October E-BOM: Operation Mind Control

Memory Hole’s EBook of the Month

Beginning this month and hereafter Memory Hole Blog intends to present and make available an important book-length work that is either obscure or forgotten, may have fallen out of print, and yet is freely available on the internet. The purpose of the monthly post is to rekindle awareness and discussion on a select number of important titles, while providing an organizing component to these volumes that have fallen into “The Memory Holemindcontrol.”

How many of today’s so-called “lone wolf terrorists” have been covertly manipulated to carry out their actions? Were “solitary” political assassins such Lee Harvey Oswald, James Earl Ray, Sirhan Sirhan, Mark David Chapman, and John Hinckley Jr., products of mind control techniques? This important book, published close to four decades ago, cogently documents the US government’s concerted involvement in mind control projects, some of which are now fully operational.

October’s E-BOM is Operation_Mind_Control (1978) by investigative journalist and alternative media pioneer Walter Bowart. The author presents the volume as a work of “citizens’ intelligence,” chronicling the US government’s array of long-running research programs into mind control techniques and their utilization in various political assassinations and other intrigues.

[Warning: Operation Mind Control contains explicit content.]

“To alter and control human minds is the ultimate anarchy,” writes Richard Condon, author of The Manchurian Candidate, in the book’s Foreword. “What is offered by official apologists as a tribute to the needs of derring-do by romantic spies are acts of hatred and sadism against all people in an insane and degraded determination to extirpate conscience from society.”

“Please keep fearfully in mind,” Condon continues,

that the astonishing information published in this seminal work of investigative reporting, concerning avenues taken to decision and execution by our secret police to dissolve human minds, then to operate those minds as a small boy might operate a Yo-Yo, for purposes of counter-intelligence military efficiency, and the destruction of democratic institutions, was drawn directly from federal records and from official laboratory archives of the highest educational purpose–as well as from the reviving memories of those who had already undergone the dehumanizing process.

Selected excerpts from the work:

The techniques of mind control developed, even by 1967, were making brainwashing seem like the metaphor it was: a washboard and scrub-bucket technique which had little use in a world where the sonic cleaner, with high frequency sound, higher than the human ear can hear, vibrates the dirt from the very molecules of matter–of the mind.

In 1947, J.G. Watkins induced criminal behavior in deeply hypnotized subjects during an army experiment. Watkins suggested a distorted view of reality to his subjects by inducing hallucinations which allowed them to avoid direct conflict with their own moral concepts. He carefully chose his suggestions to be in line with his subjects’ preexisting motivational structures, and so was able to induce so-called anti-social behavior.

The top priority for testing in mind control were those drugs which were found to induce hypnosis. The administration and effects of barbituates, amobarbital, secobarbital, pentothal, and sodium amytal were studied. Nonbarbiturate sedatives and calmatives such as ethchlorvynol, glutethimide, methyprylon, methylparafynol, captodramin, and oxanamide were also tested. A whole range of ampehtamines and their derivatives were discussed as good tools to produce a “produce a ‘push’–an outpouring of ideas, emotions, memories, and so forth.” New drugs, such as ritalin, marsilid, and mescaline were thought to hold great promise for mind-control applications. Perhaps the most promising of this last group was a “consciousness-expanding drug called LSD-25.

[In 1976] [t]he army announced that since 1956 it had tested LSD on nearly 1,500 it had tested LSD on nearly 1,500 unwitting servicemen, and on several thousand more volunteers, a total 6,940 in all. At the same time the army made this disclosure, it requested permission from the Defense Department to conduct further tests with at least two new drugs–drugs which were many times more powerful than LSD. Permission was granted with the stipulation that “guinea pigs” be volunteers only.

“What do you know about the military or intelligence agencies’ use of pain-drug hypnosis?” I asked. “They used several different things. I’ve seen, actually seen, guys coming back with blanks only in certain places of their memory. Let’s say that I know positively, not by hearsay, that it’s done.”
“You’ve seen it?” I asked.
“You’ll never get me to admit it;” he grinned.
“Well, how is it done?” I asked.
“They use hypnosis and hypnotic drugs. They also use electronic manipulation of the brain. They use ultrasonics, which will boil your brain. When they use hypnosis, they’ll at the same time be using a set of earphones which repeat, “‘You do not know this or that,’ over and over. They turn on the sonics at the same time, and the electrical patterns which give you memory are scrambled. You can’t hear the ultrasonics, and you can’t feel it, unless they leave it on–then it boils your grey matter.”
Unless the assassin had done the same research I had, he could not only have known this through firsthand experience. The CIA documents released in 1976 revealed that ultrasonic research was undertaken for a period of more than twenty years. But the documents said that the research had stopped, so I asked him about that.
“Yeah, the
research has stopped. They’ve gone operational. It ain’t research anymore. They know how to do it,” he said.
“Do you mean that it is your opinion that it hasn’t stopped, or do you know it hasn’t stopped?” I asked.
I mean I know it hasn’t stopped,” he said.

Within days of the army’s admission of drug testing, the Department of Health, Education and Welfare revealed that it had administered LSD to about 2,500 prisoners, mental patients, and paid volunteers between 1954 and 1968. HEW said further that it had given seven and a half million dollars in grants to more than thirty university researchers who independently ran LD tests on human subjects.

What was not revealed until much later was than the CIA had used every possible military and civilian agency or government, as well as a number of universities and private research groups, to test LSD and other drugs, plus a whole array of psycho-technologies in an all-out search for reliable methods of controlling the human mind.

One of the documents John Marks obtained was dated July 30, 1956. Under the heading, “Schizophrenic Agent” the memo stated that bulbocapnine, an alkaloid, could cause catatonia or stupor from its affects on the central nervous system and the cerebral cortex. The report stated: “We desire to have certain psycho-chemical properties tested on man, using the bulbocapnine which we were fortunate to obtain from (deleted), a sample being enclosed herewith. More bulbocapnine is available if needed.”

Besides drugs, MKDELTA and MKULTRA experimented with radiation, electroshock, psychology, psychiatry, sociology, anthropology, harassment substances and what were called “paramilitary devises and materials.” Contacts were made with individuals at prominent hospitals and drug “safe houses” under Bureau of Drug Abuse Control. Through the Bureau of Narcotic and Dangerous Drugs and federal institutions such as prisons, drugs could be administered to unsuspecting individuals.

Patrick J. McGarvey, a veteran of fourteen years in U.S. intelligence services … said that his indoctrination was carried out in a classroom which was “right out of The Manchurian Candidate. It was a cavernous room not unlike a nineteenth century surgical exhibition pit.” That training, he said, consisnted of “an admixture of common sense, insanity, old-time religion, and some of the weirdest lectures you can imagine.”

Experimentation with drugs and behavior modification became so widespread in prisons and mental institutions that in the middle and late 1960s court dockets became crowded with lawsuits filed on behalf of the “human guinea pigs” who were victims of such research. By 1971 the number of lawsuits had reached such proportions that the Senate Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights began an investigation. Three years later, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, chaired by Senator Sam Ervin, released a report entitled, “Individual Rights and the Federal Role in Behavior Modification.” It was largely ignored by the press, yet it revealed some interesting information …

The report disclosed that thirteen [such] projects were run by the Defense Department; the Department of Labor had conducted “several experiments”; the National Science Foundation conducted “a substantial amount of research dealing with understanding human behavior”; even the Veterans’ Administration participated in psychosurgery experiments, which, in many cases, were nothing more than an advanced form of lobotomy.

Author bio from the book:

Walter Bowart, (Walter Kirby) was born in Omaha, Nebraska, in 1939. He was awarded a McMahon journalism scholarship to the University of Oklahoma and has since worked as an editor, publisher, and writer. His articles have appeared in many journals including, The East Village Other, the underground newspaper which he founded in 1965.

Walter Browart lives in Tuscon with his wife and three children.

Browart passed away in 2007. For more information see his New York Times obituary. See also Mr. Browart’s biographical entry on Wikipedia.-JFT

149 thoughts on “October E-BOM: Operation Mind Control”

      1. Is there any hope for other formats other than .pdf? It’s hard to read on small devices. How about and ePub or Kindle edition, which would be much more reader friendly.

    1. A while back I was riveted to Dave McGowan’s “The Mostly True Story of Laurel Canyon” for 3 straight days. I grew up not far from there and was heavily influenced as a child. Product of the 60’s as they say. I need to dig into more of his work. Very glad I found this site too!

  1. You all probably are aware that Ted Kaczynski was part of human (probably LSD) experimentation while he was attending Harvard in the late 1960s. In the early 1970s he left his teaching position at Berkeley, (and disappeared for over a decade), but I’m rather sure Uncle Sam knew where Ted was spending his time. And I’m rather sure he was used well past the Harvard experiments. He never got a trial. They wanted his mouth kept shut. His attorney basically convicted him along with the gov’t. No evidence was ever produced. The shack he’d been living in was hauled away to a military base, never to be seen again.
    I get a weird, sketchy feeling about his younger brother David; he’s the one who turned Ted in. He’s an attorney who worked with runaway youth and directs a budhhist monastery. The FBI couldn’t turn him up in 18 years, but David read the ‘manifesto’ and figured out it was Ted. It’s just a little too convenient.
    If you haven’t seen the movie about Kaczynski titled, “The Net, the Unabomber, LSD, and the Internet” I suggest it–available on youtube.
    Also these may be of interest:


      1. I loved Miles Mathis’ take on the Unabomber, Patrick. Have you read his analysis on Manson? It’s very detailed and quite persuasive.

      2. Yes. It’s very convincing. The part about Lookout Mountain having a direct line of sight to the Cielo Drive house was really important–especially in light of what Dave McGowan has brought to light about the secret facility there.

      3. I have been following Common Core (the “new” national education policy) with great interest, including a blog (invisibleserfscollar.com) with some very novel (and very well evidenced) conclusions that most people seem to be missing.

        I happened to have just watched the Kaczynski documentary (“The Net…”) and started re-reading Mathis’s paper about the Unibomber and the CIA when I read the aforementioned blog’s most recent post (http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/opting-out-as-the-remedy-may-mean-accidentally-accelerating-nonconsensual-transformations/), and I started making some very scary connections.

        Is it just me, or does it sound like MK Ultra (or at least the lessons learned from MK Ultra) has made its way into every single public school in America?

    1. Great recommendation re: the Kaczynski documentary on YouTube. I got just over halfway through it last night and had to shut it off to get some sleep, but so far, it’s mind-blowing. I had no idea of the relationship between technology and the hippies…or if I did, I didn’t really grasp all the ramifications.

      These nearly-invisible cohorts of decision-makers are very unsettling. I can’t yet decide if I think they’re remarkably heterogeneous (academicians, businessmen, artists of every stripe, military, etc.) or frighteningly homogeneous (is there a single, common factor connecting them all?). Maybe by the end of the documentary that issue will be addressed…

    2. Jo
      Convenient? I dont doubt that such a unique presentation would strike a cord in someone who has encountered the type of rethoric before.
      I dont think Dave is hiding anything.

      1. That’s for his ideas on physics. He could be very wrong there (I have no idea — not a scientist myself) and still be right (or close) with his ideas on deep events.

      2. “Miles’ reviewers say it best” is a very silly thing to say.

        The likelihood is that he’s right about the physics. If you scan the list gran1te links to, the first set of reviews are all 1-out-of-5, and the second set are all 5-out-of-5. This is indicative of trolls trying to sabotage something being battled by honest thinkers.

        It is my position–and has been long before I ever heard of Mathis–that everything we know is false. Tesla technology could have been allowed to reshape the world we live in, if our masters had not systematically hidden it from us. Faster than light travel; antigravity; infinite, easily accessible, free energy. Anyone who looks into these things very quickly realizes that the programmers of the Matrix fight tooth and nail to keep us from thriving.

        Miles’ writings about the culture demonstrate this admirably. I have only delved into his scientific writings very gingerly, not having the time to devote to a serious study of them, I can full understand the hostility they draw. Take, for instance, his hilarity at what he considers the obvious flaws that Feynman basis his physics lessons on. Now, I have always had a deep fondness for Richard Feynman, adoring his popular autobiographies from the time he wrote them, but I can see Miles’ point. The foundational, fundamental, errors at the very start are well worth noticing. But since he’s a secular god, no one has paid any attention. Mathis, being fearless, takes that bull by the horns and wrestles it to the ground. I have not followed his argument much beyond the introduction, so I can’t speak of the meat of the thing, but I appreciate the willingness of the iconoclast to provoke outrage in the secular priesthood of our time. After all, that’s me, in spades (that’s a rhetorical device “folkie” Mark will no doubt relish–my gift to you, Markie-boy, detector of racism wherever it does not exist).

        So we shouldn’t be surprised by troll reviews, any more than the fact that he will never, ever, be invited to lecture at MIT. Any more than NASA will hire Tom Bearden to teach them about zero-point energy, and the ease of faster than light space travel, or Maxwell’s mathematics will ever be taught at the University of Chicago.

        Miles analyses the period I call the transition out of Western civilization–the last century and a quarter–as a time of increasing mind control over the entire population by technocrats who have seized control over allthe machinery of civil society–the academy, the state, the media, and as Miles Mathis points out, OF SCIENCE. When I read him, I think it could have been me who wrote that.

        The thing about his science stuff, from what I’ve read of it–he doesn’t talk about zero-point energy and Tesla and Bearden and Maxwell. He has a model that involves “charge,” which completely obviates the problem of “missing” matter and energy. It seems rigorous to me, and I’d bet the smarties at MIT would agree–if it didn’t mean they had to admit that everything they’ve always known is wrong.

      3. yeah, those are the same people that say chemtrails are water vapor, there is no discernible difference between GMO’s and conventional foods and we all need vaccines to get “herd immunity.”

        they need to crawl back into their caves and STFU.

        1. really? how many times have you tried commenting on controversial subjects on amazon? I was in a battle for years with shills after comment on what in the world are they spraying. anytime a controversial book is published the operatives go to work. I have no opinion on Mathis’s Physics papers, but just because I am not a physicist doesn’t mean I will take the word of some commenters on amazon or anywhere else. most commenters are always wrong about subjects that I do know about. Vaccines, cancer, allopathy in general, chemtrails, Global warming, war, eugenics, fluoride, GMO, marijuana, corporatism etc. they are always wrong, why would I believe them on physics? In miles non physics papers he lays it out very clearly using logic for those who are capable. If you are one that is too bewildered to believe such things unless they are laid out and admitted by the power structure, then you would probably be too bewildered to believe anything even if it was admitted. You don’t have to harmonize with every word of his to come to some conclusion about a subject.
          If you have read his art and counter criticism papers please point out some things where he has led the gullible reader astray? Speaking in generalities and calling him a disinfo agent for the ignorant does no one any good.
          what theories have no bearing in reality? what about the rest?

        2. Fish, with all due respect –
          pi = 4.


          He says time is factored in to a circle. Time is an a priori observation or perception relevant only to man.

          His fallacious logic in math has been debunked by too many to number.


          The few that are non-detractors, are his aliases. I do not see him as the next galileo.

          Lastly, You say:

          “…most commenters are always wrong about subjects that I do know about…they are always wrong, why would I believe them on physics?”

          That is the same logic I use with Mathis. Why believe his theories when he is always wrong with his math?

        3. I have no way of knowing if pi=4 in kinematic situations. It is all over my head. Honestly it seems to be over the head of the “debunker.” I wouldn’t really call that a debunking. I mean his paper was long – like thirty pages of stuff that will make your head spin and it links to four other papers that you have to understand to understand the current subject of pi in kinematic situations and the debunker took a few quotes, tried to explain the context in a sentence or two and said see look how crazy this Mathis guy is. maybe he is crazy about physics I have no way to gauge that. I have a good friend that is a physicist maybe I could ask him. Oh wait, he believes the official story about 911. Not because of any physics related stuff – because he doesn’t believe that “people could be so evil” relating to an inside job.(so now he makes lasers that go on drones for crowd control) so maybe I shouldn’t take anyone’s word for anything? I choose to withhold judgment on things I don’t understand until I do understand them.

          I have never asked anyone to believe Mathis’s theories. I suggest they read his papers. They are all in English. You don’t need a PHd to understand what he is trying to convey. Most everyone is qualified. Some logic and understanding of how the world actually works helps.

          Even if his theories about physics are wrong, and I’m not conceding that point because I have no clue, what does that have to do with his paper on Lennon’s death being faked? He is a very talented portrait artist, a logical thinker and a good writer so he explains his theory very well. I would certainly read the paper before making any conclusions about it.

          The paper on the Tate murders is a joy to read as well.

        4. Hey Fish i couldnt help but take one more stab at him after i saw this…

          Miles’ true charlatan self is no better epitomized than in his pretentious “guilde de la blanchepierre” – which is in french “stone white” due to translation. You would think that he might first google his attempt at french before naming his make-believe playhouse backwards. Genius!

          Happy Halloween Guys

      4. Patrick / Fish
        After 3 hours of researching miles I came across those reviews and they said it better than I could. I think he is an arrogant dabbler – not speciAlized in any skill, but average at many.
        I noticed so many errors in his thinking that I began to presume he was doing this as a joke to the gullible or he was a disinfo agent for the ignorant.

        Granted, his topics are interesting and his line of thought is refreshing and abstract, the problem is when you start delving into his theories you can find that many have no bearing with reality.

        These types of people work (intentionally or not) to destroy the truth movment and should be called out so no one propagates his bs and makes the rest of us looks foolish.

      5. I concede that it is over my head, I havent had a reason to do any calculus since 95. Mathis is good, he creates paradoxes by subtly misconstruing or contorting a basic aspect/concept, or by misdirection/diversion finds a hole or gotcha with hypo-pathetical inferences and then claims he has debunked every mathmetician in history.

        Thats called intellectual dishonesty, and thats the gravitas of all his works – exploiting via sleight of hand. Unfortunately to show what he did wrong would take 30 pages – like you said – and I really dont feel up to the challenge, especially since there are no people out there that back his claims. Is that enough to not believe him? Thats up to the individual. For me, I will steer away from his clever interpretations and misdirections due to his proven dishonesty re: math.

        1. “That is the same logic I use with Mathis. Why believe his theories when he is always wrong with his math?”

          no, it’s not. your logic is skewed 180 degrees from mine. You tell the readers to believe some reviewers on amazon or other sites that mathis is full of hot air even though the subject matter is above 99% of peoples heads. I tell them to read the articles that they are capable of dissecting and decide for themselves. These distinctions are significant.

          “Thats called intellectual dishonesty, and thats the gravitas of all his works – exploiting via sleight of hand. Unfortunately to show what he did wrong would take 30 pages – like you said – and I really dont feel up to the challenge, especially since there are no people out there that back his claims. Is that enough to not believe him? Thats up to the individual. For me, I will steer away from his clever interpretations and misdirections due to his proven dishonesty re: math”

          So what exactly are you saying man? So if someone has lied before and they tell you 2+2=4 you assume that is not true? It makes no sense to think like that. A persons interpretation of physics has no bearing on ones thoughts about Charles Manson.

      6. Fish I love you to death man but… Idk.

        you are starting to sound a lot like Mathis. You arent one of his aliases are you?

        Jk – I read all 3 of his sandy hook articles and loved them – minor logical fallacies aside. I also read his extended bio and almost puked at the sheer narcissism. Then I read some more physics articles and I can tell you exactly where he goes wrong on each one, its like buying a car from a fast talking salesman. Given the time to review every word, its becomes easy to find.

        As far as his theories, I bet he is cia. He definitely talks them up enough. Good reads nonetheless.

        1. ha! No, not mathis.

          well you seem pretty convinced and the math is way above my head so I’ll keep it in the back of my mind next time I read an article.

          ha,ha, yeah, he does hold himself in high regard.

      7. I read some of Miles rantings about how stupid Newton and Einstein were and how Feynman got it all wrong. After that I was curious about what wonderful formulas he had discovered. Turned out he hadn’t found them yet…! Good to know.
        Feynman who got it so wrong managed to calculate quantum electrodynamic properties with an impressive accuracy in exact agreement with experiment. By several orders of magnitude better than any other quantitative connection known to man.
        That said I think there is plenty of room for working out a better theoretical geometric framework for physics. When Miles wants to get rid of points in space it doesn’t ring like a crazy idea. He isnt the first to think about it but he might have some new take. Like someone stated above: Refreshing, so despite his presumptuos tone, I would give him the benefit of a doubt, since I havent but briefly browsed his texts.
        His flow of words, with scarcely any formulas reminded me of Arthur Eddington.

      8. Perhaps this is another example of what I keep advising people to do. Read everything. More often than not the conclusions are wrong, but oh what gems we can find in the author’s analysis.

        If we do otherwise where does that lead? “I only read people who are always 100% accurate and everyone agrees?”. Frankly, “agreement” is a poor substitute for logic.

        I am not technically qualified to make too many judgements about technically complex subjects. If I do I have an obligation to educate myself about them. Further, some things are so technically complex that in order to discuss them either your audience has to be equally conversant or you need to write a book.

        if we wish to encourage the sharing of other’s ideas, we shouldn’t create an atmosphere where controversial theories are attacked. It is certainly alright to find fault with the idea, it is another thing to attack the person.

        If he is courageous enough to put his thoughts out there, we should honor that by discussing them on their merits. Admittedly, there are some who have ulterior motives. He doesn’t strike me as one of them.

      9. Now after having read Miles text about the unabomber, I wonder whether Miles might be involved in some kind of double play. Not necessarily of a malevolent kind, maybe the, ‘look a bit crazy precaution’. I won’t specify why I think so here but it’s the overall impression sofar, not this particular document. But I will point out that I suspected immediately after the news broke out about the manifesto in june 1995 that Us intel had foreknowledge about it and controlled the particular publication date. I later felt that an intelligent man like Ted couldnt possibly believe he would get any other effect from killing engineers but to throw them into the arms of our darlings, the under cover bro’s. This makes Miles suspicions seem reasonable.
        I have never suspected Ted to be an agent but I agree with Miles that I found part of the manifesto very confusing. My guess in 1995 was that this whole agenda of targeting engineers was aimed at convincing electronics experts and others in the know to keep their mouths shut about mind control technology. They were meant to be thinking ‘oh yes the unabomber is the kind of individual you would like to secretely mindread’. You know that 1996 was a time when some targeted people were allowed to present their stories in official hearings so they had good timing capturing Ted in april 1996. The reason I thought Us intel had foreknowledge was because of things that happened to me the 20th of june, but I pass over the details. The manifesto was poststamped saturday the 24th of june (in SF I think) and published the 28th. I also got the adress to Ted from the brother but never wrote to him figuring they would never allow a private correspondence. And if he is an innocent scapegoat, it might even make things worse for him. The only thing I wanted to know was when exactly he left his cabin (if that was his point of departure) to travel to the place where he made the copies and then posted them. I was curious about how close in time this was compared to the 20th.

        1. Peter –

          you cant leave us hanging like that – could you maybe drop a hint of what happened 6-20 of 96? What part of the country were you in? I remember quite a few events from 96 – the hale bopp comet being the icing on the cake of what seemed to be a strangely ethereal year.

          As an aside any thoughts on his Schrödinger’s Cat:


      10. Thank you peter! This is becoming a weekly thing – last week it was passio. Nobody looked him up, but he is an admitted high priest of the church of satan – a known cia front. Plus his idol is david icke.
        A while back it was *Halbig – and i took heat for weeks until his clown posse revealed themselves for who they were.

        I dont mind playing devils advocate and countering spurious claims/people, but its up to all of us to at least partially vet the comments (hopefully before posting).

        I think Ric posted a week ago that NO ONE is immune from propaganda or mind control no matter how “aware” they are.

        I know I get a ton of stuff wrong, but I try to take a cursory look around the opposition so Patrick doesnt embarass me. Or James. If James says something to me I know Im in trouble.

        Ok. I’m done.

        * Enjoy the following unquestionable decimation of one wolfgang halbig – by an amateur -like u or me – who has earned his credibility:


        1. Gran1te: What do you mean “nobody looked him [Passio] up”? How could you possibly know that? Passio ADMITS he WAS a Satanist for ten years (not “IS”)…and your point is? I watched two of his very long lectures, the one about Natural Law and one called “Street Smart Spirituality”, and in the 14 hours total lecture time, I could find nothing in them to suggest that he is a CIA shill or working as a disinformation agent. Even if he IS a government operative (which I highly doubt), what, exactly, is misleading about anything in these two lectures? By the way, Icke isn’t Passio’s “idol”, it’s Tsarion (who I don’t like any better than Icke)…but that makes no difference to me. That would be like someone dismissing everything/anything I say because I believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God. SO WHAT? You take these “drive-by” pot shots, and then act as if you’ve proven something. If you think Passio’s a disinfo agent, refute a claim (Lord knows, he makes enough of them), but don’t just try to besmirch his character.

          And just because I like *some* of the messages/theories propounded by people like Mathis and Passio (and James Corbett…don’t forget to rip him to shreds!), doesn’t mean I idolize or “follow” them. That’s ridiculous. And, for the record, I’ve never liked Fetzer or Halbig.

          But please, Gran1te, if you’re going to make a claim, make it clear, make it accurate, AND BACK IT UP! It’s only fair…

      11. Grant1e
        You asked about 20th june -95
        My pedantic nature would compel me to avoid misunderstandings and that would make the task overwhelming. Moreover I ceased to discuss it in 2002 after several deaths occurred. However it is highly on-topic.
        I was Clockwork Orange’d by more modern means than they dare show in that movie. The reason? They were getting irritated because I didnt accept what they wanted me to see as friendly gestures. Matchmaking and that sort of thing. Social engineering. They were impatient and decided to expose to me the fact that they had provided me with a cybernetic control of the erection. Similar to viagra but with proportional control, more like the real thing. I am not sure exactly why they also tortured me for several days until I got suicidal. Maybe they needed to cover the exposed cybernetic technology by having me remitted to a mental asylum so nobody would believe it. And maybe different parties were involved.
        Anyway before this dramatic phase they wanted to compensate me for what they had earlier done to me and I didnt comply. I wanted them to leave me alone. Earlier when I was secretely under serious suspicion of constituting a threat to national security they never gave me a clue. Just patiently spying for three years to see if they could uncover any secret terrorist network or catch me barehanded.
        The only reason I know they had been after me is they eventually provided the clues one after the other, like Miles they like the namegame. I dont blame them for being a bit curious but why cant they just talk with a suspect to sort things out?
        Answer is some of the careers are more rewarding if they dont.
        There really were some suspicious circumstances but it would have been easy to explain.
        I also had a time marker from the end of the cold war when I woke up with a strange bulge on the back of my arm and with an extreme and unexplicable pain in the neck. Much later I realized that this most likely was the time when they had me implanted.
        This is a rough picture leaving out many details that would make it easier to understand the dilemma the authorities put themselves in. The subject really bugs me and I prefer to discuss the topic in a more general and less personal manner.

        1. Totally understand. Thats alot to swallow, please forgive my incredulity, but what you just said is pretty wild. I will respect your wish to keep it general, but if you ever have any words of wisdom or tactics of how you were even able to survive such a situation – please do. Maybe it could help someone else who can’t speak on the web.

          Which makes me wonder, do you feel safe posting on websites, what with everything you know, coupled with the snowden affirmations, it would seem to be dangerous. I have had to bite my tongue several times because I’m not sure if disclosing certain things would help more than it would hurt. Damned brave of you and dino and evergone else who can expose the misdeeds of this runaway police state.

      12. Grant1e
        In my particular case it would have been easy to get through it all if I had complied and swallowed my pride. And maybe praised them like you praise your maker. This because too many normal people among the authorities knew about some aspects of it.
        For most people who are targeted there is no option like that. They are just considered mentally ill and nobody will stretch out a hand to help them unless they accept the verdict of DSM.
        So my advice would be to act like a small animal when the herd comes thundering and run to safety and keep your head down, looking stupid and inconspicious. If you wanna be a hero you’re on your own.
        Its not safe to come forward and I do observe strange symptoms probably everytime, but I dont know what causes it. It may after all be natural causes only there seems to be a correlation.
        I never raise the issue, but its good that it is brought up. In particular I wish to stress that implant technology should be at the focus of attention. And not silly patents of a variety of ineffective methods. In about 1981 one journal about artificial organs suddenly branched out into a version labeled ‘official’ implying that there was a classified version also. Before the branching it published various types of biological fuel cells for powering artificial and electronically powered entitities. One might suspect that the classified version would publish more evolved versions of powersources, maybe similar to living tissue.
        There are tons of newer articles in the electronically stored journals in research libraries but I dont intend to spend time on that myself. Like I said the subject really bugs me.

    3. I hope the video gets better. I just listened to john brockman’s BS story about playing the banjo in central park blah, blah’ blah. who buys this crap?

      I highly suggest people read some miles mathis before spending time on this video.

      Speaking of Mathis, I never got even one comment after I posted the link to his paper on Lennon. http://mileswmathis.com/lennon.pdf

      Growing up on the beatles as most of us did I expected that people would be either as blown away that lennon is still alive or irritated and unconvinced by the paper. I have dual monitors at my desk and I watched the movie as I read the paper-it was awesome! For people who enjoy the mystery and satisfaction that I get with some of these “face matching” scenarios (like the “Greenbergs” and Annie Hadad) this paper is a real treat.

      1. Btw, the FBI started confiscating Lennon fingerprints shortly after the movie was released. Well worth seeking out and watching if you have any interested in Lennon & The Beatles.

      2. You Guys really need to read this. I posted on the Gun Control blog here but no ones interested in that topic. Sorry if I’m pushing it but I think it’s a really good read.
        Here it is:

        Putin to western elites:-play-time-is-over

        A Must Read Speech from Putin. Very long. I’ve included some excerpts out of context. It’s worth your time to read. He nails the rich elites with their new world order and all the arrogance and folly.

        Most people in the English-speaking parts of the world missed Putin’s speech at the Valdai conference in Sochi a few days ago, and, chances are, those of you who have heard of the speech didn’t get a chance to read it, and missed its importance.
        (For your convenience, I am pasting in the full transcript of his speech below.) Western media did their best to ignore it or to twist its meaning. Regardless of what you think or don’t think of Putin (like the sun and the moon, he does not exist for you to cultivate an opinion) this is probably the most important political speech since Churchill’s “Iron Curtain” speech of March 5, 1946.

        The Cold War ended, but it did not end with the signing of a peace treaty with clear and transparent agreements on respecting existing rules or creating new rules and standards. This created the impression that the so-called ‘victors’ in the Cold War had decided to pressure events and reshape the world to suit their own needs and interests. If the existing system of international relations, international law and the checks and balances in place got in the way of these aims, this system was declared worthless, outdated and in need of immediate demolition.

        Pardon the analogy, but this is the way nouveaux riches behave when they suddenly end up with a great fortune, in this case, in the shape of world leadership and domination. Instead of managing their wealth wisely, for their own benefit too of course, I think they have committed many follies.

        A unilateral diktat and imposing one’s own models produces the opposite result. Instead of settling conflicts it leads to their escalation, instead of sovereign and stable states we see the growing spread of chaos, and instead of democracy there is support for a very dubious public ranging from open neo-fascists to Islamic radicals.

        Why do they support such people? They do this because they decide to use them as instruments along the way in achieving their goals but then burn their fingers and recoil. I never cease to be amazed by the way that our partners just keep stepping on the same rake, as we say here in Russia, that is to say, make the same mistake over and over.
        They once sponsored Islamic extremist movements to fight the Soviet Union. Those groups got their battle experience in Afghanistan and later gave birth to the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.

        The West if not supported, at least closed its eyes, and, I would say, gave information, political and financial support to international terrorists’ invasion of Russia (we have not forgotten this) and the Central Asian region’s countries. Only after horrific terrorist attacks were committed on US soil itself did the United States wake up to the common threat of terrorism. Let me remind you that we were the first country to support the American people back then, the first to react as friends and partners to the terrible tragedy of September 11.

        First there was the military operation in Iraq, then in Libya, which got pushed to the brink of falling apart. Why was Libya pushed into this situation? Today it is a country in danger of breaking apart and has become a training ground for terrorists.
        Only the current Egyptian leadership’s determination and wisdom saved this key Arab country from chaos and having extremists run rampant. In Syria, as in the past, the United States and its allies started directly financing and arming rebels and allowing them to fill their ranks with mercenaries from various countries. Let me ask where do these rebels get their money, arms and military specialists? Where does all this come from? How did the notorious ISIL manage to become such a powerful group, essentially a real armed force?

        The measures taken against those who refuse to submit are well-known and have been tried and tested many times. They include use of force, economic and propaganda pressure, meddling in domestic affairs, and appeals to a kind of ‘supra-legal’ legitimacy when they need to justify illegal intervention in this or that conflict or toppling inconvenient regimes. Of late, we have increasing evidence too that outright blackmail has been used with regard to a number of leaders. It is not for nothing that ‘big brother’ is spending billions of dollars on keeping the whole world, including its own closest allies, under surveillance.

        Let’s ask ourselves, how comfortable are we with this, how safe are we, how happy living in this world, and how fair and rational has it become? Maybe, we have no real reasons to worry, argue and ask awkward questions? Maybe the United States’ exceptional position and the way they are carrying out their leadership really is a blessing for us all, and their meddling in events all around the world is bringing peace, prosperity, progress, growth and democracy, and we should maybe just relax and enjoy it all?

        It’s a VERY long speech and worth every word. I know how some of you feel about Alex Jones but this is where it is posted:


      3. Fish,
        I read the entire Mathis Lennon piece when you posted it a while back. I never commented because I saw how so many people were praising his works.

        i’ve been an avid Lennon fan my entire life.The actor looks good playing Lennon era 1968. I watched him sing some Lennon songs in a video from 2006 on youtube.

        He looks exactly like Lennon 1968 white album days but he can’t sing Lennon very well. The tribute band guys sound more like Lennon.

        But he is a dead ringer playing Lennon in that era but that was 40 years ago.

        Sorry, but I’m 100% positive He is not Lennon.

        1. Ha,ha. It’s him!
          What are the chances that a lennon impersonator would have the same nose, moles in the same spots, the same teeth, and matching veins in his hand and sound exactly like the aged john lennon? he sounds exactly like the 80’s lennon. what about all the memorabilia? do impersonators make enough to own all that gear? seriously, what are the odds?
          Even if you don’t come to the same conclusion, was it not worth the read to ponder all that Sgt. Pepper stuff? He blew that out of the water.

          The fingerprints? It’s him! HIM!

          Thanks for commenting Ric, I have been wanting to talk about this for a while!

      4. Fish,
        yea the matching moles is very strange. but as I said he looks like Lennon 40 years ago. If the cops really finger printed him do you know what the results were?

        And yes, its a very intriguing read, down the road of that Dave guys piece on the late ’60’s rock bands in Hollywood and Laurel Cyn,

        My favorite part of the Lennon piece is knowing Paul McCartney gets all his copyrights back starting in 2016..ha

      5. All right, fish, I’ll jump in to this one–just for you.

        I’ve been following the Paul/Faul theory pretty closely, for years. I have some very good links I can share on that one, if you like. I am absolutely convinced Paul died (was killed?) in 1966, which is why they never appeared in public again, and their music, which from then on was 100% studio produced–a first–changed completely. Paul is inches taller than Paul, among other obvious things.

        Doing that kind of research, one comes upon other stories of imposters, doubles, and replacements. And John is one of them. This is a good link: http://www.whale.to/b/lennon_h.html.

        Al Capp, the cartoonist, visited the “bed-in,” and scoffed that the man playing Lenin in bed with Ono could not even put on a decent Liverpudlian accent. For instance. The theory is that there were numerous Johns over time.

        So when I read the Mathis piece, I had to combine the two in my mind. I believe he makes a convincing case, so far as it goes, but it’s likely that the guy who went into hiding is not the guy who got his start in Hamburg whorehouses with the rest of the lads.

        I like to believe that I have represented before this MHB community a man with a rational mind, who is always prepared to give evidence for what I believe when I say things that seem possibly outrageous. Sometimes I openly state that I’m speculating. But THIS material takes me far outside my comfort zone in communicating to MHBs teeming throngs. The evidence for this stuff is very solid, but it requires considerable time to examine, and it is generally considered so wacky as to not be worthy of consideration by even the seasoned conspiracy examiner. So I could, in fact, lose my following by doing you this favor, fish–you owe me one.

        That said, I only state it publicly because I have sifted the evidence and concluded that the Beatles were taken over by the mind controllers, and their members replaced, for the purpose of social engineering. The early Beatles were a completely different phenomenon than the later Beatles. If Mathis is correct that these people all have escape clauses in their contracts, it does not apply to the innocent artists who stumble into really influential roles on the biggest stage. They are apt to be killed and replaced, if they will not agree to be made illuminati mind control slaves. It is the replacements, or the originals who were MKUltra from the start (Jim Morrison, for instance) who get that deal that allows them to walk away. At least, that’s how it seems to me as I understand the phenomenon today.

        1. ha! I’ve ruined your reputation!

          It is a fun subject at least. A nice change from some of this other stuff. I find The whole Faul thing is quite conceivable. I have only seen a really bad movie on it, and the video is obvious bs but the idea he was replaced with a new paul seems really believable to me.

          Mathis speculation about Michael Jackson having a double do his last tours seems totally believable to me too. These “stars” are a money making product. Why would they want to turn down all that money just because they don’t feel like going on the road and doing a hundred shows? Just hire an understudy and then have them do it. I bet a lot of stars do that.

      6. Fish, this was the first time I’ve read his stuff. He is VERY interesting. i like his style. I’ve said before that it is never wise to make “heroes” of anybody, even on the internet.

        If one is not looking for a “guru”, one isn’t disappointed when something they say doesn’t “ring true”. For my money he’s just putting it out there. He even says that he expects not to be believed by most.

        What’s wrong with that? Nothing, in my book. I grew up with The Beatles too, and liked them very much, but they are not “heroes” so I don’t worry too much about other’s opinions of them or anything related to them.

        I think he did a masterful job. In fact, I intend to read all his stuff just to see what else he has to say. He writes well, is artistic and logical. I’m fascinated with the study on Sgt. Peppers.

        I’m not totally convinced that “Mark” is “John”, but……who knows. I get the logic. I agree that he sounds more like an Englishman trying to sound American than vice versa. Still, it isn’t “exactly” right. I suppose a person could attribute that to age, of course. John had a hard edge.

        Another problem is that “Imagine” is not a “Beatles” song. It sounded strange to hear him ask “what’s your favorite Beatles song?”. It would be an odd thing for “John” to say.

        Still, the part about “Intelligence” and the music industry is intriguing. In fact, if it bothers anyone (it does me), an artist would not necessarily have to know who was pulling the strings at the top to be involved. So the speculation that Tara was “promoted” and “admired” for it by the boys is a little weak to me.

        The problem that I have with a lot of these theories is that most imply that the musicians somehow knowingly cooperated with dark powers. My suspicion is that they were led to do things thinking they were connected in less sinister ways. I do believe they were manipulated.

        I have to admit, it would be VERY “John-like” to be playing music (his own), out in the open and having a laugh at us all. There is much speculation about Paul as well, maybe more. I wouldn’t rule that out either, based on what I’ve read.

        I think Mathis is a good researcher and sees the interconnectedness of things. I admire that. His conclusions are his own. Nothing wrong with that either. He did a good job building a case. I’d love to see a comparison of those finger prints.

        1. I’m glad you see him the same way I do. I’ve most of his papers in the last few months and I’m kinda itchin’ for a new one to read.

          You have been quiet recently.

      7. Patrick, you’ve no doubt read some of the same sites that I have. I tend to look at it musically. My suspicion is that they were sucked in like any aspiring musicians would be. Later, the novelty began to wear off, or maybe they became uncooperative.

        I don’t for a minute doubt the dark underpinnings of it . Even the replacements may not have fully understood who was pulling the strings. There are many reasons for my suspicions.

        There was an obvious radical change in the music with the new “Paul”. The shift to piano and a much more melodic approach to the songs. Whether he was killed or just made his escape is more unclear. I’m very sure that the current one is not the one we started with.

        In the case of John, I can see how that could have been done. After all the Chapman story is every bit as unbelievable as anything else we’ve discussed here. It isn’t as easy to work through as we may think because there was literally NOTHING of them personally that wasn’t controlled by publicists. The best insights come from friends and those are not all that reliable.

        I think Mathis did a great job. As usual, there are a few things I find not all that conclusive. What seems to have attracted him to it in the first place makes it unusual enough to deserve looking at. I mean, really! Making a movie like that and leaving all those “beatlesque” clues? That would be the work of someone very skilled by anyone’s measure.

        If it were just a movie about someone’s obsession it would be interesting. That sort of obsession would be a mental illness. On the other hand, if it really were John, it would certainly fit what we know of his personality.

        I may take some time and see just what I can discover about this “Mark”. I have quite a bit of old musical equipment too. I have modern stuff as well. What Mathis says is more or less true about it. It isn’t “uncommon” (with the exception of the keyboard), however. I don’t know what “John’s” setup was. I know that “Paul” used Studor eight tracks, not Akai.

        I have no idea how much an “impersonator” makes. It would take quite a bit of money to buy all that but he had over 60 years to accumulate it. I also don’t know if everything he does is acoustic. That wouldn’t be very “John-like” either. He played acoustic, but he was a rocker.

        Judging by Mathis’ analysis this was a bit of a stunt. If it really was “John” he could certainly afford to pull it off. I could see him doing this and living out the rest of his days “hiding in plain sight”, everybody thinking him an obsessive “character”. On the other hand, he wasn’t exactly “modest” either. Something tells me he would want to take credit for it.

      8. This conspiracy theory/theories about the Beatles is what makes me even more suspicious about Miles. Its an evolved version of John Colemans nonsens(the latter says he is a former MI6 agent) about the Beatles being unable to play anything and being created by the Thavistock Institute(a british psyops organization funded by the Rockefellers)
        No doubt the Beatles may have come in handy for various reasons and got some help in the marketing process, but they simply had talent for making hits. I don’t deny that various CIA covert operations could use rock music in particular when it strolls along into drug-propaganda.
        But wasnt there simply an overlap between what these newly rich stars desired and the needs of those CIA-agendas often also involved in the distribution. Long before rich people didnt need the Beatles to abuse opium and the variations.
        And the argument that it isnt John because he didnt sing so well in some live performance is not convincing. He was older and maybe not so prestigious, maybe casual about how he stood or sat. And the earlier videos were perhaps just mimed using sound from a much repeated studio recording with the same group.
        I think you guys will detract from your credibility if you buy those conspiracy theories. Especially since you have dared scrutinize things like the Sandy Hook seemingly successfully exposing it as fraud, you ought to be weary about turning everything into conspiracy.
        John Lennon was considered to be a very dangerous opponent to the USG. The guy threatened to seriously challenge them by way of his influence over young people. You can arrive on the death list for less. That they would kill him is no more surprising than the murder of MLK, Malcolm X etc

        1. “I think you guys will detract from your credibility if you buy those conspiracy theories. Especially since you have dared scrutinize things like the Sandy Hook seemingly successfully exposing it as fraud, you ought to be weary about turning everything into conspiracy.”

          Well, it’s a good thing I never had any credibility. But seriously, are we pandering to cretins now? Someone has made it this far, gotten to this website and read all of our comments but now they are going back into the matrix because we were talking about the beatles? Come on man. If we lost someone from that then it wasn’t really much of a loss. kinda like picking rotten apples from the ground.

          I can’t speak for others but I have come to the conclusion since sandy hook that most of the things ever presented to me as real were fake. Does my position create discord with the general public? yes, that is the reason they do these events so sloppily and release things like the robbie parker footage. Even so, you reach a point where your silence becomes dishonesty and the other position is untenable. I am sick of walking on my tippytoes.

          In ’07 I was working with a group on the ron paul campaign. I was still a huge alex jones fan at the time and was way more caustic than I am now. My friend was always tiptoeing around and I wanted to be more direct. He said “you can’t feed steak to a baby.” I said ,”sure you can.” you chop it up real small and shove it up their ass. sure, they will crap most of it out but some of it still gets digested.” I think we were both right but he is still treading water in the republican party in 2014 and I wonder if it has done any good at all. People still pick and choose the truths they want to accept. I for one am sick of all the games. I don’t know what the right answer is but I am finished trying to convince people of anything. I just speak my mind and give my opinion when it’s not asked for. I don’t really know how I’m perceived and I don’t really care. They’re the ones in the dark, not me.

        2. Great post. I’m with you. If we can’t discuss conspiracy here, where can we?

          Back to the Miles Mathis debate (I’m on jury duty and have had my hands full): At the risk of speaking out of turn or for anyone else, I say it’s foolish to suggest that any of us holds the man up as an idol. I haven’t seen any indication of that. I have not (nor plan to) waded into his science/math-related stuff, as I wouldn’t know if he was blowing hot air or not. That stuff is over my head…and out of my range of interest. His other work, though, I like. I don’t agree with everything he says, not by a long shot, but it doesn’t matter. In many cases, he’s offered an alternative way of looking at an event (or cultural phenomenon, or whatever). Does he make some mistakes in his reasoning? Are his conclusions misleading? I’d be more than happy to entertain reasonable and specific disputes of his logic, facts, or conclusions, but no one that I can find have given any.

          Like Gran1te claims to have, I did my own digging into Miles’ reputation. I’d bet I saw all the same stuff Gran1te did. I read nothing that convinced me of anything other than the fact that Mathis is hated by some people who aren’t shy about saying so. There is NO PROOF that Mathis creates shadow accounts; in fact, Mathis has been publicly accused of doing this, and he denies it. I certainly could find no evidence of this, outside unsubstantiated accusations. Maybe time will prove that he’s a liar and a wacko; maybe it will ultimately prove his theories definitively right, or maybe wrong. But I certainly don’t see very many people but the kind of time, effort, and thought…with so little recompense…into these issues as Miles does. So that’s my two cents’ worth.

      9. Yes Peter, it’s a dicy way to flirt with a loss of credibility, as I mentioned to fish. But as I also said, the evidence is so overwhelming (in the case of Paul/Faul) that those who gather hear regularly should be aware of it. The link I provided for John’s replacement is also very compelling. So, having put my foot in the dangerous water, I might as well wade in deep.

        Here is a blog on Paul/Faul a young woman has been steadily maintaining for five years (I am sending you to the most recent entry, called The Tragical History of PID-Part 1): http://plasticmacca.blogspot.com/2014_10_01_archive.html Be sure to listen to the podcast with Jim Fetzer, which comes right after; it is particularly interesting, because I have heard other podcasts with him on the subject in the past, where he is very skeptical. He’s a Beatles fanatic, of course. Well, this woman, Tina Foster, has him convinced. If you go back through the archives (I suggest you do), you will find a very great deal of solid research, all well presented.

        Here is an exhaustive study of the photographic/film evidence: http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/fc1.html It is many pages deep, so follow the link to the next at the bottom of each page. This is a nice, bite-sized way to work your way through it all without being overwhelmed. I sent this one, incidentally, to a friend of mine, a professional photographer who has taken many hours of formal training in Photoshop, and he was absolutely persuaded that Paul was replaced by Faul–and this guy does

      10. Note: Somehow I hit send before I was finished–and it’s in moderation, so this will only make sense once James releases it. Continuing…

        This friend of mine absolutely hates entertaining conspiracy speculation. He sees the obvious difference between the two men, and he said to me that it would have been impossible to fake all those photographs in the days before Photoshop or image-processing computers of any kind.

        Now, why is this worthy of the risk of discussing it openly? The music industry has been largely taken over by Tavistock/CIA/MI5/MI6, and that process began with the Beatles. The power of the new forms of popular music to induce mind control was recognized, and used. The Beatles of Love, Love Me Do and I Want To Hold Your Hand had such amazing consciousness transforming effects on teenagers that Intelligence recognized the value in harnessing that power. But by harnessing it meant bending it. Think of the album cover for Rubber Soul, a sort of distorted image, as just the start of what was to come. Of course, they set up many other bands after that from scratch, and tried many variations. But the Beatles were the gem in the crown in those early years, and their sort-of wholesomeness mixed with just enough that was “off” to put Parents ill-at-ease was just perfect as a jumping off point. Of course, they had to be steadily corrupted if it was going to work (Disney these days does this all the time to its young stars, turning nice girls into sluts).

        It’s all about shaping the public mind, and the Beatles were too important to allow any balky members to back out. It was a machine now, and they were indispensable cogs in it. They were obviously joyous in the early years, and brooding and moody in the latter period, even as they were becoming the biggest stars in the world. Odd, that.

      11. Fish, yes, I’ve been quiet recently. Sometimes I just don’t feel inclined to add anything. Sometimes I just sense a “disconnect” and rather than sound like I’m a “life coach”, I keep my mouth shut.

        I’ve said many times here that I’m not inclined to “pick teams” when discussions seem to go that way. I’m also not a fan of shutting anyone up either. If someone feels strongly enough to post a comment, it’s fine with me. I neither have to agree with it or check it for orthodoxy.

        Regarding Miles Mathis, he’s interesting. I don’t agree with everything he says,, not would I be likely to. In fact, I can’t think of one writer that I ever totally agreed with.

        I do believe that there are those who are disinfo agents. I don’t think he’s one of them. Whatever inspires him to study and write about a topic is solely known to him. I too find some topics more interesting than others.

        Most of all, they are “thought provoking”. I like that. I like ideas and I like to discuss things. It is truly remarkable when I run across anyone who shares some of my thoughts. That’s what I like about this site.

        Miles’ discussion of Lennon is appropriate material in that it may show just how deceptive things really are. Patrick is the first person I’ve run across that echoed my beliefs with regard to the Beatles.

        Is that “important”? All by itself, perhaps not, but it is instructive if one is interested in the sort of world we live in. For my money it is….information. The motives behind it are very speculative.

        I don’t mind a trip down the rabbit hole every so often. Just like life, sometimes there are endless possibilities. There is a danger in taking ourselves so seriously that we are afraid to discuss less “meaningful” topics.

        I read Miles’ paper on Manson. It too is interesting. It has “holes” in it (in my opinion), but it was well done. I don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater , even if he’s been eating “steak”.

        Sometimes we need to “take a step back”, and realize that all we are doing is reinforcing the conclusions we’ve already reached. I love a good mystery and it is fun to debunk these psyops. I think it’s fair to say that we’re beyond the point of arguing whether they exist or not.

        We live in a society where every home contains a box that defines “reality”. It is reinforced at the theater. Entertainment is no longer entertainment. It is conditioning. No one has to convince me.

        That doesn’t mean that art has died. You simply have to go and look for it. It doesn’t arrive all tied up with a bow through the “magic box” or over your car radio.

        Trust me, that was the problem with “popular” music in the 60’s as it is now that we’ve “moved on”. People are wonderfully creative. That is a trait that those who seek to control abhor. It isn’t useful to them. It is difficult to control and unpredictable.

        So, do I see a connection between “replacement Beatles” and Sandy Hook? Why, yes, I do. Both are manipulations. If one doesn’t wish to be mesmerized by what is “presented” to them, one has to learn to look beneath the platform when the magician does his thing. It’s what separates the chumps from the champs.

  2. Call it what you will; mind control, opinion manipulation, social control, thought control, engineering consent… I am becoming convinced that this is the cornerstone subject within the Alternative Media, Truth Movement (as hijacked as it is). This is not new, in fact this ‘reality’ is ancient. It is how the few control the many. What is different today versus all of recorded history is technology. We’ve gone from mass media to individualized media in less than 100 years. From newsprint, radio, movie, TV, to the Internet. Not only can the controllers individualize their programming but they can now get immediate feedback on it’s effectiveness.

    We are all under layers and layers of mind control. And don’t be fooled by thinking that because you’re ‘aware’ it has no ‘effect’ on you. Those aware have been tricked into focusing on ‘individual’ mind control. Which has it’s uses. But the real power comes from group mind control, mass mind control. I would highly encourage you to read “Propaganda” by Edward Bernays. Real propaganda is covert. The purpose of propaganda is to shape your opinion without you realizing it. To create an ‘idea’ within your mind that you think is your own but what actually planted.

    I recently stumbled upon ‘Operation Mind Control’ and downloaded the PDF. I much prefer reading a real book. But refuse to do business with Amazon. I guess I’ll knuckle down and read the PDF.

    1. http://smellslikehumanspirit.com/edward-bernays-propaganda
      it is a fine line that alternative media walks. Guy Evans is, as is James Tracey at a level needed to plum the depth and breadth of important dynamics at play.
      and for an update (2012) OYMC held in Denmark had many informative speakers who are plugged in with valuable insights on the matrix and those complicit with implementation. Lars Drudgaard is a good listen.
      All human beings unlike those who torment or tremour in this psychotronic environment.

      1. Massa, good to see you again. I have to ask – could you take a little extra time to arrange your comments into coherent sentences, please?

        It seems that you are dumping the contents of several frames of mind at once, which is interesting, but very hard to follow for those of us that don’t know you.

        its evident you have something to say, it would benefit us all if you could slow down and focus – maybe one idea per post?

        That said, I read your previous reference to fullerenes in its entirety, but could not glean what their significance was – care to elaborate?

  3. Thank you for bringing into the picture these books from the past. I haven’t been on the truth scene for long so am unaware of past “warnings” to us in the present. This type of information gives us facts and figures to dialog with those that are still disbelievers and think we are living in a fairytale, or just emotionally hysterical. Keep up the good work.

      1. No they don’t believe a word they’re saying. The Guy at the 2:00 mark can’t even keep a straight face when he says no one believes these people(sandy hook parents) and they can just Email a response or send a “proxy” haha to explain their side of the story for the panel. What a joke.

    1. What a bunch of bull crap! The families that have been globe trotting on Air Force one against gun rights and are in Washington State now for their big anti gun vote, want privacy? Who would of ever thought, the state that has an anti-gun vote on the ballet next Tuesday, would of had a school shooting last week? And the school prince was no less the perpetrator? He was perfect in every way, except his mickey mouse toy pistol gun jammed, and still he managed to kill three and critically injure 3 others.

      It is always possible children died, but it is all so contrived.

  4. The mind manipulators by Alan Scheflin and Edward Opton from 1976 concludes after analyzing a host of material that they dont think the effect of hypnotic mind control is strong enough to explain the lone nut manchurian candidate scenario(in my words). They say the reason for manipulating these people is to create a credible scapegoat, while the shootings are carried out by experts. But that was written before several lone nut events, like that regarding John Lennon and RReagan.
    I think its partly true what the CIA said that their research wasnt successful. But only in the sense that one particular method didnt have a high success-probability. If you use several independent methods on the same target, including the method of profiling, selecting a particularly inducible individual, the resulting probability may be raised significantly.

  5. my contention that the purient troglodytes at the top of our food chain not only want your body and mind, but your very soul. the human spirit resideds in the mind.
    Like ghouls, cretins feed on the human spirit.

    we don’t know the half of the evil.

  6. It is official folks, a large proportion of the citizens are totally insane. The trick and treating tradition, may have been a bad idea from the start, and has proven to be just ridiculous with the dangers of weirdos doing strange if not dangerous things and parents forcing little ones to beg deep into the night .

    Live on a circle, not unlike other areas in the past, where folks felt it was safe to dump their kids off and then to scoop them up at the end to go the next ‘rich’ spot. Even have witnessed parents remotely monitoring from their cars, say trick or treat, say thank you. I sure did not need remote monitoring in my day to know those 4 simple words!

    Times have changed, and perhaps the neighborhood has a lot of elderly, who can no longer afford the ridiculous cost of candy, and most houses remain dark, which I suppose is a blessing in that we are no longer deemed one of those ‘rich’ circles.

    I do turn the lights on and welcome the neighborhood children, but turn it off maybe around 7:30, when it is dark. Try to be friendly, and the last Dad? carrying maybe a 1 year old like a sack of potatoes, who seemed despondent, complained he was exhausted. You know what? You and that baby can just stay in that car and he will never know the difference. Really you want candy for the baby? Have half a mind to call child protective services! Of course did not say those last two things out loud.

    And here we have a 3 year old and a 16 year old tragically run over at 10:00 at night, on a very busy road, lived there and it would be a non-choice for trick or treating, and someone still has their lights on inviting kids in?


  7. Thank you peter! This is becoming a weekly thing – last week it was passio. Nobody looked him up, but he is an admitted high priest of the church of satan – a known cia front. Plus his idol is david icke.
    A while back it was *Halbig and i took heat for weeks until his clown posse revealed themselves for who they were.

    I dont mind playing devils advocate and countering spurious claims/people, but its up to all of us to at least partially vet the comments (hopefully before posting).

    I think Ric posted a week ago that NO ONE is immune from propaganda or mind control no matter how “aware” they are.

    I know I’m rarely right, but I try to take a cursory look around the opposition so Patrick doesnt embarass me. Or James. If James says something to me I know Im in trouble.

    Ok. I’m done.

    * Enjoy the following unquestionable decimation of one wolfgang halbig – by an amateur like u or me who has earned his credibility:


  8. Junglesurfer on YT has done quite a lot of work on this Faul/Paul business. Thanks for links. I am going to look into this further. Not too much surprises me anymore.

  9. Patrick, In order to break out of the endless loop of comments, I’ll “break tradition” and add my (hopefully last) comment here.

    You may or may not realize that you said a mouthful with your depiction of “The Lads” as they started out and the transformation to what they became. These were not “intellectual giants”. They banged around in seedy Hamburg and took speed to stay awake.

    They were originally pretty talented. They became VERY talented. Having been a lifelong musician I can state that we tend to improve (hopefully), but it generally doesn’t happen like that.

    When you couple that with the life changes, i.e., a new wife, a sudden interest in the arts, a switch to piano, it begins to make sense. The originals were not good fodder for the handlers plans.

    Musically, they suddenly became very advanced. While it is not impossible for someone to learn these skills, it takes time. Just as “Faul’s” sudden relationship with Linda Eastman seemed to amaze his closest friends, “John’s” dropping of his old (somewhat plain) wife for Yoko Ono was ascribed to his sudden desire to be thought an art aficionado.

    As a little thought experiment, could it be that Miles is really looking at “Fohn”? John was hard-edged, even in his “peace activist” days. He didn’t come across as a “sweet guy”. He is known to be rather cruel at times.

    The one certainty we can take from these explorations is that things are not as they are claimed. Even the alleged hatred of John by J. Edgar Hoover is nonsense in my book. He was in a position to take care of anyone he truly wanted to be rid of.

    They were used as a distraction. “Bread and circuses”. After all, what influence did the citizenry in general have over the Viet Nam war? None! It was universally despised and openly discussed for years. It had no influence on those in power.

    I was in London when Abby Road came out. It seemed there wasn’t a shop front anywhere that didn’t have copies plastered to the windows. I’ve never seen anything like it before or after. So, they were influential, just not with the PTB.

    1. All very true, lophatt. One thing I’d like to know more about is the history of 100% studio production. I believe it started with the Beatles, although I think Brian Wilson was going there about the same time (Don Was’ excellent documentary I just Wasn’t Made For These Times gives some real insight into Wilson’s genius). But Pet Sounds is more or less conventional musically, in the end. He conceived it in his head and could only get it onto tape by highly producing it in the studio, but it sounded like regular music when he was done.

      All right. Zappa, too. I read his book, and he talked about Les Paul, and the invention of a machine that can create artificial echo, which completely transformed what could be done with recorded sound–and Zappa was on that like a duck on a junebug.

      But the thing is, since no one had done these things before, since the endless possibilities were yet to be discovered, how did the Beatles get it down so well, so suddenly? Sargent Pepper is insanely complex musically. I doubt that anyone listening at the time could truly grasp what they were hearing, much less describe how it was done.

      That’s just my outsider curiosity, of course. I didn’t discover the Beatles until they had already broken up, much less know anything about what went into making recordings. I was just a little kid at the time.

      1. I think the key to the whole Faul/Paul /Beatles mystery is the strange death of Mal Evans, who was shot by the LAPD (isn’t that a coincidence?). Apparently writing a tell-all book, all of his papers were taken at the time of his death.

        It seems many of these events all have a key element that is either destroyed or disappeared: 9/11: Building 7, RFK: the lady with the polka-dot dress, Beatles: Mal Evans. Uncovering these elements and you probably would uncover the truth behind each of these events.

      2. I was not too convinced about the Faul/Paul theory but then I read about Mal’s untimely demise and it really raised my suspicions about the Beatles being manipulated. Also, Heather’s sudden divorce from P(f)aul had a number of odd occurrences to it as if she finally found out the truth and she decided she wanted no more of the hoax.

      3. Patrick, “sound enhancement” has been around since at least electrified music. Early examples being the “spring reverb”, “plate reverb”, tape echo, etc.. Most, if not all of these are not digitized.

        I am fond of saying that if Bach had had them available he would have used them. It is interesting that you mention this. I was thinking about it after I wrote my little ditty last night.

        Doing something “live” is different from doing something in the studio. Sometimes they compliment each other. When I write I use various methods. I’m not sure I have a favorite. A piece of music often “evolves” from a simple idea. The inspiration comes from many sources.

        We use terms like “talented” to describe people we like. I am careful not to denigrate people simply because my taste does not allow me to enjoy their music. There is music that is “technically wonderful” but awful to listen to, and vice versa.

        One of the “clues” to the Beatles replacement is the retreat into the studio. They simply stopped performing. During this time they had some of the finest recording engineers around working with them. It is likely that they learned by doing and got to a point where they could experiment in their own studios whenever they liked.

        To me the business of recording is rather grueling and I’d much rather perform live. While there are various ways to do this the most common is to simply tape everyone’s part individually and the rest is up to the engineer. Once the master is made it can be modified any way that the engineer likes.

        The various sound enhancements are overdubbed. They aren’t played like that on the master. When playing “live” either your sound engineer adds them or you control them yourself through pedals or presets.

        What you have with the Beatles (in those days) are various snippets of song ideas woven together. They made little “bridge pieces”‘ to transition from one tune to another. Then they lavished oodles of sound reinforcement on to them. How much of that was the engineer and how much was their idea is unknown.

        In a sense they are responsible for the final product. Much of this would have been very difficult, if not impossible, to perform live. The Beach Boys stuff is very different. It is true that he explored with recording tricks. They were all about harmony. Zappa is another story altogether.

        I have a few tapes of “Faul” with “Wings” getting ready for a tour. He is very knowledgable. It is an entirely different circumstance to score for an orchestra or to chart and refine pieces for live performances.

        There are certainly examples of various bands “getting lost” in recording. It can either be a valuable tool or a trap. Personally I don’t see the value in producing something that can’t be played live. But that’s just my taste.

      4. Anne, every account of this that I’ve read is different. Some say it was an “air rifle”, some a “rifle”. “Badfinger” was actually produced by Paul McCartney.

        A “producer” is not the same thing as a “roadie”, which is essentially what he was. There isn’t much use for a roadie when you stop performing. He became one of dozens of “hangers on” that followed them individually and collectively all over the place.

        Being cremated within a day or two is strange. I don’t know what to think about the “honorary LA Sheriff” business. There is something to the “entertainment genre” that seems to get details completely skewed.

        Maybe its just that so much of it is based on friend of a friend testimony. George Harrison sort of described him as the man servant.

    2. Knowing what we know now, it is not surprising that the radio and music industry was used as a propaganda tool in the 50’s and 60’s and still today.

      The younger folks may not be aware that tv in these years only had 3 channels, the programming was not very entertaining nor was the reception. Remember thinking my friends who were the first to get color tvs must of been millionaires, although a lot of shows were still broadcast in black and white.

      To put it all into perspective, Fox News was launched in 1996 as the first competitor to CNN and that was really not that long ago.

      In other news of total brainwashing, believe the global warming alarmists have finally lost their steam!


      1. Skirt, what we call “entertainment” is usually “marketing”. It may be to sell a product or an agenda. From the beginning TEE VEE was selling lifestyles.

        It’s “success” is directly proportional to its usefulness. Movies are another form. For that matter, plays do to the same thing to a lesser degree. I think it is amazing how most people think that the advertising was the key. It wasn’t.

        Those who watch TV uncritically are doomed. It doesn’t matter what the form or format, it is all propaganda. It is the last place you’d look for truth.

    3. Patrick, a couple of last thoughts after re-reading your comment. When they started experimenting in the studio they had a young engineer (I can’t remember his name right now but he’s still around), who did things nobody else did. He wanted very much to be their “go to guy” so he pushed the equipment past where his employers wanted it to go.

      He was very innovative and had a closet full of props from old radio sound stage days. We also shouldn’t overlook all the “acid” taken in those days and its effect on “ideas”.

      While studio time is expensive, they had plenty of money and the run of the place. They could play around all night with remixing tracks and adding sound effects. This eventually got more refined.

      I think, in answer to your question, that most musicians couldn’t or wouldn’t afford to spend hours in a studio “on the clock”. Bands, even today, generally have their parts all ready to go when they go to the studio so as not to waste time. It isn’t even necessary for everyone to be there at the same time.

      Eventually there comes a time when you all have to sit down together and listen to the mixed version. That’s usually when the arguments begin. That too, is “on the clock” so, unless you’re wealthy enough to afford to waste time the final product may not always be what you had in mind.

      Actually, the home studio stuff has gotten so good that it is not really necessary any longer to go through this. Of course there is a benefit to doing this collaboratively. I agree that they were pioneers in stretching the bounds of recording.

      1. Lophatt,
        That “young engineer” whose name you can’t remember is Geoff Emerick, who was hired at age 15 by George Martin as an assistant. He assisted on their first recordings and eventually worked his way to becoming their main engineer. His first effort in this capacity was the album Revolver. Not afraid to try new techniques and extremely innovative, Emerick recorded Lennon’s vocal on “Tomorrow Never Knows” through a Leslie speaker. Probably his most creative work was done on Sgt. Pepper, especially the song, “Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite” where Emerick spliced multiple tracks of calliope and organ sounds together in order to create the carnival effect Lennon desired. Emerick also engineered St. Peppers LHCB (won a Grammy for sound engineering) and The Beatles, better known to us as the White Album (another Grammy.) For an inside look at what transpired in the studio with the band, his book Here, There and Everywhere is a worthwhile read.
        So, yes, much of the “sound” that was created on these later Beatle albums must be credited to the behind the scene musical wizards like Geoff Emerick.

      2. That’s the guy! Emerick. I recently read a piece about him. He still records analog. He put together a group of new popular bands and had them record 60’s music, some Beatles tunes.

        It was interesting because he said he spend hours rehearsing them because they were used to having the engineer correct all their mistakes. When they were finished he said some of them were literally in tears because they felt they had improved so much from all the professional advice and practice.

        I have modern recording equipment as well as old stuff. These days the engineer corrects pitch errors and such digitally. In “the old days” it had to be correct or you did it over and over until you got it right.

        A lot of that “new sound” we hear from popular artists is attributable to the auto-correction software correcting their pitch. While it may be nice not to have to listen to clunker notes, it is a bit like “cheating” to have the equipment sing on pitch for you.

  10. Something belonging to this subject matter whether true or not is the following by one of the novorussian military:
    “…If we’re speaking of the artillery bombardment of peaceful cities, then those who are firing don’t know what they are firing on. They hit wherever they’re given guidance. They don’t know the consequences of their strikes. But the punitive actions are conducted by already totally ferocious nationalists, drugged, brainwashed, and unaccountable for their actions. No reasonable arguments have an effect on them. There develops the impression that methods of neuro-linguistic programming are being practiced on them. This also concerns the volunteers from Russia who are fighting alongside the Ukrainians….”
    – whether true or not it indicates that people in present day battle fields think this may be practised out there.

    1. Oh, wow. I started reading this Mathis paper on O.J., and had to stop, because what he says about grand juries is totally wrong.

      Grand juries meet secretly; the identities of the jurors are secret; and they sit for a long period of time, usually about 18 months. Neither the defendant nor his or her attorney is even present. They don’t know about these proceedings. One of the reasons for secrecy is so the defendant doesn’t know of the grand jury’s investigation, to avoid flight.

      So what Miles Mathis says about “defense motions” before a grand jury is ridiculous, since there ARE no defense motions. There is no voir dire of the jurors (questioning by attorneys to screen them for bias), either, since they sit on all matters brought to them in the period of their service. There is no “change of venue” with a grand jury, either. And the states vary in their requirements, whether a preliminary (probable cause) hearing or grand jury, so it is silly for him to cite what a Florida defense attorney says about Florida law (which is what he had to do when he couldn’t find what he wanted in California law!)

      Also, Kathleen Kennedy-Powell’s being admitted in 1977 DOES mean she is now 62.

      I didn’t read further. So far, he does not know what he is talking about.

      1. To be fair, it was the article from university of Dayton that made the claim about the judge agreeing with the defense attorneys. mathis was analyzing this claim (which is weird, according to another article judges aren’t even present at california grand jury proceedings) and does not seem to understand the process very well.
        I don’t think this paper is really about courtroom proceedings so lets see what happens from here.

      2. Dino, of course you are quite correct. I quit on this one as well. I didn’t like the way he began. He writes fairly well but he could lose the ego.

        I don’t have to tell you about grand juries. He seems to be confusing things a bit. That is a shame because his legal ignorance casts doubt on the rest of his theory.

        He seems to be suffering from a common malady. That’s the desire to select “the one true culprit”. In his case it always seems to be “The CIA” or “Intelligence”.

        While I wouldn’t argue that they don’t contribute to our current state of affairs, I don’t think they are totally self-motivated. I also have to caution those who place too much emphasis on “the military” that they are not a powerful or omniscient as some would have us believe.

        So, if the goal of the paper is to convince us that the killings were a hoax, that is a pretty high bar to get over by itself. Going beyond that to identifying the perpetrators and their motives is even more difficult to “prove”. It is alright at a thought experiment.

        I liked his papers on the Unibomber and John Lennon. Having said that, I also said I had some reservations. You have hit on what, for me, is the biggest problem. Some of the premises are untenable. If one starts from a faulty premise it doesn’t matter how flawless one’s logic. it doesn’t lead to usable evidence.

        As an example, his apparent belief that Satanists and some other actors are not “real” and are merely the product of “intelligence” is nonsensical. He may actually mean something different than he actually says.

        So, in so far as he states the obvious, that media is controlled and events are managed to produce fear, I’m in agreement. In fact, that may be the ultimate product, but there are several means to that end and they are not all alike.

        So, I’ll wait to see what else he writes. He seems, from his preambles, to be moving from humble opinion to over confidence. He can certainly do whatever he likes but his command of certain subjects that he treats with such great conviction are detracting from what I think he intends to convey.

      3. Fish, I “think” he is confusing certain motions made during the trial with the “grand jury” proceedings. Where he got his information isn’t the issue. He seems to have “made the leap” that there were “errors” in the indictment process.

        My personal opinion is that the killings were real and he was guilty as sin. I also think they reached the correct verdict. Not because he didn’t DO it, but they botched the prosecution so badly that “reasonable doubt” was obvious.

        I’m afraid this one belongs more in the category of “famous circuses” than hoaxes. Everybody wanted to be a “star”. Maybe Clark was after Nancy Grace’s spot on TEE VEE. I know Ito was.

        This fiasco provided many hilarious hours of discussion at my house. It IS a study on the shamelessness of American media. It had it all. Bad cops, bad attorneys, egotistical judges, blabbering news bimbos.

        What this one needs is a paper on shameless opportunism.

        1. ” Where he got his information isn’t the issue. He seems to have “made the leap” that there were “errors” in the indictment process. ”

          That is true in regards to dino’s comment about him not knowing what he is talking about. In regards to Granite’s supposition that he is a disinfo artist trying to make us look bad on purpose it has some significance. I’m trying to get in his head as best as I can to decide for myself what were dealing with here. I can see him googling “grand jury oj” and stumbling across that paper which confirmed his belief this was hoaxed so he tried to build on that. That would be a case of sloppy research trying to prove what he already believed. If he had made that up out of the blue then it would lend credence to Granite’s theory that he is purposefully trying to make us look bad mixing fantastic in with concrete.

          that was the reason I made that comment, I wasn’t trying to defend him at the time.

      4. You put it very well, lophatt; thank you.

        I did, nevertheless, get “Capricorn One” from the library and watched it last night. It was great–very suspenseful and realistic. It’s about astronauts on the first Trip to Mars–who are actually pulled from the rocket before liftoff, at gunpoint, and secretly installed in a warehouse in the desert until their “return from space,” threatened with death, and death of their families, if they don’t go along with the plot. I don’t want to be a spoiler so will say no more except that O.J. has a very small role, thankfully.

        I thought this may very well be how many of these things happen: threats of death. I just read “LBJ: the Mastermind of the JFK Assassination” by Philip Nelson, by the way, which explained what happened at Parkland Hospital in the same way, substantiated by interviews with the doctors. Texas state law required the autopsy to be done right there, but the doctors were threatened at gunpoint by the Secret Service agents who took JFK’s body away and back to Washington.

      5. Fish, if I were to try to “get inside his head”, (as you said), I would imagine that he features himself a “Renaissance Man”. Writer, poet, scientist, painter……, heady stuff.

        So, unfortunately, when you strip away the obvious talent, you are left with another site dedicated to “ME”. That’s perfectly alright, I just don’t normally visit those since I’m not looking for a new worship center.

        I have to admit that McGowan strikes me a bit the same way. I don’t buy a lot of his conclusions either. And sometimes, I can absolutely, personally vouch for the fact that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

        Having said that, he DOES find interesting information. I read him like a lot of others for information, not conclusions. For what it’s worth, I am actually ecstatic when I find a good conclusion. It doesn’t happen very often.

        That is one reason why I don’t worry too much about “credibility” because I’m not a follower. If the most bull-goose looney site posts some useful bit of information……GREAT! If the most reasoned, credentialed narcissist posts garbage in perfect prose, it’s still garbage.

        I guess I’m more interested in ideas than people. It’s nice to find good people, there just aren’t a lot of them out there. I was the kid in school who always cut the pep rallies. I don’t root for anybody’s team.

        If I consider someone a “star” it will be because of what they say or do, not because they insist that I agree with everything they say. It’s a graded scale, however, and some things are just too ill-considered to be taken seriously.

        With Mathis the ultimate villain appears to ALWAYS be some amorphous creation known as “Intelligence”. That’s like confusing a shovel for a construction company. With McGowan it’s “the Military” (ooooh!). I’m no friend of the military but I know enough about them to know they couldn’t find their derrieres with a flashlight and a magnifying glass. They can and will obey orders.

        If someone wants to posit a culprit, fine. Once they do that the burden is on them to show how they arrived at that conclusion, to the exclusion of all other suspects. That rarely happens. It takes a lot of hard work and solid reasoning to do that. It takes more than coincidental dates.

    1. William Dear spent 14 years and his life savings researching this subject, and produced a book, O.J. is Innocent and I Can Prove It (http://www.amazon.com/O-J-Innocent-Can-Prove-It/dp/1616086203). I have not read it, but Dr. Stan interviewed him (it’s part of a four-tape set about research proving OJ did not do it, which I listened to more than once).

      Dear concludes that the murders were committed by his son Jason, a psychotic with a motive, and that OJ went to the scene of the crime after the fact, evidently to cover it up somehow. OJ is not a very bright man, but he evidently has strong feelings of familial loyalty. Dear purchased the contents of Jason’s defaulted-on storage locker, and found there the murder weapon and a photo of Jason wearing the watch cap found at the scene of the crime.

      Miles made no reference to this, which I found disappointing. As much as I enjoy reading him, I find his delight in his own intelligence annoying. Maybe he’s smart enough that it wouldn’t take him 14 years to find the truth, but at least Dear went to the trouble of interviewing everyone involved. It appears that Miles hacked around on the computer for a couple of days and applied his canned theory that these kinds of spectacles are always death-free. He gives the impression that with his formula these things write themselves, and that everyone is too stupid to see what is perfectly obvious.

      Well, no one is more respectful of the complete stupidity of the American people than me, but I suspect that some of these matters are not as obvious as Miles seems to find them, and lots of people believe murders were committed that night in Brentwood not because they believe everything they are told by the MSM but because there is some evidence that persuaded them. Give them SOME credit, Miles.

      When he does actual research, he demonstrates an admirably probing mind, and he sees implications most of us may overlook. And when examining a field he knows well, such as modern art, his work is very valuable indeed, and the dirt he uncovers is very worthy of our attention. But, …what was it we were talking about earlier…? Credibility! That’s it! When you have a startlingly unusual opinion about something everyone thinks they know all about, you lose credibility if you can’t prove it. He should know that.

      1. Don’t you find it kind of spooky, at least uncanny, the way Miles Mathis has burst on the scene with all these papers on different subjects, espousing different theories on some of the same events as Dave McGowan, Patrick? Mathis uses McGowan’s pieces as an (uncredited) springboard, but then goes in a different direction to theorize what really happened. I am thinking particularly of their different takes on the Lincoln assassination.

        And his background in art, so similar to McGowan’s background in photography. And then he also professes to be an expert in physics?
        So I am wondering if he is a peculiarly effective kind of disinfo agent, put out there specifically to cast doubt on McGowan’s truly original and exhaustively researched theses.

        In his paper on Ted Bundy, Mathis’s main point is that the guy is probably a member of McGeorge Bundy’s family. Although Ted Bundy’s putative family history is certainly questionable, there was just not enough substance to make this connection. (On the other hand, his point about Bundy’s fathering a child while in prison is a very good one: I agree that doesn’t happen!)

      2. Indeed, dino, I have noticed and contemplated all these things. Some I find disturbing. Certainly, his seeming obliviousness when it comes to Dave’s existence is troubling. He should be acknowledging him, linking to him, and praising his work. Dave’s Lincoln articles are particularly amazing in terms of groundbreaking research, unique insights and the startlingly unasked (but now obvious) questions he’s the only one who has posed. And then Miles comes along, pretending he’s the first one rethinking the thing. Leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

  11. Quoting Miles after criticizing Larouche
    “Some will say: what about you?, how do we know you’re not another posted guru, planted to misdirect us?
    Well I’m not famous am I? I’m not on TV am I? I’m not promoted by some studio or consortium or publisher or think-tank. No one is sending you here. If you got to these pages, you got here on your on, probably by lucking out in a websearch.”
    . . . . .
    Sigh, then I’m not an infiltrator.

    1. I appreciate your suspicions, Peter (and dino’s, too). I have shared them, although I have not revealed that here. Anyone following my past comments would agree that I wait to call out trolls until their “tells” are obvious. No point in being the boy who cried wolf!.

      If Miles Mathis is a plant, we have to congratulate our masters for taking a segment of their chattel seriously, as intellectual opponents. In most of this kind of game, the people assigned to deceive truly smart people have to present truth more than 90% of the time; the poison, like that of snake venom, is a very small proportion. So they have to be fun to read for smart people, otherwise we’d not keep reading them.

      That’s a good thing and a bad thing. Miles is helpful, philosophically, if you are not prone to going off the rails. Lophatt is really good at expressing that thought: read it all, if most of it is good, and sift out the parts you detect to be wrong.

      Now, I’m not calling Miles out. I don’t know yet. But my ears have been pricked up for a while now, and I stand alert.

      One thing I’ll add. I engaged in an email back-and-forth with him recently, where I advised him of a theoretical error he was making in one of his “papers.” His glib reply informed me that I was misreading him completely. I replied with a brief proof, quoting him. His acknowledgement of my observation was real–I give him credit for that–but very weak. The take-away from that, it seems to me, is that he does not expect genuine critiques of his ideas, and believes he can easily chase away most who attempt it by implying that they’re too stupid to comprehend his material. If that doesn’t work–because you are smart enough to prove your critique beyond doubt–he does not deny it, thus not alienating that particular reader.

      But he has since made the same error in sociological reasoning he acknowledged that I caught him in. If he’s so smart, and so honest, why would that be? I myself actively change my opinions and positions as people who take the trouble to make the attempt demonstrate to me that I am mistaken. I know that in the future I will think differently about things I believe today because I think differently about similar questions than I did in the past. This is intellectual integrity.

      James Tracy has revealed in these pages his similar experience, and he has alienated colleagues because of it. Certainly, this is a key reason that this internet landscape is as valuable as it is. And why such fine writers and thinkers feel comfortable having conversations such as this. Whether Miles Mathis is one of us is yet an open question at this point, for me–but he’s on thin ice, in my mind.

      1. Patrick I wrote the following comment before I saw your one but I leave it unchanged.
        I took to browse through the headings of Miles sci-papers and that was not very promising. The thing is his style makes me very suspicious. He is definitely not simpleminded but that impression clashes completely with the presumptuous manner in which he goes about dumping a long range of emementary pieces of established science including adding obvious misconceptions. I dont think all those are honest mistakes. And it even suffices to read the titles. That fact alone is alarming.
        It isnt the way to act if you want to add disinfo for protection.
        In that case a common method is to bring in the aliens and their ufos. Kevin Barrett did that recently.
        Miles also seems to make nonevents out of everything. Some of you have brought up examples here.
        I have no theory about the motive. It could be an art project in itself, to study the various responces both from scientific debunkers and from somewhat likeminded conspiracy theorists. If this would be part of cognitive infiltration with the intention of undermining the credibility of critique similar to that posted here it failed completely since you have easily uncovered so many weaknesses already.

      2. Just so no one misunderstands what I’m saying, I’m not calling him names nor am I trying to make anymore out of this than I said.

        He has a good mind, he is just a little egotistical and incautious. In short, anyone who doesn’t agree with him is not, by default, stupid. Those of you who know me should realize that I have absolutely no problem whatsoever believing TPTB would do anything.

        Regarding O.J., all I have is the evidence presented at the trial. I haven’t bothered to read anything else on the subject. If there is a deep, hidden plot underlying this I am simply not aware of it.

        Now that Patrick has brought it up, I may read the book. I was merely commenting on THIS piece. I don’t expect everyone to know legal procedures or medical techniques. It is another matter, however, when you basically call people “stupid” and base your reasoning for that on flawed information.

        For his sake I hope he can regain his balance. Faulty conclusions are more common than not. Nobody HAS to reach any conclusions. It would be better (IMO) to simply present what one has discovered and offer it for others to consider. Of course there isn’t much “glory” in that.

        I know the readers at this site are not reading his stuff because they are in love with him. If he continues to push his Messiah complex he may lose a few. That would be a shame because I think he has something to offer. There is a difference between “sharing” information and “taking credit” for “solving” something. Other than his self-declaration he hasn’t achieved his goal. Humility doesn’t seem to be his strong suit.

      3. Patrick, I’m about to cry… I’m so happy for you man!

        This has been truly one of the best discourses I’ve ever been involved in – I would love to engage all of you in person so we could communicate faster.

        Watching everyone deconstruct this enigmatic character – with Fish playing apologist) was enlightening for us all since everyone had a different POV to posit. Tragically, we did not get a chance to tackle Miles from the Race baiting angle.

        I don’t want to sound like a Fred Savage voice over, but I think I saw a lot of growth from everyone – lively discussion, everyone doing their homework, and most importantly We played pretty fair. I’m proud of this group we have here. I mean, to get so many gifted thinkers from all our diverse backgrounds, congregating day after day to figure out whats really going on with deep politics – or the beatles…. It’s just a real treat to be a part of.

        So as not to detract any further, I’m dying to hear Fish’s conclusion.

        So Fish, were you playing devils advocate or are you serious?

        one person to analyze.

        1. Playing apologist? Please. I don’t play at all. Unless someone gets under my skin – I’ll razz ’em a bit but I don’t play.
          I think my review was pretty fair. I explained how the first nine pages were crap but I went on to finish the paper and it picked up .
          I am really good at reading people in person – words on paper is not so easy.
          I think if miles had just stuck with the photographic stuff the paper would at least be enough to pique one’s curiosity. Pretending that he’s Perry Mason didn’t lend well for his credibility.

          granite, I didn’t actually notice your participation in the discourse? Dino and Lophatt both got irritated and quit – at least with the OJ piece.
          I gave a pretty detailed explanation of why I lean towards the same conclusion as miles (which I am guessing was his starting point) and Patrick seems like he gave it a good read. Where are your thoughts – or have you started with a conclusion like miles did?

      4. Gran1te, this place is indeed a rarity, and enormous fun. As you say, too bad it’s virtual.

        Lophatt, if Dear’s investigation is correct, OJ IS guilty–just not of murder. He is guilty of messing with a crime scene to protect a murderer, and refusing to admit it. If he looked guilty as sin on television, it’s because he WAS.

        Fish, I agree with you about Miles’ photo evidence. I don’t know what to make of it. Weird.

      5. Miles is the first to point out that there are gate keepers at every level. (Forget which paper of his’ that’s in.) Not that that doesn’t make him one, but the idea is useful – as you break through a level to the truth, there will be others to misdirect at a more refined level.

      6. Patrick, I wrote a somewhat long response to your comment on Mr. Dear. It got “eaten” somehow in the “moderation” process.

        I think I understand what you’re saying and I agree with your assessment of O.J.. It could very well be that his reason for looking so guilty has to do with actual “guilt” for another crime.

        I will read Dear’s book. I had a lady attorney working for me a few years ago and we discussed this case to death. While we didn’t always agree on some of the particulars, we did on the overall outcome.

        While there is much to discuss about the case, the thing that struck me hardest was the obvious standard for police work and evidence handling. They are so accustomed to dealing with people who cannot afford to challenge their evidence that they are sloppy.

        Most people who find themselves defendants in a criminal case cannot afford their own attorney, yet alone the cost of testing evidence and hiring investigators. My guess is that, if that were the norm we would find quite a bit of hanky-panky with the evidence.

        The sad part if one is innocent, is that being accused is expensive. Even if you’re acquitted you may be broke. While I feel no sympathy for O.J., I do have it for some others.

        I’ll read what Dear has to say.

  12. well, I am not sure where to start with this one. In many ways it was like the Ted Bundy paper that dino referenced. A lot of presumption and low on facts. There are a few of his papers that are like that. It is unfortunate that he spent the first 9 pages of this talking about stuff he didn’t know about, researched, came to the wrong conclusion and then wrote as if he figured out the obvious truth. About page 10 he gets into stuff that was much more convincing that this was a stageshow and it is really within his area of expertise.
    all I needed to see were the crime scene photos to think that something is up with this case. I imagine this is where Miles started and convinced him this was fake then he went about “researching” (the quotes are an acknowledgement of patrick’s statement about internet sleuthing which I agree with – I had a similar thought myself) to prove the point. he would have done much better had he left the courtroom stuff out of it.
    those crime scene photos look so fake. the skin color like he said seems obvious to me plus the blood patterns make no sense at all. If there were small patters all over the place OK but there are SPLATTERS in all the wrong places – as if they dripped from a blood bag and the used a brush to splatter it outward in directions that make no sense. left splatter, right splatter left etc. I mean, even if you walked a charlie chaplain down the blood puddle you wouldn’t get blood marks like that – you would have footprints not blood splatter. I agree with him on the pose too. A convenient combover of the hair which looks like they dipped it in a can of vampire blood. You can almost see brush marks where they combed her lower hair over her face! Actually compared to the rest of her hair – you can see brush marks. Her body has no scrapes or chafing just blood marks. If you were in a fight for your life to get blood all over you like that I would expect some body damage. I look worse than her after weedeating. Then you get to her feet. She is slightly clenching her right toes. Does that look like a body in rigor mortis? She is probably doing that to show more muscle definition for the photo! What a poser! Her feet are totally clean. It is a swamp in the area of the struggle but the bottoms of her feet are spotless. Not a drop of blood on the conveniently place menu also. I wonder how they fit that menu into the storyline. ” They were minding their own business just about to order some chinese when OJ Kruger burst through the door!”
    The ron goldman photo is really fake looking as well. I think Mathis made the salient points on that photo.
    The photo of fred and patti goldman is the clincher for me. If that isn’t the most sandy hook photo I have ever seen! Hell they might as well have had the Phelps play that part!
    The photos of Nichole and “Denise” side by side seem conclusive to me too. She has funny eyebrows. you can pluck them all you want but if they grow in funny there is only so much you can do about it. Look at HER left eyebrow – no matter what esthetician works on her you can tell that is the same eyebrow.
    The story about the prosecutor and the fake photos on wikipedia are certainly not proof of anything but it is weird enough to see that something fishy is going on there.

    I hate to be the voice of dissent and I totally understand how he pissed everyone off with this paper, but I have to come to the same conclusion as mathis based on the photographic evidence. If the murder was a sham then the trial had to be too.

    1. Fish, maybe. All we have are images. For a guy who prides himself on being “superior”, he makes a lot of common mistakes with his reasoning. He arrives at his conclusions and “bends” the evidence to justify them.

      IMO it would be wiser of him to simply show his observations and let the reader decide. Instead he spend a lot of time pointing to specious “evidence” as conclusive “proof” of his points.

      One of the problems with that approach is that he may be right and “prove” himself wrong. What’s left are a series of annoying statements that insult the reader’s intelligence.

      The problem I have with the theory is that, outside of maybe the Goldman’s lawsuit, what is the motive? This would be a pretty ambitious plot for someone to pull off without some political gain at the end of the rainbow.

      O.J. is too pathetic a character to be a target. His other paper on the Manson Family at least has a viable motive. I’ve got an open mind. I just wasn’t persuaded by this one. This looks more like a “stupid human trick” to me than a conspiracy.

      1. That’s a good quick summary of how I look at it too, lophatt. Swaggering arrogance is just unseemly, and counterproductive. I think part of the pleasure of participating in the conversation at MHB is that most of the regulars try to approximate the kind of humility you describe. We wish to present our thinking, and have the rest give it thought. We are persuasible. Mathis is new to most of us, and I’ll bet he’ll start to seem cloying–if he does not already. He’s got great potential, but stuff like that is a turn-off.

        As for the motive in the OJ thing, Miles is selling the idea that it was to do with the launch of a television series, and the publicity the trial would generate. This is a very weak theory, and certainly not one a supposed super genius would propose.

        He does have an interesting point when he presents his photographic evidence–but that has to be weighed with all the rest of the evidence.

        If OJ is as dumb as he obviously is, it makes sense that he would crudely rush to the crime scene in his expensive Italian shoes, and try to protect his lunatic son from a lifetime in prison. Dumb people do dumb things when emotionally startled, to defend family. He might have been assured, after his crude cover-up attempt led to him as a suspect, that if he spent all his fortune on lawyers, the insane son could be kept out of the picture and OJ himself (because he really didn’t commit murder) would go free. He’s now in a swirling whirl of confusion and emotional trauma–which is what we saw on his face in the courtroom.

        Mathis has raised some very important points–he just does not know how to sift the wheat from the chaff, and how to make smart readers know he knows the difference–probably the most important skill to have in such an endeavor.

  13. If it makes any difference I was too young to remember much about the trial. I remember the slow-mo car chase and I remember Kato Kalin – which makes me remember that it was quite a soap opera.
    One thing about miles reasoning that bugs me is when he starts stating laws or regulations that (in this case) the courts or in other papers the correctional system must follow. For you and I yes, that would be true but the government can do pretty much whatever it wants especially with high profile cases. If they wanted to use them as a publicity stunt they would, it’s not necessarily evidence that an event was faked. But, as with this paper, he tends to convince me with the photographic evidence. The multiple Mumia Abu Jamal’s, the multiple mansons – with swasticas of different sizes and chirality, these are the things that make me believe they have been sandy hooking us all along.

    1. Sorry, Elfmom, for not getting back to you sooner. You’re smart not to have a Facebook account, and I assure you, you’re not missing much 🙂

      Patrick: I’ve been a fan of VC for years myself. It’s a great resource for all things symbolic. I feel like an old lady there, though, as many of the readers seem to be young’uns, but it does my heart good to see that there’s interest and awareness in the younger generations.

        1. Yack! It’s sad to say, but I’m about the least “mom-like” person…I’m lucky my sweet son doesn’t know the difference!

          Thanks for the laugh, though…it was unexpected, and that’s the best kind 🙂

    1. long time guys! I went to davesweb and it brought back memories from years ago. i’m sure this is a little off topic, but its worth mentioning how a little phrase – an assumption in this case – can veer the reader down an unduly conspiratorial path:

      (note that I have no problem with dave’s website, just pointing out something we can all see (15 years later) as a little overblown).

      Without further ado:

      “The American media had a good laugh over a story that was briefly bandied about a couple of years ago. It seems that a certain manufacturer of consumer electronics had inadvertently released a batch of ‘defective’ video cameras to the public. These cameras had a most unusual feature: when used in a particular manner, they allowed the user to covertly film unsuspecting people sans clothing.
      The press chuckled over this for a few days, particularly when noting that a recall effort by the company had not resulted in the return of very many of the faulty cameras. This is likely because the cameras were not actually defective, at least not in the normal sense of the word. In fact, they performed the normal home video camera functions quite well.
      The problem was that they had an extra function. The company explained that this was due to a manufacturing defect – a bad batch of chips – and the story was quickly lost in the shuffle and forgotten. But beneath this seemingly inconsequential story of a company mishap lurked something far more sinister – a brief glimpse into Big Brother’s toolbox.
      It can be safely concluded that these cameras were not by any stretch of the imagination ‘defective.’ They actually performed exactly as designed. The problem most likely was that a batch of cameras built for military and/or intelligence purposes found their way onto the consumer market. This obviously presented a bit of a problem for the company. They could not even admit that such technology exists, let alone that they were in the business of developing and manufacturing such devices. The solution? Blame it on a manufacturing defect.”

      Now how many times do you think such speculation meanders into our daily conspiracy drivel and we eat up as truth? Granted with 20/20 vision of the past we know that this wasn’t some secret tech accidentally mixed into consumer production. This was merely a marketing technique which Sony had brilliantly executed.

      On one hand you have old infrared technology being incorporated into digicams, and on the other you have the 1950’s-like attitude towards nudity that the (then 1998) public would surely scorn.

      Real Solution? Leak “inside” scoop to a few journalists of an accidental inclusion of this military grade feature, create a cult following of geeks, and then allow time for consensus to mature to the concept (thereby absolving Sony of any potential negative criticism for distasteful technology, which thus, ushers in the next era of video cameras).

      There’s more, though. Sony has not only advertised their new camera, they have revealed to the public a “secret” tech (which was really nothing new), all the while leading the public to believe that:
      1. The military indeed is advanced well beyond what we know
      2. Sony makes advanced gear

      Looking back 15 years we can see that the military was exponentially more advanced than what this tidbit of tech demonstrated. But more importantly, look how far off the course we were if the premise behind that introduction was taken seriously – as it undoubtedly was by most.

      I do recommend reading the rest of the article, as Dave nails it on every other looming technology he brought up – all 2 years before minority report came out.


  14. I was checking my Facebook feed again and ran across this (again from McGowan’s Facebook group page):

    Weird Scenes Inside the Canyon
    2 hours ago
    For those who are wondering, a re-post that appeared here yesterday was removed at the request of the original poster. My apologies to the poster and to all of you.

    Both the re-posted comment as well as the original are now removed. Huh. Just thought I’d share.

    Along the same lines, some time ago, after reading several excerpts online, I requested and received a copy of the e-book, “Beast Wing 666: Abusive cults in the UK”, by Nathaniel J. Harris. I have copied the introduction directly from the book (pardon the formatting) and pasted it below; if anyone is interested in the whole thing, I’d be happy to send it by email (the author gives his permission to share and disseminate freely).

    “What do you call it when Satanists have children
    together? Ritual abuse. It’s a reality, my friends. A very
    sad reality.”
    – Grobbly the Clown

    This book is a first hand perspective on the problem
    of ritual abuse and mind control cults in the U.K.;
    much of which is ‘occult’ in theme, and targets
    children. The author is an insider of occultism whose
    own family has been torn apart by events directly
    related to the first ever convictions of ritual abuse in
    British criminal history; the cult that surrounded
    convicted sexual abuser Colin Batley, Elaine Batley,
    Jaqueline Marling, Shelly Millar, Peter Petrauske, and
    Jack Kemp. Many members of this abusive cult are
    still at large, some even gaining a significant level of
    ‘pseudo-fame’ within the occult community.
    During my twenties, I joined an occult organization. I
    gained considerable significance within the group,
    and was granted a number of pompous sounding titles
    of no significance to the wider public, but meant
    much within the community I was a part of; Priest,
    Mentor, and Magister Templi, as well as the official
    ‘Fool’ of the U.K. and U.S.A. sections. At the time of
    BEAST WING 666 – ABUSIVE CULTS in the U.K.
    my involvement the cult was more or less benign, but
    later came to harbour a number of abusive
    My own parents also happened to be heavily
    involved in Paganism, and remain so at the time of
    For reasons that shall become clear with time, I no
    longer have any contact with the cult I joined, or with
    my parents.
    It is hoped this book will be of use to professionals
    who come across this problem in their work; police,
    social workers, psychotherapists, journalists, and
    It may also be of help to anyone whose own life has
    been damaged, directly or indirectly, by abusive cults.
    It is also hoped this book will be read by members of
    the ‘occult community’. Whilst society as a whole
    seems to suffer a collective myopia regarding issues
    such as cults and child abuse, the occult community
    has been especially groomed to consider any such
    allegations in terms of ‘Satanic Panic’, and routinely
    mistake any attempts to address such issues as attacks
    on the beliefs such communities hold. This book is
    not an attack on occultism; it is an attempt to address
    a very real problem within the occult community.
    BEAST WING 666 – ABUSIVE CULTS in the U.K.
    I also have an entirely personal hope for this book;
    that it will help lead to the prosecution of the many
    guilty in the case relating to my own family. Some of
    the guilty have already been convicted, and are at the
    time of writing in jail- as has been reported in the
    mainstream press. Others are still at large.

    1. I think that if you’ve been following the hoopla in the UK lately regarding pedophile abuse over the decades, there is a tie-in to this behavior centered in LA.

      There are “hot spots” of Satanic activity all over the world. What good is it to be a “Master of the Universe” if you can’t flaunt it through outrageous behavior with total immunity?

      These creatures mock us daily. They know that their perverse “brothers and sisters” have their backs. They relish abusing their “cattle”.

      This sort of knowledge is important if we are to protect ourselves and others. It is hard to acknowledge, and disgusting to read, but it is important. When one truly catches a glimpse of what these guys are capable of, any doubts as to what they are up to should vanish. When the going gets weird, the weird get going.

      1. Yes Lophatt, undoubtedly the pedo-rings in UK/Europe and the US are related. I was recently reminded of the ghastly Johnny Gosch disappearance and listened to several of Noreen’s (the mother) interviews. She tells a compelling story, and a heartbreaking one…and it is tied to the Franklin Cover-up.

        Political corruption and perversity on a global scale. Is it no wonder society has taken the nose-dive it has when our leaders are such as they are? Though, to be honest, I waver between thinking that our leadership mirrors society, and that our society follows our leadership, but I guess that’s beside the point anymore.

        I have a theory that the lessons learned from MK Ultra (et al) are now being implemented in classrooms across the country…and we’re far behind many other Western countries in this regard. While MK Ultra (et al) seems to have focused upon individuals, the lessons are being applied globally. Whether “Intelligence” is responsible, like Mathis posits (I highly doubt it), or there’s a cabal of social directors in charge of running the Satanic (or Luciferian, if you prefer) agenda of the Elite (more likely) is another debate.

        The “Lone Wolf” ideas being bandied about are good ones. There is a reason for it, that’s for sure, and it won’t benefit any of us in the long run.

      2. Recynd
        You doubt intel is involved. Intel works for the oligarchy and they want puppets to blackmail so eg politicians dont try to shake off their bonds.
        (Goes without saying that they have uses as scapegoats with strange suspicious psychological profiles and torpedos and whatever low status task.)
        Secret societies more or less overlapping with the oligarchy might have some independent ideosynchracies too but on the whole this is the usual game of tyrannical control by all available means.

        1. Forgive me for not being more clear. Intel is clearly INVOLVED, but I doubt it’s the main culprit. Whatever groups that are instructing Intel to get the blackmail-able material are clearly higher up the food chain.

          You may not agree with me, but I wanted to clarify what I meant (which I may not have done a very good job doing here).

          I enjoy your contributions, btw.

  15. Recynd, my comments on these types of testimonies and theories does not mean that I don’t believe that they happen. I’m reasonably sure that they do.

    Further, that they happen “in the military” or any other recognizable group, is also highly likely.

    What I object to is the “conclusions” that most make about the setting being indicative of the source of the aberrations. In other words, that “the military” is somehow “the main culprit. I think they’re just “convenient”.

    All of the information is useful. “Poppy” Bush was fond of talking about “the end of history” as a goal. Through research such as this we help to keep history alive.

    What all of this leads me to is that it is basically the manifestation of evil in its many forms. The setting is instructive, it is easily controlled and manipulated. The military consists of self-serving conformists who do what they are told for personal gain. It is also a great place to hide truly sick individuals and protect them from responsibility for their actions.

    I suggest that, looking back, the old “Hellfire Clubs” where depravity was carried out in caves and tunnels isn’t any different. It is just that, after WWII the military grew disproportionately and enabled them to have vast areas to practice their art.

    With the development of the CIA there was another “somewhat hidden” entity where they could burrow in and do what they liked without unwanted scrutiny.

    I also believe that certain areas are bound to take on the flavor of the creatures that inhabit them. It would be hard to find a more dishonest group than the military. On the surface they get “great press”. Underneath they are often contemptible. Everything is illusory.

    What I’ve said is that, while they are capable of great damage, they are not in control of anything. They are functionaries. They do as they are ordered. They are afraid to initiate actions on their own and endanger their interests.

    So just like cops are allowed to abuse the citizenry as a “reward” for their usefulness, the military are allowed (encouraged?) to practice these dark acts free from normal consequences. On the surface they are “role models”, underneath they are demons.

    They are not the only group that this can be said of. Their leaders prey on anyone they can. The more convenient the situation, the better for them. All that’s required is self-interest and a dark area free from scrutiny. These become their “dark legions”.

    So I don’t think McGowan is spouting “disinformation”. I just think that he is coming to the wrong conclusions. Was the area affected by the presence of “the military”? Of course. They were there, after all. How could dark deeds done in private not spill over into the surrounding community?

    Just like with SHES. Do you think that having a “Church of Satan” down the road is harmless? At the end of the day any community is just a mixture of who inhabits it. Evil begets evil.

    So yeah, reading a story such as this is instructive. We should see it as a cautionary tale. Things are seldom what they are advertised to be. The stronger the advertising the more skeptical we should be.

    1. Great remarks; I wholeheartedly agree with you. To blame “the military”, “U.S. Intelligence”, or even “The Illuminati”, is to put blinders on.

      I have posted another comment, currently in moderation, that points the finger at yet another group. Please know, I don’t take any of this as “gospel truth”. Anecdotes, though not hard evidence, are not worthless either; where there’s smoke, there’s usually fire.

      Good comments, as usual.

    2. I’m glad to see that you understand what I’m trying to say. The “acts”, ugly as they are, are just that, “acts”. Where they are carried out are just locations. The use of various groups is because they are useful.

      A military base has an advantage in being shut off from the outside world. It is a place subject to intense control. There is absolutely no doubt that dark things happen there. Some of them happen because of the proclivities of the inhabitants, others are organized.

      As the noose tightens we are all coming to live in a giant “military base”. They just don’t advertise that fact. Bases are a control freak’s wet dream. Pretty soon we’ll all be in that nightmare.

      Their biggest obstacle is that the types of people who freely submit to military rule are easy to control. It is not so homogenous in “the outside world”. I suppose the plan would be like that in Ukraine. They eliminate the opposition.

      That’s where those MRAPS and countless Stasi forces come in. That’s at the root of the surveillance and the “lists”. That’s why schools look like they do these days.

      It’s all very obvious for those who have eyes to see. What we discuss here is an aspect of that. Creating a false reality is important to them. They must have fear to confuse the mind and “justification” for their actions.

      The only thing that keeps us out of that “prison of the mind” is knowledge and awareness. Seeing is not believing if your field of view is confined to a television set.

      So, in a sense, the military are the “anti-enlightened”. They willfully choose to sacrifice their free will to their “superiors”. In exchange they get great prizes. They get a comfy false reality to live in. They get praise and false glory. They are not likely to give it up.

      The same method extends to cops and a host of other minions with acronymic names. They are merely self-serving extensions of control.

      So, in order to avoid the traps we have to be aware of them. Sometimes they don’t look like traps. Sometimes they are too obvious. That is one reason why history is needed. That is why they wish for its end.

        1. what a joke – nice catch Anne. I just read some pretty good stuff on (the sometimes ridiculous, sometimes informative) nodisinfo:


          Which brings me to the repulsive propaganda that fox has been spewing as of late regarding the navy seal who “killed UBL”:


          Laughable? At first. I cringe now. It’s so damn silly. “pop pop pop” he says. He claims he got him 3 times in the head.

          I watched most of the interview and I am truly dumber for it. This kind of crap they put out just ruins my day and I can barely talk about it.

          And as for Dorner… I doubt he was even real. He surely didn’t write that garbage manifesto full of fun acronyms that we all got to learn about. I’m starting to think that they have contests to see who can make up the most unbelievable story to go along with their pre-planned constitution shredding goals. Can you imagine what a hoot it must be for all the agents to see this junk broadcast? And then trying to converse the gullible public as if its real What a fun job

        2. They never disclose the amount of money settled upon to avoid a court case and declare yup those two old girls can decide amonst themselves how to split that 4.2 million dollars. They just keep getting more in our face with the ridiculous, and taunt us with what are you going to do about that?

        3. The whole Dorner story…from start to finish…was ridiculous. So clearly meant to instill fear. I felt like I was the only one who was appalled by the massive military response in the attempt to capture a single man. Who knows what, if any, was even real. I bet the money spent on the thing was real…

        4. The funeral of “MacKay”, the statue and the aftermath is over the top by many miles. I lived just an hour away from Big Bear when this charade took place and never saw any traces of this largest manhunt in the history of Southern California.


          Two excerpts:

          ~Dorner’s rampage sparked what local police describe as the largest manhunt in the history of Southern California~

          ~Lynette MacKay added: “It’s still very, very hard living in this house and going to dinner around town.~

          If my husband was killed during the largest manhunt where I happen to live, the furthest thing from my mind would be “going to dinner around town.”

        5. I was working right off the grapevine at the time and a chp buddy of mine that I had known my entire life (lds btw) rolled his eyes and then nuanced that I should just drop it. Not cryptic at all, just that the conversation wasn’t worth having. I brought it up to gauge his response because, at the time, American everyman had already guessed (correctly) that this was staged and I wanted to see just how much the average cop knew.

          From this brief exchange (at the daddy daughter valentines dance – probably day 2 of the manhunt), I gathered a) he was not concerned for his life and b) this was not being taken very serious. I remember trying to make more of it than (in retrospect) was necessary – this was, afterall, at the height of the media firestorm.

          I should mention that the grapevine would have been an obvious route for dorner, as it was the only road out of socal. Once in the valley, he could have gone anywhere. I wish I knew exactly what my friend had been told, but alas, that’s as close as I got…

          Also, Anne – thanks for your diligence hunting down all the “trivial” pieces that allow us to connect the dots. I know it must take up a lot of time – but it sure makes things easier for the rest of us.

        6. If that guy is “35”, he must have had some “hard miles”. Dorner was a precursor to ISIS. He was “superman”. Same as the manhunt for the Chechen Bros. in Boston.

          One is certainly more likely to get ventilated by one of these trigger-happy Gestapo types than any “Lone Nut”. All of that Israeli training has resulted in them emptying their magazines at the slightest suspicion of danger.

          I have to question the sanity of those who feel “safe” because of this. Armed and dangerous, and funded by the state. Dorner was the “archetype” of the moment. There are so many lately.

          What ever happened to the little girl with the murdered family? What about John Holmes? The list is endless. They are all “larger than life”, because they are.

          It’s a wonder we don’t die of methane exposure.

    1. I won’t speculate but the mere fact that his book was available in my technical university library indicates that Bowart never came close to anything classified for real use in intelligence.
      Nevertheless if he was actively working for cia then this means they were willing to have themselves painted in very dark colors.
      Maybe he didnt work for them but he thought they were providing him with inside info.

  16. I took the trouble to peruse some of the newer parts
    This rather revealing extract, save the E.T. nonsense, for me is proof enough that Bowart was an honest truth seeker.
    Below my notes in square brackets.
    Extract from ch 34 of the extended researchers version of W Bowarts operation mind control
    [text from Bowart’s interview with an engineer april and november 1994]
    Q:I’ve talked with a lot of people who are describing microwaves or ELF or some kind of wave which can read their mind and implant voices. You ever heard anything like that?
    W: We have been involved in projects that included devices that were implant devices that had the same density as bone and that were implanted in spaces between bone so that when cat scans or x-rays were taken it would appear indistinguishable from bone. It wouldn’t show up.
    Q: Wouldn’t there have to be some kind of metal in the electronic parts?
    W: There would be, but a thin type of shell that does not block x-rays and some of the newer devices that we’ve worked with and have seen others work with are ceramic material. You cant tell them from bone. They used to be fairly large, but about five years ago[ie 1989] they reduced them to the size of — you know what a chicklet looks like? [piece of chewing gum] — about like that. And now they have special equipment which allows them to mold it into bonelike structures. When you see it on the bench you think you’re looking at a piece of bone. And they can actually use this to replace a piece of bone and the bone will bind right to it.
    [Then they discuss using various noninvasive em signals to cause disturbing effects. Thats what W has in mind with his next answer]
    Q: Some of the people believe they are targeted from satelites…
    W:Well there is…the satellite itself would not bprobably produce a signal that is strong enough to adversely affect someone. However it can produce a control signal that would trigger a device on the ground, that could do the same thing.
    Q: They’ve called it the “Mental Telepathy System”. And they’re complaining about two-way conversations. They’re not just hearing voices. The voices are answering their questions and engaging them in dialogue.
    W: Well that’s one of the common complains I’ve heard. We know for a fact.. Now, I have to be careful what I’m saying here. We have… we do work for all kinds of different entities… and there are certain entities that we do work for both int the countermeasures and the actual production of devices that can do these kinds of things, that we have confidence with so we have to be very careful what we say…but we can tell you for a fact that, there are quite a few people who have implantables. They’re being affected by these implanatbles. They’re very small and they’re very hard to detect and there’s all different kinds. There are some that just transmit data from the person including, it could be biological type data, medical data like heart rate, blood pressure — or it could be data coming off their nerve system, their muscles, their vocal cords so that anything they say could be picked up and transmitted. Also there could be tranceivers. Some of them are fairly complex using computer chips that are highly miniaturized. We know this for a fact and we believe that there are numerous people in this country that have the implants in them. Somewhere along the line they were hospitalized, or they have a period thay can’t account for in their lifes, they took a drive someplace on Monday morning and they came back Thursday afternoon and they don’t have the faintest idea of what happened in between — missing time.
    [He has to be careful what he says so he doesnt hint that some secret entity could do it much faster and there is no need for hospitals or missing days?]
    We know for a fact that a lot of this work is done by entities that we have no direct knowledge about ourselves. But from the type of
    manifestations that are ocurring and from other things we have seen, we know that there are certain things that are either being done by people in a highly secretive position in the United States or operating from a foreign country, or maybe E.T.’s for all we know.

    Q: I was going to ask about your use cof the word “entities”. Some of the people who are experiencing this have raised the question about E.T.’s.
    W: It’s very similar. The devices, however, are quite varied in function and in different positions placed in the body and different lengths of
    time and duration, most are tranceiver type devices, but there are some that are just transmitters and some that are just receivers.
    The functions they perform are from control type functions to monitoring functions. They’re very sophisticated in their transmission. Instead of transmitting in a continuous way where you say something and then its transmitted, they store the data for some time and they blurt it out in compressed form, and then its stretched out — whatever receives it — stretches it back out. So they’re very hard to detect. To the untrained ear they sound like radio static to a field strength scanner it’s hard to find them. We do a lot of work. Some of it we cannot even begin to talk about….
    [David Ben Gurions secret intel agency MAX during WW2 used the described compressed transmission technique for secret messages passing the german lines and the germans heard only seeming static noise. John Loftus & Mark Aarons mention this in The secret war against the jews 1995]

Comments are closed.