BBD – A Spookwork Orange

…because nothing rhymes with orange.

And worth repeating:

“That stained glass curtain that you’re hiding behind never let’s in the Sun.”

This is going to be another mash-up. I will provide some insight into the psychology of the covert field agent based on my experience as a target and explain how this is bad for America. In the same post here, I will also add some new information with regards to Wicked Game, in this case what I have in Chapter 13 regarding my work as a real estate consultant in New York City.

In early 2010, Brooklyn had to my eye turned into a spook free-for-all. While it is impossible to be 100% accurate as to what/who was, and wasn’t, there were a few that I think were very apparent. As I noted there, there was a man whom I nicknamed ‘Balding’ who I saw on a few occasions, all but once in Brooklyn, the exception being the doctor’s appointment where my then-partner wanted to get me on some anti-psychotic drug or similar. ‘Balding’ seemed to me to be the boss or supervisor of a few others, primarily Anthony and his roommate who rented the condo above the one my partner owned. Anthony and the other guy made a lot of noise. There was the time I saw them moving in and they broke the door that served as the primary means of egress in case of fire–apart from jumping from the balcony or getting stuck in the parking garage–for our half of the building. The condo board was oddly in no hurry to fix this and became angry with me for requesting the they do so after days of the door being inoperable. This was all in a time of fire in a borough that was reeling from several arsons–including the one that claimed the home of my friend Kate Conway and her father.

Aside from Anthony and ‘Balding’ there quite a few others. A few doppelgangers which I’ve noted elsewhere, most of whom were not very exact in their resemblance with one exception, a younger double for Larry Johnson sitting in a car one evening wearing sunglasses.

But the real pains-in-the-ass were, for some reason, mostly young women. I’m going to take a guess that they over-did things in order to seek approval of the man’s world in which they found themselves working. They were really extremely impolite and overzealous in their harassment, and as I’ve noted a few posts below, almost certainly aware that I had been drugged and therefore even more frazzled at what a person under normal circumstances would consider one odd event if they had witnessed only that one.

The most blatant was a woman–not young, don’t know what her excuse was–mocking me, what I was saying on the phone to my ex-partner, while I was on the Stone Arch Bridge in Minneapolis. She did it repeatedly and loudly. I finally said, “Ain’t that the f—ing truth?!?” loudly. She jumped, shut up, and fully failed to make eye contact with me.

This was when I realized that spooks are at heart cowards. They hate the light being shined on their dirty deeds and the methods they use to achieve them. Since they are as a whole in the service of multinational corporations, banks, and oligarchs and have declared war on the rest of us, it is imperative that both occur. Really, it is a matter of survival.

But any rational person undergoing the psychological harassment that I endured in New York and in Minneapolis after moving there would call it torture, torture-lite at best. The legal definition, you see, requires captivity. In this case, there was only the captivity that being drugged surreptitiously out of your mind, psychological herding, covert ops designed to get you fired and ruin your relationships provides. So while not technically torture in the legal sense, it is torture in the layman definition sense. It has the same purpose: To get the target to do something they would not normally do.

What is the motivation for the field agent overall, though? What are they thinking when they do this, not to members of Al Qaeda, but to their own fellow citizens?

Once again I present a Derren Brown experiment. Absolutely no hypnotism involved, merely human psychology. I suggest beginning at the 07:30 mark:

Derren Brown The Experiments – Remote Control. Link removed.

New link {2019 April 26}.

Anonymity and group-think or mob-mentality lead to some seriously cruel results. Spooks enjoy anonymity, comes with the territory. They also have the implicit approval of their superiors to increase domestic terrorism in order to further secure more funding. Funding which goes partially to private firms and then gets kicked back to politicians who vehemently defend the organizations. Organizations which, by the way, do not have to disclose to whom and how much they contribute to political campaigns.

It really was a bit like what you see in the video except on occasion something positive would seem to happen. It was as if someone were trying to intentionally put me on an emotional roller coaster, perhaps with the intent of making me as socio- or psychopathic as possible; emotionally disturbed. Then with the further intent of driving me to violence, which would then be used to a} further justify more contracts, trampling of rights in general and b} to add LGBT to the list of people the Deep State can use bigotry to distract from their theft of wealth from and destruction of the middle class.

Except of course for me this was not just one hellish night followed by an apology and replacement of what was destroyed. This went on for over a year and Barack Obama, whom I assume to be stone-cold psychopath, has prevented anything being done about it at every turn with his war on whistleblowers. Separate what the man says from what he does, because they are rarely kin, and I think you see more of the same as we got from Bush and will get from the next POTUS.

Shifting gears, it has also came to my attention that there was a lot more to the so-called Ground Zero Mosque story than I would have guessed:

Matthew Phelan, “The Ground Zero Mosque Was an Inside Job,” Gawker/Black Bag, 11 September 2014:

You’ll note the involvement of the son of a man shot by a bag lady, allegedly a CIA drug smuggling money man. You’ll note the involvement of a FBI consultant. I was entirely unaware of any of this when I was doing work on the project in late 2009.

You’ll also see, if you click on the tax form, the Aspen address. Aspen is home to the Aspen Institute and it’s Aspen Strategy Group and is another of those spy-world-magnet places, where there are annual meetings of spies and muckity-mucks.

You may also recall I. ‘Scooter’ Libby’s “poem” to Judy Miller of the New York Times:

You went into jail in the summer. It is fall now. You will have stories to cover — Iraqi elections and suicide bombers, biological threats and the Iranian nuclear program. Out west, where you vacation, the aspens will already be turning. They turn in clusters, because their roots connect them. Come back to work — to life.

Tim Grieve, “Scooter Libby, Judy Miller and those turning aspens: What did Libby mean in his cryptic letter to Miller? She provides some clues,” Salon, 31 January 2007:

Between MKULTRA killers/targets, Aspen, Plamegate, the Cordoba House, and connections to not one but two agencies in the intelligence community, this is a meme hurricane. I don’t much know what to make of it except it does fit with some of those other clients I mention in the chapter linked at top of this post.

The only other things I’ll add is that this might not only serve the Republicans but the Democrats as well. Not that the Democrats really want peace, but that many who vote for them believe that they do, and that’s all that matters. The Ground Zero Mosque may have been an op to mobilize the bases of both main parties, and not just the Republicans.

But one should also note that this heavily implies the involvement of the intelligence community in elections. I would say that that is the biggest no-no for them, but there are so many no-nos to choose from, many of which we already know to have been violated, eg, CIA not only spying domestically but on the US Senate, torture, DoD spying on protestors, FBI’s parallel construction and entrapment ops, etc.

Just gets weirder and weirder and yet somehow clearer and clearer.

MKULTRA Voting Trends Subproject

There is apparently a bit more released in the MKULTRA FOIA documents than John Marks had available when he wrote The Search for the Manchurian Candidate. Additionally, there are some errors in the list he supposedly compiled regarding the nature of the subprojects. For example, subproject 127 regards voting and the usual list shows #123 and 124 as identical. 126 on that list is actually 125, 125 is 124, etc. and 127 “Voting” was simply missing.

Not only had I not heard of this one before, I don’t think it’s mentioned anywhere that I’ve seen. Scouring via web search has turned up no coverage.

As a result of this and other potential errors in the list floating around the web, I’ve upadated the “MKULTRA” tab up top as well as the “MKULTRA subprojects #84, #119, Projects BIZARRE & PANDORA” tab. Technically #84–one of the hypnosis subprojects–doesn’t belong on that tab but I believe that the old style hypnosis projects formed some basis for the remote electronic suggestion projects that came later.

It seems that practically every abuse studied and labeled as a no-no by Congress during the 70s has come back to haunt us including assassination, and so why not a more covert version of voter fraud “to protect America” as well? A passage from the documents on studying voting:

To begin with, let me express my unstinting and unqualified enthusiasm for general concept behind the project. Though we know very well that there is little hope that we will ever be able to conduct a real longitudinal study, covering several decades, we have often spoke about the need for such a study. This proposal fills a gap; it does so by utilizing data already in existence. The costs are minimal, the opportunity unique, and the promise great. The data ought to be exploited.

To exploit fully the unique data requires, however, a more complete statement of what the analysis of “the individual act of voting” contributes over and above what could be inferred from an analysis of voting statistics by election districts, differentiated according to their ecology. Usually the impact of the “political situation” on various categories of voters is inferred from aggregate data. Such inference can be made only on the assumption that the factors revealed on the aggregate level operate on the whole and as a rule on the individual level as well. The proposed project offers an opportunity to test this assumption by examing a series of election. It is capable of locating individuals {i.e. their social status} who account for heightened or slackened interest and for changes in alignment.

Certainly, we are talking about swing voters as well as what creates party loyalty and voting stability. There are actually several pages available, largely unredacted.

The target foreign country, where they hoped to study voting patterns from–perhaps 1910 to 1960 or so–is something of a mystery.

We know from the documents that it was considered a friendly nation in 1960.

At some point within the period in question, voting was restricted to male property owners 30 years or older who lived in the district at least a year. I haven’t been able to identify a country fitting that description.

It appears to have seven letters in the country name and six in the people descriptor. “Ireland” works, but “Irish” is too short.

One cover letter also says “So far our experience with [REDACTED] foundations has been that they react unfavorably to research in the field of political sociology.”

It had some kind of records dating back 50 years obviously. Census data for individuals with identifying records.

In any case, it is both fascinating that there’s a country with such records and that they would be willing to share them with the US. More likely, the records are simply at a university or government building in the host country and the hope was to access the records without drawing attention to the US government’s involvement.

But, combined with other subprojects, for what possible purpose?

Turn On, Tune In, Drop Out

See The Black Vault‘s CIA MKULTRA Collection, CD ROM #3, subfolder “DOC_0000017385”:

Subliminal Communication Technology Part 6

It gets even more hilarious.

Mr. Glickman. Are you aware of any research the Defense Department has done in any of these areas?

Mr. Tyler. I am not. I understand that you [Dr. Becker] are.

Tyler turns the spotlight back to Becker.

Dr. Becker. I am not at liberty to answer that question. I am sorry.

Mr. Tyler. In the press there was some indication. Mother Jones, some indication it has been done. We have never been contacted.

Mr. Glickman. I had Army folks a couple of years ago give me a little course in something called neurolinguistic programming. But that is not the same thing as subliminal conditioning.
But it has parallels in certain areas.

Tyler goes on to dispute (apparently correctly) the effectiveness of NLP.

I note, also, that NLP sounds a lot like what Jared Lee Loughner was raving about at some point. The use of grammar to control minds. Something like that.

But to the point, Becker was involved in defense research related to using subliminals to affect human behavior, clearly.

By the way, here’s Becker’s Tulane page. You think that there’s anything missing with regards to his accomplishments? He does not even have a Wikipedia entry (some marketing guru does) nor did I even find a reference to him there.

Next Drs. Silverman and Shevrin. Silverman did not provide a written statement. Shevrin winds up speaking first.

You immediately get a shift in tone.  Shevrin outlines what he’s about to discuss and says he will end it with recommendations regarding legislation for regulating the use of subliminal technology and use and states plainly that it has already been used for commercial exploitation.

He also does not hedge about the effectiveness:

The original findings [in the 1950s], since replicated and supported by improved methods, showed that pictures or words flashed so quickly that the person could not report seeing them, nevertheless registered in the mind unconsciously and influenced consciousness without the person being aware of it.

Such unconscious influences could be detected in dreams, images, hypnotic states, or by subtle changes in the perception of conscious stimuli presented at the same time as the subliminal stimulus. Thus, a neutral face would be seen as angry or happy, depending on whether the word angry or happy had been flashed subliminally at the same time as the neutral face was being displayed.

There’s your election fraud in a nutshell. Simple enough.

It’s also likely one of the ways, somehow similar in principle, that they are able to ruin relationships. As I’ve noted before, voice-to-skull can be used to project an obvious sound into the head of a human being but can also be used to do so with subliminal audio.

The number of possible nefarious applications is only limited by the imagination and funding to find out if said application works.


It was as if when outside of awareness the stimulus was treated in a more dream-like way and appeared to be caught up in the person’s inner preoccupations and fantasies. … it would appear that subliminal stimuli are responded to in quite idiosyncratic and private ways.

Shevrin seems to meander a bit, discusses the differences in brain activity, for example, in a man with blood phobia when shown words that he associates with the sight of blood, both supraliminally and subliminally. He then mentions the 1977 research of Russian scientists Kostandov and Arzumanov. They tested words related to crimes committed by violent offenders. They found that they could almost establish guilt based on presenting words related to the crimes that only the actual perpetrator would know. Shevrin sums it up thusly:

Although this may sound like science fiction, we may be on the threshold of invading the individual’s last stronghold of personal privacy–his own inner thoughts, and this is 1984.

Mindreading via reading brainwave activity. Not the point I was interested in making, but certainly related. He continues:

I hesitate to think what future applications might be if these kinds of findings are further advanced and I would assume as in all scientific fields that they will be advanced. It is only a matter of time.

I am quite concerned that findings of this sort, which are of fundamental scientific importance and which can ultimately be used to benefit mankind, could in the wrong hands be used for invasive and manipulative purposes.

Nearly three decades since then.

I should probably note that many people who consider themselves targeted individuals of organized stalking and/or electronic harassment believe that their thoughts are being read. Typically, but not always, these experiences are similar to Jung’s synchronicity.

I will state that, on occasion I have had experiences for which my mind having been read is one possible explanation. However, since I know (and by now so should you) without a doubt that voice-to-skull exists, it is also possible (and frankly far more probable) that instead of reading my mind, they simply “wrote” the idea in it subliminally and tried to make me think that it was mine that they read and put into the mouth of someone else.

I’ve heard that this has happened to many TIs and many of them wind up thinking that the person speaking can read their thoughts, is one of “them”, the perps, regardless of who it is. I think my explanation far more likely. The person said the same words for the same reason I was thinking them: voice-to-skull or similar. The confusion is likely due to whatever else had been done to the TI, ie, drugs or some substance or pathogen that causes confusion. See again item #1, 1955 draft MK/Ultra memo, causing a person to have illogical thoughts and to behave erratically in public in order to discredit them.

And so there we have Shevrin hitting the nail on the head. Sounds like scifi. The words of Aldous Huxley from 22 years seem prophetic.

Behold the power of science fiction.

Subliminal Communication Technology Part 5

David Tyler mostly echoes what Dr. Becker has already said. He also mentions that Becker is retiring, leaving Proactive Systems, Inc. the only major contender in the crime prevention via subliminals in business. He states that at that time, his company had over 40 devices leased out (they only leased out of concerns of reverse engineering or tampering with the messages) and by the end of August 1984 they would have 50.

His company’s equipment, for non-crime prevention use, has a different legal or ethical view of the use of subliminal audio than Behavioral Engineering’s. The difference may be slight or simply a sales ploy in practice. Hard to say.

Basically, when it comes to other uses, such as medical (Tyler mentions heart surgery recovery as another use, that attitude has a strong correlation to success after heart surgery), they do not mask the message using music or sound. In fact, he says, if you stand right under or next to the speakers, you can plainly hear it. He says this was an ethical concern over the general idea of putting messages in peoples’ heads without their knowledge. For crime prevention he makes a similar argument as Becker, that we make exceptions for that anyway.

He goes a little deeper into the data than Becker did and suggests that the successes in stores in reducing theft are likely employees and frequent customers, and that it likely only works on people who are not already determined to steal before they walk in. In other words, the system is merely giving them a gentle shove toward not stealing when they are debating internally or on the fence about it.

He also mentions that a New once asked them if they would do a “vote no” machine for an upcoming union vote. His answer is interesting if only because it’s exactly the kind of dodgy answer that makes me prick up my ears:

Mr. Tyler. We get strange requests as well. A New York firm called us about a “vote no” message for a union election coming up. For our company, if we are–

Mr. Glickman. Would you design such a message?

Mr. Tyler. Could we? That says “vote no.” It would be easy to do.

Mr. Glickman. Would it be effective?

Mr. Tyler. I don’t think you can use it to make people do things they don’t want to do. I think it has to be someone on the border line for us to even be effective with honesty reinforcement.

Tyler’s first line of defense is not a simple “no” but rather a qualified maybe. Next:

The evidence is unclear.

Which I take to mean, “Let me get back to you when I’m Becker’s age and there’s tons more research.”

And then:

Our belief is that you cannot do it that way. You cannot make people do things specifically either.

Because the evidence is unclear, they have the option of going with beliefs (that of course protect the bottom line, this is very typical business really). Then he threw the curveball about what happens when you (presumably) have more than two options (for example, steal/don’t steal or vote yes/vote no) and try to determine specific behavior:

They did experiment, if I recall, where they tried to make people buy turkey sandwiches. This is all in a laboratory situation. They had a deli set up. They bought more meat sandwiches, but not more turkey.

Glickman throws out a hypothetical Reagan reelection question. Tyler responds:

First, from our research with audio subliminals, they have to be repeated very, very frequently, because it is frequency and repetition that makes it effective. A brief exposure will not do much. There are other researchers that say we are wrong.

Tyler explained previously that the anti-theft device repeats constantly. It seems likely that so do the medical versions. He continues:

It is possible that it could be done if it was appealing to some kind of emotional impact. But I have no expertise in the visual area.

He seems to be referring to the idea that subliminal pictures along with something like “If you believe in home, family, and motherhood, vote for President Reagan” (Glickman’s example) might have some effect if a person were exposed to it frequently enough. On audio which is within his expertise:

In the audio area, it would be very, very questionable if you are trying to get a lot of things through. You could play the word “Reagan” or “Mondale,” are you going to have an impact, are they going to make a value judgment on those words.

Note again that here they are discussing this technology in the absence of drugs, PSYOPs, covert operations designed to send a particular message.

For example, the framing of Bradley Manning was likely to affect views on not only repealing DADT, but views on gays in general. The basic message would be something like, “Gays are untrustworthy, are traitors.” I have little doubt that that is still the banter being batted back and forth in certain circles despite the overall impact having been mitigated due to the person who reported the breach being gay himself.

Which brings me to the larger point. There are likely many groups using these methods. Some of them oppose each other. The Reagan/Mondale example is apt here. I think it very proabable that this stuff is part and parcel of election cycles. If not used on the public at large (and, really, why wouldn’t it be?), it at least gets used for specific purposes in the overall game. For example, why not getting a political operative like James O’Keefe III off after attempting to bug a US senator’s office? And suggesting the idea of doing so to him in the first place?

And then there were those irrationally irate people who disrupted the town hall meetings on healthcare reform. If it hadn’t been for the actual murder of my own grandmother (a mysterious anemia, also the cause for putting my dog Cleo to sleep, also alluded to in item #10 of the 1955 MK/Ultra memo I refer to often), Sarah Palin’s notion of it being about “killing grandma” would still be laughable to me. Instead it’s merely still untrue, just not a humorously so.

And of course the implication is to lay these last portions at the feet of the brothers Koch. You know, a client of the company I work for. Found myself there without knowing that when I got called to fill in one day a week when the previous subcontractor suddenly started behaving erratically like he had paranoid schizophrenia. That’s quite a trend.

But the larger point is, I think, that without exposing this tech and methods and the unthinkably undemocratic uses that they have been put to (undoubtedly using some legal-weasel arguments that if a person can be persuaded by repeated electronic attacks then they are criminals anyway) things will always be decided by a few. The fate of the human race will be determined not by a consensus among the species, but by a few opportunists who may not have the well-being of the whole in mind.

How to achieve such exposure? Well that’s the question, isn’t it?

  • Calendar

    • June 2019
      M T W T F S S
      « Feb    
  • Search