannon alleges she was raped by her former cadet classmate at the United States Military Academy in New York in 1986. She dropped out shortly afterwards.
Now a jewelry designer and a mother living on the West Coast, she added that the pressure in the army to keep quiet and not turn in her peers meant that she did not even report the alleged rape at her exit interview. 
'There was no way I was going to report that. The blame would fall squarely on me,' she said, adding she had only told a few friends at the time.
Shannon alleges she was raped by her former cadet classmate at the United States Military Academy in New York (file picture)
Shannon alleges she was raped by her former cadet classmate at the United States Military Academy in New York (file picture)
She made the claims on her blog Short Little Rebel in 2013 -  which followed the announcement that Colonel Riggins had been nominated for general.
Shannon denies having any knowledge of his nomination until she was contacted by Army officials investigating her blog post.
Riggins was 'euphoric' after his nomination but his joy was not to last long after he was hauled in front of the Army's Criminal Investigations Division for questioning and had his DNA and fingerprints taken at Fort Myer in Arlington.
While investigators were not able to prove or disprove Shannon's claims, Riggins' pending nomination was pushed to Promotion Review Board.
Despite the board declaring Riggins 'fully qualified for promotion', army documents obtained by ABC 7 show Secretary of the army John McHugh still decided to cancel his promotion. Army officials refused to confirm why the colonel's name was pulled from the promotion list.
But Riggins, who feels he has been 'abandoned' by the army, believes the secretary was simply not willing to risk his reputation defending him. 
The decorated colonel has now filed the multi-million dollar defamation lawsuit, claiming it was 'the only avenue left to me to clear my name.'
Both parties, who will argue whether the sex was consensual or rape, will meet in a Fairfax County courtroom.

81 comments:

lynda said...

Until the LAST sentence of this article, I noticed he had strong denials regarding rape and sexual assault but he did not deny ever having sex with her. I knew right in the beginning of article that they had had a sexual relationship.

'Frankly the day I started saying his name was the day I started blaming him instead of myself, she told ABC 7 On Your Side. 'I didn't ask for this day. I'm being forced into a courtroom,' Shannon said, 'It's costing me and my family pretty much all that we have saved. I knew that risk when I wrote it and I don't regret it a day.'

Frankly- need to persuade that she is telling the truth. She uses the "I" pronoun so there is no distance language or lack of commitment to her statement yet says, "I didn't ask for this day. I'm being forced into a courtroom." My feeling is that yes, she did "ask" for this day, she wanted her day, and she got it by naming him openly in a blog. She is "forced" into courtroom, strong language and reaffirms to listener that again, she is being "forced" by this man to do something she doesnt want to do or didn't want to happen. I am unsure whether this was a calculated move on her part, it is hard to imagine that it was a coincidence that her naming him coincided with his intended promotion. She brings closeness with family by saying it is costing her and her family money. Her family is helping financially supporting her in her answering of this lawsuit with money "saved". Not money they have, but money they "saved". She dropped out shortly after the alleged incident and did not speak of it for 30 years. She has not brought a lawsuit against HIM, or a counterclaim against his lawsuit thusfar.

My thoughts at this point (and I could be WAY off of course) is that they had a consenting sexual relationship, he broke it off, ending the relationship in a hurtful way to her,they had sex one more time after breakup. she left because of it, but has never quite gotten over break-up and coincidentally posted a blog when he was up for promotion. I think she was not raped (though I am open to the possibility that she thinks she was) and that 30 years later her reality is that she WAS.

rob said...

I totally agree with your last paragraph. She must have been keeping track of him and his career all this time, and when the big promotion was about to happen, she decided to get him back for whatever slight she felt. Kinda reminds me of Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill.
As a woman, all I can say is that all claims of abuse are not real. A man should not be punished because he was young and dumb, or because he dumped you.
I say ask both to submit to a polygraph and see who backs down first.
I also agree, that if he is guilty, he does not deserve to be further promoted in the military.

Peter Hyatt said...

I fully expect the word "left" to be found in her original statement (somewhere early on).

I have done many statements of rape in which the man has been seen deceptive, but a few like these where his denial is reliable.

She must have burned in bitterness for a long time, and perhaps experienced a recent failure in life that caused the envy to surface and destroy him.

Off topic,

I am interested in opinions on this documentary. It is powerful:

http://10news.dk/?p=1841#comment-9434

I thought of myself as informed, but the scope is broader than I have known, or have understood even from those on the ground who have contacted me.

Peter

Peter Hyatt said...

PS

I did not comment on consensual sex. I assumed that readers recognized that.

John mcgowan said...

In this short clip from YT Colonel Wil Riggins denial is diffirant from what has been reported in Daily Mail online.

Hes says:

"I never raped Susan Shannon. I didn't sexually assault Susan Shannon.

The first denial is unreliable, although, it could be true. The word "never" however, is not a substitute for "did not". It is less stressful for liars to employ the word "never". It avoids a specific time. The second is noted as reliable as it contains all 3 components of a reliable denial. First person singular, connecting himself to the event. Past tense "didn't, and the specific allegation. This is only a short clip and he may have issued a reliable denial before this and or after.

John mcgowan said...

Link to the above:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Na5XlLUI168

John mcgowan said...

Exclusive: Retired Virginia Army Colonel sues woman accusing him of rape
BY JOCE STERMAN, ABC 7 NEWS FRIDAY


SEPTEMBER 25TH 2015


Again it reports here that he said "I did not rape Susan Shannon" in the written article, but he clearly says in the VT "I never raped Susan Shannon, every aspect of that story is verifiably false."

John mcgowan said...

Oops. Here is the link to the above again, lol

http://wjla.com/features/7-on-your-side/exclusive-retired-virginia-army-colonel-denies-rape-allegations

lynda said...

John...I wonder if he worded it "I DID NOT rape Susan Shannon because while they were having consensual sex, and probably a "one time after break-up sex" it was still consensual..so he NEVER raped her during their sexual relationship. I think I may have said this wrong, do you get what I'm trying to say? lol

lynda said...

I take your point also..good catch

Juliet said...

Here is the Short Little Rebel's blog post in which she made the rape claim:

https://shortlittlerebel.wordpress.com/2013/07/15/the-rape-of-a-female-cadet-at-west-point/

She sounds bitter and rather jealous of her female 'Queen Bee' peers - she has obviously had regrets that she left the military. She says West Point was a lonely place for her. It turns out the guy was dating someone else at the time of the alleged rape, to whom he is now married. She says she found his Facebook, which he shared with his wife, and posted her allegations on it. I think she's using him as a hook on a which to lay the responsibility for her failed military career - there are several reasons why she left, but discovering he had a girlfriend may have been the final straw.

"Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned, Nor hell a fury like a woman scorned" .?

Sometimes - not all women are like that.

Juliet said...

Here is the Short Little Rebel's blog post in which she made the rape claim:

https://shortlittlerebel.wordpress.com/2013/07/15/the-rape-of-a-female-cadet-at-west-point/

She sounds bitter and rather jealous of her female 'Queen Bee' peers - she has obviously had regrets that she left the military. She says West Point was a lonely place for her. It turns out the guy was dating someone else at the time of the alleged rape, to whom he is now married. She says she found his Facebook, which he shared with his wife, and posted her allegations on it. I think she's using him as a hook on a which to lay the responsibility for her failed military career - there are several reasons why she left, but discovering he had a girlfriend may have been the final straw. IShe's done her research on rape in the military and hedged her bets on that.

"Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned, Nor hell a fury like a woman scorned" .?

Sometimes - not all women are like that.

Juliet said...

I can't delete the first, the second is the post intended.

lynda said...

Juliet...Good Lord, no wonder he is suing her! This confirms she is a woman scorned for me. She gives us all (Particularly REAL rape victims) a bad name, setting back the social awareness we've achieved and reinforcing the backward mentality and prejudice that still exists. Ugh.

Rob..I do have to say that I personally, consider Clarence Thomas a pig and a liar. I have never seen any SA done on the hearings but I have no doubt he did the things she stated. When he pulled the "black man lynching" card, that sealed it for me.

lynda said...

I read the entire thing and her comment section. Wow. She states she was unconscious from drinking and that the only reason she knew she was raped was because of the "evidence" left behind. How does she even no it was HIM if she was unconscious? That is a bizarre statement to me..she admits that she had blacked out and "woke" with the evidence. I;m sure his lawyers are jumping on that statement. She also goes into great detail about what she has "lost" because of his lawsuit and that she will become ALL our champion! I would not be surprised if a public funding site goes up. Her statement is all over the place. Curious she does mention unnecessarily that she had no place to go when she left because her mother told her not to come home if she quit WP. She uses persuasive language quite a bit. I'm sticking with my original assessment, she wasn't raped and thusfar, has not admitted that i know of that they even had a sexual relationship, she makes it sound as if it was a "stranger" rape.

lynda said...

On AB7onyourside, she stated she told a few friends at the time..on her blog she states she told NO ONE.

Anonymous said...

Peter, you are extremely ill informed, a characteristic that makes you a good teacher of a specialized subject. However, those taking these classes know how to use the knowledge to dupe the teacher. Hence, the foot in the mouth syndrome.

Not to slam you, but that's what's happening. You take a written piece by a "journalist" and assume it is the gospel.

...She must have burned in bitterness for a long time, and perhaps experienced a recent failure in life that caused the envy to surface and destroy him." (The onslaught of Vietnam era movies during the '80s prompted many suicides. Yes, seeing a movement on TV that could have saved them in a past could cause someone to speak out.)

...She gives us all (Particularly REAL rape victims) a bad name, setting back the social awareness we've achieved and reinforcing the backward mentality and prejudice that still exists. Ugh." by anon lynda-jealous her rape wasn't broadcast on national TV.

...Kinda reminds me of Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill.
As a woman, all I can say is that all claims of abuse are not real. A man should not be punished because he was young and dumb, or because he dumped you. " by rob (keep it up, new research is always needed to confirm the obvious).

Juliet said...

Lynda - it would be bad if he did have sex with her while she was unconscious, and if he already had a girlfriend she didn't know about - no angels in this story, I don't think. The timing makes it seem like spite, though - along with the rise of the idea that women should no longer be considered in any way responsible for allowing themselves to become so drunk that they aren't capable of giving consent, while men, however drunk and stupid they become, are somehow always considered capable of making sober rational choices. Of course it's terrible to take advantage of a drunk or unconscious woman - I'm not suggesting that it isn't, but here we see so many young women put themselves into that situation, frequently with wealthy footballers rather than the unemployed guy down the road, so it can be hard not to see the £ signs in their eyes. Just thinking that what might have seemed shameful, and a poor reflection upon her character at the time, might look a lot more like an opportunity to her now. She was finding her career choice difficult for various reasons, and she disappointed herself and her parents by dropping out - she acted in haste, has regretted it ever since, and seeing her contemporaries succeed where she failed is an ongoing source of bitterness to her - so she focused blame on the love-interest gone wrong, because it was that humiliation which gave her a reason other than herself, to quit. I can see she might hold some resentment towards him, if he used and made a fool of her whilst knowing she had a romantic interest in him (did she?) - but to do that to him, and thirty years on? It looks like revenge, to me.

rob said...

I agree that some women/girls have a hard time coming forward with charges of sexual abuse. In the Cosby case, many were encouraged by the fact that so many others had come fwd, so now, maybe people would believe them.
I just question, when many years later, just when the accused is about to be given a promotion, a higher position, THEN the 'victim' feels it is the correct time to come forward. In the Clarence Thomas case, it was national news. The average person wouldn't have known about this particular promotion, unless they make an effort to follow the others life.

Anonymous said...

Is that an admission of guilt?

Anonymous said...

I don't know if I would have come forward or not in the Cosby case. I do believe that these women, or most of them, were either raped while under the influence of drugs or felt they were coerced into allowing him to dally with them due to his false promises and the advancement of their careers. Either way it was a form of rape. IMO, it is at long last time for him to pay.

In this case, I probably would have kept my mouth shut 'til kingdom come, whether it was rape or had initially been consensual sex. Who among us has not been coerced in one way or another at some time in our lives? Probably most of us. The trick is, FORGET about it, move on with your OWN life and never speak of it again. I promise you, consider the source, it WILL go away. Apparently she refused to do this and THAT is not normal if one wants to have a successful and peaceful life.

This is little different than me going after the member of the Blackwood Brothers Quartet who tried to rape me when I was fifteen years old. It was on a dark lonely country road. He was supposed to be dropping me off at my home after appearing and singing at our church services that evening, instead he drove me down onto a long country road and tried to rape me. I fought and fought him, finally feeling a bottle lying on the floor of the car and started hitting him with it in his back and the back of his head.

Finally I was able to get out from under him and out of the car. I ran and ran in weeds and briars and shrubs, as he slowly followed behind me trying to talk me into getting back into the car for the next two miles in the dark on the way back to my home. I have despised every member of any male quartet ever since then, and I probably could have had him charged with attempted rape, and every time one of them died in more recent years, I hoped it was him; but I knew that it was best for my own mental health to forget about it and move on. I did. IMO, she should have. She has nothing to gain nor has she had all these years other than bitterness. Such a loss. ABB

Anonymous said...

As to the Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas case; I believe every word she said. This low-life b'stard should NEVER have been appointed. He isn't fit to lick her shoes.

This was a horror story for her. I just hope she has done well with her life. ABB

lynda said...

Anon @ 11:55 AM says..

She gives us all (Particularly REAL rape victims) a bad name, setting back the social awareness we've achieved and reinforcing the backward mentality and prejudice that still exists. Ugh." by anon lynda-jealous her rape wasn't broadcast on national TV

You need to clarify this statement for me before I give a response. Are you saying I am jealous or she is jealous?

Anonymous said...

what year was that ABB?

Anonymous said...

Anon @at 8:35 PM

That is the most pathological post I have ever read anywhere, on any site, and that includes the comment section on TMZ. Do you even use Statement analysis?

Anonymous said...

ABB, what do you think about the Men's Rights Movement?

BallBounces said...

I understand the strong denial:"'I did not rape Susan Shannon. I did not sexually assault Susan Shannon."

What I don't get is the next sentence: "Every aspect of (her) story is verifiably false.'"

If he is using the word verifiable in the usual sense, how can every aspect of her story be verified as false after 30 years? Maybe he's just using the word as an intensifier and not in a literal sense. Still, it troubles me and seems a stretch.

Anonymous said...

Anon @10:14, you are sorely lacking in the knowledge of the principals and practices of statement analysis, otherwise, you would recognize that I am not pathological or dishonest in any way. I am probably the most honest person I have ever known, but you are too jaded in your demonic jealousies to recognize it. I have urged you before; read the Psalms and Proverbs and find yourself there.

Do I even use statement analysis? Yes, very much so. However, probably as much in astuteness, the fundamentals of psychology, and common sense application as I do in the practice of statement analysis. May I ask, where is yours?

Anon @10:38, I am not thoroughly familiar with the men's rights movement. What exactly is their creed of endeavor?

ABB

Lemon said...

". . . you are sorely lacking in the knowledge of the principals (sic) and practices of statement analysis, otherwise, you would recognize that I am not pathological or dishonest in any way. I am probably the most honest person I have ever known, but you are too jaded in your demonic jealousies to recognize it."
- A(BB) @10:54

I would like us all to take a moment and bask in the glory that is Statement Analysis.
That is all. Carry on.

horse chestnut said...

No, I dont think she is lying. His reliable denial was misquoted. Peter you dont have enough sample to call it, do you? Please read her blog post. I think he did rape her and is now trying to Lance Armstrong her into silence.

lime soda said...

"Their creed of endeavor"?
Sweet jesus...

horse chestnut said...

Stop! Everyone stop! Peter could you please look at his denial now that we know he was misquoted? Can we all stop bashing this woman until we know? How is it unreasonable that she feel angry and his promotion tapped into some deep feelings and exacerbated her sense of victimization from being raped? Of course it would. If he raped her and she felt forced out and then thirty yearz later to see him being celebrated?! Come on. Everyone on here would be traumatized too. If you say you wouldnt then one of us is lying and the other one is me.

Juliet said...

Peter - I watched the documentary, marathon viewing effort as it turned out to be.bI found there was more than an element of scaremongering, and that while there was some attempt to explore the reasons why some young (ghettoised) Muslims feel alienated and excluded from the free societies they are supposed to belong to, it seemed the underlying intention was to create or increase fear and suspicion of the Muslims of Europe in general. I thought it had echoes of the 'reds under the bed' propaganda of an earlier era. I didn't find his approach to be constructive - to my mind it served mainly to reinforce the idea, as indeed was presented, that the guy in his white robes standing outside the mosque (or anywhere) is quite likely to be considered first as a terrorist and only possibly as a Muslim going peacefully to or from his Friday prayers. I think the documentary would add to the stress of those who have to live with the psychological degradation of knowing they are constantly regarded with suspicion by at least some non Muslims who pass them by, or who avoid passing them by on the street. I wonder what that might do to a person's self-esteem, and how it cannot cause anger and resentment when an entire community feels itself to be considered as a menace on account of the actions of a minority.

I don't much rate the documentary - it's not helpful to the vast majority of European Muslims, who live peaceful quiet lives, who bother no-one, and who have come to live here precisely because they don't want to live under Sharia law and extremist regimes. They have my sympathy for finding themselves so negatively portrayed on account of the disaffected minority who are attempting to influence their children towards that which they, or their own parents, were glad to leave behind.

I thought one or other of these links might be of interest to you or anyone who is viewing the documentary - there's a lot of material there - I have not read it all:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/19/british-muslims-driven-to-extremism-alienated-at-home

http://www.radicalisationresearch.org/about/

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/396030/preventing-violent-extremism-systematic-review.pdf

Juliet said...

On a personal note, I find myself neighboured by a Cathedral on one side, and by a Mosque and Islamic education centre (Shia) on the other, with just a few houses between - quiet neighbours, everyone goes peacefully about their business -there is no Muslim call to prayer, the cathedral bells ring on Sundays and once during the week for bell-ringing practise. A fair number of Muslims live in the neighbourhood, and have been here for decades - we're newcomers to them. The mosque sends us a Christmas card, which is a great courtesy - it's nice that they acknowledge the significance the festival holds for us, and want us to know they send their good wishes. It's good to know one is surrounded by the prayers of the faithful - I don't mind which brand. We have more than half a dozen mosques in the area, and rather more churches. Not so long ago the respective leaders and imams in the mosques preached at Friday prayers against extremism, as some known extremist youths had come in from the next city, where they do have a problem, and were spotted leafleting and engaging with young people here - it's a great worry for Muslims, the majority then, that their children may become radicalised. I find it very concerning that people who are Muslim are often being demonised through subtle and not so subtle means, when most of them, like most of us, aspire to live good lives and want only good futures for their children.

Anonymous said...

Hmmmm..... stumbled on this "analysis" which is quite interesting.
https://liberalmormon.wordpress.com/2014/12/28/a-problematic-case-involving-susan-shannon/

Juliet said...

BallBounces - I agree, 'verifiable' is troubling. More, it's plain stupid, unless he is able to produce evidence that he was not there at the time of the alleged rape. The accuser said on her blog that when she was going through the formalities of leaving the military she was asked by a psychologist if she had been raped. Perhaps her answer to that is in her records. I wonder if that would maybe serve as adequate 'verification'.

John mcgowan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
John mcgowan said...

JULY 21, 2013


The Rape of a Female Cadet- Part II

https://shortlittlerebel.wordpress.com/2013/07/21/the-rape-of-a-female-cadet-part-ii/

Facebook

https://www.facebook.com/shortlittlerebel?fref=ufi

Anonymous said...

Lemon @ 11:45; I stand corrected in my misspelling of the use of the word "principles". You are correct, in my haste I misspelled it. SOo, shoot me.

There you go again, brown nosing. I wouldn't exactly think of "basking in the glory of statement analysis", however, I do see it as having a lot of merit in this world of class-act liars and crafty suck ups.

Anon @10:36 asked what do I think about the "mens rights movement" to which I responded that I was not thoroughly familiar with it and asked what is their creed of endeavor. For this lime soda (probably the same previous poster under a different fake guise) gave me the smirk "sweet Jesus"...

For this I have two comments; 1) Jesus IS sweet, thank you; and, 2) every well organized organization has a creed and an endeavor to accomplish it. It is reasonable to ask what this is, which I did since I am not familiar with it.

HOWEVER, this thread is NOT about me and it is not about any mens civil rights movement. It is about the woman who has been stewing in bitterness for 30 years over (she claims) having been raped by another cadet. Maybe she was and maybe I would too had it happened to me. Since I have never been raped, per'se, I merely pointed out an instance when I certainly almost was and how I moved on.

I did not say that I 'would' have been able to move on had I actually been raped. I would like to think that I COULD and would be able to move on in an effort to put it behind me and be able to lead a more normal life. That was the point I was making. In the end, I think it would depend on the circumstances of the rape. However, I certainly CAN see a situation where one might want to get their revenge when they finally get their opportunity, but to live in bitterness over it for thirty years to such an extent that they cannot even make a success of their own life?

Whether she actually WAS raped, I do not know. It seems there are some questions as to how dishonest the rapist cadet has been, and continues to be. I have not walked a mile in her shoes. If she wants it explored, whether out of revenge or not; in my opinion, she has every right to do so. She DID pay a high price for it and apparently will continue too. Let the chips fall where they may. ABB

Anonymous said...

OT: Peter, when you get around to it, and more time has elapsed and more statements have been made; would you consider doing an analysis of Donald Trumps statement; Headlines in the NYDN this morning: "Trump makes wild claim of 42% unemployment." In his video statement he gives cause for making this statement and estimates the figures to be anywhere between 30 and 42%, some of it based on projections of financial analysts and some his own calculations.

I am betting that he is right on the money! I have experience in finance in connection with my career of 35+ years and I can see exactly where he's coming from. It occurred to me several years ago that we were being lied too about our 'low' unemployment rates, also watching as numbers jump of monthly/annual job and employment increases, which indicates that our economy is moving right along just fine when it isn't; my son and I decided to do our own research.

The figures being thrown at us are those figures taken from the employment and unemployment rolls, reflecting ONLY those who register as being unemployed and those who obtain a job during a certain time frame. They do NOT allow for those receiving disability checks, unemployment subsidies unless they drop from the rolls, those receiving welfare, early and late retirees who are receiving retirement and social security benefits, those in prison, those living in their parents basement who aren't registered anywhere, prostitutes who live by their wits, or any others who are being financially supported or subsidized by someone else and are NOT registered as seeking employment.

Here's what we came up with: Everyone who is over the age of eighteen and is not a full time student and does not have either a part time or full time job is unemployed. This does not include immigrants. (There are no reliable numbers of immigrants who work for cash under the table). This DOES include stay-at-home housewives and house-husbands who are physically and mentally able to work, unless they are caretaker of another incapicated individual. We could only estimate these.

It includes ALL of our otherwise unemployed adults who receive government issued monthly checks who are adding nothing to the economy by way of gainful employment which produces an income, therefore they are taking FROM the economy rather than adding to it. NONE of these recipients are included in our vastly misleading employment/unemployment percentages. We are talking truly able bodied adults.

We allowed a guesstimate percentage for exclusion of those who are elderly retired and are physically unable to work and those who are incapacitated in their homes or an institution and those in mental institutions, but not those in prisons who ARE able to work. MY/OUR numbers came up to over 40% of our adult U.S. American population who do NOT work and have no viable income of their own that they earned by the labor of their own hands. They HAVE no job.

Those who do not receive adequate monthly retirement checks based on their prior earnings are looking to others to support/subsidize them. It is so simple to distinguish how we arrived at this figure. Yes indeedy; at least 40% of our U.S. American citizens ARE unemployed. They are nonproducing for whatever reason they justify it. I get it. If you are not gainfully employed and are physically and/or mentally able to work, then you are among the unemployed; and THIS totals more than 40%. And THAT'S a fact. ABB


Anonymous said...

Why don't you start a blog for Trump, ABB. You could call it "Stumping 4 Trump" and give him all the calculations you 'came up with" that have been out for a couple of years now.

Did you vote for Obama?

Didn't you push Shillary Clinton too, before Statement Analysis blew that for you?

Anonymous said...

ABB has a lot of potent "quotable s" embedded in its information based text. What website would one expect to see excerpts from Bartlett's or philosophy garnered from lyrics?

Anonymous said...

Houston, we have a problem:

kxan.com/ap/boy-14-charged-in-death-of-his-pregnan...

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/exas-man-21-impregnates-11-year-old-girl-repeatedly-raping-article-1.1294787

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/12/10-year-old-girl-jailed-charged-raping-4-year-old-boy-houston-texas_n_3744778.html

http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/10/09/17-year-old-kills-his-mother-and-sister-calls-911-to-turn-himself-in/

Anonymous said...

Anon @10:41. My post was to PETER, not you. However; okay, will respond....

Trump wouldn't need my calculations. He would already have better ones than I do. Mine were done simply off the top of my head; he used a few financial analysts.

Did I vote for Obama? No, I didn't but would have had I made it to the pols; he already had more than 51% of the vote without mine anyhow. HOWEVER, I and many more like me have been very disappointed that he has not done a better job when he could have, or that he did nothing to help heal race relations in this country, in fact, has made them worse. I gave up even reading about him a long time ago.

I have been a lifelong democrat and in some ways I still am, but am actually a registered independent; having only once voted republican and that was for Regan, which I very much came to regret because HE is the one who destroyed higher education social security benefits for dependent children of the widowed, whose deceased parent HAD earned those benefits. I said then that I would never vote republican again; THEN watching alcoholic GWB destroy our economy single-handedly was the icing on the cake.

Yes, I have been all for Hillary (and Bill, in the hope they might be able to help to reestablish some calm and upward movement to our economy), until I began to see so many of her lies and deceptions; which, I AM grateful to Peter for bringing forth the obvious that I had a tendency to overlook. Now I definitely DO lean towards supporting Trump, who DOES have a handle on the economy, is sharp, capable and could make some actual progress in bringing this country back to its' strengths of long ago.

But does it even matter what I think or do? Absolutely not. Nor does it make any difference what YOU think. Nah... not one iota. I suggest you row your own boat and don't worry about mine..... alrighty? Thank you! ABB

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @ 12:14, Houston; Goodness. Such awful things going on.... Awful. Thank you for updating the news. All very sad. ...Pathetic. ABB

Anonymous said...

" I have despised every member of any male quartet ever since then, and I probably could have had him charged with attempted rape, and every time one of them died in more recent years, I hoped it was him"

"I knew that it was best for my own mental health to forget about it and move on. I did."

Well, which one is it?

Lis said...

I was uneasy right away with the term 'short little rebel.' It seems both defensive and aggressive at the same time.

She can't spell 'soldier'

This statement:
"I felt the need to tell the story about a rape of a solider I personally know: that solider is me."

Her statements make me uneasy. One reason is that she seeks to imply things without specifically stating them. She wants the reader to read a certain meaning but she doesn't clearly state it.

For instance, please note that she does not say in her post that after she had passed out from drinking too much, she found "the evidence" that she had been raped when she awoke- she merely suggests to other women that this can happen if one drinks to excess with ones' 'buddies'. Is this what happened to her? She does not clearly say so.

I find it problematic that she apparently checked into reporting this rape officially but decided against it (she's 'not sure why') yet chose to pursue damaging this man's life unofficially, through social media, which she reports felt 'satisfying' to her. There would be requirements for bringing a case officially which would not exist in social media. One could accuse someone out of the blue with no evidence whatever.

Perhaps Riggins uses the term "verifiably false" in reference to statements that can be checked, such as:

"I called West Point (several years ago) and found out that hundreds of women cadets are now reporting rapes that happened while I was there- almost 25 years later."

Personally, I find it hard to believe that hundreds of women cadets were reporting rapes that happened nearly 25 years ago. I would not doubt if some had, but hundreds? Hundreds is a lot of people. Obviously, this is a statistic that can be checked.

She has a page devoted to her rape case. It is basically about freedom of speech and implies that she has changed her opinion on many of the things she has written about. She writes, "If bloggers are held to account to every word they ever wrote as standards for what they believe today, then, well, no person should ever blog."

There could be more information, more facts to come out, but at this time the combination of her dissembling, on the one hand, and his indignation and confidence in pursuing this case, on the other, suggest to me that she is not speaking the truth about having been raped by this man.

Anonymous said...

She wants to be the face of all women raped in the military. She may have been raped. I'd wager she is telling her friend's story moreso than her own.
Something traumatic happened as she subscribes to an apocalyptic faith-based religion and clings to the lunatic fringe conspiracy theorists rhetoric (typical among armed service members and their family). Here's an excerpt:


I believe our GOVERNMENT shot those kids and teachers and used Adam Lanza and his family to pull it off. They might have killed two birds with one stone. One: If these men are involved in the LIBOR scandal, they can manipulate their testimony. Two: they get gun control. How very, very clever and efficient of them, right? I hate to say it. I hate to put myself ‘out there’ with this because I KNOW how I will be attacked. But I don’t do this for anyone’s approval. I do it to help the American People. You look at these links and you decide.
(under update on Conn. shootings)

Anonymous said...

arch 03, 2013 Update–

since this article was written, both Facebook and BING (Microsoft) have launched a corrupt and fraudulent attack on my WordPress site and my FB sites. Here is the article to prove it. If I were just a crazy person and nothing I wrote made sense, wouldn’t my insanity condemn me? It is BECAUSE so very many people BELIEVED this article that the government has asked these companies to shut my sites down. It hasn’t worked- all my sites continue to grow. But they HAVE had an impact on that growth. They are now breaking the law and committing business fraud to shut my message down. WHY? They thought they could shut these sites down- but God prevented it. They keep growing. BECAUSE my sites keep growing, my internal stats (and those of independent site stat pages like Webstatsdomain.com) prove that their search engine results can NOT be mathematically correct! It literally proves that they are deleting my search results to kill my publicity. This has put them into a very dangerous situation if anyone bothered to sue them. Their illegal fraud also serves to further prove my points in this article. They must FEAR my message (the Christian Conservative message) to show their hands so blatantly. To go this far. Whether or not you think this article is true or that our government would do such a thing, you must ask yourself, why are they BOTHERING to shut down my sites? And you must also ask, is that what our government SHOULD be doing in a country with free speech? Only the most foolish person thinks the same people will always be in power. IF the pendulum swings to the conservative side, do YOU want the government to censor YOUR speech like this? THINK about it, World. Think about it.. From Short Little Rebel wordpress blog.


The Army abandoned him as needed. They grew the monsters.

lynda said...

I have to say, LittleRebel isn't doing herself any favors. In her last couple blogs regarding her rape blog, she invokes the name of God and her Christian Conservative message. The religious right I am sure are going to pick up her battle cry and her alleged rape will be front and center in the political ring as we go into our election year. I'm not liking what she continues to write. Why does she make a point to say they MUST FEAR her message and then qualifies that her MESSAGE is the CHRISTIAN Conservative? Once again, this time on an alleged rape charge, the separation of Church and State is muddied up because of the passion such a charge incites. Which she very well knows. To me, she is seeking her 15 minutes of fame and she is going to ride it as long as she can. I give no credence to her opinions or the alleged rape.

Juliet said...

I have been reading more of Short Little Rebel's blog, and her appeal to the Women of America, and find the following interesting:

'I can bear this burden- I can carry this torch to the end. Let me help all you rape victims in this case. Let me tell your stories because I will get some air time.'

(Desperately seeking the stories of 'you rape victims' to fill airtime - for writing so much, she has very little of her own rape 'story' to tell.)
----

Southerner
SEPTEMBER 11, 2015 AT 8:42 AM
Thank you for doing this. I have not experienced this, but I know others who have and as you correctly, stated – breaking the silence is all that is going to rectify these situations. I give thanks for strong people like you. Keep up the good work!

REPLY
Short Little Rebel
SEPTEMBER 11, 2015 AT 9:30 AM
Thank you, Southerner. You can help by sending this to your friends who have been raped. I want to know their reasons so that I can write a good paper on the subject. I believe I know why most don’t report their rape but I would like the stories from real people to confirm my ideas.

JULY 17, 2015
Losing Everything Can Be Quite Wonderful
....Everything is under the authority of God. This is going exactly as he planned. When I am weak, he is strong. Through my stupid mistakes, God will deliver me even more gloriously- just watch him work! God will not allow me to be a slave to my attacker. In fact, he will turn and punish my attacker for what he is doing.
----

I don't notice Short Little Rebel referring to her alleged rapist as 'her attacker' at any point previous to the lawsuit. She feels attacked now, as a result of the legal action. On an earlier occasion she used 'her attacker' in referring to her roommate's rapist - she didn't apply it in relation to herself.

Was her rape claim one of her 'stupid mistakes'? I think she is so convinced of the righteousness of her cause that she has no problem believing that God is on her side.

--

'...We, the one whom he raped, will owe him millions of dollars for the rest of our lives, simply because we can’t find over $100,000 to defend ourselves in court against his dirty lawyers! Believe me, I looked everywhere for a lawyer to take my case pro bono- ha! Every defense lawyer wanted at least $20- $30 thousand dollars up front to even look at my case. And the court won’t allow us to get that money back when we win the suit! It is lost forever. So, winning is still losing- and our rich, powerful rapist can still lick the cream off his whiskers! This is called intimidation. It is to silence you and me, Women of America. And it works. It works well.'

---
What, really, does that mean - 'We, the one whom he raped' - ? So now this guy has raped all the Women of America, or she wants people to send her their rape stories in order to take the focus off the fact that so far, she hasn't actually told one, or hasn't worked out quite what it is - so please, 'you rape victims', send in your stories to help confirm her ideas. (? :-/)

A bit harsh, perhaps, but that's what it looks like, to me.

lime soda said...

I find it hard to believe that was point would have given her that kind of information over the phone let alone at all when it opened some up to a lawsuit. If like saying why don't you take this class action because there are many plaintiffs who be willing to join you in this lawsuit against us. I don't think that would ever happen. no that would never happen.

lime soda said...

she is the Messiah of rape victims or so she would have them believe. Is so offensive that she says you rape victims

Anonymous said...

hopefully she'll let us know as soon as she decides...

Anonymous said...

I think she's nuts. As I'm understanding it from some of the above posts, she, as an adult over the age of eighteen; got drunk willingly on the night in question and allowed herself to unknowingly participate in sex with the guy. THAT is not rape. Did she put up a fight? I doubt it. She was drunk. But whose fault was it that she was drunk? Sounds like it was her own. Did he hold a pistol to her head and force her to get drunk, or sneak little beanie's into her drinks?

How drunk was he? Drunk or sober, it appears to me that he was taking advantage of what came natural to him. This does not appear to be an illegal act. Weren't they both consenting adults, both over the age of eighteen? She did not even know the act had occurred until after she awakened from her stupor and felt the sticky evidence on her body. In her sickening humiliation over what SHE had done, she stewed over this for the next thirty years telling herself she was raped? IMO, she is a victim of her own twisted mind, placing blame on someone else for her own failures.

Now she wants an attorney to take her case pro bono? AND all these additional rape victims she's attempting to gather up? How crazy is she? There are many hours involved in taking on a pro bono case like this, or any other tangled up mess. Good heavens, they don't see a win here, nor do I. Lawyers don't throw away their time like this on lawsuits without merit, they have to make a living too. But she seems to expect it. Blame the victim? Well duhhh... sometimes the so-called victim IS the one to blame, or at least as guilty as the one they are blaming.

Ha... too bad her ridiculous case hasn't already been filed; I think she would see it thrown out of court pronto, out of hand; leaving her with egg on her face and making a fool of her. I feel sorry for her for her tormented mind, even throwing God (and Christianity) into the mix; who BTW, was not the one who got her drunk that evening, but to allow something like this to destroy her life and future that she destroyed herself? Yep. Nutty as a fick'en fruitcake. Just MOO. ABB

tania cadogan said...

REPLY
Short Little Rebel
SEPTEMBER 11, 2015 AT 9:30 AM
Thank you, Southerner. You can help by sending this to your friends who have been raped. I want to know their reasons so that I can write a good paper on the subject. I believe I know why most don’t report their rape but I would like the stories from real people to confirm my ideas.


Interesting,, she claims she was raped which would make her one of the real people

She tells us I believe I know why most don’t report their rape
I believe allows for others to believe otherwise.
She believes she knows which allows her to know or believe otherwise.

She weakens her statement regarding knowing why most don't report their rape.
I believe is a qualifier which weakens her statement.

A strong statement would be I know why most of us don't report our rapes
She would be including herself with the victims and also including herself as someone who has been raped.

The pronouns US and OUR show unity and shared experience.

Since she claims she was raped, surely she would know definitively why most don't report their rape, the same reason she didn't report her rape at the time it allegedly occurred.

Does she not regard herself as one of the real people who have been raped?
This would mean then that she wasn't raped.

I want to know their reasons so that I can write a good paper on the subject.
She isn't doing it to help the victims in any way , shape or form, she is doing it to benefit herself at the expense of others.
Note also she qualifies this statement with the word GOOD
She doesn't want to write a paper on the subject, she wants to write a GOOD PAPER.
This would cause me to ask if previous papers she has written have not been good?

I believe I know why most don’t report their rape but I would like the stories from real people to confirm my ideas.
The word "but" should always be observed carefully, particularly observing the words that follow the word "but" in comparison to what preceded it.
It can refute what preceded it, or can be used to compare, or even negate what preceded it.
Here the word BUT relates to I believe I know why most don't report their rape
Does she not know why people don't report their rape?
Given her allegation of being raped does she not believe she knows why she didn't report it at the time?

She uses the term Real People in relation to victims of rape.
Why use this phrase and not the expected VICTIMS?
Would she have said REAL VICTIMS and then realised the implication would show she wasn't a real victim?


I would like the stories from real people
Stories is a strange word to use since a story is something made up.
Would EXPERIENCES not be a better word?
Wouldn't it be better to say something along the lines of I would like to hear from other victims of rape or I would like to hear about other victims experiences
Is this because she is in fact telling us a story rather than something she has experienced or from experiential memory?
Words are spoken or written a microsecond after being thought of.
Story is on her mind for a reason, is the reason she chose the word stories due to her own story telling?

She introduces REAL PEOPLE making people sensitive.
If there are real people, are there also fake people?

Juliet said...

Your breakdown and articulation of all that is very good, Tania - it better clarifies why it all looked so iffy.

Somewhere else in her writing, I'm pretty sure that she reveals that her motivation in setting up and writing the blog was to get this guy - the entire blog was and is her stage for revenge. I'll see if I can find that bit again, though it turns my stomach to spend more than a few minutes reading her - she's quite the manipulator.

In one page, and not unlike Relentless Julie Baker, she says it was important to her that no-one should doubt her sincerity in writing the blog- it seems to me that all the dubious Christian stuff is there to convince people of her 'simcerity' and to try to enlist the support of 'like minded' people. I wish I had grabbed those bits at the time but I was too busy looking for even better/worse bits. :-/ It makes me want to run away screaming when anyone describes themselves as sincere, but it can be more interesting to stay put. Sincerity - so over-rated :) IMO.

Juliet said...

Simcerity - sincerity - (or maybe not, simcerity might be a better fit. )

Anonymous said...

I'm not entirely buying her story that her blog posts were innocently seen "by the military" and THEY contacted her. Oh? Oh so innocently, "they" just happened to be reading her blog site?

I wasn't aware that anyone in the military sits around reading blog sites all day and night. Civilians or otherwise, it would take a whole army within itself just to read not-so-random blog sites. Thousands and thousands and hundreds of thousands of useless blog sites? Do they? Without someone in the right position within the military first being contacted and TOLD about certain blog posts? ABB

Juliet said...

I found this, though it's not the part I was looking for - the way she chooses to relay the 'rapist's' account of what happened is interesting :

'His 2014 story: I, (I!) am still obsessed with him (him!) because we dated a few times 31 years ago. We had sloppy drunk consensual sex and he broke it off with me (note: this is still a serious cadet offense- sex on campus. note 2: this is still conduct unbecoming of an officer). We had cordial, friendly relations for two more years and he didn’t hear from me until July 2013, when I mysteriously wrote a malicious article with the sole desire to ruin his career. He offers no explanation why, after 31 years, a happy marriage, a wildly successful career, three beautiful children, no criminal record, no record of stalking, no attempts to contact him, I suddenly and out of nowhere desire to prevent him from making his general rank. His story is that HE is the center of my world, not my beloved husband. My marriage is apparently a sham, despite all evidence otherwise; I have fooled my church, my neighbors and all my friends and have secretly been obsessed with HIM for 31 years. And when I saw an opportunity to harm him (even though I could have harmed him when he got promoted to Captain, Colonel and Lt. Colonel but took the immense gamble that he would continue to ‘re-up’ in the U.S. Army in order to attempt to make General), I finally decided to STRIKE! He is insulting my very real marriage and he is insulting my children’s very real, loving and wholesome parents. Basically, I must be a very crafty, mentally disturbed woman. As I said, rape is a process.'...

'...And now, this butt wipe, wants to sue me (ME!). I should sue him. It is laughable. My husband certainly wants to. But I don’t. My lawyer actually thinks we could win; the idiot, after all, has confessed to the sloppy drunk sex. His only quibble is the date. And he will look extremely deceptive and manipulative trying to fix the date in the ONLY 6 month window in the history of West Point where there was a statute of limitation on reporting rape. That is why he lied about the date. And that is what my cadet friend lied about as well. That is what my rapist’s sister lied about. It is critical that they nail the date to 1983. Because he can’t be prosecuted, even if he admits to it. But in civilian court, it doesn’t matter. He admitted I was completely drunk. He claims he was also very drunk, but his admission of having sex with me denies that as it is well-known that a man can’t have sex if he is incapacitated by alcohol.'

----
The first part is like a confession? In the second excerpt she says 'the idiot, after all, has confessed to the sloppy drunk sex.' 'The' - so she's agreeing that there was 'sloppy drunk sex'.

This particular page makes for difficult reading, I would sympathise if it were not for the rape claim - she obviously had a horrible time at West Point, but that can't justify what she is doing. In my opinion she was not raped, they had 'sloppy drunk sex' - in the cold light of day she knew she couldn't endure the embarrassment, and it was the final straw. What happened was regrettable, but where, even, is HER story, or is his story, as she conveys it, also her story?

Juliet said...

Here is the link to the post which the above quotes came from:

https://shortlittlerebel.wordpress.com/2014/11/17/rape-is-not-an-event-it-is-a-process-that-never-ends/

Lis said...

Wow, Juliet. That post is painful to read.

The section about her mother rings true to me. A mother's rejection is behind so much of the brokenness in this world!

She speaks of sloppy sex, dirty money, canker that is festering and rotten, dirty, used goods, damaged property... and a mother who called her a prostitute from the time she was a teenager.

Her words reveal so much more than she realizes. They are painful to read.

Lis said...

Also, Juliet, I, too, wonder how much of "his" statement is really hers? She seems to be writing in such a way as to appear to be exxagerating, as if to be sarcastic, but in doing so, she frames quite a few statements about herself that I wonder if they are revealing more than she realizes?

Anonymous said...

It is painful, Lis and Juliet. Is that self loathing or blaming?

So let me get this straight. If I am following her description of HIS version, this "event" occured, she spent two more years at West Point and THEN she had a meltdown and had to leave because of the pressure brought on by the rape?

Another note I find interesting about her. https://shortlittlerebel.wordpress.com/2012/12/16/urgent-update-on-connecticut-shooting/#comment-5790
I am quite sure she arranged this interview in VA. She lives in WA. This would not have been big news. Certainly the Army folks would like to keep it quiet. The plaintiff would have NOTHING to gain from bringing it to the forefront. That pretty much leads to her. I doubt the interviewer who thought the story newsworthy saw this exerpt from her Sandy Hook article:

"Almost on day one, I told my husband: “The facts don’t make sense. Something is wrong here.” Last night, after I saw a talking head interview (or, I should say, NOT interview) the father of the boy who saw his teacher get shot and ran for his life with a couple of friends, I told my husband, “Something is not right here. She didn’t ask a single relevant question. So far, this boy is the only eye-witness of the gunman coming forward. She didn’t ask if the boy saw one or more shooters. She didn’t ask any details of what the gunman did first, second, third. She didn’t ask for a description of the gunman. These reporters are complete prostitutes. They could care less about the feelings of the people they interview. So why didn’t she ask any of these questions?” In fact, I could tell she was biting back questions. I looked at my husband and said, “Cal, this thing is starting to stink."

NOTE: Aside from the utterly bizarre take on Sandy Hook, it seems odd that she calls the news reporter a prostitute, and yet when it suits her to gain some exposure, seeks out the "services" of a similarly credentialed media representative.

And then there's this, further down the page:

March 03, 2013 Update–

"since this article was written, both Facebook and BING (Microsoft) have launched a corrupt and fraudulent attack on my WordPress site and my FB sites. Here is the article to prove it. If I were just a crazy person and nothing I wrote made sense, wouldn’t my insanity condemn me? It is BECAUSE so very many people BELIEVED this article that the government has asked these companies to shut my sites down. It hasn’t worked- all my sites continue to grow. But they HAVE had an impact on that growth. They are now breaking the law and committing business fraud to shut my message down. WHY? They thought they could shut these sites down- but God prevented it. They keep growing. BECAUSE my sites keep growing, my internal stats (and those of independent site stat pages like Webstatsdomain.com) prove that their search engine results can NOT be mathematically correct! It literally proves that they are deleting my search results to kill my publicity."

NOTE: So she wants publicity. Wait, I thought she was just a humble blogger from WA doing this for the glory of God. Whoa. Paranoid with delusions of grandeur?

Disturbing.

Juliet said...

Lis (and anyone interested) - yes- it's odd she chooses to relate his story in the way she does - she doesn't even say 'I supposedly' or 'I allegedly' or 'he says' - so while her intention is sarcasm, it comes across as if at some level she's either accepting of, or not strongly disagreeing with, what he is saying - she's not nearly sarcastic enough. Her bracketed note is interesting, too - as if she's saying, well, even if that (sloppy drunk sex) is the truth, he was still in the wrong, because he broke the rules, as though that wouldn't also have applied to her, and as though that somehow justifies a rape allegation.

She writes that early on, she reported a roommate and her boyfriend, who kept using her and the roommate's room for sex - they ignored her requests to stop, and it drove her crazy as she had nowhere else to study. The girl or her boyfriend were thrown out, as I recall. The consequence for SLR was social ostracisation, and her life generally made more difficult - she makes it sound as if everyone hated her (yet she claims to have friends from those days), so perhaps she was prone to paranoia even then. Maybe she perceives the 'drunken sloppy sex' as rape, not because it was, but because it seemed to her to have been some type of revenge act against her, maybe the guy only pretended to be interested in her order to be able to portray her in a certain way later. When she knew the guy was not really interested, he had a girlfriend, and others would know she had broken the same rules for which she'd caused someone else to be thrown out, perhaps she anticipated being thrown out herself, or ridiculed and cold-shouldered past the point of endurance, so leaving voluntarily was pre-emptive. It seems she is paranoid, yet we don't know what the guy might have said to her before she became 'unconscious'. We can't know what really the sex might have been about for either of them. She talks a great deal about revenge, denies that's her motive, but it looks like revenge, especially the bit where she talks, again with unconvincing sarcasm, about his various promotions, about her taking a gamble as each came up, basically, in the hope he would go higher, then making her allegation only when he was about to reach the pinnacle of his career. So she didn't lay in wait, watching as he climbed the ranks, biding her time for thirty years, hoping to destroy him? I think she did. Her venom, upon discovering his Facebook is exquisite, and shows she had not looked him up out of idle curiosity or in order to friend him, but because she hated him - she then set about causing him damage. She saw his wife shared the page and posted allegations on his page in an attempt to destroy his marriage, and from that point on, presumably from the early days of Facebook, her obsession escalated.

I think she had a difficult early life, but the rape allegation does not ring true. She talks of having endured 'my rape' for thirty years, and rape being a process - maybe developing what happened into what she believed was a credible story of rape has taken that long, but she has now discovered that her story is not strong enough to stand. She wants, may demands, back up from 'real people' to help 'develop her ideas', ostensibly round why she did not feel able to report it, yet made her allegations online - she wants the stories to help fill out her own, because she knows it is lacking. Maybe she feels psychologically raped by her West Point experience, due to the general abuse she writes about, and the attitudes towards women, and she's focused it all on the only person she can - the one person, or the last person, she had drunken sex with at West Point. I don't know, but It's interesting that she goes on to say she kept nothing from her days there, not even a single memento - a form of cleansing, perhaps. Rape victims usually say they next went on to shower.

Juliet said...

may demands - nay, demands.

I hate auto correct - distortion is so out of order. It even does it when you're not looking. :-/

Juliet said...

Here follows what might have been more appropriately entitled 'Short Little Rebel's Appeal to Even You'. I like how she is a capitalised nobody.

...'God put me here for a reason, Friends, and that is to instruct you. To make an example for you.'...

'...Can you see how God is using a Nobody? He can achieve great things through everyone. Even you.
I am standing tall for you, readers. Sometimes, I want to just give up. I’ll be honest. I want to just say, “no more.” Sometimes, I want to just leave this earth and go home to Jesus. Such is the burden upon me now. I feel as if happiness will never come to me again. But then, I think of you. I’m serious. What would you do if you heard I gave up- if I took a bottle of pills and just went to sleep? Before God even gives his judgement in this case? What if I give up after all I have told you? Won’t you lose hope too? Might you also give up? If so, why have I worked for so long? I can’t let you down! You and my children are all that tether me to this world right now. This is the God’s honest truth. I will stay to the end and endure what God has set before me. I want you to see what courage is. I want you to know that God does not test beyond what is bearable. I want you to do likewise.
God is doing a mighty work through me. I don’t know why. I don’t know where he is going. I have no idea if he will save me. I just know I have to take each step in faith. And you are all meant to witness each step. It is for all your edification. You were meant to watch. There are no coincidences in life. I am nobody in this world and yet, this very important case swirls about me. I wish it wouldn’t. I wish it were swirling around someone else and I got to cheer them on. I just want peace and quiet despite the image my enemies want to portray. But God will do what he will do. You must also obey God in what he asks of you. Just as I am. No one gets to hand in the towel, hear? No one. We’re in this together, thick and thin.'

---
Watching might be edifying, not necessarily in the way she anticipates - I'm all for not throwing in the towel.

Anonymous said...

I agree, Linda. It seems like she thrives on the adoration of her readers. Now that she is backed into a corner, she has the hubris to think that she can be the face of a movement. I found it interesting that she felt led to make the charge after hearing of SUCCESSFUL suits of other military women in rape cases.

She is acting the innocent in this but I highly doubt there is a shred of innocence in her agenda. It is all about her....but it plays to building a base of support to make this an altruistic effort. The only bandwagon on which she jumps is one on which she might gain some public attention. It would make sense that SHE called the media, just as she likely called the media for this earlier article:

http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20120529/NEWS01/705299945
""Other school districts are already doing it in Washington state," Shannon said. "Why is this a difficulty when it's so beneficial to my daughter and others like her?"

Difficulty. Well, because it appears that that is how her district in Washington State's system is set up. It sounds like she thinks the Washington State school system should be revamped because it would be so benefical to her daughter ... and others like her. This is not unlike her thinking that real people should come forward and tell her their stories so she can write a good article to further her defamation defence effort (since her case appears to have little in the way of soundness to go on.)

An aside, she makes these statements in her "about my case" section:

“I’ll bet that you [dear reader] and I have more in common than we do in difference.”

and

“So, be kind and be human.” to new visitors to her page.

I find it ironic that further down the page, she invites her readers to comment on her posts thusly:

"Let me know what you think- but all comments are monitored. If you are leaving a nasty, unhelpful comment, it will never see the light of day."

Be kind. Be human. Yikes. As to nasty I guess I get that. But I wonder what she considers unhelpful. A comment in which someone suggests she get therapy? THAT would be helpful, but I doubt she would have the insight to see it that way.

One final comment. In the defamation article, her representative states that her case is defencible due to "the truth". Where was this truth during her interviews which eventually led to the plaintiff's subsequent consideration by the US Army as being "fully qualified for promotion"?

It will indeed be interesting to see if and how this all plays out in court.

Anonymous said...

Can't resist this, her most recent post from tonight:

"I've given up drinking altogether because it is dangerous in these trying times. But the clarity hurts, it's true."

THAT might explain a LOT. Just sayin. G'night.

Juliet said...

From Short Little Rebel's blog post'A Sunday Morning Satanic Attack - and a Good Word to Boot!'

https://shortlittlerebel.wordpress.com/2015/08/16/a-sunday-morning-satanic-attack/

...'I want to share with you an experience I had at church this morning. I was trying to sing at worship this morning when I felt satan accusing me of doing a terrible job on my blog. I started feeling so down on myself. So sad, so distracted- I couldn’t sing anymore!...'

...' I called out to him and poured out my heart and told him the truth- I was too weak to rebuke satan and that I needed his strength to do it. And then, in a quiet mental voice, I told satan to get behind me in the Name of Jesus- because my Lord was nearby to ensure it. And People, he left just that quickly. Just the name of the Lord is enough. It is enough. I was able to continue in my worship and I was given the peace and clarity to hear the message. I was also given a good message to share with you today.

Here is the message:

It doesn’t matter how badly we screw up in our work for Christ. It doesn’t matter if we say it wrong. It doesn’t matter if we do it wrong. It doesn’t matter if we, in doing it wrong and saying it wrong, seem to represent Christ poorly. If all that mattered, none of us could serve Christ well- no work could ever be completed- we should all just stop before we even start. No, none of that matters because the only reason we succeed in our work for God is because God has anointed us to our work. Note the Bible Verse in the meme above- “You will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes to you, and you will be my Witnesses to Jerusalem…”. It is this Anointing of the Holy Spirit that does the work of Christ. My pastor spoke about this ‘anointing’ today. Anointing is when God works through us to break down the walls in front of us. Anointing is when God opens doors and windows, breaks open hearts, minds and souls, creates understanding where there was none, brings joy where there was sorrow, creates friendship and bonds in the most unlikely of situations. It isn’t because we said it the right way that we succeeded on our blogs- rather, it is because God wished it that our blogs succeeded. Our words weren’t the right words that reached people- rather, it was that God opened the hearts of those whom he wished to open. And when people are offended by my words, again, it is God who wished it as well. We are not the true operators of our anointing- God is. Does this mean that we are not responsible for our actions? Of course not! We are. However, our actions are not what will make or break what God wills to be done through us- as long as we remain obedient to his will.

That is the Word I wanted to share with you today.'

...'If you’re terrified of speaking the ‘right way’ and doing it ‘the right way,’ I want to offer myself as example. When have I ever done it the right way? or spoken it in the right way? And yet, I feel God’s hand of approval on my head! I know he is with me, even on my worst days, when I have made the worst mistakes. Sometimes, like now, I have no idea if I have done good or bad. No idea! I think I have done the right thing and can only pray that I listened correctly. I will have to wait until I see my Jesus to find out. Yet! I still feel his hand upon my head- he still loves and approves of me. How about them there apples, as my Dad would say?'

Anonymous said...

The woman has spent the last thirty years going whacko. Messed up. Seriously whacko. IMO, she needs long term therapy. I hope for her own sake that when she finally has her day in court some wise judge will order her to undergo psychiatric evaluation and treatment. She's a mess. ABB

Juliet said...

My thoughts on what Short Little Rebel wrote in her 'Sunday Morning Satanic Attack' blog.

I think she is mistaking the voice of her conscience for 'satan'. She knows she has 'screwed up badly' , made 'mistakes' and seems to have 'represented Christ poorly' - still, she's not ready to be any more specific, and the language is minimising. She uses 'we' a lot. It's only she who has written her blog articles and used her platform to accuse a man of rape, but she is trying to spread the responsibility in general way, as she says this is a message or word from God which she is meant to share.

She says she called out to God and told him 'the truth'. I believe she did, and then decided that 'doing and saying it wrong' (so minimising) doesn't matter, because God will cover her mistakes because she's a child of God, anointed and doing 'his' work. Although she doesn't reference the text, what she is saying seems a perversion of the idea that 'love covers a multitude of sins' - she did wrong, but God will collude with her to make it turn out right.

She has 'no idea' if she has done good or bad. 'No idea!' She told God the truth, but she apparently has no idea if she has done good or bad. If one decides to 'tell the truth' has the truth not previously been told? She only 'thinks' she has done the right thing and 'can only pray' that she listened correctly. So, just some miscommunication problem with God, if it turns out she 'misheard'. She thought God was saying one thing, she just was trying to follow HIS will.

---

Well, 'the heart is deceitful above all things', so perhaps she's not so aware of her self-deception and her will to deceive others. Yet she also writes often of being a strategist, of being one who makes a plan and sticks to it, and takes pride in her ability to plan and to succeed in her plans. She fits God round her narrative, knowing that her God-talk will cause some people to believe in her goodness and 'sincerity'. I think she is pretty screwed up, but that doesn't excuse not telling the truth in public, and believing that telling it to God in private somehow makes it all right, whilst continuing in that untruth in public. Something major is bothering her and it involves her blog activity, and 'the truth'.

I have known people who think like SLR, who account any contradiction, obstruction, even their own conscience, as a 'satanic attack'. It's the ultimate in not taking responsibility and in blame shifting. SLR portrays herself as the type of person who finds any obstacle to her own will being carried through to be the work of the devil - whether really she believes that, or just finds it an effective means of manipulation, I don't know - a bit of both, perhaps. She does what she claims God tells her to do, and when something goes wrong it is due to satan - what a helpless pawn she is, so selflessly doing God's will, struggling to hear him right, being attacked by satan, all for the sake of her dear readers, friends, even you, even 'you rape victims'. I shouldn't write more - I can't be objective as I do not like her character or the way she exploits her faith, and the simple faith of others, to her own ends.

Lis said...

Juliet, I agree. I have an uneasy feeling about her if this case should continue to its logical conclusion, she seems fragile, unstable.

Juliet said...

Lis, yes - I agree. She's a strong character but she is also n the edge now that her world might implode and it seems she might have 'misheard' God. I also agree with ABB's comment at 9.39am.

Anonymous said...

She has suggested in another article that if she is found dead that either her "attacker" or the US government is culpable.

Anonymous said...

Ummm... interesting. Yes, very unstable. I wouldn't be surprised if she becomes suicidal if she isn't already. Surely she senses that she keeps making a fool of herself; however, is unable to stop?

She is emotionally unhinged. Sad. I hope someone is keeping an eye on her. ABB

Anonymous said...

So... I did my interview with Inside Edition yesterday in Seattle. whew. That was tough. The interviewer, Steven Fabian, asked some tough questions and I did my best to answer them from my heart. It was... difficult. Can I tell you something? I wish I and my family weren't going through this. I wish my church weren't going through this. Everything and everyone in my life has been put through hell because of this. I feel as if I have not only lost money but I have lost friends over this. This kind of thing makes people afraid and it makes them want to distance themselves from you. And that, in turn, hurts your feelings and you lash out at them. It feels like betrayal. You want people to stand with you, not back away and protect themselves. This type of attention is tough to take, I guess. Stephen Fabian said that the interview wouldn't be aired for at least a week. I surprised myself with some of my responses. Please continue to pray for me. I feel very alone right now. Pray that God moves his hand to repair what is broken, to cause hearts to be humble, to move minds to clear and to move souls to deeper understanding and obedience to his will. Pray also that I can see his will clearly and that my heart will soften, that I will see wisdom, forgiveness and love instead of betrayal and fear. Most of all, pray that God's people stick together in these troubling times. For me, the outlook is cloudy and the way looks blocked. That doesn't mean it is. God knows there is a way and I trust in him with all my heart. Can you pray with me that he shows me the way through all this mess? Susan

Anonymous said...

Analyze this:

http://www.insideedition.com/headlines/13338-wife-stands-by-colonel-husband-accused-of-west-point-rape-hes-not-capable-of-that

Text:

Susan Shannon claims she was raped in 1986 by then-fellow cadet Wil Riggins at West Point Military Academy in New York. She said she never told anyone until she wrote about it recently on her blog.

But Riggins' wife, Nancy, is standing by him. She told INSIDE EDITION: “We've discussed this every day. We wake up talking about it and we go to bed talking about it. He is not capable. He would never do that.”

Shannon wrote in her blog: “I need to tell the story about a rape of a soldier. That soldier is me. The man who raped me, Wil Riggins, is now a Colonel in the Army.”

She said when she was a cadet she got drunk at a party and Riggins offered her a lift in his car. She said when she passed out in the car, she was raped.

In keeping with the Cadet Corps' alleged Code of Silence, Shannon said she never reported the alleged attack.

Shannon told INSIDE EDITION: “I remember him getting on top of me and unzipping my coat and him saying ‘This won't take long.’ I was saying like ‘What are you doing?’”

She says she confronted him about the alleged rape.

“I demanded of him, ‘Did you have sex with my unconscious body?’ And he smiled at me with a big smug face and he shook his head, you know he was not sorry, not at all,” she said.

“I thought no-one would believe me,” she continued.

Shannon said she dropped out of West Point soon after but Riggins went on to have an illustrious career in the Army and rose to the rank of Colonel.

He was under consideration to become a Brigadier General when Shannon publicly accused him of rape.

“I did not rape Susan Shannon at West Point at any time,” he told INSIDE EDITION.

“I did not pick Susan Shannon up that night. During our entire junior, first and second year semester, I had no social interaction with Susan Shannon at all,” he continued.

The Army launched an investigation in 2013 and found insufficient evidence to pursue rape charges against Riggins. The investigation effectively destroyed his military career and he retired from the Army.

Riggins has filed a $2 million defamation lawsuit against Shannon.

Read: Cops: Newlyweds Killed Wife's Alleged Rapist Before Frying Up and Eating His Genitals

He claimed to remember only speaking with her once, saying: “The only significant disagreement that I ever remember between the two of us was a time when and she yelled very loudly and was complaining that it was so hard to make the grades that were going to get her into medical school. And I made a comment: ‘Well maybe you don't belong at West Point.’”

But Shannon is not backing down from her claim, telling INSIDE EDITION: “I spoke the truth from my heart. I spoke the truth of what I know. I know exactly what happened in that car and so does he. I have the right to my free speech. And every woman who has been raped has a right to her free speech to tell her story.”

Anonymous said...

I have followed Susan Shannon's blog from time to time. She is bat-sh*t crazy. A total loon and disconnected from reality. I hope he wins his case as Susan is just desperate for attention. She is a pathetic, mentally unstable and miserable human being. I think she is just trying to get back at him for not pursuing a relationship with her.

Anonymous said...

Trial jury awarded Col. Riggins over $8 mil....they didn't buy her story.

Peter Hyatt said...

Thank you for the update.