Leonard Cohen, Operative? (Ann Diamond material)

[brekin]

guruilla:

@brekin: I'm not going to address your question, even though it may be sincere, because, while "the squeaky wheel gets the oil" is a fair principle for group therapy and spiritual workshops, it does not work so well in a think tank, where personal issues (or in this case, skepticism taken to a borderline neurotic degree - just IMHO, of course) don't really have much of a place. After a certain amount of squeaking, "If you don't like it, why stay?" becomes a reasonable response, I think. Simply put, you are the only one complaining at this thread, and your complaints (again IMO) have got us absolutely nowhere so far in terms of teasing out the material (though they may have been part of a therapeutic process for some involved).

Yes, why address my question of how any the facts posted go to prove LC is an operative when you obviously take them as contributing to LC's non-tuxedo'd intelligence career somehow. I mean why address the subject head on? As to your own oblique question above, why stay? Because there is a question to whether LC is an operative. I don't think he is from what I've seen, I wouldn't put in the realm of the impossible, but would like some tangibles either way, so I'm hanging.

As far as "my complaining in the thread" I see my contribution as beneficial because many times material has been taken at face value as going in the column that LC is an operative without any real discussion or even analysis. The ridiculous photo that you included in the LC fact list above again, for example, when we still don't know who is in the picture, where the setting is, who took it, who gave it to AD, whether it is staged, where it originated, what is happening, etc only shows the continuing compulsion to "just believe and it will be so" regarding the facts. So, I guess my presence could be considered therapeutic if a continued reminder regarding reality is scene as a form of therapy. As again, I don't see a consensus in belief a prerequisite for participation in a thread I view questions of my involvement and stance in a thread as annoyingly improper and a form of harassment (to say nothing of malignant armchair mental diagnoses).

[backtoiam]

No, that is the ethic of the internet consolidator. You just take a little copypasta from here, a little from there, a little suggestive seasoning, rub your wand over it, and voila! pronounce so and so is an intelligence operative.

No. This thread has big ? on its thread title and nobody has made that declaration. You on the other hand, seem to know for sure. So tell us? I don't mean to be a dick, but I enjoy this thread, and you cannot tell me what to believe. Due to my own personal experiences with some of this stuff this thread is cathartic for me and I find comfort from this thread due to some of the things I have endured in my life, of a very similar nature. OK?

My third eye works very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, damn good, I also have a magic wand, and I know what i see, but I haven't said so have I?

But you haven't proven anything, other than to those who already want to believe. All you have is a suggestive pile and not a chain of reasoning building an argument to a logical conclusion.

Does that mean we have to close the Rigourous Intuition doors because we don't have enough proof to suit you? By your standards this forum could not even exist.

"The truth is in there, somewhere. I can't remember where the photo is or what specific evidence would lead one to conclude that its true, but after spending a lot of time playing in the pile I believe it is so." People like piles, though, because there very unstructuring forestall unpleasant realities and logical challenges, point by point, because the points are so diffuse, hidden and unconnected that they hold the promise of anything being possibly true. It is threatening then when the pile starts to be organized and attempts to build an argument with the before believed solid pieces of the pile.

It has been said “truth” is a funny concept. What is truth to one may not be to another because opinions vary from one person to another. “Truth” in this context consists of one’s opinion or point of view. By this definition truth can be altered, changed or even “made”. For example, the truth believed and espoused by MSNBC is far different than that of FOX News, both by the reporters themselves and by viewers.

I just wishing you would stop pissing in the oatmeal. WE HEAR YOU, YOU ARE NOT CONVINCED.

[lunarmoth]

I feel exactly the same way you do about hypnotism, guruilla. However in 1998 I decided to have a past life regression with a woman hypnotherapist I instinctively trusted. She interviewed me beforehand about my medical and psychological history, and reason for wanting to investigate a possible PL. I told her it was my pattern of anxiety in relationships that was causing me to sabotage one after another. So she regressed me to ancient Egypt and Nazi Germany. It was like being thrown into both lifetimes - and the contents were life-changing. (You don't have to believe me). I also never doubted I was creating everything that happened in those climactic regressions -- something I try to keep in mind as I go about my daily life.

Last January I had the flu during two solid weeks of minus 20 degree weather and to pass the time indoors my friend and I watched instructional tapes from a course he had taken in hypnosis. The tapes were interesting and taught various induction techniques using practical demonstrations and story telling. Frequently I would end up in a deep trance while my friend stayed awake. Several times i dreamed or relived programming. Once i talked in my sleep snd my friend reported what I had said. "At least they didn't program me as an assassin. At least I've never killed anyone." Mostly though I saw images: i remember a bird flew out of my chest and disappeared over a lake and I felt a sense of release.

Later I began feeling major profound changes happening in my life, affecting my emotional patterns. I'm fairly convinced this was the result of these experiences in assisted self-hypnosis. I.e. I followed guided meditations and techniques that can bring you safely in and out of deeper (and higher) levels of trance than you could other wise access and where deep healing can happen.

[backtoiam]

"At least they didn't . program me as an assassin. At least I've never killed anyone." Mostly though I saw images: i remember a bird flew out of my ches and disappeared over a lake and I felt a sense of release.

I know why the caged bird sings, its because he got away. Just sayyinn.....

[Joao]

Everything brekin has written in this thread has been absolutely dead on. Cheers for having the energy to engage and question.

Does that come with a shiny apple?

I'll extend brekin's invite to you: out of the thousands of words brekin has written at this thread (every last one of which has been dead-on), can you single out the one thing he wrote that's most dead-on? If you can, then I will address that.

I realize my post was low-effort, but it's only to point out that absence of debate on the internet is hardly equivalent to consensus. "You're the only one complaining" is a nasty criterion. My two-bit post was not in support of brekin as an individual, which he hardly needs and surely doesn't want, but rather it was a rejection of the idea that seeking actual evidence of a reasonable standard is somehow harmful or unseemly.

It's frustrating to see fair questions turned into a would-be referendum on an individual poster. This thread presents an interesting topic and critical engagement is one of the most sincere and valuable avenues of potential support. Instead, the topic is treated as dogma and merely ending a sentence in a question mark runs the risk of an apoplectic response. It's been comical at times, and contributes to my personal skepticism of the material under discussion.

Thanks for your offer. With due respect, however, I expect it will result only in further rhetorical wranglings. My own take on the discussion so far is summed up well by the following: "All you have is a suggestive pile and not a chain of reasoning building an argument to a logical conclusion." Perhaps LC is indeed an "operative", but the material presented is simply not persuasive. I don't expect to see his 201 file but a poet's verses are not a reasonable substitute. I'm not challenging the thread's existence, the principal's testimony, or defending LC. A question was raised, and I (for one) have been glad to see it challenged. It's respectful and fair to do so.

[guruilla]

@brekin
At this point, I have to second backtoiam: the only thing you have really expressed at this thread is that you are not convinced, and that you want more evidence. I know it’s been a long thread, and you’ve been singing what seems like the same old song for quite some time; so I may have forgotten something along the way which you brought to the table. If so, I am sure you’ll remind me.

Meanwhile, addressing your two main refrains:

1) You are not convinced.

Fine, OK, I got that. But you left out the bit where you explained why you think I or anyone else should care.

2) You want more evidence

That’s great! Good to have you onboard. By all means, go and look! We await your discoveries with baited breath. Really.

There are literally dozens of facts listed above which you or anyone else can look further into to see if there’s more there that will lend them significance, or that will prove they are, after all, unrelated to any intelligence-like activities.

Your argumentation here, as far as I can tell anyway, has rarely if ever involved addressing specific points (except perhaps for that photo, but even that really comes down to subjective opinion: you think it’s silly, other people think it’s at least relevant). I don’t think you’ve ever once responded to a specific argument or shown any particular interest in any of the information here. Your arguments have mostly, or even all, been about what you see as people’s credibility credulity and lack of rigor; in other words, you seem to want to teach us how we are doing it wrong, and, in the process, to show us how you know better. That seems to be pretty much the gist of it.

If I suggested neurosis behind this continued interest in “debating” (i.e. policing) this thread, it’s because I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt, allowing that you are neither stupid nor deliberately disruptive or dishonest. Take it or leave it. (Neurosis is hardly a diagnosis, anyway, since no one here can claim to be free of it.)

Lastly, as an example of just how anti-productive and sneakily disingenuous your contributions might seem to be (if I wasn’t prepared to chalk it down to your being triggered and posting without thinking), let’s look at your last question which you made at the thread:

For those who will cry, Blind! Blind! Don't you see brekin, LC is a intelligence operative, but one who doesn't where a tuxedo all the time!! I say, pick the best example from above as evidence or an example LC as an intelligence operative. I'm really quite curious to see which one people think as positive proof.

This is not questioning, much less dialoguing. It’s baiting.

If any single example were able to stand alone as evidence, there wouldn't be any need to go to all the trouble of laying out all the countless different bits of possible evidence, in order for them to paint a picture in people’s minds. Have you never seen a court case on TV? How many crimes and mysteries (besides the really contrived kind that provide a smoking gun for lazy audiences) have you read or seen in which a single piece of evidence is enough to solve the case or persuade the jury? That’s just lame TV.

In the context of everything that has come before it, your question makes no sense at all. Worse, it seems like a deliberate mockery of the research and deductive process, in general, and of those involved, specifically.

At this point, brekin, I think it’s fair to say that the onus is on you to explain all of these Cohen-correspondences away as mere coincidences. Explain to us why they are irrelevant, and convince us that you are really seeing something that we are missing. And if you can’t, then how else are people to take your paltry arguments, disingenuous questions, and mean-spirited baiting except as either deliberate obfuscation, or some sort of desperate attention seeking?

[lunarmoth]

Brekin: your posts have had the feel of a drunken rant even if you keep coming up with new riffs to justify their mind numbing repetitiveness. No one behaves this boorishly in defence of "intellectual rigour" -- i think there's a deeper motive behind your apparent inability to integrate and store new information. It's called being a bully and the more you do it, the more alarms go off.

I'm getting pms telling me that RI has a tradition of targeting mind control survivors, and most have left. I'm new here, and frankly I don't care. Guruilla has presented "my material" in ways I would not have had the guts to. There's been more discussion than I ever expected. I'm happy to stay and see this thread evolve.

"History" - to anyone who's studied it - isn't about stacking up points. It's about creating plausible interpretations of known facts, and building narratives based on causality.

When a theory is true, the facts in support of it multiply. When it's false, the sources and leads dry up fast, without needing a dedicated team of debunkers to come in with flamethrowers and bulldozers to finish the job.

Your obnoxiousness here is almost enough to persuade me we've struck something solid that will keep expanding and attracting opposition from people like you.

[Wombaticus Rex]

I'm getting pms telling me that RI has a tradition of targeting mind control survivors, and most have left. I'm new here, and frankly I don't care.

Well, a couple things: I salute you for sticking around, and fuck, that hits me like a ton of bricks.

I don't know how I could have expected to curate or maintain something better than that, but I did aspire to it. (I definitely don't see my role here as leadership or control.)

I often scroll through the huge hulking expanse of subforums and...well, keep scrolling, mostly.

Arf. I don't see how RI, as a public, google-indexed-daily-ass internet forum open to the public, can serve as a safe space for MC survivors. Even just to allow for open commentary on the trigger-tastic, handler-saturated edifice of pop culture would have to rule that out, right?

Another thought that has, again and again, restrained my ModFinger on this thread: "This is online. This could have been an email thread." How am I going to limit access to this? Personally, I'm 100% fine with treating this thread like a slow-motion podcast and removing myself from the equation as much as possible, but I'm not going to restrain anyone else from engaging with you -- you meaning anyone here -- like an open comments thread.

Which, this is.

[lunarmoth]

I'm getting pms telling me that RI has a tradition of targeting mind control survivors, and most have left. I'm new here, and frankly I don't care.

Well, a couple things: I salute you for sticking around, and fuck, that hits me like a ton of bricks.

I don't know how I could have expected to curate or maintain something better than that, but I did aspire to it. (I definitely don't see my role here as leadership or control.)

I often scroll through the huge hulking expanse of subforums and...well, keep scrolling, mostly.

Arf. I don't see how RI, as a public, google-indexed-daily-ass internet forum open to the public, can serve as a safe space for MC survivors. Even just to allow for open commentary on the trigger-tastic, handler-saturated edifice of pop culture would have to rule that out, right?

Another thought that has, again and again, restrained my ModFinger on this thread: "This is online. This could have been an email thread." How am I going to limit access to this? Personally, I'm 100% fine with treating this thread like a slow-motion podcast and removing myself from the equation as much as possible, but I'm not going to restrain anyone else from engaging with you -- you meaning anyone here -- like an open comments thread.

Which, this is.

I was told survivors have been actively harrassed here. Not by random visitors - but as covert policy.

[Wombaticus Rex]

Well, that could only flow from me, at this point.

I confess, I've never seen handlers coming. I try to now, but I'm probably just paranoid.

The biggest point I want to make is twofold - that I bear you no ill will and that if testifying in an online space where anyone can sign up and engage is dangerous, there are other channels to do that. That's not written as some frowning prohibition - disclose away, anyone - but as an earnest OpSec enjoinder.

[brekin]

God, the drama in this thread, its like a conspiracy episode of Glee. I don't have time for rebuttal of all the accusations, passive aggressive smears and flexing of powerful third eyes but I will briefly call bullshit on so called targeting of MC survivors and the whiny increase of RI somehow not being cozy to, for lack of a better term, alternative theories of whatnot. Ladies and gentleman, your conspiracy kung fu is some pitiful shit, if I, wet paper bag of woo loving, crazy ass, hail mary passes into the deep end zone of the twilight zone conjecturing, am being cast as Joe McCarthy of the Truth Squad. Really, if every time I pull out one of my telfon coated armor piercing questions people want to go on lockdown and have a house meeting to ask if brekin can leave his highly annoying and potentially dangerous questions out in the garage, then your theories or anti-theories are not yet ready for public vetting (discussion).

Culling through the fact list, these were the facts, or whatnot, that seemed to me to have any legs to the theory LC is an operative for me. Again, the only one I'm seeing with heavy gravitation is Cohen taking part in Hebb's experiments. Again, as I have asked this question before, how do we know he took place in these experiments at all? All we have is LC telling AD he took acid once in a flotation tank and enjoyed it (like swimming with the dolphins) and we have him a student at McGill.

The Cuba, Israel, and Ethiopia eve of revolutions appearances seem to have some meat, but maybe he's just a revolution junkie. We don't have him appearing to do anything operational other than his U.S.O. duty for the IDF. Again, maybe something there, but I know lots of rich kids who like to be on the scene danger tourists a la Anderson Cooper with their camcorders, some go by Sarajevo while others are fine with Coachella.

ADT: In 1951, Cohen took part in Dr. Donald Hebb’s notorious sensory isolation experiments, for which student volunteers were paid $20 a day.

Fact: Hebb was involved with CIA-backed mind control experiments at McGill Uni during this time. He did use student volunteers, and paid them $20 a day.) The notorious picture that’s been discussed at this thread is of one of them, or at least, it precisely matches the conditions they were subjected to. And yes, it’s perhaps not an entirely subjective statement to say that he does resemble Leonard Cohen.

Fact: In 1961 (still working on his CC-funded novel?), Cohen visited Cuba, after the revolution and right before the Bay of Pigs US invasion occurred. He was arrested as a spy on the beach, but eventually released. The invasion began and he was again arrested at the airport while trying to leave, supposedly having been mistaken for a Cuban solider trying to escape. He was miraculously able to escape.

Fact: in 1962, Cohen returned to London and hung out with Bacal and her boyfriend, the gangster-turned-black activist Michael X. X and Bacal formed the London Black Power Movement. Cohen later joked/boasted about his friendship with Michael X on Canadian TV, how X had promised him a country. For followers of the Occult Yorkshire/Crucial Fictions investigation, another of Cohen’s Montreal pals in London during this period was Robert Hershorn, seen here with Roman Polanski)

Fact: In 1964-5, National Film Board of Canada (NFBC) (founded to create propaganda during the Second World War) produced an hour-long documentary about Cohen called Ladies & Gentlemen, Mr. Leonard Cohen. The documentary begins with a humorous anecdote about Cohen’s visit to an unnamed mental institution. Later on, Cohen talks about why he went to Cuba, his "deep interest in violence," and how he "wanted to kill or be killed.” He also refers to his friendship with Michael X (without naming him). Towards the end, the documentary shows Cohen mingling with a young Bohemian crowd, with a voice-over about how Cohen is especially “interested in young people.” He is also seen playing guitar and singing at a party.
.....
Fact: By Cohen’s own account, when Cohen first met Janis Joplin at the Chelsea Hotel (widely rumored to have been an operations hub for the CIA), he introduced himself as Kris Kristofferson, whom Joplin was looking for.

Fact: In 1973, a few days before the Yom Kippur war began, Cohen travelled to Israel. He joined the Israel Defense Forces(IDF) but did not fight, being considered more useful as a singer to boost soldier morale.

Fact: Immediately after his stint in the IDF, Cohen flew from Israel to Asmara, Ethiopia, where he supposedly wrote “Chelsea Hotel” (about Janis Joplin). The Ethiopian revolution/civil war began soon after his visit, in early 1974. In Cohen bios, AFAIK and based on a Google Books search, the only mention of Asmara refers to his writing a song there. Whatever his reasons for being there, they appear to have been lost to history (deemed immaterial).

[identity]

God, the drama in this thread, its like a conspiracy episode of Glee.

One woman's drama is another woman's comedy. Carry on, all.

[backtoiam]

God, the drama in this thread, its like a conspiracy episode of Glee. I don't have time for rebuttal of all the accusations, passive aggressive smears and flexing of powerful third eyes but I will briefly call bullshit on so called targeting of MC survivors and the whiny increase of RI somehow not being cozy to, for lack of a better term, alternative theories of whatnot.

t

If I were you I would take a cold shower and stop reading this thread. None of the rest of us are experiencing drama. Some of us enjoy exploring the continuity between esoteric social engineering and the exoteric consequences of its subtle manifestations in the real world. If this thread is a grain of sand in your oyster, and is not producing a pearl, I would just stop if I was you.

It has produced pearls for me, but i'm just crazy like that, because, I can read between the lines. Its that third eye shit again, over and over...Hell dude, just leave the building if its driving you crazy.

[brekin]

God, the drama in this thread, its like a conspiracy episode of Glee. I don't have time for rebuttal of all the accusations, passive aggressive smears and flexing of powerful third eyes but I will briefly call bullshit on so called targeting of MC survivors and the whiny increase of RI somehow not being cozy to, for lack of a better term, alternative theories of whatnot.

t

If I were you I would take a cold shower and stop reading this thread. None of the rest of us are experiencing drama. Some of us enjoy exploring the continuity between esoteric social engineering and the exoteric consequences of its subtle manifestations in the real world. If this thread is a grain of sand in your oyster, and is not producing a pearl, I would just stop if I was you.
It has produced pearls for me, but i'm just crazy like that, because, I can read between the lines. Its that third eye shit again, over and over...Hell dude, just leave the building if its driving you crazy.

See, those are some damn good reasons why you are not me. And I'm not going anywhere. I'm a hard dick brother like that. I'm glad you got your pearls, though, and someone threw them before you.

[backtoiam]

wombaticus wrote:

I don't know how I could have expected to curate or maintain something better than that, but I did aspire to it. (I definitely don't see my role here as leadership or control.)

I often scroll through the huge hulking expanse of subforums and...well, keep scrolling, mostly.

And you do a hell of a damn fine job. I respect you more than I can say. Moderator Appreciation Week should be held more often.