What is the point of this blog?
Conspiracy is not my obsession, nor my guilty pleasure. My interest lays in the multifarious ways in which we as a society and as a culture are being manipulated from behind the curtain. I became aware of social conditioning whilst quite young and yet still somehow failed to see how it had affected my own thinking until well into middle age.
Conditioning is everywhere in our culture and those who practice it in order to advance certain agendas are past masters at its many forms.
I therefore offer the information presented within this blog as an overview of the many forms that the manipulators of our society can and do use to their advantage and our cost.
I’m aware that many who read these posts will be coming to much of what is covered here cold. And so, I have compiled this brief glossary of terms as an aid to understanding the concepts here covered.
MKULTRA: Note; there is much that we still do not know about this program. And there is no real evidence that it does not continue today (though most certainly under a different name). Note also that there were many sub projects under MKULTRA, such as MONARCH to name but one.
Hegelian dialectic: The dialectic, put simply, involves taking two opposing ideas; Thesis and Antithesis (eg. Capitalism and Communism, Left wing and Right wing, Theism and atheism) and putting them into conflict. After a time the two arguments begin to take on aspects of their opposite, in effect creating a third way, known as Synthesis. The blending of Capitalism and Communism creates a kind of collectivist fascism. The blending of Theism and Atheism creates New Age type quasi religions.
Agenda 21: Not what it appears to be, but rather the very epitome of the wolf in sheep’s clothing.
New World Order: This is not, I believe, the name of an organisation as is commonly claimed, but rather, a scheme that has been running beneath the surface of our society for well over one hundred years. It is the planned take down of the Nation State by a cabal of elitist Oligarchs. They have been working tirelessly for a world (radically reduced in population) collectivised and controlled by a global police state apparatus.
Illuminati: This name, which you will rarely find used on this blog, should be considered a general term intended to describe the more occult (hidden) aspects of New World Order conspiracy. I feel that it is generally used inappropriately and most often (though not always) by COINTELPRO operatives trying to discredit those who question.
Tavistock: The Tavistock Institute pretends to be a benign charitable NGO, but is actually a key component in the creation of social manipulation and mind control techniques.
What they claim to be.
What they are accused of being.
I will add more to this section when and as time permits.
I would also wish to direct the reader’s attention to the following essential reading. If you have not had access to any of these books then you have little chance of understanding the world you find yourself living in.
Bibliography of essential texts
Dr Anthony Sutton: Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution
Carroll Quigley: Tragedy & Hope: A History of the World in Our Time
Edward Bernays: Propaganda
Zbigniew Brzezinski: The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives
John Coleman: The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations
David Ray Griffin: The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the Cover-Up, and the Exposé
Michael C Ruppert: Crossing the Rubicon
Webster Griffin Tarpley: 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in the USA
Eustace Mullins: The Secrets of the Federal Reserve
Niki Raapana, Nordica Friedrich: 2020: Our Common Destiny and The Anti Communitarian Manifesto
Cathy O’Brien, Mark Phillips: Trance: Formation of America
David McGowan: Weird scenes inside the canyon
Other books of note:
Confessions of an economic hit man by John Perkins, The shock doctrine by Naomi Klein, Debunking 9/11 debunking by David Ray Griffin, Cognitive Infiltration: An Obama Appointee’s Plan to Undermine the 9/11 Conspiracy by David Ray Griffin.
An alternative examination of the lyrics to Love’s ‘red telephone’ viewed through the prism of MKULTRA
By Winston Smith
“We start with an excellent subject … we need a man or woman who is highly intelligent and physically tough. Then we start to develop a case of multiple personality through hypnotism. In his normal waking state, which we will call Personality A, or PA, this individual will become a rabid communist. He will join the party, follow the party line and make himself as objectionable as possible to the authorities. Note that he will be acting in good faith. He is a communist; or rather his PA is a communist and will behave as such. Then we develop Personality B (PB), the secondary personality, the unconscious personality, if you wish, although this is somewhat of a contradiction in terms. This personality is rabidly American and anti-communist. It has all the information possessed by PA, the normal personality, whereas PA does not have this advantage … My super spy plays his role as a communist in his waking state, aggressively, consistently, fearlessly. But his PB is a loyal American, and PB has all the memories of PA. As a loyal American, he will not hesitate to divulge those memories.” ~ Psychological warfare operative George Estabrooks From ‘Weird scenes inside the canyon’ by David McGowan
I kicked this piece off with the above quote from McGowan’s excellent book on the Laurel Canyon scene because I think it may be very relevant to one (actually several) of the musicians featured in it. Arthur Lee, leader of the band Love is one of the more enigmatic and sometimes sinister personalities to have emerged from said scene.
I won’t go into the details of his life and origins here as there is plenty of biographical information available on the subject both on the web and in a plethora of print books. I will however point out a few quite salient facts.
Despite his hippie peace and love credentials Lee had a lifelong love of firearms (as indeed did David Crosby and several other famous Laurel canyonites). This wasn’t necessarily a bad thing in and of itself, however… In 1995, after Lee was arrested for discharging a gun off his balcony, police found him to be in possession of a quantity of Teflon coated rounds (otherwise known as armour piercing bullets).
In 1983, he had also been arrested for arson.
According to McGowan, Lee was known to have a pretty serious authoritarian streak (a character trait he shared with that great Svengali of the hippie movement Frank Zappa – also The mamas and the papas’ John Phillips for that matter. Oh yes and Don Glen Vliet aka Captain Beefheart – hmm, wasn’t the hippie movement spawned by a lot of control freaks). McGowan quotes Drummer Snoopy Pfisterer saying Lee was ‘a megalomaniac; extremely authoritarian’ and David Anderle Loves producer stating he didn’t want to ‘say that Arthur was demonic, but he was very manipulative and destructive’.
“Like others in this saga, Arthur appears to have suffered with a rather pronounced dissociative disorder. Drummer Gary Stern once said that he believed ‘there were two Arthurs, as if he were schizophrenic.’ Rock’n’roll photographer Herbie Worthington described Arthur as ’a walking contradiction. He could be the sweetest person one minute and then his mind would click and he could be an asshole.’”
In all my research for this piece, I never came upon a single reference to something I personally find a little puzzling about Lee, why did a black man from Memphis sing like a white man from Britain?
And that brings me to our song ‘red telephone’, a standout track off the third Love album ‘Forever changes’. At first listen it appears to be a kind of Pink Floydesque rumination on the nature of madness in the vein of say ‘comfortably numb’. Upon deeper examination, however, certain themes become apparent to the informed ear.
Sitting on the hillside
watching all the people die.
I’ll feel much better on the other side.
I’ll thumb a ride.
In the opening verse, Lee talks of his distress at watching others die, either metaphorically or literally (there was plenty of both going on in Laurel canyon during this period), but from a distance, as represented by the image of him ‘sitting on the hillside’. This could also be a very literal reference to the secret military installation/ laboratory perched atop lookout mountain at the very heart of the canyon community.
He then states that he’ll ‘feel much better on the other side’
The other side could very well reference the act of dissociation experienced by those who suffer from Dissociative identity disorder. In her book ‘Trance Formation of America – The true life story of a CIA mind control slave’ Cathy O’Brien describes how, through trauma techniques, mind control victims are splintered into multiple personalities which they can then be made to ‘switch’ between at their handler’s command. This is colloquially called ‘going over the rainbow’ and the other personality is what’s on the ‘other side’. ‘I’ll thumb a ride’ may refer to the fact that it is another that takes him over the rainbow rather than his own free will or desire.
addendum: In a conversation with a good friend of mine who has training in psychology and a fairly in depth knowledge of dissociative personality disorders she had this to say, ‘The part about the hillside is something I have personally observed in abuse victims. It doesn’t have to be about actually witnessing people dying. It could just as easily be watching other people being abused or hurt or be the individual observing themselves from outside the body. Anyone who says that is not possible should work with some abused kids or teens sometime.’
I believe in magic.
Why, because it is so quick.
I don’t need power when I’m hypnotized.
Look in my eyes.
What are you seeing? (I see…)
I feel real phony when my name is Phil
Or is that Bill?
This verse is particularly revealing. The magic he is referencing is, I believe, the MONARCH/ MKULTRA mind control that can magically switch him in an instant between totally different personas (alters). The reference to hypnotism (a fundamental mind control technique) requires no real explanation. The real ‘tell’ is in the line ‘I feel real phony when my name is Phil, or is that Bill’. Could it be clearer? He is expressing his discomfort at being made to assume these ‘other’ personas that are not truly who he believes himself to be.
Life goes on here
Day after day.
I don’t know if I’m living or if I’m supposed to be.
Sometimes my life is so eerie.
And if you think I’m happy paint me (White) (Yellow)
Again, some fairly self-explanatory references here. The sense of dissociation and confusion are fairly evident.
My friend again; ‘Have you looked into colours in mind control techniques? Was he particularly religious? The yellow is often associated with Christian alters. Just like black and white are code for divide and conquer.
‘Colours are used in all different ways to map out the programming of the individual. The mind is broken down into sections or compartments. Each is assigned a colour. It’s like electrical wiring, but it’s a map to the wiring in the brain. The wires are known as ‘ribbons’ or ‘scarves’. So in this case, the red telephone would seem to be the mechanism used to convey information. Red is often sexual and is heavily used in magic rituals. Wires may be outgoing or inbound only; therefore no information is allowed back in or out. That’s why someone may have no recollection afterward. All a handler would need is a ‘map’ of the programming already in place plus trigger words or numbers. It’s as simple as a blueprint.’
I’ve been here once.
I’ve been here twice.
I don’t know if the third’s the fourth or if
the fifth’s to fix.
Sometimes I deal with numbers.
And if you wanna count me
count me out.
‘Sometimes I deal with numbers’, this could be referencing having handlers that are not identified by name. Alternatively, as Cathy O’Brien explains in her truly disturbing book, mind controlled slaves are often times used as couriers between the government and whatever shady or illegal entities they deal with. The numbers may well refer to money. ‘Count me out’ could mean quite literally out of his head; out to lunch, another way of saying dissociated.
I don’t need the time of day
Anytime with me’s ok.
I just don’t want you using up my time
’cause that’s not right.
This verse really stood out for me. When he sings ‘I just don’t want you using up my time’ I think he’s referring to the times when he is involuntarily ‘over the rainbow’ in a dissociative state. This is often time that the victim has no memory of; lost time. I’m sure this loss is resented ‘cause that’s not right’.
They’re locking them up today.
They’re throwing away the key.
I wonder who it’ll be tomorrow, you or me?
The final refrain is perhaps the most poignant for me. At first I assumed he was talking of others being locked up by the establishment. However, it eventually occurred to me that he is actually speaking about his alters being eliminated one by one; locked away in his subconscious. The key being thrown away likely refers to the trigger word used to ‘call out’ particular alters.
We’re all normal and we want our freedom
Freedom… freedom… freedom… freedom. All of God’s children gotta have their freedom…
The coda where he says ‘we’re all normal and we want our freedom’ and other voices (that are all in fact his voice) repeat the word freedom over and over, as if there’s a host of people inside his brain, is really quite heartbreaking.
And so there you have it, a somewhat left field interpretation of a song that often leaves its listeners bemused and perplexed. I do recommend that the reader pick up both O’Brien’s and McGowan’s excellent books that on the surface appear to have a lot less in common than they in fact do.
What I have written above makes far more sense with the benefit of the information they present.
Other articles you may find elucidating:
Did the Starman fall from planet Tavistock?
Jim Morrison and the LC
Frank Zappa and the LC
“Return to Oz”
Spencer Ackerman for The Guardian in New York
Tuesday 25 November 2014
New analysis of data conducted by human rights group Reprieve shared with the Guardian, raises questions about accuracy of intelligence guiding ‘precise’ strikes.
The drones came for Ayman Zawahiri on 13 January 2006, hovering over a village in Pakistan called Damadola. Ten months later, they came again for the man who would become al-Qaida’s leader, this time in Bajaur.
Eight years later, Zawahiri is still alive. Seventy-six children and 29 adults, according to reports after the two strikes, are not.
However many Americans know who Zawahiri is, far fewer are familiar with Qari Hussain. Hussain was a deputy commander of the Pakistani Taliban, a militant group aligned with al-Qaida that trained the would-be Times Square bomber, Faisal Shahzad, before his unsuccessful 2010 attack. The drones first came for Hussain years before, on 29 January 2008. Then they came on 23 June 2009, 15 January 2010, 2 October 2010 and 7 October 2010.
Finally, on 15 October 2010, Hellfire missiles fired from a Predator or Reaper drone killed Hussain, the Pakistani Taliban later confirmed. For the death of a man whom practically no American can name, the US killed 128 people, 13 of them children, none of whom it meant to harm.
A new analysis of the data available to the public about drone strikes, conducted by the human-rights group Reprieve, indicates that even when operators target specific individuals – the most focused effort of what Barack Obama calls “targeted killing” – they kill vastly more people than their targets, often needing to strike multiple times. Attempts to kill 41 men resulted in the deaths of an estimated 1,147 people, as of 24 November.
Reprieve, sifting through reports compiled by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, examined cases in which specific people were targeted by drones multiple times. Their data, shared with the Guardian, raises questions about the accuracy of US intelligence guiding strikes that US officials describe using words like “clinical” and “precise.”
The analysis is a partial estimate of the damage wrought by Obama’s favored weapon of war, a tool he and his administration describe as far more precise than more familiar instruments of land or air power.
“Drone strikes have been sold to the American public on the claim that they’re ‘precise’. But they are only as precise as the intelligence that feeds them. There is nothing precise about intelligence that results in the deaths of 28 unknown people, including women and children, for every ‘bad guy’ the US goes after,” said Reprieve’s Jennifer Gibson, who spearheaded the group’s study.
Some 24 men specifically targeted in Pakistan resulted in the death of 874 people. All were reported in the press as “killed” on multiple occasions, meaning that numerous strikes were aimed at each of them. The vast majority of those strikes were unsuccessful. An estimated 142 children were killed in the course of pursuing those 24 men, only six of whom died in the course of drone strikes that killed their intended targets.
In Yemen, 17 named men were targeted multiple times. Strikes on them killed 273 people, at least seven of them children. At least four of the targets are still alive.
Available data for the 41 men targeted for drone strikes across both countries indicate that each of them was reported killed multiple times. Seven of them are believed to still be alive. The status of another, Haji Omar, is unknown. Abu Ubaidah al-Masri, whom drones targeted three times, later died from natural causes, believed to be hepatitis.
The data cohort is only a fraction of those killed by US drones overall. Reprieve did not focus on named targets struck only once. Neither Reprieve nor the Guardian examined the subset of drone strikes that do not target specific people: the so-called “signature strikes” that attack people based on a pattern of behavior considered suspicious, rather than intelligence tying their targets to terrorist activity. An analytically conservative Council on Foreign Relations tally assesses that 500 drone strikes outside of Iraq and Afghanistan have killed 3,674 people.
As well, the data is agnostic on the validity of the named targets struck on multiple occasions being marked for death in the first place.
Like all weapons, drones will inevitably miss their targets given enough chances. But the secrecy surrounding them obscures how often misses occur and the reasons for them. Even for the 33 named targets whom the drones eventually killed – successes, by the logic of the drone strikes – another 947 people died in the process.
There are myriad problems with analyzing data from US drone strikes. Those strikes occur under a blanket of official secrecy, which means analysts must rely on local media reporting about their aftermath, with all the attendant problems besetting journalism in dangerous or denied places. Anonymous leaks to media organizations, typically citing an unnamed American, Yemeni or Pakistani official, are the only acknowledgements that the strikes actually occur, or target a particular individual.
Without the CIA and the Joint Special Operations Command declassifying more information on the strikes, unofficial and imprecise information is all that is available, complicating efforts to independently verify or refute administration assurances about the impact of the drones.
What little US officials say about the strikes typically boils down to assurances that they apply “targeted, surgical pressure to the groups that threaten us,” as John Brennan, now the CIA director, said in a 2011 speech.
“The only people that we fire a drone at [sic] are confirmed terrorist targets at the highest level after a great deal of vetting that takes a long period of time. We don’t just fire a drone at somebody and think they’re a terrorist,” the secretary of state, John Kerry, said at a BBC forum in 2013.
A Reprieve team investigating on the ground in Pakistan turned up what it believes to be a confirmed case of mistaken identity. Someone with the same name as a terror suspect on the Obama administration’s “kill list” was killed on the third attempt by US drones. His brother was captured, interrogated and encouraged to “tell the Americans what they want to hear”: that they had in fact killed the right person. Reprieve has withheld identifying details of the family in question, making the story impossible to independently verify.
“President Obama needs to be straight with the American people about the human cost of this programme. If even his government doesn’t know who is filling the body bags every time a strike goes wrong, his claims that this is a precise programme look like nonsense, and the risk that it is in fact making us less safe looks all too real,” Gibson said.
There are good minds doing some solid research into the black activities of the 9/11 cartel. I highly recommend this interview.