JF Kennedy

The Terror Industry (1)

By M.K. Styllinski

 If you’re submitting budget proposals for a law enforcement agency, for an intelligence agency, you’re not going to submit the proposal that ‘We won the war on terror and everything’s great,’ cuz the first thing that’s gonna happen is your budget’s gonna be cut in half. You know, it’s my opposite of Jesse Jackson’s ‘Keep Hope Alive’—it’s ‘Keep Fear Alive.’ Keep it alive.”

former FBI assistant director Thomas Fuentes


twin-towersIt took over 35 years for the majority of Americans to realise that factions within their own government assassinated John F. Kennedy. Not exactly a hopeful premise from which to start. It was at this juncture that the ground was laid for a more serious threat to the freedoms of not just the American Republic but to the stability of the whole world. More than 14 years have passed since the September 11 attacks and more people than ever are studying the official story and coming away with many more questions than answers.

Opinion polls on 911 vary greatly, both in terms of the questions asked and the size of the number of respondents. Back in 2006 more than a third of the American public suspected that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East. [1] One in seven people in the UK believe the US government staged 9/11 and a recent poll sponsored by the German magazine Welt der Wunder resulted in 89 percent of the respondents saying they don’t believe the US government has told the whole truth about 9/11. [2] Interestingly, for the purveyors of State protection, a 2012 online poll by The Franklin Centre Library revealed that 77 percent thought 11 years after 9/11 that we were all less safe than before. [3]

With 75 top professors and leading scientists claiming  9/11 was ‘inside job’ in 2014, it appears academia is catching up with the public, though at a snails space. A more respectable 2,322 architects and structural engineers have also expressed their disbelief in all or some of the aspects of the official story over at Architects & Engineers for 9/11 truth (ae911truth.org/). There are hundreds of other 9/11 website organisations and non-profit educational charities who take issue with the governments version ranging from grassroots to academic.

The online encyclopedia of Wikipedia, (censored and guarded by suitable official story gatekeepers) provides the best summary of the US government and media-led “conspiracy theory” which has lodged itself in the public mind. The following represents the standard synopsis which is constantly wheeled out from media outlets and taken as the consensus.

Once upon a time…

“The September 11 attacks (also referred to as September 11, September 11th, or 9/11) were a series of four coordinated suicide attacks upon the United States in New York City and the Washington, D.C. areas on September 11, 2001. On that Tuesday morning, 19 terrorists from the Islamist militant group Al-Qaeda hijacked four passenger jets. The hijackers intentionally flew two of those planes, American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175, into the North and South towers of the World Trade Center complex in New York City; both towers collapsed within two hours. The hijackers also intentionally crashed American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, and intended to pilot the fourth hijacked jet, United Airlines Flight 93, into the United States Capitol Building in Washington, D.C.; however, the plane crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after its passengers attempted to take control of the jet from the hijackers. Nearly 3,000 people died in the attacks, including all 227 civilians and 19 hijackers aboard the four planes. At the time of the attacks, media reports suggested that perhaps tens of thousands might have been killed, and the total number of casualties remained unclear for several days.

Suspicion quickly fell on Al-Qaeda, and in 2004, the group’s leader, Osama bin Laden, who had initially denied involvement, claimed responsibility for the attacks. Al-Qaeda and bin Laden cited U.S. support of Israel, the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia, and sanctions against Iraq as motives for the attacks. The United States responded to the attacks by launching the War on Terror and invading Afghanistan to depose the Taliban, which had harbored Al-Qaeda. Many countries strengthened their anti-terrorism legislation and expanded law enforcement powers. In May 2011, after years at large, bin Laden was located and killed.” [4]

So, let’s get this straight…

… What we are being told is that a handful of mostly Saudi Arabians without military or intelligence training, acting independently of government or Intel agencies, managed to outsmart the whole Anglo-American Intelligence network, Israel’s MOSSAD and NATO; as well as the National Security Agency with its massive surveillance of connected networks spanning the globe. Let’s add to this the so-called “failures” from the National Security Council; US Airport security; NORAD, Air Traffic Control and the US Air Force. Let’s not forget the world’s most powerful defence system overseen by the world’s greatest superpower which just happened to allow a handful of Arabs with minimal pilot’s training, armed with box-cutters fly two jumbo jet airliners into the financial heart of downtown New York exploding into the most famous icons of world trade, whilst another employed an impossible flight manoeuvre in order to crash into the military defence centre of the most powerful nation on earth. Then, just before Obama’s election time, Osama Bin Laden, a known CIA asset and a former close business associate of the Bush family is conveniently found after over a decade of being “on the run”. Despite being the most wanted terrorist on earth, he is not questioned – like so many in Guantanamo Bay who appear to be mostly innocent yet tortured nonetheless – he is assassinated and promptly dumped at sea. Mission accomplished.

dreamstime_s_21682504

© Rkaphotography | Dreamstime.com – US Wars Are State Sponsored Terrorism Photo

That has to be the worst conspiracy theory ever to insult the intelligence of a sixth grader.

Yet, that is the official story we are expected to accept – without question. Most shocking of all, that’s exactly what so many people do: accept a story that simply cannot be true. Moreover, to add insult to injury and the memory of the dead, no proposal for an independent investigation into why the most monumental “failure” in National Security could have happened has arisen from the President, Congress, the Joint Chiefs of Staff or the MSM; nor has anyone been reprimanded, let alone prosecuted. The reality has been constant resistance, stone-walling, disinformation, propaganda, threats, suicides, and murders. Add to the mix are the corrupted commissions and inquiries whose only remit is to push the official story that must be made to fit into official culture. Of course, such a coup d’état could never have been accomplished if societies hadn’t been suitably tenderized by decades of social engineering. Part of that success has been due to the global War on Terror, or “overseas contingency operations” as Obama likes to call it.

Al-Qaeda and the global war on terror is the continuance of a “Strategy of Tension,” which refers to a period in Italy from 1969 to 1974, which suffered a series of terrorist attacks with heavy civilian casualties. It was an offshoot of what has been called Operation Gladio and their state-sponsored terror teams in Europe. [5] The strategy had its roots in fascist beliefs of Synarchism within government, military and intelligence networks. Their objective was to ruthlessly exploit underlying fears and grievances in European nations so that people would believe that the attacks were carried out by a communist insurgency within Europe. Many of these terrorist organisations went underground and resurfaced to be periodically stimulated by their masters for bespoke objectives. They do not just arise out of the blue. Much like the ebb and flow of paedophile and sex abuse networks, terrorist atrocities are given the required camouflage so that the perpetrators and their handlers remain in the shadows.

There are many populist and academic sources that will prove the phoney nature of Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden. Of particular note is the acclaimed UK documentary The Power of Nightmares by Adam Curtis Top where CIA officials openly admit that the creation and history of Al-Qaeda as a terrorist network is a fabrication. [6] As former French intelligence officer Major Pierre-Henry Bunel confirms:

“The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al Qaida. And any informed intelligence officer knows this. But there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an identified entity representing the ‘devil’ only in order to drive the ‘TV watcher’ to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the US and the lobbyists for the US war on terrorism are only interested in making money.” [7]

The CIA has used this ghost to buttress the fantasy that is Al-Qaeda (and the new proxy private army called ISIL), employing fake media reports and video appearances clearly from persons other than bin Laden himself which have fed into the aftermath of the new pearl harbour that was 9/11. [8] Even the name of “Al-Qaeda/Al-Qaida” has produced confusion, even dark amusement in Arab circles as one commentator wryly observed: “You have heard before that ‘Al-Qaeda’ roughly translates into ‘the base,’ but were you aware that ‘Ana raicha Al Qaeda’ is Arabic colloquial for ‘I’m going to the toilet’? Would hardened terrorists hell bent on the destruction of the west name their organization after a euphemism for taking a shit?” [9]

A fair point.

The common tactic that has been referred to before is known as the Hegelian Dialectic, though in truth Hegel described social changes rather than pointed manipulation in this context. However, it serves a suitable framework for the thinking behind state-sponsored terrorism which goes something like this:

1. The government creates or exploits a problem then attributes blame to others.

2. The populace react by asking the government for protection and help.

3. The government offers the solution that was planned long before the crisis.

4. Outcome: Rights and liberties are exchanged for the illusion of protection and help.

This is the geopolitical paradigm of our times largely unknown by the public, though thanks to the internet this is gradually changing. Government and military agencies at the mid to lower levels are equally unaware of this old formula which writer G. Edward Griffin described as: “… not a war on terrorism to defend freedom, but a war on freedom that requires the defense of terrorism.” [10] Meantime, the PR from the MSM and academia is still pushing the idea that America and Europe are overrun with teeth-gnashing terrorists hell-bent in renting asunder the fabric of our Western way of life. Since what is left of any civil rights in Europe and the US constitution has been eviscerated by the very same authorities who peddle these myths then might there be some mileage in the idea that they have something to gain from it all? For anyone who has taken the time to research the genesis of terrorism and the present-day nonsense passing for terrorist laws in the United States it is beyond doubt that the only thing American and European people need to fear is their governments.

According to a basic statistical analysis from 2013 the actual percentage of the US population who may be classified as a terrorist is around 0.00016%, or about 1 in 624,297 people. In this context, the writer Marc Salvo makes a pertinent observation about this topsy-turvy terror game when he said just a few months ago: “We’re not suggesting that terrorism doesn’t exist, but considering that 1 in 1000 Americans in 2010 were the subject of police misconduct ranging from excessive force beatings and murder to sexual assault and false arrest, perhaps the government should turn its surveillance on itself, rather than the 99.9% of Americans who want nothing more than to be left alone.” [11]

That is not to say there are not genuine terrorist plots, but the key issue here is what prevents terrorism from occurring and what actively encourages it? We know that invading Syria or Iraq has provided a massive surge of terrorist cells in those countries as a result and a bleed-through must have occurred in America and Europe. However, like some police trawling and entrapment operations in the UK, the lines between what is a genuine terrorist plot and creating home grown fanatics is more than blurred, it continues to stoke the needed fear and high profits necessary to sustain a terror industry.

As Al-Qaeda is wound down, ISIS takes over, funded with billions of dollars: a new brand with new bloody atrocities to market …

 


Notes

[1] ‘New National Poll: 36percent of Americans Believe 9/11 Was an Inside Job’ By Thomas Hargrove, Scripps Howard News Service Seattle. August 2, 2006.
[2] ‘One in seven believe U.S. government staged the 9/11 attacks in conspiracy’- The belief is more common among younger people, with a quarter of 16 to 24-year-olds subscribing to the theory By Alanah Eriksen, Daily Mail, 29 August 2011 | ‘German Poll: 89percent Question 9/11’ Welt-der-Wunder, January 24, 2011, 9/11 Truth News.
[3] ‘9/11 Online Poll’ The Franklin Center, September 11, 2012. http://www.franklincenterblog.wordpress.com
[4] ‘September 11th Attacks’www.wikipedia.com ( A far better starting point for an alternative “wikipedia” version of 9/11 can be found at wikispooks.)
[5] “Operation Gladio is undisputed historical fact. Gladio was part of a post-World War II program set up by the CIA and NATO supposedly to thwart future Soviet/communist invasions or influence in Italy and Western Europe. In fact, it became a state-sponsored right-wing terrorist network, involved in false flag operations and the subversion of democracy.
The existence of Gladio was confirmed and admitted by the Italian government in 1990, after a judge, Felice Casson, discovered the network in the course of his investigations into right-wing terrorism. Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti admitted Gladio’s existence but tried to minimize its significance.
The main function of the Gladio-style groups, in the absence of Soviet invasion, seems to have been to discredit left-wing groups and politicians through the use of “the strategy of tension,” including false-flag terrorism. … The aim was to instill fear into the populace while framing communist and left-wing political opponents for terrorist atrocities.” – Operation GladioNATO/CIA “Stay-Behind” Secret Armies/ Truth Move / International Truth Movement, http://www.truthmove.org/content/operation-gladio/
[6] A partial listing for your own research follows: The Power of Nightmares BBC documentary by Adam Curtis. This is freely available to watch from various sources on the internet. ‘Al Qaeda and the ‘War on Terrorism’’ By Michel Chossudovsky, January 20, 2008. The Centre for Global Research: http://www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=7718 and read the updated version of his 2005 book: America’s War on Terrorism by Michel Chossudovsky,| ISBN 0-9737147-1-9 2005. wwwglobalresearch.ca.: “…new chapters focuses on the use of 9/11 as a pretext for the invasion and illegal occupation of Iraq, the militarisation of justice and law enforcement and the repeal of democracy. According to Chossudovsky, the ‘war on terrorism’ is a complete fabrication based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin Laden, outwitted the $40 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus. The “war on terrorism” is a war of conquest. Globalisation is the final march to the “New World Order”, dominated by Wall Street and the U.S. military-industrial complex. September 11, 2001 provides a justification for waging a war without borders. Washington’s agenda consists in extending the frontiers of the American Empire to facilitate complete U.S. corporate control, while installing within America the institutions of the Homeland Security State.” | See also: ‘Divide and Conquer: The Anglo-American Imperial Project’ by Andrew G. Marshall, Global Research, July 10, 2008 and ‘The Myth Of The Palestinian Suicide Bomber’ By Joe Quinn, Sott.net, 29 Jan 2007.
[7] ‘Al Qaeda: The Database’ by Pierre-Henry Bunel, Wayne Masden report November 18 2005. “In yet another example of what happens to those who challenge the system, in December 2001, Maj. Pierre-Henri Bunel was convicted by a secret French military court of passing classified documents that identified potential NATO bombing targets in Serbia to a Serbian agent during the Kosovo war in 1998. Bunel’s case was transferred from a civilian court to keep the details of the case classified. Bunel’s character witnesses and psychologists notwithstanding, the system “got him” for telling the truth about Al Qaeda and who has actually been behind the terrorist attacks commonly blamed on that group. It is noteworthy that that Yugoslav government, the government with whom Bunel was asserted by the French government to have shared information, claimed that Albanian and Bosnian guerrillas in the Balkans were being backed by elements of “Al Qaeda.” We now know that these guerrillas were being backed by money provided by the Bosnian Defense Fund, an entity established as a special fund at Bush-influenced Riggs Bank and directed by Richard Perle and Douglas Feith.”
[8] ‘Researcher: Bin Laden’s beard is real, video is not’ – Digital evidence supports the theory that Al-Qaida is recycling old footage to create new messages. Cnet.com September 12, 2007.
[9] ‘Existence of ‘Al-Qaeda’ Is Crap; Quite Literally’ – Did Osama really choose to name his terror network after potty humor or was it a computer database he used to chat with his CIA handlers? By Paul Joseph Watson, PrisonPlanet.com| October 6 2006: “The origins of the name “Al-Qaeda,” and its real arabic connotations prove that every time the Bush administration, Fox News, or any individual who cites the threat of ‘Al-Qaeda,’ as a mandate for war and domestic authoritarianism, they are propagating the myth that such a group ever existed.
An organization by the name of “Al-Qaeda” does not exist and has never existed outside a falsely coined collective term for offshoot loose knit terror cells, the majority of which are guided by the Pakistani ISI, Mossad, the Saudis, MI6 and the CIA, that were created in response to America’s actions after 9/11 – as the recent NIE report shows. According to the BBC documentary The Power of Nightmares, the infamous footage of Bin Laden marching around with armed soldiers was a ruse on the part of Osama himself, graciously propagated by the lapdog press, in which actors were hired off the streets, given uniforms and guns and told to look aggressive.” […]
[10] ‘The Chasm: The Future Is Calling’ (Part One) by G. Edward Griffin 2003, Revised March 17, 2011.
[11] ‘Odds That You Are a Terrorist: 1 in 624,297’ By Mac Slavo, SHTFplan.com, October 18th, 2013.

Save

9/11: The Point of No Return?

By M.K. Styllinski

 “Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th; malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists themselves, away from the guilty.”

 – President G.W. Bush, at the United Nations, November 10, 2001


9-11_Truth_2Note: Let it be said right at the start: I am no 9/11 scholar. This is merely an attempt to refresh our minds about the nature of the September 11th attacks in the context of an emerging Pathocracy and the subjects previously discussed. Therefore, what follows in this series is in no way a comprehensive analysis of what is, after all a vast topic. That said, as part of an exploration of why humanity stands at the threshold of massive change, it would be foolish not to include a summary of the key elements involved in such a global marker. I hope the following posts help to at least clarify the subject for those beginning to take a serious look at the nature of our reality in this context.


September 11th 2001 and the World Trade Centre attacks are a signpost in the fortunes of social control. It was the day – perhaps more than any other in the last two hundred years – that saw geo-strategy and our societies change for the worse. With any major act of synthetic terror there is a window of opportunity to perceive the objective reality behind the noise and smoke before Official Culture brings the shutters down once more. Since 2001, anyone who has taken the time to carefully sift through the discrepancies, distortions and obvious lies of the official conspiracy theory will have to navigate through the minefield of individual and collective belief as to how the world works. We bridle at accusations that our thinking is often just second or third hand opinion lifted from mainstream radio, T.V., newspapers or blogs. Seldom do we truly question what we are being force-fed through the constant osmosis of “news”. What the mainstream media (MSM) and most of current academia believe doesn’t just impinge on our own evaluations but very often exclusively determines the quality and direction of our opinions. This is why the media has such a crucial role to play in the correct presentation and dissemination of information.

Unfortunately, we cannot trust the MSM to provide unbiased and objective analysis due to a variety of conflicting interests from corporate, government and Psychological Operations teams (PSYOPS) embedded in media institutions for decades and the internet since its inception. Our news is layered over with self-censorship and journalistic pride that will not touch subjects deemed taboo for fear of losing their job or even worse, losing respect and prestige so coveted in their respective fields. As a result, there are well-known journalists and academics for which the subject of 9/11 is off-limits because it is has evolved into such a “hot potato” of controversy that to address it would mean the end of their social standing.

It is also true that certain persons still operate from a hopelessly juvenile dictionary which they still prefer to use when appraising personal and external realities. They derive comfort in overly simplistic versions of national and international events, despite the apparent expertise and erudition in their chosen field. Their beliefs come first and reality is tailored towards it. They cannot and will not sanction the idea that a coup d’état could have taken place on September 11th and no amount of reasoning will alter such a position. The often smug, post-modern denials and ad hominem attacks are used as a battering ram against those wishing to find the truth and if you start to make some headway in connecting the dots you will likely be on the end of carefully targeted character assassination by the fearful and ill-informed.

Official Culture determines what is or isn’t possible regarding the nature of governments and the military-intelligence apparatus, which means an almost impenetrable wall preventing critical analysis and reasoned discourse. What is now labelled the 9/11 Truth Movement is no exception, having been thoroughly infiltrated by paid CoIntelpro agents tasked with sowing the seeds of in-fighting and disinformation.

Talk show host and “king of conspiracy theory”, Alex Jones is a prime example. Famous for his cringe-making rants and bombastic behaviour and extremely commercial internet websites, he manages to switch off anyone interested in discovering the objective truth about our world, though he naturally appeals to those of high school age just waking up to the world.  Jones exists to hoover up any and all information pertaining to conspiracy-related topics and thus helps to tarnish these subjects by association. If he happens to get invited on mainstream television he is so over the top and reactionary that any rational conversation is impossible. This is how CoIntelpro works: whether a conscious or unconscious agent, both will assist to deflect, distort and disinform.

alex_jones

Alex Jones Talk show host and “conspiracy king”.

Similarly, Go to the internet pages of the very popular encyclopaedia Wikipedia and search for the pages on 9/11 and you will come away thinking that the 9/11 Truth Movement is inhabited only by delusional nerds, that the official story is beyond repute and supported by cast-iron facts. Wikipedia is visited by millions of people every day who might be persuaded by the obviously skewed presentation; where voluminous pages expound on the official story, affording little time for critical appraisal and alternative arguments.

In reality, there are many well qualified, experienced, rational and sincere persons for whom the official story of 9/11 does not and cannot possibly be anything but a fictional account. Anyone who approaches the subject with an open but skeptical mind and are able to think critically about this issue will inevitably come away with the disturbing conclusion that something is very wrong with the narrative we have been sold. Yet, there is a constant maintenance of the official story by the MSM and governments world-wide.

Once you start digging, the propaganda, blatant lies, fallacies and distortions are so painfully obvious to those who take the time, that it becomes truly shocking how deeply managed our culture truly is. And be assured, you don’t have to go very far before the central premise of the official story shows itself to be no more than a house of cards waiting to tumble. But fear is the cement upon which the bricks of belief can be constructed. And it is sometimes terrifying to have all that one thought good and true scattered to the wind. But it must be done if we are to have any hope at all going beyond an illusion of democracy.


“I Believe…”

Two words which have determined the course of history.

We humans have a curious predisposition to seek belief instead of facts. All actions or non-actions are based around either direct verification by experience and attention to supporting evidence or a preference for belief which includes neither. Belief systems set a demarcation line that cannot be crossed. One is happy in one’s belief and reality defines it.  Our wishful thinking tends to offer temporary comfort from the demons in our subconscious shadows. The wish to believe provides it with a formal structure which we can re-affirm in the outer world, surrounding ourselves with others who have chosen the same “consensus” through which to live their lives. Threats to those constructs are often resisted with logical fallacies and emotional reactions:

“Because the Bible says so and the Bible is the word of God.”

“I believe in Science. If there is no empirical proof then as far as I’m concerned, it doesn’t exist.”

“You don’t believe in all that 911 conspiracy theory nonsense do you?”

Peer groups and tribal memberships provide a rich reservoir of socio-cultural knowledge offering a ready template for custom-made ideologies. This is gradually adapted to one’s own personality and conditioned by long-term memory. If it fits with our need to survive in society, perhaps buffering us from pain, fear and uncertainty, then our social position, values, and objectives will conform to it. Conformity – at whatever degree or level – is a defining factor accompanied by a dictionary of interpretation which must exclude other forms of knowledge. When such a dictionary becomes out-dated and in conflict with the facts – even though new knowledge lies alongside it – that interpretation becomes a juvenile one, locked into the past and resistant to change.

Change, as we all know, can be very painful.

dreamstime_m_20965675© Krutoeva | Dreamstime.com – Through Rose Colored Glasses Photo

When assumption and ignorance are chosen as a way to protect ourselves from uncertainty, responsibility and unpleasant memories then abstract ideas provide the tool for social engineering and the seeds for ponerological influences. It logically follows that one’s beliefs can facilitate directions which – though founded on good intentions and “Christian principles” – may not be in the individual’s, groups’ or societies’ best interests. Any belief tends to reduce the potential for creative choices by limiting the field of awareness and therefore the quality of consciousness.

Psychopaths, social dominators and authoritarian personalities cling to their beliefs as a confirmation of their chosen, highly subjective reality. They serve any figure of authority be it a new age guru, academic lecturer or any type of leader that confers rewards for obedience. They prefer fantasy rather than what is, especially if, in the authoritarian’s case, it provides certainty against the unknown, however simplistic.

The psychopath will create reality according to his instinctive, primal desires which exclude all else. He will bend and force life into his twisted conceptions, whatever the cost and whatever the stakes. He turns the world into a poker game with guns and aces up his sleeve. Our wish to believe lends him momentum to achieve his goals; the projection of his self-belief is willingly received by those whose inner nature is vulnerable and without foundation. Belief restricts an open system of learning, which often includes suffering. Suffering accompanies self-growth as we discover what is, rather than what we would like it to be.

The world is conspiratorial by nature though this fact has been successfully glossed over by a combination of wishful thinking and perception management. After all, if you want to suggest that the government and its agencies have our best interests at heart then the denigration of those who offer an unprejudiced search for truth outside of traditional corporate controlled media is a standard tactic. It is also pertinent to mention recent university studies which reveal that the 9/11 official story “gatekeepers” fit the profile of irrational and emotionally unstable individuals when exposed to an alternative view of reality, no matter how sensible or logical that reality may be.  In June 17, 2013 online journal 21st Century Wire included a post entitled: ‘New studies: ‘Conspiracy theorists’ sane, while government dupes are crazy and hostile’. Psychologists Michael J. Wood and Karen M. Douglas of the University of Kent found that:

“The research … showed that people who favoured the official account of 9/11 were generally more hostile when trying to persuade their rivals.” […] “For people who think 9/11 was a government conspiracy, the focus is not on promoting a specific rival theory, but in trying to debunk the official account.”

In other words, the stereotype of the conspiracy theorist as lunatic, fringe-fanatic, in fact generally described those who defend the official conspiracy theory provided by the governments and their media outlets.

Political scientist Professor Lance deHaven-Smith’s book Conspiracy Theory in America (2013) published by University of Texas Press provides further insights into the term “conspiracy theory.”

It is a matter of historical record, albeit widely unknown, that the CIA embarked on an illegal propaganda campaign to circulate the phrase so that it became a pejorative term. (See: “In 1967, the CIA Created the Label ‘Conspiracy Theorists’ … to Attack Anyone Who Challenges the ‘Official’ Narrative). So, when people began to question the 1963 assassination of J.F. Kennedy they would be ridiculed and defamed thus providing a psycho-social protection for the subject. As we know, there is nothing more powerful than the herd instinct for self-preservation. In the Professor’s own words: “The CIA’s campaign to popularize the term ‘conspiracy theory’ and make conspiracy belief a target of ridicule and hostility must be credited, unfortunately, with being one of the most successful propaganda initiatives of all time.”

WTC_smoking_on_9-11

September 11th attacks on the World Trade Center’s Twin Towers, 2001.

Studies have also shown cognitive dissonance and “confirmation bias” dominates the perceptions of those who prefer to believe in the 9/11 official story and many other official versions of historical conspiracies, despite many of those “theories” since proven to have been conspiracy fact. While hard-core skeptics and self-avowed debunkers tend to exhibit an absolutist  persona backed up by a militant belief in materialist science, what may be at the root of this apparent quest to find the truth is nothing more than an abnormal emphasis on the left brain, a neurological deficiency which limits the ability to see beyond their own authoritarian beliefs. This was revealed in spectacular fashion by Professor Bob Altemeyer’s studies on authoritarian followers.

There remains today a wealth of information on the internet and in published books regarding the events of September 11th 2001. You may be one of those people who consider themselves open-minded and well-read, willing to take on new sources of information in order to learn about our world in order to expand your awareness. Although there has been a sea-change in collective awareness you would still be in the minority. When we approach the subject with an open but skeptical mind, and sift through the media and US government’s official story of September 11th, then we will come up against a “conspiracy theory” that is logically inconsistent, defies the laws of physics, flies in the face of rational, deductive observations and fails to explain the reasons and causes of these events on so many different levels that we will likely suffer a change in our world-view. Depending how inured one is in Official Culture this will result in two emotional responses and the choices which must follow:

1) Shock and cognitive dissonance as a result of one’s cherished beliefs about the world coming under attack and the fear and stress induced. A shoring up of those beliefs may occur, calling a halt to any further research and a determined crystallisation of the official story. Depending on how deep the threat to one’s beliefs the information presents, the seeking out of groups and persons who can bolster and buffer those beliefs will take place where ridicule, disinformation and authoritarian precepts rule the day. No matter how illogical or irrational the stance, nothing must be allowed to penetrate these beliefs since they are bound up with identity.

2) A period of disbelief and sadness, perhaps even an initial rejection, followed by an interlude of reflection and soul-searching. This might lead to a re-visiting of the subject and the determination to find answers. The choice is made to seek a better understanding of the issues involved and arrive at more objective appraisal. The only way to do this properly is to network with others who have also recognised that something is seriously amiss.

That does not imply that all the answers are immediately forthcoming or even correct, only that the government story cannot be true and therefore a new, independent investigation must take place, however improbable such a possibility may be.

This brings us back to the idea that there are two types of people who will gravitate to either an a priori belief and the comfort it offers at the expense of truth, or the ability to think critically while maintaining an open mind – a healthy skepticism if you will. Authoritarians, drawn from both conservative and the liberal, function largely on emotions which are used to defend their worldview. The intent behind any assessment of new information is based not on the search for truth but the need to maintain that belief and thus to “feel good”. Unexamined assumptions inform the reality of fundamentalists or absolutists who prefer order and error to complex truth. Since irrational criteria is used for assessing facts which are filtered through the controlling belief, they cannot be aware of their own indoctrination and dogma.

9-11-2011A

Freedom lights anniversary (wikipedia)

Ideally, true critical thinkers, with a broad knowledge of many fields test the certitude of their conclusions. Experiential knowledge and networking without prejudice acts as the litmus test for evaluations. Lying to themselves does not feature and nor do manipulative appeals to the emotions. Impartiality and objective observation of each opposing camp is analysed while using their heads and their hearts to position themselves fairly, even if it leads to the break-down of a hidden bias or the discovery of a set of assumptions. They are aware of how easily it is to deceive themselves. This latter grouping is lacking in relation to the 9/11 inquiries and related fields – most especially ponerology.

This is what makes the events of 9/11 a highly controversial issue because it is not simply a matter of addressing the gargantuan holes in the government story; it is akin to peeling away the outer layers of an onion which can stimulate a parallel process to occur within ourselves. It is here that we find the crux of the challenge: this process of discovery is potentially more painful than simply pointing out errors in logical reasoning and scientific principles; far more sensitive than addressing social, cultural and geo-political justifications for why the official story doesn’t make sense. As you dig deeper you realise that what we considered to be truth and reality is turned upside down and that is akin to experiencing a form of withdrawal from our addictive, Official Culture. Our faith and trust in our valued institutions and the beliefs – so often based on a false interpretation of history – can be shaken to the core. So much so, that our world-view begins to unravel and thus our sense of self.

If you are one of those who consider themselves outside such cultural shocks then perhaps your particular belief hasn’t been discovered yet. The deceptions inherent in the 9/11 attacks may be easy for you to take on board but there are sure to be other “sacred cows” lying buried …We all have them. When we have not been suitably prepared and these revelations happen too quickly we can fall into loneliness, sadness and even depression as a result of knowing what we would rather not know, perhaps having shielded ourselves from what we knew to be true deep down. Or, we can go to the other extreme and become drunk on the new information, our intellect inflating to the extent it squeezes out emotional nuance and thus proper communication. We become trapped in that particular mirror and over identify with the subject in question, becoming fundamentalist in our quest. 

This is the greatest challenge to the uncovering of information and knowledge regarding 9/11 and other crimes, as it demands that we shine the light on the darkness in the outer world thereby highlighting our own inner complacency. Those factions within the Establishment who may have sanctioned and perpetrated the events of 9/11 rely on the fact that many will not go against a complex and tightly-woven set of beliefs and their societal constructs. This programming instinctively resists any attempts at disclosure and investigation in favour of the status quo. 

dreamstime_m_34143077

© Alphaspirit | Dreamstime.com – Businessman Like An Ostrich Photo

The events of 9/11 are unquestionably a rich field of discourse not just because the world changed into a more paranoid and dangerous place since that tragic event, but because the answers to so many questions about the role and function of government, the media and commerce lie within it. It is the central core from which various paths of deleterious influence fan out, and which can be traced back to providing tangible benefits to a select few. Machiavellian strategies are always in the shadows stimulating these collective traumas in the mass mind and suitably conditioned to accept the solutions proffered, however ridiculous. Qui bono always applies.

After the whitewash of the 9/11 commission, the still deafening silence of much of the MSM and infiltration of the 9/11 Truth Movement by CoIntelpro, it may be that researchers and investigative journalists have lost the initiative they might have had. Every year which goes by gives an advantage to those who perpetrated this ambitious crime. The dire consequences for the American people and for the world in general cannot be overstated. The present police state in the USA and geopolitical events in the Middle East and the Ukraine are testament to this fact.

Despite this, there is hope. More and more people are deciding to think critically about the events of that day and the surrounding geo-political narratives. It will be an arduous task to produce a consensus where it counts regarding the events of that day, let alone push for an independent investigation. Nevertheless, it is important to remember that our social systems have largely evolved to keep us compliant and docile and/or pathological and disturbed. The tranquility of mind and openness necessary to make informed choices on this subject must be hard won, especially when Establishment dynamics largely operate in secrecy along with policies in plain sight which require an understanding of their vocabulary and insider language. Thanks to independent internet journalism the blindfold might be slipping … slowly but surely.

As noted in previous posts, secrecy and conspiracy are the standard pillars holding up our Official Culture. A reminder from historian and researcher Richard M. Dolan will underscore the fact:

“Nearly everything of significance undertaken by the military and intelligence community in the past half-century has occurred in secrecy. The undertaking to build an atomic weapon, better known as the Manhattan Project, remains the great model for all subsequent activities. For more than two years not a single member of Congress knew about it, although its final cost exceeded the then incredible total of $2 billion. During and after the Second World war, other important projects, such as the development of biological weapons, the importation of Nazi scientists, terminal mind control experiments, nationwide interception of mail and cable transmissions of an unwitting populace, infiltration of the media and universities, secret coups, secret wars and assassinations all took place far removed not only from the American public, but from most members of Congress and a few presidents. Indeed, several of the most powerful intelligence agencies were themselves established in secrecy, unknown by the public or Congress for many years.” [1]

Undue secrecy and manipulation on the part of Empire always fails in the end, albeit going underground. The trick will be to predict how and when those roots may rise again. Hindsight is after all, a wonderful thing. But thanks to pioneers in the fields of psychopathy and ponerology we are now seeing a return to ancient wisdom, which, down through the ages may have been alerting us to the evil in our midst. That’s where a finely-tuned psycho-social conscience is crucial in preventing the ascendance of psychopaths in power, and when it becomes a matter of soul survival for the individual and his culture.

So, with this in mind, how did it get to a state of affairs where the American public (and much of the world) could so easily accept the Hollywood version of 9/11?

To answer this question, we must take a brief detour back to Mr. Edward Bernays who contributed to a very modern psychological coup against the US population and the consequent systematic dumbing down of its education.

 


Notes

[1] p.23; introduction; UFOs and the National Security State Chronology of a Cover-up – 1941-1973 (2002) By Richard M. Dolan. Published by Hampton Roads Publishing Co.

Satan’s Little Helpers VI: Sleepers and Electro-Shocks

“Virtually every leading psychiatrist in North America between the 1940’s and the 1970’s was involved in some aspect of the CIA’s mind control research.”

– Colin A. Ross, M.D


 TM BRAIN

In the early 1970s, US Navy Psychologist Lt. Commander Thomas Narut was assigned to the U.S. Regional Medical Centre at Naples, Italy as part of the US Navy’s assassination program. The psychologist overstepped his freedom to speak about such activities in 1975 at a NATO conference in Oslo where over 120 psychologists were in attendance which led to an interview by Sunday Times journalist Peter Watson on the conference and the Doctor’s comments. His particular contribution was ‘Dimensions of Stress and Anxiety: The Use of a Symbolic Model and Verbal Intervention in Inducing and Reducing Stress.’

Many believed it was a Navy recruiting exercise punctuated by Narut’s own self-importance which offered a little more detail than perhaps the Navy would have intended. Many other psychologists expressed amazement and concluded that the information should have been classified. He told the delegates that prisons were being used as recruiting centres for assassins who were then dispatched to various covert operations at embassies and combat zones and hot-spots world-wide, something which was also said to have taken place as part of the first decade of MK-ULTRA experiments. [1] Narut makes it clear in both the conference speech and the subsequent Sunday Times piece that the US Navy was the place in the world for a career psychologist as it had the best scientists and technology, a ready-made supply of willing guinea-pigs, plentiful funds and good logistical support to transport subjects wherever you wished.

Bowart takes up the story:

The conditioning of Narut’s assassins was accomplished by audio-visual desensitization, a standard behavior modification process. These men were ‘desensitized’ to mayhem by being shown films of people being killed or injured in a number of different ways. At first the films would show only mild forms of bloodshed. As the men became acclimated to the scenes of carnage, they would see progressively more violent scenes. The assassin candidates, Narut explained, would eventually be able to dissociate any feelings they might have from even the goriest scenes they viewed.

Narut said that of course U.S. naval psychologists would have first selected the candidates for training by their psychological make-up. Those selected for assassination assignments were often from submarine crews and paratroops.

Others were convicted murderers from military prisons who had already shown a proclivity for violence. Still others were men who had been given awards for valor. World War II Medal of Honor winner Audie Murphy was a subject of extensive research. The best killers, according to Narut, were men whom psychologists would classify as ‘passive-aggressive’ personalities. [2]

Narut it seems, got into hot water with his superiors and was forced to recant stressing that it was merely theoretical despite his repeated insistence that CIA assassination programs were “going to come out anyway.” – which they did. The doctor’s story is just one example of many psychologists being employed for psychological warfare and illegal clandestine operations but there equally numerous operations which are known to have come under the umbrella of MK-ULTRA, though no doubt known under a different name.

These included:

… the training of security officers at the Washington-based International Police Academy by psychologists and sociologists. The officers were supposedly being taught interrogation techniques for Third World countries; actually it was a highly sensitive clandestine operation organized for the training of U.S. spies. Congress closed the Academy on January 1, 1974, after its real purpose was disclosed to the press.

Another, uncovered in the late 1960s, was “Project CAMELOT,” purportedly a sociopolitical analysis of Chile, but actually designed to keep Chile free of Communist leaders by discrediting them. Project CAMELOT played an important role in the overthrow of Salvador Allende and his democratically elected leftist government.

In 1975 Congress questioned the navy about its development of a questionnaire to survey attitudes toward death. Congressmen had learned that psychologists were eagerly working on such a questionnaire, known as the “Value of Life” study, that would allow the navy to assess a recruit’s willingness and ability to kill from the very first day he entered the service. [3]

As Pathocracies emerge with a greater and greater spread of pathological infection then it isn’t a huge leap of faith to understand that mind control programs do not simply stop after a show of commissions and presidential finger-wagging. Presidents are not in control as Kennedy would surely agree. As advances in neurology, pharmacology and consciousness continued so did technology – beyond all expectations. One of the minions who proved useful in the field was Dr. José Delgado who was nothing if not thorough in his research.

In 1965, The New York Times reported on Delgado’s successful experiment in the use of electronic implants connected to the motor nervous system of a bull – the unfortunate animal was stopped from charging by remote radio-control. The bizarre capabilities of surveillance was demonstrated when he surgically implanted a cat with an electronic implant which transmitted everything the poor moggy was seeing and hearing to a TV monitor. Delgado’s foray into publishing produced Physical Control of the Mind: Toward a Psycho-civilized Society (1969) which helped to confirm his Dr. Evil status on the net – not without justification. The doc is messianic in his belief that humans will undergo “psycho-civilization” by uploading the contents of their brains directly to machines and vice versa. With statements like that it is unlikely that he was told to limit his experiments to animals.

According to a 2001 interview for Cabinet magazine conducted by artists and writers Magnus Bärtås and Fredrik Ekman there are still many of Delgado’s descriptions in his own articles and reports of how he moved from animals to humans in contemporary American medical libraries. The reporters relate how Delgado, Dr. John Mark, and other colleagues “…describe what was the first clinical use of Intracerebral Radio Stimulation (IRS) on a human being.

Dr Jose Delgado

Dr Jose Delgado

The stimoceiver itself only weighed 70 grams and was held fast by a bandage.” In an article called “Radio Control Behavior” in the February 1969 issue of The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease there can be found:

… short descriptions of the patients who have had the device affixed to their brain. A black fourteen-year-old girl on the border of developmental disability who grew up in a foster home suddenly goes into a fury that leads to the death of her two stepsisters. A thirty-five-year old white industrial designer who ends up killing his wife and children flies into a rage when other motorists try to overtake him and he chases them and tries to run them off the road. Their aggressive behavior is supposed to be registered by the stimoceiver in the way a seismograph registers the earth’s tremors and the same stimoceiver is then to “turn them off” via the FM transmitter. [4]

In the interview Delgado admits that as far as he was aware nothing came of the IRS device due to the complexity of the brain and the unreliability of the mapping: “We never knew which parts of the brain we were stimulating with the stimoceiver. We didn’t even manage to prevent epileptic attacks, which we thought would be the simplest of things. We never found the area where  epilepsy attacks originate.” [5]  The authors reveal their surprise at his: “casual attitude towards the stimoceiver which was heralded as a great contribution to science.” Normal practice for the radar experiments in psychological control are to appropriate and integrate into covert programs. After all, mind control operations were still continuing. It was at the congressional hearings on the CIA-sponsored MK-ULTRA operations that Delgado made his famous declaration of psycho-surgery.

It seems highly improbable that such experiments were ignored especially when they often yielded startling results. To illustrate the effectiveness of electro-stimulation Delgado and his colleagues: “…orchestrated violent scenes in the lab” descriptions of which were captured in the book: The Brain Changers: Scientists and the New Mind Control, by Maya Pine:

As the film opens, the patient, a rather attractive young woman, is seen playing the guitar and singing “Puff, the Magic Dragon.” A psychiatrist sits a few feet away. She seems undisturbed by the bandages that cover her head like a tight hood, from her forehead to the back of her neck. Then a mild electric current is sent from another room, stimulating one of the electrodes in her right amygdala. Immediately, she stops singing, the brainwave tracings from her amygdala begin to show spikes, a sign of seizure activity. She stares blankly ahead. Suddenly she grabs her guitar and smashes it against the wall, narrowly missing the psychiatrist’s head. [6]

As the authors delved deeper into the experiments on people Delgado became suspicious and tense. He terminated the interview not long after.

Rather than regretting his time of psychosurgery innovation it is likely that Delgado was feeling petulant about being left out of the loop after his data was integrated into the continuing experimentation. He may have had considerable lack of success with the vagaries of brain plasticity but his work on animals was highly valued during the parallel mind control work of MK-ULTRA and other operations. Though unconfirmed, it is thought that Delgado worked on Project PANDORA as part of the CIA’s experiments into electromagnetic modulation with particular attention to scrambling the minds of soldiers on the battlefield. It was at exactly the same time that the CIA began to conduct radiation experiments on the US population, just prior to Delgado starting his research on electro-magnetic radiation and its capacity for influencing people’s consciousness.

After the 1974 congressional hearings Delgado continued his animal research managing to link his brain implants with computers. This was documented in “Two-Way Transdermal Communication with the Brain” published in 1975 where he stated:

“The most interesting aspect of the transdermal stimoceivers is the ability to perform simultaneous recording and stimulation of brain functions, thereby permitting the establishment of feedbacks and ‘on-demand’ programs of excitation with the aid of the computer. With the increasing sophistication and miniaturization of electronics, it may be possible to compress the necessary circuitry for a small computer into a chip that is implantable subcutaneously. In this way, a new self-contained instrument could be devised, capable of receiving, analyzing, and sending back information to the brain, establishing artificial links between unrelated cerebral areas, functional feedbacks, and programs of stimulation contingent on the appearance of pre-determined patterns” [7]

Delgado continued his experimentation on an island in Bermuda, where a group of gibbons were placed at his disposal. Naturally, the doctor had them all fixed with electronic brain implants which led him to discover how to build and destroy social orders using electrical brain boosts. [8]

© infrakshun

José Delgado was one of a number of scientists popping up all over the world in response to the developing world of mind control technology. The Establishment had already advanced along the road of electrical stimulation of the brain way before Delgado came on the scene but like all such megalomaniacal individuals they were absorbed into highly compartmentalised research departments and isolated from the big picture. It is highly unlikely that the doctor new about the depth of experimentation which had already taken place and the many government projects at work parallel to his own. And like so many authoritarian followers drunk on visions of security and control, he envisaged a day when a “psycho-civilized” society would embrace an array of technology to ensure compliance and a just and balance social order.

Describing the template upon which this particular mode of technology would function: “A two-way radio communication system could be established between the brain of a subject and a computer. Certain types of neuronal activity related to behavioral disturbances such as anxiety, depression, or rage could be recognized in order to trigger stimulation of specific inhibitory structures.” Experimentation into methods of electrical stimulation of the brain and practical studies in hypnotic induction of amnesia had been taking place since the 1940s.

Radio Hypnotic Intra-Cerebral Control-Electronic Dissolution of Memory (RHIC-EDOM) made an entry into the public domain in 1967 by writer Lincoln Lawrence who floated the idea that Lee Harvey Oswald, and by extension Jack Ruby and Sirhan Sirhan had all been programmed RHIC-EDOM. The Russians had not been responsible but: “… an international cartel of commodities merchants who sought to make millions by driving the market down with the assassination of a president—any president.”

He stated further:

“Lee Harvey Oswald was to be utilized as an RHIC controlled person … somewhat like a mechanical toy. An RHIC controlled person can be processed …. allowed to travel to any country … and be put to use even years later by the application of RHIC controls. In short, like the toy, he can in a sense be ‘wound up’ and made to perform acts without any possibility of the controller being detected.

“Under RHIC, a ‘sleeper’ can be used years later with no realization that the ‘sleeper’ is even being controlled! He can be made to perform acts that he will have no memory of ever having carried out. In a manipulated kind of kamikaze operation where the life of the ‘sleeper’ is dispensable, RHIC processing makes him particularly valuable because if he is detected and caught before he performs the act specified … nothing he says will implicate the group or government which processed and controlled him.” [9]

A small electrode was implanted inside Oswald’s mastoid sinus which would respond to radio signals which he could hear inside his head. The messages would be enhanced by post-hypnotic suggestions and conditioning which would effectively make Oswald into a Robot assassin. According to Bowarts’ research the Dallas autopsy report included a small scar on the mastoid sinus behind Oswald’s ear.

The author includes more evidence of RHIC-EDOM reaching the public in 1975 this time from journalist, James L. Moore, who claimed he had classified documents leaked to him by CIA officials contained information concerning RHIC-EDOM. The 350-page scientific report was prepared by the CIA immediately after the murder of President John F. Kennedy and described a method changing men into what could effectively be called cyborgs who could kill on command. According to Moore, the first part of the induction meant undergoing deep hypnosis whereupon specific tones were used to induce a deep-state trance so that feelings could be initiated. The signals were directed to specific areas of the brain which dealt with emotion, fear, anger, etc. in order to maximize and enhance the required actions. The tones could and the subsequent instructions could be triggered not just over a period of weeks but if necessary, throughout the individual’s lifetime.

This was followed up with the electronic dissolution of memory (EDOM) which is achieved through effectively jamming the natural pathways of the brain’s electrical impulses. The chemical involved in this process is acetylcholine whose job is to carry electrical impulses from various parts of the body such as eyes and ears, nerve endings etc. back to the brain where memory is located. Since memory is made of electrical impulses produced from these pathways of acetylcholine, static is created from the jamming of the brain and sights and sounds are blocked. No memory will exist of your action within that period. According to these same documents variable memory manipulation is thus achievable along with a variety of modifications according to the drugs and type of hyno-programming used. James L. Moore’s source stated: “That was the first thought to hit us at CIA. It’s pretty obvious that Ruby was programmed to kill Oswald, even by Ruby’s own words … As for Sirhan, there is no other explanation; it’s a proven fact that his memory has been completely erased.” Moore was in doubt that: “… the assassination of John Kennedy … was carried out by disgruntled CIA and FBI personnel, using Mafia and Cuban exile flunkies.’” [10]

One might be forgiven for thinking that all this information is just too whacky to be considered a sensible appraisal of the military-intelligence apparatus. Unfortunately, the vast amount of declassified commission reports despite redacted material) science patents and witness and victim testimony from many disparate sources confirms the veracity of the above.

In 2013, a report detailing a DARPA-funded program in “Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation” (TMS) appears to indicate that the tradition is alive and well. At the Center for Strategic Communication, based at Arizona State University headed by Steve Corman, a man with extensive experience of PSYOPS strategies in the context of terrorism The objective is: “… to remotely disrupt political dissent and extremism by employing in tandem with sophisticated propaganda based on this technology.”

Such research is given the PR gloss that it pertains to foreign war games when in fact it is more likely to target a domestic populace as social and economic strife increases. According to phase 3 of the study paper entitled: entitled: “Toward Narrative Disruptors and Inductors: Mapping the Narrative Comprehension Network and its Persuasive Effects” the ideal is to terminate lines of thinking in favour of thoughts they would not normally be prepared to believe. In a military context we can understand that this is not likely to be persuading people to see through Establishment deceptions – quite the opposite. They intend to do this by: “… selectively alter[ing] aspects of narrative structure and brain functions via Transcranial Magnetic Simulation (TMS) to induce or disrupt selected features of narrative processing.” [11]

© infrakshun

Cognitive reasoning and narrative comprehension is covered by one research group whose job it is to restrict or “disrupt or enhance” those parts of the brain responsible for narrative structure and/or brain functioning to minimize or maximize persuasive effects on subject proclivity to engage in political violence.” [12] Once knowledge of neural networks is understood in this context (memory, attention, narrative processing etc.) this can pave the way for “strategic communication” messages delivered through TMS, replacing the particular belief systems with what will obviously be the government’s preferred options. Disrupting or inducing “narrative validity” of the mass mind in favour of the “transportation and integration” of the waiting socio-cultural belief system is confidently predicted to be eminently doable. These researchers agree that such a science of “narrative persuasion” and disruption has/will have “considerably practical and strategic importance.” [13]

This is well-funded academic research headed by those with considerable experience in reaching similar goals in military PSYOPS field. And let us be absolutely clear what this kind of military funding is seeking: the disruption of the way people think and process ideas and stories so that they can be replaced with versions of their own. They going to the core of how people process and arrive at beliefs at the neurological level. Armed with this knowledge: “Mechanical disruptions of narrative processing may be, ultimately, replicated through targeted strategic communication campaigns that approximate the narrative disruptions induced via magnetic stimulation.” [14]

Using the data from TMS they will transfer these effects to words and messages targeted to specific centres of the brain. Combine with this with Neuro-Linguistic Programming, (NLP) audio and visual subliminal technology and a number of other known inverted self-help modalities there is enormous scope to mold the mass mind over and above standard technological advances within marketing, advertising and PR, already bristling with innovations. The combination of these elements is truly terrifying and not a modicum of force has been used as oppose to the kind overt coercion that we see in classical totalitarian regimes.

This paper and its practical research capabilities is one of the most disturbing examples of mind control yet seen. Although impossible to find on the internet at its original source, the fact it that it was publicly available does beg the question what is occurring at the classified level of research. Occasional leaks like this one from so many outsourced research units is perhaps inevitable in the Information Age. What it does do is add more pieces of evidence that control of the mass mind is as vital to the Pathocracy as it has ever been. Once you have complete knowledge as to what parts of the brain work and how to circumnavigate those who exhibit truly independent thinking all you need are the covert means to introduce such testing. As the emerging revolution in SMART society shows us, plasma televisions, smart phones and the constant reminder of the benefits of a fusion of man and machine should give us considerable pause.

Since we live in an outsourced, corporate world where employees’ ignorance of the State and their own lack of social conscience offers a perceived insulation them from ethical responsibility, it is much easier to advance technology in weapons, nanotech, microbiology and neuro-psychopharmacology industries than it was in the past. As long as scientists and lab technicians and the brightest men and women can work with whom they consider the best and receive a fat pay cheque for their trouble then any moral oversight is passé. The thrill of creativity and problem solving becomes a willing dance with the devil. Our individual, daily choices are as important as the collective ones yet our capacity to choose subjectivity over a nagging objective reality remains stubbornly fixed.

If it was possible to change the mind of an individual so that he or she acts on behalf of the State decades ago, where are we now with the huge advancements in technology and the rise of a technocratic, outsourced elite? Can we be sure that these advances have not been adapted to large numbers of people – even whole populations?

 

See also: Technocracy XIV: Psycho-Civilised

 


Notes

[1] op.cit. Bowart (p.167)
[2] Ibid. (p.163)
[3] ‘Mind Control by Harry V. Martin and David Caul Napa Sentinel August –September – October -November 1991. Taken from the Sunday Times article in 1975 by Peter Watson.
[4] ‘Psychocivilization and Its Discontents: An Interview with José Delgado’ by Magnus Bärtås and Fredrik Ekman, Cabinet magazine, Issue 2 Mapping Conversations Spring 2001.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid.
[7] ‘Two-Way Transdermal Communication with the Brain,’ Delgado, Lipponen, Weiss, del Pozo, Monteagudo, and McMahon, a co-operative publication of the Medical University of Madrid, Spain, and Yale University Medical School, 1975.
[8] (p.99)Mass Control: Engineering Human Consciousness Jim Keith, IllumiNet Press, 1999.
[9] op.cit. Bowart (p.262)
[10] Ibid. (p.264)
[12] Ibid. (p.23)
[13] Ibid. (p.40)
[14] Ibid.

 

Good Intentions I

By M.K. Styllinski

“The evil that is in the world almost always comes of ignorance, and good intentions may do as much harm as malevolence  if they lack understanding.”

– Albert Camus


The genesis of evil has so often sprouted from the best of intentions where the highest of ideals are inverted towards goals which can only lead to a negative outcome. Empathy and altruism are the jewels in humanity’s crown. Relieving the suffering of others is a natural desire and an evolution of a psychological mechanism that seeks to reinforce group cohesion. For psychopaths however, they are amusing qualities ready to be used against us should we not be armed with the knowledge of how that subversion can take place within individuals, groups or governments.

The ability to empathise – to place ourselves in the emotional and intellectual position of another and thereby understand what s/he is feeling or thinking – is one of the highest expressions of the human condition yet it is also one of the most precarious. Altruism is naturally opposed to selfish, egoistic needs and concerned with promoting the welfare of another without thinking of the benefits one would receive from such behaviour. In the presence of a rising narcissism in Western society, true altruism seems to be somewhat rare.

How important is it that people know how big your heart is?

How far does our unconscious need to feel wanted, loved and appreciated determine the roots behind some of our altruistic actions?

Pathological altruism is an implied motivation to promote the welfare of another but in fact, leads to negative consequences to the instigator and / or the recipient. Free-will and choice are often ignored in favour of the desire “to help” and replaced with subtle manipulations amounting to force in order to achieve those goals.  At root is the irrational feeling that the instigator “knows what’s best for you” while also feeding his or her own desire to be the saviour (or martyr) according to the dynamics involved. In the end, pathological altruism helps no one and increases chaos.

Martin Luther-King, Gandhi, J.F. Kennedy and other individuals, despite their very human flaws may be outside this pathology as their ultimate objective was truth, inspiring many to reach for the same standard. The effects from their actions were entirely beneficial and remain a common ideal counter to the prevailing psychopathy. It may also be why  such people seldom last. In a world carved out by social dominators they activate the existing and natural traits in the human family to cooperate and create and are therefore een as potent threats to the status quo.

If a government knows what’s best for you and insists on pushing through reforms without a referendum; if a person insists on sending you their subjective interpretation of what constitutes “love and light” when you expressed your wish not to receive it;  if an individual refuses to see the negative attributes of her partner preferring to focus on his nicer qualities – even to the point that she excludes his violent tendencies; when the hoarding of animals is used to support the hoarder’s own emotional needs while the true needs of the animals are left unmet – these are all examples of pathological altruism which may or may not have the extra influence of psychopathy in the background fuelling the extremes. Either way, pathological altruism maybe a component of a dependent personality disorder, characterised by an adaptive or maladaptive altruism. The evidence shows that the spectrum of psychological disorders must be widened significantly to include this condition.

Fundamental to pathological altruism is the idea of a dependency on an external object that can be changed, rescued and somehow altered in order to alleviate the unresolved conflict the instigator is feeling. Projecting our subconscious suffering onto the external world in order to achieve change is endemic in the world. Inevitably, it will be a multitudinous mix of pathologies that will subvert genuine intent, so often framed by bureaucratic processes and political pressures coming to bear on the institutions in question. We will take a look at NGOs and charitable organisations in this context. This is not a veiled attack on children’s charities, merely an exploration of possible issues in direction, most notably in the present climate of fear surrounding accusations of abuse and sexual exploitation.

Fear and Funding

The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty against Children (NSPCC) has a long history and a solid reputation for protecting children and raising awareness of children’s rights. After focusing on adults in the previous round, their £1.5 million, 2004 advertising campaign concentrated on going directly to children themselves, encouraging them to go to organisations rather than work it through within the family. Unfortunately, there were concerns from child advocates and academics that highlighted the dangers of placing undue importance on agencies outside the family.

Campaigns of this kind, marketed and advertised directly to children, were creating a fine line between alleviating a deep-seated problem and actually adding further layers to an already potent fear which has been injected into society. According to one academic: “This creates a poisonous atmosphere, in which both mistrust and suspicion thrive,” he said. “People who are concerned about the effect of advertising on children ought to be concerned about this.” [1]

Children must be protected from the often subtle influence of self-confirming beliefs and assumptions regarding the powerfully sensitive issue of abuse, not least the substantial history of a growing injustice that goes with it. A sensationalist crusade is not what is required, yet this so often seems to be the preferred strategy. Increasing the powers of professionals to speak on children’s behalf is not the same as empowering children to have the confidence to understand and take action in concert with protective guardians. Society needs very little conspiratorial manipulation, if the seeds of subjective beliefs merely attach themselves to the right meme. *

nspcc-bathroom-small-19400

“Bathroom” – Brand name: NSPCC Product: NSPCC Childline | Agency: Saatchi & Saatchi

Charities like NSPCC use a significant part of their funding base to mount huge advertising campaigns. The climate of suspicion rather than evidence is gaining ground. Though many offer up the tired old polarity between left-right agenda politics behind criticism of traditionally liberal institutions one can see that “political correctness” and the staid conservatism of yesteryear are both part of the problem. There is cause for concern that children and parents are being demonized by activities that, while prevalent, are not taking place in every household. Yet the NSPCC spends over 38 million a year on campaigning, PR, administration and public education with 28 million on actual children’s services. [2]

Does this advertising really work? Reports suggest that “shock and awe” tactics projected into families already struggling with innumerable problems may not be the answer.

Part of NSPCC’s drive to protect children also includes those who have themselves been abused with a monitoring that pushes the boundaries of what can be termed “protection.” We can also seeing another form of pre-emption emerging: “From 2002 onwards we are developing this work to help young people who have not yet abused others, but show signs of doing so in the future.” According to a recent report by The Spectator from September 2002 The Data Protection Register lists: “…details of sex life, political opinions, ethnic origin and religious beliefs on offenders and alleged offenders and their relatives. Possible recipients of this data include employers and voluntary and charitable organisations.” [3]

If it was just a case of inappropriate PR and advertising, propaganda and selective data, it would be alarming enough. However, the track record of child advocacy and social services regarding child abuse cases in many instances is less than exemplary. (America’s CPS is most definitely turning into something very disturbing in this context. For more on their record see Police State Amerika IV: The New Brutality).

The report also mentions the case of the Victoria Climbie [4] who was tortured over a nine-month period in 1999 and finally murdered by members of her family, one of a number of cases which were missed in the last two decades. Serious inaction on the part of social services, police child-protection units and two hospitals were found to be the cause of the death with the NSPCC sharing a central part of the blame. Victoria Climbie had been beaten, burned with cigarettes and forced to sleep in a bin liner inside an empty bath. The eight year old died in February 2000 with 128 separate injuries to her body along with contributory symptoms of hypothermia and malnutrition. Yet she was ignored.

Some of the reasons for the Climbie tragedy lay directly at the door of the charity yet a new multi-million pound campaign to stop child abuse on completion of the Climbie report could be said by some to have distracted criticism away from any more probing into the NSPCC. True to form, junior police officers were also alleging that they were made scapegoats in the case. Though we could say it is unfair to single out a case such as this, where one “slipped through the net”, there have since been several others which follow a similar catalogue of failures along with cases which do not necessarily make headline reports.

The emphasis on advertising campaigns and big corporate donation drives, active lobbying and hi-tec expenditure have placed the NSPCC in the position of receiving the most donations charity in the UK. It shows that there must be something deeply flawed in the system which allows a child to be tortured and abused to death from an error of data management that was “inadequate and incomplete.” The Climbie case was high profile – what of the cases which do not reach the press?

It is a matter of record that:

  • They failed to check on Victoria for a week after she was referred to them in August 1999 because they were busy planning a party.
  • They did not act on the eight-year-old’s multiple injuries for several months despite her being referred to them as an urgent case.
  • Once the referral had been received vital clarification of the information and the expectations of social services were not sought.
  • NSPCC officials had altered documents to show they closed the case. [5]

Apologies were offered with little attempts to reason why the above happened. There were also denials that this was an indication of a cover-up, although that is precisely what it was. Since that time there have been scores of other cases where children have been not not only neglected but left to die at the hands of their abusers. This is not to say that the majority of our charities do not do great work, they obviously do. In the context of Official Culture, is the status and way of life of this charity – indeed any charity – more important than its primary goal?

An article from 2012 from the opinionsite.org entitled: NSPCC maintains abuse hysteria as donations fall goes into some detail as to the problems with NSPCC’s trajectory. Though I don’t agree with all the author’s recommendations he makes some very valid points highlighting:

A report by New Philanthropy Capital which was covered by the Guardian newspaper in 2007 concluded that despite spending £250 million in its ‘Full Stop’ campaign, the NSPCC had been singularly ineffective in making any significant difference to the abuse of any children.  It also noted the NSPCC’s addiction to high-profile PR campaigns, effectively drawing public attention to child abuse through exaggeration and less than accurate research. The report said the campaign was something that “…had very little bearing on whether a substance-abusing parent neglects their child behind closed doors, or whether a sexual offender chooses to abuse a child when they have the opportunity to do so in secret.”

Disturbing allegations that the NSPCC can be viewed as an arm of government propaganda is also levelled:

  • The NSPCC is the only charity with statutory powers of investigation and referral. This means that the charity is 100% an arm of the government of the day and as such, is allowed to continue its dishonest practices with impunity.

  • Its activities and falsely secured respectability mean that the government has a ‘fall guy’ when a policy goes horribly wrong. Ministers just blame the NSPCC advice and its alleged ‘research’ and claim the government was acting in good faith.

  • The royal family and celebrities have strong funding connections with the NSPCC. They give it an air of further respectability and surround it with a protected status that most will not even dare to criticize.

No doubt great lessons were learned in terms of logistical planning, data collection and the like. But questions still remain as to the overall awareness of the deeper implications of abuse in general, where on more than one occasion the charity’s own figures and myths concerning child abuse contradicted its own high profile campaigning messages.

According to NSPCC about 1 percent of UK children are abused by a parent, most usually the mother, not the biological father as so many reports suggest. Other listed abuse is shown to have come from relatives, brothers or stepbrothers at the top end of the scale. Significantly, the researchers estimate that about 13-14 percent of sexual abuse involves non-relatives – which is to say, people outside the family. It has long been known that even in the United States as far back as 1989, that: “ … non-biological fathers were almost four times as likely as natural fathers to sexually abuse children in their care” according to one University study. It went on to state: “Another report found that, although mothers’ boyfriends contributed less than 2 percent of non-parental child care, they committed almost half of all the child abuse by non-parents.” Which follows the pattern of paedophiles who manipulate mothers into a relationship in order to gain access to the child or children. That said, the study also aligned with other research revealing: “… mothers to be more violent toward children than fathers are. Yet the NSPCC study omits the further disturbing factor, brought out in American reports that such physical abuse is most likely to occur among lone mothers. In one such survey, unwed mothers reported a rate of ‘very severe violence’ toward their children that was 71 times higher than the rate among mothers who lived with fathers.” [6]

Expensive media campaigns defined by powerful images targeting the insecurities of parents can produce unnecessary destabilisation.  Over simplification of complex issues seems to be the prerogative of our soundbite culture. The media inevitably distorts and reconfirms the myth of the family in the United Kingdom as an inherently dangerous place. After the many miscarriages of justice fuelled by sensationalist media reports how much does charity PR and media bias actually inform the public and thereby raise awareness? Or can it serve to introduce new tensions of guilt, hyper-sensitivity and political correctness into families already being squeezed by child laws and socioeconomic strictures that increase family fragmentation?

Family abuse does unquestionably take place but dealing with the problem may not lie in hugely expensive advertising campaigns bypassing parents and instilling fear and doubt in the young. It is one thing to tell children the truth in ways that are manageable and that can be healthily assimilated and made sense of, but quite another to garner profit from the creation of fear plucked from essential truths and to then seed it in the child’s mind with no reference point for understanding. This amounts to programming of a very destructive kind.

There is also evidence that charities and NGOs across environmental activism, child exploitation and medical research are being funded by the very sources that are part of the problem, giving ammunition to those who see such moves as the assimilation of civic society by corporatism and politics. NGOs rely on funding from individual donors, foundations, corporations and governments; therefore, a case could be made that these funding sources can affect NGO policy, subtly twisting decision-making in favour of corporate designs. The core legitimacy of many NGOs and charities then becomes debatable.

Since Live Aid, most independent charities have been transformed into businesses channelling millions of pounds and dollars into a multitude of projects. The strategy of maintaining growth and the payment of its employees as the consumption and production becomes ever greater, is of paramount importance. With the income of the UK’s top 500 fundraising charities topping £8.6bn in 2004 one can imagine that financial steerage and conditional donations is becoming a greater issue. [7] Where there is new direction in sources of funding, politics will not be far behind.

The humanitarian NGO Care International and the murder of its director Margaret Hussein, is a case in point. The organization had most of its donations from the US government and therefore never publicly condemned the war in Iraq for fear of losing its income, very likely contributed to the belief that Hussein had sold out to Western colonialism. Or what about Save the Children, describing itself as “the world’s largest independent global organisation for children” relies on huge donations from corporations and governments. The US counterpart of the charity came down hard on its UK branch as it condemned the military in Iraq for breaching the Geneva Convention when US military forces blocked humanitarian aid. Future withdrawal of funding from the US government was implied in several heated exchanges.

Governments and corporations have become the new donors rather than the voluntary sector of the public, where operational independence has been removed. If you look carefully, you can see that the higher principles of service to humankind have been vastly diluted. Or as a recent report from the Association of Charitable Foundations mentioned: “In a world where funding comes from service contracts, there is a danger that the passion is neutralised, in the interests of financial survival. People do what they are paid to do, rather than what they care deeply about doing.” [8]

The painful irony is that there is certainly networks of systematic abuse which are organised and sealed behind the closed doors of the powerful. Occasionally the bleed-through into their resource (the public) does occur and we are able to see examples of a progressively pathologised society. But are the vast sums of money spent on NSPCC’s campaigns justified and do they produce results  – targeting the real purveyors and sources of high level abuse?


* The term “meme” was coined in 1976 by Richard Dawkins, which refers to a unit of cultural information transferable from one mind to another. Or as Dawkins said, ‘Examples of memes are tunes, catch-phrases, clothes fashions, ways of making pots or of building arches’.

Notes

[1] “Campaign by NSPCC “poisons families’ ” The Sunday Times Monday, January 19, 2004
[2] “A UK children’s charity has come under fire for spending more on advertising and administration than directly on children’s services.” – BBC News, 13 December, 2000.
[3] http://www.nspcc.org.uk/
[4] The Victoria Climbie Inquiry http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/
[5] Officers in Climbie case ‘scapegoats’ BBC News, Monday, 18 February, 2002.
[6] ‘Myths Aside, Traditional Families Protect Kids Best British Report Stirs Up Debate about Sexual Abuse’ The Times, December 22, 2000.
[7] ‘Top charities’ income rises 42 per cent’ Society Guardian, June 30, 2004.
[8] http://www.acf.org.uk/ Association of Charitable Foundations UK Offices.