MC and delusions (loads of TRIGGERS)

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

MC and delusions (loads of TRIGGERS)

Postby lightningBugout » Sat Nov 07, 2009 11:06 pm

This is a fun one. From the abstract of the paper, it is not clear (to me at least) if they are referring to people like myself who believe they were exposed to government programs as a child or people who believe raybeams are turning them into automatons.

I suppose the good news is that places like RI can basically be characterized as "enabling" the delusions of survivors.

whole paper here:
http://arginine.spc.org/vaughan/Bell_et ... eprint.pdf

------------------

Psychopathology. 2006;39(2):87-91. Epub 2006 Jan 2.
'Mind control' experiences on the internet: implications for the psychiatric diagnosis of delusions.

Bell V, Maiden C, Muñoz-Solomando A, Reddy V.

School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK. BellV1@cardiff.ac.uk

BACKGROUND: The DSM criteria for a delusion indicate that it should not include any beliefs held by a person's 'culture or subculture'. The internet has many examples of people reporting 'mind control experiences' (MCEs) on self-published web pages, many of which suggest a community based around such beliefs and experiences. It was hypothesized that some of these reports are likely to reflect delusional beliefs and the hyperlinks between web reports were likely to show evidence of social structure, demonstrating the 'culture or subculture' exemption to be increasingly redundant in light of new technology. SAMPLING AND METHODS: Texts from web sites reporting MCEs (n = 10), experience of cancer (n = 10), depression (n = 10) and being stalked (n = 10) were identified, and were blind-rated by three independent psychiatrists for the presence of delusions. Hyperlinks from web sites reporting MCEs were used to create a network structure; this was compared with a size-matched, randomly generated network and known social networks from the literature using social network analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The sampled web-published accounts of MCEs are highly likely to be influenced by delusional beliefs. Social network analysis suggests there is significant evidence of an online community based around these beliefs. The fact that individuals can form a community based on the content of a potentially delusional belief presents a paradox for the DSM diagnostic criteria for a delusion, and suggests the need to revise and revisit the original operational definition in the light of these new technological developments.
Last edited by lightningBugout on Mon Nov 16, 2009 4:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
"What's robbing a bank compared with founding a bank?" Bertolt Brecht
User avatar
lightningBugout
 
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:34 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby lightningBugout » Sat Nov 07, 2009 11:10 pm

Did this get posted here? I was on hiatus from RI when it was first published.

I am fascinated by the hijacking of the term "mind control" here. While there may be some overlap, please note that people believing themselves to be victims of "gang-stalking" and surveillance, etc. comprise a 100% different category than the comparatively much more metered group of folks who believe they were exposed to extreme abuse and/or MK Ultra and its children.


----------------

Sharing Their Demons on the Web
Paul Smith for The New York Times

By SARAH KERSHAW
Published: November 12, 2008

FOR years they lived in solitary terror of the light beams that caused searing headaches, the technology that took control of their minds and bodies. They feared the stalkers, people whose voices shouted from the walls or screamed in their heads, “We found you” and “We want you dead.”
Skip to next paragraph
Related
Times Topics: Mental Health and Disorders
Edel Rodriguez

When people who believe such things reported them to the police, doctors or family, they said they were often told they were crazy. Sometimes they were medicated or locked in hospital wards, or fired from jobs and isolated from the outside world.

But when they found one another on the Internet, everything changed. So many others were having the same experiences.

Type “mind control” or “gang stalking” into Google, and Web sites appear that describe cases of persecution, both psychological and physical, related with the same minute details — red and white cars following victims, vandalism of their homes, snickering by those around them.

Identified by some psychologists and psychiatrists as part of an “extreme community” on the Internet that appears to encourage delusional thinking, a growing number of such Web sites are filled with stories from people who say they are victims of mind control and stalking by gangs of government agents. The sites are drawing the concern of mental health professionals and the interest of researchers in psychology and psychiatry.

Although many Internet groups that offer peer support are considered helpful to the mentally ill, some experts say Web sites that amplify reports of mind control and group stalking represent a dark side of social networking. They may reinforce the troubled thinking of the mentally ill and impede treatment.

Dr. Ralph Hoffman, a psychiatry professor at Yale who studies delusions, said a growing number of his research subjects have told him of visiting mind-control sites, and finding in them confirmation of their own experiences.

“The views of these belief systems are like a shark that has to be constantly fed,” Dr. Hoffman said. “If you don’t feed the delusion, sooner or later it will die out or diminish on its own accord. The key thing is that it needs to be repetitively reinforced.”

That is what the Web sites do, he said. Similar concerns have arisen about a proliferation of sites that describe how to commit suicide, or others that promote anorexia and bulimia, providing detailed instructions on restricting food and photographs of skeletal women meant to be “thinspiration.”

For people who regularly visit and write on message boards on the mind-control sites, the idea that others would describe the sites as promoting delusional and psychotic thinking is simply evidence of a cover-up of the truth.

“It was a big relief to find the community,” said Derrick Robinson, 55, a janitor in Cincinnati and president of Freedom from Covert Harassment and Surveillance, a group that claims several hundred regular users of its Web site. “I felt that maybe there were others, but I wasn’t real sure until I did find this community,” Mr. Robinson said.

There is no concise survey of mind-control sites or others describing gang stalking — whose users believe that groups of people are following and controlling them, as part of a test of neurological or other kinds of weapons likely conducted by the government — on the Net. But they are easy to find. Some have hundreds of postings, along with links to dozers of similar sties. One, Gangstalkingworld.com, welcomes visitors with this description: “Gang Stalking is a systemic form of control, which seeks to destroy every aspect of a Targeted Individual’s life. The target is followed around and placed under surveillance by Civilian Spies/Snitches 24/7.”

The site lists more than 71,000 visitors, and it has links to several other sites, including Harrassment101.com, which has 965 posts.

One poster to Gang Stalking World wrote in August: “It’s insane that I daily have to come home and try to figure out if my Web sites will still be up or shut down. This week they have really been playing with me, and so it was my time to play back.” The post directs readers to other gang-stalking sites should their favorite sites be shut down.

Mr. Robinson said in an interview that that he has been tortured and abused by gang stalkers and by “neurological weaponry” since leaving the Navy in 1982. “To read the stories and the similarity of the harassment techniques that were going on, to hear about the vandalism, appliance tampering and all the other things were designed to drive a person crazy, who do you go to with this?” he said. “People will say you are delusional.”

For Mr. Robinson and several other Web site users interviewed for this article — all of whom insisted they were not delusional, including one man who said he had been hospitalized in psychiatric wards — the sites provide the powerful, unfamiliar experience of being understood by others.

“By and large, most people are sane and coherent and can relate exactly what’s happening to them,” Mr. Robinson said. “They can say the things that would otherwise get them labeled as delusional.”

His group of self-described “targeted individuals” met offline in Los Angeles last month for their inaugural conference, he said, where they attended a meeting to share stories, including the humiliating experiences of being told they are insane.

Mental health experts who have closely looked at the Web sites are careful to say that there is no way to prove if someone posting on, say, Mr. Robinson’s site, Freedomfchs.com, which says its mission is to seek justice for those singled out by “organized stalking and electromagnetic torture,” is suffering from mental illness.

Vaughan Bell, a British psychologist who has researched the effect of the Internet on mental illness, first began tracking sites with reports of mind control in 2004. In 2006 he published a study concluding that there was an extensive Internet community around such beliefs, and he called 10 sites he studied “likely psychotic sites.”

The extent of the community, Dr. Bell said, poses a paradox to the traditional way delusion is defined under the diagnostic guidelines of the American Psychiatric Association, which says that if a belief is held by a person’s “culture or subculture,” it is not a delusion. The exception accounts for rituals of religious faith, for example.

Dr. Bell, whose study was published in the journal Psychopathology, said that it does not suggest all people participating in mind-control sites are delusional, and that a firm diagnosis of psychosis could only be done in person.

For people who say they are the target of mind control or gang stalking, there may be enough evidence in the scientific literature to fan their beliefs. Many sites point to MK-ULTRA, the code name for a covert C.I.A. mind-control and chemical interrogation program begun in the 1950s.

Recently the sites have linked to an article published in September in Time magazine, “The Army’s Totally Serious Mind-Control Project,” which described a $4 million contract given to the Army to develop “thought helmets” that would allow troops to communicate through brain waves on the battlefield.

And the users of some sites have found the support of Jim Guest, a Republican state representative in Missouri, who wrote last year to his fellow legislators calling for an investigation into the claims of those who say they are being tortured by mind control.

“I’ve had enough calls, some from credible people — professors — being targeted by nonlethal weapons,” Mr. Guest said in a telephone interview, adding that nothing came of his request for a legislative investigation. “They become psychologically affected by it. They have trouble sleeping at night.”

He added: “I believe there are people who have been targeted by this. With this equipment, you have to test it on somebody to see if it works.”

Dr. Bell and some other mental health professionals say that even if the users of such sites are psychotic, forging an online connection to others and being told — perhaps for the first time — “you are not crazy” could actually have a positive effect on their illnesses.

“We know, for example, that things like social support, all of these positive social aspects are very good for people’s mental illness,” Dr. Bell said. “I wouldn’t say it’s entirely and completely positive, but it can be positive.”

Some research has shown that when people with delusions undergo group cognitive therapy, the group process can be helpful in their treatment.

But the Web sites are not moderated by professionals, and many postings discuss the failure of medication and say that mental health professionals are part of the conspiracy against them.

“These people lead quietly desperate lives,” said Dr. Jeffrey A. Lieberman, chairman of the Department of Psychiatry at Columbia University. “And if they are reinforcing each other and pulling people toward something, if they are using the Internet and getting reinforcement, that’s good.”

The mind-control sites remind some experts of the accounts of those claiming to have been abducted by aliens in the 1970s and ’80s. One person’s story begat another until many insisted they had had virtually identical experiences of being taken onto space ships by silvery sloe-eyed creatures.

Some of those now posting on mind-control sites say they are being remotely “sexually stimulated” by their torturers. Some alien abductees had said similar things. Subsequent research generally showed that those who believed they had been abducted were not psychotic, but suffering from severe memory and sleep problems, or personal traumas, Dr. Bell said.

Psychiatrists and researchers say it is too soon to say whether communication on the Internet among people who may be psychotic will negatively effect their illnesses.” This is a very complex little corner,” said Dr. Ken Duckworth, the medical director for the National Alliance on Mental Illness, an advocacy group. “Some people may find it’s healing, but these are really hard questions. The Internet isn’t a cause of mental illness, it’s a complicating new variable.”
"What's robbing a bank compared with founding a bank?" Bertolt Brecht
User avatar
lightningBugout
 
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:34 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby American Dream » Sat Nov 07, 2009 11:16 pm

Image
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby lightningBugout » Sat Nov 07, 2009 11:23 pm

I got stuck at home last night and found myself reading Vice magazine, online. They had a pithy little piece about h1n1 vaccines and referred to the "paranoid schizophrenics" who believe that vaccines are harmful. While I appreciated their linking of the phrase to AJ's website, it reminded me again of how curious it is that we in this country use schizophrenia as a smear against those who may believe in conspiracies.

I know the soviets used "mental illness" as a strategy for the repression of dissenters. But I wonder, what is the genesis and etiology in the States for the same phenomena? Anyone.
"What's robbing a bank compared with founding a bank?" Bertolt Brecht
User avatar
lightningBugout
 
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:34 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby mulebone » Sun Nov 08, 2009 12:06 am

Schizophrenia can only be used as a smear amongst folk who don't know much about schizophrenia. Granted, that's probably most of the population, but the mass mind has never been particularly adroit or knowledgeable.

For example, in 1919, Freud disciple Dr. Viktor Tausk published a paper on the origins of a common delusion suffered by a myriad number of schizophrenics. In this delusion, those afflicted spoke of flat depthless images emanating from a small black box which, in turn, imprinted these foreign notions and images on their minds.
Eventually sufferers felt that this alien imagery replaced their own thoughts and feelings to such a great degree that they began to lose the ability to distinguish between these pseudo-events and actual reality.

It wasn't long after this that the infant TV came kicking & screaming into the world. If that last bit about pseudo events replacing reality doesn't provide a good description of our celebrity obsessed culture, where the death of someone like Michael Jackson causes an outpouring of surreal pseudo-grief while the real tragedy of murdered Iraqis elicits none, I'll eat my hat.

I'd postulate that these supposed sick folk were actually visionaries who, somehow, caught a glimpse of our future.

Quite rightly, it scared the spit out of them.

I'd also postulate that the terms "sick" and "well" have almost no meaning these days. If they ever did. If you get the chance, take a spin around Jim Hogshire's Pill-A-Go-Go. I think that the psychiatric community has some version of "normal" that only exists in their textbooks and, maybe, in their fevered little imaginations.
In my opinion, anyone can be made to appear "mentally ill" given enough time and ingenuity.
Well Robert Moore went down heavy
With a crash upon the floor
And over to his thrashin' body
Betty Coltrane she did crawl.
She put the gun to the back of his head
And pulled the trigger once more
And blew his brains out
All over the table.
mulebone
 
Posts: 279
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 12:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby mulebone » Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:04 am

One more thing, the term "mind control" has probably outlived its usefulness.
Huge numbers of folk are "mind controlled" who have never been exposed outright to any clandestine government program. Just because they don't see themselves as such doesn't make it any less true.

For example, let's say 100,000 people are sitting around on a Saturday night watching NCIS. At each emotion tugging plot twist, 100,000 people are probably thinking the same fucking thing at the same fucking time. All those individuals homogenized into a nice lumpen mass. If that ain't mind control, again, I'll eat my hat. I've witnessed far too many folk regurgitating shit they heard on TV as if it were their own thoughts to see them as anything other than mind controlled.

To me, this is far creepier than the "mind control" you're referring to, primarily because unwitting government test subjects are exactly that, unwitting. Therefore, they're innocent victims. But the folk who allow themselves to be added to the big gob of fleshy tube watching Play Doh do this by their own volition. While I can feel sympathy for any supposed unwitting test subjects, I find it really damn hard to work up any for the mass of media addicts who wittingly allow themselves to be controlled every damn day of their lives.

I realize that the "influencing machine" delusion has a long pedigree amongst schizophrenics, but can we really call it a delusion when just about every home has a big high definition flat screen influencing machine sitting right in their living rooms. The fact that most folk don't see it as such would lead me to wonder who, exactly, is really delusional.
Well Robert Moore went down heavy
With a crash upon the floor
And over to his thrashin' body
Betty Coltrane she did crawl.
She put the gun to the back of his head
And pulled the trigger once more
And blew his brains out
All over the table.
mulebone
 
Posts: 279
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 12:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 23 » Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:17 am

mulebone wrote:I realize that the "influencing machine" delusion has a long pedigree amongst schizophrenics, but can we really call it a delusion when just about every home has a big high definition flat screen influencing machine sitting right in their living rooms. The fact that most folk don't see it as such would lead me to wonder who, exactly, is really delusional.


TELEVISION AND THE HIVE MIND
http://www.mackwhite.com/tv.html

Image
"Once you label me, you negate me." — Soren Kierkegaard
User avatar
23
 
Posts: 1548
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 10:57 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby lightningBugout » Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:24 am

Yep, TV is a form of "mind control." But for most survivors, "mind control" is our best google bet at finding others who experienced things like we did.
Last edited by lightningBugout on Wed Nov 11, 2009 6:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
"What's robbing a bank compared with founding a bank?" Bertolt Brecht
User avatar
lightningBugout
 
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:34 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby n0x23 » Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:38 am

One more thing, the term "mind control" has probably outlived its usefulness.


As has the term "mind", which is nothing but a thought about a thought.

So how can one control something that does not inherently exist?

The answer is a non sequitur, an absurdism, an oxymoron.

All day, day after day, folks running around talking crazy talk.
"No God no Brahma can be found
No matter of this wheel of life,
Just bare phenomena roll
Dependent on conditions all."
n0x23
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 11:35 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby n0x23 » Sun Nov 08, 2009 12:45 pm

Cp2w wrote: (paraphrasing)
Is that your position?


Yes, it is my position that the term "mind" has probably outlived its usefulness.


Cp2w wrote: (paraphrasing)

What is [t]he answer?


I should have been more specific....So how can one control something that does not inherently exist?

Any answer that is given, will most likely be a non sequitur, an absurdism, an oxymoron.

Why did you type "[t]he" like that?


You also agreed with my comment..."All day, day after day, folks running around talking crazy talk."...were you implying that what I posted was "crazy talk"?


If any of your questions that I paraphrased are incorrect, I apologize, it was not intentional. :)
"No God no Brahma can be found
No matter of this wheel of life,
Just bare phenomena roll
Dependent on conditions all."
n0x23
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 11:35 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 23 » Sun Nov 08, 2009 12:53 pm

n0x23 wrote:I should have been more specific....So how can one control something that does not inherently exist?


You can't. Since the controller doesn't exist either.

Thoughts will continue to appear to be real to the thinker, as long as the thinker perceives himself to be real.
"Once you label me, you negate me." — Soren Kierkegaard
User avatar
23
 
Posts: 1548
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 10:57 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby compared2what? » Sun Nov 08, 2009 12:54 pm

Thanks. The post with the questions I actually asked was :

n0x23 wrote:
One more thing, the term "mind control" has probably outlived its usefulness.


As has the term "mind", which is nothing but a thought about a thought.

So how can one control something that does not inherently exist?


Is it your position that thoughts don't inherently exist?

The answer is a non sequitur, an absurdism, an oxymoron.


What answer is "[t]he answer"?

All day, day after day, folks running around talking crazy talk.


No arguments here.
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby compared2what? » Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:05 pm

n0x23 wrote:Why did you type "[t]he" like that?


In order to accurately quote your text, in which the initial "T" was capitalized without putting a random initially-capped consonant in the middle of the sentence.

You also agreed with my comment..."All day, day after day, folks running around talking crazy talk."...were you implying that what I posted was "crazy talk"?


No. I couldn't agree more that they do.

If any of your questions that I paraphrased are incorrect, I apologize, it was not intentional. :)


No worries. It was very conscientious of you to attempt the reply! Your paraphrase of the first question did somewhat alter its meaning, though. So if you feel like answering it, I'd appreciate the response.

No pressures either, however.
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby n0x23 » Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:14 pm

You can't. Since the controller doesn't exist either.


Agreed.
That is why the term "mind control" is an oxymoron.


Thoughts will continue to appear to be real to the thinker, as long as the thinker perceives himself to be real.


I would like to qualify that, by stating, the thinker does not perceive, the thinker is the effect of the cause, the cause being the thought that preceded it and while there is no transubstantiation between thoughts, the linkage between the two are the transitory, supporting conditions and the illusion that the act of perception is an individualistic phenomenon.
"No God no Brahma can be found
No matter of this wheel of life,
Just bare phenomena roll
Dependent on conditions all."
n0x23
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 11:35 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 23 » Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:18 pm

n0x23 wrote:
You can't. Since the controller doesn't exist either.


Agreed.
That is why the term "mind control" is an oxymoron.


Thoughts will continue to appear to be real to the thinker, as long as the thinker perceives himself to be real.


I would like to qualify that, by stating, the thinker does not perceive, the thinker is the effect of the cause, the cause being the thought that preceded it and while there is no transubstantiation between thoughts, the linkage between the two are the transitory, supporting conditions and the illusion that the act of perception is an individualistic phenomenon.


But the notion of cause-effect is still a thought. A perception.

Cause-effect supports the notion, too, of time. Something that Einstein posited isn't real either.

Any perception of a perception only strengthens the perceived reality of perceptions.

And as long as there is a perceiver who perceives himself to be real, his perceptions will appear to be real as well.
"Once you label me, you negate me." — Soren Kierkegaard
User avatar
23
 
Posts: 1548
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 10:57 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Next

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 9 guests