B.F. Skinner

World State Policies III: The Scientific Technique

“Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated. When the technique has been perfected, every government that has been in charge of education for a generation will be able to control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen…”

Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society

Science is in crisis. A product of our official culture, fraud, corruption and a scientific thought police continue to circumscribe academic evaluation, shackling the best scientists and maintaining a materialist gridlock on open-minded and multidisciplinary approaches.  Consequently, in many quarters, the state of science resembles an authoritarian religion where money and inflated academic egos dominate, rather than a quest for truth.

Capitalising on the Age of Reason firmly set in place by the Illuminism and “Enlightenment” of the 18th Century, the “scientific method” or “technique” grew out of Germany and Prussia of the 1800s embracing the theories of the new scientific rationalists such as John Locke and Jean-Jacque Rousseau. This was to inaugurate a new educational system never before seen. Children would become the nuts and bolts of the State, bludgeoning generations of young people into a rigid prison of rationale and reason. Feelings would be irrelevant.

Hegel was one of the most influential philosophers of the modern age and the culmination of the German idealistic philosophy school of Immanuel Kant. Like the Prussian militarists who inspired utilitarian schooling so beloved of the corporatists, there was only one way to live and be – through the world of reason and a rejection of the heart as an organ of perception. To Hegel the state is the ideal of Absolute Reason where citizens gained their freedom from being subservient to the state. Hegel viewed the State through a lens of religious fascism where it: “… has supreme right against the individual, whose supreme duty is to be a member of the state.” It is therefore unsurprising that both fascism and communism have their philosophical roots in Hegelianism and Illuminism – flag bearers of the present Global Establishment. [1]

To bring all this up-to-date we need to introduce another mechanistic thinker who was to provide a massive contribution to our understanding of behaviour which was absorbed into the cult of control in the West of the 20th Century. His name was Burrhus Frederic (“B.F.”) Skinner who took his cues from Ivan Pavlov’s research into temperament conditioning and involuntary reflex actions. A scientist who sincerely wanted his ideas to benefit humanity he nonetheless, fell into the belief trap that populations could be controlled by a positive reinforcement which was simply a concealed method of coercion. In fact, Skinner was an early technocrat in his thinking and believed in a utopia of science and technology that could control populations rather than encouraging free-will. He stated: “It is a mistake to suppose that the whole issue is how to free man. The issue is to improve the way in which he is controlled.”


A Clockwork Orange (1971) which drew heavily from the ideas behind behaviourism. Theatrical release poster by Bill Gold (wikipedia)

Skinner was Influenced by the Age of Reason and its advocates. His social contract was to be extended to include a scientific elite which would make sure that populations stayed within certain parameters set down by an agreed upon “scientific technique.” It is for that reason that he held with the belief that specialists as “reinforcers” should impose “codified contingencies” to ensure that people – as the instinctive machines he believed them to be – should follow prepared lines of behaviour just as rats in his experiments were encouraged to go down certain paths in a maze.

Skinner introduced us to the ideas of behaviour therapy which included his discoveries of operant conditioning, aversion therapy, and desensitisation. Operant conditioning involves the reinforcement of certain behaviour accompanied by a stimulus such as light or sound. Reinforcement depends on the frequency and occurrence of the response and what type of reinforcement mechanisms are found in the immediate environment. Skinner used rats to illustrate his thinking by using simple experiments with food and water as rewards. When a rat depressed a bar it was rewarded with food. Regardless of how the bar was depressed is irrelevant, operant conditioning shows that it is the frequency or rate at which the operation is carried out (how many times the bar is pressed within a given time and how rapidly) which determines how successful operant conditioning has been.

Aversion therapy is exactly as it sounds: the individual is exposed to a stimulus alongside some form of reinforcement discomfort which is designed to create an aversion to the initial desire. This technique was used in the past to try and cure homosexuality or alcoholism. It was also graphically featured in Stanley Kubrick’s film A Clock-work Orange (1971) as a means of mind control. Skinner’s experiments with rats and pigeons were extraordinarily instructive and offered new insights into how our environment shapes our behaviour. However, he wanted to graduate to humans in a bid to find the perfect automaton, so he took the liberty of using his own daughter. (We don’t know what his mother had to say about this of course). The baby was placed him in a large, sound-proof box with one window where the temperature was carefully controlled. “The Skinner Box” as it would later be known, would go on to be used in many laboratories so that reinforcement and operant conditioning studies could be reliably employed. Skinner was untroubled by the use of his daughter in the experimentation proclaiming that: “crying and fussing could always be stopped by slightly lowering the temperature” and since the box was sound-proofed, everyone was a winner according to Skinner, as “… soundproofing also protects the family from the baby.”

Desensitisation describes a psychological technique whereby the subject is placed in a relaxed and suggestive state and exposed to images and /or accompanying sounds which are designed to evoke mild stress or anxiety. The images gradually become stronger in content until finally the image is so strong that the person shows no anxiety. He has been slowly desensitised to feeling associated with that particular imagery. As the reader can appreciate these methods induce both positive and negative results based entirely on the intent of the experimenter. Furthermore, he discovered that the level and frequency of the rewards determined how the required behaviour could be maintained.

Skinner at the Harvard Psychology Department, c. 1950 (wikipedia)

It was a breath of fresh air for those in Elite circles and enthusiastically incorporated into the psychological warfare of the emerging National Security State. The emphasis on instincts  espoused by Freud, the social engineering modalities of the Frankfurt School and the biological determinism of humans and life itself as nothing more than components of a machine all provided grist to the mill which psychopaths used to keep spinning their reality. Since Skinner’s main focus was developing a society that could be controlled, his contribution in the understanding of how behaviour operated in the modern world was seen by the Pathocrats in this context. The behaviourists were welcomed into the fold and put to work which has led to behaviourism as one of the most accepted and revered forms of psychology in authoritarian perception, not least because ethical science seems to be inimical to its applications. Changing behaviour and belief is vital to changing society with – and preferably without – consent.

Since B.F. Skinner’s experiments, aversive stimulation and knowledge of operant conditioning has been explored through the Cold War to the War on Terror, MKULTRA to the PSYOPS in Media propaganda and the black ops of regime change. Society itself is the new Skinner Box and official culture is both the cause and effect. With the advent of mass surveillance and SMART society, with an ever more integrated functionality from infrastructure to social networks, the behaviourists ethos of managed reflexes has evolved into new technocratic blueprints of managed societies and the ability to carefully control both the inner and outer environments of the human mind.

Perhaps the best representation of elite thinking on the “science technique” to shape society came through the intellectual leviathan that was British philosopher, educational theoretician and mathematician Bertrand Arthur William Russell. The mythology surrounding this man ensured that he was an ardent humanist, socialist and advocate of peace. His controversial views on the future of society have been largely air-brushed from the rose-coloured worship which periodically takes place in the halls of academia and the peace movement. Yet, there is ample evidence that he was one of the most scheming Machiavellian figures of the 20th Century who knew exactly how to play the public and leaders alike with his misanthropic views.  As Lyndon La Rouche summarised in his  1994 Schiller Institute article Russell’s mindset incorporated:  (1) a racism as virulent as Adolf Hitler’s; (2) a feudal-aristocratic socialist’s Ruskin-like hatred for modern European civilization; and (3) a utopian’s obsessive commitment to bringing about civilization’s descent into a parody of pre-Renaissance feudalism, or sometimes even pre-civilized barbarism.”

Russell channelled his beliefs into the Pugwash Movement which he founded in London July 9, 1955 using the Russell-Einstein Manifesto. This led to the first meeting in 1957 attended by many renowned scientists. He received many awards throughout his career and was highly influential in Elite circles. The impetus for creating Pugwash was drawn from his wish to give a scientific justification for world government by using the threat of the Cold War as pretext. Indeed, in his famous treatise: The Impact of Science on Society (1953) he makes his position clear regarding the nature of science and its purpose: “I do not believe that dictatorship is a lasting form of scientific society – unless (but this proviso is important) it can become world-wide.” [2]Whether the members of the movement held exactly the same beliefs as Russell remains to be seen. But as we know, there was certainly strong mass appeal for such ideas, Russell being one of a number of great minds to give vent to his authoritarian sentiments.

Russell believed that the empires of the past lost control over their dominions due to an inefficient social programming which should have been in embedded in the development of the centralised structure. He claims that the “Scientific technique” had removed this limitation. The future would be open for the establishment of a successful world government (Empire) if a “unifying principle” could be found that superseded the fear of war: “… unification under a single world government is probably necessary unless we are to acquiesce in either a return to barbarism or the extinction of the human race.” [3]

While explicating the evils of the Soviet era he clearly saw this as the forerunner of a more streamlined and cohesive social structure where: “… the very evils of the system help to give it stability. Apart from external pressure, there is no reason why such a regime should not last for a very long time.” [4]

As is the case with such a mind-set, it is always the rabble-rousing masses that are the cause of the chaos rather than the institution and creation of strictures that develop from it. Or as Russell mentions, “evil passions in human minds …” that stand in the way of a World State. The philosopher wishes to replace one society and dictatorship driven by the fear of war with another that would make war unnecessary due to the dumbed down compliance of the ordinary man-made stupidity. War would disappear but so would the basic human condition of love, creativity, freedom and spirituality, though this would only be a right and fitting state of affairs according to Russell, since the Elite were eugenically destined to dispense these qualities amongst the plebeians through a strictly behaviourist and Darwinist belief-set:

“War has been, throughout history, the chief source of social cohesion; and since science began, it has been the strongest incentive to technical progress. Large groups have a better chance of victory than small ones, and therefore the usual result of war is to make States larger. […] There is, it must be confessed, a psychological difficulty about a single world government. The chief source of social cohesion in the past, I repeat, has been war: the passions that inspire a feeling of unity are hate and fear. These depend upon the existence of an enemy, actual or potential. It seems to that a world government could only be kept in being by force, not by the spontaneous loyalty that now inspires a nation at war.” [5]

Could it be that these same “passions that inspire hate and fear” are primarily due to the very centralised systems Russell intends to enforce on the rest of us? No doubt we have the very manifestations of just such an “enemy, actual or potential” in the form of the War on Terror and false flag operations to keep the public allegiance to the State. The existence of an enemy has always been fabricated by authorities in order to maintain their power base, a state of affairs that became progressively ponerised once that door was opened. Russell’s solution to the creation of that “loyalty” is not by force but through a type of education that would result in a populace made suitably docile and unthinking. He understands very well the importance of mass psychology and believes it to be “immensely important” and “politically useful”. If Russell’s scientific dictatorship is to work, then modern methods of propaganda must target education. Instead of the threat of war we now have the children as the target of indoctrination. Mass psychology is to be used to this end:

This subject will make great strides when it is taken up by scientists under a scientific dictatorship. Anaxagoras maintained that snow is black, but no one believed him. The social psychologists of the future will have a number of classes of school children on whom they will try different methods of producing an unshakeable conviction that snow is black. Various results will soon be arrived at. First, that the influence of home is obstructive. Second, that not much can be done unless indoctrination begins before the age of ten. Third, that verses set to music and repeatedly intoned are very effective. Fourth, that the opinion that snow is white must be held to show a morbid taste for eccentricity. But I anticipate. It is for future scientists to make these maxims precise and discover exactly how much it costs per head to make children believe that snow is black, and how much less it would cost to make them believe it is dark grey. [6]

We see exactly the same vision of children as products envisaged by the American National Education Board and the Rockefeller mind-set where children’s minds are there to be beaten into shape so that they conform to a carefully prepared aversive conditioning. Is it not interesting to see the same perception appearing from a representative of the British intelligentsia bridging the same belief in the minds of industrialists and Fabians more than half a century before? Then of course, we have the same pattern appearing in the forces behind Illuminism and the outgrowth of Empires which underlie the sub-stratum of psychopathy as the unchanging progenitor.

It seems Russell is unable to step outside his own philosophical trap that State and science offers a panacea for human evolution despite the very presence of government always indicating otherwise. The comprehensive overthrow of freedom and the individual mind for peace and the “greater good” is in evidence once again:

It is to be expected that advances in physiology and psychology will give governments much more control over individual mentality than they now have even in totalitarian countries. Fichte [German Philosopher] laid it down that education should aim at destroying free will, so that, after pupils have left school, they shall be incapable, throughout the rest of their lives, of thinking or acting otherwise than as their schoolmasters would have wished. But in his day this was an unattainable ideal: what he regarded as the best system in existence produced Karl Marx. In future such failures are not likely to occur where there is dictatorship. Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible. Even if all are miserable, all will believe themselves happy, because the government will tell them that they are so.”  [7]  [Emphasis mine]

Now, if you are blinking your eyes at these statements and thinking perhaps such a noble laureate is not advocating such a position and is merely indicating a future state of affairs, you are mistaken. Remember that the goal of Bertrand Russell and others of his kind has always been the imposition of a scientific World State determined by an Elite. Any intellectual philosophising around that point with the accompanying nuggets of undoubted wisdom mean nothing when set against the framework of what is an authoritarian desire finally let off its leash and buffered by the security of his intellectual status.

Russell’s vision aligns closely with Aldous Huxley’s dystopian novel Brave New World (1932) which describe developments in reproductive technology and sleep-learning that combine to change society. The scientific technique is exacted so precisely that it produces mechanized human beings who are sealed into a tightly controlled artificial environment, separate from nature and the “perils” of intellectual creativity or free thinking. Science is only used as medium for social control just as Skinner and Russell advocate, where dehumanisation will ensure ignorance and weakness, which will thus ensure the end of war.

The framework of science under pathocratic control, sterilizes the natural rhythms of life, replaced with prescriptive values which have little to do with freedom or free-will. It is interesting that science – perceived as an entirely rational subject – can be employed to indoctrinate irrational inclinations. While it is science that the State uses to control its citizens, it is also science that brought about the need for totalitarian control in the first place. The degradation of normal people under the scientific dictatorship will be inevitable so that threats from creative individuals who can offer alternative visions would be inhibited, as is the case in any Pathocracy. And it is here that we see the same process occurring under the “democracies” of many political and academic institutions of the United Kingdom, America and other European countries. This knowledge about the existence of susceptible individuals and how to work on them will continue to be a tool for world conquest as long as it remains the secret of such “professors”.

As Andrew Łobaczewski observed, when ponerology becomes skilfully popularised science, it will help nations to develop immunity. Science can serve as liberator or prisoner of human consciousness, something which seems to have escaped Bertrand’s ambitious scope for world government. As Huxley wrote in BNW: “… we have our stability to think of. We don’t want to change. Every change is a menace to stability. That’s another reason why we’re so chary of applying new inventions. Every discovery in pure science is potentially subversive; even science must sometimes be treated as a possible enemy. Yes, even science.” [8]


Bertrand Arthur William Russell

This brand of vertical collectivism demands the erosion of national sovereignty necessary to usher in global governance, the start of which begins with the introduction of economic unions (European Union, Africa Union, Asia Union etc.) that will later be interlocked into one Global Union under the hammer of closer world integration. Russell shows an idealistic belief that in order to prevent the “barbarism” of war conducted by nation states: “Means must be found of subjecting the relations of nations to the rule of law, so that a single nation will no longer be, as at present, the judge in its own cause,” and where “… national liberty will have to be effectively restrained.” While preferring not to mention the obvious manipulations by industrialists and Zionist interventions, he goes on to state that once Russia and the United States have come under effective control of collectivism where:

“… either by victory or by an obvious military superiority, the preponderant Power can establish a single Authority over the whole world, and thus make future wars impossible. At first, this Authority will in certain regions, be based on force, but if the Western nations are in control, force will as soon as possible give way to consent. When that has been achieved, the most difficult of world problems will have been solved, and science can become wholly beneficent.” [9]

Of course, we must place our trust in Western nations and the rule of law and science as the beneficent arbiters of reality for the masses and bow down to their imposed “welfare.” The best answer for Russell is a Global Authority since he is a man cast from the authoritarian mould. Similarly, ensuring the comprehensive dilution of the genetic stock of normal human beings must be implemented and parallel methods of population control introduced through ostensibly benign reasons. Hence, the emphasis on the population explosion, its causes and effects.

Over 40 years later the same theme is in evidence, this time from one time US foreign policy advisor to President Jimmy Carter Zbigniew Brzezinski in his book The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives (1997). Brzezinski, CFR and Trilateral Commission member eloquently offers the same solution for American Hegmony under cover of United Nations protocols.

He states:

“In brief, the U.S. policy goal must be unapologetically twofold: to perpetuate America’s own dominant position for at least a generation and preferably longer still; and to create a geopolitical framework that can absorb the inevitable shocks and strains of social-political change while evolving into the geopolitical core of shared responsibility for peaceful global management. A prolonged phase of gradually expanding cooperation with key Eurasian partners, both stimulated and arbitrated by America, can also help to foster the preconditions for an eventual upgrading of the existing and increasingly antiquated UN structures. A new distribution of responsibilities and privileges can then take into account the changed realities of global power, so drastically different from those of 1945.” [10]

The overwhelming imperative is always global governance whether for ideology, power, greed, or psychopathic propagation. If we follow the beliefs of the Russells and Rockefellers of this world the kind of financial-scientific feudalism they so desperately desire will be very soul-less environments indeed and is precisely why they will always break down. As he exclaims: “The completeness of the resulting control over opinion depends in various ways upon scientific technique,” which means an array of suitable scientifically-based techniques must be found to ensure the resulting education will reflect their minority mind-set with all its psychological anomalies. Such people have no problems experimenting in altering the genetic structure of animals, plants and Nature itself in order to dominate and control rather than to work with or co-create. It is inevitable that under a Pathocracy and the knowledge of the Human Genome, the experimental bar on humans will rise, both in secrecy and in public.

It is interesting that like Rockefeller, Stalinist Russia is so often the example in Russell’s mind:

“When such methods of modifying the congenital character of animals and plants have been pursued long enough to make their success obvious, it is probable that there will be a powerful movement for applying scientific methods to human propagation. There would at first be strong religious and emotional obstacles to the adoption of such a policy. But suppose (say) Russia were able to overcome these obstacles and to breed a race stronger, more intelligent, and more resistant to disease than any race of men that has hitherto existed, and suppose the other nations perceived that unless they followed suit they would be defeated in war, then either the other nations would voluntarily forgo their prejudices, or, after defeat, they would be compelled to forgo them. Any scientific technique, however beastly, is bound to spread if it is useful in war – until such time as men decide that they have had enough of war and will henceforth live in peace. As that day does seem to be at hand, scientific breeding of human beings must be expected to come about.” [11]

And no doubt this “scientific breeding” to produce only the best and strongest will adhere to the same “beastly” precepts that gave rise to the legion of authoritarian principles down through the ages. But Russell doesn’t seem to be worried about that since his white, Oxford-educated Anglo-Saxon genes are beyond reproach and can only lead to a scientific destiny wholly in line with the same kind of British Empire perfection which so captured Cecil Rhodes.

Let’s remember what Russell wrote about education and his regime for the compliant child where: “… Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible. Even if all are miserable, all will believe themselves happy, because the government will tell them that they are so.” And finally, the justification for applying the vertical collectivist dream: those totalitarian governments were not so bad … They just needed the right quality of intellectual steerage. Let’s not be too hasty. Russell may not be advocating explicitly such a state of affairs but by inference he means to suggest that such “atrocities” are nevertheless highly practical for an emerging World State and encouraging maximum stability:

“A totalitarian government with a scientific bent might do things that to us would seem horrifying. The Nazis were more scientific than the present rulers of Russia, and were more inclined towards the sort of atrocities that I have in mind. They were said – I do not know with what truth – to use prisoners in concentration camps as material for all kinds of experiments, some involving death after much pain. If they had survived, they would probably have soon taken to scientific breeding. Any nation which adopts this practice will, within a generation, secure great military advantages. The system, one may surmise, will be something like this: except possibly in the governing aristocracy, all but 5 per cent of males and 30 per cent of females will be sterilised. The 30 per cent of females will be expected to spend the years from eighteen to forty in reproduction, in order to secure adequate cannon fodder. As a rule, artificial insemination will be preferred to the natural method. The unsterilised, if they desire the pleasures of love, will usually have to seek them with sterilised partners.

Sires will be chosen for various qualities, some for muscle others for brains. All will have to be healthy, and unless they are to be the fathers of oligarchs they will have to be of a submissive and docile disposition. Children will, as in Plato’s Republic, be taken from their mothers and reared by professional nurses. Gradually, by selective breeding the congenital differences between rulers and ruled will increase until they become almost different species. A revolt of the plebs would become as unthinkable as an organised insurrection of sheep against the practice of eating mutton. (The Aztecs kept a domesticated alien tribe for purposes of cannibalism. Their regime was totalitarian.)

To those accustomed to this system, the family as we know it would seem as queer as the tribal and totem organisation of Australian aborigines seems to us… The labouring class would have such long hours of work and so little to eat that their desires would hardly extend beyond sleep and food. The upper class, being deprived of the softer pleasures both by the abolition of the family and by the supreme duty of devotion to the State, would acquire the mentality of ascetics: they would care only for power, and in pursuit of it would not shrink from cruelty. By the practice of cruelty men would become hardened, so that worse and worse tortures would be required to give the spectators a thrill.” [12] [Emphasis mine]

Neither democracy nor “The Rights of Man” are sufficient to avoid such “scientific horrors” only a World State determined by socialist principles. A world government with psychopaths at the helm would revel in just such a future.

Bertrand Russell was briefly a member of the Fabian society and resigned over the issue of “entente” or alliances that could lead to war. However, liberalism, socialism and pacifism were just labels for Russell stating: “I have never been any of these things, in any profound sense.” [13]It was his reaction against idealism and his work as a logician which defined his distaste for war and classical totalitarianism. Ironically, he merely advocated another form of dictatorship, its only difference being that it was inverted. He conforms to the Fabian worldview that society must be gradually “shattered to bits” on the anvil of socialism in order to be reformed into a world where a global scientific elite would dominate. Russell is an intellectual genius and knew exactly what he is saying. And though he includes profound insights into the nature of democracy and education his disdain for the common man and his myopic view of science used to dominate and enforce is crystal clear throughout. Though he falls short of recommending certain Dystopian conclusions his vision for enforcing peace through a scientific Elite is the defining reason for his book. And from an undoubted conscientious objector no doubt he really believed his own perceived altruism as so many do. All the same, they lead us down the path of destruction by offering an antidote that is merely more of the same.

One of the first targets of an emerging Pathocracy is within education and in particular the sciences. Łobaczewski had direct experience of this kind of “scientific” induction which was carried out under state Communism in Poland. Based on specific psychological knowledge only the psychopath could harbour and use, he described the process of personality disintegration which occurred as “transpersonification” dispensed from University professor as new tools of the State. According to Łobaczewski, these professors “… knew in advance that he would fish out amenable individuals, and even how to do it, but the limited numbers disappointed him. The transpersonification process generally took hold only when an individual’s instinctive substratum was marked by pallor or certain deficits. To a lesser extent, it also worked among people who manifested other deficiencies in which the state provoked within them was partially impermanent, being largely the result of psychopathological induction.” [14] *

It is the intellectual spellbinders from the Neo-Conservative movement to the Fabian and corporate libertarians of the past and present who act through the MSM as conduits for transpersonification and ponerogenesis. We place highly intelligent men like Russell on the pedestal of laudability, whilst disavowing their toxic legacy which can only encourage the receptivity of authoritarian minds. Such complacency in resisting seductive beliefs dressed up in surrounding wisdom sets up a verdant psychic landscape for future pathogens to flourish and should never be underestimated. Learning the language of psychopathic beliefs is vital, as they will inevitably give rise to state-mandated actions which have been given the veneer of time-honoured respectability.


* Drawn from Łobaczewski’s own experiences as a student in Communist Poland, a detailed explanation of the transpersonification process as seen through the scientific academia of the time. The extract is taken from the introduction in Political Ponerology: The Science of the Nature of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes.

 Pathocracy and “Transpersonification”

An extract from Political Ponerology: A Science on the Nature of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes By Andrew M. Łobaczewski, edited by Laura Knight-Jadczyk:

May the reader please imagine a very large hall in an old Gothic university building. Many of us gathered there early in our studies in order to listen to the lectures of outstanding philosophers and scientists. We were herded back there – under threat – the year before graduation in order to listen to the indoctrination lectures which recently had been introduced.

Someone nobody knew appeared behind the lectern and informed us that he would now be the professor. His speech was fluent, but there was nothing scientific about it: he failed to distinguish between scientific and ordinary concepts and treated borderline imaginings as though it were wisdom that could not be doubted. For ninety minutes each week, he flooded us with Naïve, presumptuous paralogistics and a pathological view of human reality. We were treated with contempt and poorly controlled hatred. Since fun-poking could entail dreadful consequences, we had to listen attentively and with the utmost gravity.

The grapevine soon discovered this person’s origins. He had come from a Cracow suburb and attended high school, although no one knew if he had graduated. Anyway, this was the first time he had crossed university portals, and as a professor, at that!

“You can’t convince anyone this way!” we whispered to each other. “It’s actually propaganda directed against themselves.” But after such mind-torture, it took a long time for someone to break the silence.

We studied ourselves, since we felt something strange had taken over our minds and something valuable was leaking away irretrievably. The world of psychological reality and moral values seemed suspended as if in a chilly fog. Our human feeling and student solidarity lost their meaning, as did patriotism and our old established criteria. So we asked each other, “are you going through this too”? Each of us experienced this worry about his own personality and future in his own way. Some of us answered the questions with silence. The depth of these experiences turned out to be different for each individual.

We thus wondered how to protect ourselves from the results of this “indoctrination”. Teresa D. made the first suggestion: Let’s spend a weekend in the mountains. It worked. Pleasant company, a bit of joking, then exhaustion followed by deep sleep in a shelter, and our human personalities returned, albeit with a certain remnant. Time also proved to create a kind of psychological immunity, although not with everyone. Analyzing the psychopathic characteristics of the “professor’s” personality proved another excellent way of protecting one’s own psychological hygiene.

You can just imagine our worry, disappointment, and surprise when some colleagues we knew well suddenly began to change their world view; their thought-patterns furthermore reminded us of the “professor’s” chatter. Their feelings, which had just recently been friendly, became noticeably cooler, although not yet hostile. Benevolent or critical student arguments bounced right of them. They gave the impression of possessing some secret knowledge; we were only their former colleagues, still believing what those “professors of old” had taught us. We had to be careful of what we said to them. These former colleagues soon joined the Party.

Who were they, what social groups did they come from, what kind of students and people were they? How and why did they change so much in less than a year? Why did neither I nor a majority of my fellow students succumb to this phenomenon and process? Many such questions fluttered through our heads then. It was in those times, from those questions, observations and attitudes that the idea was born that this phenomenon could be objectively studied and understood; an idea whose greater meaning crystallized with time.

Many of us newly graduated psychologists participated in the initial observations and reflections, but most crumbled away in the face of material or academic problems. Only a few of that group remained; so the author of this book may be the last of the Mohicans.

It was relatively easy to determine the environments and origins of the people who succumbed to this process, which I then called “transpersonification”. They came from all social groups, including aristocratic and fervently religious families, and caused a break in our student solidarity to the order of some 6 %. The remaining majority suffered varying degrees of personality disintegration which gave rise to individual searching for the values necessary to find ourselves again; the results were varied and sometimes creative.

Even then, we had no doubts as to the pathological nature of this “transpersonification” process, which ran similar but not identical in all cases. The duration of the results of this phenomenon also varied. Some of these people later became zealots. Others later took advantage of various circumstances to withdraw and re-establish their lost links to the society of normal people. They were replaced. The only constant value of the new social system was the magic number of 6 %.

We tried to evaluate the talent level of those colleagues who had succumbed to this personality-transformation process, and reached the conclusion that, on average, it was slightly lower than the average of the student population. Their lesser resistance obviously resided in other bio-psychological features which were most probably qualitatively heterogeneous.

I found that I had to study subjects bordering on psychology and psychopathology in order to answer the questions arising from our observations; scientific neglect in these areas proved an obstacle difficult to overcome. At the same time, someone guided by special knowledge apparently vacated the libraries of anything we could have found on the topic; books were indexed, but not physically present.

Analyzing these occurrences now in hindsight, we could say that the “professor” was dangling bait over our heads, based on specific psychological knowledge. He knew in advance that he would fish out amenable individuals, and even how to do it, but the limited numbers disappointed him. The transpersonification process generally took hold only when an individual’s instinctive substratum was marked by pallor or certain deficits. To a lesser extent, it also worked among people who manifested other deficiencies in which the state provoked within them was partially impermanent, being largely the result of psychopathological induction.

This knowledge about the existence of susceptible individuals and how to work on them will continue being a tool for world conquest as long as it remains the secret of such “professors”. When it becomes skillfully popularized science, it will help nations to develop immunity. But none of us knew this at the time.

Nevertheless, we must admit that in demonstrating the properties of this process to us in such a way as to force us into in-depth experience, the professor helped us understand the nature of the phenomenon in a larger scope than many a true scientific researcher participating in this work in other less direct ways.


As a youth, I read a book about a naturalist wandering through the Amazon-basin wilderness. At some moment a small animal fell from a tree onto the nape of his neck, clawing his skin painfully and sucking his blood. The biologist cautiously removed it — without anger, since that was its form of feeding — and proceeded to study it carefully. This story stubbornly stuck in my mind during those very difficult times when a vampire fell onto our necks, sucking the blood of an unhappy nation.

Maintaining the attitude of a naturalist, while attempting to track the nature of macro-social phenomenon in spite of all adversity, insures a certain intellectual distance and better psychological hygiene in the face of horrors that might otherwise be difficult to contemplate. Such an attitude also slightly increases the feeling of safety and furnishes an insight that this very method may help find a certain creative solution. This requires strict control of the natural, moralizing reflexes of revulsion, and other painful emotions that the phenomenon provokes in any normal person when it deprives him of his joy of life and personal safety, ruining his own future and that of his nation. Scientific curiosity therefore becomes a loyal ally during such times.



[1] p. 133; Philosophy of Right, “The State”, By Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel 1821 Trad. S. W. Dyde, 2008. Cosimo, Google Print, p. 133.
[2] p.57; The Impact of Science on Society by Bertrand Russell, Published by Routledge; New edition edition, 1985 | ISBN-10: 041510906X
[3] Ibid. (p.27)
[4] Ibid. (p.51)
[5] Ibid. (p.27)
[6] Ibid. (p.31)
[7] Ibid. (p.52)
[8] Brave New World by Aldous Huxley (1932).
[9] op. cit. Russell (p.97)
[10] op. cit. Brzezinski (1997)
[11] op. cit. Russell, (p.29)
[12] Ibid. (p.53)
[13] p. 260; The Autobiography of Bertrand Russell, By Bertrand Russell. Published by Routledge January 1950
[14] op. cit. Lobacwezki (p..27)


Satan’s Little Helpers IV: The Manchurian Reality (1)

By M.K. Styllinski

“I never thought about laying down my life, but maybe I laid down a lot more than my life in service to my country. My soul?”

US Air-force Service man and mind control victim

“The key to creating an effective spy or assassin rests in splitting a man’s personality, or creating multi-personality, with the aid of hypnotism. This is not science fiction. I have done it.”

George Estabrooks, Harvard University graduate, Rhodes Scholar, and chairman of the Department of Psychology at Colgate University who hypnoprogrammed U.S. government agents during World War II.


© infrakshun

Mind control is very much in the public consciousness, largely as a product of Hollywood. Films such as Stanley Kubrick’s A Clockwork Orange (1971) or The Bourne Identity (2004) paint a specific picture of secret government mind control operations all of which fascinate us, not just for their brutality but because they are drawn from easily verifiable, historical facts. Though disinformation and distortion surround the issue of mind control in the past, the questions regarding how much investment has been devoted to the development of technology for individual and mass mind control applications remain as relevant as ever. Since the private sector and outsourcing has taken over a multitude of US government departments it is only logical that experimental data which was accrued over the cold war years was simply continued within deep black projects in known and unknown R & D companies. Taking a cursory look at marketing and advertising innovations it is clear that military technology is continuing to seep into the public domain. Once the province of conspiracy mythology, mind control and behaviour modification is as powerful as it ever was. But just how far has military-intelligence come with their dreams of automated assassins?

Organised religion, cults and self-help gurus have all used various psychological techniques to assist or control the devotee’s mind for the good of the group or attached belief system. Assimilation to a cause and strength in numbers is as old as the hills. But mind control for political ends using cutting edge experimentation of behaviour modification, neuro-psychopharmacology and even the occult, is something relatively new. And for it to be part of government black operations perhaps reaching a state of unimaginable sophistication is something profoundly disturbing. But it must be addressed if we are to have a chance to counter it.

Written by Richard Condon and published in 1958, The Manchurian Candidate is the definitive book about mind control and brainwashing. It was made into a film of the same name a few years later. The movie resonated with the public already immersed in Cold War fears and the US propaganda of brainwashing techniques by the Russian and Chinese communists.

The-Manchurian-Candidate_1962_thumb.jpgIt told the story of a US Army sergeant on active service during the Korean War, captured by the enemy and subjected to deep hypnosis. The idea was to ensure that the solider had no recollection of his actions which were buried deep behind a wall of amnesia. He is programmed to murder through carefully designed cues. On his return to the United States he kills a candidate for the Presidency and several other people who were threats to his secret mission.

Condon’s book was a work of fiction though extraordinarily accurate in all but the true pioneers of specific techniques of manipulating the human mind. Rather than the pesky “reds” who were out to brainwash the brave men and women of Uncle Sam, something more sinister was lying in wait much closer to home.

Out of print and hard to come by, Operation Mind Control (1978) by Walter Bowart exemplified the kind of investigative journalism which is so desperately needed in the mainstream media today. It remains a classic in mind control research. Using the Freedom of Information Act, a good measure of patience, tenacity and expensive payments to several researchers he managed to unearth many declassified documents and obscure government reports. He interviewed long forgotten victims for case studies drawn from mostly from Vietnam and Korean War veterans to US Army and Air-force military personnel. Bowart painstakingly cross-checked testimony of what remained in the federal archives, recording their stories in order to weave it into a polished narrative of non-fiction. After two years of research studying science reports and government documents from libraries he was able to piece together not only why it was that so many victims had amnesia but what type of behaviour had been controlled and to what end. Bowart’s research has been built upon by other researchers and victims and his findings remain just as pertinent and shocking as they did in the tumultuous 70’s.

 Operation & Mind Control

Mind control had already been perfected by the late 1940s and early 1950s by the use of drugs, knowledge of Pavlovian conditioning and the behavioural science of B.F. Skinner. The latter was to be one of the pillars of an extreme materialistic social biology used to experiment on the US population in order to “psycho-civillise” it to specific objectives. The brainwashing imagery was a useful mythology held to be almost a kind of magic that would control the victim’s mind. In fact, as Bowart states: “It was … none of these things. Techniques which seemed to change the beliefs of American POWs and others behind the Iron Curtain employed no hypnosis, no drugs, no new methods for the control of the mind and certainly nothing magical.” It was a supremely effective method of “fueling a home-grown fear of the Communists upon which the Cold War so greatly depended.” [1]

The author informs us:

The US used classic projection to take the potential heat from themselves by inventing the idea of brainwashing which was in fact practised by America vare of nazi techniques more than any other country. “They did not use drugs or hypnosis, nor did they invent any mysterious new devices for breaking the mind and will of a man.”

“The United States government did not have to stoop to the slow and exhausting process the Chinese and Russians used. In the age of electronic brain stimulation, neuro-psychopharmacology, and advanced methods of behavior modification and hypnosis, the government certainly didn’t have to resort to methods as unsophisticated as brainwashing. The techniques of mind control developed, even by 1967, were making brainwashing seem like the metaphor it was: a washboard and scrub-bucket technique which had little use in a world where the sonic cleaner, with high” frequency sound, higher than the human ear can hear, vibrates the dirt from the very molecules of matter—or the mind. [2]

Brainwashing was psychological indoctrination which can be said to take place in our religious and pop-cultures on a daily basis and as an adjunct to something quite different. It was the USA who had perfected not a system of brainwashing but a comprehensive system of mind control where a person was not only broken but a new personality installed and programmed. This was much more than torture and indoctrination this was mind rape; an emptying of the essence of the individual.

At the time and for many today, the idea of hypno-programmed political assassins is still the province of pulp fiction and conspiracy lore. Yet, it is beyond question that millions of dollars were spent on breaking persons within the military and civilian life so that they might create “zombies” who were designed to be conscienceless with dual or multiple personas in order to carry the bequests of their programmers. Essentially, sociopaths – made to order.

ThatsMyFace_lifesize_wearable_facemask.jpgPerhaps one of the most important points to remember from Bowart’s research is the realisation that mind control covers a multitude of domains and multidisciplinary branches operating under cover or within the public domain and with suitable fronts which accelerate the momentum of behaviour modification for the State. In much the same way as the defence or weapons industry, various levels of work take place which could be termed as benign right up to the morally dubious and criminal experimentation well beyond democratic purview. Each researcher, foundation and outsourced agency is allowed to know only what is necessary to know to accomplish the segment of research or testing which ultimately complements the whole. This now applies to technology in a way that did not during post-war America and Europe. As Bowart discovered mind control programs did not have a “single originating source, but several.” He further states:

“The operation is too widespread and complex for it to be created by a ‘cult.’ If a cult there must be, then it is a cult within a cult, in an interlocking chain of invisible minigovernments with unwritten rules, unwritten plans, and unwritten loyalties. It is the plan of a secret bureaucracy—what I call a cryptocracy—which conspires against our laws and our freedoms.

‘Cryptocracy’ is a compound of crypto, meaning ‘secret,’ and -cracy, meaning “rule, government, governing body. The cryptocracy, then, is the secret government whose identity and whereabouts have slowly and reluctantly been hinted at by the Congress through its investigations into Watergate, the CIA, and the rest of the intelligence community.” [3]

In other words, Cryptocracy is an outgrowth of Pathocracy.

As present events have revealed so clearly with the whistle-blower and former CIA intelligence analyst Edward Snowden the National Security Agency is far more likely to be the source of the financing and promotion of mind control operations large and small than the CIA which has traditionally been labelled the “baddie” of the intelligence underworld. Given the extraordinary depth of surveillance and snooping by the NSA and its feelers into future technology and Pentagon’s DARPA it is safe to say that only the very tip of a very cold iceberg has been revealed so far. (To that end, some may say Edward Snowden may yet prove to be a patsy in a turf war between the CIA and NSA. But that’s another story).

Whatever the case, an alliance still exists not just between factions within the NSA, CIA and Defence Intelligence Agency, the Office of Naval Intelligence and subsidiaries in military intelligence, but also within the civil service, private contractors, academic institutions and corporations. Psychopaths operate by clustering together and allowing a pathogenic infection to spread. There are no borders to ponerological ascendance once it has taken hold and mind control techniques are fully embedded in the emerging Pathocracy.

The creation of Manchurian candidates or “zombies” who serve to oil the wheels of geo-political strategy or contour the mass mind to accept new laws have a particular type of personality which is best suited to such endeavours. They are usually highly suggestible, sensitive, from abusive backgrounds, with low-self-esteem and even naïve. Other types may have sociopathic or psychopathic tendencies offering further possibilities. 99 percent of these testimonies had some form of amnesia in common. Memory from early childhood was mostly if not entirely absent and recollection as to their specific “secret” work alongside their standard posting was fragmentary or missing. In the US chosen guinea pigs of the pre-and post-war era were usually drawn from the US Army and US Air-force. Special barracks and locations for training and experimentation were set up with suitable cover such as supply men or nondescript administration jobs.

behravesh20110710205727530.jpgWalter Bowart related numerous cases of military men following a pattern of highly disturbing dreams in which they kill a friend, family member or unknown person in a variety of ways: “In their sleep, the memories of atrocities surface to vivid awareness among the victims of mind control. Night after night terrible images, suppressed by deeply conditioned responses, emerge as terrifying nightmares. Are they mythological? The stuff of dreams? Or are they recovered memories?” [4]

Back in the 1940s Dr. George Estabrooks chairman of the Department of Psychology at Colgate University helped set the hypno-programming snowball in motion. The foremost expert on hypnosis he was brought to Washington immediately after the Pearl Harbour attack as an advisor in Washington. Estabrooks was obviously in his element telling his masters that he “… could develop a uniquely dangerous army of hypnotically controlled Sixth Columnists,” if they so wished which evidently got them salivating at the prospect. [5] The creation of programmed assassins was about to commence and communist paranoia fed into the urgency for unquestioning mind control research and experimentation in the minds of the civil service and lower level contractors who had been taken in by the propaganda of highly advanced brainwashing techniques of the Soviets and Chinese.

Estabrooks was the first to suggest mass hypnosis experimentation on an easily accessible resource: the US Army. Numerous presentations of the power and efficacy of hypnosis were given by the Doctor as declassified and public documents attest. In one such demonstration he describes the possibility of mind controlled saboteurs already ensconced in the heart of America primed and ready to carry out their missions. In one demonstration he stated:

“Let us suppose that in a certain city there lives a group of a given foreign extraction. They are loyal Americans but still have cultural and sentimental ties to the old country. A neighborhood doctor, working secretly for a foreign power, hypnotizes those of his patients who have ties favorable to his plans. Having done this he would, of course, remove from them all knowledge of their ever having been hypnotized.

“Next comes a one-month period of indoctrination under hypnosis. By various means, including the offer of substantial rewards and educational processes designed to strengthen their ancestral loyalties, their cooperation is obtained.” […]

“All right, you say. This sounds beautiful on paper. But what about the well-known ‘psychological principle’ that no one will do anything under hypnosis that he wouldn’t do when he’s awake?” … “My experiments have shown this assumption is poppycock. It depends not so much on the attitude of the subject as on that of the operator himself … In wartime, the motivation for murder under hypnosis doesn’t have to be very strong,”… I am convinced that hypnosis is a bristling, dangerous armament which makes it doubly imperative to avoid the war of tomorrow.[6] [Emphasis mine]

This was akin to saying to a bunch of waiting wolves please don’t eat these lambs they are far too delicious to ensure a sound digestion. The direction of mind control research was set.


Dr. George Estabrooks

Eastabrooks continued to feed all kinds of nightmarish scenarios which could befall America. The ultimate irony is that he assisted in making these worst case scenarios real with the emergence of the OSS, then the CIA and the National Security State several years later. In effect, mind control was institutionalised at the start. And since the intelligence and shadow government apparatus had been infected with the psychopathy of Nazi influence – the pioneers of mind control experimentation – this was like pouring kerosene on growing embers.

By the early 1950s, electro-shock treatment and drugs as an aid to hypnotic induction caused the research to take on an unstoppable momentum. Eastabrookes had suggested: “… that new drugs would be discovered which would be capable of inducing deep hypnosis in virtually any individual regardless of his degree of cooperativeness.” [7]

By 1953, after Dr. Albert Hoffman had discovered the hallucinogenic and mind expanding properties of LSD the CIA had invested in the drug in order to corner the market and to use it in drug experiments with animals and human beings. With the eventual rise of LSD, cocaine and other designer chemicals as the drugs of choice for the Revolution it seems that this particular experiment had fast run away from them. After all, if LSD – despite its toxic effects – proved to expand the mind and thus allow the ability to see the folly of authority in all its guises this would eventually prove to be a major problem, as indeed it did. )The massive protest movement against the Vietnam War and the corollary of social reforms was one such unforeseen effect). This is why, in part at least, the New Age and the “psychedelia” or counter-culture movement was embedded with government informants and disinformation agents in order to defang and discredit their often genuine wish to expand the awareness and freedoms of the mass population. It became not a bastion of true spiritual freedom but a quagmire of dangers for the spiritually naive.


Albert Hoffman

Now that LSD and its associations were becoming emancipatory impure heroine certainly helped reverse the trend. Once the CIA controlled the distribution and availability of drugs it was free to use it as a resource and a tool of targeted social change. LSD began to dry up and became illegal by 1966. Heroine fresh from the CIA controlled Golden Triangle in Asia took over and was pushed particularly hard in ethnic minority towns and cities across the US. The youth caught between the utopian promise of drug-based counter-culture assumed heroine would do the same. A generation of addicts were created and awareness derailed once again. Even towards the end of the 1950s think-tanks had already been suggesting that addiction was a potent way to keep societies passive and malleable. (This was already well known to PR guru Edward Bernays with his perception management techniques for encouraging acceptance for commercial cigarette use). And since heroine did not “expand consciousness” it was a doubly effective on top of the daily inducements of alcohol and consumerism.

It was only by June, 1975, that the public was able to officially confirm in the mainstream media that government that the CIA had been using the US population as a drugs laboratory and feeding behaviour-influencing drugs to ordinary citizens for more than twenty years. The Rockefeller Report of 1975 revealed at least some of the details. The report stated that the drug research: “… was part of a much larger CIA program to study possible means for controlling human behavior. Other studies explored the effects of radiation, electric shock, ultra-sound, psychology, psychiatry, sociology, and harassment substances.” [8]

The fact that Rockefeller is headlining such a report should indicate the nature of the accountability. Nothing has changed with so called reports, commissions and suitably skewed media appraisals which are largely exercises in damage control so that the public is given a bone to chew and business returns to normal. Subsequent FOI requests from journalists for documentation on the Rockefeller report certainly revealed more information which was nonetheless, heavily redacted. This was closely followed by CIA director Richard Helms departure and not before he ordered the shredding of a huge quantity of files pertaining to mind control experiments. Nevertheless, what information did remain was disturbing enough.

“In 1949 the Office of Scientific Intelligence (OSI) undertook the analysis of foreign work on certain unconventional warfare techniques, including behavioural drugs, with an initial objective of developing a capability to resist or offset the effect of such drugs. Preliminary phases included the review of drug-related work at

institutions such as Mount Sinai Hospital, Boston Psychopathic Hospital, University of Illinois, University of Michigan, University of Minnesota, Valley Forge General Hospital, Detroit Psychopathic Clinic, Mayo Clinic, and the National Institute of Health.

“This first project, code-named Project BLUEBIRD, was assigned the function of discovering means of conditioning personnel to prevent unauthorized extraction of information from them by known means. It was further assigned to investigate the possibility of control of an individual by application of special interrogation techniques, memory enhancement, and establishing defensive means for preventing interrogation of agency personnel.” [9]

Project Bluebird became Project ARTICHOKE which would handle most of the developments of hypno-programming and drug-enhanced behaviour modification. According to CIA documents by 1953 a cryptonym was in circulation named MKDELTA which evolved to become Project MKULTRA: “… an umbrella project for funding sensitive projects … approved by Allen Dulles on April 3, 1953. It’s remit covered: … policy and procedure for use of biochemicals in clandestine operations …” with experimentation in: “… radiation, electroshock, psychology, psychiatry, sociology, anthropology, harassment substances” along with “paramilitary devices and materials.” [10]

The compartmentalised intelligence imperative has remained the same since the 1940s to the present day. Bowart reminds us of this fact by distilling the intent behind the experimentation into three key questions which they have been asking in order to direct their research:

  • Can accurate information be obtained from willing or unwilling individuals?
  • Can agency personnel (or persons of interest to this agency) be conditioned to prevent any unauthorized source or enemy from obtaining information from them by any known means?
  • Can we obtain control of the future activities (physical and mental) of any individual, willing or unwilling, by application of [mind-control] techniques?

If it sounds too Hollywood, this is entirely due to the diet of movies and pulp fiction we have grown up with since the late 1950s onwards. The fascination with something so insidious has always captured the public attention but only as a means of cathartic entertainment rather than an acceptance that such fictionalised accounts were based on real events, sometimes far more horrific than authors and film-makers could imagine. Yet, this is the inheritance of the Anglo-American and Conservative Establishments who welcomed the Nazi exodus and its development of the National Security State.

The military, mental institutions, hospitals, government agencies and civilians had become a vast resource of men and women who would become career-zombies for the state, often unaware of their double lives and clueless about the missions they undertook. The 1960s was positively awash with drugs and behaviour modification. Case studies in FOI requests documents reviewed in both Operation Mind Control and many other more recent literature on the subject have sourced official declassified documents. Though many of these are in the public domain still more documents were heavily redacted suggesting the advances and those responsible go much deeper.

Since many of the most sensational murders are perpetrated by psychopaths who have “broken down” and exhibit an inability to control their primitive desires, it seems the essential psychopath not only has a high degree of control in maintaining his “mask of sanity” but must remain attentive to his camouflage in all other endeavours. This includes those  employed at high level posts and those undertaking missions of a highly sensitive nature.

Since the world operates like a machine for the pathocrats, then its cogs and wheels must be finely tuned. Which is why the US Army and prisons are an ideal recruiting ground for those with a predisposition to violence and even accustomed to killing, but not necessarily psychopathic. An unpredictable, criminal psychopath was not an asset for mind control. Anti-social personality disorders and authoritarian followers with a high degree of emotional suppression are ideal since they are more likely to follow commands rather than act on impulse.

Once training is completed the individuals are selected for their particular talents, be it for assassination team-based black operations and sexpionage. Agents are often teamed together as male and female so that should the sexual urge raise its head, then each could service the other so that the mission had less chance of being compromised by the “primitive mind.”

Since the Anglo-American-Israeli nexus is the leader in such operations it brings into relief how darkly amusing International laws and treaties truly are. They are routinely flouted on a daily basis, whether it is engineering a coup, deploying PSYOPS units or engineering false-flag events in domestic or foreign settings. As is so often the case with the global state and its institutions, they serve to offer the illusion of civilisation while offering leverage to their psychopathic designers to corral the public and fatten it for the kill.


[1] (p.45) Bowart, Walter; Operation Mind Control (1978)
[2]   Ibid. (p.54)
[3]   Ibid. (p.24)
[4]   Ibid. (p.26)
[5]   Ibid. (p.59)
[6]   Ibid. (p.60)
[7]   Ibid. (p.72)
[8]   Ibid. (p.87)
[9]   Ibid. (p.101)
[10] Ibid. (p.102)