Do You Know The Muffin Man?

SYSOP'S NOTE: The following file is the complete text of a
letter sent by Dr. Michael Aquino to CBS after they aired a
made-for-TV movie entitled "Do You Know the Muffin Man?"
This movie was a fictional account of a "typical" ritualized
child abuse case in a "typical" day- care center, modeled
closely after the allegations in the McMartin, Bakersfield,
and Akron "scandals." Dr. Aquino's letter thoroughly rebuts
these charges.

No response from CBS had been received as of 12/18/89.

This letter is reprinted with permission of the author, who
asked me to point out that documentation for everything he
says in here is available on request to the address shown.
-- J. Brad Hicks, Sysop WeirdBase


Post Office Box 4507, St. Louis, MO 63108
MCI-Mail: 278-4041
Telex: 6502784041

Michael A. Aquino, Ph.D.
High Priest of Set                              October 25, 1989 CE

Programming Department
CBS Television
51 West 52nd Street
New York, New York 10019

Dear Sirs:

    Your  broadcasting of the television-movie DO YOU KNOW  THE  MUFFIN
MAN? on October 22 displayed extremely shocking bias and disregard  for
the truth. To the extent that this film is interpreted by audiences  to
represent  the  general truth behind the epidemic of day-care  "Satanic
child abuse" witch-hunts which have convulsed this country for the last
several years, you will be responsible for the encouragement of further
injustices  of  the  most  traumatic kind on  innocent  people  falsely
accused of such horrors.

    You  may shrug this off by citing the fine-print disclaimer at  the
end  of  the film that this was a "fictional" drama. Yet the references
to real-life incidents ("the Presidio, El Paso, and West Point") in the
film as though they were proven examples of the kind of crime depicted,
coupled with the TV GUIDE and on-screen announcement that "according to
government  statistics some 39,000 children were sexually  abused  last
year",  made  it  clear that the film was to be understood  as  thinly-
fictionalized "docu-drama".

    From McMartin onward, the epidemic of day-care "child abuse" scares
has  been  characterized by spontaneous and violent attack upon  chosen
targets the moment they are selected. Presumably child sexual abuse  is
so  heinous a crime, as witchcraft during the middle ages, that  it  is
unthinkable for anyone to be accused of it unless he or she  is  indeed
guilty.  Everyone wants to go on record as denouncing such  individuals
vigorously, lest one become suspect oneself for not showing  sufficient
enthusiasm  for the hunt. On the other hand, no individual or  official
wants to take responsibility for stating that the alleged abuse did not

   Permit me to itemize the more conspicuous fallacies of Muffin Man:


    What your announcement failed to state is that THE VAST MAJORITY OF
According to David Finkelhor, Associate Director of the Family Violence
Research  Program, University of New Hampshire, the primary  threat  of
sexual  molestation comes from MEMBERS OF THE CHILD'S FAMILY, NOT  FROM
crimes  upon day-care personnel may be a device to cover up incest,  or
to  destroy  women's  options for child-care  outside  the  home,  thus
forcing  them  away from personal/professional lives of their  own  and
back  to the fundamentalist model of "a woman's place". In CHILD SEXUAL
ABUSE: NEW THEORY & RESEARCH, Finkelhor writes:

   In  many  respects the moralists were mistaken about the problem,
   since  they portrayed the greatest danger to children  as  coming
   from  strangers and depraved individuals outside the family,  not
   from  within the family, where, as recently documented, the  more
   serious threat is.


    Dr.  Roland Summit testifies so consistently for any accusation  of
"child  abuse" that he has become nationally known as the  "prosecution
doctor". (Cf. Paul & Shirley Eberle, THE POLITICS OF CHILD ABUSE,  Lyle
Stuart  1986.)  He  now has a distinguished record of participating  in
several  celebrated "child abuse industry" scandals in which scores  of
innocent people were randomly accused, put through nightmarish ordeals,
and professionally ruined.

    Why  did  you  not  also  consult some of  the  many  distinguished
physicians who expose and deplore the "child abuse industry",  such  as
Dr.  Lee  Coleman, Director of the Center for the Study of  Psychiatric
Testimony  in  Berkeley, California? Were you  afraid  that  you  might
discover "inconvenient" facts which invalidate the pre-determined theme
of the film?


   This was presented in the film as "conclusive proof" that one of the
children  had been raped. In the case of at least one real-life  witch-
hunt  that at the Presidio of San Francisco - it was also used  in  the
case  of the child whose parents originally instigated the scare. Later
on the physician who originally diagnosed the child's rectum as injured
retracted  that  diagnosis on a television news  documentary.  By  that
time,  of  course, the witch-hunt was in full swing  and  no  one  paid
attention to this inconvenient development.

    Dr. John McCann, Associate Clinical Professor of Pediatrics at  the
University  of  California, San Francisco, has produced  a  study  that
reveals  far more normal variations in the vaginal and rectal areas  of
children  than  most  physicians are aware of. He  and  his  assistants
examined  the vaginal and rectal areas of some 250 prepubertal children
with  no history of sexual molestation and found that "private parts  -
particularly girls' genitals - can be as variable from person to person
as  noses  or breasts". Responsible physicians are accordingly becoming
more  cautious  about diagnosing "rape" from such variations.  See  the
article in MS magazine, March 1989.


    As  your  film showed, this is a staple of "day-care  child  abuse"
witch-hunts. Once their minds are made up, zealots simply keep  working
the  children over, again and again, for months or years if  necessary,
until the children are ready to say anything expected of them. Moreover
any  statement at all from such children which can be "interpreted"  by
parents or "therapists" into sexual context is construed as "evidence".
MUFFIN  MAN  presented  this  as  a  perfectly  normal  and  acceptable

    As  the MEMPHIS COMMERCIAL APPEAL noted on January 20, 1988 as part
of its 6-part series on the "child-abuse" epidemic:

   Investigators  in  El Paso sometimes refused to  accept  denials,
   retractions,  or  silence from children.  They  attributed  those
   actions  to stress-related "avoidance" behavior or to the  "child
   sexual  abuse  accommodation syndrome", a controversial  doctrine
   that says abuse victims inevitably recant allegations.

   The COMMERCIAL APPEAL further observed that:

   Luiz  Natalicio, an El Paso psychologist who evaluated  tapes  of
   interviews  in  the  abuse case there, compares  the  questioning
   techniques to those used by Communist Chinese forces on  American
   soldiers  captured during the Korean War. Like the POWs, children
   in  the  El  Paso  case were isolated in unfamiliar  and  usually
   barren   surroundings.   They   believed   their   release   from
   questioning,  and  satisfying such needs as  drinking  water  and
   going  to  the  bathroom,  depended upon  whether  they  provided
   information,  Natalicio said. "If we can do it with  adults,  you
   can  imagine  how  effective it can be  with  children,  who  are
   dependent  on  us totally for their conception of reality,"  said
   Natalicio,  a  former  University of Texas professor  who  taught
   courses on the psychological aspects of interrogation.


    This  invention  was  created  by  accusers  to  explain  away  the
inconvenient fact that day-care centers are generally open places  with
lots  of observation and access, parents and children coming and going,
and  no  opportunities  for  molesting, much  less  elaborate  "Satanic

   Merely proposing such an idiotic "explanation" does not validate it,
no  matter  how  often it is tried. Not one "witch-hunt" has  validated
this  absurd  allegation.  So  why did your  movie  present  it  as  an
"accepted" practice?


   This must rank with the survival of Elvis Presley as one of the most
asinine  myths  of  the 1980s. It is in COMPLETE CONTRADICTION  to  the
official, published doctrines of the Satanic religion, as contained  in
Anton LaVey's SATANIC BIBLE of the old Church of Satan (1966-1975)  and
in the CRYSTAL TABLET of the contemporary Temple of Set (1975-present):

   Under  no circumstances would a Satanist sacrifice any animal  or
   baby. There are sound and logical reasons why Satanists would not
   perform  such sacrifices. Mankind is the godhead to the Satanist.
   The purest form of existence reposes in the bodies of animals and
   human  children who have not grown old enough to deny  themselves
   their  natural desires. They can perceive things that the average
   human being can never hope to. Therefore the Satanist holds these
   beings  in  a sacred regard, knowing that he can learn much  from
   these natural magicians of the world.

   The Satanist is aware of conventional religions' universal custom
   of  killing  their  gods. The Satanist, however,  does  not  hate
   himself  nor  his gods, and has no desire to destroy  himself  or
   anything for which he stands. It is for this reason that he would
   never willfully harm an animal or child.

   The  Satanist  would not intentionally hurt others  by  violating
   their sexual rights. If you attempt to impose your sexual desires
   upon  others who do not welcome your advances, you are infringing
   upon  their sexual freedom. Therefore Satanism does not  advocate
   rape, child molesting, sexual defilement of animals, or any other
   form  of sexual activity which entails the participation of those
   who  are unwilling or whose innocence or na•vetˇ would allow them
   to be intimidated or misguided into doing something against their
   wishes. - SATANIC BIBLE

   Children  should  not  be  allowed to attend  any  Black  Magical
   ritual. They will not understand it, may be frightened by it, and
   may  wrongly represent it to others. Pets may be present only  if
   they  may  be  depended  upon  to enhance,  not  to  disrupt  the
   atmosphere.   Under  no  circumstances  is  any  life-form   ever
   sacrificed or injured in a Black Magical ritual of the Temple  of
   Set.  Violation  of  this  rule will  result  in  the  offender's
   immediate  expulsion  and referral to law-enforcement  or  animal
   protection authorities. - CRYSTAL TABLET OF SET

    The  senior  Supervisory Special Agent of  the  FBI  in  charge  of
"Satanic   abuse"  investigations  is  Kenneth  Lanning,  FBI  Academy,
Quantico,  Virginia.  As  the  MEMPHIS COMMERCIAL  APPEAL  reported  on
January 18, 1988:

   Lanning said he was perplexed by the growth of such stories  with
   no evidence to support them. "Some people believe there is large-
   scale abduction of children," Lanning said, "that individuals are
   going  around  snatching little children, keeping  them  captive,
   transporting them to other locations where they're being murdered
   in  Satanic rituals. Is that possible? I guess it's possible.  Is
   it probable? I don't see any evidence of it."

    While  Lanning has patiently repeated this authoritative  statement
any  number  of times since then, it seems that anti-Satanism  fanatics
are  determined not to hear it. I understand that some of them, furious
over  this  "inconvenience",  have simply labeled  Lanning  a  Satanist
himself  (which he is not) and continued their campaigns.  This  is  in
keeping  with  medieval practice, in which anyone daring to  defend  an
accused witch was simply accused in turn.

    The  theme of "sexual abuse of children" has been loosely  used  as
hate-propaganda  by  Christianity  for  centuries  against  any   other
religion it wished to slander. Along with "child sacrifice", it  was  a
theme  used  aggressively against the Jews up to World  War  II,  after
which  time  Nazi violence against that religion made it  unfashionable
for  Christians to openly attack it. The Satanic religion, on the other
hand,  appears  still to be considered an appropriate target  for  such

   The effect of such hate-propaganda, of course, is to create a social
atmosphere  in which Satanists must fear any association with  children
whatever,  whether  their own or someone else's. While  Christians  may
indoctrinate their children with Christian ideology - including at  the
many  day-care  centers  run by Christian  churches  -  any  hint  that
Satanists  might even be DISCUSSING their religion with their children,
much less teaching it to them, is guaranteed to provoke social and,  to
the extent it can be effected, official persecution.

    As  it  happens,  neither the old Church of Satan nor  the  current
Temple of Set ever operated any programs for minors, nor accepted  them
as members. Nevertheless it is outrageous that Christians should expect
us  to accept a social climate in which ONLY they, not anyone else, can
discuss religion with children.

    Also  as  it  happens, the religion with a PROVEN RECORD  of  child
sexual  abuse  by  its officials is CHRISTIANITY, not  Satanism.  I  am
talking  not  about  mere  allegations,  but  about  PROSECUTIONS   and
CONVICTIONS - and also about official policies to cover up such  crimes
when  they  have  occurred.  To take just the  Catholic  Church  as  an
example:  In  the  December 30/31, 1988 SAN JOSE  MERCURY  NEWS,  court
records  and sworn testimony  in civil and criminal cases involving  35
priests  in  dioceses across the U.S. over the past five years  -  most
since  1985 - show that in one or more cases Catholic Church  officials

   * Ignored parental complaints that a child has been molested.

   * Failed to inform authorities, even though most states have laws
   requiring that such complaints be passed along to police or child
   welfare agencies.

   *  Transferred  the offending priest to another parish  or  other
   church-owned  facility,  such as a hospital  or  school,  without
   warning  parents in the new location of the trouble  in  the  old
   parish, and often without even requiring the priest to stay  away
   from children.

   * Refused to help priests who have asked for psychological help.

   * Attempted to discredit parents who complained, even when parish
   officials  knew  of  earlier complaints  against  the  priest  in

   *  Fought, usually with success, to make sure that the  files  in
   civil lawsuits against the church are sealed and that settlements
   remain  secret even after the payment of millions of  dollars  in

   *  Failed to seek out probable victims and declined to turn  over
   files   containing   information  about  accusations   of   other
   molestations to attorneys suing the church.

    Catholic  Father Thomas Doyle, a Washington, D.C. priest and  canon
lawyer  who has looked into the issue of pedophiliac priests, told  the
MERCURY  NEWS he knows of about 200 Catholic priests who have  molested
children  in the past 4-5 years. He said that as many as 3,000  priests
could be pedophiles.

   F. Ray Mouton, a lawyer working with Doyle, added:

   I have consulted with dioceses and Catholic religious orders from
   every part of this country, and it is my impression that there is
   not  one single, solitary bishop or vicar in this country who has
   not  dealt  with  the problem of a pedophiliac priest  under  his
   supervision.  Conservatively I would estimate that  in  the  last
   several  years, hundreds of priests and other clerics  have  been
   discovered  as  pedophiles,  leaving  a  trail  of  thousands  of
   Catholic child victims.

The  SAN  JOSE  MERCURY  NEWS  provided the following  examples  [among

   * In 1987 priest Roger Trott, Diocese of Greensburg, Pennsylvania
   pleaded  guilty to one count of corrupting a minor, a 13-year-old
   altar  boy,  in  a plea arrangement providing for no  jail  time.
   Afterward  the district attorney discovered that Trott  may  have
   molested  as  many  as  15  boys.  A  year  before,  the  diocese
   reportedly  paid $375,000 to two families on behalf  of  children
   alleged  to  have been molested by another priest, Father  Dennis
   Dellamalva, who was never charged. Neither the families who  sued
   nor the diocese would discuss the settlement.

   *  In  1987  priest Richard Galdon, Archdiocese  of  Newark,  New
   Jersey, was sentenced to 25 years in prison after pleading guilty
   to one count of first-degree aggravated assault and two counts of
   second degree aggravated assault against three boys. Galdon,  57,
   admitted engaging in oral and anal sex with boys for 17 years. DA
   investigator George McGrath said that he talked to 18 boys  at  a
   school who said they were molested by Galdon.

   *  In  1985 priest Carmelo Baltazar, Diocese of Boise, Idaho  was
   sentenced to 7 years in prison for luring two teenage boys to his
   house,  fondling  them,  and  giving  them  liquor,  drugs,   and
   pornography.  He had been kicked out of the U.S. Navy  (where  he
   had  been  a chaplain) as well as transferred from three previous
   dioceses  for similar conduct. An attorney who sued  the  diocese
   said  that  Baltazar's previous job was at a  hospital  in  Napa,
   where he fondled a boy on a dialysis machine. Despite being  told
   about this, a Catholic hospital in Boise hired him and then  took
   no  action after an Episcopalian minister reported to the  bishop
   that Baltazar had fondled a boy in double leg traction.

   *  In  1987 priest John Salazar, Archdiocese of Los Angeles,  was
   sentenced  to  6 years in prison for engaging in oral  copulation
   with two altar boys. He had been left in his position despite one
   mother's report that her son had been molested in 1985.

   * In 1985 priest Alvin Campbell, Diocese of Springfield, Illinois
   was  sentenced  to  14 years in prison after pleading  guilty  to
   sexually  abusing  7 boys. Campbell later admitted  that  he  had
   molested boys for more than 20 years.

   *  In 1987 priest Walter Weerts, Diocese of Springfield, Illinois
   was  sentenced to 6 years in prison for performing  oral  sex  on
   three  teenage  boys. The diocese paid $2.5 million,  one  source
   told  the MERCURY NEWS, to three families who sued when a pattern
   of  transferring  him from parish to parish  was  uncovered.  The
   diocese refused to discuss the case.

   *  In 1986 priest Ronald Fontenot, Diocese of Spokane, Washington
   was  sentenced  to  1  year in jail and 2 years  in  a  treatment
   program  after  teen-age boys complained that he had  engaged  in
   oral copulation with one and fondled four others.

   *  In 1986 priest Andrew Christian, Diocese of Orange, California
   received  5  years' probation on condition he go to  a  treatment
   facility  after  being  found  guilty  of  26  counts  of   child
   molestation. The church never told authorities of abuse  reported
   3 years earlier, when it sent Christian to counseling and did not
   remove  him  from supervising boys. When the counseling  stopped,
   molestings began.

   *  In 1986 priest William O'Connell, Diocese of Providence, Rhode
   Island  was  sentenced  to 1 year in prison  and  2  years  in  a
   treatment  center  after  pleading no contest  to  26  counts  of
   sexually abusing 12 boys.

   *  In 1985 priest Paul Leech, Diocese of Providence, Rhode Island
   was sentenced to 3 years in prison for molesting 3 boys.

   *  In 1986 priest Timothy Slevin, Archdiocese of Washington, D.C.
   was  sentenced to 3-12 years after pleading guilty to four counts
   of  sodomizing a boy at Sacred Heart Catholic School. Slevin told
   police he sexually abused 6 other boys aged 10-16.

    In  contrast to this shameful record, there has never been a SINGLE
charge  against or conviction of ANY Satanist for child  sexual  abuse,
anywhere, any time. The reason is quite simple: WE DON'T DO IT. Ours is
a  religion  in  which  sex is NOT treated as a religious  fetish,  nor
restricted between consenting adults. It is regarded simply as one more
bodily function with pleasurable and romantic aspects.


    Animal  sacrifice  is strictly forbidden by this  nation's  Satanic
churches,  per the above quotes from the Satanic Bible and the  Crystal


    In  fact this is one of the MOST conspicuous indices that the child
in  question  has been coached by zealots. As such it is  an  important
indicator impeaching the testimonies of such children and should not be


   While the film showed the defense lawyer objecting and the objection
sustained,  this  scene was clearly added to "substantiate"  the  older
child's  statements. The reason that polygraph results are not  allowed
in  court,  of  course, is that they are NOT reliable. There  are  many
reasons why they may give false readings. The history of their  use  in
child-abuse witch-hunts is that they are ignored by prosecutors if they
support  the  accused  person's innocence and  are  treated  as  "proof
overwhelming  all  other evidence" if the accused  is  judged  to  have

    As  Washington columnist James Kilpatrick recently reported in  his

   A witness for the American Medical Association testified that the
   results  of  such  examinations are "only  somewhat  better  than
   chance".  Another  estimated that polygraph  machines  wrongfully
   hang  a label of "liar" on at least 400,000 honest persons  every

   A  Senate  report  described the problems. A  standard  polygraph
   records  changes  in  blood pressure, respiration  patterns,  and
   sweat.  By  analyzing  a  chart of these  changes,  the  operator
   reaches  conclusions on the honesty of the person being examined.
   The  physiological data may be quite accurate, "but there  is  no
   evidence  that  these recorded changes are unique to  deception".
   Such   factors   as  "anger,  fear,  anxiety,  surprise,   shame,
   embarrassment, and resentment can cause identical changes".


    No  Satanic  religious ceremony has EVER been held  in  a  day-care
facility,  nor have implements or persons involved in such  a  ceremony
EVER  been  found  in  the  way your film implied.  No  law-enforcement
official curious about any activity of the Church of Satan or Temple of
Set has EVER been resisted with violence.

    To further highlight the film's ignorance of authentic Satanism,  a
ritual  knife was referred to as an "athame", and the "Satanists"  were
shown  in  red  robes. An athame is a device used by  the  Wicca  pagan
religion,  not  by Satanists. And Satanists do not wear red  robes  for
rituals. [Perhaps you confused us with Catholic cardinals?]

   Even more preposterous was the film's use of "Satanic names" such as
Isis, Medea, Triton, and Pegasus. Obviously you - or Roland Summit,  or
whoever else your "expert" on Satanism happened to be - knows as little
about  mythology as about athames. In Egyptian mythology  Isis  is  the
wife  of  Osiris, OPPONENT of the "Satanic" god Set. Medea is a  figure
from  Greek  mythology  having nothing to do  with  Satanic  symbolism.
Triton  is  a fish, and Pegasus is a horse. Genuine magical  names  are
chosen  carefully, with precise attention to the mythology in question.
Or  perhaps  you intended your "conspiracy of Satanists" to  include  a
frogman and a jockey?


    PRESIDIO OF SAN FRANCISCO: This 1986-87 scandal was simply one more
scam  in  the  "McMartin  copycat"  series.  Neither  prosecutions  nor
convictions of anyone resulted. A Baptist minister by the name of  Gary
Hambright was initially targeted in that witch-hunt; later on  an  Army
chaplain decided to attack my wife and myself as well.

    All  charges against Hambright were ultimately thrown  out  by  the
court  or withdrawn by the prosecution, and thus he is entitled to  the
presumption  of his innocence. More than that, the U.S. Federal  Public
Defenders  in his case state that the evidence quite clearly exonerates
him  of  any such crimes. Ask them yourself: Ms. Nanci Clarence  &  Mr.
Jeff Hansen, Federal Building, San Francisco - (415) 556-7712.

    No charges were ever brought against me or Mrs. Aquino, because the
evidence  conclusively proves not only that we could not have committed
crimes  as  alleged, but also that they never occurred at all.  On  the
other  hand,  I  preferred  court-martial  charges  against  that  Army
chaplain,  Lawrence  Adams-Thompson, for  making  knowingly  false  and
malicious  accusations against us. I am still at  this  time  insisting
that  the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Division follow through with
investigation  of  these  charges which  I  preferred,  and  of  Adams-
Thompson's  attempt to defraud the U.S. Government of  several  million
dollars  in  fraudulent monetary claims based on his fake  allegations.
[Following  the  West  Point pattern as noted  below,  parents  in  the
Presidio  witch-hunt  filed  over $66 million  in  claims  against  the
government in an attempt to make a little money from what they had  put
their children through.]

    WEST  POINT:  This July 1984 scandal began after a girl  came  home
bleeding  in  the  vaginal area. In the usual pattern allegations  then
mushroomed  to include several children, animal sacrifice, pornography,
and  "rituals  involving  people wearing bloody,  Dracula-type  masks".
Ultimately  950 people were interviewed including hundreds of  children
aged  2-6. No charges were ever brought against anyone because of  lack
of  evidence. Nevertheless a Captain Grote refused a promotion to Major
and proceeded to accuse Army officials of covering up "the presence  of
ritualized/Satanic child abuse at West Point". [There were no Satanists
at  West  Point at the time.] Perhaps as disappointing to the  accusers
under  the circumstances was the fact that 8 families had filed  claims
against  the government totalling $110 million, easy wealth  which  was
unlikely to be realized if the scam would not be officially endorsed.

    EL  PASO:  In June 1985 this McMartin-copycat got under  way  after
parents  questioned their 3-1/2-year-old daughter about a word she  had
used.  Two YMCA female teachers were eventually accused as the feeding-
frenzy  grew.  Nine children talked about monsters,  being  kissed  and
fondled,  and  "having pennies put in their pee-pees".  This  case  was
prosecuted, and both women were found guilty. One conviction was  later
overturned, and [as of the most recent account I read] the other is  on

    Again  it is interesting to consider the role that monetary  claims
played  in  this affair. Insurers for the YMCA reached a  $600,000-plus
settlement  with  parents  after  an  appellate  court  overturned  the
conviction  of  one  of  the two female workers  accused.  Parents  had
originally sued for more than $24 million.

    If  there  is any "pattern" to be demonstrated by these  cases,  it
would  seem  to be one of parental greed rather than of "Satanic  child

   The  United  States  has  now  been  through  several  years of such
disgraceful witch- hunts, which films such as  MUFFIN  MAN  purport  to
excuse and justify.  To the extent that audiences accept its theme, you
have  acted  to  stimulate and encourage further outrages of this sort.
This is genuine child abuse, as it is always the children,  along  with
the  targeted  adults, who are the sufferers from these orgies of greed
and hatred.

   It is ironic that, at the same time these ferocious witch-hunts  are
being  promoted,  the  country  is bewailing its lack of adequate child
day-care services.  Under these circumstances only a lunatic would have
anything to do with operating or working  in  a  day-care  service,  no
matter WHAT  salaries  are offered.  Nor does one have to be male to be
targeted; such witch-hunts have victimized  young  and  old,  male  and
female alike.

   If  this is the situation you sought to endorse by your broadcast of
MUFFIN MAN, then I expect you are quite pleased with  yourselves.    If
after  considering  the  facts  cited  in  this  letter you have second
thoughts about what you did, then perhaps CBS should make  a  statement
to   that   effect  and  remove  this  disgraceful  film  from  further
circulation.  It belongs in a trash-bin along with Nazi  Germany's  THE
ETERNAL JEW and similar hate-propaganda filth.


Michael A. Aquino

Go Back to Shy David's Temple of Set Page.