Mind Kontrol

“My own opinion is enough for me, and I claim the right to have it defended against any consensus, any majority, anywhere, any place, any time. And anyone who disagrees with this can pick a number, get in line, and kiss my ass.” (Christopher Hitchens)

I admired Hitchens, defiant to his last days, possessed of his own mind, flipping us off even as he departed this world.

At the other end of dignity, I was struck by the words in the post below of (Saint) Ignatius Loyola, a man who had obviously lost his mind. But it is a sad fact of our existence that a small percentage of the population is highly susceptible not so much to “thought control” (most Americans), but a more sinister practice, “mind control.”

In fact, anyone who reads the literature of the 1950’s and 60’s will run across a mind control program run by the CIA called “MKULTRA,” the object of which was to find people who could work under control of others without their knowledge. James McGowan trifled with this notion in his book “Programmed to Kill,” in which he speculates that the serial killers of the 60’s and 70’s might well have been subjects of that program.

CIA is a large organization, thousands of talented people, but at its beating heart center are psychotic monsters. They ran a program in Vietnam called “Phoenix.” It was assassination on a large scale, as many as 40,000 dead. What happened to these trained killers when they returned stateside? Did they become plumbers and accountants? (One man whose murderous behaviors in Vietnam are on record, Bob Kerrey, went on to become a governor and senator.)

Abu+Ghraib-2-by+fervidal31MKULTRA is a fascinating subject. A trip through its history will take the inquiring mind through hypnosis, child abuse, sexual perversion, dissociative disorder, LSD and other drugs, and of course, the torture regime. What we saw at Abu Ghraib was not some out-of-control underlings getting off by scaring people with dogs … it was a scientific program of torture designed to induce psychosis. Out of such settings come assassins, suicide bombers, and men who proudly pose for photographs while beheading other men. That’s our CIA. Did the MK program ever stop?

MKULTRA was (is?) run by men in business attire sitting behind desks and claiming to be protecting us. But who protects us from them?

And though we will never be able to know for sure, people like Sirhan Sirhan, Mark David Chapman, John Hinckley, Jr., Charles Manson, Squeaky Fromme, James Holmes and others all fit the bill, victims of mind control. CIA claims that MKULTRA was a bust, and was discontinued. I doubt it.

James-Holmes_TINIMA20130118_1004_18Look at the photo to the right. James Holmes is obviously drugged. What kind of drugs? What kind of treatment has he undergone? His mind is gone.*  Sirhan Sirhan to this day cannot remember his activities on the night of June 5, 1968 (the only reason he is still alive). A professional hypnotist from Harvard has studied him and finds that he was deeply hypno-programmed.

We have a cancer within our body politic, an agency that runs programs like MK, and that determines the fate of our country by means of murder and skullduggery. And we have among us people who are susceptible to mind control. If the bulk of the population were not in such a trance as to not be able to see what is before their every eyes, perhaps we could put a stop to it.

I have not linked to anything here. It’s all out there for people of curious bent, and for the others, linking does not prod curiosity.
______________
*Will he soon be founding a religious order?

Comment with photos

The comment below printed but the photos did not at Reptile Dysfunction. So I print it here. People who would not look at the photos anyway can now avoid coming here to see them.
____________________
Steve, you can slap them in the face with evidence, which I will do one time here, and they won’t (can’t) look at it. They take solace in ridicule. Our crime, the thing that makes us “conspiracy theorists” is thinking. if this were the 1600’s we’d be labeled witches, in the `1700’s jailed as Quakers, in the 1950’s and 60’s we’d be labeled “communists.” Americans historically hate people who think.

The photo below is a thermal image of Ground Zero with some overlay showing the actual size of the buildings compared to what was left that day. Normally a demolition leaves about 13% of the original size in debris, so that the rubble should have stood perhaps thirty stories high. There is perhaps two stories of debris. There has been no time for the steel to have been “shipped to China,” a false lead and part of the cover-up. It is not buried underground, as photos from that day clearly show the basements of the buildings mostly free of debris and intact. Firemen were wandering around down there after the buildings disappeared.

Green image

These photos below, a section of tower of perhaps 70 stories in height that turns to dust before our eyes.

Dusty

The evidence is there, easy to find, and people avoid it. Why? What power of mind do the people who did this crime have over the population that they can make them stare at their shoes? It is thought control, that’s all, really interesting to watch but painful to endure.

A “duh” moment

I recently stumbled on some words that are so pregnant with obvious truth that I slapped my forehead with a “Duh!” *

During the Civil War Lincoln virtually emasculated the Constitution. Historians forgave him, since we were at war. 9/11 was seen as justification for a pre-formed Reichstag-like enabling act that set aside most constitutional guarantees.

Other examples abound, as Eugene Debs might attest.

The point is that our supposed form of government, a democratic republic, is quickly set aside whenever there is trouble.

If when we have trouble we set aside our form of government, isn’t that an admission that our form of government does not work? After all, if it isn’t there when we need it, it might as well not be there at all.
_______________
*The words are by Dr. Walt Brown: “…if that diagnosis is accurate, democracy as a system is a pathetic failure. And when it shuts itself down in a crisis – that validates failure.” He was referring to the unending need of our two parties to tear each other down whether those in power are doing a good or bad job.

Great moments in cinema

The line “Mongo only pawn…” was written by Richard Pryor, who was originally cast to be the black sheriff in Mel Brooks’ classic, Blazing Saddles. I watch the movie when I need a lift. Good hard laughter is a sleep aid.

The studio overrode Brooks in casting, and the part of Bart, the sheriff, went to Cleavon Little, who did a creditable job.

But we’ll never know what we missed had Pryor gotten the part.

What little news I pay attention to, I get wrong!

I had a long drive into and back from greater Denver today, and listened sporadically to NPR when other stations were doing commercials. (Colorado Public Radio runs commercials all day long, as much as any other station … they just don’t call them that.)

I gathered that some kind of deal had been struck to remove the threat of nuclear weapons from the Middle East. The radio journalists were gaga about Kerry and Obama.

I thought great! Israel has agreed to disarm!

Later I learned that they were talking about Iran, a country that doesn’t have nuclear weapons but could use a few.

As it turns out, the real crazies, the Israelis, are still armed with nukes. It is still a danger zone, madmen at the wheel.

As you were folks, no news here.

The nature of the beast

I think about writing this post now and then and back off, as it is much like lecturing the tides. Nonetheless, it does no harm to discuss things as they really are. The way things “ought to be” is a life on a different planet. We have to live on this one.

People are herd animals, or more politely, tribal beings. We value belonging far more than any other psychic reward. Consequently, there is very little interest in knowing anything that does not settle well with mainstream views. For most people, not belonging is too painful to endure. So they only know what the group knows. (How else do you explain religions?)

People have layers. The outer shell claims to think, read, explore. That’s a false front. Most people do none of those things. There are layers beneath the public self, and there is the “self” that our leaders speak to. They know we don’t read. They know when we enter the voting booth, for example, that we haven’t done anything more than view a few TV commercials and don’t even know the names on the down-ballot. They also know to flatter our phony selves while dealing seriously with the one hidden from view.

This is the essence of advertising, public relations, politics, and propaganda – the knowledge that people do not think, evaluate evidence, explore, or use  critical thought. For example, even as your brain might tell you that what is happening to the left here is physically impossible, the leaders and the group tell you it really happened. The group rules. Reality is cast aside. It does not matter.

Some of us are different. In a comment in a prior post, I recalled an event wherein I participated in group ridicule of some kids that were exhibiting nonconformist behavior.* I remember feeling revulsion at my behavior even at that time, in high school, when peer pressure was very high. (Why else would I remember it now?) I also was a very bad Boy Scout, to the point where the group leader finally took me aside to tell me “We don’t talk like that here.” (We were asked to come up with a game to play during a meeting. I had suggested “Ring around the Rosie.”) I lasted all of six months in that group. What a waste of my parents’ money to buy a uniform!

Am I different from most people? Yes. Am I better? Please consult the opening paragraph above. I am merely describing reality.

That does not matter. The larger point, the one I wrestle with is this: Is there any point to knowing what I know, of being different?

The answer is not satisfying, but must suffice: Individuals can make a difference. But it is hard, and along the way, we have to somehow work the herd to our own advantage. This skill is called “politics.” I do not know how to do that. I refuse to pretend to be something I am not merely to win the favor of a group. That is demeaning.
_______________
*John Bragg, if you ever by chance read this, even though you don’t know I was part of that group, please accept my sincere apologies.

A clinker

Every now and then we stumble on a piece of information that is so out of tune that we automatically disregard it. So too did John Armstrong when he was doing the body of research for his book “Harvey and Lee.”

I like Mr. Armstrong, that is, I think I get a sense of the man. He’s not married to a theory, but rather to pursuit of truth. Evidence leads him to places he’d not otherwise have gone. He claims, based on twelve years of research, that there were two Oswalds: Lee, an American born in New Orleans, and Harvey, a Russian-speaking Eastern European immigrant whose real name he never learned. The identity of the European was merged with the American during the 1950’s.

In 1953 William Henry Timmer lived in Stanley, North Dakota, a town west of Minot in the northwestern part of the state. During that time he met a boy from New York City who called himself “Harvey,” or “Harv” Oswald. He was a curiosity in that small town, and other boys knew him as well. Harv talked about communism and once told Timmer that “Some day I am going to kill the president and that will show them.”

At the time of the assassination, Timmer had a “funny feeling” that Harv was the guy arrested in Dallas. His mother wrote a letter to President Johnson advising him of the incident. (The letter is shown beneath the fold.) The FBI followed up on the lead, but the Warren Commission ignored it, as “Lee” Oswald was officially in 1953 in New York City. His presence in Stanley was an anomaly.

“Harvey” Oswald, the man shot by Jack Ruby, was as he said, “just a patsy.” He did not shoot President Kennedy. There were perhaps four teams of shooters in Dallas that day, and rather than three “shots” perhaps three volleys of shots. But to have this same Harvey, the patsy, claim in 1953 that he had already been set up on a mission is confounding.

Harvey the spy was set up like this: He spoke fluent Russian, but kept that fact hidden while there. As “Lee,” the Russians would think him a real American, as they would dig into his background.

His secret ability to speak Russian allowed “Harvey” to hear and read things around him during his famous “defection” to the USSR. It’s brilliant.

How both “Harvey” and “Lee” were spotted and recruited is a mystery. Mr. Armstrong does not claim to know those details, only the outcome. I accept all of that as standard operating procedure, probably as old as Julius Caesar.  Deep cover spies are known throughout recorded history.

The “clinker” is the statement in the early fifties that he intended to kill “the president.” What possible explanations are there for this?

  • Mr. Trimmer is lying, and is merely a publicity hound. Armstrong has interviewed him at length (he lives near either Great Falls or Helena, Montana), and thinks he is honest. That’s an open question, but if he is a hound, he’s not good at it. He’s not gotten publicity, nor has he made money on his knowledge.
  • That boy in Stanley was someone else. Timmer remembers him introduced as “Harvey Oswald,” however, and thinks he is the man Jack Ruby shot. The coincidence of names and looks is, at the very least, an oddity.
  • “Harvey” was just talking tough for the boys. He was, after all, a big city kid in a small rural town. (That, to me, has some plausibility, but does not fully explain the happenstance of a New York kid in North Dakota threatening to shoot the president.)

There’s another explanation, and it is my own concoction, possibly a reach: In the postwar era, the United States government (and news media) was slowly infiltrated with moles, a continuation of the Third Reich, a mass importation of spies and military men under Operation Paperclip and by other means. CIA was the vehicle. They and others of that persuasion, who are nothing if not devoted to their cause, made their way into pivotal positions in the military and civilian government, and their ultimate aim was coup d’etat.

The coup would be an American coup, that is, uniquely designed for an American public long immersed delusions of self-governance and exceptionalism. We would be allowed to keep outer appearances of self-governance, our three branches of government and supposedly independent media, intact. But form would be devoid of substance, as it appears to be at this time.

To do this, at some point it would be necessary to murder the president and neutralize the executive branch. Any president would do. The murder would be a “coming out”, a show crime used to demonstrate to those in regular government who was really in charge. The people who did the crime were in effect saying “Look at us. Look what we can do. You’d be wise to stand down now.”

Only fools believe the official story of the JFK assassination. It’s ludicrous. Yet it stands as an icon. All who want a piece of the action must bow before it. No one of a “serious” bent in government, media or academia questions that painfully obvious lie.

Could it be that in 1953 a young man had been selected as patsy for the murder of the president, not even knowing who that president might be?

I do not know, of course. But the story of William Henry Timmer must either fit or be discarded. If it fits, then historians (now called “conspiracy theorists”) must discard all of this nonsense of JFK the hero, and merely regard him as JFK, the poor schmuck.

It fits, for me, in one regard: It would have been relatively easy to remove JFK from office without murdering him in public. What we saw that day was not a murder so much as an execution. Its purpose might actually be contained in its clumsiness.
Continue reading “A clinker” →

Plato’s TV

We are headed to Montana for an impromptu class reunion (made possible by the existence of Facebook), plus some time away from electronic signals thereafter. Things will be slow around here.

I have long struggled with Plato’s Cave Allegory, and so tried to update it a bit here, hopefully having a grasp of its significance in our age. Television supplies reality for most Americans, and is the medium by which most of our lies are facilitated. Most people don’t read, but then, I don’t really understand why printed lies are not as effective as televised ones. I have been able to sort my way through the lies of our times [even though books lie], but it has taken many years and I have swallowed whole on many lies in the process. It is a game of musical chairs, new lies taking the place of old ones, until such time that truth settles in. Possibly.

With TV, a lie like 9/11 or Boston, told but once, sticks forever. TV has such persuasive power that people cannot fathom actors staging events for our benefit. It’s a confidence game. The underlying belief of Americans, no matter how much skepticism they profess, is that if something is on TV and labeled “news” it is true.

Given the power of such a medium, there is no way the state would let it operate unfettered. So naturally the American television media is state-controlled. Americans might believe such a thing about Cuba or North Korea, but never their own country. That’s part of the lie.

 TV owns reality. Since government controls TV content, government owns reality.

Below I have plagiarized the Wikipedia entry on the Cave Allegory, making changes as needed.
____________________

The Allegory of the Television (also titled Plato’s TV)

Plato in his work The Republic (514a–520a) sought to compare “…the effect of education and the lack of it on our nature”. It is written as a dialogue between Plato’s brother Glaucon and his mentor Socrates, narrated by the latter.

Plato has Socrates describe a gathering of people who have lived chained to a couch all of their lives, facing a television. The people watch images on the TV screen and begin to designate names to these images. The images are as close as the couch prisoners get to viewing reality. He then explains how the dissident is like a prisoner who is freed from the couch and comes to understand that the images on the screen do not make up reality at all. Away from the television, the prisoner can perceive the true form of reality rather than the mere images seen by the couch prisoners.

Our perception of the world around is habitation on a couch with the screen’s light reflecting throughout the home. Our view of the real world only comes into focus once we abandon our televisions.

____________

For reasons unknown the following video seems apropos. Tim Russert, considered one of the best of show in his time, is either acting out a script or swallowing whole on a Rumsfeld routine (performed during the time after 9/11 when people were still in shock).  Seen with a proper dose of skepticism, it is hilarious.

A brief trip in the hall of mirrors

OBL FrightOsama bin Laden is one of those characters that appears to be, like Lee Harvey Oswald, in part real human and in part a creation of the American intelligence system. The image on the right was shown Americans during the staged 9/11 events, and was designed to frighten us, to be part of our nightmares. It is heavily doctored to look menacing, almost a religious icon. OBL fattyBut like “Oswald,” there are apparently more than one Osama, and after his death (reported to be December 13, 2001), new images appeared. To the left is “Fatty” bin Laden alongside the real guy. fake-bin-laden1The man immediately below is an impostor as well. Most Americans are not attune to photographic fakery, and the power of suggestion makes images shown to them to be what  authority figures say they are. This is true of both bin Laden and Oswald. Harvey and lee The image below a comparison of two Lee Harvey Oswalds. The one on the left a man born by that name in New Orleans in 1939, the one on the right a Russian-speaking Eastern European immigrant whose real name is not known to this date. It is the one on the right who was murdered by Jack Ruby on December 24th, 1963, and who miraculously survived for almost two days in custody of the Dallas Police. Two people, to my knowledge, have reported having contact with the New Orleans-born LHO on the left after the assassination – Robert Vinson, as reported in James Douglass’ book JFK and the Unspeakable (see link), and Mae Brussell, who reported on her radio show in the early 1970s that she had been contacted by the man on the left. In the world of spooks, we can never be sure what is true. Both “Osama” and “Oswald” were operatives, spooks, and patsies at once. Both had body doubles running around impersonating them. Both were “sheepdipped,” or made to look guilty prior to a crime and without their knowledge. All are now dead for sure, and I can only guess that the New Orleans-born Oswald was either dispatched or re-branded after 11/22/63. Osama was murdered in 2001, shortly after 9/11, and with reason given his comments below:

“I was not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States nor did I have knowledge of the attacks. There exists a government within a government within the United States. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; to the people who want to make the present century a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity.

That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks. … The American system is totally in control of the Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States … I have already said that we are not hostile to the United States. We are against the system, which makes other nations slaves of the United States, or forces them to mortgage their political and economic freedom.

(Those were his replies to questions submitted by Pakistani newspaper Ummat, published on 9/22/2001.) (I know, he went all Mel Gibson on us.) OBL November tape

Fake Osama later appeared on al-Jazeera in November of 2001, and approved of the 9/11 events, implying foreknowledge. But one year later, in November of 2002, the Swiss Institute for Perceptual Artificial Intelligence in Lausanne, commissioned by a French TV station, concluded that the voice heard in the November tape was not the real bin Laden.

In mid-September of 2001 the Taliban offered to turn bin Laden over to the United States if some evidence of his complicity in 9/11 events could be produced. The United States opted instead to bomb Afghanistan.

I don’t know what is real or fake, of course. I’ve been fooled many times. It is no more wise to trust self-described “9/11 Truth” leaders than the CIA, as I’ve found that they are often in league with one another. The former operates as a second tier of the cover-up. I can only report to you that this is a complicated world with many liars, and that the last place to look for truth is in the United States Government or its state-controlled news media.

Secrecy in a Military/Industrial complex

Most Americans are caught up in the idea that we have an elected government and that our opinions and votes influence public policy. We are encouraged to think that way. Many among us spend their days advancing political candidates and engaging in meaningful debate about public policy. These are our greatest fools.

Walter Lippmann (1889-1974) said that the American public is but a “bewildered herd.”

A herd has power (think of a buffalo stampede) but no intelligence or direction. Inside our leadership class it is intuitively understood that the herd should suffer the illusion of democracy.

“Democracy” allows us to spend our time and effort in debates that outside the bewildered herd are of no consequence. Elections are a distraction. Leadership will engage in the ritual, even publicly submitting themselves to the humiliation of interrogation by elected officials (as when leaders of oil companies were lined up in submissive posture to testify before congress). It is absurd, but considered necessary to foster the illusion of democracy.

I have spent many years trying to understand our political economy. I once thought Lippmann to be an elitist. But he was a realist. I do, however, see a fatal flaw in his reasoning, and that is the notion that the leadership classes possesses better vision than the herd.

There may be safety in secrecy, and all of our military and science and corporate affairs are shrouded in secrecy. Every matter of public importance has two facets, the real one, and the one told to the public. Hence we have things like 9/11 and Apollo, events of real significance, but completely shrouded in secrecy. Leadership regards this as an essential part of public governance.

But looking out over the unspeakable horrors that the U.S. and British aristocracies have inflicted on the planet, it is hard to imagine them to be more than an elite body immune to the consequences of its own mistakes – consequences that the rest of us must suffer. They seem no more than common criminals.

Life … “is a tale, told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” It’s all quite absurd, don’t you think?