4 MIND CONTROL IN THE 21st CENTURY THE ROLE OF "PERCEPTION CONTROL"

Signs of the Times for Sat, 04 Feb 2006

Mind Control

4 MIND CONTROL IN THE 21st CENTURY THE ROLE OF "PERCEPTION CONTROL"

Compiled by Ralph W. Omholt AIRLINE CAPTAIN skydrifter@comcast.net

"Perception Control = Emotional Control = Mind Control"

"Control" is the operative term. Is information presented with frequent repetition and passion? Or; is information kept totally secret - or prejudicially enshrouded with shame ("A ‘good’ person wouldn’t go there")?

Is the "controlled" information factual, or has an illusion been created? The American media re-packaged the Muslims in the Balkan region as "Ethnic Albanians," ignoring the Islamic role and their association with both bin Laden and the CIA. No one of prominence questioned the descriptor. Overnight a previously unheard of organization, "The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe" (OSCE) "recognized" new Balkan countries – instantly admitted into NATO. Thereafter, Yugoslavia’s put-down of an internal rebellion was re-packaged as an attack against a NATO member & the Balkan War was on.

The "Serbs" were attempting to return to their traditional Balkan homes, in the fashion of Jews returning to modern Israel. The media re-packaged their attempts as some form of invasion & the war progressed against Yugoslavia.

In the end, the ‘new’ nations borrowed billions from the International Funds & all sins were forgiven. The illusions worked! It was all a matter of "Controlled Perception." The ‘new’ nations were now ‘controlled’ through the banking system.

For rest of story click here

Commentary on the Cointelpro War

Signs of the Times for Fri, 10 Feb 2006

Signs Editorial:

Commentary on the Cointelpro War

Magus

Greetings from the Swamps of Eugnosia, Forum Friends and Passengers,
The old Magus, being of a more formal time than this era we now traverse, simply cannot countenance warping the standards of his tastes so as to pronounce upon the Good Lady's journal such an unkind name as is "blog" (which resonates upon the tongue as though 'twere describing some misbegotten amphibious creature born in a bog on a log); to describe the Signs writ large and the one who writes them there, when both be filled with Graces and Fair indeed for the readers' eyes to behold, indulge me as I quote her sage advice.

Taken from Maestra Laura's Missive, "How To Spot COINTELPRO Agents":
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"How To Spot a Spy"

One way to neutralize a potential activist is to get them to be in a group that does all the wrong things. Why?
1) The message doesn't get out.
2) A lot of time is wasted
3) The activist is frustrated and discouraged
4) Nothing good is accomplished.
FBI and Police Informers and Infiltrators will infest any group and they have phony activist organizations established."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And So, Gentle Reader Friends and Forumites,

Look you back but a few Forum pages, and there will you espy the Magus did address himself a letter to another, the Good Lady Cindy of Sheehan, she who fights the BushLiars in her slain cub's name and does Noble Battle to save the cubs of all the other Mama Bears whose soldiering kinder do yet live.

'Twas in that epistle to Cindy Sheehan that the Magus described to you, and told you truly True, of the most likely theft, misdirection and futility of participation by all the millions of poor, humble, honest American citizen-prisoners in the phoniest of phony groups of a false opposition, those many well known dotted and undotted orgs. Poor, hoodwinked and desperate to be heard and seen, to have effect one at all as yet, they've invested everything they had, as yet, into what could only be a False front collection of "opposition" and "progressive" groups.

If the valuing of its sum total be rightfully placed upon the Proof of its Works, then this movement is most useful for GWB and his PTB Masters. They are benefiting enormously from the utter lack of any real and effective, organized opposition, a worldwide deficit, not just domestic.

Said covert, more than highly likely COINTELPRO operations were most timely established, in the years immediately pre-junta, by the notorious, but, so we are told to believe, oh so very repentant Mr. George of Soros, Bilderberg mogul extraordinaire.

Now, read again, what is quoted above, reposted at last for these perilous times. 'Tis from a document, a True Work, that I'd thought was long lost forever, and now, good but most painful to see, it has been returned to warn all Humanity. 'Twas written first by those of us, way back then, way back when, way back there while and after we'd first learned the hard Truths that it tells.

No, we never "quit" or "sold out" as they've sworn in all these years since. A covert, domestic COINTELPRO war took us out. At terrible costs for all of us, we fought with all we had back then. Helplessly we watched as, one by one, like pins in the bowling alley, our compañeros y compañeras began to fall. And never was there anyone or anything visible to whom we could assign even suspicion, let alone any blame.

In every community, in every human rights, civil rights, democracy advocacy, labor rights, voting rights, womens rights, gay rights and anti-war group or organization, no matter how small, peripheral or fringe, all of our Leaders, our Doers, our Thinkers, our Organizers, our Musicians and Artists and Poets, all of our greatest Lovers of Humanity, and our Trying-To-Be-Liberators of all started getting killed in random murders, suicides and fatal accidents, along about 1968 and onward. It was as though some plague were sweeping through our ranks, despite that we were young, strong and filled with determination and the highest of ideals and goals.

They began arresting us by the thousands, from 1968 onward, and especially after the launching of the "War on Drugs" against us in 1972. Any counterculture figure, from any walk of life, no matter how noble and saintly, no matter how unknown or insignificant in the overall, nationwide picture, every local "star" that shown began being suddenly arrested, charged with offenses beyond the scope of his or her imagining let alone commission, then summarily convicted for crimes done when and where they hadn't even been there. No amounts of exculpatory evidence or eyewitnesses, no airtight alibis well documented proved an obstacle to convictions and harsh sentences.

Right after the Manson and Einhorn cases had turned judges and juries against us all, from mid 1970 onward, the minimum sentence for a radical anywhere in this country seemed to have suddenly become 10 years, in maximum security, for spitting on the sidewalk, and the cops carried the vials of "spit" in their own pockets to provide all the necessary "evidence." That's what Jeff St. Clair got, in Ann Arbor, Michigan, 10 years hard time for having two joints in his shirt pocket in late 1970, a charge that should have been a misdemeanor, and would have been, just a couple of short years before.

The rest of the local "stars" and the less visible but oh so key people with real dedication and the ablility to produce, by way of hard, long hours of work and more work, those who got results moving anyone or anything in a pro-human rights direction of any kind, or pro-equality, pro-organization, or anti-war, began simply, suddenly vanishing. The most common way was by "moving," to another city or another country, just leaving in the middle of the night, or over a weekend, or going home to visit the folks and never coming back.

They were suddenly gone, to places far away that had never been mentioned before, for the flimsiest excuses, leaving no forwarding addresses for friends and movement associates who'd been like family for several years. Many of them left all of their worldly belongings behind to be "forwarded." But, the three compañeros I lost that way never did contact anyone to send them their stuff. The Magus, being ever faithful, still has quite a few treasured things he'd love to give back to his long gone, lost best friends of 1970.

Many others were found dead or with their fine brains permanently burned out by overdoses of drugs they'd never been near to at all, or else by suddenly lethal potencies of drugs that they'd taken safely, off and on, or recreationally, for years before without either hard addiction or other ill effects. Janis Joplin and Jimmi Hendricks are the two best known examples, but such happened in every community of activists, especially to the "local stars" and hardest workers. By the time the final SLA group was slaughtered, burned to cinders down to the last woman and child in 1977, in the crawlspace beneath their Philadelphia safe house, the movement was gone.

Those of us left alive had been stricken by a mysterious malady of our minds. Thanks to the Good Lady Laura, to whom he is forever indebted for finally making it all make sense, the Magus now understands that we were bombarded with brain wave manipulations galore, our thoughts disrupted frequently by mind control technologies and EM bursts. Those of us who have made it back to full clarity and intellect have paid an enormous cost in damages to our bodies and health. No one I know who was in the movement then is truly healthy even now, and many are, despite their outer appearances of normality and full function of intellect, incapable of focusing their attention on topics more threatening or disturbing than whether the dog needs to go for a walk, not to this day.

There is something precious and deep that has literally been burned out of them. While they still oppose the totalitarians, they cannot organize the actions of their own lives well enough to do anything concrete, like blogging or writing to politicians, and, for some reason, they are forever meaning to do these things then failing to follow through. The only term that fits them is the walking shattered. The new diagnosis that has been created, mostly just to describe them, is "Adult Onset Attention Deficit Disorder". But, gentle reader firends, they had no such deficits when they worked tirelessly to free us all, way back then, way back when, when we fought tyranny as one tribe of young lions together.

To this day, the Magus has yet to have encountered other former 60s-70s activists who can, and do, clearly, sequentially and with full integration, remember precisely when and why did the action, the movement stop, as to their own active participation in it. To nearly all of us, memories of the years 1972 to 1975 through 1977 to 1980 are patchy, disjointed, "foggy." Everything is sharp before that and after that, but those 5 years are "blurry." Funny thing, even for the next 10 years after that, taking any active step to organize, speak out, campaign and oppose anything just did not, would not could not come to mind and stay there long enough to actually do anything. Not even for himself, the Magus is sad to say, was any active Work, such as resuming his lifelong esoteric studies, possible until sometime around 1990 or so.

It was as though it was simply impossible to focus on anything farther from one's self than the immediate family and a job. That was ALL we could do. Notice that even Joan Baez has just now been able to make it out of her seclusion and get semi-active again, despite her having tried to do so with the Farm Aid concerts, twice, at their very start, in the 80s, she just couldn't; she managed to do one concert and that was it, until the past couple of years. And FOR JUST HOW MANY OTHERS IS THIS TRUE? Write the list yourselves of the many musicians, artists and poets who've gone into long obscurity and decline to barely begin to now arise again.

Consider, oh please do, younger reader friends: People who were so active, so dedicated, focused and sincere as we do NOT just fade into the woodwork, from a certain year onward, never to go out and Work again. Yet, for the most part, that is exactly what has happened to all the 60s activists. When historical documentaries are on, even Woodstock, I cannot watch them. It literally plays hell with my brain to do so. It hurts like the worst kind of migraine but deeper, broader than that. Another big piece of the puzzle is that, from 1972 onward, the MSM and press coverage of ALL activism came in only 1 format: NO MENTION AT ALL unless negative. And, not coincidentally, between 1972 and 1975, first cocaine and then its evil sister, Disco, arrived. Mass mind control? Oh yeah, brain, mind, body and heart rot supreme to a relentless beat.

Then, from 1977 to 1980, the AIDS epidemic struck and was ignored completely. It was deliberately left to ravish the last remnants of the intellectual brilliance, organizational skills, drive and creative talents of a generation that had launched a powerful, nearly successful rebellion against tyranny in any form, building gratefully upon the works and with the help of the Depression era populists, the union folks and the civil rights workers who marched and worked in solidarity with us.

By 1990, almost no one was left from the radical 60s who might have been able to step up into any leadership role, or to guide and encourage the youth of the next generation. Robbed of older peers by all of this, and being told the Lies that the "irresponsible and selfish Baby Boomers all just sold out," they sadly became and called themselves "Generation X". They still do not know the Truth of what had really happened to those "Boomers" who should have been there to mentor and nurture and welcome and work with them. Anyone who might once have filled that role was gone, at least in mind, or in jail, or mental institutions, or graves.

The Lies proclaiming "the Boomers sold out" have reigned for 35 years. But Woodstock is not all that we were and did, nor does it tell the tale truly, my friends, nor fairly, nor do ought than painting the lot of us clowns. But, we were Truth's fighters, and they took us down. The Magus tells Truly because he was there, and right to this minute, old wounds bring him tears. Yet, obviously, he never quit: He IS here.

A Posteritous Admonition

"How To Spot A Spy" you must learn truly for yourselves.I bid you do, please, now, my Friends, Mark these Facts I tell. Police accounts and "histories" may have recorded else, But we were naive victims of fell Liars and foul Stealth.

Be wiser. Be forewarned, then Be less gullible than we.Be smarter and Be bolder, and then, most of all, Be Free.Be all that you can Be, and you'll Become all that you must,And do not put your trust in those the easiest to trust.

Bidding You Fondest Delighting in Truths and Things Real,

Magus

3 MIND CONTROL IN THE 21st CENTURY THE STANFORD PRISON EXPERIMENT

Signs of the Times
for Sat, 04 Feb 2006
Mind Control


3 MIND CONTROL IN THE 21st CENTURY THE STANFORD PRISON EXPERIMENT

Compiled by Ralph W. Omholt AIRLINE CAPTAIN skydrifter@comcast.net

Stanford psychology Professor Philip Zimbardo, said to be a high school classmate of Milgram, took the issue of simple "authority" to the level of "power over others," in his 1971 "Experimental Prison" study.

The essence of that experiment demonstrated the propensity for ‘normal’ people to succumb to primal deviant behavior. Of particular note is that the director of that experiment, Professor Philip Zimbardo, fell prey, as well. It took his soon-to-be wife, to shock him back to a civilized mindset.

While the ‘experiment’ was intended to be a simple role-playing observation platform; the players - and the researchers - ‘psycho-morphed’ into a deviant mindset, as though passing through a time-warp; into another solar system. Again, the primary mechanism was "Perception Control."

In the "Stanford Prison Experiment," the distinction must be made between ‘externally incited’ perception, versus spontaneous self-perception. As with the Milgram experiments, environment played a dominant role.

Zimbardo's stated reason for conducting the experiment was to examine the ‘power’ of such variables as roles, regulations, group identities, symbols and "…situational validation of behavior," which would probably repulse and disgust the ordinary individual.

In the background of the "prison" experiment, Zimbardo previously conducted research on what he described as "…de-individuation, vandalism and dehumanization;" in an attempt to illustrate how easily that ordinary people could be incited to engage in anti-social acts. The associated environment of the earlier experiments embraced situations where the participating individual felt anonymous, or wherein they could perceive others to be less than ‘human,’ as ‘enemies’ or even ‘objects.’

In the subsequent/consequent "prison" experiment, 70 young men were "arrested." Most were college students, paid $15 a day for two weeks.

The brief duration of the experiment is highly significant, relative to the noted transformation of character.

The participants volunteered as subjects for an experiment on prison life; advertised by a local paper. They were put through the expected interviews and a battery of psychological tests. Twenty-four of those ‘arrested,’ deemed to be the most normal, average and healthy, were selected. They were assigned randomly, as either ‘guards’ or ‘prisoners.‘ The "prisoners" were booked at a real jail, blindfolded and driven to the college campus makeshift prison.


Bear in mind, that the players (test subjects) ALL were consciously aware that the mission was role-playing; not reality. Yet, in the fashion of "Lord of the Flies," they devised their own social value system.

The ‘guards’ were issued uniforms; instructed not to use violence. They were told that their job was to maintain control over the prison.

On the second day of the experiment, the ‘prisoners’ staged a revolt. Once the ‘guards’ had crushed the rebellion, the ‘guards’ spontaneously increased coercive aggression tactics, against the ‘prisoners.’ Their tactics included the humiliation and dehumanization of the ‘prisoners.’ In consequence, the college staff had to frequently admonish the ‘guards’ against such tactics.

In particular, the worst noted instances of abuse took place in the middle of the night, when the guards believed that the college staff was not watching over the experiment. The treatment of the prisoners went to such tactics as forcing the ‘prisoners’ to clean out toilet bowls with their bare hands; acting out degrading scenarios. The ‘guards’ also urged the ‘prisoners’ to become snitches. The loss of control caused the college staff to note the extreme stress reactions, forcing the release of five prisoners, one per day, prematurely.

PERSONALITY DIVERGENCE

During the experiment, Zimbardo’s fiancé, Dr. Christina Maslach, began her observation of the experiment, starting the evening of the fifth day. Her role was to conduct subject interviews. In her words, she initially found it "dull and boring."

During her assignment, she encountered what was described as a pleasant conversation with a "charming, funny, smart" young man awaiting the start his guard work shift. Independently, other researchers had previously advised her that they were watching a particularly sadistic ‘guard,’ nicknamed by both prisoners and the other guards as "John Wayne." Dr. Maslach later discovered that "John Wayne" was the same young man that she had previously talked with.

The "compartmentalization" was extreme. In his "John Wayne" role, the person radically transformed; even speaking with a Southern accent. Even his body motions were different, as was his interaction with the ‘prisoners.’ She said, "It was like [seeing] Jekyll and Hyde. . . . It really took my breath away."

It was clear that this ‘guard’ had gone to the adaptive extreme of inventing his own mythology, even in a known ‘make-believe’ world. His dissociative adaptation served as a firewall, between his actions and his conscience; even in a known time-limited environment. That, in turn, empowered his actions. Again, he was consciously aware that he was in a role-playing experiment – only.

Christina described that several prisoners engaged "John Wayne" in a debate; accusing him of enjoying his job. He claimed that he wasn't really like that; that he was just playing his assigned role. One ‘prisoner’ challenged "John Wayne" on the matter, citing the history that he had tripped him earlier, as he was taking the prisoner down the hall to the bathroom. The ‘prisoner’ addressed the fact that no researchers were around to witness the treatment, indicating that the act came out of "John Wayne’s" true character and disposition. "John Wayne" defended himself, insisting (rationalizing) that that if he let up, his role wouldn't remain powerful.

Maslach described that she became sick to her stomach, while observing the ‘guards’ marching ‘prisoners,’ with paper bags over their heads, to the bathroom. She reported that her fellow researchers teased her about her reaction. Given the nature of the experiment and the credentials of the researchers, the divergence in ‘professional’ attitude is no small indicator.

After a later emotional encounter with her fiancé, Zimbardo was forced back to reality, becoming aware of the transformation of the researchers, ‘guards’ and ‘prisoners,’ alike. Thus, the experiment was terminated, given Maslach’s illumination of the matter of "professional accountability."

Maslach married Zimbardo in 1972.

Automatically, one’s mind goes to the Iraq Abu Grhaib scandal; questioning how such events could happen, against such well-known studies as Milgram and Zimbardo; let alone the known Nazi horrors of W.W. II. There is a reasonable presumption that such would be far beneath the dignity of American troops.

However, it should not be lost that the deeds were not only admitted by the Pentagon and White House (with extreme reluctance), but were defended, with an insistence that the U.S. forces had a unique "right" to conduct torture, certainly levels of coercion, which clearly violated the Geneva Conventions. The world ignored the Geneva Conventions’ prohibition on the military use of penitentiaries; the prison use continued.

It should be noted, also, that Abu Grhaib was not the first, nor the exclusive location of such atrocities. Among other matters, the U.S. forces had bombed an Afghan POW facility, during the Johnny Spann / John Walker Lindh debacle, at Mazir I Sharif. Such was a grievous violation of the Geneva Conventions.

Yet, what does the global public believe? EXTREME CONDITIONING Next, go to the study of W.W. I "shell shock" and the near-zombies which that effect produced – as studied by the Tavistock Institute. Next, visit the LSD and amphetamine studies of the CIA’s "MKULTRA" project. Move onward, to the sciences of Propaganda, Psychological Operations and "Coercive Persuasion" (Jonestown tactics). One quickly arrives at the ease of manufacturing a "Manchurian Candidate!" Oswald, Ruby, Sirhan, James Earl Ray, McVeigh; there are plenty of examples in the USA, alone. However, these will be more astutely observed as "Manchurian Patsies." The suggestion is that a reliable transformation process is available, which begins with the "shock" of hallucinogens; followed by a regimen of amphetamines, hypnosis and reinforcement methods; possibly to the extreme of drug addiction to amphetamines, in particular.

MIND CONTROL IN THE 21st CENTURY CHAPTER 2

Signs of the Times
Mind Control

2 MIND CONTROL IN THE 21st CENTURY THE PSYCHOLOGY OF AUTHORITY AND PERCEPTION, VERSUS RESPONSE

Compiled by Ralph W. Omholt AIRLINE CAPTAIN skydrifter@comcast.net
In order to understand the mystery of seemingly blind compliance to authority, there is perhaps no better sample of human nature than the 1961 experiments on "Obedience to Authority," conducted by Dr. Stanley Milgram, a psychologist at Yale University. His studies were spawned by the recent trial and execution of Adolph Eichmann. The results were posted in Milgram's "Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View" (1974).

Milgram focused on the propensity for obedience to authority, versus the role of personal conscience. His work was in consequence of the rationalizations and justifications for the Nazi acts of genocide – as offered by the accused at the World War II, Nuremberg War Crime trials. The perpetrators’ defense was typically based on "obedience" - claiming that they were "… just obeying orders" under the authority of their superiors. However weak the claim may have appeared, it was firmly believed, by the accused. In particular, the Nazi perpetrators were well educated and members of the German aristocracy.

The Eichmann trial stirred the question as to how easy it would be for ‘good’ and educated (American) people (college degree) to be conditioned to commit even murder – in exchange for simple "acceptance and approval." What if Eichmann, and his accomplices were, in fact, "….just following orders."

More directly, the Milgram study demonstrated the propensity for people to submit to even ‘mild,’ even "presumed" authority – let alone threat or even internal fears. (Not even notable amounts of money were required.) The psychiatrists of the day forecast that 2% of any population would be compliant – the ‘sickos;’ the Milgram Study demonstrated 65%!

The setup of the experiment called for so-called "teachers" (unknowing subjects of the experiment) to be recruited by a newspaper ad offering $4.50 for one hour's work. The ‘price’ is worth noting. The recruits all had college degrees. It is also worth noting that the setup time was remarkably brief; there was no extensive ‘conditioning’ required. Both of these factors attest to an apparent pre-disposition for submission to "perceived" authority. The experiments would remind most of the TV series, "The Twilight Zone."

The volunteer ‘teachers’ thought that they were recruited to take part in a psychology experiment investigating memory and learning. The recruits were introduced to a stern looking "experimenter," dressed in a white lab coat; as well as an ordinary and pleasant co-subject (actor, in fact) who was presumably recruited via the same newspaper ad. The true subject ("teacher") was assigned to direct the ‘learning’ of the other ‘volunteer; using electric shocks as a learning motivator.

The teacher-recruit was led to believe that he/she had been chosen randomly, to be a scientific ‘teacher.’

Both the actor and the ‘teacher’ were given a ‘sample’ 45-volt electric shock, to set the realism of the ‘stage.’ The "teachers" were told that the experiment was designed to explore the effect of punishment, to prompt correct responses for manufacturing learning behavior.

The ‘teachers’ were advised that the electric shocks were to be of increased by 15 volts, for each mistake that the ‘student’ made during the experiment.

The ‘teachers’ control panel had 30 switches, clearly labeled in 15 volt increments; ranging from 15 volts, up to the maximum of 450 volts. Each switch also had a rating label, incrementing from "slight shock" to "danger: severe shock". The final two switches were additionally labeled "XXX". Thus, the subject could not be the least bit ignorant of the potential consequences of his/her deeds.

The experiment environment had the ‘student’ in another room; with the ‘teacher’ made aware of the "actor-student's" discomfort by poundings on the wall.

The actors ("students") pretended to be stupid, seemingly requiring (deserving) increasing shocks – feigning pain, misery and unconsciousness. The "teachers" abided by the background ‘authority’ until they were doing the deeds of sadists & murderers – a convincing simulation, of course.

In reality, no further shocks were actually delivered. Again, the ‘teacher’ was unaware that the ‘student’ in the study was actually an actor who would use his talents to fake increasing levels of discomfort; as the ‘teacher’ administered what he/she assumed were increasingly severe electric shocks, for the supposed mistakes made by the "student".

The ‘experimenter,’ with the white lab coat, was in the same room as the ‘teacher.’ Whenever the ‘teachers’ asked whether the increased shocks should be delivered, he or she was verbally encouraged by the experimenter to continue.

Amazingly, the test subjects didn’t question as to why the ‘experimenter’ needed a surrogate, in the first place. Using actors as the student-victims, the actual test subjects ("teachers") were directed to ask questions of a presumed "student," sitting in a sealed booth, with the "teacher" delivering increasing electrical shocks, if the ‘student’ got the wrong answer. A presumed torturous-fatal electric shock was incrementally delivered, by 65% of the unwitting "teachers," punishing the student to the very end of the 450-volt scale! No ‘teacher’ stopped before reaching 300 volts!

Worried ‘teachers’ did question the ‘experimenter,’ asking who was responsible for any harmful effects. It is worth noting that the primary concern was personal accountability, versus the welfare of the perceived victim. The ‘experimenter’ assumed full responsibility, with the ‘teachers’ accepting the response as adequate; then continued shocking their ‘student,’ even though some of the ‘teachers’ were obviously extremely uncomfortable with their deeds.

Return to another fact of life – cultures hide the fact that in times of crisis, people have a third choice, beyond ‘fight-or-flight; specifically, "Submission." (Consider the rape victim!)

In the Milgram study, the test subjects were unwittingly submitting to rather mild coercion of their ‘handlers.’ They assumed that they were factually torturing – even killing – the ‘students,’ preferring the acceptance-approval of their handlers, to their basic personal values and even morality, itself. They questioned, but with mild coercion, they complied with ‘authority.’

From Milgram’s "The Perils of Obedience" (1974), it is learned that Milgram solicited predictions on the outcome, from various ranges of people; including psychiatrists, faculty in the behavioral sciences, graduate students, college sophomores and even middle-class adults. Those polled reliably predicted that virtually all of the chosen subjects (‘teachers’) would refuse to obey the experimenter. The psychiatrists, predicted that most subjects would not go beyond 150 volt level, when the actor-victim made the first explicit demand to go free. The psychiatrists expected only 4 percent of the ‘teachers’ to continue to the simulated 300 volt level, estimating that only a pathological personality (one in a thousand) would administer the highest voltage.

The Milgram Experiment was continued in a number of variable scenarios; such as the ‘student’ indicating discomfort by way of voice feedback (versus pounding on the walls of his ‘chamber’) – starting at the "150 volt" level. At that point, the ‘actor-victim’ requested that the experiment be ended. The ‘teacher’ was consistently told by the experimenter that - "The experiment requires that you continue. Please go on." or verbiage, to that effect. In that scenario, the percentage of ‘teachers’ who were prepared to administer the maximum of 450 volts, dropped slightly - to only 62.5%. Desperate verbiage, versus pounding on the walls, made little difference.

The environment of the experiment was considered, as well. The surroundings of the experiments seemed to cast an "aura of authority," as well. When the environment of the experiment was conducted in a nondescript office building – versus within the walls of a prestigious and ornate hall on Yale's campus - the percentage of ‘teachers’ who were prepared to administer the maximum voltage dropped to 47.5%.

Immediate environment also played a key role, demonstrating the ‘personal’ role of authority "proximity," In one environment, the "experimenter" was at end of a phone line; versus being present in the same room as the ‘teacher. In this scenario, the percentage of ‘teachers’ who were prepared to administer the 450 volt shock dropped to 20.5%. In another scenario, the ‘teacher’ could independently elect the magnitude of the shock level; in that scenario, the percentage of ‘teachers’ who were prepared to continue to the extreme of the scale dropped to 2.5%.

That scenario, in particular, clearly demonstrated the role of "authority," as the major influence over the behavior of the subjects, given that the test subjects’ performance otherwise fell into the predicted range of the psychiatrists.

Return to another idea – that the radical majority of any population lives in response to their "Sacred Illusions." The spouse would NEVER cheat, one’s child could NEVER grossly misbehave. We all have such illusions.

Thus in the Milgram Experiment, the "Sacred Illusion" was that once agreeing to take on the task, the subject was committed/compelled to submit to authority – and not much of it – even to the extreme of presumed sadism/murder.

What is not addressed, to any adequate degree, is the role of "accountability" – factual or ‘assumed.’ By any account of history, the subservience contained the assumption that ‘authority’ served as a firewall, between the deeds of the performer, versus such accountability as criminal prosecution. The seeming ‘chain-of-command,’ obviously pre-supposes a ‘chain-of-accountability.’

In particular, in the Milgram experiments, the presumed "authority" to commit sadism and even murder, was a simple verbal assertion, "I am responsible; you are not." To the ordinary person, it staggers the imagination that college educated people could be that naïve/compliant. Clearly most are. Milgram’s experiments tested how much pain an ordinary, well educated, citizen would inflict on another person; upon being ordered to so, by an experimental scientist. In those experiments, "apparent authority" was tested against the strongest moral imperatives forbidding hurting another.

Even with the ‘teachers' hearing screams of the ‘victims,’ authority won more often than not – 65% of the time, in optimum conditions. The experiments demonstrated the willingness of ordinary and educated adults to comply with the command of "perceived authority."

Next one must ask what the uneducated person might do, as well as those with a known history of social deviance.

Ironically, the Milgram "obedience to authority" experiments preceded the Viet Nam War, with its bizarre rationalizations, and millions of American soldiers "…just following orders." Tragically, the American soldiers suffered the fate of lepers, when returning home. More tragically, no lessons were learned by the American public, versus the nefarious minds of the American military and related corporate players.

Milgram had plenty of company. The "Milgram Experiment" has been repeated around the world with similar results.

It must be particularly noted that there is an implied risk-reward factor in such cases. 65% of Milgram’s subjects essentially murdered for $4.50!

The significance of that figure indicates implies that money is GENERALLY a minor concern. However, money can be made to be a factor. As starving graduate student may ‘hurry-up’ if $100 was offered, if the experiment was concluded in ½ hour; with verbal taunting by his ‘experimenter.’ What is the reasonable estimate of an ‘experimenter’ asking, "Do you want to ask questions, or do you want to get paid – and how much? The clock is ticking."

Thus, it must be observed that if the ‘65% percentile can be rather easily stirred into sadism & murder, what does it take to get 95% of a given population to submit to the acceptance of propaganda – and a mandate for just ‘silence?’

Where do such experiments lead?

MIND CONTROL IN THE 21st CENTURY Chapter One

From
Signs of the Times for Sat, 04 Feb 2006
Mind Control
1 MIND CONTROL IN THE 21st CENTURY Chapter One

Compiled by Ralph W. Omholt AIRLINE CAPTAIN skydrifter@comcast.net

"Mind Control" is to be catalogued with space travel, wrist radios and ray-guns; yesterday’s fantasy becoming today’s reality. Certainly, it goes without saying, that "Mind Control" is more accurately addressed as "Behavior Control;" one leads to the other. Accommodating simplicity and common understanding, the term "Mind Control" will be used as a synonym for "Behavior Control."

The topic of "Mind Control" has been the subject of university laboratories, Madison Avenue marketing firms, intelligence services, warfare planning (psyops), pharmaceutical developments, electronic experimentation, psychiatry and medical advances. In brief, "Mind Control" is as factual as the TV set; alive, functional and ever- evolving. The topic of "Mind Control" is understandably complex. Few doubt the effect of simple propaganda, as evidenced in various wars. Unfortunately, one of the success elements of "Mind Control" is the disdain of those who resist thinking about the topic. Yet, with such horrors as the Nazi applications during W.W. II, the topic of "Mind Control" is highly pertinent to the general public. Specifically, the general public repeatedly asks how a civilized people could possibly commit such well-documented atrocities. Current (2006) American politics and warfare confront the "Mind Control" issue, head-on. Ignorance, apathy and denial are a deadly combination.

"Mind Control" is a function of a variety of descriptors and applications. Most commonly, the term "Psyops" (Psychological Operations) is used. However repugnant, the history of the W.W. II Nazis is the most common association of the horrors against the human race. The Nazi horrors were not unique in history, simply the most advertised. As an example of Mind Control," Israel, depends on that particular advertisement, for U.S. foreign aid. Yet, the "Nazi" issue remains the best example, by virtue of it’s popularly known history.