Aliens, Culture Control & the End of Dream's End

[American Dream]

I can't say I fully agree with the characterization of MKULTRA given above.

A full array of psychiatric techniques to fulfill a wide variety of operational and experimental goals can not be written off so easily as meaningless or unnecessary.

With regards to the issue of malicious mind-messers, I was reminded me of this important quote, always relevant to the process of trying to suss out the motivations of shady people on the Internet:

"Spook or asshole, what's the difference?"

-John Judge

[monkeytribe23]

Coming back to the events surrounding his disappearance, Franck
now told Guieu more details he remembered of his abduction: he felt
prepared for what was coming, he said, as soon as he woke up from his
deep sleep in the car. Next he was lying on a flat surface, on top of a
machine located in some sort of laboratory. This surface was comfortable,
and he was not physically restrained. Along the walls were tall
cabinets with blinking lights and dials, above which were signs he could
not read. He fell asleep again and does not know how long he was
unconscious, but he is sure to have been alternately awake and asleep
numerous times. He was always in the same room, except that small,
luminous spheres, the size of a tennis ball, often floated in the air above
him. Voices spoke to him, pleasant voices, which seemed to come from
these spheres. They discussed the future survival of humanity and gave
him the date of the official contact between them and the earth.

[.....]

"Then will you tell me what the disappearance of Franck Fontaine
was all about?"
"We refer to the Cergy operation as an Exercise of General Synthesis,"
Mr. D said calmly, as if he spoke of the latest engine test for a new
kind of rocket. "A highly-placed personality has done detailed planning
for it." He mentioned the name of a cabinet member with vast connections
in the world of high technology.
"How many people were in the know?"
"No more than ten to fifteen, all at a high enough level to establish
what sort of manipulation was justified under the state secrets rule."
"What were your objectives?" asked my informant, who was amazed
at the turn the conversation had taken. .
"The operation was structured around military, scientific, and political
goals. It was purely national and had no impact beyond our borders."
"What happened to Fontaine?"
"We put him to sleep and he was kept under an altered state of high
suggestibility."
"Were the police and the gendarmerie aware that the operation was
a hoax conducted by a higher-level agency?"
"Certainly not. Their behavior under these conditions was one of the
things we wanted to observe."
"What was your own role?"
"My interest in the affair is purely personal. It has no relationship
to my position with the French Air Force."
"Would it be correct to say that you deliberately created a major
UFO event to find out if you could rely on the reactions and the
investigative abilities of local law enforcement agencies?" asked the
astonished researcher.
"That would be a fair way to describe it."
"What about GEPAN?"
Mr. D shrugged. "We had the same reasons to find out how the
scientific experts would react, naturally."
"Were you also using the media? Did you have wider objectives?"
"I cannot answer your question. But if this operation had been
completed, the next phase would have been far worse."
"Why are you telling me all this?"
"I have my own reasons."
"Aren't you afraid I will publish this interview?"
"Anything you publish will simply be denied."
The man got up to indicate that the interview had ended.

Jacques Vallee - Revelations

[nathan28]

I can't say I fully agree with the characterization of MKULTRA given above.

A full array of psychiatric techniques to fulfill a wide variety of operational and experimental goals can not be written off so easily as meaningless or unnecessary.

With regards to the issue of malicious mind-messers, I was reminded me of this important quote, always relevant to the process of trying to suss out the motivations of shady people on the Internet:

"Spook or asshole, what's the difference?"

-John Judge

I don't disagree. I'm saying when you step back from it, though, and give it a little space, it's deadly folly. Folly, but still deadly. Torturers know all sorts of subtle technique i'd imagine but it's still torture. And likewise I'd be curious to know how widely-deployed mind "control" in public is today. And to what extent it's necessary and to what extent it's actively deployed. TV is the best psyop of all time and that practically happened by itself.

I'll have to admit, part of my suspicion about all of this lies based on my general attitude towards technology. I'm not into iPhones or gadgets that much--the reason I finally bought a measley 2 GB ipod was so I didn't have to listen to Top 16 electronic music at the gym. I run Linux on one computer at home, but it's a hobby, that's all. So if i was a spook sitting on awesome acoustic mind control devices, I'm not sure I'd feel the need to deploy it when I could just send someone in Operations to go break into an activist's apartment.


Monkeytribe, good find.


FWIW Dream's End's website is now on total lockdown vs. the Wayback Machine, so he is probably not happy about this burst of interest and I'm not sure I blame him. His materials were, however, at one point public domain... down the memory hole.

(rhymes with "HTTtrack")

Like I said, though, there's someone actively watching, even if it's just DE.

And I'm not totally comfortable doing a public post-mortem on this when it's clear that the focus of it all is not happy with that, since I mean no ill. So I may refrain from much further participation, but I said that twice already.


So, assuming it is more than personality conflicts--since DE has taken away the original mat'l this is by memory--DE had between three or four key points IME:

1. The alien abduction phenomenon was a cover for the MC programs and suggests that they have persisted
2. The far Right has via people like Pat Buchanan, Catherine Austin Fitts, Paul Craig Roberts and other anti-Bush conservatives infiltrated the the Left not only with agent provacatuers but in fact in a leadership role as well
3. the SRI Changing Images project has been injected into the popular culture to redirect political energy, particularly anything socialist, into W.O.O., particularly via Theosophy-like programs
4. Changing Images in DE's opinion may--emphasis on the "may"--have been part of something not all that dissimilar to what the Christian Fundies worry about when they fret over the Satanists in the NWO

Now, you can already see how those theories might have upset someone outside of the psyops-special-forces: the Left, the New Age, the populist Right, etc., are all implicated. But are any of those suggestions really so damning that they'd warrant the psyops special team involvement? Maybe. But maybe not.

#1. is a problem, because it cuts through the cover story. But with useful idiots like David Icke, is it much of a worry that someone else pointed to the man behind the curtain?

#2. is not that surprising--it's in plain sight, far more than some of the more suspect '70s-era funding of the far right or even the Elohim City shenanigans from about twenty years ago.

#3. Could get someone's cackles up. This is actually the most interesting to me since I have trouble imagining how it would unfold exactly, and the only reference point I have would be the Course in Miracles-MK-ULTRA connection.

#4. is W.O.O. already. If 8-bit were here maybe he'd comment. I don't have much to say, save that most occultists can't be trusted to watch your own dog, let alone run a centuries-long scheme, but maybe that's the point.

[compared2what?]

Twof points:

(1) I read Changing Images of Man. And first of all, if the hypothesis is that publicizing its existence, or writing an astute and compelling analysis of it might constitute a threat to power great enough to psy-op the credibility out of him or her -- btw, is that the proposition? I've kind of gotten lost -- while anything's possible, I'd put the odds of it being the case in the low-to-non-existent range. For one thing, it's kind of self-evident that the astute and compelling analysis wasn't discredited.

For another, at least as far as I'm aware, there's very little (if any) precedent among any of the governmental and/or non-governmental entities who play that shit for running that particular kind of game on a person who (hypothetically) represents that particular kind of threat -- ie, on someone whose work is primarily analytical (as opposed to investigative) and broadly informative (as opposed to specifically revelatory of named and dated outrageous and/or criminal conduct).

Plus, although I should qualify this premise as based in large part on personal and anecdotal evidence, it's at least not contradicted by pertinent literature and history on the subject, so fwiw:

Effective professional gaslighting pretty much has to include one or both of two features that aren't in the picture here:

First of all, it almost always includes a physically invasive component. That can be anywhere on the spectrum of mild-to-extreme from dead-cat-on-doorstep, to the sudden-onset chronic-getting-of-flat-tires. to being conspicuously followed for a short distance by someone who's not doing anything more definitively menacing than acting and/or looking so bizarre that describing them in a police report would sound like a paranoid delusion to most peope, to crackly noises on your phone line that wouldn't ordinarily be scary if you weren't on the look-out for scariness. In fact, ideally it should be something that ambiguous in origin, whether it's a bullet in the mailbox, or a beat-down, or one or two prank calls.

Second of all, whoever might or might not be fucking with you almost always wants you to be in absolutely no doubt at all about exactly what the source of the trouble you might or might not be having is, in an ambiguously unprovable kind of a way.

Because the tactical objective of gaslighting isn't primarily to discredit the subject by making him or her look and/or actually go crazy, although that has several major secondary benefits, both as a lesson to others and as an insurance policy if the primary objective -- which is purely to put a stop to whatever threatening activity brought on the pys-op -- either fails totally or only succeeds temporarily. I mean, discrediting is good but obviously having nothing out there in need of discrediting is priceless.

So it has to create at least the perception of prospective physical risk and it has to be clear about precisely what behavior needs to be modified and why. And neither of those things appears to apply either to DE or to anyone else who was or is here -- or at least not that I know of, and I could easily be mistaken about that. Please correct me if I am.

(2)....I've said this before. But, hey, I'll say it again!

As far as I'm concerned, there's only one common-to-near-universal aspect of gaslighting (and/or other, comparable psy-op fear-inducing techniques) that matters for the purposes of self-defense.** And that's that they almost always create an open question that's exceptionally arousing to contemplate. As a matter of fact, there's often, although not always, a part of the puzzle that has literal or symbolical associations with some form of culturally and socially repressed sexual arousal -- ie, sexualized children, or a hot chick it would be necrophiliac to think about fucking, or the money shot of some big phallic buildings having an explosive orgasm. Or whatever. And yes, I agree that last one's debatable, but it's not that important, and anyone who feels implicated by it can consider it retracted.

It's imperative, imo, to be on the look-out for this and to take swift, decisive action if you detect it. That being the counter-intuitive but 100 percent fool-proof defensive action of never spending one moment's thought or energy contemplating any part of it, unless you have an interest or objective that absolutely depends on it. In which case, you should contemplate it only for whatever predetermined amount of time you've decided in advance to allot to pursuing one clearly defined goal at a time on terms that you've clearly and conscientiously established for yourself. Then you should get some fresh air and exercise or go see a movie. Also, it can't hurt to Tell someone you trust what you intend to do in advance, and be honest with at least yourself and possibly that person if you don't observe the boundaries you set for yourself.

Do not, under any circumstances, dwell on the question on whatever free-range terms may occur to you as you go, or ones that you've accepted as they were presented or suggested to you. If you're the target of the ambiguous and remote harassment, remind yourself that it doesn't matter at all whether it's all in your mind or actually happening. Because either way, it can't damage or destroy your life by consuming it if you don't pay any attention to it.

And....I'm not saying that what's imperative imo and effective in my experience is therefore mandatory for all other people in every conceivable circumstance, despite the forceful phrasing that makes it sound like that's exactly what I'm saying.

That's really just me addressing myself, because I know my own weaknesses. However, on less subjective grounds, I do also think that you can't go wrong overestimating how insdiously seductive or how time-consuming having your personal curiosity aroused can be: It's like a drug, people lose their lives to it without even noticing. Owing to which, I'm offering the above as a perspective worth considering as you go about your own independently thinking way more because it's the only perspective I have that works than because it's the only one there is.

Those are my two subjective cents.

**Except, of course, taking sensible precautions vis-a-vis your physical safety. Which includes being prepared to take photographs or video of anything that happens to you in public, I am adding, just because that's not emphasized enough, I have no idea why.

[Wombaticus Rex]

I would also agree, and I suspect Ty would as well: there are no secret sentences in Changing Images of Man. It's a very fascinating and (intellectually) high-level document, but none of the master plans included are unique. You can read The Aquarian Conspiracy or Harman's Global Mind Change and get all the same information. To me the most interesting thing about the document was it's origin: it's really one of the last Dharma-style mad scientists on acid project the pentagon paid for. The weird science has gotten a lot more weaponized and boring (and much more destructive and disgusting) in the years since CIM was published.

As a related aside: I always felt the proper title was Changing Hardwired Images of Mankind's Potential, because then the acronym would be cooler.

I don't think the hornet's nest that left Ty in Internets Exile and reading this thread in silence had much to do with SRI, though. The midwest is full of amazingly evil things happening in plain sight.

[barracuda]

That was an interesting read, compared, but I am puzzled by the part #2, outline by you below:

As far as I'm concerned, there's only one common-to-near-universal aspect of gaslighting (and/or other, comparable psy-op fear-inducing techniques) that matters for the purposes of self-defense.** And that's that they almost always create an open question that's exceptionally arousing to contemplate. As a matter of fact, there's often, although not always, a part of the puzzle that has literal or symbolical associations with some form of culturally and socially repressed sexual arousal -- ie, sexualized children, or a hot chick it would be necrophiliac to think about fucking, or the money shot of some big phallic buildings having an explosive orgasm.

Why is this association mandatory or commonly used, and what is the function of it? In your opinion. And where do you get this background? Just for my own curiosity...

[OP ED]

wanna hear a funny story?

something totally unrelated to any of this.

last nite i couldn't sleep. i'd suggest this is a result of having slept all day. whatever it was, i was up and down all evening. got bored this morning. not sure exactly what time, but the sun had just started coming up but couldn't actually be seen from here yet.

so i'm trying to sleep. dozing in and out. had this bizarre dream of some mexican guy [i don't know] who managed to play me out of some money in some scam artistry outside my local IHOP where i was going to meet some friends for dinner. anyhow he basically robs me and i spend the nite trying to catch him, missing the dinner date.

[somehow IHOP let me eat for free when i finally get inside, something they've actually done for me before on account of my having gone there for years]

afterwards, as i go home, i drive through this sort of carnival parade thing blocking my street. at first i thought they were anti-abortion protestors, as there is an "advisory" clinic on my block that gets targeted fairly often during the summer. [still dreaming here] they block my path. lots of people in masks and costumes of various sorts. eventually they surround my car and start pounding my windows and doors. it is at this point that i realize that these people aren't wearing animal masks, etc, that in fact, they all have animal heads. as my window finally caves in, i wake up.

look at the clock, i'd only dozed off for a few minutes. fortunately my fever from my recent sickness seems to have broken. i feel much better actually except for being mildly disturbed by my dream.

needing nicotine and caffeine, i decide to call off sleeping, and get up for the day. get dressed. start coffee. nagging feeling. [like i forgot something important] turn on oven/stove to make breakfast. pour coffee. decide i need fresh air, since i can breathe again now, and decide to take my coffee into my garage. i go outside, but don't open the garage door. too chilly for me to enjoy the full effect in my recovering state. i leave the lights off because i enjoy the sorta pale dawnlite. drinking coffee, light cigarette. i wander about a moment.

eventually i walk over to the window of the garage door, looks out on my driveway.

there is some dude [speculative] standing in my driveway. about say, 40 yrds away, near the street. in a robe and cloak. with a strange mask on. looks like an elephant.

just fucking staring at my house.

not moving at all. i watch [him?] through my window for a few minutes. maybe less, like two or three minutes. felt longer i'm sure. he never moves, but i get the distinct impression he is staring at me and knows i can see him, even though this should be impossible. [this particular window is basically one-way with the lights off inside, and nowhere i'd been in my house was visible from the front, even if one could see through my perpetually closed blinds] while i am pondering this, reassuring myself that there is in fact no way this person can see me, it finally moves. just nodding its head. like "yes, i can see you". creeped me out. my interest is no longer passive and i take two steps to the door inside to retrieve one of my many firearms. when i return to the window, in preparations to open the door and question and/or frighten this person, they are gone.

is it better to hope that i am now schizophrenic or that creepy people in masks are stalking me?

all of this happened a few hours ago.

[OP ED]

That was an interesting read, compared, but I am puzzled by the part #2, outline by you below:

As far as I'm concerned, there's only one common-to-near-universal aspect of gaslighting (and/or other, comparable psy-op fear-inducing techniques) that matters for the purposes of self-defense.** And that's that they almost always create an open question that's exceptionally arousing to contemplate. As a matter of fact, there's often, although not always, a part of the puzzle that has literal or symbolical associations with some form of culturally and socially repressed sexual arousal -- ie, sexualized children, or a hot chick it would be necrophiliac to think about fucking, or the money shot of some big phallic buildings having an explosive orgasm.

Why is this association mandatory or commonly used, and what is the function of it? In your opinion. And where do you get this background? Just for my own curiosity...

sounds a bit freudian for me, honestly.

[Col. Quisp]

OE: Sounds like you've been messin' where you shouldna been a messin...

spooky, fer shure

i hope you're not the next casualty (i.e., DE)

[Perelandra]

is it better to hope that i am now schizophrenic or that creepy people in masks are stalking me?

I'm having trouble with this one, too many questions. Is it possible the light was bad and it was an Alzheimer's victim in coat and hat? Along with your dream, it seems very odd. Did you ever figure out the mailbox incident?
Wowie. Start carrying your camera, at least.

[rrapt]

Wow OP ED, what an experience! To me its weird but not really surprising that you had the dream featuring animal-headed people before seeing the elephant man. Time is a phenomenon which takes its familiar form (past>present>future) in our conscious worldly mind state, but is according to some more hip to this stuff than me, a component of time-space. Those two are not so distinct as we suppose, so perhaps your dream was essentially in some way simultaneous with the sighting of the elephant man. Or after it or before it as you remember.

That comment was just to show I'm interested, not that I have any good insight. I'm clueless on how the dream and the elephant man relate; to me it would be quite scary, first that it happened and second that I have no idea what it means.

Quit smoking, cut back on the coffee, get your sleep pattern in order, and watch more TV. You'll be fine.

[OP ED]

is it better to hope that i am now schizophrenic or that creepy people in masks are stalking me?

I'm having trouble with this one, too many questions. Is it possible the light was bad and it was an Alzheimer's victim in coat and hat? Along with your dream, it seems very odd. Did you ever figure out the mailbox incident?
Wowie. Start carrying your camera, at least.

never figured out the other. there are suspects but little evidence. and the police here don't care unless my mailbox is worth more than $5000, which was unlikely considering i probably got it at a garage sale.

as for the other, no, i could see them quite clearly in the available light. well enough to know the colors of everything. it was late enough the birds were already up.

my current hypothesis is that one of my cult friends was tripping and decided to test his newfound telepathy on me. i've been checking around for missing occultists. the beginning of my dream was remarkably normal, though that makes it weirder to me, actually.

i don't have nearly as many cameras as i do firearms, but it is something i will consider, in the event something similar happens again. normally i have a cameraphone actually, but it was early enough that it was still on the charger instead of in my pocket.

[my stalker episodes, i am fairly sure, are likely completely unrelated to DE, if anything i routinely interact with much more disturbed people than his internet death groupies]

[i only mentioned it because it was very recent and perplexing and only slightly OT]

i've been drawing the fucker before i forget the details of [his] appearance.

edit:

Quit smoking, cut back on the coffee, get your sleep pattern in order, and watch more TV. You'll be fine.

quitting smoking is easier said than done.
hadn't had coffee for days. i'd only had a few sips this morning.
and my sleep patterns are always abnormal but i don't always see weird people on my property. [by always, i mean since i was little]

watching more tv really isn't an option for me.

[nathan28]

I would also agree, and I suspect Ty would as well: there are no secret sentences in Changing Images of Man. It's a very fascinating and (intellectually) high-level document, but none of the master plans included are unique. You can read The Aquarian Conspiracy or Harman's Global Mind Change and get all the same information. To me the most interesting thing about the document was it's origin: it's really one of the last Dharma-style mad scientists on acid project the pentagon paid for. The weird science has gotten a lot more weaponized and boring (and much more destructive and disgusting) in the years since CIM was published.

As a related aside: I always felt the proper title was Changing Hardwired Images of Mankind's Potential, because then the acronym would be cooler.

I don't think the hornet's nest that left Ty in Internets Exile and reading this thread in silence had much to do with SRI, though. The midwest is full of amazingly evil things happening in plain sight.

That was part of my intent behind trying to do a post-mortem on it, to point the forum brain at it and just take it apart. See if any of the actual moving parts line up with the theories of the motion. As C2W pointed out, analysis of something already out in public isn't really cause for what we have seen suggested has happened. I am running out of pontification points.

I don't think Changing Images is directly intellectually stimulating, but it is a very interesting artifact--I'd say, not only do you not see this coming out of the Pentagon anymore, you don't see that sort of high-level (which means, "prone to being very wrong") thing taking place anywhere (and, on a personal note, for those of us who spent a lot of time in public libraries, it's kind of sad)--I think, however, that there is a missing link in the SRI-Changing Images--New Age Marketing craze. There's something missing from how we get from Changing Images of Chimps to The Secret. Who "injected" this stuff and where? I have some personal stake in that question on account of all the W.O.O. I've read, witnessed and done, and I certainly think it very much it may have been a path that's been meant to walk down.

There is still plenty of mad science going on with DARPA, it's just way lame. but hell, TIA-IAO was good for some serious paranoid lulz and that was only a couple years ago.

Anyway it's also a moot point at this late date, "Changing Images of [Humanity]" matters a lot less than "General Crisis of Neoliberalism".


OE: Generally i have no comment on elephant man, save to say I'd hope you were reaching for a rifle or something else with good penetrating power if you had the opportunity to choose your weapon

[OP ED]

OE: Generally i have no comment on elephant man, save to say I'd hope you were reaching for a rifle or something else with good penetrating power if you had the opportunity to choose your weapon

i actually came to your thread to discuss other things. i just felt like sharing. for several reasons, not least among them that people around here might take me more seriously than say, the local police. i didn't have a crime to report anyhow, only creepiness. "you say a blue elephant, maybe 5'7" in a cloak? sir have you been drinking?" :: "well yes officer, but only after the elephant creeped me out" etc etc

...

1. The alien abduction phenomenon was a cover for the MC programs and suggests that they have persisted

by this theory it would also suggest that MC cults have been faking "abductions" for millenia and also the associated high weirdness. as such it is an unlikely scenario IMO.

did the CIA contact Joseph Smith or Saul/Paul?

2. The far Right has via people like Pat Buchanan, Catherine Austin Fitts, Paul Craig Roberts and other anti-Bush conservatives infiltrated the the Left not only with agent provacatuers but in fact in a leadership role as well

this is likely true, but may be entirely unrelated to the other subjects. political flipflopping or disingenuities are fairly common.

3. the SRI Changing Images project has been injected into the popular culture to redirect political energy, particularly anything socialist, into W.O.O., particularly via Theosophy-like programs

i think rather that New Age is merely the New Radical Chic for leftists and that its political overtones were adopted afterwards. a lot of the democrats seem truly dedicated to their fluffy bunny cults.

4. Changing Images in DE's opinion may--emphasis on the "may"--have been part of something not all that dissimilar to what the Christian Fundies worry about when they fret over the Satanists in the NWO

i'd say it probably is, as far as christians are concerned. the rightist christians who educated me regarded the popularization of especially oriental systems as being part of satan's plan to rule us all.

[Wombaticus Rex]

I think, however, that there is a missing link in the SRI-Changing Images--New Age Marketing craze. There's something missing from how we get from Changing Images of Chimps to The Secret. Who "injected" this stuff and where? I have some personal stake in that question on account of all the W.O.O. I've read, witnessed and done, and I certainly think it very much it may have been a path that's been meant to walk down.

offhand:

1. Episode 3 of the Adam Curtis documentary Century of the Self offers a great breakdown of how "alternative" psychology and the sociology wizards at SRI created the market segmentation and consumer identities that have driven the past 30 years of nihilist greed and destruction.

2. Turn Off Your Mind, Gary Lachman. Also provides a memorable overview of the corruption/decay of the flower power momentum.

I know there's a much better resource that's slipping my frontal lobes right now.