Sirhan Sirhan: I was brainwashed' into killing

[Project Willow]

Pw, I was being a bit facetious but I am willing to defend this assertion. I am well aware of MK, as you know, personally as well. However, when we are making political observations OR legal ones, I will have to see more evidence to someone being so deeply controlled so as to make them KILL, (as opposed to granting a blowjob), and lose accountability.

I still differ with you and we should have the legal discussion, it's come up a number of times of late.

Your example , a person who kills under gunpoint, is not relevant. (that would be justified killing AT TIMES, but not always. We are not supposed to kill someone else to save our lives, but self defense can extend to some of these cases).

It most certainly is relevant as that kind of coercion, kill or be killed, is a major component of MC, but it's not the only one.

I was refering to fascism "accountability" problem, because that's how it works, people harm others at gun point, and somehow we never know who is the original guy at the top who does it of choice. I made this assertion in view of the selective and differential treatment of "accountability" on this board, as a POLITICAL board. I hope the case was made. the "they made me do it" defense is not rigorously applied here, to say the least.

"I was just following orders" is indeed morally problematic in many cases, so the question becomes is it possible to draw a line where coercion or lack of control diffuse responsibility? I'll argue that there is such a line and behind it are the lethal weapons I've seen created through the tortures of MC.

LAstly, personal note, in 1992, I think or perhaps late 1991, I was dragged to a shooting range in West LA, almost daily, with an Israeli thug, Yehuda something, who would put me in the booth with a large shining Glock pistol. that's the closest to "manchurian" I ever got, hopefully I have never used this skill, but I am well aware of hypnosis and induced amnesia. We can all be subjected to various strange deeds, and children in Siera Leona kill their own families and tribe after a short period of drug-cruelty training. I do think though that if we recognize those situations, it should be done with rigour, and intellectual honesty.

I'll share something of my experience too. I was a young kid at the time and could barely hold up the rifle. I've always been thankful I wasn't a great shot. This kind of training, from what I know of other survivors, is SOP. In my experience, assassins aren't created in great numbers but when they're done well, they're not only trustworthy, they're efficient and lethal as hell.

[JackRiddler]

There is something gently disturbing about the smiles on offer here.

Horndogs, for sure. Them along with 82% of the penis-afflicted.

[82_28]

I think that if you can kill for an intangible purpose where you get nothing in return from the fruits of your own creative labor -- you have been brainwashed.

Note SS's words from the night Bobby Kennedy was shot: "I did it for my country". Which isn't to say SS did do the killing, as Jeff points out. However, somebody did. Brainwashing is all about keeping the self hidden from itself. Parris Is, "Where we make Marines." None of these people are born natural warriors, however they too do what they do "for the country". They are born babies into a culture/cultures that pays lip service to the sanctity of life, but in truth is a death cult, a grand global cult of death otherwise known as "the empire which never ended". There are perhaps differing houses in this empire who vie for various amounts of power, social and economic influence, monopolies on raw materials etc. But it is they same. They have given us cultures of death in order to occlude the planet they believe they inhabit -- thus, wholesale generational brainwashing has been going on for thousands of years.

In a case like Sirhan Sirhan and others like him, I suspect his "extreme" form of brainwashing is akin to the brainwashers selecting a dog by breed, genealogy and trainability, much like Michael Vick. With SS, his brainwashing was done with a view to a furtherance of the brainwashing and social control of society at large by empire ridding itself of a possible contender in one of empire's houses who threatened to change the balance to the point that the "controllers" would be seen.

BTW, that image of Bobby recognizing his life leaving him is awful, haunting and gut wrenching. I'd never seen that before.

[Nordic]

Well if you can make a guy shoot a gun at a Presidential candidate in a crowded kitchen of a hotel, you can also make him say "I did it for my country".

Sirhan was certainly chosen to be the perfect patsy, and for a variety of reasons. Being of Palestinian descent certainly played into it as well. They've gotten a LOT of mileage out of that little detail.

Yes, 82, I agree about that photo. I don't recall having seen it before either. If I did I may have forgotten it on purpose. I tend to do that with unpleasant things.

[Mikey]

There is something gently disturbing about the smiles on offer here.

Horndogs, for sure. Them along with 82% of the penis-afflicted.

yeah but these dudes look 'sharky' all teeth and chin and triangular heads

[hava1]

I am here for any legal discussion on criminal defense, to the best of my knowledge. (the issue differs in each jurisdiction, but the basic common law rules are similar, including bn iSrael/ USA and the rest of the common law countries. First, we have to distinguish subjective fear from objective threat of life. The law is not satisfied with subjectivity even if sincere.
Second, how many lives can you take to save yours ? (that's were the fascism/following orders issue enters). There has to be a proportion between the legitimate interest one protects and the level of violence used to protect that interest. (one's own life, and one's family as opposed to one's property, freedom etc.).

OUr judgements as to who made a free choice/decision and who was at the mercy of terror are very much political. I had mentioned that because some of us always get the rough end of the "free will" spectrum, and others are always excused. We know that from the issue of battered wife syndrom, and the differential treatment w/r to "crimes of passion" by males, but I am refering to the racial/ethnic/NATIONAL origin biases that I met here;

but you know that doesnt matter as long as we are conscious that these are political decisions, I am satisfied.

YOur description of assassins can very much apply to any of the special commando forces here in ISrael that graduate their training. They are brainwashed, and from personal accounts I heard, even years after service, they know that upon certain cues, they will obey and they will kill, under orders. Are they exempt ? To what exent, and where do you draw the line ? is it a subjective line ? (how it effects the individual ?) OR is it some objective line between legit brainwashing, say in the military/CIA and between...what ?torture ?

I am not refering to minors, and I will agree they are exempt, and so it is important to see when the "training" began, and the law would probably accomodate, when minors are the subject. A minor cannot consent anyway.

Pw, I was being a bit facetious but I am willing to defend this assertion. I am well aware of MK, as you know, personally as well. However, when we are making political observations OR legal ones, I will have to see more evidence to someone being so deeply controlled so as to make them KILL, (as opposed to granting a blowjob), and lose accountability.

I still differ with you and we should have the legal discussion, it's come up a number of times of late.

Your example , a person who kills under gunpoint, is not relevant. (that would be justified killing AT TIMES, but not always. We are not supposed to kill someone else to save our lives, but self defense can extend to some of these cases).

It most certainly is relevant as that kind of coercion, kill or be killed, is a major component of MC, but it's not the only one.

I was refering to fascism "accountability" problem, because that's how it works, people harm others at gun point, and somehow we never know who is the original guy at the top who does it of choice. I made this assertion in view of the selective and differential treatment of "accountability" on this board, as a POLITICAL board. I hope the case was made. the "they made me do it" defense is not rigorously applied here, to say the least.

"I was just following orders" is indeed morally problematic in many cases, so the question becomes is it possible to draw a line where coercion or lack of control diffuse responsibility? I'll argue that there is such a line and behind it are the lethal weapons I've seen created through the tortures of MC.

LAstly, personal note, in 1992, I think or perhaps late 1991, I was dragged to a shooting range in West LA, almost daily, with an Israeli thug, Yehuda something, who would put me in the booth with a large shining Glock pistol. that's the closest to "manchurian" I ever got, hopefully I have never used this skill, but I am well aware of hypnosis and induced amnesia. We can all be subjected to various strange deeds, and children in Siera Leona kill their own families and tribe after a short period of drug-cruelty training. I do think though that if we recognize those situations, it should be done with rigour, and intellectual honesty.

I'll share something of my experience too. I was a young kid at the time and could barely hold up the rifle. I've always been thankful I wasn't a great shot. This kind of training, from what I know of other survivors, is SOP. In my experience, assassins aren't created in great numbers but when they're done well, they're not only trustworthy, they're efficient and lethal as hell.

[Stephen Morgan]

Where did the CIA verify that ?

I refer you to Levenda's Sinister Forces, although it is a generally well established fact that people can be made to act against their will in any way.

[Project Willow]

YOur description of assassins can very much apply to any of the special commando forces here in ISrael that graduate their training.

No, I'm not talking about soldiers, I'm talking about mind control subjects. Maybe the first necessary exercise is to describe and categorize them. I'll come back to this later as work intercedes.

Where did the CIA verify that ?

I'll answer this quickly however, as I already posted it.

2.) Miss [redacted] was then instructed (having previously expressed a fear of firearms in any fashion) that she would use every method at her disposal to awaken Miss [redacted] (now in a deep hypnotic sleep) and failing this, she would pick up a pistol nearby and fire it at Miss [redacted]. She was instructed that her rage would be so great that she would not hesitate to "kill" for failing to awaken. Miss [redacted] carried out these suggestions to the letter including firing the (unloaded pneumatic pistol) gun at [redacted] and then proceeding to fall into a deep sleep.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/38088065/Decl ... ultra-Docs

[sw]

I had an alter who was greatly disturbed that he failed out of the Delta type programming. He felt like a huge failure for failing out. He wanted to "be an army of one." He thought these people were the "good" guys. He wanted to be the elite. He was around seven. And, when he "told" in therapy and was not killed, he was angry about that as well. Angry that these people lied to him. After all, they were his heroes. They lied to him. He told and he was not killed. He was shocked.

And, the parts were trained to kill the body if certain criteria were met. Where does that fall?

It is also a huge blur sometimes when one is in front of a screen being shocked into believing that they killed and being in the real world killing. Reality is blurred to the point that a part might think they killed, but in reality, who knows if it was all brainwashing at various levels.


Like in the movie Inception, you kill someone only to find out that it was not a dream and you really killed the person. Blur time, blue age, blur reality...who knows who kills who.

[Stephen Morgan]

Project Willow's example is the specific one I was thinking of but was too lazy to look up.

[hava1]

these are cases of hypnosis.

[hava1]

The definition cannot be specific to the context (subject of experiments, or cia dupe), it has to be a general definition, which applies to all. PW, it doesnt matter if the person is a soldier or not, in terms of how they are influenced, I am talking about the mechanism of taking over the person's will for the moment.

in the case of soldier its the closest to acting under orders of the state, which makes the killing lawful. so these are two separate issues.

I was looking at the notion that SIrhan was claiming to have acted as "robot", that's a mental/psychiatric defense. That still does not prove that there's a sender behind, who should be charged with the killing. So, in fact there are 3 issues. None of them = legally sound. (taking over a person's will, getting orders from a State organ, and proving there's another person's plan behind).

Hypnosis is indeed a big lacunae in the law, perhaps because nobody raised that defense in cases of manslaughter yet, in Israel at least. its a tough one to prove, unless hypnosis is admitted as an interogation method (and a person submits herself to this form of interrogation, to prove she was hypnotised to do such and such). But suppose we have a vid with the hypnosis session, and then the act fits. Still not sure it constitutes a defense. definitely it will be hard to accept multiple cases stretching over a period of time.

on edit - Israeli criminal code recently added a defense for hypnosis and similar non psychiatric cases of "loss of control", however there is no ruling on any of the sitautions mentioned there, so...everything is still open:) However, laws such as regarding to Nazis and war crimes do not include these exceptions, at least in ISrael.
So there, we are back to the political issues. Since we are dealing with political crimes to start with.

[Project Willow]

these are cases of hypnosis.

And your point is? While we don't completely understand the exact mechanisms, hypnosis is also used to access alternate personality states in multiples, and hypnosis was used extensively in the training and creation of MC subjects, at least during the 60's and 70's.

What are you saying Hava, that until I can produce a documented case of a mind controlled assassin with full blown DID you aren't going to believe it's possible? Have you read the Hersha sisters' account? Have you read Kathleen Sullivan's memoir? Do you think there is some line between being dissociative over providing services involving sex and providing services involving violence, because that seems arbitrary to me.

So, getting back to that legal discussion, I'll get to that description now, of MC cases and how assassins are made and then let's see if we can find common ground on the issue of responsibility.

So we have a range here, from the case of hypnosis used on intact adults that I referenced above to a full blown assassination specialist who's been put through the standard developmental training for MC subjects that became operational sometime between the late 1950's and the early 1960's. At that end of the scale I'm talking people who were taken between age 3 and 5 and then subjected to training, or rather, torture and conditioning at least 4 to 5 times yearly throughout their childhood development, and then set loose upon the normative world.

Shall I get into how assassin alters are created? Do we need that level of detail? I'll provide a generalization at least, because to some degree almost all MC survivors of that vintage were subjected to this kind of training and violent alters were created in every system. The assassin alter requires two components, one that functions as a "battery" and then another that might be termed its facade. The battery, or energy part is created by isolating very normal emotional responses to violence (usually rape or sodomy), rage and pain, but with an emphasis on the rage. The handler does a sort of survey of parts within the existing system to figure out which one(s) store rage. One is chosen and is isolated and conditioned to be stuck in that rage, in a sort of loop, so that the feeling never dissipates. This battery, the supplier of energy, is then paired, like a twin, with its front aspect, the alter or part who will face the world when in assassin mode. This part feels the unending rage of the battery part, but otherwise doesn't understand its origin. This part is completely disconnected from any other human emotion or sense especially anything close to empathy. It is thin, a slice, yet enough of a slice to move the body. It is trained and rewarded for any physical activity that produces harm or the desired result of its trainers. It only knows two modes of existence, the endless loop of rage which it experiences as intolerable pain, or the release from this loop cycle, the reward phase when it has performed according to its orders. It will do anything to reach the reward phase and its release from agony.

I hope that is sufficient. So let's take it all the way and remind folks that the central person who holds these parts, battery and its facade, within them is completely unaware that they exist and therefore, regardless of how moral or caring or kind that person might be, they have not only no control but no awareness that these aspects of themselves exist and can operate in the world, and that has been the case since their childhood.

Now tell me, can this central person be held accountable for the actions of that battery/facade assassin team, created in extreme trauma, against their will, as they were growing as child, completely without their knowledge? I am completely comfortable proclaiming right here and now, that no, the central, normative persona of such a being is not responsible, not in any way.

No, such a person had been made into a tool, and we don't blame the tool, the gun or knife, for the crime, we blame its user. This may not be case law yet in the US, but I am reminded of a conversation I witnessed in the early 90's amongst a group of professionals and the determination was similar, once you make a absolute tool of someone he cannot be held responsible for the actions of those portions of himself who are under the control of other people.

As for the hypnosis example, I'd like to hear others' input on this, but it seems to me a similarly difficult scenario and without knowing a great deal about how hypnosis works immediately or persists, impossible to consider.

[hava1]

The point is ...well, if the law centers on the hypnosis part, I dont know that all the other details of the torture/control are relevant or if being a soldier, civilian or child matters.

I dont know of MC legal cases that dealt with the criminality of the actions perpetrated by the victim. The tort cases deal with the nature of the abuse, perpetrated upon the victim of the MC drill. but if there';s such a case, PLEASE link to reference.

I'm saying that a lot will depend on which crime will be analysed. I suspect that if Eichman raised the defense, it would be dismissed, not because he surely wasnt MK'ed (Who knows), but the law is not about truth, its about instilling more fear to offset the fear induced by perps. In fact, we are hoping that the fear of GOd will win, but it rarely does.

The law sets norms not only per-case justice. Since these are normally political/war crimes we are dealing with, and since the fear/terror perped on the MK'ed person depends on the power of the state behind that handler, we are back to politics. NAturally, if a CIA person attempts to threaten me, that's a credible threat, BECAUSE of the status of that country, which is ..say...total, all over the world as well. But if it were a private person, that's not credible/objective threat, enough to justify committing murder , and if its a smaller scale Israeli mobster, well...whatever.

Personally, I am with you, its just that I am experiencing a tension now between myself as victim and larger legal arguments to the contrary. I think tort is a good start, we agree this is a major tort/crime against the individual mk'ed person.

I have been called a "soldier" here, not once, since people can (i dont protest too much against it) see my national affiliation as a sort of general draft. We, here in ISrael see all the Germans during ww2 as "soldiers" etc. I might see others seeing american cia dupes lumped up with their senders to commit political and war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Depends, again, what crimes shall be the subject of trial, if ever there is one.

--
I certainly draw a line. I think that claiming you were controlled to have sex, is a valid claim, with or withou hypnosis. we know that already.but that's hardly a crime anyway. It could be part of a larger scheme (bribe/extortion), but then one has to see whether the dupe was in the loop. usually, not,. even if they acted freely.



--
Just for me today, headline Haaretz, the new national security advisor for Bibi says - "any soldier, or anyone, who obstruct a military operation should be shot in the head". is that credible threat ? ) I think it is.

[Project Willow]

Just for me today, headline Haaretz, the new national security advisor for Bibi says - "any soldier, or anyone, who obstruct a military operation should be shot in the head". is that credible threat ? ) I think it is.

I think so too Hava, and yet I know it is nowhere near what you or sw, or I or even Sirhan Sirhan were subjected to and that no one will ever really fully understand.