Written by Katin for IPCRESS Blog.
In the spring of 2002, the Israeli military had the Palestinian town of Ramallah under siege. The IDF had captured three of the four Palestinian television stations. While in control of these media outlets, the Israeli military implemented a very disturbing plan: they began broadcasting pornographic movies to the Palestinian households. For those who are familiar with the tactics frequently used by Israel against the Palestinian people, such a thing will come as no surprise. And they have done far worse. Yet, there’s something especially twisted about this event.
Sorcha Faal is not always the most reliable of sources, yet there are some compelling elements to her latest post, here. Definitely worth a read.
The Ft. Hood shootings occur just when Congress is forcing through the controversial health care bill. A similar incident occurred back in October of 2002. At this time, Congress was voting on whether to declare war on Iraq, but all eyes were focused on the activities of the “DC Sniper,” whose rampage of terror coincided perfectly with these political events.
On Friday, Governor Perry of Texas announced that there were THREE shooters. Similar reports confirmed this, although news of the other shooters quickly disappeared from the news. At this point, Hasan is regarded as the “lone gunman.”
Perry’s remarks can be found HERE.
Fort Hood PSYOP Test Fails, Leaves 13 US Soldiers Dead, Muslim Officer Blamed
by Sorcha Faal
In what one Russian Military Analyst (jokingly?) speculated could possibly be a “very sick” way of publicizing a new American movie opening this week about the US Pentagons decades long experiments in mind-control technology (“The Men Who Stare At Goats”), has instead, according to these reports, resulted in a tragic massacre of at least 13 US Soldiers preparing for deployment to the Iraq war from the giant US military base of Fort Hood, Texas.
The mind-altering mechanism is based on a subliminal carrier technology: the Silent Sound Spread Spectrum (SSSS), sometimes called “S-quad” or “Squad”. It was developed by Dr Oliver Lowery of Norcross, Georgia, and is described in US Patent #5,159,703, “Silent Subliminal Presentation System”, dated October 27, 1992. The abstract for the patent reads:
“A silent communications system in which nonaural carriers, in the very low or very high audio-frequency range or in the adjacent ultrasonic frequency spectrum are amplitude- or frequency-modulated with the desired intelligence and propagated acoustically or vibrationally, for inducement into the brain, typically through the use of loudspeakers, earphones, or piezoelectric transducers. The modulated carriers may be transmitted directly in real time or may be conveniently recorded and stored on mechanical, magnetic, or optical media for delayed or repeated transmission to the listener.”
According to literature by Silent Sounds, Inc., it is now possible, using supercomputers, to analyse human emotional EEG patterns and replicate them, then store these “emotion signature clusters” on another computer and, at will, “silently induce and change the emotional state in a human being”.
Posted November 9, 2004
By George Monbiot. Published in the Guardian 9th November 2004
There is a precedent for the Bush Project, but it’s not fascis
“If Bush wins”, the US writer Barbara Probst Solomon claimed just before the election, “fascism is possible in the United States.”(1) Blind faith in a leader, she said, a conservative working class and the use of fear as a political weapon provide the necessary preconditions.
She’s wrong. So is Richard Sennett, who described Bush’s security state as “soft fascism” in the Guardian last month.(2) So is the endless traffic on the internet. In The Anatomy of Fascism, Robert Paxton persuasively describes it as “… a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy and purity”.(3) It is hard to read Republican politics in these terms. Fascism recruited the elite, but it did not come from the elite. It relied on hysterical popular excitement: something which no one could accuse George Bush of provoking.
But this is not to say that the Bush project is unprecedented. It is, in fact, a repetition of quite another ideology. If we don’t understand it, we have no hope of confronting it.
Sixty-four years ago this month, six million Americans became unwitting subjects in an experiment in psychological warfare.
It was the night before Halloween, 1938. At 8 p.m. CST, the Mercury Radio on the Air began broadcasting Orson Welles’ radio adaptation of H. G. Wells’ War of the Worlds. As is now well known, the story was presented as if it were breaking news, with bulletins so realistic that an estimated one million people believed the world was actually under attack by Martians. Of that number, thousands succumbed to outright panic, not waiting to hear Welles’ explanation at the end of the program that it had all been a Halloween prank, but fleeing into the night to escape the alien invaders.
Later, psychologist Hadley Cantril conducted a study of the effects of the broadcast and published his findings in a book, The Invasion from Mars: A Study in the Psychology of Panic. This study explored the power of broadcast media, particularly as it relates to the suggestibility of human beings under the influence of fear. Cantril was affiliated with Princeton University’s Radio Research Project, which was funded in 1937 by the Rockefeller Foundation. Also affiliated with the Project was Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member and Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS) executive Frank Stanton, whose network had broadcast the program. Stanton would later go on to head the news division of CBS, and in time would become president of the network, as well as chairman of the board of the RAND Corporation, the influential think tank which has done groundbreaking research on, among other things, mass brainwashing.
by Brandon J. Snider
by Brandon J. Snider
“I have already alluded to the difference hitherto existing between regiments of men associated for purposes of violence, and for purposes of manufacture; in that the former appear capable of self-sacrifice – the latter, not.”
~ John Ruskin, Unto This Last, 1862
This was the view of one of the 19th century’s most prominent and influential leftists. Ruskin goes on to say that “the soldier’s trade, verily and essentially, is not slaying, but being slain.” It isn’t the natural danger of being killed in battle that has Ruskin mesmerized. One can be killed doing almost anything. It is the fact that the soldier “holds his life at the service of the State.” Service. This is Ruskin’s euphemism for being a hired killer.
There are techniques that police and security experts use to help tell if someone is lying. This knowledge might also be useful to managers and employers, but it’s more important for you — the average person — to help prevent falling victim to frauds, scams, and other deceptions.
Be warned, however. Sometimes it’s better not to know these things. Once you become a good lie detector, you may be offended when it is painfully obvious that someone is lying to your face.
Essay needs to be edited for emphasis and clarity. Will re-post it shortly.
Written by Katin for IPCRESS Blog
The Establishment has been working overtime to understand a section of the brain which is connected to emotional behavior. They are developing drugs and medical procedures which will be able to control this part of the brain–or destroy it, if they need to. In the last few years they have made enormous advances, and we can only imagine what they have in store for us once this has all been perfected.
Written by Katin for IPCRESS Blog
There was a brief struggle against the porn industry during the 70s. Led by elements of the Feminist movement, they correctly saw this as a sexual/political issue. Andrea Dworkin, one of the most vocal anti-porn Feminists, produced some influential material analyzing the porn culture, but her work was largely undermined by her strident Anti-Male message which led her effort off-track. The problem, of course, wasn’t “Men,” but the Establishment and its plan to promote porn culture for specific political-cultural purposes. The Feminists appeared to be using the issue of pornography merely as a means to attack Men. This greatly minimized the effectiveness of their argument and blinded them to the coming assault being prepared by the Establishment.