Operation Mind Control
By Walter Bowart
Chapter Nineteen
By Walter Bowart
Chapter Nineteen
FROM BIONIC WOMAN
TO
STIMULATED CAT
In 1967 a writer named Lincoln Lawrence published a
book which asked the question: Was Lee Harvey Oswald a
robot-assassin programmed by a sophisticated technique
known as RHIC-EDOM? The letters stood for Radio Hypnotic Intra-Cerebral Control-Electronic Dissolution of
Memory.
Lawrence speculated that Oswald had been behavior controlled and prepared during his "defection" to the Soviet Union as a "sleeper" agent programmed to return to
the United States and murder on cue. It was the Manchurian Candidate theme, with one exception. Lawrence
insisted that the Russians had not masterminded the
RHIC-EDOM plan. It had been masterminded, he
thought, by an international cartel of commodities merchants who sought to make millions by driving the market
down with the assassination of a president—any president.
Lawrence wrote, "Lee Harvey Oswald was to be utilized as .. . (and now you must clear your brain and put
aside your preconceived notions of what espionage and sabotage are today) .. . an RHIC controlled person . . .
somewhat like a mechanical toy. An RHIC controlled person can be processed (as Oswald was in Minsk), allowed to
travel to any country . . . and be put to use even years
later by the application of RHIC controls. In short, like the
toy, he can in a sense be 'wound up' and made to perform
acts without any possibility of the controller being detected.
"Under RHIC, a 'sleeper' can be used years later with
no realization that the 'sleeper' is even being controlled! He can be made to perform acts that he will have no memory
of ever having carried out. In a manipulated kind of kamikaze operation where the life of the 'sleeper' is dispensable,
RHIC processing makes him particularly valuable because
if he is detected and caught before he performs the act
specified . . . nothing he says will implicate the group or
government which processed and controlled him."1
Mr. Lawrence used as evidence the official Russian records that Oswald had been admitted to the hospital in
Minsk at 10 A.M. on March 30, 1961. The records state
that he was admitted with complaints about suppuration
from the right ear and a weakening in hearing. Lawrence
said that this was a cover-up for "the real reason for Oswald's stay—but there was one slight oversight. He was
hospitalized for eleven days for an 'adenoid' operation.
Eleven days for an adenoid removal is, or course, preposterous. In austere Soviet Russia it was particularly ridiculous!"
What really happened, according to Lawrence, was that
during the operation a small electrode was implanted inside
Oswald's mastoid sinus. The electrode responded to a radio
signal which would make audible, inside Oswald's head,
certain electronic commands to which he had already been
post hypnotically conditioned to respond. (The autopsy report in Dallas noted that there was a small scar on the
mastoid sinus behind Oswald's ear.)
In 1967 the idea sounded utterly preposterous. Mr.
Lawrence's book, Were We Controlled?, found only a minuscule audience. Lawrence, on the other hand, may have
had much more evidence than he was allowed to present.
His credentials indicated that he had been "working in liaison with the department of defense."
In 1975 the RHIC-EDOM story surfaced again. This
time a Tennessee journalist said he had been given top secret documents by two former CIA officials whom he
would not identify. The journalist, James L. Moore, said
that the papers in his possession described the details of "a
military technique of mind-control called Radio-Hypnotic
Intra-Cerebral Control—Electronic Dissolution of Memory."
Moore described the RHIC-EDOM file as a 350-page
scientific report, which was prepared by the CIA immediately after the murder of President John F. Kennedy. He said it described a way of turning men into electronically
controlled robots programmed to kill on command.
According to Moore, in the initial (RHIC) stage of programming the prospective killer is put into a deep hypnotic
trance, and conditioned to go into trance at the sound of a
specific tone. "A person may be placed under this control
with or without his knowledge, programmed to perform
certain actions and maintain certain attitudes" whenever he
hears the tone. "Effective for a lifetime," Moore said, "control may be triggered weeks, months, or even years after
the first 'hypnosis' and programming."
"Medically," Moore continued, "these radio signals are
directed to certain parts of the brain. When a part of your
brain receives a tiny electrical impulse from outside
sources, such as vision, hearing, etc., an emotion is produced—anger at the sight of a gang of boys beating an old
woman, for example. This same emotion of anger can be
created by artificial radio signals sent to your brain by a
controller. You could instantly feel the same white hot anger without any apparent reason."
The second part of the process, electronic dissolution of
memory (EDOM), Moore said, is more complex. "In the
brain is a chemical called acetylcholine, which carries
electrical impulses from the eyes, ears, nose, nerve endings,
etc., to the part of the brain where memory is located.
Memory is nothing more than the recording of these electrical impulses, and acetylcholine is the path (or 'wire') that
connects the inner brain to the nerves of your eyes and
ears .. . By electronically jamming the brain, acetylcholine creates static which blocks out sights and sounds. You
would then have no memory of what you saw or heard;
your mind would be a blank."
Moore said that according to CIA documents, this
method can be used either to block the memory completely, or to slow it down so that events seem to have
happened later than they actually have. "According to a
knowledgeable CIA source, this is what happened in Dallas
and later in Los Angeles," Moore stated.
Moore quoted his unidentified source as saying, "That
was the first thought to hit us at CIA. It's pretty obvious
that Ruby was programmed to kill Oswald, even by Ruby's
own words .. . As for Sirhan, there is no other explanation; it's a proven fact that his memory has been completely erased."
"The assassination of John Kennedy," Moore said "was
carried out by disgruntled CIA and FBI personnel, using
Mafia and Cuban exile flunkies.'"
The claims of James L. Moore would sound fantastic
were it not for the abundance of information to support the
possibility of their validity.
The Helms memo to the Warren Commission mentioned
something called "biological radio communication." Although the term was not fully explained, Helms related it
to ESB: "Current research indicates that the Soviets are
attempting to develop a technology for control in the development of behavioral patterns among the citizenry of the
USSR in accordance with politically determined requirements of the system. Furthermore, the same technology can
be applied to more sophisticated approaches to the 'coding'
of information for transmittal to population targets in the
'battle for the minds of men.'"
It seems entirely possible that the "radio magnetic waves"
Moore referred to and the "biological radio communication" Helms referred to may be one and the same. Both
terms probably describe waves radiated in the electromagnetic spectrum. Both sound waves and radio waves have
been studied for their coercive effect on the mind. Ultrasonics are sound waves, traveling in a medium different
from the radio medium.
A 1951 MKULTRA CIA memo also described what
could be related to RHIC-EDOM. "There is no reason to
believe that Russia and some of the satellites have not investigated the effects of ultrasonics on man, perhaps to the
extent of its possible use in the future for interrogation purposes. We have no reports which indicate past use of ultrasonics on prisoners for this purpose, but its possible use
should be taken into consideration."
Meanwhile, ultrasonics research was underway. Drs. W.
Fry and R. Meyers of the University of Illinois used focused ultrasonic waves to make brain lesions of a very controlled size. Their research, conducted in 1961, demonstrated the great advantage of ultrasonics over the psychosurgical techniques which implanted electrodes in the
brain. By using low-energy sound beams, Fry and Meyers stimulated or destroyed neural tissue at the point of focus
of the beams without cutting or drilling into the brain.
A few years later Dr. Peter Lindstrom at the University
of Pittsburgh used a single unfocused sonic beam to destroy
fiber tracts without damaging the nerve cells next to them.
Lindstrom used this "prefrontal sonic treatment" as a substitute for lobotomy, to destroy fiber tracts in the frontal
lobes of patients who had either untreatable pain or severe
psychiatric disorders.
The cryptocracy's secret funds and guidance directed a
number of research projects into the effects on the brain of
various vibrations beyond the perception of ordinary human senses. In one experiment recommended by Norbert
Wiener, a sheet of tin was suspended from the ceiling and
connected to a generator working at ten cycles per second.
When large field strengths of one or two volts per centimeter (a very minute amount) were oscillating at the alpha
frequency of the human brain, extremely unpleasant sensations were reported by the volunteer subjects.
Scientists at the Brain Research Institute of the University of California took up the investigation of the effects of
oscillating fields on human behavior. They experimented
with field strengths of not more than a few hundredths of a
volt per centimeter. After fifteen minutes of exposure to
such oscillating fields, subjects showed measurable degeneration in performance of simple tasks.
These and other experiments led the cryptocracy to study the effects of very-low-frequency sound (VLF)—the opposite of ultrasonics—as an instrument of war. Research revealed that there is a natural wave guide between the ionosphere and the earth which could be used to propagate very-low-frequency radiation and guide it to selected locations on the earth. Studies showed that this low-frequency sound subtly affected the electrical behavior of the brain in much the same way that Dr. Adey's studies had shown.
The alpha-wave frequency of the human brain is from eight to twelve hertz (cycles per second). The ionospheric wave guide oscillates at eight hertz, making it a good harmonic carrier of low-frequency sound (LFS) waves. These are such long waves that they are virtually impossible to detect. Pentagon reports apply LFS to demobilizing the productive capacity of a civilian population in time of war.
Dr. Frank Barnaby, Director of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, suggested what the cryptocracy already knew: "If methods could be devised to produce greater field strengths of such low-frequency oscillations, either by natural (for example, lightning) or artificial means, then it might become possible to impair the performance of a large group of people in selected regions over extended periods."3
Since Anton Mesmer's early experiments with animal magnetism, Western scientists have known that monotonous rhythms produce drowsiness and open the individual to hypnotic induction. Scientists found that flashing a strobe light at a certain frequency could induce epileptics to have seizures. Subjected to ultrasonic or very-low frequency sound in harmony with alpha rhythms, an entire population might be lulled into a state of drowsiness by the unperceived waves, and radio and television—the normal channels of mass hypnosis—could implant suggestions to control the behavior of entire nations.
Soviet scientists have used electronic fields applied outside the head to induce and enhance the qualities of sleep. Their most widely publicized device is the "electrosone." It permits low-frequency pulses to be applied to the cerebral cortex through mild electrical stimulation—electrical current sent through electrodes placed on the eyelids and behind the ears. The Soviets claim that this technique, called electronarcosis, can give the benefits of a full night's sleep in only two or three hours. The sleep is induced rapidly and is so deep that the subject wakes up as fully refreshed and invigorated as if he had slept an entire night.
Radiation has also leapt into the vanguard of mind control technology. The Soviets have been studying the effects of microwave radiation since 1933. They have found that, among other things, microwaves can affect the central nervous system. They have also discovered that microwave radiation, even of low intensity, can seriously alter the normal rhythm of brain waves, causing hallucinations and drastic perceptual changes, including a loss of the sense of time. In biological studies, they found that exposure to microwaves causes changes in protein composition and in white blood cells. A number of endocrine responses are also altered by microwave radiation, including the activities of the thyroid and other glands. And, lastly, microwaves can cause maternal lactation to cease and, in some cases, male sterility.
In 1962 when the CIA discovered that the U.S. Embassy in Moscow was being irradiated with microwaves, the cryptocracy reacted with silence. For years the U.S. government knew about the Russian research but appeared to ignore it. Perhaps they feared that any claim that microwave radiation could affect human behavior would bring great restrictions on the use of radar, microwave relays, and on booming microwave oven sales. But a less obvious reason suggests itself: the cryptocracy did not want to draw attention to its own use of radiation in mind control.
In May, 1968, General Electric announced that it was recalling 90,000 color TV sets which were emitting excessive amounts of dangerous X-rays. This set the gears in motion for Senate hearings on the problem of radiation effects. But the cryptocracy still protected its interests; the Defense Department sent two high-ranking medical officers from each branch of the armed forces to assure the senators that safeguards to military-sponsored research into the biological effects of radiation had been adequate. They testified that nobody in the armed forces was being exposed to hazardous amounts of radiation.
Meanwhile, the microwave bombardment of the U.S. embassy continued, and the CIA acted as if it knew nothing at all about radiation effects, denying that there was even a problem.
Yet in 1964, when Dr. Milton Zaret, an ophthalmologist at New York University's Bellevue Medical Center, published a paper reporting that there were harmful biological and behavioral effects to micro-radiation, the CIA immediately came around to ask Zaret some questions.
They wanted to know whether he thought that electromagnetic radiation beamed at the brain from a distance could affect the way a person might act. Dr. Zaret told the CIA that from what he'd read in the Soviet literature on the subject it seemed quite conceivable that microwaves could produce behavioral changes. On another occasion, Zaret said, a CIA doctor inquired of him if he thought that microwaves could be used to "facilitate brainwashing."
In early 1965 the CIA informed Dr. Zaret that the Russians had been irradiating the American embassy. Later Zaret was called to attend a special meeting at the Institute for Defense Analysis in Arlington, Virginia. There he met a number of people from the Defense Department's Advanced Research Projects Agency who were also working on the problem of radiation.
Subsequently Dr. Zaret and others set out to duplicate the conditions of micro-radiation in the embassy. "I remember that in one experiment we succeeded in replicating a Czechoslovakian study of behavioral effects in rats, but also observed some unique convulsions in these animals prior to death." When Dr. Zaret relayed that information to Washington he received a telegram from the CIA ordering him not to pursue the investigation any further.'
In May, 1972, Jack Anderson broke the "Moscow Signal" story, which had been kept secret for ten years: the Russians were bombarding the American embassy in Moscow with micro-radiation. Anderson speculated that the CIA had been trying to cover up the fact that the Russians were trying to brainwash American diplomats by microwave bombardment. He implied (probably correctly) that the CIA had created the cover-up to protect its own secrets of mind control by irradiation.
After the disclosure, Anderson came under heavy attack from representatives of both the military and industry. There were loud protests from the microwave oven manufacturers, but no one refuted the brainwashing angle of micro-radiation. The story lay dormant until June of 1977, when it was announced that teams of scientists at the University of Utah and the University of Washington had received grants from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences to study the effects of chronic low-level microwave exposure. Dr. Om P. Gandhi, professor of electrical engineering and bioengineering at Utah, said, "Most U.S. scientists are still quite skeptical of the Soviet studies."
As hypnotists had done over the years, many scientists express doubt that electronic, sonic, or radiation techniques would ever be used for such purposes.
"The reports of new technical developments for brain stimulation have led to a concern that it will be used as the basis of an 'electro oligarchy' where people could be virtually enslaved by controlling them from within their own brains . . . there is actually little foundation for the belief that brain stimulation could be used as a political weapon," Elliot S. Valenstein said. "It doesn't make sense. Anyone influential enough to get an entire population to consent to having electrodes placed in its head would already have his goal without firing a single volt."6
Dr. Willard Gaylin agreed, saying, "Electrode implantation or surgical ablation of brain sections as a direct means of political control seems unlikely—much less a threat, for example, than drugs. Such an individualized and dramatic procedure hardly seems suited to the enslavement of populations or the robotization of political leaders. Drugs, brainwashing by control of the media, exploitation of fears through forms of propaganda, and indoctrination through the sources of education, particularly if preschool education or neonatal conditioning . . . becomes an approved practice, all seem more likely methods of totalitarian control."7
The British biochemist Dr. Steven Rose issued a similar objection: "Unlike ancient maps marked 'here be monsters,' there will not be .. . brains transplanted into bodies or bottles, thought, memory or mind control, telepathic communication or genetic engineering, artificial intelligence or robots . . . I believe them impossible—or at least improbable; more importantly because scientific advance and its attendant technology only comes about in response to social constraints and social demands. Because there are at present no or few social demands in the direction of these lurid potential developments, they do not represent, in a world beset with crises and challenges to human survival, serious contenders for our concern.'"
Of course, when science is developed in a piecemeal, compartmentalized fashion, as it is under the direction of the cryptocracy, then no social constraints come into play. Where the public is kept ignorant, and where scientists themselves are manipulated by the grant system, the balance upon which Dr. Rose relies is absent.
On the other hand, for every scientist who denies that mind control exists or will ever exist, there is one who sees it as a desirable form of social control. Social psychologist Kenneth B. Clark appears to be one of those men.
Expressing the fear of the nuclear age, and the group Paranoia of the Cold Warriors, Clark said, "Given the urgency of the immediate survival problem, the psychological and social sciences must enable us to control the animalistic, barbaric and primitive propensities in man and subordinate these negatives to the uniquely human moral and ethical characteristics of love, kindness, and empathy .. . We can no longer afford to rely solely on the traditional prescientific attempts to contain human cruelty and destructiveness."
Clark suggested that behavior control requirements be imposed on all "power-controlling leaders," and even those who aspire to such leadership. He would require them to accept and submit to "biochemical intervention which would assure their positive use of power and reduce or block the possibility of using power destructively.
"It would assure," Clark said, "that there would be no absurd or barbaric use of power. It would provide the masses of human beings with the security that their leaders would not sacrifice them on the altars of their personal ego."8
But if there were a mind-controlled President in the White House, what guarantee would we have that the cryptocracy would not use such access for purely selfish motives? Obviously, submission to any form of mind control by politicians could lead to Clark's "masses of human beings" being sacrificed not on the altars of personal ego but on the altars of national security.
There seems to be a good deal of cultural momentum leading toward a cybernetic anthill society. If we can draw any inference from the numerous predictions made by men of accomplishment in our society, it is that direct brain computer interface, the cyborg, and the resulting mass mind control are on the horizon.
D. G. Brennan, member of the Hudson Institute, mathematician, and expert on national security problems, predicted: "Computers as sophisticated as the human brain will be small enough to be carried in a shoe box."9
Arthur C. Clarke, science-fiction writer, predicted: "The first intelligent computer will be the last machine man will need to make—and quite possibly the last that he'll be permitted to make."10
Gerald Feinberg, professor of physics at Columbia University, predicted: "It will be possible to tinker with the brain—to make the human memory more reliable and accessible at the expense, say, of breadth in sensory responses."11 Olaf Helmer, founding member of Institute for the Future, predicted: "Slave robots are likely to appear. It may also be possible to devise a way for a disembodied brain to be kept alive so that it can give instruction to a robot which will act as its body."12
Stephen Rosen, a research scientist at IBM, predicted the unification of physical medicine (like drugs and organ transplants) with behavioral techniques (like biofeedback, cybernetic learning, and psychology).
And there is Jose Delgado, who predicted—among other things—the coming of a psycho-civilized society. Delgado also said that the fundamental question of the future would be "who is going to exert the power of behavior control?" And even Delgado, a true believer in ESB, issued a warning that in the future the cryptocracy would have to be curtailed. "It is .. . essential that relevant information not be restricted to a small elite, but be shared by all."13
Whether created by the use of hypnosis, drugs, behavior modification, electronic or sonic brain stimulation, or through a combination of these tools of psycho-science, the cyborg is stalking us in our dreams. And just as life imitates art, men live out their dreams in their waking state.
The dream, expressed by the prophetic visions of men from all walks of life, is of a time when the machine or the drug will take over and relieve man of his difficult burden of self-responsibility. For better or worse, self responsibility—where each individual acts consciously, and accepts the consequences of his own actions—is the stuff of which freedom is made.
The prophecies of poets, writers, scientists, and futurists express what can be considered a regressive, devolutionary myth. Sprung from the complexity of technological life, where self-responsibility is largely directed by propaganda and indoctrination, where an ignorant rather than an enlightened public is desired, the majority of responsible actions can result only in cultural disaster. This, in turn, adds to the frustration of the individual who, weighing all the facts—or what were presented as facts—thought he had made the best choice possible. When these decisions, based on false information, are shown to result in negative effects, the frustration of the individual grows. Weariness eventually sets in, and the individual becomes willing to surrender his self-responsibility and eagerly awaits his liberation by some authoritarian figure.
In the past such people as Hitler, Lenin, or Mao Tse Tung were high-profile father figures who inspired trust and surrender by the masses. In the modern technological miasma, a nameless, faceless cryptocracy is manipulating world politics.
The cryptocracy supports only those foreign and domestic leaders who are sycophants of secrecy. Of necessity keeping a low profile, the cryptocracy can inspire neither the allegiance nor the surrender which was inspired by the previous exploiters of the cult of personality. Thus, with no human image representing benevolent authority, the masses embrace a substitute father figure—technology. The dream of test tube babies, genetically engineered children, and electronically controlled parents visits the collective unconscious and manifests itself in the way we see the future and in the mysticism of the day.
Even Uri Geller, the Houdini of parapsychology, seems to be expressing this very myth. His supposedly occult powers, he says, come from contact with beings who present themselves as "deliverers" from outer space. With superior intelligence, they manifest all forms of telepathy, telekinesis, and teleportation, and have told Mr. Geller that they are pure mind, maintained throughout eternity by machines which traverse the universe and transcend time and space.
As the psychologist Erich Fromm said, "A specter is stalking in our midst whom only a few see with clarity. It is not the old ghost of communism or fascism. It is a new specter: a completely mechanized society, devoted to maximal material output and consumption, directed by computers; and in this social process, man himself is being transformed into a part of the total machine, well fed and entertained, yet passive, unalive, and with little feeling. With the victory of the new society, individualism and privacy will have disappeared; feelings toward others will be engineered by psychological conditioning and other devices, or drugs."14
Fromm is talking about the new myth, which anticipates a time when the machine or the drug will manipulate the human mind and relieve man of his difficult burden of freedom. From the new mythology comes the public tolerance of the cryptocracy as well as the hero worship of such figures as James Bond, the Six Million Dollar Man, and the Bionic Woman. Everywhere in modern literature and art, and in the mass entertainment media, one can see the expressions of the modern myth of techno-eroticism and the dark shadow of the priesthood of secrecy. There is so much of it in the media, in fact, one has to suspect that the American public is deliberately being desensitized to the concept of mind control and the "psycho-civilized" society.
The cryptocracy has gone to absurd lengths to develop remote-controlled beings. Victor Marchetti revealed that the CIA had once tried to create a cyborg cat. He said that the Agency wired a live feline for sound in an attempt to use the pet for eavesdropping purposes. The cat was first altered electronically so that it would function as a listening device in areas where potential enemy agents would be discussing covert plots.
But problems developed, Marchetti said, and the cat had to be rewired. The cat would wander away from its target area, as cats will, looking for food. The CIA fixed that by inserting wires directly into the hunger center of the cat's brain. The wires were attached to a radio receiver which would suppress the hunger pangs by remote control. But once that problem was solved, the CIA found that the kitty needed more circuitry in its brain to control its natural urges. After the hunger center was turned off the cat still would wander away, this time following the sex instinct. The CIA planted more electrodes into the sex center of the cat's brain.
After the electronic feline was at last ready for its assignment, it was turned loose on the street and was followed by a CIA support van loaded with electronic monitoring gear. Before any conversations could be picked up, however, Marchetti said, "the poor thing got run over by a taxicab."
The future should come as no surprise, now that Science Digest has reported that as of 1976 there has been a robot Population explosion in the United States, with some 6,000 mechanical humanlike machines performing simple human tasks. According to the publication, within the next thirty years there will be more robot than human workers in America.
The typical state of robotdom is still very expensive. Today the average robot costs about $50,000. Most use tele- 274 Walter Bowart vision to "see" and to review their work. A number of the 6,000 robots in service are busy building other robots. A Robot Institute of America is already in existence.
Even situation comedies such as the television show about the robot cop Holmes and Yoyo embody the myth and condition the individual to accept the day when wires will enter his brain—wires hidden inside the skull: clandestine circuitry for covert cyborgs. The myth of surrender to control by technology is being glorified as the highest aim of the twentieth century version of the American Dream.
The American Dream is turning into a cybernetic nightmare. As poet Richard Brautigan said, trying to find hope in their myth, one day we may all be "watched over by machines of loving grace."
The cryptocracy has used mind control for the past thirty years. It has used it on its own agents and employees, on enemies and friends alike. It has used it on thousands of Americans without their knowledge or consent. The CIA has programmed assassins and couriers by it. The CIA has even openly confessed to its conspiracy of mind control.
Many people will believe that since the CIA has publicly disclosed its interest in mind control, it has now ceased its activities. The earlier CIA records, however, contain a number of termination dates for aspects of Operation Mind Control, yet evidence clearly suggests that it continued past those dates.
In 1975, following the release of the Rockefeller Commission Report and the subsequent investigations by Senator Church's and Congressman Pike's committees, a public accounting was given and apologies were made. The intelligence community was reprimanded and small changes made.
But then in July, 1977, following a wave of resignations in the CIA's clandestine services, CIA Director Adm. Stansfield Turner informed the Senate Intelligence Committee that the whole story had not been told, even though the case had been put to rest. Turner informed the committee and the White House that additional information had been "found" that proved the CIA had given a number of mind-controlling drugs to untold numbers of Americans, including alcoholics, drug addicts, and terminal cancer patients. A CIA spokesman questioned by reporters could say no more than he did not know how many persons were tested or whether any harm resulted, but that the new records indicated that there had been cases in addition to those revealed in the previous congressional hearings.
The result was headlines in the press about the CIA and drugs (the two words were now commonly linked), but few newsmen made the connection between drug tests and behavior control or mind control.
Recent history documents the fact that the CIA, as the whipping boy of the cryptocracy, covers up and routinely lies about its activities, heaping one lie on another, in a labyrinthine network of falsehood. It stretches credibility to believe, therefore, that the CIA and especially lower-profile members of the cryptocracy have terminated the mind control research and development that has been going on for thirty years. While it may be true that the pain-drug hypnosis aspects of mind control have been stopped, one cannot believe that it has ceased because it is thought illegal or immoral. If it has ceased, it has ceased only because it is obsolete and the new technology of radiation and electronic brain stimulation has given the cryptocracy a more powerful form of control. What is likely is that the cryptocracy is moving from the control of an individual's mind and body to the control of the masses.
There is usually a twenty-year lag between the laboratory development of new technology and its application at large. For example, the techniques of audio-visual desensitization were developed at Stanford University in the mid-fifties by Volpe and Lazarus. Working under government contracts at the time, they discovered how a person could be cured of phobic fears (such as the fear of flying), alcoholism, drug addiction, homosexuality, and other "social illnesses" that were previously thought incurable. While Volpe and Lazarus thought that they were merely trying to develop a technique to help people, the government kept a watchful eye on their research. As we discovered by the confession of Commander Narut, the navy used audiovisual desensitization for its own purposes in the mid-seventies, exactly twenty years after its original development. The techniques of narco-hypnosis were developed before World War II and became widely applied in the early sixties. The next stage of mind control is based on radiation which can stimulate the brain for the purpose of remote control. This technology already exists today and is in the experimental stage. We can be assured that inside twenty years it will be used widely by people outside the government.
The problem of mass manipulation is much easier to solve than individual manipulation. A number of studies have demonstrated that people behave in groups much differently then they do alone. One navy study showed that the most potent modifier of behavior is peer-group pressure. This same pressure comes into play in crowd psychology. By controlling the leaders of a crowd, the entire crowd can be controlled through simple suggestion. It has been demonstrated that the cryptocracy has the desire and the technology to control us all.
The cryptocracy's desire for control comes from the desire for national security. National security has been the excuse for illegal U.S. activities everywhere in the world. National security has made a mockery of the Geneva Convention as well as the Constitution of the United States. It has become the fool proof cover not only for authorized foreign activities but also for unsanctioned deeds of both cryptocrats and politicians. It has been the main instrument for the manipulation of public opinion. The primary target against which the national security managers have waged their psychological war has been the people of the United States.
Secret government cannot function in a climate of free speech, open criticism, and public exposure. The question comes down to one of democracy: are the American people willing to give up their democratic principles in exchange for this elusive national security?
In his book Roots of War, retired cryptocrat Richard Barnet wrote: "The great root of war is the vulnerability of the public to manipulation on national security issues. People do not perceive where their true interests lie and hence are easily swayed by emotional appeals to support policies that cost them their money, their sons, and their own lives. Because they have been willing to accept uncritically the myth of the national interest—i.e., the definition advanced by the national security managers—they exercise almost no control over the commitments the managers make in their name. Supposedly [they are] the beneficiaries of national security policy which really protects the interests of all Americans only if those interests are articulated in the political process."
Even Gen. Maxwell Taylor has lamented the corruption of the national security premise: "National security," he said, "once a trumpet call to the nation to man the ramparts and repel invaders, has fallen into disrepute, a victim of complications arising from the Vietnam syndrome and from its own internal contradictions, excessive defense budgets and collusive dealings with the military-industrial complex. Watergate revelations have fueled suspicions that it may be little more than a cover for executive encroachments upon civil liberties and a free press."1
While propaganda, disinformation, misinformation, and assassination have all played an important role in bringing the American democracy to heel, mind control holds its future. It is not surprising that under the label of national security the cryptocracy should seek to control minds. Nor can it come as a surprise that the cryptocracy (always in the vanguard of technology) should develop efficient methods of mind control. But that the legal machinery of the Constitution of the United States should become so fouled by the practitioners of psycho-politics can be experienced only with the outrage one feels at a case of rape, for it not only represents the rape of law and democratic values, but also the rape of heretofore inviolate recesses of man—his mind and soul.
America's form of government was created by men who clearly saw that those in power, no matter how well meaning, could unwittingly endanger the liberties of individuals. The Bill of Rights was incorporated in the Constitution to ensure liberty. Most important, it set limits on what the government could not do to its citizens, even with the approval of the majority. The constitutional protections were largely effective until they were circumvented by the technological revolution and the National Security Act of 1947.
By that one act, the safeguards of privacy which had protected U.S. citizens for nearly two centuries were dissolved by a President and approved by a Congress which emerged into a Cold War paralyzed by fear of the new death-dealing technology the cryptocracy had created.
The National Security Act is Catch-22. It grants the National Security Council sweeping and virtually unlimited powers to integrate all policies of government and coordinate all agencies, both foreign and domestic. And just what is "national security"? Presidents, secretaries of state and defense, and scholars have been trying to define it since the term was coined.
According to Frank N. Trager and Frank L. Simonie, in their book National Security and American Society, national security is "the part of government policy having as its objective the creation of national and international conditions favorable to the protection or extension of vital national values against existing and potential adversaries."
Over the years we've seen the "adversaries" defined as home-grown Communists, critics of government policy, and all those who marched to end the Vietnam conflict, and eventually anyone Richard Nixon thought did not agree with his political outlook. We've seen "vital national values" defined as those values which work for the interests of corporate oligopolies, regardless of their effects on the national economy or the best interests of the people of the United States.
Rather than live by the principles of democracy, and demonstrate to the totalitarian countries the dynamics of freedom, the cryptocrats resorted to the practice of tyrants. In so doing they damaged their own cherished institutions, and lost time, money, and lives in the useless and poorly conceived Cold War campaign.
Since its beginning the cryptocracy's Cold War against communism has been a losing battle. In the postindustrial World, politics and nationalism were replaced by economics as the motivating force of modern society. The U.S. cryptocrats seemed not to believe in the strength of the "free enterprise" system. They ignored the fact that the world had become more than anything else an economic battleground.
Despite the realities of modern global politics, the U.S. cryptocracy has continued to assert that secrecy is its most vital weapon against the Communists. On this point the argument goes: "In our open society with its free press, it is very difficult to win against a closed Communist world. We must assume the cloak of secrecy, like the Communists, in order to hold our own against them."
The "national security" mentality, while manifesting a paranoid need for secrecy and control, was not the major cause of the growth of cryptocracy. The wonders of the post industrial age were the real cause for the erosion of freedom and privacy. The creation of new weapons of terrible proportions created a nuclear medusa complex; all who looked upon the bomb were turned to stone by their fear. The growth of the "soft" social sciences made possible an invisible totalitarianism. These "humanist" sciences became new tools for studying and labeling individual behavior. They came to be applied to create boundaries of conformity. Further, the desire for conformity created the need for the surveillance of individual behavior.
The growth of government and the creation of large industry inevitably gave birth to bureaucracy. Bureaucracy with the aid and encouragement of the educational establishment created files, and cryptocracy created super secret psychological files. With advancements in electronic technology—increasingly sophisticated microphones, transmitters, and surveillance devices—the erosion of privacy becomes a mudslide.
Although the most often invoked justification for secrecy is to keep technology from falling into enemy hands, history has shown that secrecy is, at best, only a delay to public access. Since modern technologies have been developed from a pool of common scientific knowledge, they cannot be kept secret for long. Eventually, all the fruits of the empirical pool slip from specific control and find their way into general use as independent discoveries take place.
Mind control, as it exists today, will certainly become available within twenty years to anyone who desires it and can afford it.
Equally to blame with the cryptocracy for the development of mind control are the psycho-sciences. Here are educated men and women who have spent many hours in study, preparing (supposedly) for years of service to their fellow men. They have high standing in the society and are well paid. They are the priests of a new religion. T
he psycho-scientists who have allowed their research to be used against humanity should be known. They must be held ethically accountable for their research into coercive mind control. Psychology itself is not entirely made up of cryptocrats and people who seek control over others. There are "humanist" psychologists who seek only to help people. But to behaviorists humanistic psychology seems to be not much more than a fad. And if a fad it is, it will probably fade into history, leaving behind the Skinnerian kind of psychology, the kind that now dominates American college classrooms, the only really reliable psychology, the psychology of conditioning—behaviorism. And from behaviorism comes behavior modification.
Mind control remains above United States law, making it a most attractive tool for clandestine operators. U.S. courts, and even the majority of the psychiatric profession, will not admit that it is possible to take over someone's memory and willpower by mind control. Until now, there has been little to prove the case.
In several foreign democracies, however, cases have come to trial which involved hypnotists who had their subjects commit crimes while acting under posthypnotic suggestion. The "criminals" robbed banks or committed murders without being conscious of their crimes. In these cases the foreign courts placed the burden of blame on the mind controllers. The hypnotists, received the stiff sentences, while the "trigger persons" were either allowed to go free or given greatly reduced terms. In the United States no such precedent exists. When it has come up in a trial, the question has been ducked, since it would require lengthy testimony by psycho-scientific experts, few of whom seem able to agree on the subject.
The closest the courts have come to considering the case of mind control was in the Patty Hearst case, but F. Lee Bailey at the last minute backed away from his planned "brainwashing" defense. One of the witnesses for the defense was Dr. Martin T. Orne. Dr. Orne testified at the trial that Patty Hearst had indeed been "brainwashed" by the SLA. Orne should have known whether or not Patty Was brainwashed since, as the head of the Office of Naval Research's Committee on Hypnosis, he helped develop the coercive use of hypnotic mind control for the cryptocracy. Despite Orne's expert testimony Ms. Hearst's plea of duress Was ignored and she was imprisoned subject to psychiatric review. A close examination of her trial records may shed a great deal of light on the problem an individual faces in pleading "mind control."
There is no one who dispenses freedom, but there are many who would take it away. Freedom is not free; it must be won. The individual must stand with others against even the smallest tyranny. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
Former CIA official Victor Marchetti put it plainly when he told Freedom News Service what he thought ought to be done.
When pressed for concrete examples of what a citizen can do to curb secrecy, dismantle the cryptocracy, and return democracy to the people, he said, "You know, you just can't beat it. The only way you're going to clean up some of these outfits would be if a President came in there and said, 'Well, I'm just not going to tolerate some of this stuff.' And even then it would be difficult for the President because this bureaucracy is so entrenched and so fortified that it has connections all over in our society.
"The CIA and the FBI do not completely control the office of the President obviously, but they have an awful lot of influence in that office. Their influence derives from their capabilities and the fact that they operate in secrecy . . . They are not really concerned with the public interest. They always hide behind such things as 'national security' and they say that their activities are in the 'national interests' but the record doesn't substantiate that.
"You may stem the tide, and then begin to push it back, but you're not going to change it overnight. This thing was building for thirty-five years. . . . These guys aren't going to just change. They're going to go down swinging; we've seen that already."
In July, 1977, President Carter appointed his former Annapolis classmate, Adm. Stansfield Turner, to head the entire intelligence community. In so doing he gave him sweeping powers which no other intelligence director in the history of the United States has ever possessed. With one quick stroke of the pen Carter created America's version of Lavrenti Beria, the late chief of the Soviet secret police. This was Carter's promised reorganization of the intelligence community. Appearing to reorganize it under Turner, he merely strengthened its totalitarian potential.
Only days before Turner was made intelligence czar, as director of CIA he testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee investigating MKULTRA. Turner told the senators that the CIA had stopped all drug testing. He was not asked nor did he volunteer information about new technologies of mind control. He did not say the mind-control operations had stopped, only that the experiments had stopped.
While the CIA has been severely criticized, and some of its activities appear to have been apparently curtailed, so unfettered is the cryptocracy that some other, as yet unnamed, agency may be right now consolidating power and extending the ruthless and subtle psychological war against democracy.
The individual can do little to stop the use of psychopolitics, the cryptocracy's most important weapon, against him. But individuals working together can be effective. Americans are a people with a tradition of freedom—as always, paid for in blood. Regardless of how difficult life becomes in the complex modern world, men must not give up their freedom to think for themselves. From that freedom springs all others. But we must not be naive. To attempt to stop mind control is to confront the cryptocracy in its lair. Without mind control how can the cryptocracy be certain it will be able to keep its secrets?
Operation Mind Control will not be exposed by the work of an honest security guard and diligent reporters, as was the case with Watergate. It will take nothing less than a concerted effort on the part of an informed and outraged public, their legal representatives, and the press to uncover even the beginning of the trail to the identity of the elite core of the secret government which rapes the human mind. And, in the process of uncovering the cabal of mind controllers, the entire fabric of the United States government may well come unraveled.
To stop the cryptocracy, the Congress and the people will have to wage a ceaseless campaign to dismantle and reorganize the entire intelligence community from the ground up under some law other than the ill-defined National Security Act. Congress has taken only token steps in this direction, having embraced the myth of National Security. The campaign to stop the cryptocracy will require the same sacrifice, the same endurance, the same expression of national group feeling that it took to end the Vietnam conflict. In one way the fight is the same—the enemy is within .
Somewhere within the United States the technology for the creation of the perfect slave state is being perfected . Whether or not the mind-controlled state becomes a reality depends not so much upon the efforts of the cryptocracy , but upon the free will , determination, and strength of character of the American people.
footnotes and
source
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/archivos_pdf/operation-mindcontrol.pdf
These and other experiments led the cryptocracy to study the effects of very-low-frequency sound (VLF)—the opposite of ultrasonics—as an instrument of war. Research revealed that there is a natural wave guide between the ionosphere and the earth which could be used to propagate very-low-frequency radiation and guide it to selected locations on the earth. Studies showed that this low-frequency sound subtly affected the electrical behavior of the brain in much the same way that Dr. Adey's studies had shown.
The alpha-wave frequency of the human brain is from eight to twelve hertz (cycles per second). The ionospheric wave guide oscillates at eight hertz, making it a good harmonic carrier of low-frequency sound (LFS) waves. These are such long waves that they are virtually impossible to detect. Pentagon reports apply LFS to demobilizing the productive capacity of a civilian population in time of war.
Dr. Frank Barnaby, Director of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, suggested what the cryptocracy already knew: "If methods could be devised to produce greater field strengths of such low-frequency oscillations, either by natural (for example, lightning) or artificial means, then it might become possible to impair the performance of a large group of people in selected regions over extended periods."3
Since Anton Mesmer's early experiments with animal magnetism, Western scientists have known that monotonous rhythms produce drowsiness and open the individual to hypnotic induction. Scientists found that flashing a strobe light at a certain frequency could induce epileptics to have seizures. Subjected to ultrasonic or very-low frequency sound in harmony with alpha rhythms, an entire population might be lulled into a state of drowsiness by the unperceived waves, and radio and television—the normal channels of mass hypnosis—could implant suggestions to control the behavior of entire nations.
Soviet scientists have used electronic fields applied outside the head to induce and enhance the qualities of sleep. Their most widely publicized device is the "electrosone." It permits low-frequency pulses to be applied to the cerebral cortex through mild electrical stimulation—electrical current sent through electrodes placed on the eyelids and behind the ears. The Soviets claim that this technique, called electronarcosis, can give the benefits of a full night's sleep in only two or three hours. The sleep is induced rapidly and is so deep that the subject wakes up as fully refreshed and invigorated as if he had slept an entire night.
Radiation has also leapt into the vanguard of mind control technology. The Soviets have been studying the effects of microwave radiation since 1933. They have found that, among other things, microwaves can affect the central nervous system. They have also discovered that microwave radiation, even of low intensity, can seriously alter the normal rhythm of brain waves, causing hallucinations and drastic perceptual changes, including a loss of the sense of time. In biological studies, they found that exposure to microwaves causes changes in protein composition and in white blood cells. A number of endocrine responses are also altered by microwave radiation, including the activities of the thyroid and other glands. And, lastly, microwaves can cause maternal lactation to cease and, in some cases, male sterility.
In 1962 when the CIA discovered that the U.S. Embassy in Moscow was being irradiated with microwaves, the cryptocracy reacted with silence. For years the U.S. government knew about the Russian research but appeared to ignore it. Perhaps they feared that any claim that microwave radiation could affect human behavior would bring great restrictions on the use of radar, microwave relays, and on booming microwave oven sales. But a less obvious reason suggests itself: the cryptocracy did not want to draw attention to its own use of radiation in mind control.
In May, 1968, General Electric announced that it was recalling 90,000 color TV sets which were emitting excessive amounts of dangerous X-rays. This set the gears in motion for Senate hearings on the problem of radiation effects. But the cryptocracy still protected its interests; the Defense Department sent two high-ranking medical officers from each branch of the armed forces to assure the senators that safeguards to military-sponsored research into the biological effects of radiation had been adequate. They testified that nobody in the armed forces was being exposed to hazardous amounts of radiation.
Meanwhile, the microwave bombardment of the U.S. embassy continued, and the CIA acted as if it knew nothing at all about radiation effects, denying that there was even a problem.
Yet in 1964, when Dr. Milton Zaret, an ophthalmologist at New York University's Bellevue Medical Center, published a paper reporting that there were harmful biological and behavioral effects to micro-radiation, the CIA immediately came around to ask Zaret some questions.
They wanted to know whether he thought that electromagnetic radiation beamed at the brain from a distance could affect the way a person might act. Dr. Zaret told the CIA that from what he'd read in the Soviet literature on the subject it seemed quite conceivable that microwaves could produce behavioral changes. On another occasion, Zaret said, a CIA doctor inquired of him if he thought that microwaves could be used to "facilitate brainwashing."
In early 1965 the CIA informed Dr. Zaret that the Russians had been irradiating the American embassy. Later Zaret was called to attend a special meeting at the Institute for Defense Analysis in Arlington, Virginia. There he met a number of people from the Defense Department's Advanced Research Projects Agency who were also working on the problem of radiation.
Subsequently Dr. Zaret and others set out to duplicate the conditions of micro-radiation in the embassy. "I remember that in one experiment we succeeded in replicating a Czechoslovakian study of behavioral effects in rats, but also observed some unique convulsions in these animals prior to death." When Dr. Zaret relayed that information to Washington he received a telegram from the CIA ordering him not to pursue the investigation any further.'
In May, 1972, Jack Anderson broke the "Moscow Signal" story, which had been kept secret for ten years: the Russians were bombarding the American embassy in Moscow with micro-radiation. Anderson speculated that the CIA had been trying to cover up the fact that the Russians were trying to brainwash American diplomats by microwave bombardment. He implied (probably correctly) that the CIA had created the cover-up to protect its own secrets of mind control by irradiation.
After the disclosure, Anderson came under heavy attack from representatives of both the military and industry. There were loud protests from the microwave oven manufacturers, but no one refuted the brainwashing angle of micro-radiation. The story lay dormant until June of 1977, when it was announced that teams of scientists at the University of Utah and the University of Washington had received grants from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences to study the effects of chronic low-level microwave exposure. Dr. Om P. Gandhi, professor of electrical engineering and bioengineering at Utah, said, "Most U.S. scientists are still quite skeptical of the Soviet studies."
As hypnotists had done over the years, many scientists express doubt that electronic, sonic, or radiation techniques would ever be used for such purposes.
"The reports of new technical developments for brain stimulation have led to a concern that it will be used as the basis of an 'electro oligarchy' where people could be virtually enslaved by controlling them from within their own brains . . . there is actually little foundation for the belief that brain stimulation could be used as a political weapon," Elliot S. Valenstein said. "It doesn't make sense. Anyone influential enough to get an entire population to consent to having electrodes placed in its head would already have his goal without firing a single volt."6
Dr. Willard Gaylin agreed, saying, "Electrode implantation or surgical ablation of brain sections as a direct means of political control seems unlikely—much less a threat, for example, than drugs. Such an individualized and dramatic procedure hardly seems suited to the enslavement of populations or the robotization of political leaders. Drugs, brainwashing by control of the media, exploitation of fears through forms of propaganda, and indoctrination through the sources of education, particularly if preschool education or neonatal conditioning . . . becomes an approved practice, all seem more likely methods of totalitarian control."7
The British biochemist Dr. Steven Rose issued a similar objection: "Unlike ancient maps marked 'here be monsters,' there will not be .. . brains transplanted into bodies or bottles, thought, memory or mind control, telepathic communication or genetic engineering, artificial intelligence or robots . . . I believe them impossible—or at least improbable; more importantly because scientific advance and its attendant technology only comes about in response to social constraints and social demands. Because there are at present no or few social demands in the direction of these lurid potential developments, they do not represent, in a world beset with crises and challenges to human survival, serious contenders for our concern.'"
Of course, when science is developed in a piecemeal, compartmentalized fashion, as it is under the direction of the cryptocracy, then no social constraints come into play. Where the public is kept ignorant, and where scientists themselves are manipulated by the grant system, the balance upon which Dr. Rose relies is absent.
On the other hand, for every scientist who denies that mind control exists or will ever exist, there is one who sees it as a desirable form of social control. Social psychologist Kenneth B. Clark appears to be one of those men.
Expressing the fear of the nuclear age, and the group Paranoia of the Cold Warriors, Clark said, "Given the urgency of the immediate survival problem, the psychological and social sciences must enable us to control the animalistic, barbaric and primitive propensities in man and subordinate these negatives to the uniquely human moral and ethical characteristics of love, kindness, and empathy .. . We can no longer afford to rely solely on the traditional prescientific attempts to contain human cruelty and destructiveness."
Clark suggested that behavior control requirements be imposed on all "power-controlling leaders," and even those who aspire to such leadership. He would require them to accept and submit to "biochemical intervention which would assure their positive use of power and reduce or block the possibility of using power destructively.
"It would assure," Clark said, "that there would be no absurd or barbaric use of power. It would provide the masses of human beings with the security that their leaders would not sacrifice them on the altars of their personal ego."8
But if there were a mind-controlled President in the White House, what guarantee would we have that the cryptocracy would not use such access for purely selfish motives? Obviously, submission to any form of mind control by politicians could lead to Clark's "masses of human beings" being sacrificed not on the altars of personal ego but on the altars of national security.
There seems to be a good deal of cultural momentum leading toward a cybernetic anthill society. If we can draw any inference from the numerous predictions made by men of accomplishment in our society, it is that direct brain computer interface, the cyborg, and the resulting mass mind control are on the horizon.
D. G. Brennan, member of the Hudson Institute, mathematician, and expert on national security problems, predicted: "Computers as sophisticated as the human brain will be small enough to be carried in a shoe box."9
Arthur C. Clarke, science-fiction writer, predicted: "The first intelligent computer will be the last machine man will need to make—and quite possibly the last that he'll be permitted to make."10
Gerald Feinberg, professor of physics at Columbia University, predicted: "It will be possible to tinker with the brain—to make the human memory more reliable and accessible at the expense, say, of breadth in sensory responses."11 Olaf Helmer, founding member of Institute for the Future, predicted: "Slave robots are likely to appear. It may also be possible to devise a way for a disembodied brain to be kept alive so that it can give instruction to a robot which will act as its body."12
Stephen Rosen, a research scientist at IBM, predicted the unification of physical medicine (like drugs and organ transplants) with behavioral techniques (like biofeedback, cybernetic learning, and psychology).
And there is Jose Delgado, who predicted—among other things—the coming of a psycho-civilized society. Delgado also said that the fundamental question of the future would be "who is going to exert the power of behavior control?" And even Delgado, a true believer in ESB, issued a warning that in the future the cryptocracy would have to be curtailed. "It is .. . essential that relevant information not be restricted to a small elite, but be shared by all."13
Whether created by the use of hypnosis, drugs, behavior modification, electronic or sonic brain stimulation, or through a combination of these tools of psycho-science, the cyborg is stalking us in our dreams. And just as life imitates art, men live out their dreams in their waking state.
The dream, expressed by the prophetic visions of men from all walks of life, is of a time when the machine or the drug will take over and relieve man of his difficult burden of self-responsibility. For better or worse, self responsibility—where each individual acts consciously, and accepts the consequences of his own actions—is the stuff of which freedom is made.
The prophecies of poets, writers, scientists, and futurists express what can be considered a regressive, devolutionary myth. Sprung from the complexity of technological life, where self-responsibility is largely directed by propaganda and indoctrination, where an ignorant rather than an enlightened public is desired, the majority of responsible actions can result only in cultural disaster. This, in turn, adds to the frustration of the individual who, weighing all the facts—or what were presented as facts—thought he had made the best choice possible. When these decisions, based on false information, are shown to result in negative effects, the frustration of the individual grows. Weariness eventually sets in, and the individual becomes willing to surrender his self-responsibility and eagerly awaits his liberation by some authoritarian figure.
In the past such people as Hitler, Lenin, or Mao Tse Tung were high-profile father figures who inspired trust and surrender by the masses. In the modern technological miasma, a nameless, faceless cryptocracy is manipulating world politics.
The cryptocracy supports only those foreign and domestic leaders who are sycophants of secrecy. Of necessity keeping a low profile, the cryptocracy can inspire neither the allegiance nor the surrender which was inspired by the previous exploiters of the cult of personality. Thus, with no human image representing benevolent authority, the masses embrace a substitute father figure—technology. The dream of test tube babies, genetically engineered children, and electronically controlled parents visits the collective unconscious and manifests itself in the way we see the future and in the mysticism of the day.
Even Uri Geller, the Houdini of parapsychology, seems to be expressing this very myth. His supposedly occult powers, he says, come from contact with beings who present themselves as "deliverers" from outer space. With superior intelligence, they manifest all forms of telepathy, telekinesis, and teleportation, and have told Mr. Geller that they are pure mind, maintained throughout eternity by machines which traverse the universe and transcend time and space.
As the psychologist Erich Fromm said, "A specter is stalking in our midst whom only a few see with clarity. It is not the old ghost of communism or fascism. It is a new specter: a completely mechanized society, devoted to maximal material output and consumption, directed by computers; and in this social process, man himself is being transformed into a part of the total machine, well fed and entertained, yet passive, unalive, and with little feeling. With the victory of the new society, individualism and privacy will have disappeared; feelings toward others will be engineered by psychological conditioning and other devices, or drugs."14
Fromm is talking about the new myth, which anticipates a time when the machine or the drug will manipulate the human mind and relieve man of his difficult burden of freedom. From the new mythology comes the public tolerance of the cryptocracy as well as the hero worship of such figures as James Bond, the Six Million Dollar Man, and the Bionic Woman. Everywhere in modern literature and art, and in the mass entertainment media, one can see the expressions of the modern myth of techno-eroticism and the dark shadow of the priesthood of secrecy. There is so much of it in the media, in fact, one has to suspect that the American public is deliberately being desensitized to the concept of mind control and the "psycho-civilized" society.
The cryptocracy has gone to absurd lengths to develop remote-controlled beings. Victor Marchetti revealed that the CIA had once tried to create a cyborg cat. He said that the Agency wired a live feline for sound in an attempt to use the pet for eavesdropping purposes. The cat was first altered electronically so that it would function as a listening device in areas where potential enemy agents would be discussing covert plots.
But problems developed, Marchetti said, and the cat had to be rewired. The cat would wander away from its target area, as cats will, looking for food. The CIA fixed that by inserting wires directly into the hunger center of the cat's brain. The wires were attached to a radio receiver which would suppress the hunger pangs by remote control. But once that problem was solved, the CIA found that the kitty needed more circuitry in its brain to control its natural urges. After the hunger center was turned off the cat still would wander away, this time following the sex instinct. The CIA planted more electrodes into the sex center of the cat's brain.
After the electronic feline was at last ready for its assignment, it was turned loose on the street and was followed by a CIA support van loaded with electronic monitoring gear. Before any conversations could be picked up, however, Marchetti said, "the poor thing got run over by a taxicab."
The future should come as no surprise, now that Science Digest has reported that as of 1976 there has been a robot Population explosion in the United States, with some 6,000 mechanical humanlike machines performing simple human tasks. According to the publication, within the next thirty years there will be more robot than human workers in America.
The typical state of robotdom is still very expensive. Today the average robot costs about $50,000. Most use tele- 274 Walter Bowart vision to "see" and to review their work. A number of the 6,000 robots in service are busy building other robots. A Robot Institute of America is already in existence.
Even situation comedies such as the television show about the robot cop Holmes and Yoyo embody the myth and condition the individual to accept the day when wires will enter his brain—wires hidden inside the skull: clandestine circuitry for covert cyborgs. The myth of surrender to control by technology is being glorified as the highest aim of the twentieth century version of the American Dream.
The American Dream is turning into a cybernetic nightmare. As poet Richard Brautigan said, trying to find hope in their myth, one day we may all be "watched over by machines of loving grace."
Chapter Twenty
THE ENGINES OF SECURITY
The gases of technology fuel the engines of security.
New terrifying technology created secret systems to
conceal its potential for devastation. Those systems, in
turn, proliferated into an industry of secrecy. That industry turned its vast potential to research and development to create a science of secrecy—mind control—a science unto itself. The cryptocracy has used mind control for the past thirty years. It has used it on its own agents and employees, on enemies and friends alike. It has used it on thousands of Americans without their knowledge or consent. The CIA has programmed assassins and couriers by it. The CIA has even openly confessed to its conspiracy of mind control.
Many people will believe that since the CIA has publicly disclosed its interest in mind control, it has now ceased its activities. The earlier CIA records, however, contain a number of termination dates for aspects of Operation Mind Control, yet evidence clearly suggests that it continued past those dates.
In 1975, following the release of the Rockefeller Commission Report and the subsequent investigations by Senator Church's and Congressman Pike's committees, a public accounting was given and apologies were made. The intelligence community was reprimanded and small changes made.
But then in July, 1977, following a wave of resignations in the CIA's clandestine services, CIA Director Adm. Stansfield Turner informed the Senate Intelligence Committee that the whole story had not been told, even though the case had been put to rest. Turner informed the committee and the White House that additional information had been "found" that proved the CIA had given a number of mind-controlling drugs to untold numbers of Americans, including alcoholics, drug addicts, and terminal cancer patients. A CIA spokesman questioned by reporters could say no more than he did not know how many persons were tested or whether any harm resulted, but that the new records indicated that there had been cases in addition to those revealed in the previous congressional hearings.
The result was headlines in the press about the CIA and drugs (the two words were now commonly linked), but few newsmen made the connection between drug tests and behavior control or mind control.
Recent history documents the fact that the CIA, as the whipping boy of the cryptocracy, covers up and routinely lies about its activities, heaping one lie on another, in a labyrinthine network of falsehood. It stretches credibility to believe, therefore, that the CIA and especially lower-profile members of the cryptocracy have terminated the mind control research and development that has been going on for thirty years. While it may be true that the pain-drug hypnosis aspects of mind control have been stopped, one cannot believe that it has ceased because it is thought illegal or immoral. If it has ceased, it has ceased only because it is obsolete and the new technology of radiation and electronic brain stimulation has given the cryptocracy a more powerful form of control. What is likely is that the cryptocracy is moving from the control of an individual's mind and body to the control of the masses.
There is usually a twenty-year lag between the laboratory development of new technology and its application at large. For example, the techniques of audio-visual desensitization were developed at Stanford University in the mid-fifties by Volpe and Lazarus. Working under government contracts at the time, they discovered how a person could be cured of phobic fears (such as the fear of flying), alcoholism, drug addiction, homosexuality, and other "social illnesses" that were previously thought incurable. While Volpe and Lazarus thought that they were merely trying to develop a technique to help people, the government kept a watchful eye on their research. As we discovered by the confession of Commander Narut, the navy used audiovisual desensitization for its own purposes in the mid-seventies, exactly twenty years after its original development. The techniques of narco-hypnosis were developed before World War II and became widely applied in the early sixties. The next stage of mind control is based on radiation which can stimulate the brain for the purpose of remote control. This technology already exists today and is in the experimental stage. We can be assured that inside twenty years it will be used widely by people outside the government.
The problem of mass manipulation is much easier to solve than individual manipulation. A number of studies have demonstrated that people behave in groups much differently then they do alone. One navy study showed that the most potent modifier of behavior is peer-group pressure. This same pressure comes into play in crowd psychology. By controlling the leaders of a crowd, the entire crowd can be controlled through simple suggestion. It has been demonstrated that the cryptocracy has the desire and the technology to control us all.
The cryptocracy's desire for control comes from the desire for national security. National security has been the excuse for illegal U.S. activities everywhere in the world. National security has made a mockery of the Geneva Convention as well as the Constitution of the United States. It has become the fool proof cover not only for authorized foreign activities but also for unsanctioned deeds of both cryptocrats and politicians. It has been the main instrument for the manipulation of public opinion. The primary target against which the national security managers have waged their psychological war has been the people of the United States.
Secret government cannot function in a climate of free speech, open criticism, and public exposure. The question comes down to one of democracy: are the American people willing to give up their democratic principles in exchange for this elusive national security?
In his book Roots of War, retired cryptocrat Richard Barnet wrote: "The great root of war is the vulnerability of the public to manipulation on national security issues. People do not perceive where their true interests lie and hence are easily swayed by emotional appeals to support policies that cost them their money, their sons, and their own lives. Because they have been willing to accept uncritically the myth of the national interest—i.e., the definition advanced by the national security managers—they exercise almost no control over the commitments the managers make in their name. Supposedly [they are] the beneficiaries of national security policy which really protects the interests of all Americans only if those interests are articulated in the political process."
Even Gen. Maxwell Taylor has lamented the corruption of the national security premise: "National security," he said, "once a trumpet call to the nation to man the ramparts and repel invaders, has fallen into disrepute, a victim of complications arising from the Vietnam syndrome and from its own internal contradictions, excessive defense budgets and collusive dealings with the military-industrial complex. Watergate revelations have fueled suspicions that it may be little more than a cover for executive encroachments upon civil liberties and a free press."1
While propaganda, disinformation, misinformation, and assassination have all played an important role in bringing the American democracy to heel, mind control holds its future. It is not surprising that under the label of national security the cryptocracy should seek to control minds. Nor can it come as a surprise that the cryptocracy (always in the vanguard of technology) should develop efficient methods of mind control. But that the legal machinery of the Constitution of the United States should become so fouled by the practitioners of psycho-politics can be experienced only with the outrage one feels at a case of rape, for it not only represents the rape of law and democratic values, but also the rape of heretofore inviolate recesses of man—his mind and soul.
America's form of government was created by men who clearly saw that those in power, no matter how well meaning, could unwittingly endanger the liberties of individuals. The Bill of Rights was incorporated in the Constitution to ensure liberty. Most important, it set limits on what the government could not do to its citizens, even with the approval of the majority. The constitutional protections were largely effective until they were circumvented by the technological revolution and the National Security Act of 1947.
By that one act, the safeguards of privacy which had protected U.S. citizens for nearly two centuries were dissolved by a President and approved by a Congress which emerged into a Cold War paralyzed by fear of the new death-dealing technology the cryptocracy had created.
The National Security Act is Catch-22. It grants the National Security Council sweeping and virtually unlimited powers to integrate all policies of government and coordinate all agencies, both foreign and domestic. And just what is "national security"? Presidents, secretaries of state and defense, and scholars have been trying to define it since the term was coined.
According to Frank N. Trager and Frank L. Simonie, in their book National Security and American Society, national security is "the part of government policy having as its objective the creation of national and international conditions favorable to the protection or extension of vital national values against existing and potential adversaries."
Over the years we've seen the "adversaries" defined as home-grown Communists, critics of government policy, and all those who marched to end the Vietnam conflict, and eventually anyone Richard Nixon thought did not agree with his political outlook. We've seen "vital national values" defined as those values which work for the interests of corporate oligopolies, regardless of their effects on the national economy or the best interests of the people of the United States.
Rather than live by the principles of democracy, and demonstrate to the totalitarian countries the dynamics of freedom, the cryptocrats resorted to the practice of tyrants. In so doing they damaged their own cherished institutions, and lost time, money, and lives in the useless and poorly conceived Cold War campaign.
Since its beginning the cryptocracy's Cold War against communism has been a losing battle. In the postindustrial World, politics and nationalism were replaced by economics as the motivating force of modern society. The U.S. cryptocrats seemed not to believe in the strength of the "free enterprise" system. They ignored the fact that the world had become more than anything else an economic battleground.
Despite the realities of modern global politics, the U.S. cryptocracy has continued to assert that secrecy is its most vital weapon against the Communists. On this point the argument goes: "In our open society with its free press, it is very difficult to win against a closed Communist world. We must assume the cloak of secrecy, like the Communists, in order to hold our own against them."
The "national security" mentality, while manifesting a paranoid need for secrecy and control, was not the major cause of the growth of cryptocracy. The wonders of the post industrial age were the real cause for the erosion of freedom and privacy. The creation of new weapons of terrible proportions created a nuclear medusa complex; all who looked upon the bomb were turned to stone by their fear. The growth of the "soft" social sciences made possible an invisible totalitarianism. These "humanist" sciences became new tools for studying and labeling individual behavior. They came to be applied to create boundaries of conformity. Further, the desire for conformity created the need for the surveillance of individual behavior.
The growth of government and the creation of large industry inevitably gave birth to bureaucracy. Bureaucracy with the aid and encouragement of the educational establishment created files, and cryptocracy created super secret psychological files. With advancements in electronic technology—increasingly sophisticated microphones, transmitters, and surveillance devices—the erosion of privacy becomes a mudslide.
Although the most often invoked justification for secrecy is to keep technology from falling into enemy hands, history has shown that secrecy is, at best, only a delay to public access. Since modern technologies have been developed from a pool of common scientific knowledge, they cannot be kept secret for long. Eventually, all the fruits of the empirical pool slip from specific control and find their way into general use as independent discoveries take place.
Mind control, as it exists today, will certainly become available within twenty years to anyone who desires it and can afford it.
Equally to blame with the cryptocracy for the development of mind control are the psycho-sciences. Here are educated men and women who have spent many hours in study, preparing (supposedly) for years of service to their fellow men. They have high standing in the society and are well paid. They are the priests of a new religion. T
he psycho-scientists who have allowed their research to be used against humanity should be known. They must be held ethically accountable for their research into coercive mind control. Psychology itself is not entirely made up of cryptocrats and people who seek control over others. There are "humanist" psychologists who seek only to help people. But to behaviorists humanistic psychology seems to be not much more than a fad. And if a fad it is, it will probably fade into history, leaving behind the Skinnerian kind of psychology, the kind that now dominates American college classrooms, the only really reliable psychology, the psychology of conditioning—behaviorism. And from behaviorism comes behavior modification.
Mind control remains above United States law, making it a most attractive tool for clandestine operators. U.S. courts, and even the majority of the psychiatric profession, will not admit that it is possible to take over someone's memory and willpower by mind control. Until now, there has been little to prove the case.
In several foreign democracies, however, cases have come to trial which involved hypnotists who had their subjects commit crimes while acting under posthypnotic suggestion. The "criminals" robbed banks or committed murders without being conscious of their crimes. In these cases the foreign courts placed the burden of blame on the mind controllers. The hypnotists, received the stiff sentences, while the "trigger persons" were either allowed to go free or given greatly reduced terms. In the United States no such precedent exists. When it has come up in a trial, the question has been ducked, since it would require lengthy testimony by psycho-scientific experts, few of whom seem able to agree on the subject.
The closest the courts have come to considering the case of mind control was in the Patty Hearst case, but F. Lee Bailey at the last minute backed away from his planned "brainwashing" defense. One of the witnesses for the defense was Dr. Martin T. Orne. Dr. Orne testified at the trial that Patty Hearst had indeed been "brainwashed" by the SLA. Orne should have known whether or not Patty Was brainwashed since, as the head of the Office of Naval Research's Committee on Hypnosis, he helped develop the coercive use of hypnotic mind control for the cryptocracy. Despite Orne's expert testimony Ms. Hearst's plea of duress Was ignored and she was imprisoned subject to psychiatric review. A close examination of her trial records may shed a great deal of light on the problem an individual faces in pleading "mind control."
There is no one who dispenses freedom, but there are many who would take it away. Freedom is not free; it must be won. The individual must stand with others against even the smallest tyranny. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
Former CIA official Victor Marchetti put it plainly when he told Freedom News Service what he thought ought to be done.
When pressed for concrete examples of what a citizen can do to curb secrecy, dismantle the cryptocracy, and return democracy to the people, he said, "You know, you just can't beat it. The only way you're going to clean up some of these outfits would be if a President came in there and said, 'Well, I'm just not going to tolerate some of this stuff.' And even then it would be difficult for the President because this bureaucracy is so entrenched and so fortified that it has connections all over in our society.
"The CIA and the FBI do not completely control the office of the President obviously, but they have an awful lot of influence in that office. Their influence derives from their capabilities and the fact that they operate in secrecy . . . They are not really concerned with the public interest. They always hide behind such things as 'national security' and they say that their activities are in the 'national interests' but the record doesn't substantiate that.
"You may stem the tide, and then begin to push it back, but you're not going to change it overnight. This thing was building for thirty-five years. . . . These guys aren't going to just change. They're going to go down swinging; we've seen that already."
In July, 1977, President Carter appointed his former Annapolis classmate, Adm. Stansfield Turner, to head the entire intelligence community. In so doing he gave him sweeping powers which no other intelligence director in the history of the United States has ever possessed. With one quick stroke of the pen Carter created America's version of Lavrenti Beria, the late chief of the Soviet secret police. This was Carter's promised reorganization of the intelligence community. Appearing to reorganize it under Turner, he merely strengthened its totalitarian potential.
Only days before Turner was made intelligence czar, as director of CIA he testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee investigating MKULTRA. Turner told the senators that the CIA had stopped all drug testing. He was not asked nor did he volunteer information about new technologies of mind control. He did not say the mind-control operations had stopped, only that the experiments had stopped.
While the CIA has been severely criticized, and some of its activities appear to have been apparently curtailed, so unfettered is the cryptocracy that some other, as yet unnamed, agency may be right now consolidating power and extending the ruthless and subtle psychological war against democracy.
The individual can do little to stop the use of psychopolitics, the cryptocracy's most important weapon, against him. But individuals working together can be effective. Americans are a people with a tradition of freedom—as always, paid for in blood. Regardless of how difficult life becomes in the complex modern world, men must not give up their freedom to think for themselves. From that freedom springs all others. But we must not be naive. To attempt to stop mind control is to confront the cryptocracy in its lair. Without mind control how can the cryptocracy be certain it will be able to keep its secrets?
Operation Mind Control will not be exposed by the work of an honest security guard and diligent reporters, as was the case with Watergate. It will take nothing less than a concerted effort on the part of an informed and outraged public, their legal representatives, and the press to uncover even the beginning of the trail to the identity of the elite core of the secret government which rapes the human mind. And, in the process of uncovering the cabal of mind controllers, the entire fabric of the United States government may well come unraveled.
To stop the cryptocracy, the Congress and the people will have to wage a ceaseless campaign to dismantle and reorganize the entire intelligence community from the ground up under some law other than the ill-defined National Security Act. Congress has taken only token steps in this direction, having embraced the myth of National Security. The campaign to stop the cryptocracy will require the same sacrifice, the same endurance, the same expression of national group feeling that it took to end the Vietnam conflict. In one way the fight is the same—the enemy is within .
Somewhere within the United States the technology for the creation of the perfect slave state is being perfected . Whether or not the mind-controlled state becomes a reality depends not so much upon the efforts of the cryptocracy , but upon the free will , determination, and strength of character of the American people.
footnotes and
source
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/archivos_pdf/operation-mindcontrol.pdf
