Abu Ghraib, Satanists, and Spoon-Benders

by **psyop samurai** » Mon Aug 22, 2005 4:28 am

by Edward Spannaus In a legal battle currently raging in Federal court in New York, the Pentagon is desperately trying to block the release of more photos and videotapes of prisoner abuse and torture at Abu Ghraib. At issue, in the lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Physicians for Human Rights, Veterans for Common Sense, and others, are 87 photographs and four videotapes, which are reported to contain images of rape, sodomy, and other conduct far more horrendous even than that which has been disclosed so far. The question raised, is what connection does this have to the reports received by EIR that the Special Warfare crowd based at Fort Bragg, N.C., is deeply enmeshed in "spoon-bender" Mind War programs and experimentation, and intersects outright Satanic circles? <a href="http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2005/3233_abu_ghraib.html">www.larouchepub.com/other...hraib.html</a>

by **Dreams End** » Mon Aug 22, 2005 1:14 pm

here is a link to the Mindwar paper as it appears on Michael Aquino's site: (Actually, there are links to several documents, so click on the Mindwar link to get the PDF) <a href="http://www.xeper.org/maquino/index.html">www.xeper.org/maquino/index.html</a> Now, admittedly, I read this over really quickly, but this phrase from the Larouche report (no the one in the link but the one in Jeff's article) seems to be false: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Leaving nothing to the imagination, the document concluded by emphasizing that MindWar should employ subliminal brainwashing technologies, and weapons that directly attack the targetted population's central nervous system and brain functioning:<hr></blockquote> The paper actually says that there is no need for such techniques and that if it were found out that the government were using such techniques it would undermine the effort. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>But in the long run, brainwashing does not work, because intelligent minds later realize their suggestibility under such conditions and therefore discount impressions and options inculcated accordingly. (from Mindwar, p. 9)<hr></blockquote> The second part of the EIR quote is, in fact, in the paper: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>"There are some purely natural conditions under which minds may become more or less receptive to ideas, and MindWar should take full advantage of such phenomena as atmospheric electromagnetic activity, air ionization, and extremely low frequency waves," the paper concluded. <hr></blockquote> This is a little closer to what Steinberg was suggesting was in the paper, though Aquino emphasizes "natural" phenomena. Still we know that these things can be manipulated as well. I'm not saying Aquino is a good guy. I'm only suggesting that this paper is not what they claim it to be. There's no occult element at all, and Aquino is at pains to suggest that Psyops must be based on "truth" and cannot disseminate lies. Of course, who gets to define the truth.....? But there is no call for "employ subliminal brainwashing technologies, and weapons that directly attack the targetted population's central nervous system and brain functioning". Perhaps Aquino has edited the paper as it appears on his site, but I notice the EIR report doesn't quote from the paper on this point but merely provides a summary. Only the second quote above is actually stated as a direct quote from the paper. Now, Aquino may be writing all of this with a nudge and a wink. In fact, his using John Marks' Search for the Manchurian Candidate as a source (footnote, p. 9) seems almost like a sly little joke. But the point is, on its face, the document is not what EIR claims it to be. Aquino even makes fun of the rumors that surrounded this document in the intro. My concern is that, once again, someone has taken some interesting and important material and added some distortions into it. EIR is pretty consistent with this technique. I always try to verify an EIR report before I quote from it. If they have some previously discovered "unexpurgated" copy that differs from the one on Aquino's site, they should explain that and point out the differences. Please, someone else read the paper and see if I'm just missing something. Again, while you can maybe "read between the lines", and while the implications of the paper are definitely troubling (though employing psyops on our own population is surely not an idea that originated in 1980, witness the "Operation Northwoods" idea from 1962), the paper is simply not what EIR claims.

by **robertdreed** » Mon Aug 22, 2005 1:44 pm

Most of the techniques that are presently being used as psyops interrogation techniques at Guantanamo Bay were systematically applied during the Korean War by the North Koreans. You know, our old friends. The principles of conditioning are basic enough that I have little doubt that most of them pre-date their use by the North Koreans, and for that matter the Nazi experiments at Dachau. or the exploitation of Pavlov's research by the Soviets. Most of the "refinements" seem to have to do with not killing the detainee prematurely or causing permanent physical harm. That and the use of stimulant, depressant, and disorienting drugs. Target the mind, leave no marks. I read a news weekly article about 15 or so years back that was an interview with Navy SEAL Richard Marcinko. He was upfront about the sort of intimidation that can be brought to bear. I have no doubt that he went through the interrogation course himself. Okay, a "lite" version of it. And not for months on end. There's a difference between the rare situation where an urgent need arises to pressure a detainee suspected of holding direct criminal knowledge of a planned act of mayhem or homicide, with an acute sense that seconds count...and re-inaugurating the Inquistion, with a 2-way mirror for the local Marquis to watch and take notes. Using the Disappeared, whereabouts unknown even to their families. This is, to me, sufficient reason to impeach quite a few members of the Bush administration, including the President, and maybe a few Supreme Court Justices as well. Not because of what they've gotten so far- (a decidedly dicey path of legal obstacles...including the fact that the lead military prosecutor at Gitmo quit, as did the next two replacements, and as far as I know they still haven't found anyone to take the job...) It's simply because of what they've asked for. Too much power. I'm willing to compromise. They relinquish the reins of power, go back to the ranch quietly and stay there, and we'll take a look at the criminal charges and see if an accomodation can be made. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p097.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=robertdreed>robertdreed</A> at: 8/24/05 3:57 am

by **smiths** » Wed Aug 24, 2005 6:33 am

its very gentlemanly of you to let them go quietly back to the ranch robert, awaiting some charges, myself, i think i would round them up and drop them off in sadr city to get to know the locals, maybe a couple of little twinges in my conscience, but i think i'd be able to move on you must understand i am against killing in almost all cicumstances, but i think that letting the common iraqi's spend some time with the neocons and their ilk would surely be fair. and anyway, what charge and punishment could possibly fit the crimes against the earth and its inhabitants, that they have commited

Abu Ghraib, Satanists, and Spoon-Benders

Abu Ghraib, Satanists, and Spoon-Benders

Re: Abu Ghraib, Satanists, and Spoon-Benders

Gitmo and "brainwashing"

back to the ranch

Who is online