MTV banned portrayal of hypnosis in 1983?

by **havanagilla** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 1:11 pm

I also think that there have been numerous experiments to incorporate the lessons from manipulating ONE person, to small groups, families finally cults, then larger cults, and then whole segments of society. I remember my own involvement in group experimentation, during my high school years. I think I know who was behind it here, and it was already in the late 70's. Since then, I am sure the knowledge grew, and now religious and cult programming is available on large scale. Stlil the vehicle is mainly religoius or quasi religious ideas/myth/imagery. While I have no proof, of course, I think that in Israsel the religious right (settlers) were subject to mass programming. Also smaller groups of Mystical Hassidic "born again" etc., were very heavily entangled with intel. Certainly Kabbalah Center (Madonna et al) has visible ties to prominent intel figures in Israel and criminal associations as well (drug/prostitution figures). lastly, I felt that Netanyahu, who was here called "the magician" by his devout, semi primitive and mystically religiously oriented followers - is also connected, via his handlers from the USA (the Evangelics). I trust the guru I met in California, who was a Hindu that he figured out that if the american gov watns all of us brainwashed totally, so shall it be, they can do it, and to ANYONE (so he said), which is why he suggested the tactics of "hiding", and taking a silence vow (speaking as less as possible). I totally agree with DE that Hypnotism (combined with drug and some remote acess via electronics) can make anyone vulnerable. However, in order to reach total control, some more effort is required, namely, by establishing some real connection, getting someone to actually associate with the victim routinely. My "crazy" take on it, is that there is a software as well, like PROMIS that can take over the process as well.

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 5:09 pm

Fourthbase, this is the perfect thread for analyzing how sports instills values and images into children and men. Why do men watch sports and women watch soaps? Why the huge 'gender gap'? Ritual affirms cultural values, repetition programs and normalizes them. My answer: Men are fed mock-warfare. Women are fed mock-families. This both eats up bandwith and affirms the social tendencies desired by the National inSecurity State, a male warrior class and a female support team. Not totally artificial, just amplifying and locking in ancient evolutionary survival attributes for the state. Of course we've evolved past the old slay-them-or-suckle-them good cop/bad cop gender role template into social animals who are hard-wired for compassion as recently proven with medical technology BUT that dynamic is in the collective childhood of our species and can be evoked exactly the same way it is in CIA interrogation manuals or marketing or rule-by-tension. The same pattern is- *Disorientation *Regression *Transference *Compliance Make people think they need a daddy and then be the daddy. The post-Vietnam Syndrome economic draft and post-women's liberation movement adjustments to social engineering now have women being brought into the culture of competitive violence to both make them assets and lessen their resistance to violence in men. Zena the Warrior, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and America's playgrounds in the 1990s suddenly had a violent girl problem. Now imagine how the sports-war imagery affects boys who seem much more neurologically and hormonally pre-disposed to violence with eons of mythic artifact reinforcing this. Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels told his local networks to use every gathering over 5000 to imbue Nazi-ism. Sports+Evangelism are high emotion groupthink events and now ARE being combined at some sports arenas having CHRISTIAN THEME DAYS with 'services' following the game when emotions are high. First arena doing this? In Colorado. The US Air Force Academy and other military bases are there and local media is extremely Pentagon-oriented. (Read it recently, still looking for the story...) This article about a fan acting out his sense of betrayal by his team , his "first love" is a good example of the sense of self identity involved in sports fans, MALE identity- <a href="http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2006/05/14/1648838.htm">www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/20...648838.htm</a> <blockquote>Quote:<hr>It's something I've often thought about because loyalty is so intricately constructed with several layers of complexity. I don't care what Dr. Phil says, you can delve through politics, religion and relationships and you'll never match the loyalty of a sports fan. .... In the early weeks of the 2006 season, Carroll decided he had finally had enough, realizing that his lifelong love affair with the Royals had turned into an abusive relationship. He was being taken for granted, his hopes and devotion ignored. ..... How do you say goodbye to a first love? You make sure your son is sitting to your left. You have your brother fly in from Iowa to sit at your right. <hr></blockquote> John Graham recently spoke at the US Air Force Academy on the need to follow legal orders and got a standing ovation. Now he's on a 'no-fly' list.  Here's his essay that is only anecdotal but in the right direction on Football as War- <a href="http://www.giraffe.org/speeches_seahawks.html">www.giraffe.org/speeches_seahawks.html</a> Ole E. Anthony is a former spook now exposing corrupt televangelists and his story shows how religion and TV is used for mind control. And so is sports. All mass psychology influencing the individual- <a href="http://www.trinityfi.org/press/latimes01.html">www.trinityfi.org/press/latimes01.html</a>

by **havanagilla** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 6:08 pm

, <blockquote>Quote:<hr>it's interesting that back in the early seventies, this subject was evidently not taboo for the left (who will now not touch this sort of stuff...I say this AS a leftist in sadness and frustration.) A friend of mine inherited a very large cache of left materials going all the way back to the thirties...really archive quality stuff and maybe he will make these things available for researchers. Old newsletters, books, etc. And the Candy Jones book was there. Nowadays, this is only material for the "paranoid right." And being neither paranoid, nor right, I do find this frustrating.<hr></blockquote> yes

by **friend catcher** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 7:27 pm

In the late 1980's there was a wash of hypnotists plying the student union bars of the UK with stage shows and booze. They were extremely popular and the amazement of attendee's was sincere and genuine. The nature of the shows was to ridicule and humiliate victims in increasingly bizarre ways that the tv hypnotists were prevented from by rules of decency. One friend of mine told me how at Salford University a girl had been entranced into giving a blow job to a fellow victim, on a stage, before several hundred people. My friend was impressed rather than outraged and said no one walked out or complained, which struck me as very odd at the time. Maybe it wasn't just those on stage that were being tranced. My only experience was to be told by a hynotist that I was a poor candidate and I'd have to give up smoking the hard way.

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 8:50 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>back in the early seventies, this subject was evidently not taboo for the left (who will now not touch this sort of stuff<hr></blockquote> Soldiers lay down 'covering fire' so others may advance. Recently, the Dobson-inflamed religious right covered for the advance of 'Chicken Little' by squawking over a different cartoon character. A brief 'moral' outburst against the cartoon 'Spongebob Squarepants' accused the character of being gay and thus a stealth effort by the 'liberal media' to 'turn our kids gay.' This had the non-homophobes chuckling over the wacky vigilance of 'those kooks.' Of course people aren't turned gay. They are born with their sexual identity and there's nothing wrong with homosexuality. But now the non-homophobe 'left' will be predisposed to the same disbelief when exposed to the topic of social engineering through pro-male anti-female military recruiting themes in 'Chicken Little' and 'The Incredibles' plus most mainstream media they put in their children's minds. This is called diversionary discrediting to hide a topic. This is also why the Clinton's had constant 'Whitewater scandal,' to prevent examining of CIA arms and drug-running through Mena Airport with the can of worms that topic opens, the secret criminal government.

by **thurnandtaxis** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:22 pm

That link I posted was to the Richie Blackmore/Rainbow video. I think my mention of Candy Jones, the mind-control-slave predecessor to Kathy O'Brien, got you thinking that I was linking to the O'Brien documentary. Nothing so didactic from me, just a bit of "eye candy". Though the swinging pendulum in the video makes me want to keep blinking and turning my head away. The narrative basically has the shrink hypnotising some guy, who then starts to dream about rescuing his girlfriend from an abduction in one of those LA aqueducts. The thugs throw him in the water, he gets out, then his girlfriend tries to kill him. This scenario is played out as a type of "false memory'" being implanted by the hypnotist who has actually imprisoned the girlfriend himself. Then the guy breaks out of trance, hears girl, punches shrink, rescues girl, then whacks the shrink again for good measure. Love conquers all, -as it should be.

by **havanagilla** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:50 pm

Hugh, this was a quote from DE's post that caught my eye, as I am personally disappointed that the left is not touching these crucial human rights issues. This got me to challenge the validity of the entire "left", because really, this is like dancing around the main problems and ignoring them, while repeating slogans "anti war" etc. that mean very little. The only still very valid "left" activity has to do with economy, namely, working towards socialism, but frankly I don't think this is at all POSSIBLE, to work for social change without addressing the methods used by the rivals, to prevent this social change. Does it mean the left has no grounds ? don't know. -- Totally agree with you on the method you are describing and generaly on the misuse of TV and movies to promote stealth agendas etc. However, the gay issue is more complex. there is a gay double spin method, seen here too. the question of choice in terms of sexual preferences is again more complex. Surely, in terms of the larger social phenomenon, gayness is not a choice, but in the world of MC, changing sexual preference is done, being done and can be done quite easily. This again creates the usual paralysis in the dogmatic left. "If we acknowledge MC and the ability to force gayness on someone, we reinforce the religious pov etc. etc. so we will deny it.". Namely, the left cannot these days take a step towards a bit more complexity and is afraid of the media and of "how things shall be perceived". working under constant terror from "how things might look" or worse, "how things might temporarily validate my opponents' claims", is pathetic defensive strategy and is bound to fail. there is lack of true conviction, and a lot self doubt among the left. -- One can say - gays should have rights, sexual preferences should not be rated as good or bad, BUT it is quite possible to influence someone's sexual choice under extreme conditions of pressure, brainwashing , rape and suggestion, as it is possible to make someone kill another by psychological method or make them commit a suicide. I think the main blind spot in the left is the issue of whether or not we are our own masters and truly have free will, or can we very easily be turned into suicidal slaves by "remote suggestion" or worse, DRUGS and some voodoo. the basic belief system of the "left" denies our limitations as humans, (that's reserved for the right/religious people) and would rather black out half of what we see happening in order to maintain the official party line. (we call it here the tactics of saying "there is no such animal", upon actually seeing an animal one is not familiar with). however, the concept of free will and being your own master is a bit more complex, and if developed enough, can still hold water. Namely, we have the right not to be unduly inlfuenced, but we CAN be influenced, at least for a while or forever by underhanded psychological methods, and some say underhanded supernatural methods. It only requires a new approach and addressing the new threats on freedom, rather than denying them because "the religious right" might be partly validated through the process (namely, some of their claims that the bible and all of its devil/god stuff is true).

MTV banned portrayal of hypnosis in 1983?

Re: "Evangelism" perfect vehicle for mass hypnotis

Re: Sports and evangelism are perfect vehicles for fascism.

Re: Sports and evangelism are perfect vehicles for fascism.

Re: Sports and evangelism are perfect vehicles for fascism.

Hava notes how the topic has been put aside.

I wasn't clear Hugh,

Re: This is called diversionary discrediting to hide a topi

Who is online