Sanitizing the War on Terror

Here, in a nice neat summary, is the true point of the endless "war on terror"(c) being foisted on the citizens of the US. Joe Quinn has got the number of the psychos in charge. Feast yourself on the political insight found at SOTT.

Blue Ibis
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sanitizing The War On Terror

Joe Quinn
Sott.net
Thu, 03 Apr 2008 16:23 EDT

Michael Hayden - loves a good conspiracy

For years "conspiracy theorists" have suffered the ignominy of exile on the fringe of political debate, not to mention social acceptance. "Conspiracy" was not necessarily a 'dirty word', but form the phrase "conspiracy theory" and you could almost hear the shutters coming down on already closed minds. Stories of the lies and secret machinations of the political military and corporate elite were ridiculed as fantasy and a virtual impossibility. Indeed, the very existence of a political, military and corporate elite was widely disavowed. Changes are afoot however - big changes. The lies and abuses of the directors of the American empire project and their associates in collective Western government over the past few years have become so egregious, so flagrant, that it is now virtually impossible for the average citizen to accept the official version of reality and still lay claim to their own sanity.

Got Sanity? If so, you have "soundness of judgment or reason".

Tell me then, what's your judgment on the "war on terror"? What does your reason say about the mythical yet somehow ubiquitous "al-Qaeda"? You have, after all, had almost 7 years to get comfortable, in one way or another, with these ideas. By now your sanity, if you possess it, should have told you some very specific things about those two hot topics. If however you are insane, take heart because you don't even need to be compos mentis to grasp this truth, just your eyes and ears. Got those? Then let's begin.

For many years now millions of people around the world, including former members of the US and other governments, academics and professionals have known and spoken about the fact that "al-Qaeda", far from being a modern Islamic terror group was the name given to a small grouping of extremist and deluded nut-jobs that the US and British governments hired and trained to fight the Russians in Afghanistan in the late 70's and early 80's. Also widely accepted is the fact that, after that particular conflict, Pakistani intelligence, in league with the CIA, continued to handle and groom these extremists and stage-manage their sporadic attacks around the world in order to conjure up the modern "Islamic terror threat".

Several mainstream media outlets and US government officials have stated that Osama bin laden was a CIA asset who was used to funnel money to these extremists and oversee the establishment of militant training camps, all under the control of Western agents.

A French intelligence report, carried by the mainstream press, stated that Osama Bin Laden met with a CIA agent in the American hospital in Dubai two months before the 9/11 attacks.

Everyone knows, (or should) that the Bush government escorted members of Bin Laden's family out of the US on September 11th 2001. We have all even been treated to a well-researched movie about the long standing ties between Bush senior and the US oil cartels and the bin laden family.

And finally, several mainstream media outlets, quoting official government sources, have reported that Osama bin Laden probably died many years ago.

Given just these basic facts, the tip of the iceberg of the evidence, how can anyone still believe that the US is actually fighting a "war on terror" to "safeguard our freedoms" rather than a war of conquest and empire expansion, and still lay claim to their sanity? I mean, is the proposition so hard to digest? Remember history class? It's not like this is the first time a group of power mad Westerners got together and tried to conquer as much of the world as possible. Really, the only way the "war on terror" as described by the Bush government et al could appear any more ridiculous is if Ronald McDonald were to start giving White House press briefings. Then again, if a Mr Magoo look alike has sufficed over the past 8 years to convince many people of the reality of a "worldwide Islamic terror threat", then maybe Ronald isn't such a bad idea, at least from the Bush government's perspective.

Speaking of Mr Magoo, his ideological (and possibly body) double in the CIA Director Michael Hayden, seems to have understood that the US government's Islamic terror threat fable is beginning to wear a little thin. To forestall the social unpleasantries that might accompany any further break down in belief, Hayden, citing no evidence whatsoever, recently warned that the American people faced a new and unprecedented threat - "Western-looking" Islamic terrorists. Yes indeed, the once simple check-list for IDing a "terrorist" - medium dark skin, fuzzy beard, speaking funny, white thing on head and sandals - has become infinitely more complex. Look around you. Do you see a white male or female of European descent? Better contact the FBI, your freedoms may be in danger.

You see, there is no limit to the nonsense that these "reality creators" will attempt to pass off on the general public. If they think you'll buy it, they're gonna try and sell it to you, and with the tripe that you've swallowed for the past 8 years, who can blame them? Still, while we await the debut of the "Western-looking Arab terrorists", we can continue to tune our reality reading instruments on the "Arab-looking" ones, like Mr. Magoo for example. Recently, BBSC (British BS Corporation), along with their ideological counterparts throughout the bordello that is the mainstream media, treated us to one of several missives from the much loved cartoon character:

Al-Qaeda deputy calls for attacks

An audio message attributed to al-Qaeda's deputy leader, Ayman Zawahiri, has called for attacks on American and Israeli interests.

The voice, not confirmed as Zawahiri's, urged retaliation for Israeli raids on the Gaza Strip. [...]

No specific targets are mentioned, but the voice accuses Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan for forming a "satanic alliance" with Israel and the US to blockade the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip.

So let's break this one down. The title attempts to get us all worked up: "Al-Qaeda deputy calls for attacks". That's pretty categoric. Then we read a little further and realise that the "al-Qaeda deputy" could not spare his entire body for this latest transmission, just a small part of him, only his voice to be precise. But wait, did we say it was Ayman Zawahiri's voice? What we meant to say was that it was a voice that has been attributed, by parties unknown, to Ayman Zawahiri (who himself has never been confirmed).

Even the BBSC appears less than committed on this one, and ends up referring only to "the voice". Maybe Zawahiri should take his cue from the BBSC here and officially change his name to "The Voice". He would definitely garner more respect (even from me) if all future transmissions were described as coming from "The Voice". "The Voice today threatened to smite the infidels...", that kind of thing. Anyway, even if their report was a little weak, the BBSC made sure to add a nice picture of the person to whom "the voice" is attributed, yet not confirmed (and never will be) just in case anyone starts to suspect this particular voice doesn't have a face. It does, it's just that the voice and the face have never been attributed to each other, and neither have been confirmed as existing independently of each other. That's just the way it is in the crazy world of Islamic terrorism. So what we have here, despite the categoric title, is a disembodied voice that someone has attributed to a person called Ayman Zawahiri and which says things that, strangely enough, dovetail nicely with the claims of the war on terror mongers in the US, Israeli and British governments, and that's the main point anyway. Now, your sanity should be telling your something here, but hold off on the judgment just yet.

The problem is that this is but one example of the repeated "core evidence" presented to you over the past 8 years for the reality of a "world wide Islamic terror network" that is determined to attack all infidels. Of course, no one can deny the reality of the murderous attacks of 9/11, Madrid in 2004 and London in 2005, but what is very clearly in question here is the identity of the authors of those attacks, because evidence presented by "a voice" (or a clearly faked video tape) on the internet is no evidence at all.

In fact, when you look at it, the people who proclaim the reality of the "Islamic terror threat" have presented very little in the way of verifiable evidence to back up their claims. Ever. The main body of their evidence takes the form of the "terror attacks" that have and continue to be carried out on civilians in Western and Middle Eastern countries, attacks that are however never fully or impartially investigated and invariably leave many troubling questions.

"No-one has claimed to have carried out the attack, but Iraqi and US security officials are blaming al-Qaeda in Iraq."

Assuming you listen to or read the mainstream news, how often have you heard or read this phrase over the past 7 years? And how often did you accept it as fact? This and other mysterious attributions of blame have come to define and underpin the entire war on terror, not merely in Iraq but in the other US and Israeli dominated "theaters of conflict" such as Afghanistan and Israel/Palestine.

On the 8th March 2008, yet another bomb exploded in a crowded market place in Baghdad killing 68 civilians and wounding many more, and yet again we were told that "al-Qaeda in Iraq" was to blame. As in every other "al-Qaeda" attack, no evidence was provided for this claim, and the US military itself has stated that the foreign fighters of which "al-Qaeda in Iraq" is allegedly comprised do not exist.

You see, even the US government and military realise that the bombings and murders in Iraq that have claimed the lives of more than 1 million Iraqis over the past 4 years cannot reasonably be ascribed to any real Iraqi insurgency, because the real Iraqi insurgency is made up of the very civilians that are being murdered in the bombings! Hence the need for a shadowy group called "al-Qaeda in Iraq" on which to pin the blame, a group that never speaks except in the form of anonymous internet postings or crassly faked video tapes. So if "al-Qaeda in Iraq" does not in fact exist, who is carrying out the bombings?

Before we get to that, allow me to get a little personal.

Ask any intellectually challenged Western citizen (of which there are many, particularly in America) what the capital of Greece is and they are likely to say "France", but ask him for the name of the war being fought by the US and its allies and he will give you the correct answer - "the war on terror". This is due to the knowledge, or lack thereof, that the capital of Greece is not and never has been understood as necessary to the average Joe's survival or honor, despite the fact that he may well have come across it many times in his life. Such information is not processed by or held in that part of the brain that deals with simplistic black and white, fear-based fight or flight responses. The "war on terror" and what it means to the average Joe infidel however is.

The phrase is useful to our warmongering psychopathic leaders because it provokes a knee-jerk response from Joe, and also extracts his "permission" to pursue a no holds barred war on a concept - terrorism. The political elite are sure that the average Joe is too stupid to consider the concepts behind a war on terrorism. The political elite manipulate him into accepting the simplistic, false reality and Joe unwittingly accepts the more deviant reality.

When he is threatened (or is made to be believe so), Joe's response is predictable, "If Bin Laden were here I'd kick his ass and bury him at ground Zero and go every day to take a piss on his grave," as one New Yorker quipped.

Joe does not like the idea that he is being screwed over in any way, by anyone. That state of mind is certainly useful to the agenda of the Empire builders to present the current threat as being posed by foreigners, and as a 'reaction machine' Joe will vent his spleen in an uncompromising way at anyone he believes to be a threat to all he holds dear. For Joe, being told that someone is stealing his beer and being told that some foreign country is threatening his way of life provokes the same reaction (possibly because a large part of Joe's way of life is beer).

This predictable fear-based reaction from ordinary people is the substance that has driven America's imperial expansion for many years. The architects of empire have milked it mercilessly.

Yet this tendency of the man in the street (and I include here all levels of Western society regardless of whether or not they know that the capital of Greece is in fact Germany) to get all Pavlovian can work both ways and is therefore a dangerous game for the psychopathic elite to play.

The day that the average Joe realises that he has been lied to, that, horror of horrors, his own government has lied to him, stolen his liberties and cynically squandered the lives of his fellow countrymen and women, Joe's basic fear-based reaction will be redirected, the lack of fuzzy beards and sandals will be irrelevant. All that is needed is for someone to explain to Joe, in simple black and white terms, the facts of the matter. This time no deceit or withholding of information will be necessary. The Truth is always best served pure and simple.

So, let's get pure and simple...

Part II tomorrow.

[Can't wait!!]

Martha Stout's Latest in the Huffington Post

The Huffington Post gave Dr. Martha Stout some air time for this most insightful column. Of particular interest is that the comment section (almost) uniformly in agreement with her conclusions was CLOSED after only 26 entries? The PTB must have been terrified of the degree of social proof that could be generated by leaving this article open to comment by the rabble. You can comment on the SOTT site or on the Forum

Blue Ibis
********************************************
George Bush's Paranoia War

Dr. Martha Stout
Huffington Post
Fri, 05 Oct 2007 15:02 EDT

Extreme fear is a first-rate weapon, neuropsychologically speaking. Unlike ordinary experiences, which are organized in the cerebral cortex, traumatic experiences stay "stuck" in the limbic system, an emotional, evolutionarily older area of the brain. As our lives go along, these chaotic memories can be triggered in us by reminders of the traumatic event, even in new situations that are far less dangerous. Triggering this neurological "switch" causes us to react fearfully--as if the trauma were happening all over again-- and temporarily derails our ability to think and act rationally in the present.

When the president of the United States behaves in ways that redouble the population's fears, his behavior is a psychological issue. When the White House uses advertising specialists to instill in our minds terrifying visual images of mushroom clouds above American cities, American psychologists should be concerned, to say the least. When our chief executive dwells yet again on "death and destruction" in a speech he makes as we observe the sixth anniversary of our national trauma--and tells us that if we hinder his war policy, our enemies will "come here to kill us"--it's time for professionals who know about the effects of psychological trauma to speak up. As such a professional, I invite any person of reasonably sound mental health to engage in this brief and illuminating fantasy:

Imagine for a moment that somehow the American presidency falls to you, instead of to George Bush, and that, for reasons known only to you and your conscience, you accept the position. Not long after you move into the Oval Office, the United States is hit by a disastrous terrorist attack. Counterterrorism measures that should have been attended to long ago must now be designed at emergency speed--protective systems for the skies, the ports, the nation's nuclear facilities, its food supplies--but you can see that, just now, your stricken countrymen are scarcely able to think at all. Their physical and psychological landscapes have been disfigured by inscrutable "others" from a distant part of the world, and they are deeply traumatized and subclinically paranoid. The resonance of their fear is almost palpable. In this uniquely vulnerable state of mind, three hundred million people turn to you en masse, and, prepared to trust your answer implicitly--to cling to it, even--they ask you the following question: What should we do now?

I believe that, as you looked out on millions of your countrymen lost in fear and grief, you would experience an overwhelming desire to help them. You would earnestly want to bring them some comfort and peace, so they could protect themselves, heal, and rebuild. And--exiting this little fantasy exercise and returning to the reality of the last six years--perhaps, like me, you've been repeatedly saddened to witness that not everyone in such a rare and influential position experiences a desire to assist his own nation in recovery and real self-protection.

That some of our leaders didn't display this sort of heartfelt reaction has been understandably difficult for Americans to acknowledge out loud. As playwright and McCarthy victim Arthur Miller wrote, "Few of us can easily surrender our belief that society must somehow make sense. The thought that the state has lost its mind and is punishing so many innocent people is intolerable." But, if we curb our wish to forget a painful truth, we can recall that the rise of insanely self-interested fear politicians is a phenomenon as ancient as the existence of hierarchical society itself. The heartless cultivation of fear has been used politically at least since the first century BC, when the Sicarii and the Zealots committed public assassinations to terrorize the Romans in ancient Palestine. We saw it in Joseph McCarthy's reign of paranoia over the US in the 1950s, and we're seeing it again now.

Extreme fear is a first-rate weapon, neuropsychologically speaking. Unlike ordinary experiences, which are organized in the cerebral cortex, traumatic experiences stay "stuck" in the limbic system, an emotional, evolutionarily older area of the brain. As our lives go along, these chaotic memories can be triggered in us by reminders of the traumatic event, even in new situations that are far less dangerous. Triggering this neurological "switch" causes us to react fearfully--as if the trauma were happening all over again-- and temporarily derails our ability to think and act rationally in the present.

A disaster-made glitch in the brain makes us unusually vulnerable to influence, and herein lies a convenience for ambitious authoritarians. In The Paranoia Switch, I coin the expression limbic war to refer to the activities of a fear monger who increases his political power by repeatedly triggering traumatic memories in the brains of individuals who have lived through a group calamity. A politician doesn't have to know anything about the neuropsychology of trauma to conduct such a limbic war. It's like sex, in the sense that you don't need to understand biology to participate.

Is our president a scaremonger? Is George Bush waging a limbic war against us? Is he truly cold enough to be using the fear generated on September 11, 2001, as a kind of renewable resource to maintain his political power and further his own agenda? To help answer this question, I'd like to post a summary of the list I provide in The Paranoia Switch--ten behaviors observable historically in leaders who have used fear to keep people in line:

1) Unsurprisingly, leaders who use fear as their primary political strategy speak repeatedly of dangerous people and frightening situations. They address other topics too, and may even use humor. But somewhere within virtually every communication, there will be several references to danger, and to just how frightened people must not forget to be.

2) Fear politicians frequently offer descriptions of catastrophic events that might happen in the future, and of other such events that would have happened had the plans not been thwarted.

3) Such leaders are prone to accuse those who disagree with them of being disloyal to the group and/or naive.

4) Fear brokers tend to look, act, and speak like the people found in their constituencies, sometimes almost in caricature. The fear broker's self-presentation tends to be that of an adequately educated person, but not a worldly or intellectual one. If from a region where the people speak with an accent, such a leader is likely to nurture this characteristic in himself.

5) Fear mongers often behave like archetypal parents. A fear-mongering leader may imply that, though the people are his brave charges, they cannot be expected to be so courageous and strong as he, and therefore, they must always rely on him. He demands to be trusted, and promises that he will never abandon them or give up on his goals.

6) Leaders who practice fear politics tend to admonish people over "moral" issues, and use shame to exert control. As a typical example, a sexuality-related topic (an issue around marriage, childbearing choices, homosexuality, etc.) will be introduced into a popular discussion that had nothing to do with sexuality, and then notes of shame or sin will be blended into the altered debate. These actions on the part of the leader may temporarily distract people from their original concerns.

7) In a seeming contradiction, fear brokers praise the group for being moral and heroic. A scare-mongering leader tends to speak of how much more God-fearing, principled, selfless, and admirable the people of his nation are than all the other peoples of the world.

8) Fear-mongering leaders project personal infallibility. When asked the direct question, "Do you feel you made a mistake?" the answer is always no, regardless of how conspicuous the mistake.

9) Such leaders tend to be secretive, and to be certain that other people, too, are keeping dangerous secrets. Scare-tactic politicians are often obsessed with gathering information about their countrymen, though much of this information may be objectively meaningless.

10) Whatever their tongue, fear leaders use language that pulls for primitive emotions: words and concepts (in the group's language) such as vengeance, cowardice, and good versus evil. In addition, fear politicians are associated with a skewed pronoun usage, specifically the frequent use of the third person plural--they--as in declarations of what they are doing to us. In contrast, moral leaders tend to employ the first person plural--we--as in references to what we (the people) can do to help ourselves.

This, in abridged form, is the book's list of ten behavioral characteristics of political fear mongers. Where George Bush is concerned, doing the math is not hard. (I don't know what you came up with, but I counted ten out of ten.) It is my hope, as a trauma psychologist and as a citizen, that we will choose a very different kind of leader in 2008, one who will not engage in an emotional war against us, and who is wise enough not to imagine that our worst fears are his best friends.

Comment: Dr. Stout has touched on some very important ponerological concepts: the 'special psychological knowledge' of pathological individuals, the hysterization of society and its manipulation (see Transmarginal Inhibition), the similarity between pathocracies both present and past, the use of paramoralisms.

Unfortunately, she seems to still be under the illusion that the American people have the ability to choose a better leader in 2008. If we take her comparison to the fear-mongers of old a step further, we can see that such leaders are not above election fraud--they will do anything in their power to keep power, and that includes providing the illusion of choice and freedom.

Taking the comparison even further, we can see that such a political system would have no qualms about murdering its own citizens for similar purposes. Dr. Stout also seems to be under the illusion that foreign "terrorists" committed the attacks of 9/11. A quick read of Dr. David Ray Griffin's books on the subject (especially his latest, Debunking 9/11 Debunking) and SOTT's own 9/11: The Ultimate Truth, would demonstrate the absurdity of such a position.

That being said, Dr. Stout's books are an invaluable source of relevant information. Check out her latest, The Paranoia Switch, as well as her previous books: The Myth of Sanity and The Sociopath Next Door.

The Cult of the Plausible Lie

One of the best SOTT Focus articles published to date. If you've ever wondered how thing things you know are "off" or wrong, still "legally" happen, here's how things can be put over on a society. Add this to the knowledge of psychopathy and you may have a fighting chance in this world.

Blue Ibis
************************************************

Flashback: The Cult of the Plausible Lie

Laura Knight-Jadczyk
Signs Of The Times
Fri, 09 Jun 2006 12:00 EDT

©Signs of the Times

"Never ascribe to malice those things which may be explained by stupidity." That is an important phrase, and a necessary one; it keeps people from being paranoid. However, it has a corollary most people don't know: "One MAY ascribe to malice those things which stupidity cannot explain." Robert Canup

As the mail continues to come in on the COINTELPRO issue, a number of questions have been raised - mainly about how to tell the difference between Truth and Lies - and I thought I would take some time this morning to try to cover a few aspects of this issue.

I've covered many aspects of this issue here and there on our websites, but since google manages to ensure that we are suppressed on search results, many people have not yet discovered these collections of observation, evidence, and supporting material. (Regarding google, we have been collecting data and making experiments for over a year now and will soon publish some of the results, but don't expect to them to be trumpeted by google!)

The primary problem that I see humanity struggling with today is precisely delineated by psychologist Andrew Lobaczewski: it is an almost total lack of adequate psychological knowledge on the part of the masses of humanity - the population of ordinary, normal people.

Ever since ancient times, philosophers and religious thinkers representing various attitudes in different cultures have been searching for the truth as regards moral values, attempting to find criteria for what is right, what constitutes good advice. They described the virtues of human character and suggested these be acquired. They created a heritage ... which contains centuries of experience and reflections. In spite of the obvious differences among attitudes, the similarity or complementarity of the conclusions reached by famous ancients are striking, even though they worked in widely divergent times and places. After all, whatever is valuable is conditioned and caused by the laws of nature acting upon the personalities of both individual human beings and collective societies.

It is equally thought-provoking, however, to see how relatively little has been said about the opposite side of the coin; the nature, causes, and genesis of evil. These matters are usually cloaked behind the above generalized conclusions with a certain amount of secrecy. Such a state of affairs can be partially ascribed to the social conditions and historical circumstances under which these thinkers worked. Their modus operandi may have been dictated at least in part by personal fate, inherited traditions, or even prudishness. After all, justice and virtue are the opposites of force and perversity, the same applies to truthfulness vs. lies, similarly like health is the opposite of an illness.

The character and genesis of evil thus remained hidden in discreet shadows, leaving it to playwrights to deal with the subject in their highly expressive language, but that did not reach the primeval source of the phenomena. A certain cognitive space thus remains uninvestigated, a thicket of moral questions which resists understanding and philosophical generalizations. [...]

From time immemorial, man has dreamed of a life in which his efforts to accumulate benefits can be punctuated by rest during which time he enjoys those benefits. He learned how to domesticate animals in order to accumulate more benefits, and when that no longer met his needs, he learned to enslave other human beings simply because he was more powerful and could do it.

Dreams of a happy life of "more accumulated benefits" to be enjoyed, and more leisure time in which to enjoy them, thus gave rise to force over others, a force which depraves the mind of its user. That is why man's dreams of happiness have not come true throughout history: the hedonistic view of "happiness" contains the seeds of misery. Hedonism, the pursuit of the accumulation of benefits for the sole purpose of self-enjoyment, feeds the eternal cycle where good times lead to bad times.

During good times, people lose sight of the need for thinking, introspection, knowledge of others, and an understanding of life. When things are "good," people ask themselves whether it is worth it to ponder human nature and flaws in the personality (one's own, or that of another). In good times, entire generations can grow up with no understanding of the creative meaning of suffering since they have never experienced it themselves. When all the joys of life are there for the taking, mental effort to understand science and the laws of nature - to acquire knowledge that may not be directly related to accumulating stuff - seems like pointless labor. Being "healthy minded," and positive - a good sport with never a discouraging word - is seen as a good thing, and anyone who predicts dire consequences as the result of such insouciance is labeled a wet-blanket or a killjoy.

Perception of the truth about reality, especially a real understanding of human nature in all it's ranges and permutations, ceases to be a virtue to be acquired. Thoughtful doubters are "meddlers" who can't leave well enough alone. "Don't fix it if it ain't broke." This attitude leads to an impoverishment of psychological knowledge including the capacity to differentiate the properties of human nature and personality, and the ability to mold healthy minds creatively.

The cult of power thus supplants the mental and moral values so essential for maintaining peace by peaceful means. A nation's enrichment or involution as regards its psychological world-view could be considered an indicator of whether its future be good or bad.

During good times, the search for the meaning of life, the truth of our reality, becomes uncomfortable because it reveals inconvenient factors. Unconscious elimination of data which are, or appear to be, inexpedient, begins to be habitual, a custom accepted by entire societies. The result is that any thought processes based on such truncated information cannot bring correct conclusions. This then leads to substitution of convenient lies to the self to replace uncomfortable truths thereby approaching the boundaries of phenomena which should be viewed as psychopathological. [...]

When bad times arrive and people are overwhelmed by an excess of evil, they must gather all their physical and mental strength to fight for existence and protect human reason. The search for some way out of difficulties and dangers rekindles long-buried powers or discretion. Such people have the initial tendency to rely on force in order to counteract the threat; they may, for instance, become "trigger happy" or dependent upon armies. Slowly and laboriously, however, they discover the advantages conferred by mental effort; improved understanding of psychological situations in particular, better differentiation of human characters and personalities, and finally, comprehension of one's adversaries. During such times, virtues which former generations relegated to literary motifs regain their real and useful substance and become prized for their value. A wise person capable of furnishing sound advice is highly respected.

It seems that there have been many such "bad times" in the course of human history, and it was during such times that the great systems of ethics were developed. Unfortunately, during "good times," nobody wants to hear about it. They want to "enjoy" things, to have pleasure and pleasant experiences, and so any literature that relates to such times is lost, forgotten, suppressed, or otherwise ignored. This leads to further debasing of the intellectual currency and opens the gap for bad times to come once again. [Andrew Lobaczewski, Ph.D. Political Ponerology: The Science of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes]

The facts are that "good times" for one group of people have been historically rooted in some injustice to other groups of people. In such a society, where all the hidden truths lurk below the surface like an iceberg, disaster is just around the corner.

It is clear that America has experienced a long period of "good times" for most of its existence, (no matter how many people they had to oppress or kill to do so), but particularly so during the 50 years preceding September 11, 2001. During that 50 years, several generations of children were born, and the ones that were born at the beginning of that time, who have never known "bad times," are now at an age where they want to "enjoy" the benefits they have accumulated. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like that is going to happen; 9/11 has changed everything so profoundly that it looks like there will be no enjoyment by anyone for a very, very long time.

How could this happen?

The answer is that a few generation's worth of "good times" results in the above described societal deficits regarding psychological skills and moral criticism. Long periods of preoccupation with the self and "accumulating benefits" for the self, diminish the ability to accurately read the environment and other people. But the situation is more serious than just a generalized weakness of a society that could be "toughened up" with a little "hard times".

Lobaczewski writes: The psychological features of each such crisis are unique to the culture and the time, but one common denominator that exists at the beginning of all such "bad times" is an exacerbation of society's hysterical condition. The emotionalism dominating in individual, collective, and political life, combined with the subconscious selection and substitution of data in reasoning, lead to individual and national egotism. The mania for taking offense at the drop of a hat provokes constant retaliation, taking advantage of hyperirritability and hypocriticality on the part of others. It is this feature, this hystericization of society, that enables pathological plotters, snake charmers, and other primitive deviants to act as essential factors in the processes of the origination of evil on a macro-social scale. [Andrew Lobaczewski, Ph.D. Political Ponerology: The Science of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes]

We can conjecture that if one psychologist knows the above, a few others must know it as well. And maybe some of them work for the government that has taken such advantage of 911? If we think about it, it becomes quite logical that, if they know these things then they may very wll have been complicit in 911 for the very purpose of "exacerbating society's hysterical condition." As Lobaczewski notes, it is the hysterization of society that enables pathological plotters to basically take over.

Who, exactly, are the "pathological plotters," and what can motivate such individuals during times that are generally understood by others as "good" to do things that will bring on "bad times." If times are "good," why does anyone want to plot and generate evil? Especially since it is obvious to anyone with two neurons firing that such activity will (and has historically) lead to the destruction of the plotters themselves?

Well, certainly, the current US administration has come up with an answer: "They hate us because of our freedoms." This is a prime example of "selection and substitution of data in reasoning" which is willingly and gladly accepted as an explanation by the public because of their deficits of psychological skills and moral criticism. The truth is somewhat different.

Unfortunately, after so long a time of being subjected to lies and disinformation, the likelihood of society being able to overcome the social and cultural programming is difficult, but not impossible. And that is where things like COINTELPRO come into play: psyops agents are masters of triggering emotional programs that put people back to sleep. As a student on the subject, Robert Canup, has said, 99% of all of the problems confronting mankind can be traced to a single cause: the problem of the plausible lie. And the plausible lie is what COINTELPRO is all about.

Plausible lies are monstrous things propagated by evil people for the express purpose of deceiving good people into doing the will of those who do not have their best interests at heart. It's that simple. The most powerful of these lies are so plausible that nobody even dreams about questioning their validity. Allow me to quote Richard Dolan on this point:

Some will dismiss this as one of the many conspiracy theories dotting America's landscape. The very label serves as an automatic dismissal, as though no one ever acts in secret. Let us bring some perspective and common sense to this issue.

The United States comprises large organizations - corporations, bureaucracies, "interest groups," and the like - which are conspiratorial by nature. That is, they are hierarchical, their important decisions are made in secret by a few key decision-makers, and they are not above lying about their activities. Such is the nature of organizational behavior. "Conspiracy," in this key sense, is a way of life around the globe.

Within the world's military and intelligence apparatuses, this tendency is magnified to the greatest extreme. [...]

Anyone who has lived in a repressive society knows that official manipulation of the truth occurs daily. But societies have their many and their few. In all times and all places, it is the few who rule, and the few who exert dominant influence over what we may call official culture. - All elites take care to manipulate public information to maintain existing structures of power. It's an old game.

America is nominally a republic and free society, but in reality an empire and oligarchy, vaguely aware of its own oppression, within and without. I have used the term "national security state" to describe its structures of power. It is a convenient way to express the military and intelligence communities, as well as the worlds that feed upon them, such as defense contractors and other underground, nebulous entities. Its fundamental traits are secrecy, wealth, independence, power, and duplicity.

Nearly everything of significance undertaken by America's military and intelligence community in the past half-century has occured 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 even knew about it although its final cost exceeded two billion dollars.

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.

Since the 1940s, the US Defense and Intelligence establishment has had more money at its disposal than most nations. In addition to official dollars, much of the money is undocumented. From its beginning, the CIA was engaged in a variety of off-the-record "business" activities that generated large sums of cash. The connections of the CIA with global organized crime (and thus de facto with the international narcotics trade) has been well established and documented for many years. - Much of the original money to run the American intelligence community came from very wealthy and established American families, who have long maintained an interest in funding national security operations important to their interests.

In theory, civilian oversight exists over the US national security establishment. The president is the military commander-in-chief. Congress has official oversight over the CIA. The FBI must answer to the Justice Department. In practice, little of this applies. One reason has to do with secrecy. [...]

A chilling example of such independence occurred during the 1950s, when President Eisenhower effectively lost control of the US nuclear arsenal. The situation deteriorated so much that during his final two years in office, Eisenhower asked repeatedly for an audience with the head of Strategic Air Command to learn what America's nuclear retaliatory plan was. What he finally learned in 1960, his final year in office, horrified him: half of the Northern Hemisphere would be obliterated.

If a revered military hero such as Eisenhower could not control America's nuclear arsenal, nor get a straight answer from the Pentagon, how on earth could Presidents Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, or Nixon regarding comparable matters?

Secrecy, wealth and independence add up to power. Through the years, the national security state has gained access to the world's most sophisticated technology, sealed off millions of acres of land from public access or scrutiny, acquired unlimited snooping ability with US borders and beyond, conducted overt or clandestine actions against other nations, and prosecuted wars without serious media scrutiny. Domestically, it maintains influence over elected officials and communities hoping for some of the billions of defense dollars.

Deception is the key element of warfare, and when winning is all that matters, the conventional morality held by ordinary people becomes an impediment. When taken together, the examples of official duplicity form a nearly single totality. They include such choice morsels as the phony war crisis of 1948, the fabricated missile gap claimed by the air force during the 1950s, the carefully managed events leading to the Gulf of Tonkin resolution...

The secrecy stems from a pervasive and fundamental element of life in our world, that those who are at the top of the heap will always take whatever steps are necessary to maintain the status quo.

[S]keptics often ask, "Do you really think the government could hide something like this for so long?" The question itself reflects ignorance of the reality that secrecy is a way of life in the National Security State. Actually though, the answer is yes, and no.

Yes, in that cover-ups are standard operating procedure, frequently unknown to the public for decades, becoming public knowledge by a mere roll of the dice. But also no, in that ... information has leaked out from the very beginning. It is impossible to shut the lid completely. The key lies in neutralizing and discrediting unwelcomed information, sometimes through official denial, other times through proxies in the media.

[E]vidence [of the true nature of the nature of National Security State and how it really operates] derived from a grass roots level is unlikely to survive its inevitable conflict with official culture, [created by COINTELPRO]. [Richard Dolan, UFOs and the National Security State]

Now, even though I know I am little more than a David against the Goliath of the well-funded arms of the National Security State, such as the many diverse and often contradictory sources of information and disinformation, including the mainstream media, many alternative media sources, so-called "Truth seeking groups" of all kinds, so-called New Age and Alternative writers and Impresarios of all shapes and sizes, (most of whom are COINTELPRO bogus organizations), I will continue to point out what can be observed if your eyes are open and your neurons are firing, and what can be asserted with some certainty based on collections of evidence, both material and circumstantial. Having said that, let me ask this: If there is such a thing as a plausible lie, is it not also possible that there might be such a thing as an implausible truth?

Using Canup's example: Suppose that tomorrow when you walk out of your house, an alien spacecraft lands in front of you. Aliens get out and assault you, leaving physical traces. Next, imagine that this is not a hallucination, it is not dream; it really happens. You are now in possession of an implausible truth. What chance is there of you being able to convince anyone else of what happened to you? You know it is the truth, but no one will believe you. And the root of the problem is the fact that truth generally has a feeling of reality to it. However, that feeling of reality which makes truth generally plausible is NOT the same thing as the truth itself. Others who have not experienced aliens landing and assaulting them do not have the same feeling of reality about what you are telling them. If everyone else had experienced a similar event, with the attendant feeling of reality, the truth of that event would be accepted immediately.

In short, people believe what is "familiar," or what is part of a careful, long term program of familiarization of lies that become plausible simply because they are familiar.

When science first discovered that solid matter was mostly empty space, many people reacted to this truth - this unfamiliar fact of our reality - with outrage. Debates over the "solidity" of matter and "kicking rocks" raged for years. It took a very long time, and a lot of work to gradually make others aware of this truth in order to make this "implausible" fact part of our awareness.

Learning about evil in our society, how it operates on the macro-social scale, is considered by many to be "unpleasant." They don't want to go there. It is too disturbing and even frightening. More than that, talking about these things as I am here is not familiar. To talk about evil as though it were a REAL concept is something we have been programmed to NOT do! As psychologist George Simon says:

...[W]e've been pre-programmed to believe that people only exhibit problem behaviors when they're "troubled" inside or anxious about something. We've also been taught that people aggress only when they're attacked in some way. So, even when our gut tells us that somebody is attacking us and for no good reason, we don't readily accept the notion. We usually start to wonder what's bothering the person so badly "underneath it all" that's making them act in such a disturbing way. We may even wonder what we may have said or done that "threatened" them. We almost never think that they might be fighting simply to get something, have their way, or gain the upper hand. So, instead of seeing them as merely fighting, we view them as primarily hurting in some way. [...] The legacy of Sigmund Freud's work has a lot to do with this. Freud's theories (and the theories of others who built upon his work) heavily influenced the psychology of personality for a long time. Elements of the classical theories of personality found their way into many disciplines other than psychology as well as into many of our social institutions and enterprises. [...]

The malignant impact of overgeneralizing Freud's observations about a small group of overly inhibited individuals into a broad set of assumptions about the causes of psychological ill-health in everyone cannot be overstated.[...]

We need a completely different theoretical framework if we are to truly understand, deal with, and treat the kinds of people who fight too much as opposed to those who cower or "run" too much. [George K. Simon, Jr., "In Sheep's Clothing"]

We clearly need to study this problem of macro-social evil in our world in a systematic and scientific way. And we need to get over the idea that thinking only good thoughts, thinking about happy and "nice" things is the way to good psychological health.

If physicians behaved like ethicists and failed to study diseases because they were only interested in studying questions of health, there would be no such thing as modern medicine. [...] Physicians were correct in their emphasis on studying disease above all in order to discover the causes and biological properties of illnesses, and then to understand the pathodynamics of their courses. A comprehension of the nature of a disease, and the course it runs, after all, enables the proper curative means to be elaborated and employed.[...]

The question thus arises: could some analogous modus operandi not be used to study the causes and genesis of other kinds of evil scourging human individuals, families, societies? Experience has taught the author that evil is similar to disease in nature, although possibly more complex and elusive to our understanding. [...]

Considerable moral, intellectual, and practical advantages can be gleaned from an understanding of the genesis of Evil thanks to the objectivity required to study it dispassionately. The human heritage of ethics is not destroyed by taking such an approach: it is actually strengthened because the scientific method can be utilized to confirm the basic values of moral teachings.

Understanding the nature of macro-social pathology helps us to find a healthy attitude and thus protects our minds from being controlled or poisoned by the diseased contents and influence of their propaganda.

We can only conquer this huge, contagious social cancer if we comprehend its essence and its etiological causes.

Such an understanding of the nature of the phenomena leads to the logical conclusion that the measures for healing and reordering the world today should be completely different from the ones heretofore used for solving international conflicts. It is also true that, merely having the knowledge and awareness of the phenomena of the genesis of macro-social Evil can begin healing individual humans and help their minds regain harmony. [Andrew Lobaczewski, Ph.D. Political Ponerology: The Science of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes]

Now, let me recommend new readers to take a look at my post on "How to Spot a COINTELPRO Agent." Keep in mind that the booklet I am quoting from there was compiled by activists from earlier days that had direct experiences where they were able to see only afterward how they had been duped and sidelined. My grandmother always said: "A smart man learns from his mistakes; a genius learns from the mistakes of others." In the case of COINTELPRO, some of those activists were smart, but not geniuses. Most of them got "taken out", and some of them literally had their lives completely destroyed because they were sincere and stubborn. The material in that booklet is priceless today because those who compiled it paid a high price to learn those things. Let's try to be geniuses here.

As Robert Canup writes, we face a particular, even monstrous, problem in our world: that most of what we know or think we know is based on plausible lies. A person who is sincere and speaks the truth really has almost no chance against a plausible liar. Yes, I know that goes against everything we have been taught from childhood in the "Land of the Free and Home of the Brave," but it is all too sadly true. We have been taught that "the Truth will always win" and that "anybody who believes a lie about you wasn't your friend to begin with", and a whole host of other platitudes that actually would work in a different world: a world run by people who tell the truth!

But since our world is run by people who lie for a living, you might expect that they have set things up so that liars will always win. And that is, oh so sadly, the case.

"Our culture agrees on the signs of lying. Ask anyone how to tell if someone is lying and they will tell you that they can tell by "lack of eye contact, nervous shifting, or picking at one's clothes." Psychologist Anna Salter writes with dry humor: "This perception is so widespread I have had the fantasy that, immediately upon birth, nurses must take newborns and whisper in their ears, "Eye contact. It's a sign of truthfulness." [Anna C. Salter, Ph.D.]

The problem is, if there is a psychopath - or those with related characteropathies - who doesn't know hot to keep good eye contact when lying, they haven't been born. Eye contact is "universally known" to be a sign of truth-telling. The problem is liars will fake anything that it is possible to fake, so in reality, eye contact is absolutely NOT a sign of truth telling. Anna Salter writes:

The man in front of me is a Southern good-ole-boy, the kind of man I grew up with and like. If anything, I have a weakness for the kind of Southern male who can "Sam Ervin" you, the Southern lawyer who wears red suspenders in court along with twenty-five-year-old cowboy boots and who turns his accent up a notch when he sees the northern expert witness coming. A "northern city slicker" on the witness stand will elicit the same kind of focused interest that a deer will in hunting season. You can have some very long days in court with men who wear red suspenders and start by telling you how smart you are and how simple and dumb they are.

I survey the man in front of me. I am not in court; I am in prison, and he is not an attorney but a sex offender, and he has bright eyes along with that slow, sweet drawl. He is a big man, slightly balding, and he has - I have to admit there is such a thing - an innocent face. ...

My Southern good-ole-boy certainly knows eye contact is considered a sign of truthfulness. He describes his manner in getting away with close to 100 rapes of adults and children.

The manner that I use when I was trying to convince somebody - even though I knew I was lying - I'd look them in the eye, but I wouldn't stare at them. Staring makes people uncomfortable and that tends to turn them away, so I wouldn't stare at them. But look at them in a manner that, you know, "look at this innocent face. How can you believe that I would do something like that?" It helps if you have a good command of the vocabulary where you can explain yourself in a way that is easily understood. Dress nice. Use fluent hand gestures that are not attacking in any way.

It's a whole combination of things. It's not any one thing that you can do. It's a whole combination of things that your body gestures and things that say "Look, I'm telling you the truth, and I don't know what these people are trying to pull. I don't know what they're trying to prove, but I haven't done any of this. I don't know why they're doing this. You can check my records. I've got a good record. I've never been in any trouble like this. And I don't know what's going on. I'm confused."...

As if reading my thoughts, he breaks off: "You don't get this, Anna, do you?" he says. "You think that when I'm asked, "Did I do it?" that's when I lie. But I've been lying every day for the last twenty-five years."

The practiced liar: a category of liar that even experts find it difficult to detect.

Problem is, even when dealing with people who are not practiced liars, such as college students who have volunteered for a research study of lying, most observers are not as good as they think in detecting deception. The research shows consistently that most people - even most professional groups such as police and psychologists - have no better than a chance ability to detect deception. Flipping a coin would serve as well.

"If you want to deny something, make sure you've got an element of truth in it. It sounds like its true, and there are elements of it that are very true that can be checked out, and try to balance it so that it has more truth than lie, so that when it is checked out, even if the lie part does come out, there's more truth there than lie."

This man was good enough that once he got away with stomping out of court in a huff. He was accused by his sister of raping her and molesting her daughter on the same day. He played it as a preposterous charge. His sister, he told the court, had once accused his uncle of abuse. She was well known in the family for making up crazy charges like this. He said he wasn't going to put up with such nonsense and walked out. No one stopped him, and no one ever called him back. The charge just disappeared somehow. He now admits that both charges were true.

It is likeability and charm that he wields as weapons.

The double life is a powerful tactic. There is the pattern of socially responsible behavior in public that causes people to drop their guard, and to turn a deaf ear to disclosures. The ability to charm, to be likeable, to radiate sincerity and truthfulness, is crucial to the successful liar - and they practice assiduously.

"Niceness is a decision," writes Gavin De Becker in "The Gift of Fear. It is a strategy of social interaction; it is not a character trait.

Despite the decades of research that have demonstrated that people cannot reliably tell whose lying and who isn't, most people believe they can. There is something so fundamentally threatening about the notion that we cannot really know whether or not to trust someone that it is very difficult to get anyone - clinicians, citizens, even police - to take such results seriously.

I stare at the child's statement in front of me. It is a report by a social worker of a four-year-old's account of sexual abuse by her father... [excerpts of actual report not included; read the book]

I consider the report carefully. It is filled with detail. The words are a child's words, the description exact. It is clear this child knows what oral sex is. It shows no signs of coaching. But why was this report sent to me with all the personal names and identifying information removed?

This report, I learn, surfaced in the middle of a custody fight. Dad was a wealthy businessman, successful, well respected, and well liked. Mom was an inpatient in a drug unit. My heart sinks. It does not matter how realistic this report is, how many signs of credibility, how few signs of coaching: In our system of justice, lawyers are for sale. Dad's money is going to buy some very good lawyers indeed. It isn't clear that Mom has either the money or the will to oppose him. And the child: she'll be lucky to be represented at all.

I've thought many times that if I were accused of a crime, I'd rather have the better lawyer than be innocent.

But it seems that the court responds appropriately and appoints two independent psychologists to make a recommendation. Two independent chances to get it right. Two people who are not beholden to either side and who can ask for any test, even a polygraph, as part of their decision-making. Two people whose job it is to know something about deception and to sort out the true from the false.

But both psychologists opt instead for what is termed and "interactional assessment." They simply watch the father interact with his daughter, looking for signs of bonding or, conversely, fear. They believe if he abused her, she will be afraid of him; if she loves him, he is innocent. [Anna C. Salter, Ph.D., Predators, Pedophiles, Rapists, and Other Sex Offenders]

There is no research or theory to support this approach. Sex offenders are notorious for bonding with a child and using that relationship to manipulate the child into having sex with them. In addition, a child might be afraid for very different reasons; the man may have struck her mother, but never laid a hand on her, sexually or otherwise. What justification is there for believing that one can tell from the interaction between child and alleged perpetrator whether the abuse has occurred or no?

Anna Salter stood up at a conference to challenge the "interactional assessment" approach and was silenced.

In this child's case, the alleged perpetrator is her father. Surely she loves him, even if he did what she has disclosed. He has not used violence. She does not know that there is anything wrong with what he is doing. She is four years old.

One of the evaluators notes: "Observations of father and daughter indicate a very happy, spontaneous and positive relationship."

I sigh. As if that had anything to do with anything. The fact that she loves him doesn't mean that he's innocent or guilty. Then I find something in the case file that makes me sit up straight. Of concern are the admissions by Mr. Jones that earlier in his life he had engaged in sexually inappropriate behavior with three children... These were the children of the woman he was living with at the time.

I stare at the note. This psychologist knew he'd done it before - in identical circumstances. It is a damning admission and surely means the psychologist should take this latest disclosure seriously. But he does not. Mr. Jones, it seems, is too charming, too rich, too respected. Despite knowing he is an admitted child-molester, both psychologists recommend that full custody go to Dad.

And there the story ends - in most cases.

But, in this case, the father's attorney, so convinced that his client was innocent, sent him to a polygrapher. I know he thought he was innocent because he sent him to a very good polygrapher, not the one to whom an attorney would knowingly send a guilty client. This polygrapher is an unusually good interrogator and has a 98 % confession rate. He tells his clients:

Now the problem with the polygraph is that it can't tell the difference between a big lie and a little lie and I would hate, I would truly hate for you to mess up your polygraph with something little that don't amount to a hill of beans. So if there is anything, anything at all that you want to tell me before the polygraph, now's the time so we can get it out of the way.

Under these instructions, the polygrapher found that Mr. Jones had quite a few things to say:

[I'm not including most of the confessions of this man, just selected and highly edited excerpts.]

They shower together and fondle one another. Sometimes he masturbates while they are in the shower and he encourages the child to "assist," saying that this is 'educational" for her. They sleep nude together and "sometimes things happen." This man bought a vibrator for his four-year-old daughter. And so on.

All of these confessions were made BEFORE the polygraph. What is astonishing is that he fails the polygraph because he was withholding information on oral sex with his daughter.

I find a handwritten note from the polygrapher in the file. He faxed the report to the attorney for the father. It was a private polygraph, after all, requested by the father's attorney and not one required by either of the independent evaluators (though they COULD have asked for it.] Within five minutes of faxing the report, the phone rang, "I've worked with you for twenty years, "the attorney said to him. "I hope I don't have to remind you what privileged communication means."

What privileged communication means is that this report fell under attorney-client privilege and therefore was suppressed. What is means is that the father's attorney was under no requirement whatsoever to release the report to the court, and, by law, the polygrapher could not. "

What it means is that the only reports the court saw in this case were by the two psychologists who thought they could tell whether the father way lying by interviewing him and that they could tell if the child was abused by seeing if she loved her father. What it means is that, in 1996, full custody of this child went to her father where it has remained ever since.

The polygrapher, anguished by the outcome, sent the case to me after removing the real names, with the hope that I can use it for "educational purposes."

Mr. Jones was a well-respected member of the community with a crazy wife. And he was so sincere. Clearly, the child loved him dearly. Such a man is hardly likely to be a child molester, now is he? [Anna C. Salter]

Another similar case has a report about the father:

Since the father denied the allegations, it is difficult to determine the identity of the perpetrator. In support of the father's truthfulness... he was very forthright during the interview and testing procedures. For example, he acknowledged having difficulty in his sexual relations at time, and he openly admitted that he had a possible drinking problem...

Because he admitted some problems, the psychologist concluded that he would not lie about other, more serious problems! Because he admitted problems that were legal, she concluded he would not lie about activity that was illegal! That is just rationalization; the truth is that the psychologist just simply believed the lies.

One clinical evaluator noted in a report about a sexual predator that he "stayed back to close one of the doors, a very solicitous gesture that, as it turned out, is consistent with his general pattern of behavior." The report went on to describe him as "kind, thoughtful, and considerate, a person who seemed to take pleasure in helping and caring."

Instead of concluding that the man was good at creating a front, the psychologist concluded that the man was not a brutal, violent, serial rapist. Fortunately, there was considerable evidence that he was, and he was convicted. In this case, the court got it right even if the psychologist was out to lunch.

In another case, a very well known psychologist evaluated a three month old infant with bite marks all over him. Only two people had the opportunity to inflict the bite marks in the specific time frame, and they were the parents. Suspicion centered on the father. The psychologist who was asked to evaluate him reported how tenderly he wiped the infant's nose in the evaluation, how carefully he held the baby. Based on the man's behavior in the interview, she exonerated him and recommended custody remain with the parents. Two years later, he killed the infant. [From Predators, Pedophiles, Rapists, and Other Sex Offenders by Anna C. Salter]

This is an issue that will never die. It seems impossible to convince people that private behavior cannot be predicted from public behavior. Kind, nonviolent individuals behave well in public, but so do predators, rapists, murderers, pedophiles and COINTELPRO agents who help to shape the culture in which we live. No, they weren't always called COINTELPRO, but the principle is the same. It has been used since time immemorial. The earliest written records we have are of "clappers" in the audiences of theaters in ancient Greece. What do you think the term "Greek Chorus" means? We have exactly that in the present day in the form of the mainstream media. Did you think that, with the power of the internet to reach millions of people that the "powers that be" would have ignored the necessity of installing a "Greek Chorus" on the net? "The chorus offered background and summary information to help the audience follow the performance, commented on main themes, and showed how an ideal audience might react to the drama as it was presented. They also represent the general populace of any particular story." Discussion boards are ideal formats for "Greek Choruses" as they can be vectored to "show how the ideal audience ought to react," and to "represent the general populace." In this way, the illusion can be created of a consensus when, in fact, such a consensus may not exist.

Polls are another example of Greek Choruses or Clappers.

Consider our legal system. Here you first have to ask yourself just what kind of people were in charge of the creation and shaping of our "social norms." Now sure, everybody will agree with the sayings that "you can't trust a politician," or "power corrupts" and so on, but have you ever really stopped to think about that and what it must really mean?

Most people have heard of Ted Bundy; the serial killer who was executed in Florida several years ago. Not many people are aware of the fact that Bundy was studying to become a prosecutor, and that eventually he hoped to become a judge. Those that do know that fact see it as some strangely ironic twist - an inexplicable quirk in Bundy's bizarre makeup. It never seems to occur to most people that the perfect place for a psychopathic serial killer to hide in society is as a prosecutor or a judge; but I assure you that it occurs to the Psychopaths of the world. I would estimate that about 10% of the prosecutors and judges in the United States are in fact, S.A.Ps. The ONLY difference between them and Ted Bundy is that they were able to control outward signs of their Psychopathy until they achieved their goal of being in a position of authority. [...]

John had one overriding dream; to become a judge. Here was the greatest reward possible for a psychopath: to put on the royal robes of the judiciary - to become a demigod - to have others plead to Him and beg His indulgence, to have everyone rise in awe and respect when He entered the room, for His word to literally be law, to be able to create an almost endless amount of human misery, just because He could, to punish summarily anyone who, quite correctly, displayed contempt for Him, to have the power of life and death over people, to be granted the only royal title available in the United States: "Your Honor".

How brilliant of his predecessors to slip that one past the watchful eyes of the founding fathers - who sought to establish an egalitarian society free of the mental disease of royalty. There are, he reflected, no "Your Majesties" or "Your Excellencies" in this country, but we quietly fooled everyone into accepting "Your Honors".

'John House slept soundly. In his dreams he and his kind had finally succeeded in reshaping the world into the image they wanted: the dark ages had returned. Once more the plague swept unchallenged over the country side. John could hear the voice crying out in the mud street in front of his hovel: "Bring out your dead!"

John was in his glory. This was life the way it was supposed to be. He was the new Torquemada: randomly selecting anyone who was unscarred by smallpox for a session on the rack; since anyone who had escaped disfigurement had obviously signed a pact with the devil. Here at last was an era where John and his kind could feel good by comparison: with so much misery around him John knew he was better off than those he could see dying in squalor and ignorance. John reveled in the suffering of all about him. He did what he could to make that suffering worse; no agony was so great that John House could not add to it.'

It is difficult to believe that huge parts of society have been built with the guidance of the mentally ill; but they have been. The average person is heavily invested in doing things the way Psychopaths want them done, and is unaware that the things that the S.A.Ps have them doing are psychopathic. [Robert Canup, The Socially Adept Psychopath]

Richard Dolan has pointed out that those at the top will ALWAYS take whatever measures necessary to stay at the top, and when knowledge is power, that means that they will make sure that they are in control of what people know or think they know. The sad fact is that as a society gets larger and more competitive, individuals become more anonymous and more Machiavellian. Social stratification and segregation leads to feelings of inferiority, pessimism and depression among the have-nots, and this promotes the use of "cheating strategies" in life which then makes the environment more adaptive for psychopathy in general. Such individuals may begin their lives in the lower socio-economic levels, but they often rise to the top. Psychopathic behavior seems to be on the rise because of the very nature of American capitalistic society. The great hustlers, charmers, and self-promoters in the sales fields are perfect examples of where the psychopath can thrive. The entertainment industry, the sports industry, the corporate world in a Capitalistic system, are all areas where psychopaths naturally rise to the top. Psychopaths seek power over others, it's that simple, and they gravitate to any field where there is power: medicine, law, industry, politics. It has always been that way; this is nothing new. Indeed, they comprise a very small segment of the population with an extremely large influence. It is due to this influence and the plausible lie that they can magnetize normal, decent people to follow them. They can make social conditions bad so that people feel oppressed and abused, and then they can easily blame it on someone else and agitate the people to go after and kill others based on such lies. Machiavelli discussed this sort of system plainly and openly and it has been the system of power since Cain killed Abel.

So, consider the idea that the ideas behind our social and cultural systems - including the legal system - were created by people whose agenda was to control society so that they could stay on top. And think about all the many ways they might go about doing that.

These are the same people who set up the legal system so that people would "get what they deserved".

Now, just think about that for a moment.

Imagine that you are a person at the top of the heap who knows that if you really set up a system where people got what they really deserved, you, yourself, would be instantly replaced - out the door in an instant! And so, if you are not just intent on staying on top and holding power, but cunning also, you will do everything in your power to insure that you and your kind are in charge of setting up that system, and that you remain in charge of it. You would make certain that evil was blended into the social and cultural concepts so seamlessly that nobody would ever notice.

And that is, quite literally, what happened. The individuals "at the top of the heap," who had gotten there by being the most vile and rapacious, then set about figuring out ways to deceive the masses all the while keeping their favor and adulation. They knew they had to make laws to keep order, and they knew they had to make those laws seem fair and reasonable to the masses of people or they would lose control. Losing control was the thing to be feared as anyone who has read The Prince by Machiavelli realizes.

And so, Machiavellian manipulators at the top of the heap were deeply involved in the formation of our cultural and social norms, including our legal system.

In the earliest days of this "legal system" there was a form of "justice" called "trial by ordeal". An example of trial by ordeal was holding a red hot iron to a defendant's tongue. The plausible lie used to justify this behavior was: if the defendant was telling a lie they would have a dry mouth and would be burned by the iron - while a truthful person would have a moist mouth and would be protected.

The fact is a NORMAL person who is telling the truth would most definitely have a dry mouth from fear, while a psychopath, who is incapable of feeling fear, would be the one with the moist mouth!!!

Now, just think about that for a few minutes.

(You might want to read my article on Ponerology and other articles on psychopathy, which quote extensively from several clinical psychologists on the subject of psychopathy just to get a real handle on the issue we are facing.)

Now, our current legal system is descended from "trial by ordeal" - and really isn't much different though it is much cleverer and simply not as obviously evil as that one was. You have already read a few examples above of just how the system works. As Anna Salter said, if she was accused of a crime, she would rather have a good lawyer than be innocent. That is a truly sad statement on our reality. Here's a simple way to understand our legal system, adapted from the writings of Robert Canup:

Suppose that you are on a team that is engaged in a game and you discover that:

The other team gets to make up the rules. The referee plays for the other team. One of the rules is that you are not allowed to score - the other team is at no risk Only you can be scored against.

That is precisely how our social, cultural, and legal systems operate.

The conditions of our world are designed to create the maximum chance that evil will prevail and the good people will be punished by being good and telling the truth.

Punishing normal, decent, good people involves more than just creating a social system that acts against them. The system is designed to insure that these good people are subjected to as much pain as possible for the simple fact of being good and honest. An obvious example of punishing the innocent may be found in the way the victim in a rape case is treated; their reputations are dragged through the dirt - all in the name of justice of course. Note the case quoted above, of the fellow who raped his sister and her daughter and walked out of court after accusing her of being a mental case.

The system that controls our thinking is set up like the legal system. People are taught to assume that, in any conflict, one side is lying one way, and the other is lying the other way, and people can just form opinions about which side is telling the truth. They are taught that the truth will lie somewhere between two extremes.

That is a wonderfully plausible lie.

Canup suggests that, to see the evil behind that plausible lie, we must make a different assumption: let us assume that in such cases, one side is innocent, honest, and tells the truth. It is obvious that lying does an innocent defendant no good; what lie can he tell? If he is innocent, the only lie he can tell is to falsely confess "I did it."

On the other hand, lying is nothing but good for the liar. He can declare that "I didn't do it" and accuse another of doing it; all the while the innocent person is saying "I didn't do it" and is telling the truth.

The truth - when twisted by good liars, can always make an innocent person look bad - especially if he is honest and admits that he has faults. If someone is telling the simple truth, and the other side is lying through their teeth, the basic assumption that the truth lies between the testimony of the two sides always shifts the advantage to the lying side and away from the side telling the truth. Under most circumstances, this shift put together with the fact that the truth is going to also be twisted in such a way as to bring detriment to the innocent person, results in the advantage always resting in the hands of liars.

Canup points out that, even the simple act of giving testimony under oath is useless. If a person is a liar, swearing an oath means nothing to that person. However, swearing an oath acts strongly on a serious, truthful witness. Again, the advantage is placed on the side of the liars.

Proof is a familiar concept to those used to conventional logical thinking. However what passes for proof in cultural, social, and even legal terms often bears only a superficial resemblance to what would be considered proof by those who really use their minds to think.

For example: in formal mathematics, proof rules are established - postulates are set out and a structure is built based on the postulates and the theorem. Mathematical proof is pretty much inarguable: once a proof is accepted as true it is added to the pool of known truths.

In legal proof there is a set of rules and a theory which the prosecution presents, and attempts to prove the theory by clever argumentation rather than facts. Truth is not the objective. Getting other people to believe the theory IS the objective. However, the prosecution's theory is whatever the prosecutor believes that he can get away with based on what is known about the case, or what he can PREVENT from being known. What legal 'proof' does is serve as a structure for convincing a group of people of the guilt of a person, about whom they know nothing.

There is another significant difference: Mathematical proofs are judged by experts in the particular case who are free to study any and all information about the case. Legal 'proof' is judged by people who are guaranteed to be ignorant of the case, who are only allowed to study the information presented during the formal trial, and who are not even allowed to consult the texts for what the rules say.

Our culture is so permeated with this "legal argument" system that it extends into our daily experience: the one who is the slickest at using the structure for convincing a group of people of something, is the one who is believed. Very few people take the time to obtain hard facts by carefully studying any and all information about a situation.

What we see something here that is set up to deceive people by presenting a familiar structure which, upon examination, is a sham. And again, the advantages fall to the hands of the liars.

As Canup points out, in a courtroom, juries are prohibited by law from knowing anyone involved in the trial. If the defendant is a good person who is being set up and framed, people who know him well and who have had much opportunity to interact with him over a long period of time and observe him would have much more trouble accepting lies told about him. If the jurors knew the prosecutor and knew him to be a bullying liar, they might have trouble believing the lies he was telling. If the jurors knew the defendant, and know him to be a trouble making villain they might be more likely to convict him.

By the same standards, if a person who is guilty is accused of a crime that he DID commit, as we have seen above, it is all too easy to get off. Corrupt lawyers, ignorant "experts," and blind judges let guilty people literally get away with murder all the time.

But, none of the conditions conducive to finding the TRUTH prevail in a courtroom even if we have been brainwashed to think that we have the "best legal system in the world." It is not much different than "Trial by Ordeal," only the hot poker has been replaced by a system that works as effectively to the advantage of liars.

Here then we see the worst feature of the law: it is designed to make the world safe for evil people. In effect the law serves to take the horns away from the bulls, while leaving the lions their teeth and claws. Massive, overwhelming, advantage is placed in the hands of liars. Indeed, without the legal system insuring their safety, the world would be a much more difficult place for evil people.

Everyone knows somewhere deep inside, that there is something not right about our world. In fact, at the present moment, it could hardly be worse. But most people spend their lives avoiding that fact at all cost. The brutal truth is that the our social, cultural, and legal systems are all about making people helpless then hammering them without mercy - all the while involving everyone in the illusion that right prevails.

This is an issue that will never die. It seems impossible to convince people that private behavior cannot be predicted from public behavior. Kind, nonviolent individuals behave well in public, but so do predators, rapists, murderers, pedophiles, and COINTELPRO agents who operate largely to shape and vector "social norms," or "official culture."

9-11: Toasted Cars and Steel Dust Spires

Think things were weird before? They've been weirder than you could possibly know for longer than you can imagine, and there are plenty of people who would like to keep it that way. How can the serfs be kept quiet when they figure out they're serfs? But those of us who feel that "Knowledge Protects" are striving to change that. Read and think about it. Look at those cars and REALLY THINK.

Blue Ibis

******************************************************

Ultra-terrestrials and 9-11

Laura Knight Jadczyk
"Signs Of The Times"
Sat, 15 Sep 2007 12:46 EDT

Among the many things being argued by the 9/11 "Truthers" is the question of whether or not advanced, secret, "Space Based Weapons" could have been utilized to disintegrate the World Trade Center Towers. This discussion is, of course, going on in spite of the silly propaganda nonsense recently put out by the tabloid BBC which reported on the "findings" of Cambridge Don, Keith Seffen.

All I can say to Keith is: Thinking that a steel framed building could collapse at freefall speed from the impact of even a jetliner loaded with fuel is absurd. In order to collapse at free fall speed, the underlying floors need to be removed before the floors above. It's something called Conservation of Momentum, and anyone not familiar with this should get educated before making a fool of themselves as Seffen has done.

The footage of the collapse of the 1,300ft WTC towers has been played and replayed ad nauseum and is etched in all of our minds. If by some miracle you have not seen the footage, it is freely available on the various memorial DVDs of the 9/11 attacks. It is also available for download from our web site. I strongly suggest that you avail yourself of a copy and study the collapse of both towers.

What you will see is that from the start point of the collapse until there is nothing but air where the towers used to be, about 10 seconds elapse. An object in 'free fall´ i.e. falling through thin air, will take a specific amount of time to reach the ground. The laws of gravity dictate that a 5 ton SUV, for example, and a 1lb rock, given that their relative densities are so much higher than the resistance presented by the surrounding air, will take approximately the same time to reach the ground when dropped from the same height.

The time t required for an object to fall from a height h (in a vacuum) is given by the formula t = sqrt(2h/g), where g is the acceleration due to gravity. Thus an object falling from the top of one of the towers (taking h = 1306 feet and g = 32.174 ft/sec2) would take 9.01 seconds to hit the ground.

Of course, this is in a vacuum, with no air present. It's basic physics. I guess Seffen skipped that lecture.

Allowing for the resistance of the air we would have to add on a few seconds, yet according to the government´s 9/11 Commission report , the south tower collapsed in 10 seconds flat. But, as we all saw, the collapse of the south tower 'pancaked´ through the 75 lower floors of the tower.

Those undamaged floors below the impact zone would have offered resistance that is thousands of times greater than air. What time might we allow for the section above the impact point that collapsed to pass through each floor? 1 second each floor? If so, then the collapse should have taken 75 + 10 seconds, or over 1 minute and 20 seconds.

For the sake of discussion, let´s allow just a half second delay in the collapse provided by each 'pancaked´ floor. In this case it should have taken 37.5 + 10 seconds. But let´s be really charitable and suggest that each floor below the impact point offered just 1/10th of a second resistance to the section that first began to 'pancake´ on the lower floors. In this case the collapse should have taken 7.5 + 10 seconds for a total of 17.5 seconds. Yet this is not what happened. As the official 9/11 report states and as we all saw, the towers collapsed in just 10 seconds!

How can this be possible? (Seffen's silliness notwithstanding). The only explanation is that the floors below the impact point offered no resistance whatsoever allowing the building to fall in 'free fall´ with only air as resistance. The only way that this could have occurred is if the support offered by the steel core beams was in some way undermined. The most obvious way to undermine the steel core beams of the WTC tower would seem to be via the techniques employed by demolition experts to take down buildings and have them fall into their own 'footprint´ - which is exactly what happened to the WTC towers. However, in the case of the WTC towers there are several factors that point to something other than standard technology being used to demolish towers.

This is what is being hotly contested among 9/11 researchers. In an email I received this morning, a 9/11 researcher wrote:

If Tarpley is embracing the "space beam theory", he's hurting the Truth Movement. The ptb are trying desperately to keep the Peace Movement and Truth Movement from joining forces. So far, they've been successful, but i don't think they'll be able to keep these natural allies apart much longer.

To which another researcher replied:

Surely all it would take is a qualified physicist to explain to Tarpley the physical impossibility of such weaponry?

My husband IS a physicist and he spent some time working for a DOD contractor in the U.S. before 9/11 subsequent to which we decided to leave the U.S. He has looked long and carefully at all the evidence and has some thoughts about it. Let me tell you what he proposed as an appropriate way to approach this subject in our book 9/11: The Ultimate Truth.

"Most investigators point to evidence of "explosives" and "squibs" in video footage of the collapse of the two towers, yet to effect the complete destruction of so much concrete and office material, a massive quantity of explosives would surely have been required, and such a quantity is simply not evident in the available footage. As has been suggested by Professor Jones, an advanced and publicly unknown form of "superthermite" was probably used to cut the steel core beams of the WTC towers, which leaves open the possibility that other similarly advanced and publicly unknown technology was used to disintegrate the concrete that constituted the body of the towers. In this case, it would not be responsible or wise for me to theorize about what specific device or technique was used to turn the towers to dust, however, I will say that 'sound´ and 'light´ weapons have been developed in the past 20 years by the U.S. and Israeli military that are capable of 'invisibly´ destroying hardened targets. To that I will add that part of the prepping of the WTC towers could have included the planting of 'conductors´ to effect the propagation of such an induced wave throughout the buildings and thereby causing the vaporization of concrete and human bodies alike."

That's the short version. Now, let's look at that paragraph in a broader context.

Controlled demolitions at the WTC has been scientifically proven long ago since the government's version defies basic laws of physics (not to mention an amazing series of coincidences all over the place on that day.). At this point it's just a matter of figuring out what method was used for the demolition.

NINE PIECES OF EVIDENCE FOR SPACE-BASED WEAPONS ON 9/11:

1. Seismic readings too low to account for two 500,000 ton towers

(On Dec 14, 2006, a NIST scientist said "...the collapse of the towers were not of any magnitude that was seismically significant...")

2. Concrete pulverized to powder in a way that cannot be accounted in a standard controlled demolition. (i.e. more than 50% of samples under 100 microns)

3. Steel spire turns to dust and trickles down in news videos.

4. Photographs of Ground Zero lacking enough concrete and steel to account for two 110 story towers.

5. Toasted cars over half a mile from Ground Zero.

6. Large sections of buildings "vanish"

Round holes in WTC 5 roof

Large vertical chunks "missing" from WTC 3

and WTC 6

7. Downtown Manhattan not flooded. If one million tons of towers collapsed on the slurry wall / bathtub at freefall speed, it would have broken through and flooded New York.

8. All airplanes ordered to land about fifteen minutes before the South Tower is destroyed. Right after the North Tower goes, government allows military aircraft back up.

9. Evidence for existence of Space-based weapons. (Let's remember, the government is always at least 15-20 years ahead in technology from where they publicly admit.)

Introducing the Particle-Beam Weapon by Dr. Richard M. Roberds; published in Air University Review, July-August 1984

Millimeter-wave energy to be used in a weapon by Peter Clarke; published in EE Times June 6, 2001

US hails airborne laser as weapons milestone, ABC News, October 29, 2006

So, ask yourself... what can explain ALL the anomalies listed above?

First of all, my husband, as a physicist, knows for a fact that there are weapons and technology that are already being used that are not known to the public. He developed certain technology himself that has never yet seen the light of day because it was buried in black projects. Sure, word eventually gets out after some years; but often that "word" is disinfo to distract away from what is really being done. Sometimes, it is announced as a "new discovery" because people are noticing strange things going on and the PTB have to do damage control.

This brings me to the topic of the day: Ultra-terrestrials and 9/11.

The whole "alien abduction" thing is a case study of what is being done within the 9/11 Truth Movement. Let me explain a bit:

Based on my experience as a hypnotherapist working with several alleged "alien abductees", I think it is highly probable that there is a "secret government" program that "fakes" alien abductions. However, the question must be asked "why?"

To get a complete picture of the problem, let´s look at what Richard Dolan has reported in his book "UFOs and the National Security State". He writes:

The UFO problem has involved military personnel around the world for more than fifty years, and is wrapped in secrecy. [...] Because this subject is so widely ridiculed, it is important to stress why it is worthy of serious attention.[...]

Stories of strange objects in the sky go far back into time, but the problem received little attention until the Second World War. [...]

During the UFO wave of 1947, American military and intelligence organizations conducted multiple, simultaneous investigations of these sightings. [...]

By the end of 1947, a contingent of analysts at the Air Technical Intelligence Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base believed that UFOs were extraterrestrial.

By the summer of 1948, this team prepared an "Estimate of the Situation." [...] As the story goes, Air Force Commander Hoyt Vandenberg rejected [this conclusion.] [...]

In the summer of 1952... UFO sightings were so frequent and often of such high quality that some in the air force actually wondered whether an invasion was under way. With some help from the secret CIA sponsored Robertson Panel of January 1953, the air force improved censorship over the problem. Still, it never quite went away. Civilian organizations began to collect and analyze interesting UFO reports. [...]

Then came the great UFO wave of 1965 and 1966, when the air force could no longer hide behind weather balloons and swamp gas, nor withstand public scrutiny. [...]

Let us pause to assess the situation. By the mid-1940s, America´s intelligence apparatus had reason to believe that there were artifacts in the skies that did not originate from America, Russia, Germany, or any other country. These objects violated some highly sensitive military airspace, and did not appear to be natural phenomena. One may presume that the affected national security authorities made it an immediate obsession to determine the nature and purpose of these objects, and we may infer that the issue probably became a deep secret by 1946, or 1947 at the latest. (Dolan, Richard, UFOs and the National Security State, (Charlottesville: Hampton Roads 2002) Introduction p. xix.)

It was at this precise moment in time that the Human Potential movement was "born." Do we think that this was a coincidence? By the mid-50s, it was becoming obvious that things were getting out of control and coincidentally, in August of 1956, the FBI began its COINTELPRO operation.

When traditional modes of repression (exposure, blatant harassment, and prosecution for political crimes) failed to counter the growing insurgency, and even helped to fuel it, the Bureau took the law into its own hands. Its methods ranged far beyond surveillance, and amounted to a domestic version of the covert action for which the CIA has become infamous throughout the world.

Usually, when we think of COINTELPRO, we think of the most well known and typical activities which include sending anonymous or fictitious letters designed to start rumors, among other things, publishing false defamatory or threatening information, forging signatures on fake documents, introducing disruptive and subversive members into organizations to destroy them from within, and so on. Blackmailing insiders in any group to force them to spread false rumors, or to foment factionalism was also common.

What a lot of people don´t keep in mind is the fact that COINTELPRO also concentrated on creating bogus organizations. These bogus groups (or alleged "experts") could serve many functions which might include attacking and/or disrupting bona fide groups, or even just simply creating a diversion with clever propaganda in order to attract members away so as to involve them with time-wasting activity designed to prevent them from doing anything useful. COINTELPRO was also famous for instigation of hostile actions through "independent" third parties.

According to investigators, these FBI programs were noteworthy because all documents relating to them were stamped "do not file." This meant that they were never filed in the system, and for all intents and purposes, did not exist. This cover was blown after activists broke into an FBI office in Media, Pennsylvania in 1971. The possibility of finding evidence for any of it, after that event, is about zero. To spell it out in Dolan´s words:

Regarding matters connected with "national security," there appears to be a wealth of information that does not exist officially. Thus, a request to find such documents through a Freedom of Information Act request would be in vain. Add to this the likelihood that perhaps the most sensitive information regarding UFOs may not even exist in document form ("the first rule in keeping secrets is nothing on paper," Richard Helms), and one can appreciate the difficulty that an honest UFO researcher or 9/11 researcher has in ferreting out the truth.

Now, let us take a few logical steps. The UFO problem emerged into the national consciousness in 1947, or thereabouts. Not long afterward, a lot of people began asking a lot of questions. The government wasn´t answering, and so the people began to band together to find out the answers for themselves.

Sounds a lot like 9-11, yes?

They started forming groups. And this is where things get just a bit curious. The thing that was most threatened by the UFO/alien issue seems to have been the Standard Monotheistic Religions. Religion seems to be a necessary component of political control. Social control - that is the mainstay of religion - was most definitely under threat. In fact, what seems to be true is that it is not even clear that religions - as we know them - would have survived a full disclosure. So the logical conclusion is that part of the main reason for the cover-up was to "protect the religious status quo."

As things stood at the time, protecting the religious status quo - mainly the social controls that stem from religion - was iffy at best. After a century of scholarly investigation into many religious texts, and the raising of many questions about the "old time religion," there were a lot of people in society who were most definitely turning away from religious dogma. It´s fairly simple to take the next logical step and see that a combining of the questions of those who were disenchanted with religion, politics, government, with the questions of those who wanted to know just what the heck was going on in terms of possible "extraterrestrials," was seen as a dangerous and explosive mixture. Something had to be done.

The activities of COINTELPRO in attempting to neutralize political opposition have been pretty well exposed. But we are now considering the fact that, in addition to political activists, it seems that COINTELPRO has particularly targeted groups that are seeking the truth about the interactions between the US government and Ultra Terrestrials, or so-called "aliens." That a long-time cover-up of these matters has been in effect is certainly evident to any careful researcher.

The COINTELPRO files show the U.S. Government targeted a very broad range of religious, labor and community groups opposed to any of its agendas, and it is only logical to assume that the same type of operation would be created to cover up the "alien agenda." Such a theoretical COINTELPRO operation also goes far in explaining why, when the sincere researcher of UFO phenomena enters this field, he or she discovers only lies, lies, and more lies; confusion and disinformation. That is most definitely the signature of COINTELPRO.

[It is definitely what one finds when trying to discover the truth about 9/11, or the JFK and RFK assassinations, and a whole host of other clandestine activities.]

Considering all of this, would anybody care to suggest that it did not also occur to the Powers that Be that the chief means of diverting attention and covering up the truth would be to literally fund and create the "New Age" and "Human Potential movement" so that it would follow their agenda of keeping secrets?

The same is probably true regarding the 9/11 Truth Movement. If nobody has really thought of this, better think again! Probably most of it IS COINTELPRO!

In other words, it is extremely likely that the most successful and popular of Metaphysical Mavens and New Age Impresarios are COINTELPRO agents - either conscious or dupes of those who are. And the same is the true of the 9/11 Truth Movement and even the Alternative Media.

The main objective seems to be to attack and "neutralize" those who are seeking the answers. Those who are sincere, who do bona fide research and seek to explicate the truth, are infiltrated, attacked, and marginalized according to standard COINTELPRO procedures.

What all of this seems to suggest is that the Powers That Be (PTB) have developed COINTELPRO to an all new level of Social Shaping, Cultural Brainwashing, and the main targets of this activity would include virtually anyone who is seeking the truth about the shifting realities of our world.

The cases of COINTELPRO activities against political groups must be no more than the tip of the iceberg, given that the great bulk of COINTELPRO-type operations remain secret until long after their damage has been done. By all indications, domestic covert operations have become a permanent feature of U.S. politics and Social Programming, and it is hardly likely, considering the evidence, that the New Age and Human Potential fields are exempt.

Or the 9/11 Truth Movement or the Alternative Media.

The implications of this are truly alarming. Those who manage to get close to the truth of these matters, despite the many obstacles in their path, face National covert campaigns to discredit and disrupt their research and reputations. Clearly, COINTELPRO and similar operations under other names also work to distort academic and popular perceptions of the problems facing our world.

This is glaringly obvious in the 9/11 Truth Movement.

They have done enormous damage to the search for the Truth.

"Terrorism is changing. New adversaries, new motivations and new rationales have surfaced in recent years to challenge much of the conventional wisdom..." wrote Dr. Bruce Hoffman, Director of RAND. And he was right. The only problem is, the reader is largely unaware of the definition of "new adversaries" that might be implied in his remarks. A careful reading of Richard Dolan´s book will immediately reveal what Dr. Hoffman really meant in his remarks about "terrorism." He was talking about citizens wanting to know the Truth about their world and what happens within it. Based on the documents assembled by Dolan, it is obvious that the governments of the world do indeed see the UFO problem as a very, very serious matter. In the course of assembling the documents and reporting the events, Dolan came to the inescapable conclusion that there exists an "Above Top Secret" group with access to all available UFO data, and that this group "straddled" the worlds of government, military, and industry. The evidence proves that the military created a complete fiction for public consumption designed to convince the masses that the UFO problem was "nonexistent." They were assisted in pulling the wool over the eyes of the public by "heavy handed official media and culture," and they were obviously under orders to consistently and repeatedly "debunk" the idea that aliens were ensconced in our world. What seems to be true is that most of our elected officials are as much victims of the debunking as anybody else. And the same is true about mainstream science.

Dolan writes:

Next to the bureau, the military intelligence services became the most important component of the domestic intelligence scene. Army intelligence had nearly unlimited funds, extensive manpower, specialized personnel, deep planning and training resources, and the most sophisticated communications and data processing capability. [...]

The army´s intelligence surveillance did not focus on tactical and reconnaissance data, but on political and ideological intelligence within the United States. (This was wholly illegal.) [...]

Then there was the CIA. By the late 1960s, there were more spies than diplomats in the State Department, or employees in the Department of Labor. [...]

When the Weather Underground, a radical splinter of the SDS, had an "acid test" to detect agent´s provocateurs, they had no idea that the CIA had been tripping on LSD throughout the 1950s, creating a special caste of "enlightened agents" for precisely these occasions.

Based on this, we wonder about "agents provocateur" in the New Age and UFO community who are "specially trained" as "UFO experts"? And what about the "experts" in the 9/11 Truth Movement?

The agency continued its work on mind control. Following the work of Dr. Jose Delgado [experiments in] Electrical Stimulation of the Brain [were conducted.] This involves implanting electrodes into the brain and body, with the result that the subject´s memory, impulses, and feelings could all be controlled. Moreover, ESB could evoke hallucinations, as well as fear and pleasure. "It could literally manipulate the human will at will," [said Dr. Robert Keefe, a neurosurgeon at Tulane University.]

In 1968, George Estabrooks, another spook scientist, spoke indiscreetly to a reporter for the Providence Evening Bulletin. "The key to creating an effective spy or assassin, rests in creating a multiple personality with the aid of hypnosis," a procedure which he described as "child´s play."

By early 1969, teams within the CIA were running a number of bizarre experiments in mind control under the name Operation Often. In addition to the normal assortment of chemists, biologists, and conventional scientists, the operation employed psychics and experts in demonology. (!!!)

Over at the NSA, all one can say with certainty is that its budget dwarfed all others within the intelligence community.

Dolan documents how the intelligence organizations of the United States - and very likely other countries who are working in concert with them, though outwardly they may pretend to be oppositional - have conducted terminal mind- control experiments, biological spraying of American cities, human plutonium and syphilis injections, illegal communications interception, and nationwide domestic surveillance of private citizens, political assassinations and coups, ongoing media manipulation and outright public lying on a continual basis, most especially in regards to UFOs. The above organizations, via any and all means available, made sure that, to the public at large, UFOs and aliens were a "dead issue."

Scientist and UFO disclosure advocate James McDonald said in 1969: "I am enough of a realist to sense that, unless this AAAS symposium succeeds in making the scientific community aware of the seriousness of the UFO problem, little response to any call for new investigations is likely to appear."

McDonald presented a brilliant paper entitled "Science in Default: Twenty- two Years of Inadequate UFO Investigations." Dolan comments that it was "perhaps the most damning statement about UFO research ever made." Speaking before the convention at Boston´s Sheraton Plaza Hotel, McDonald came down hard on everyone: Condon, Menzel, Hynek, and finally the scientific establishment itself. He said:

No scientifically adequate investigation of the UFO problem has been carried out during the entire twenty-two years that have now passed since the first extensive wave of sightings of unidentified aerial objects in the summer of 1947.

...In my opinion, the UFO problem, far from being the nonsense problem that many scientists have often labeled it, constitutes a problem of extraordinary scientific interest.

The grave difficulty with essentially all past UFO studies had been that they were either devoid of any substantial scientific content, or else have lost their way amidst the relatively large noise content that tends to obscure the real signal in the UFO reports.

This high noise to signal ratio is, based on the evidence, the direct product of the frenzied activities of the "National Security State" in their promulgation of the New Age/Human Potential smoke and mirrors magic show.

What is also clearly evident is that this noise is the fundament of the prevailing scientific doctrine. What we see is that the Scientific Community - though they claim to be seekers of advanced scientific truth - have been as easily duped as Joe Sixpack and Shirley Seeker of Truth. The former is interested in little more than his truck, his dog, and his weekend football game, while the latter is generally looking for a lifestyle of higher "experiences." What I also suspect is that even the lower echelons of the intelligence and military organizations must be included in this rather large grouping of the duped and deceived sheep.

An example of this duping of those investigating the matter from the "bottom up," is Andrew Tully who wrote The Super Spies, supposedly an early report on the NSA. He, and many who have followed him, suggest that the UFO is an "intelligence" device and that it evolved out of Nazi Secrets brought to the US under Project Paperclip.

Dolan lays out the evidence and disabuses us of the notion that the UFO activity could be human, technological breakthroughs as such naive conspiracy theorists propose. As he says, "all of the indicators point to a definitive NO." He then points out that, every single person who actually studies the UFO problem [yours truly included - who began as a flaming skeptic] - becomes convinced that it IS a problem of Alien invasion of our planet. Every official study of UFOs persuaded the researchers that aliens were the explanation for the data. But that data has been denied, and when denial no longer worked, it was obscured by the noise, the smoke and mirrors that prevail today in UFO research and the New Age and Human Potential movements. Do we think that this is coincidence?

Another evident production of "noise" is the nonsense that passes today as "channeling" or "alien contacts". Indeed, my own work involves what can certainly be called inspirational material, but as we have noted repeatedly, it is not your usual "channeled" info, nor do we treat it as such. For us, a controlled channeling experiment is the 10% inspiration that must be matched by the 90% perspiration of real research.

With a broad historical awareness of the facts, a firm grounding in the realization that most of what is out there is deliberate disinformation, the individual who surveys the plethora of "alternative information" in books and on the internet, can easily recognize the "noise" factor produced by the Secret State. Dolan tells us:

By the early 1970s, there were already means available to alter the moods of unsuspecting persons. A pocket-sized transmitter generating electromagnetic energy at less than 100 milliwatts could do the job. This is no pie-in-the- sky theory. In 1972, Dr. Gordon J.F. McDonald testified before the House Subcommittee on Oceans and International Environment on the issue of electromagnetic weapons used for mind control and mental disruption. He stated:

"[T]he basic notion was to create, between the electrically charged ionosphere in the higher part of the atmosphere and conducting layers of the surface of the Earth, this neutral cavity, to create waves, electrical waves that would be tuned to the brain waves. ...About ten cycles per second.

"...You can produce changes in behavioral patterns or in responses."

The following year, Dr. Joseph C. Sharp, at Walter Reed Hospital, while in a soundproof room, was able to hear spoken words broadcast by 'pulsed microwave audiogram.´ These words were broadcast to him without any implanted electronic translation device. Rather, they reached him by direct transmission to the brain.

Consider the above "neutral cavity in the ionosphere" in terms of so-called "chemtrails." Consider the bizarre fact that the entire American populace appears to be brainwashed so that they cannot even see that they are being herded to their own destruction. Obviously, a lot more is being done with this technology than creating faux "alien abductions."

Notice the dates in the above quote from Dolan´s book telling us that in the early 70s certain technologies were being developed that could "broadcast" "mind control" signals over the entire nation. We certainly suspect that this technology was developed further in the subsequent years. The question is: what did they do with it? Better yet, what ARE they doing with it?

And this is where we come to the COINTELPRO function of creating bogus organizations to attack or disrupt bona fide groups seeking truth.

We have already noted the fact that research in Electrical Stimulation of the brain could produce hallucinations. If you put hallucinations together with words, you can produce just about anything that you want in the way of "noise" to obscure the truth - including the "shape-shifting reptoids-as- humans," or a "gray dude in the bathroom," or a "Guardian Alliance," or a "Nibiruan Council," or an "Ashtar Command," or talking whales and dolphins, or belief in the Official Conspiracy Theory of 9/11. You name it - they can produce it via voices in the head and hallucinations and transmissions of frequencies that produce ecstatic states, healings, or whatever.

And so it is that the human element of the Cosmic COINTELPRO operation manages their many "agents" of disinformation - pied pipers leading the masses of Truth seekers - so that whatever the real truth is remains their secret. And that´s exactly the way they want it.

What strikes me as an essential turning point in this COINTELPRO operation was the beginning of the "expose" of two particular items that hold sway in certain "conspiracy" circles to this very day: Alien Abduction and Satanic Ritual Abuse.

The Gray alien scenario was "leaked" by Budd Hopkins. Whitley Strieber´s alien abduction books, including Communion, followed a few years after. Prior to the publication of these books, the ubiquitous "Gray aliens" had never been seen before. In fact, a review of the history of "contact" cases show that the type and variety and behavior of "aliens" around the world are quite different across the board. But, along came Budd, followed by Whitley and his glaring alien on the cover, and suddenly the Grays were everywhere.

In respect of Whitley and his Grays, allow me to emphasize one of Dolan´s comments quoted above: "By early 1969, teams within the CIA were running a number of bizarre experiments in mind control under the name Operation Often. In addition to the normal assortment of chemists, biologists, and conventional scientists, the operation employed psychics and experts in demonology." This, of course, brings us to the parallel event of that period of time: Satanic ritual abuse. SRA is the name given to the allegedly systematic abuse of children (and others) by Satanists.

As it happens, keeping our timeline in mind, it was in the mid to late 1970s that the allegations of the existence of a "well-organized intergenerational satanic cult whose members sexually molest, torture and murder children across the United States" began to emerge in America. There was a panic regarding SRA triggered by a fictional book called "Michelle Remembers". The book was published as fact but has subsequently been shown by at least three independent investigators to be a hoax. No hard evidence of Satanic Ritual Abuse in North America has ever been found, just as no hard evidence of abductions by Gray aliens has ever been found. Nevertheless, the allegations were widely publicized on radio and television talk shows, including Geraldo Rivera´s show.

And note that Geraldo is deep in the 9/11 Coverup!

Religious fundamentalists promoted the hysteria and, just as during the Inquisitions, endless self-proclaimed "moral entrepreneurs" both fed the fires of prosecution and earned a good living from it. Most of the early accusations of satanic ritual abuse were aimed at working-class people with limited resources, and with a few exceptions, the media and other groups that are ordinarily skeptical either remained silent or joined in the feeding frenzy of accusations. The few professionals who spoke out against the hysteria were systematically attacked and discredited by government agencies and private organizations.

The same system of mass manipulation is evident in the 9/11 Truth Movement.

The question has to be asked: If there are thousands of baseless accusations of SRA and thousands upon thousands of cases of unverifiable alien abductions, how do they originate?

Most of the SRA cases are said to originate with children. Since there is a widespread belief that children wouldn´t make up stories of eating other children or being forced to have sex with giraffes after flying in an airplane while they were supposed to be in day care, the stories are often taken at face value by naive prosecutors, therapists, police officers and parents. Researchers have found that children are unlikely to invent stories of satanic ritual abuse on their own. So, where do the stories come from? Accusing the therapists, district attorneys, police and parents of inducing such stories from children doesn´t seem to be a very productive answer. Yes, it may happen in some cases, but certainly doesn´t seem likely in the vast number of cases.

Now, let´s go back and think about our timeline. As it happens, "Michelle Remembers" was published in 1980, co-written by Michelle Smith and Lawrence Pazder, M.D. Budd Hopkins finished "Missing Time" in December of 1980, with an "afterward" by Aphrodite Clamar, Ph.D.

Set this side by side with the potential for broadcasting mass mind-control signals over the entire country, and it´s looking pretty "coincidental" from where I sit.

Consider this capability in terms of the 9/11 Cover-up also.

What occurs to me - putting the pieces of the puzzle together - is that there is some general kind of imagery being widely broadcast in the "neutral cavity" described above, and that it depends a lot on the individual and their cultural programming how it "takes." When we consider the fact that "Operation Often" employed "the normal assortment of chemists, biologists, and conventional scientists" and "psychics and experts in demonology," we begin to think that electronic COINTELPRO includes a whole supermarket of new "beliefs" - Gray aliens and "alien contacts" for the New Age crowd and a whole range of "sexual/ritual abuse scenarios" for those who are not open to the alien shtick; and we can't forget political persuasions and belief in Islamic terrorists.

Just think of the potential such technology possesses for convincing the public that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by 19 Arab terrorists who took down the defenses of the planet's "superpower" not to mention all the other patently absurd official explanations about that day, not to mention everything that has happened since.

Is the whole thing beamed out as some sort of "free-formal imaging," and, based on the conscious acceptance of one or another version, it takes on its individual characteristics in the minds of the millions of recipients? In other words, is it picked up by the subconscious in alpha states or in sleep, perceived as traumatic in a general scenario that can then be interpreted by the individual belief systems in terms of either being examined and or sexually manipulated by aliens on a table or "raped on an altar" by Satanists, or threatened by terrorists? Are the public productions - books by Hopkins, Strieber, and the SRA scandals, the Right Wing pundits, just variations on the "closing of the circuit" by the conscious mind accepting or creating some scenario as the explanation for the constant bombardment of such signals as described in Dolan´s book? Is it the job of COINTELPRO to create "bogus organizations" that produce various "explanations" to close the circuit and "make it real" in the person´s mind?

One has to wonder about the name of the program: Operation Often in terms of the claims of abductees - victims of repeated and "often" abductions - as well as the claims of those who suggest the SRA explanation. In either case, the believer is being "herded" into a "response camp" of either faith in alien saviors, or faith in Jesus to save them from the demonic/satanic Illuminati, Jews, Pagans; or George Bush, Israel, or War that will save them from Islamic terrorism - take your pick.

Let me make it clear that I am in no way suggesting that "abductions" or some whacked out satanic rituals do not ever take place somewhere, under some circumstances. What I am suggesting is that the Gray Alien and SRA phenomenon most certainly was not restricted in any way by COINTELPRO, and may indeed be the smoke and mirrors that hides a far more insidious state of affairs.

And the 9/11 Truth Movement itself along with much of the Alternative Media, may also be a complete Smoke and Mirrors show.

In essence, Dolan´s book shows us the history of how the many levels of society have been duped and deceived - or directly controlled - from the average citizen, to the seeker of higher truths, to the scions of science and industry, to the hallowed halls of government. Each "type" has been targeted in the way most likely to "manage" them best. Those who cannot be "managed" generally die, as scientist James McDonald - and others - did. But all the while, the UFOs kept coming, and people kept seeing them, and they kept asking questions.

In April 1971, an engineering research magazine, Industrial Research, published the results of a poll in which 80 percent of its members rejected the Condon Report; 76 percent believed that the government was concealing UFO facts; 32 percent believed that UFOs were extraterrestrial. Poll or no poll, the CIA continued to lie about its UFO interests. [...]

The worst story of 1971 was the demise of James McDonald. [Atmospheric physicist from the University of Arizona.] As far as anyone could tell, McDonald was fine all through 1970 and into 1971. On March 2, 1971, he testified as an expert in atmospheric physics at the House committee on Appropriations regarding the supersonic transport (SST) and its potentially harmful atmospheric effects. McDonald´s opponents questioned his credentials and ridiculed him as someone who believed in "little men flying around the sky." Laughter broke out several times.

Shortly after this incident, McDonald shot himself in the head and became blind. He was committed to the psychiatric ward of the VA medical Center in Tucson. In June, he signed himself out. On Sunday morning, June 13, a woman in south Tucson, identifying herself as a doctor, said a deranged blind man had taken a cab to the area. She wanted to know where the driver had dropped him off, and she made several calls. Meanwhile, a married couple and their children, walking along a shallow creek, found McDonald´s body under a bridge at 11:40 a.m. A .38 caliber revolver was in the sand, near his head. A brief note attributed his suicide to marriage and family problems. [...]

We know that many intelligence agencies were skilled in "creating" suicides. But, one might ask, wasn´t McDonald´s mental condition already deteriorating? Jerome Clark stated that McDonald was ready to "crack" in the aftermath of the SST hearings. But what caused this? Embarrassment at the SST hearings? His marriage? Perhaps, one supposes, but both of these explanations feel flimsy. Without exception, those who knew McDonald described him as possessing great integrity and courage. Was he really the type of person to commit suicide?

McDonald had been described as a man who was "afraid of nothing." What seems to be so is that this was why he was destroyed. Hynek had written that McDonald was considered by the Air Force to be an "outstanding nuisance." With the mind control arsenal that has been described at their disposal, we have a good idea of what "they" can do to the mind. Even the strongest. Courage and integrity, it seems, are no protection. We would like to note another curious death - that of Edward Ruppelt. After years as an advocate of disclosure, he suddenly did an about face - re-wrote his book recanting his belief that UFOs were extraterrestrial craft, and was dead within a year at a very young age.

It looks to me as though, if you are important enough to make a difference in the way people think and they can´t corrupt you, they kill you, and if they can corrupt you, they still kill you so you won´t have a chance to change your mind and recant your recantation like Jacques de Molay did when the Templars were destroyed. Those who get close to the belly of the beast are generally subjected to a variety of treatments it seems.

Many important and influential people have attested to the reality of the UFO phenomenon as an "alien reality." Within the military organizations, those who affirm the "alien hypothesis" are widespread and numerous. But, as Dolan shows us, they cannot discuss those views without risking the penalties of imprisonment and stiff fines.

In the present day, we have Steven Greer´s "Disclosure Project." Based on the mail I get, it seems that many in the New Age/UFO community think that this is a great and novel idea. However, history shows that it has been tried before. The one thing about Greer´s effort that suggests it is just more and better COINTELPRO is his attachment to the "aliens are here to help us" idea which is directly contradicted by history, though widely promoted by most "contactees." Even Linda Howe, for a long time the most reputable of careful researchers - and no stranger to the machinations of the Secret State - seems to have fallen for this one - or COINTELPRO. It is also now being promoted in "Fate Magazine" by Rosemary Guiley, who has the odor of COINTELPRO about her with her notable connections to military "agents." Jerome Clark is also a regular contributor to Fate.

Let me make it clear at this point that I am convinced that a lot of honest, sincere, hard-working individuals are being duped and/or controlled without being fully aware of it. But, not being aware of how your own mind is being used against you doesn't lessen the problem; in fact, it makes it all that much more tragic.

Dolan documents the failure of civilian groups in their efforts to really "end UFO secrecy." NICAP had prominent and active members, connections to Congress and the military, and their effort continued for over ten years. NICAP fought diligently for congressional hearings, and yet every time they got "close" to bringing it to the table for public consideration, the congressional sponsorship "backed off" and reversed their support.

What kind of group is it that can control our government officials in this way? An even deeper question might be: What kind of group is it that can control the media, the military, the CIA, the FBI, NSA, and even the President? What do they do to intimidate and dominate ethical and substantial persons in positions of authority? (Assuming there are any ethical persons left in any positions of authority!)

Whatever it is, we would certainly like to know because it suggests that they are hiding something so significant that even hints of it behind closed doors can send the most powerful congressmen running with their tails tucked between their legs.

This brings us back to the problem of the Secret State and its agenda. Some people believe that this secrecy is absolutely essential. They say that the public simply could not handle the truth about aliens. They say that there is no reason to spoil people´s lives with the truth because there is nothing that the average person could do about it anyway.

Is that really true? Would there be so much effort to conceal the alien agenda if disclosure of the truth wasn´t harmful to that agenda?

Dolan´s chronological history of the actual interaction between UFOs and the public and the corresponding behavior of the military, the intelligence community, the media, the scientific community in its interaction with the public, make this abundantly clear. Dolan writes:

Some believe this is, as it ought to be. Can the public really handle the truth about aliens? If the presence of others constitutes a threat to humanity, for example, what could the average person even do about it? There are those who believe that secrecy about UFOs is in the public´s best interest.

What is clearly evident, and most especially so in the past year or two, is that the "public interest" is not the concern of those making these decisions. As Dolan rightly says, secrecy is being utilized not to protect the public, but to protect those keeping the secrets - the "Above Top Secret" group - and very likely even the aliens themselves - who are not really aliens, but rather denizens of hyperdimensional realities. See:

Laura Knight-Jadczyk Interview on BBC Radio

When we consider the modus operandi of the intelligence community, in its historical perspective, what we see is that, at every level, right up to the very top, there is control and manipulation. This leads me to suggest that even those at the top level of the human Consortium are being duped and deceived and are as unable and/or unwilling to consider that possibility as those at the lower levels.

It seems obvious from the documentary evidence as well as the behavior of the military in response to UFOs and the "alien matter," that the aliens do have an agenda, and that - at some level in the layers of secrecy - there are those who know - at least on a "need to know" basis - what that agenda is. It seems abundantly evident that the secrecy has been enjoined on this group by the aliens themselves. What is more, a careful assessment of the evidence does not suggest a benevolent agenda.

As a result of the manipulations of this "Consortium," the majority of Americans are inculcated into the fiction of a representative government - a democracy - and that our scientists and representatives are "taking care of business" for us, and even if they are sometimes corrupt, they aren´t as bad as a totalitarian regime.

It has become most definitely obvious in the past couple of years that this is not the case - and probably never was. We don´t even really elect our representatives. It´s all a sham. But the fiction propagated by the media has clouded the ability of the American people to see their society and government for what it really is: an oligarchy that pretends to be a democracy to placate and deceive the public.

And one must not ever forget those "mass mind control signals" that are probably flooding the air-waves, even carried on cell phone signals.

To those who suggest that it doesn´t really matter since it is an efficient way to organize and manage millions of people, let us suggest that it is suicidal to think that an oligarchy is not primarily interested in maintaining its own position to the exclusion of all other considerations.

When we consider the evidence, we see that the groups in question have never acted in the best interests of the public. If you doubt this, spend some time reading about non-consensual human experimentation. And so, logically speaking, there is no reason to even suggest that the secrecy surrounding the "alien reality" is any different.

Dolan notes that, as a result of the concerted "debunking" of UFOs perpetrated on a populace that has been mind manipulated and dumbed down by public "education" for a very long time, our society has become extraordinarily schizophrenic about UFOs. At the level of "officialdom," as in academia, mainstream media, government and so forth, UFOs are either ignored or treated as a joke. You won´t find UFOs or Aliens - or their repeated invasion of sensitive airspace - discussed on the nightly news. You won´t find Ted Koppel analyzing them as a threat to National Security. And this state of affairs is totally bizarre because it is abundantly - overwhelmingly - clear and evident that our military and intelligence organizations consider them to be so important that information about them is classified "Above Top Secret."

However, being classified "Above Top Secret" does not seem to matter to the aliens. They arrogantly do as they please and leave the "clean up" to their human lackeys the same way some media personalities have been reported to destroy hotel rooms, and then have their accountants write checks to cover the damages, while their agents give press releases that deny any such thing ever happened.

This brings us back to the efforts of COINTELPRO. Since the military is in the position of dealing with beings of such arrogance that their checks don´t cover the damage they do, the "press releases" are issued in the form of diversion and division. UFOs and the "alien reality" are promoted in ways that simply do not relate to the documentary evidence or the factual data.

UFOs and aliens are given cachet in the New Age and metaphysical communities, and groups studying them or "channeling" them are "managed" so that the possibility of exposure of the Truth is completely minimized in the plethora of conflicting, generated "beliefs." At the same time, there are organizations that are set up to operate as "professional debunkers" and disinformation artists. Smoke and mirrors and endless confusion.

What is evident from the documents and statements of those "in on the secret," is that the current "popularity" of aliens and New Age presentations of the subject are the direct result of deliberate infiltration by intelligence personnel who are continually "spinning the wheel" of lies and distortion.

UFOs have national security implications for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is that they have involved military and industrial personnel of many nations around the globe. This situation has existed for over fifty years. In fact, a careful study of history shows an intersection between UFOs and the military for hundreds, if not thousands of years! Unauthorized airspace violations continue to occur; attempted interceptions repeatedly take place; and the secrecy orders are more severe now than ever.

We have to ask ourselves why this is so?

If the military organizations are as interested in UFOs and Aliens as we know them to be based on the evidence, and if they are in the dark about them, as the evidence also suggests, would they not be utilizing the many claimed "alien contacts" among the New Age community as resources if there was the possibility that such sources really were in contact with the "real aliens" in and about the planet as they claim? There are certainly many of these contactees that claim "extreme military interest" in their work.

However, based on the facts of the operations of the National Security State, we can pretty well objectively assess that if this were true, such contactees would not be out there promulgating their information. That they often operate unmolested, and even achieve great popularity is compelling evidence that their "information" is useless to the military, if not created by it. What seems to be true is that most contactees and channelers are dupes of the military cover-up - victims of COINTELPRO - created to generate the noise that hides the signal of the true Alien Reality. In short, the majority of claims of channelers, contactees, new age gurus, UFO researchers, and the like, both in books and on the internet, about the "alien reality," is COINTELPRO at its finest.

Take that to the bank.

And the same is true of the 9/11 Truth Movement.

One thing is clear: the UFOs themselves are not under the control of the military - or anybody else. But that the Consortium continues to debunk and cover it up - in the face of its violations of their own airspace - suggests to us again the analogy of arrogant and powerful Masters of Reality, aided and abetted by their military and intelligence organization servants who, all the while they are obeying the powerful overlords, which very well may include the 9/11 Attacks and war with Iraq, Iran, and God knows who else, seek to keep everything quiet while they try desperately to discover the secrets of power so as to arrogate it to themselves. And it seems evident that, in the present time, the game is afoot in the citadels of Power and Secrets. We don't know - and cannot know at present - whether some super secret beam weapon was used to take down the Twin Towers on 9/11; but it is possible. And frankly, it is the one explanation that seems to cover all the anomalies. Bottom line is: Something is happening, there is a schedule, and the servants of the alien masters are pushing an agenda that few of us understand. They are trying to cement controls, to solidify their power base, because Something Wicked This Way Comes..