Listen to Hannah taken to NWO Denver underground base

by **rain** » Tue Jul 04, 2006 10:39 pm

Seattle. Ex:21:12. He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death. becky, don't you find the assertions made in Hannah's statement at least a little curious ?

by **Joe Hillshoist** » Tue Jul 04, 2006 11:27 pm

Hugh I know camo gear is cool today, but when it started in the 80s, people wore army pants, khaki and camo, because they were cheap and tough. I am wearing an austn army green shirt right now, and have worn these shirts for over 20 years. Why? - cos a second hand army shirt from a disposal shop costs less than 15 bucks and lasts for years. I can crawl through hundreds of metres of wild weedy lantana native lawyer vine and other shite and not have my expensive clothes ripped to shreds. in fact the army shirts are insanely good at not tearing. The pants are comfy tough and have massive pockets. I don't buy my shit because of some programming agenda. Ramp skaters made army "shorts" popular in the 80s, cos for some reason (according to my bro, who was being chased to turn pro at the time) they are more comfy when wearing knee pads and stuff. However I did notice that the army clothes thing went alot more mainstream after the first gulf War.

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 12:18 am

Hey, Bamabecky. I know, there is lots of snobbery and stereotyping about southerners and people in rural areas but there is also a lot of poverty and bad schools that leave some folks vulnerable to manipulation. This article mentions how the 1938 War of the Worlds radio broadcast was an experiment that showed most of the resulting fear and panic was in poorer southern areas. Military recruiters still get most of their recruits from the poor and less educated Americans in the south. Now those exploiters are the ones to be mad at. <a href="http://www.madcowprod.com/MC6812004.html">www.madcowprod.com/MC6812004.html</a> <blockquote>Quote:<hr>But what has been--for almost fifty years--a closely guarded secret, is this: Orson Wells' broadcast was no mere show business stunt, but an Experiment in Fear, a psychological warfare test conducted for the Rockefeller Foundation. Here's a quote from “America Under Attack” A Reassessment of Orson Welles War of the Worlds” by Paul Heyler of Willfrid Laurier University: “A grant from the Rockefeller Foundation to Princeton University helped create the Princeton Office of Radio Research. The director was Paul Lazersfeld, an Austrian Jewish émigré and a social psychologist whose expertise in quantitative methods was tempered by a humanist leaning. He teamed with two associates, psychologist Hadley Cantrell and CBS researcher Fred Stanton, a PhD in psychology who would eventually become network president.” Paging Jerry Falwell Pretty smart company. The book continues: “The broadcast was a psychological warfare experiment conducted by The Princeton Radio Project. The Rockefeller Foundation funded the project in the fall of 1937. An Office of Radio Research was set up with Paul F. Lazersfeld as director, and Frank Stanton and Hadley Cantrell as associate directors. Using demographic data on the broadcast’s audience gleaned from a 10-page interview questionnaire given to 135 people, they created a book, “Invasion From Mars: A Study in the Psychology of Panic.” The results were available to only a few, apparently, with no talk of any paperback release Yet more than 12 percent of the American radio audience had listened to the broadcast. More than half that number took it seriously. By sociologist Hadley Cantrell’s account, published in a landmark study for the Rockefeller Foundation, more than a million people were frightened by Welles' broadcast.  The strongest currents of fear were among less-educated people and poor Southern folk.<hr></blockquote>

by **xsic bastardx** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 12:52 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Some of you guys remind me of the Republican George Bush fans that really need to get a life or at best an education. <hr></blockquote> Talk about Judgemental, sterotypical and ignorant. All were doing is expressing opinions. I personally believe it's a crock. Not because Hannah is "Country"(and jsut for the Record Arkansas is the best place I have ever lived.) or not because she is "Christian". It's because she sounds full of pomp and show. I have been in this game long enough to smell when there is something rotten in the state of Denmark. It's completely fear based in structure. Sorry, there are no missiles on the bottom of the planes and Hannah didn't go to a NWO Base. I am not saying they don't exist.....I am just saying I don't believe her. Oh yeah....Fuck Bush.

by **LilyPatToo** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 1:08 am

bamabecky, I apologize. I do have a tendency to get impatient with some of the Bible Belt people I know and it's not a trait of which I'm proud. It's just that I'm much more skeptical of anyone like Hannah than they are. Especially since learning more than I wanted to know about disinformation and COINTELPRO-type programs that our intelligence agencies have run on American citizens since WWII. So all my alarm bells go off when I hear Hannah talking--she hits on so many of what I now know are specific disinformation talking points that it makes me nuts when others don't hear it at all. And it infuriates me that (to me) she and her handlers are targeting their audience so precisely. That seems so callous to me. I HATE to see people taken advantage of and conned by professional liars and I'm sorry but that is what this sounds like. But I also know of people who are literally mind controlled and programmed to spread disinformation that they fully believe. Are you familiar with a woman named Cathy O'Brien? To me, she's the poster child for that kind of an operation. And her "rescuer" is no more than her latest handler. Some of what she believes happened to her almost certainly did, but some of it most likely did not--though she believes that it did. This isn't a simple or a straight-forward area of inquiry and it's difficult, knowing what I now know, to be as patient or as tolerant as I know I should be, when I see people being taken in. You have a perfect right to champion Hannah and to talk about it here, but I hope that you'll also consider what we more skeptical people think, too. I do apologize for my tone, though, it was unkind. LilyPat

by **Joe Hillshoist** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 1:53 am

I agree with xsic bastardx. it is completely fear based. the only empowerment is through Jesus. (which may be well and good, but when it misused by the US right wing Xtian establishment it is sus.) Not action. It touches all those fear based memes that are so common and powerful in the conspiracy minded, and does it in a way that reinforces powerless fear and a victim mentality. A good personal tewst I find, is to take the information in using a niave and innocent unprotected mindset, then sit outside yourself and watch your reactions... Fear fear fear, pain panic no future no power you will lose we are stronger you have no hope.. Any information that inspires this in someone is highly suspect IMO. It is mind control. Accept this information on face value and you will probably find yourself operating from a position of weakness and powerlessness. It frames the worldview in terms of "resistence is futile" and the inevitability of ending up in a basement room with electrodes attatched to your balls. That is something we may have to face, but facing it on your own terms and accepting that may be your fate is a very liberating thing. Having it forced on you amid the fear and panic of a construct like Hannahs is not liberating at all. You have no choice - you will end up here, thats the thought process her story leads me into. I don't buy the hopelessness it inspires.

by **xsic bastardx** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 11:52 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>It frames the worldview in terms of "resistence is futile" and the inevitability of ending up in a basement room with electrodes attatched to your balls.<hr></blockquote> Whoa. Is that what there doing now? Kudos Joe.

by **LilyPatToo** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:34 pm

Whenever I encounter any sort of new idea, I've learned to ask myself two questions: first, will believing this make me more passive? and second, who will benefit if I am made more passive? But it took a lot of abuse and exploitation before I was able to come up with that way of vetting ideas/belief systems. Roughly half of the people in the US were raised in such a way that they are literally unable to do that at all--to question authority. It's referred to as having "strict father frames" by George Lakoff, a cognitive theorist who studies how very early formation of thought processes ("frames") affect the way people see the world...and grow up to vote accordingly. I was raised that way and am living proof that frames can be changed, but not without a tremendous amount of effort and introspection. And pain. There has been an concerted effort underway for many decades to instill hopelessness in the public. Once you become aware of the sly methods used, you'll see them everywhere. Back when people began leaving organized religions, the New Age movement suddenly materialized to suck up these dissenters and, next thing you know, they've been programmed to be even more passive than their church-going brethren. It literally makes me sick to see it. We're being kept in the dark and fed BS and the ones who wake up enough to ask questions are frightened back into silence. It sucks. LilyPat

by **rain** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 8:46 pm

"Whoa. Is that what there doing now?" this probably deserves it's own thread, but since you asked. "The closed court testimony of convicted terrorism suspect Jack Thomas has been released and in it he alleged he was threatened with torture and electrocution which left him with no choice but to speak to the Australian Federal Police (AFP) on the record. His lawyers will contest the 2003 interview's admissibility and conviction in the Court of Appeal later this month. Thomas's testimony explains why he agreed to the interview without legal representation, by detailing the atmosphere of his previous six interrogations. He says a Pakistani officer threatened to execute him, saying "we'll strip you, pour water over you and electrocute you if you don't tell the truth". An American officer he believed was from the CIA threatened to send agents to rape his wife saying, "she must be lonely by now". He says an American official asked him to act as a spy in Al Qaeda safe houses and when he refused, threatened to torture him and to send agents to rape his wife. Thomas's testimony states: "When there's a superpower on one side of a little table and you're with handcuffs behind your back, you have no choice but to cooperate." Of the thousand pages of documents released today, information said to be sensitive to national security remains blacked out." <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200607/s1678753.htm">www.abc.net.au/news/newsi...678753.htm</a> - apparently.

by **xsic bastardx** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 9:10 pm

Rain I was being totally sarcastic....lmao....but thank you for the harrowing account. I actually don't put it past them. If they are going to unleash dogs to attack individuals, like they did in Iraq or have sex in front of Individuals, like they did infront of devout muslims, they will do it to there own if given the chance. I hope I never have the pleasure myself. LilyPat thank you for your observation. I believe it has brought this thread back to the point and a credible disscussion.

by **rain** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:23 pm

I realised that x.b., but the synchronicity was just too, er, opportune

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 2:24 am

The goal of all mind control is regression back into child-like attitudes of being told what to do by Daddy. All humans experience a kind of base-line Abu Ghraib as helpless infants and the memory of this experience is imprinted in our subconscious. The illusion of authority and control is created by using a simple formula that car salesmen and CIA interrogators use: Disorientation (shatters identity and autonomy) Regression (a position of helplessness is induced using 'the three D's, debility, dread, and dependence) Transferrence (the controller is made to be seen as 'Daddy,' the relief agent for stress) Compliance (the victim does what Daddy wants to obtain relief) This is how all the rule-by-tension terror and social engineering works. This is the Hegelian Dialectic using emotions. But if you remain an autonomous rational adult instead, you can't be infantalized by scientific fascism.

by **LilyPatToo** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:40 pm

That's excellent info, Hugh! Where did you learn about it? I'm always looking for deeper understanding into how people are manipulated. LilyPat

by **Joe Hillshoist** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 9:20 pm

Jack Thomas also claimed he was threatened with execustion by a Pakistani official while he was in custody. OT totally, who was Jake kovco, what enquiry?

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 9:45 pm

LilyPat, I found the best summary of this in a 1999 book by Douglas Rushkoff called 'Coercion: Why We Listen to What "They" Say.' Rushkoff actually compares the 'hand-to-hand' sales techniques deployed by corporations to the CIA's Kubark interrogation manual. <a href="http://www.parascope.com/articles/0397/kubark06.htm">www.parascope.com/article...bark06.htm</a> (Ya gotta love techniques like 'Mortimer Snerd vs Spinoza.') He also describes how the CIA picked up some of their emotional savvy from Norman Vincent Peale and Dale Carnegie. I discovered (Alfred) Biderman's Chart of Coercion from the Korean war investigations into mind control back when Abu Ghraib broke into public view. I noticed that the eight control techniques used to break the human will were used by first parents and then schools and governments to socialize children into acceptable behavior patterns. Check this out and see if you can figure out how these things are institutionalized to infantalize the entire US population as adults- <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Isolation - Deprives victim of all social support of his ability to resist Induced debility, Exhaustion - Weakens mental and physical ability to resist Monopolization of perception - Eliminates stimuli competing with those controlled by captor; Frustrates all actions not consistent with compliance Threats - Cultivates anxiety and despair Occasional indulgences - Provides positive motivation for compliance; Hinders adjustment to deprivation  Demonstrating ‘omnipotence’ - Suggests futility of resistance Degradation - Makes cost of resistance appear more damaging to self esteem than capitulation; Reduces prisoner to ‘animal level’ concerns Enforcing trivial demands - Develops a habit of compliance Six of the eight coercive techniques that Biderman documented directly parallel the statements used by the National Domestic Violence Hotline website for emotional--non-physical--abuse. Both of the other two--Induced debility, Exhaustion and Occasional indulgences--are also integral parts of psychological abuse <hr></blockquote> <a href="http://www.psychabuse.info/page2.html#Biderman">www.psychabuse.info/page2.html#Biderman</a> <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Psychological Abuse and Biderman’s Methods of Coercion In 1973, Amnesty International compiled all their past research to produce a Report on Torture. A researcher named Biderman spearheaded the effort to discover how the Chinese were able to brainwash Allied prisoners of war without the use of 'excessive force'. His theory on the psychological aspects of torture is applicable to domestic violence situations. .... Biderman described the manipulative techniques employed by the Chinese interrogators in terms of Dependency, Debility and Dread (DDD). He concludes, "The combination of these three factors, carefully contrived and nurtured, prepares a resistant prisoner for complete compliance."9 If the proper application of DDD can make a trained soldier unable to resist the demands of his enemy, how effective it must be against an untrained civilian--especially when wielded by someone who claims to love her. Furthermore, the methods used by the captors to control prisoners of war are so similar to the psychological abuse leveled against victims of domestic violence10 that Biderman’s Chart of Coercion has been used to help educate women in battered women’s shelters.<hr></blockquote> <a href="http://www.nwrain.net/~refocus/coerchrt.html">www.nwrain.net/~refocus/coerchrt.html</a> <blockquote>Quote:<hr>"Most people who brainwash...use methods similar to those of prison guards who recognize that physical control is never easily accomplished without the cooperation of the prisoner. The most effective way to gain that cooperation is through subversive manipulation of the mind and feelings of the victim, who then becomes a psychological, as well as a physical, prisoner." from an Amnesty International publication, "Report on Torture", which depicts the brainwashing of prisoners of war.<hr></blockquote>

Listen to Hannah taken to NWO Denver underground base

chapter and verse

Re: chapter and verse

Re: Good grief

Re: Good grief

Re: Good grief

Re: Good grief

Re: Good grief

Re: Good grief

re:good grief

Re: re:good grief

re: good grief

Re: Passivity

Re: Passivity

Re: Passivity

Re: D-R-T-C

Who is online