THE PSYCHOLOGY OF AUTHORITY AND PERCEPTION,
In order to understand the mystery of seemingly blind compliance to
authority, there is perhaps no better sample of human nature than
the 1961 experiments on "Obedience to Authority," conducted by Dr.
Stanley Milgram, a psychologist at Yale University. His studies were
spawned by the recent trial and execution of Adolph Eichmann. The
results were posted in Milgram's "Obedience to Authority: An
Experimental View" (1974).
Milgram focused on the propensity for obedience to authority, versus
the role of personal conscience. His work was in consequence of the
rationalizations and justifications for the Nazi acts of genocide –
as offered by the accused at the World War II, Nuremberg War Crime
The perpetrators’ defense was typically based on "obedience"
- claiming that they were "… just obeying orders" under the
authority of their superiors. However weak the claim may have
appeared, it was firmly believed, by the accused. In particular, the
Nazi perpetrators were well educated and members of the German
The Eichmann trial stirred the question as to how easy it would be
for ‘good’ and educated (American) people (college degree) to be
conditioned to commit even murder – in exchange for simple
"acceptance and approval." What if Eichmann, and his accomplices
were, in fact, "….just following orders."
More directly, the Milgram study demonstrated the propensity for
people to submit to even ‘mild,’ even "presumed" authority – let
alone threat or even internal fears. (Not even notable amounts of
money were required.) The psychiatrists of the day forecast that 2%
of any population would be compliant – the ‘sickos;’ the Milgram
Study demonstrated 65%!
The setup of the experiment called for so-called "teachers"
(unknowing subjects of the experiment) to be recruited by a
newspaper ad offering $4.50 for one hour's work. The ‘price’ is
worth noting. The recruits all had college degrees. It is also worth
noting that the setup time was remarkably brief; there was no
extensive ‘conditioning’ required. Both of these factors attest to
an apparent pre-disposition for submission to "perceived" authority.
The experiments would remind most of the TV series, "The Twilight
The volunteer ‘teachers’ thought that they were recruited to take
part in a psychology experiment investigating memory and learning.
The recruits were introduced to a stern looking "experimenter,"
dressed in a white lab coat; as well as an ordinary and pleasant
co-subject (actor, in fact) who was presumably recruited via the
same newspaper ad. The true subject ("teacher") was assigned to
direct the ‘learning’ of the other ‘volunteer' using electric shocks
as a learning motivator.
The teacher-recruit was led to believe that he/she had been chosen
randomly, to be a scientific ‘teacher.’
Both the actor and the ‘teacher’ were given a ‘sample’ 45-volt
electric shock, to set the realism of the ‘stage.’ The "teachers"
were told that the experiment was designed to explore the effect of
punishment, to prompt correct responses for manufacturing learning
The ‘teachers’ were advised that the electric shocks were to be of
increased by 15 volts, for each mistake that the ‘student’ made
during the experiment.
The ‘teachers’ control panel had 30 switches, clearly labeled in 15
volt increments; ranging from 15 volts, up to the maximum of 450
volts. Each switch also had a rating label, incrementing from
"slight shock" to "danger: severe shock". The final two switches
were additionally labeled "XXX". Thus, the subject could not be the
least bit ignorant of the potential consequences of his/her deeds.
The experiment environment had the ‘student’ in another room; with
the ‘teacher’ made aware of the "actor-student's" discomfort by
poundings on the wall.
The actors ("students") pretended to be stupid, seemingly requiring
(deserving) increasing shocks – feigning pain, misery and
unconsciousness. The "teachers" abided by the background ‘authority’
until they were doing the deeds of sadists & murderers – a
convincing simulation, of course.
In reality, no further shocks were actually delivered. Again, the
‘teacher’ was unaware that the ‘student’ in the study was actually
an actor who would use his talents to fake increasing levels of
discomfort; as the ‘teacher’ administered what he/she assumed were
increasingly severe electric shocks, for the supposed mistakes made
by the "student".
The ‘experimenter,’ with the white lab coat, was in the same room as
the ‘teacher.’ Whenever the ‘teachers’ asked whether the increased
shocks should be delivered, he or she was verbally encouraged by the
experimenter to continue.
Amazingly, the test subjects didn’t question as to why the
‘experimenter’ needed a surrogate, in the first place.
Using actors as the student-victims, the actual test subjects
("teachers") were directed to ask questions of a presumed "student,"
sitting in a sealed booth, with the "teacher" delivering increasing
electrical shocks, if the ‘student’ got the wrong answer. A presumed
torturous-fatal electric shock was incrementally delivered, by 65%
of the unwitting "teachers," punishing the student to the very end
of the 450-volt scale! No ‘teacher’ stopped before reaching 300
Worried ‘teachers’ did question the ‘experimenter,’ asking who was
responsible for any harmful effects. It is worth noting that the
primary concern was personal accountability, versus the welfare of
the perceived victim. The ‘experimenter’ assumed full
responsibility, with the ‘teachers’ accepting the response as
adequate; then continued shocking their ‘student,’ even though some
of the ‘teachers’ were obviously extremely uncomfortable with their
Return to another fact of life – cultures hide the fact that in
times of crisis, people have a third choice, beyond
‘fight-or-flight; specifically, "Submission." (Consider the rape
In the Milgram study, the test subjects were unwittingly submitting
to rather mild coercion of their ‘handlers.’ They assumed that they
were factually torturing – even killing – the ‘students,’ preferring
the acceptance-approval of their handlers, to their basic personal
values and even morality, itself. They questioned, but with mild
coercion, they complied with ‘authority.’
From Milgram’s "The Perils of Obedience" (1974), it is learned that Milgram solicited predictions on the outcome, from various ranges of
people; including psychiatrists, faculty in the behavioral sciences,
graduate students, college sophomores and even middle-class adults.
Those polled reliably predicted that virtually all of the chosen
subjects (‘teachers’) would refuse to obey the experimenter. The
psychiatrists, predicted that most subjects would not go beyond 150
volt level, when the actor-victim made the first explicit demand to
go free. The psychiatrists expected only 4 percent of the ‘teachers’
to continue to the simulated 300 volt level, estimating that only a
pathological personality (one in a thousand) would administer the
The Milgram Experiment was continued in a number of variable
scenarios; such as the ‘student’ indicating discomfort by way of
voice feedback (versus pounding on the walls of his ‘chamber’) –
starting at the "150 volt" level. At that point, the ‘actor-victim’
requested that the experiment be ended. The ‘teacher’ was
consistently told by the experimenter that - "The experiment
requires that you continue. Please go on." or verbiage, to that
effect. In that scenario, the percentage of ‘teachers’ who were
prepared to administer the maximum of 450 volts, dropped slightly -
to only 62.5%. Desperate verbiage, versus pounding on the walls,
made little difference.
The environment of the experiment was considered, as well. The
surroundings of the experiments seemed to cast an "aura of
authority," as well. When the environment of the experiment was
conducted in a nondescript office building – versus within the walls
of a prestigious and ornate hall on Yale's campus - the percentage
of ‘teachers’ who were prepared to administer the maximum voltage
dropped to 47.5%.
Immediate environment also played a key role, demonstrating the
‘personal’ role of authority "proximity," In one environment, the
"experimenter" was at end of a phone line; versus being present in
the same room as the ‘teacher. In this scenario, the percentage of
‘teachers’ who were prepared to administer the 450 volt shock
dropped to 20.5%. In another scenario, the ‘teacher’ could
independently elect the magnitude of the shock level; in that
scenario, the percentage of ‘teachers’ who were prepared to continue
to the extreme of the scale dropped to 2.5%.
That scenario, in particular, clearly demonstrated the role of
"authority," as the major influence over the behavior of the
subjects, given that the test subjects’ performance otherwise fell
into the predicted range of the psychiatrists.
Return to another idea – that the radical majority of any population
lives in response to their "Sacred Illusions." The spouse would
NEVER cheat, one’s child could NEVER grossly misbehave. We all have
Thus in the Milgram Experiment, the "Sacred Illusion" was that once
agreeing to take on the task, the subject was committed/compelled to
submit to authority – and not much of it – even to the extreme of
What is not addressed, to any adequate degree, is the role of
"accountability" – factual or ‘assumed.’ By any account of history,
the subservience contained the assumption that ‘authority’ served as
a firewall, between the deeds of the performer, versus such
accountability as criminal prosecution. The seeming
‘chain-of-command,’ obviously pre-supposes a
In particular, in the Milgram experiments, the presumed "authority"
to commit sadism and even murder, was a simple verbal assertion, "I
am responsible; you are not." To the ordinary person, it staggers
the imagination that college educated people could be that
naïve/compliant. Clearly most are.
Milgram’s experiments tested how much pain an ordinary, well
educated, citizen would inflict on another person; upon being
ordered to so, by an experimental scientist. In those experiments,
"apparent authority" was tested against the strongest moral
imperatives forbidding hurting another.
Even with the ‘teachers' hearing screams of the ‘victims,’ authority
won more often than not – 65% of the time, in optimum conditions.
The experiments demonstrated the willingness of ordinary and
educated adults to comply with the command of "perceived authority."
Next one must ask what the uneducated person might do, as well as
those with a known history of social deviance.
Ironically, the Milgram "obedience to authority" experiments
preceded the Viet Nam War, with its bizarre rationalizations, and
millions of American soldiers "…just following orders." Tragically,
the American soldiers suffered the fate of lepers, when returning
home. More tragically, no lessons were learned by the American
public, versus the nefarious minds of the American military and
related corporate players.
Milgram had plenty of company. The "Milgram Experiment" has been
repeated around the world with similar results.
It must be particularly noted that there is an implied risk-reward
factor in such cases. 65% of Milgram’s subjects essentially murdered
The significance of that figure indicates implies that money is
GENERALLY a minor concern. However, money can be made to be a
factor. As starving graduate student may ‘hurry-up’ if $100 was
offered, if the experiment was concluded in ½ hour; with verbal
taunting by his ‘experimenter.’ What is the reasonable estimate of
an ‘experimenter’ asking,
"Do you want to ask questions, or do you
want to get paid – and how much? The clock is ticking."
Thus, it must be observed that if the ‘65% percentile can be rather
easily stirred into sadism & murder, what does it take to get 95% of
a given population to submit to the acceptance of propaganda – and a
mandate for just ‘silence?’
Where do such experiments lead?
Back to Contents
THE STANFORD PRISON EXPERIMENT
Stanford psychology Professor Philip Zimbardo, said to be a high
school classmate of Milgram, took the issue of simple "authority" to
the level of "power over others," in his 1971 "Experimental Prison"
The essence of that experiment demonstrated the propensity for
‘normal’ people to succumb to primal deviant behavior. Of particular
note is that the director of that experiment, Professor Philip Zimbardo, fell prey, as well. It took his soon-to-be wife, to shock
him back to a civilized mindset.
While the ‘experiment’ was intended to be a simple role-playing
observation platform; the players - and the researchers -
‘psycho-morphed’ into a deviant mindset, as though passing through a
time-warp; into another solar system. Again, the primary mechanism
was "Perception Control."
In the "Stanford Prison Experiment," the distinction must be made
between ‘externally incited’ perception, versus spontaneous
self-perception. As with the Milgram experiments, environment played
a dominant role.
Zimbardo's stated reason for conducting the experiment was to
examine the ‘power’ of such variables as roles, regulations, group
identities, symbols and "…situational validation of behavior," which
would probably repulse and disgust the ordinary individual.
In the background of the "prison" experiment, Zimbardo previously
conducted research on what he described as "…de-individuation,
vandalism and dehumanization;" in an attempt to illustrate how
easily that ordinary people could be incited to engage in
anti-social acts. The associated environment of the earlier
experiments embraced situations where the participating individual
felt anonymous, or wherein they could perceive others to be less
than ‘human,’ as ‘enemies’ or even ‘objects.’
In the subsequent/consequent "prison" experiment, 70 young men were
"arrested." Most were college students, paid $15 a day for two
The brief duration of the experiment is highly significant, relative
to the noted transformation of character.
The participants volunteered as subjects for an experiment on prison
life; advertised by a local paper. They were put through the
expected interviews and a battery of psychological tests.
Twenty-four of those ‘arrested,’ deemed to be the most normal,
average and healthy, were selected. They were assigned randomly, as
either ‘guards’ or ‘prisoners.‘ The "prisoners" were booked at a
real jail, blindfolded and driven to the college campus makeshift
Bear in mind, that the players (test subjects) ALL were consciously
aware that the mission was role-playing; not reality. Yet, in the
fashion of "Lord of the Flies," they devised their own social value
The ‘guards’ were issued uniforms; instructed not to use violence.
They were told that their job was to maintain control over the
On the second day of the experiment, the ‘prisoners’ staged a
revolt. Once the ‘guards’ had crushed the rebellion, the ‘guards’
spontaneously increased coercive aggression tactics, against the
‘prisoners.’ Their tactics included the humiliation and
dehumanization of the ‘prisoners.’ In consequence, the college staff
had to frequently admonish the ‘guards’ against such tactics.
In particular, the worst noted instances of abuse took place in the
middle of the night, when the guards believed that the college staff
was not watching over the experiment. The treatment of the prisoners
went to such tactics as forcing the ‘prisoners’ to clean out toilet
bowls with their bare hands; acting out degrading scenarios. The
‘guards’ also urged the ‘prisoners’ to become snitches.
The loss of
control caused the college staff to note the extreme stress
reactions, forcing the release of five prisoners, one per day,
Back to Contents
During the experiment, Zimbardo’s fiancé, Dr. Christina Maslach,
began her observation of the experiment, starting the evening of the
fifth day. Her role was to conduct subject interviews. In her words,
she initially found it "dull and boring."
During her assignment, she encountered what was described as a
pleasant conversation with a "charming, funny, smart" young man
awaiting the start his guard work shift. Independently, other
researchers had previously advised her that they were watching a
particularly sadistic ‘guard,’ nicknamed by both prisoners and the
other guards as "John Wayne." Dr. Maslach later discovered that
"John Wayne" was the same young man that she had previously talked
The "compartmentalization" was extreme. In his "John Wayne" role,
the person radically transformed; even speaking with a Southern
accent. Even his body motions were different, as was his interaction
with the ‘prisoners.’
"It was like [seeing] Jekyll and
Hyde. . . . It really took my breath away."
It was clear that this ‘guard’ had gone to the adaptive extreme of
inventing his own mythology, even in a known ‘make-believe’ world.
His dissociative adaptation served as a firewall, between his
actions and his conscience; even in a known time-limited
environment. That, in turn, empowered his actions. Again, he was
consciously aware that he was in a role-playing experiment – only.
Christina described that several prisoners engaged "John Wayne" in a
debate; accusing him of enjoying his job. He claimed that he wasn't
really like that; that he was just playing his assigned role. One
‘prisoner’ challenged "John Wayne" on the matter, citing the history
that he had tripped him earlier, as he was taking the prisoner down
the hall to the bathroom. The ‘prisoner’ addressed the fact that no
researchers were around to witness the treatment, indicating that
the act came out of "John Wayne’s" true character and disposition.
"John Wayne" defended himself, insisting (rationalizing) that that
if he let up, his role wouldn't remain powerful.
Maslach described that she became sick to her stomach, while
observing the ‘guards’ marching ‘prisoners,’ with paper bags over
their heads, to the bathroom. She reported that her fellow
researchers teased her about her reaction. Given the nature of the
experiment and the credentials of the researchers, the divergence in
‘professional’ attitude is no small indicator.
After a later emotional encounter with her fiancé, Zimbardo was
forced back to reality, becoming aware of the transformation of the
researchers, ‘guards’ and ‘prisoners,’ alike. Thus, the experiment
was terminated, given Maslach’s illumination of the matter of
Maslach married Zimbardo in 1972.
Automatically, one’s mind goes to the Iraq Abu Grhaib scandal;
questioning how such events could happen, against such well-known
studies as Milgram and Zimbardo; let alone the known
Nazi horrors of
W.W. II. There is a reasonable presumption that such would be far
beneath the dignity of American troops.
However, it should not be lost that the deeds were not only admitted
by the Pentagon and White House (with extreme reluctance), but were
defended, with an insistence that the U.S. forces had a unique
"right" to conduct torture, certainly levels of coercion, which
clearly violated the Geneva Conventions. The world ignored the
Geneva Conventions’ prohibition on the military use of
penitentiaries; the prison use continued.
It should be noted, also, that Abu Grhaib was not the first, nor the
exclusive location of such atrocities. Among other matters, the U.S.
forces had bombed an Afghan POW facility, during the Johnny Spann /
John Walker Lindh debacle, at Mazir I Sharif. Such was a grievous
violation of the Geneva Conventions.
Yet, what does the global public believe?
Back to Contents
Next, go to the study of W.W. I "shell shock" and the near-zombies
which that effect produced – as studied by
the Tavistock Institute.
Next, visit the LSD and amphetamine studies of the CIA’s "MKULTRA"
project. Move onward, to the sciences of Propaganda, Psychological
Operations and "Coercive Persuasion" (Jonestown tactics).
One quickly arrives at the ease of manufacturing a "Manchurian
Candidate!" Oswald, Ruby, Sirhan, James Earl Ray, McVeigh; there are
plenty of examples in the USA, alone. However, these will be more
astutely observed as "Manchurian Patsies."
The suggestion is that a reliable transformation process is
available, which begins with the "shock" of hallucinogens; followed
by a regimen of amphetamines, hypnosis and reinforcement methods;
possibly to the extreme of drug addiction to amphetamines, in
Back to Contents
THE ROLE OF "PERCEPTION CONTROL"
"Perception Control = Emotional Control = Mind Control"
"Control" is the operative term. Is information presented with
frequent repetition and passion? Or; is information kept totally
secret - or prejudicially enshrouded with shame ("A ‘good’ person
wouldn’t go there")?
Is the "controlled" information factual, or has an illusion been
created? The American media re-packaged the Muslims in the Balkan
region as "Ethnic Albanians," ignoring the Islamic role and their
association with both bin Laden and the CIA. No one of prominence
questioned the descriptor. Overnight a previously unheard of
organization, "The Organization for Security and Co-operation in
Europe" (OSCE) "recognized" new Balkan countries – instantly
admitted into NATO.
Thereafter, Yugoslavia’s put-down of an internal
rebellion was re-packaged as an attack against a NATO member & the
Balkan War was on. The "Serbs" were attempting to return to their
traditional Balkan homes, in the fashion of Jews returning to modern
Israel. The media re-packaged their attempts as some form of
invasion & the war progressed against Yugoslavia.
In the end, the ‘new’ nations borrowed billions from the
International Funds & all sins were forgiven. The illusions worked!
It was all a matter of "Controlled Perception." The ‘new’ nations
were now ‘controlled’ through the banking system.
America was content to believe (perceive) that they had rescued the
deserving and victimized "Ethnic Albanians," who made a good living
smuggling heroin out of Afghanistan. America didn’t figure out the
last part. By any rational logic, when the Taliban shut down the
associated opium production, 9-11 was "on."
"Perception" implies "impressionability," does factually presented
information penetrate the psyche of the intended audience? If
American War Crimes are broadcast in Swahili; will the message
‘reach’ the exposed American audience? Extremely unlikely – even
when translated into English.
Perception is also a function of "registration," or "depth of
consciousness." Senator Warner reported on "Larry King" that the
Afghan high-altitude food drops were practiced for nearly a year,
before taking place over Afghanistan. How many spotted the
time-line, asking why the drops were practiced for nearly a year
PRIOR to 9-11? The presented information didn’t "register."
"Perception" is also a function of resistance to ‘registration,’ -
"denial." All the clues in the world point to 9-11 being an
inside-job; yet, few on the planet will tolerate the information to
penetrate their belief system. Just the suspicion alone, results in
global "shell shock" being effected.
The sum of trustworthy post 9-11 information points to American War
Crimes, in the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. The thought is too
horrible for most to tolerate – "denial" takes the day;
"registration" will be minimal. The elements of ‘time,’ ‘distance’
and ‘shielding’ protect against the exposure to horrible facts.
"Perception Control" also relies on the element of "identification."
A tribal leader in Africa commits genocide on a rival tribe – to the
tune of millions of deaths. "America" can’t ‘identify’ with the
problem; little is said or done. With racial apartheid being
reversed in Africa; war, civil war, starvation and the AIDS epidemic
deny Caucasian ‘identification;" Africa has been cleared to die,
save some profitable enterprises, benefiting American corporations -
whether drug companies, diamond & mineral companies or arms dealers.
Conversely, with the coverage of 9-11, and the associated
propaganda, America "identified" with the supposed threat of Saddam
Hussein – per the media presentations. The factual non-connection of
Saddam to 9-11 made little difference; fear ruled. "Perception
Control" and "authority" took command of the American psyche. The UN
reported that no viable evidence of Saddam’s alleged WMDs could be
found. That information came from ‘boots-on-the-ground’ inspectors.
The media didn’t report that finding to any appreciable degree; the
war was on.
In Hermann Goerings famous description:
"All you have to do is tell
them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack
of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same
in any country."
It was all in the "perception" and "authority."
"Perception Control" additionally implies the element of
"pertinence" and "regard." If the media reports a tree falling in a
forest; does anyone care? If an expose’ cites the media for NOT
reporting that tree falling, does anyone care?
In the fashion of "..the dog that didn’t bark," when something
representing a major concern is methodically unreported, what
pertinence and regard goes with that non-reporting carry – if any?
Silence can be constructively ‘deafening.’ In the aftermath of 9-11,
it was reported that the NSA furnished the FBI with only
information. With second thought, it is worth asking whether that
data, instead, represented the fact that
the purported ‘terrorists’
simply didn’t exist, in the first place. Certainly, the last premise
is more easily supported, than the ‘official’ version of 9-11.
As of the end of 2005, globally, somewhere around 160 people were
killed over three years by the "Bird Flu." The common cold and
‘regular’ flue kill radically more, with associated pneumonia. Yet,
the American media keeps reporting the "Bird Flu" information, as
though it was an airborne variant of HIV. To date, the American
public is trying to discover the importance of such a minor killer,
oblivious to the fact that the American tax coffers are being
drained, as though there was a viable "Bird Flu" threat to America.
The media won’t track the "research" money, nor report on the low
element of "pertinence" to the safety of Americans.
The media does NOT report the associated methodical draining of the
U.S. tax coffers by war or other "government" expenses. The
Pentagon, alone, hasn’t accounted for trillions of dollars – but the
media won’t report information which is ‘pertinent’ to the American
worker, or allow for adverse ‘regard’ for that information.
Similarly, the media evades the "pertinence" and "regard" behind the
fact that $40 billion American tax dollars haven’t rebuilt a single
"Katrina" home in New Orleans. Those who got rich on the "Katrina"
money come under the ‘authority’ banner of "Don’t ask; don’t tell."
"Perception Control" allows "distortion." The media doesn’t report
the incremental shutdown of the Medicaid and Social Security System
– ignoring the fact that the affected Americans PRE-PAID their own
benefits. The recipients are, instead, treated as parasites. Imagine
being labeled a ‘parasite’ for collecting on an automobile insurance
policy, following a bad car crash.
"Perception" is a function of specific focus (control). In the
current time frame, the NSA domestic spying scandal is the "American
uproar" – ignoring the fact that the Pentagon had a comparable
domestic spying program – both being illegal as hell. With the media
being ‘focused’ on the NSA domestic spying scandal, America is
distracted from the most important of the two issues, inadvertently
ignoring the Pentagon domestic spying scandal – and the related
"Posse Comitatus" law.
Applying "Perception Control," the media authenticated "authority,"
by relaying the ‘opinions’ of White House Lawyers – one of whom was
conveniently made head of the Bush Justice Department. The
"perception" is that attorney opinions somehow cancel laws and
judicial rulings. America overlooks the fact that attorneys render
only ‘opinions;’ courts render interpretations.
Psyops tactics aside, lying with passion in your voice doesn't
Anything approaching "Gestapo" is as Anti-American as it can get.
So, how does one sort out the domestic "spy" business?
1. Attorneys render legal OPINIONS: Courts render legal
INTERPRETATIONS. Yet, a team of White House Lawyers is cited as the
spying ‘authority’ to bypass the FISA law. Attorneys are
constructively enacting laws.
2. The Iraq campaign didn't involve a "Declaration of War." The
authority was the "Authorization for Use of Military Force." (AUMF)
There is a radical difference between the two. [Note the term
3. If the AUMF is cited as the "spy" authority, then note the AUMF
provision - "....- Nothing in this resolution supercedes any
requirement of the War Powers Resolution." (15 days, max on
4. If the NSA isn't considered to be 'military;' then FISA mandates
5. If the NSA is considered to be 'military,' then the "Possee
Comitatus" statute and the associated military guidance additionally
prohibit the "search and seizure" MILITARY authority, that Bush
6. Remember that the Pentagon had an independent and illegal
domestic spying program. While the military can legally receive
domestic intelligence, as an act of opening its own mail, Title 18
mandates the relay of the information to the appropriate law
enforcement agency (FBI). Failure to do so is "Misprision of a
Felony," under Title 18.
7. With the White House keeping the Mexican border as wide-open, as
possible, how much factual "terror" can there possibly be?
Back to Contents
PERCEPTION OF AUTHORITY
In a broader ‘perception’ horizon, examine Stanley Milgram’s
experiments on authority vs. obedience. The key factor being the
associated "perceptions," relative to that "authority." Milgram
studied the rationalizations and justifications for the Nazi acts of
genocide – as offered by the accused at the World War II, Nuremberg
War Crime trials.
The perpetrators’ defense was typically based on
"obedience" - claiming that they were "… just obeying orders" under
the authority of their superiors. However weak the claim may have
appeared, it was firmly believed, by the accused. Such was their
Certainly, the "Stanford Prison Experiment" elaborated on the
Perception is essentially a trinity:
the self perception, "…how I
think of the matter"
the espoused perception, "…how I would like
everyone else to view the matter"
the public perception, "…how
the preponderance of the public views the matter"
The idea essentially goes back to the old adage, "There are three
sides to every story, yours, mine and the facts."
The difference in the three is a matter of ‘filters’:
Is the matter
clear to all? If not; why not?
Does anyone even know what actually
If not; why not?
How is the "perception" filtered and/or
How many times has an airplane disappeared – with no discoverable
clue as to what happened?
Was it hijacked?
Was it stolen, did the
pilot get lost, crash into a high mountain glacier, or at sea?
Is the factual information "controlled?"
Ron Brown’s B-737 was
reported to have crashed in the "…storm of the decade." History
records that the factual weather wasn’t particularly bad. Yet, what
did/does the preponderance of America believe? The "Controlled
Perception" ruled the matter.
Most importantly, the FIRST presented perception controlled the
Disregarding intense propaganda, there is no viable evidence that a
757 crashed at the 9-11 Pentagon or in Pennsylvania. What does the
preponderance of the entire world believe? Thereafter, it’s a matter
of "Plausible Assertion" or "Plausible Denial."
If one reads the Vince Foster documents, he killed himself with
three different weapons, with his ghost later driving his car to the
nearby parking lot.
In such cases, one is forced to formulate an estimate of probable
history, based on available information, or reasonable assumptions.
"Perception" is obviously sometimes a unique function of
"authority." The Christian Crusaders went off to commit atrocities,
under the "Church" message, "God wills it!" Nazi Storm Troopers did
the same, being advised, "Gott mit uns!" ("God is with us!") The
role of "authority" was to serve as a perceived reliable barrier
against possible accountability and punishment; even unto God.
However, the "perception" and "authority" have to be credible.
George Bush Jr. is more selfish. According to him,
God told him,
personally, to invade Afghanistan and Iraq. He later stated that
acted through him. Given the media "dropping" the matter (Perception
Control), no one cares to talk about those claims. Bush’s claims
exceeded the assertions of Hitler!
Hitler’s Nazis serve as a classic example of the extremes of human
behavior – and how it comes about; how "perception" blended with
A typically unmentioned part of nefarious deeds is the matter of
"accountability." When ‘institutionalized’ authority takes a wrong
turn, where does the issue of accountability fall, relative to time.
Had Hitler won, for example, his leaders and soldiers would have had
no accounting. Yet, in the immediate time of a nefarious
decision-making, the issue of accountability takes on the aura of
context, relative to time.
History often frames "context;" convicted criminals are routinely
put to death as ‘historic’ villains – by the "authority" of the
State. The Nuremberg trials executed ‘deserving’ criminals. Many
cases of raw street revenge are overlooked, given the ‘context’
(perception) of history – versus personally estimated probability of
It is no secret that the Nazi "obedience" was commonly motivated by
fear of execution, prison internment; or at least a transfer to the
dreaded Russian Front. Few verified the potential consequence of
questioning or refusing, versus "…just following orders." The
extended concern is the fate of the affected individual’s family,
for better or worse. One can only ponder what they might do, under
similar fear levels. Openly or subtly, "authority" controlled
The S.S. executioner had to evaluate the effect of time, as a factor
in his accountability. If he was certain that his side would win, he
proceeded with minimal interference of human conscience. Or, he may
have been uncertain of victory, but he may have been quite certain
of his own fate on the Russian front, if he disobeyed – or
questioned - an order to kill. Add the fate of his family.
"Authority" assured him that he was on the winning side.
The ‘conscience test’ of all time seems to be in the personal
estimation of "…what people will say." (AND – the estimate as to
whether or not "they" may never find out; or figure it out?)
Another factor which is rarely addressed, is the matter of "stakes;"
personal risk or actual expenditure. In current times, the religious
zealots are betting their life and their fate in all of eternity, to
perform suicide bombings – even against innocent women and children.
The implication is that the bombers perversely view themselves as
‘holy’ martyrs, favored by God; no sacrifice being too great for
There also exists a "personal identification gap" between those who
monstrously committed the Nazi atrocities, of their own accord, and
those who did the same, under extreme duress. The Nazi monsters had
their share of conscience-driven suicides.
However unpopular (and little-known) the issue may be, it is also
necessary to objectively observe the history of Jews participating
in such organizations as the "Jewish Committees," who selected other
Jews for the Nazi death camps; add the "Jewish Police" of the Nazi
ghettos. Those participants continued to live amongst their own;
their ‘authority’ was remote, however reliable. Certainly, they had
to think it terms of their fate; and that of their family.
In modern times, a little-known driver behind the modern corporation
is the fact that a high percentage of employees are as positively
responsive to a letter of commendation from ‘authority’ in their
personnel file, as they would be to a sizeable check.
Taking that idea further, the ‘value’ in such letters is often
reduced by ‘authority’ employing impotent descriptors as
"acknowledge," versus "recognize," "applaud" or "congratulate."
Obviously, pay levels, benefits and retirements are a huge
determining factor. ‘Authority’ determines whether a military
General abides by White House insistence, with an associated
promotion, or retires two pay grades early.
Thus, it is also necessary to observe the dynamic of authority,
versus propensity for subservience.
One of the major lessons of Hitler’s Nazism was that the true
‘force’ behind that monster was the "perception" of the populace –
asking, "What does the Fuhrer want?" The key was in controlling the
Thinking to the electric battery, what happens when a "political
battery" (potential energy – with positive and negative terminals)
of Nazi methodologies is ‘hooked-up’ to a given populace?
The world should never forget that Hitler nearly won. Currently, the
world is compelled to think to the forces behind this re-designed
version of Nazism, referred to as the "New World Order."
"Those who refuse to think outside the proverbial ‘box’ are
imprisoned in it; and destined to be buried in it."
Back to Contents
PSYOPS AND 9-11
Except for two aircraft hitting the WTC towers, try to think of an
‘official’ position on 9-11 which has turned up as fact.
1. The FBI’s Robert Mueller cited the fact that
linked al Qaeda to 9-11. Later phony al Qaeda "assertions" didn’t
hold up under scrutiny.
2. There is no documented record of the purported 9-11 terrorists
making a plane reservation; there is no “record locator,” complete
3. There is no documented record of the purported 9-11 terrorists
buying or using a ticket. (IDs required)
4. There is no hard-copy of a printed ticket ‘copy.’
5. There is no record of the purported 9-11 terrorists on any of the
passenger manifests, with all legitimate passengers being accounted
6. There is no record of the purported 9-11 terrorists in the
7. There is not as much as a suggestion that the purported 9-11
terrorists had the needed pilot skills - but rather the contrary.
8. At least seven of the purported 9-11 terrorists are known to be
still alive - with no questions being asked.
9. No rational person can believe that the supposed lead hijacker’s
passport could survive the WTC strikes, let alone be ‘immediately
discovered’ in the 9-11 rubble.
10. The presented ‘security’ pictures of the 9-11 hijackers don't
match the purported terrorists.
11. Despite the origins of the alleged hijackers, there was no
in-country (Saudi Arabia & Pakistan) follow-up on the alleged
hijackers’ links to terrorists. In some fashion, the alleged
hijackers either disappeared, or were alleged to have used the names
of seven living persons (with no identity ‘discovery’ follow-up.)
12. Bush’s frantic escape via Barksdale Air Force Base went
un-explained, as it emerged that the "…real, specific and credible"
threats turned up as imaginary – and methodical.
13. The convenient
"bureaucratic fog" – alleged to have allowed 9-11
to happen - went unexplained and un-investigated, as the American
segment of the bin Laden family was immediately whisked away on
private aircraft – amidst "instant" bureaucratic efficiency.
Certainly, the 'convenient' failures went unpunished - if not
14. For the first time in history, not one, but THREE steel-framed
buildings were taken down by fire; magically falling onto their own
footprint. The events involved two different architectural design
styles, two different causes, but owned/controlled by a single
entity. NO QUESTIONS ASKED & NO ASSOCIATED INVESTIGATION!
15. A stopwatch says that THREE buildings at the WTC came down as
controlled demolition. Add the video captures of the sequenced
16. There is no way to account for the purported WTC ‘collapse’
temperatures alleged by the 'official' line.
17. There is no viable evidence of a plane crash at the 9-11
Pentagon or in Pennsylvania - versus salted wreckage pieces. In the
case of the Pentagon, they were even the wrong color! NO QUESTIONS
ASKED & NO ASSOCIATED INVESTIGATION!
18. Despite the alleged failures of Airport Security, the situation
methodically deteriorated to a Gestapo joke, as huge amounts of tax
dollars were insanely spent on the TSA.
19. For all the failures, no official has been punished for 9-11.
(with trivia such as a general who had an affair being sacked, in
20. The "official" 9-11 investigation was grossly under-funded,
producing approximately 800 pages of documents after the White House
censorship and interference.
21. In the end, the 9-11 Commission also failed to identify foreign
terrorists as the perpetrators of 9-11. The so-called
"investigation" was so much political rhetoric - hardly anything
22. That left the Afghan and Iraq invasions as blatant
America fell into an identical "denial" mind-set of 1939 Nazi
Germany. That was no coincidence of history!
23. There were no WMDs. Prior to the invasion, the
'boots-on-the-ground' UN teams reported no significant findings.
Saddam has been long deposed. Iraq had no possible connection to
9-11. For all the horrors of the USA-made Saddam, his crimes are
dwarfed by the tribal genocide of Africa. How did Saddam become the
24. Given the above, Bush's invasions continue as War Crimes!
25. For all the "terror" threat levels posted, the Mexican border
has been forced wide open from the White House; a "terrorist’s"
dream-come-true. How much “terror threat” can possibly be factual?
Yet, repeatedly, the world is SUCCESSFULLY inundated with the
assertions of "terrorism."
One is left to question, with so many inescapable indicators of 9-11
being a "Reichstag Fire," why nothing was said, for all intents &
purposes? Because the nefarious science of PSYOPS was cleverly and
effectively foisted upon America – and the world – by the mass
The harsh truth behind the obvious "mission" is hiding in plain
sight! It's to be discovered in such books as Brezinski's "The Grand
Chess Board," Barnett's "The Pentagon's New Map," and the
documentation of the so-called "Project for a New American Century"
(PNAC). In essence, "Amerika Uber Alles!" No denial is possible!
America's legacy is destined to be found in the mental-emotional
wilderness between "Don’t ask; don’t tell" and "We didn't WANT to
Back to Contents
"Perception Control = Emotional Control = Behavior Control."
Lord Acton probably answered that question in the most simple terms
"Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts – absolutely!"
experienced attest that in "power" environments, there is a
mysterious and overwhelming aura which seemingly 'possesses' the
As with the physical weapons of war, psychological operations have
legitimate uses. But, when those means are used on a domestic
population, what then? To give a wartime pistol to a policeman,
telling him to keep the domestic peace is effective. When that same
pistol is then used to coerce, intimidate or threaten the domestic
populace, something has to be done. It starts with knowing how that
It may seem strange to suggest that the study of propaganda has
relevance to contemporary domestic politics and issues. When most
people think about propaganda, they think of the enormous campaigns
waged by Hitler and Stalin in the 1930s – or McCarthy in the 1950s.
Since nothing comparable is being disseminated in our society today,
many believe that propaganda is no longer a pertinent issue. WRONG!
Propaganda can be as blatant as a ‘peace symbol’ or as subtle as a
song or poem. Propaganda’s persuasive techniques are regularly
applied by politicians, advertisers, journalists, radio
personalities, and others who are interested in influencing human
behavior. Propaganda messages can be used to accomplish positive
social ends, as in campaigns to reduce drunk driving, but they are
also used to win elections and to sell beer. Propaganda isn’t
inherently nefarious or suspect. Often, as in typical advertising or
political campaigns, propaganda is totally expected!
The propagandist is a clever researcher and writer. The
disinformationist has the added background of a psychologist – to
some extent – as well as being a ‘resourceful’ and ‘surgical’
communications specialist. He operates from a time-constrained
Whether we want to admit it or not, PSYOPS is in our daily life – it
is a serious threat. Thus, we are in a comparable position of a
banker. He knows that there will always be robbers and swindlers.
The gimmick is in being smarter and more resourceful than the
robber-swindler. The chief effort is to let the would-be
robber-swindler know that the defense mechanisms are too strong; add
the risks and probability of getting caught.
PSYOPS is generally about the control of human emotions; the
resulting ‘processed emotions’ translating into desired intellectual
(logical) decisions and subsequent actions. Think to the statement,
"Nobody can MAKE you feel a certain way; each person has to DECIDE
how they feel about something – decide for themselves."
Great logic! Now, go to the major sales corporations & ask them why
they spend millions per year on advertising!
OR; call an "ethnic" type by their least-favorite name and see what
decision is made – over the span of a split second!
The reality is that we all have the ability to inspire or persuade
thoughts or emotions in others. The trick is to inspire advantageous
decisions. Ask the husband/boyfriend who brought home the flowers to
his lady. Were some ‘results’ forthcoming? Of course they were,
whether romance – or forgiveness. Emotions = action.
The technical advance of communication tools such as the Internet,
accelerate the flow of persuasive messages - dramatically. For the
first time ever, citizens around the world are participating in
uncensored conversations about their collective future. This seems
like a wonderful development; but there is a risk.
"Information overload" is often the result of people being regularly
confronted with hundreds of intense messages, each day. Common sense
and personal experience dictates that many people respond to the
induced pressure by processing messages as quickly as possible and,
when possible, by taking mental short-cuts.
That kind of response leaves the modern propagandist or
disinformationist with a mandate to devise accommodating short-cuts,
so as to be effective in dealing with typical thought or emotional
processing. The disinformationist reacts with an effort to
effectively control/agitate emotions, exploit insecurities,
capitalizing on language ambiguity – inherent or induced - and by
bending or re-manufacturing the rules of logic. History demonstrates
that the disinformationist can be quite successful. Gaining
attention and controlling perception is the disinformationist’s
first priority, in the modern mind-control equation –
"Perception Control = Emotional Control = Behavior Control."
That leaves specialists and even common people with the task of
detecting and analyzing the disinformation and/or propaganda, so as
to create the needed awareness of the tricks which
disinformationists employ. The secondary obligation is to devise
ways of readily recognizing and resisting the subsequent short-cuts
that the disinformationists promote. In brief,
disinformation/propaganda analysis is the best immediate antidote to
the nefarious excesses of the Information Age. Just as the military
deals with "Information Warfare" as a major munition in their
arsenal, the civilian world is comparably involved in the topic –
like it or not.
As an example of the seriousness associated with the modern
application of domestic propaganda, the Institute for Propaganda
Analysis (IPA) published a series of books, including:
The Fine Art of Propaganda
Group Leader's Guide to Propaganda Analysis
Propaganda: How To Recognize and Deal With It
The IPA centers its illustrations on seven basic propaganda devices:
In "The Fine Art of Propaganda," the IPA makes the point that,
essential in a democratic society that young people and adults learn
how to think, learn how to make up their minds. They must learn how
to think independently, and they must learn how to think together.
They must come to conclusions, but at the same time they must
recognize the right of other men to come to opposite conclusions. So
far as individuals are concerned, the art of democracy is the art of
thinking and discussing independently - together."
Another interesting book was written by
Richard Brodie, "The Virus
of the Mind." The book carefully describes the creation and
conditioning of certain social and political values, logic processes
and seeming behavioral mandates in the mind of the American culture.
The essence of the book cites the automatic mental and emotional
reflexes which have been methodically conditioned into the ‘norms’
of the American society.
How many times in American society has the
statement "You can’t say that" successfully stopped a conversation?
It’s quite common. Imagine that statement being controlling in the
proverbial ‘land of the free.’ Certainly the constraining
descriptor, "Politically Correct" has been dramatically effective,
amidst often mandated "diversity training."
The book describes the "reflexive" intellectual, emotional and
social reactions in terms of "memes." While the term seems to
distract, the content of the book is otherwise quite good.
Imagine the traditional American society being taken away, one slice
at a time. Those old enough can testify that America has seen just
that. In one secretly planned operation, "Operation Northwoods," the
comparable description is "time-phased changes." Rather like the
alcoholic asking, "Oh, what is one more drink going to hurt?" Take
enough pennies away from a dollar, and the dollar is totally gone!
Conversely, the effect can be equally dramatic. Compare the tax rate
of the Korean War era to today’s world! Then note the tax-dollar
rip-off programs – if you can spot them!
The incremental increase of tax rates leaves America working for the
‘government,’ not themselves. Yet, Americans are worse off, by far,
than the early 1950s.
In real estate, the three guiding rules are "Location, location,
location!" In the world of PSYOPS, the comparable rules are "Timing,
timing, timing!" In the world of PSYOPS, the weakest tool can be
effective, given the element of TIMING.
One of the most important applications of ‘timing’ is the dynamic of
‘first-up;’ the proverbial ‘early bird.’ Given the dynamics behind
the events of 9-11, they become a classic for all time. 9-11 was an
inside-job; get used to that.
With no documentation linking al Qaeda to 9-11, per the FBI’s
Mueller, al Qaeda became the instant villain. Osama bin Laden issued
a formal denial in an audio tape; but the ‘first-up’ effect was
already in place. With that background, an obviously phony video
tape was played before America, attempting to implicate bin Laden.
We know it worked – that’s PSYOPS. AND, look at what that PSYOPS
(Don’t get enthralled by the effect,
the 9-11 PSYOPS story is very
ugly. It may mean the death of America, as we knew it. If in doubt,
read the "Patriot Act.")
"Timing" can also be a major clue to the astute observer. To be
‘first-up’ may also indicate who the villain actually is. Those who
support the ‘first-up’ may be peripheral villains. In the immediate
aftermath of 9-11, the ‘official line was, "There were no warnings.
When that was illustrated as a lie, the claim was changed to
As though any perpetrator is going to
advertise his intentions in the Sunday Times! As time went on, more
and more ‘warnings’ were illustrated; along with the history of the
warnings being silenced with prejudice – from within. Out of the
Hollywood version of "Godfather," comes the same dynamic – "…the
first person…" Timing is important for many reasons.
NAME CALLING AND LABELING
"Bad names" have always played a tremendously powerful role in the
entire history of the world; as well as in our own personal
development. Names have ruined and killed people; but, they have
also stirred men and women to outstanding deeds and accomplishments.
Names and labels have ruined the lives of people and have sent many
to prison. Names and labels have made men angry enough to enter
battle and slaughter their fellow men – or to die for the declared
named or labeled cause. Names and labels have been applied to
people, groups, associations, churches, tribes, gangs, colleges,
political parties, neighborhoods, states, regions of the country,
nations, and races.
Many tremendous results have been effected –
just with a name or label. In American history, the "McCarthyism"
ruined lives of truly great people, just with the simple implication
of "Communist;" no proof required! Even today, descriptors such as
"Commie," "Pinko" and "Leftist" bring a programmed emotional
In Current politics, "politically undesirable" has been labeled as
"evil" or "terror." Laws have been passed on these elements, as
though one could comparably outlaw the darkness of night. Yet, the
strategy worked, the draconian laws were passed!
The name-calling technique of the disinformationist usually links a
person, or idea, to a negative symbol, of some type. Beyond pure
propaganda, the disinformationist crafts the name-calling into a
form which has an emotional effect on the targeted audience. The
usual style is to inject ‘distrust,’ into any association with the
targeted individual/issue. The disinformationist who uses this
technique hopes that the targeted audience will mentally AND
emotionally reject the person or the idea on the basis of the
negative symbol, instead of objectively looking at the available
Again, the element of "INTENT" is key. To cite some of Bush’s
cabinet members as ‘felons,’ warns the listener, however negative
the image is.
The most obvious type of name calling involves generally accepted
‘negative’ names. For example, consider the following:
However, the relative position of the name-calling ‘assailant’ or
the ‘victim’ is a factor. "Expensive" is bad to a buyer, but
wonderful to a seller. A more subtle form of name-calling involves
words or phrases that are selected because they possess or create a
negative emotional charge.
A responsible Pentagon official may propose specific military budget
cuts. Instead of being labeled as "wise" or "fiscally conservative,"
the official gets labeled as "stingy." Either description can refer
to the same behavior – with an extreme of different connotation.
Other examples of negatively charged words include:
The name-calling technique leaves the casual observer with the
logical mandate to ask intelligent questions when spotting
"name-calling." Not all "name calling" is inappropriate or
counter-productive. If a female politician cites a colleague or
opponent as a ‘sweetheart,’ the connotation isn’t particularly
inappropriate or negative.
To cite Saddam Hussein as a ‘monster’ is
dynamic; although a highly negative imagery. However, subjectivity
is important in such matters. Referring to a man as a ‘sweetheart’
may ruin the day of a feminist. Referring to Saddam as a ‘monster’
may stir a Muslim supporter to violence.
The appropriate questions:
Is the name calling appropriate?
Would a reasonable person find the name-calling personally
What is the intention behind the name calling?
What does the name imply?
Does the idea in question have a legitimate connection with the
typical association behind the name?
Is an idea or thought process which serves a given person’s or
group’s best interests being discounted/dismissed through such name
Omitting the name calling, what are the merits in the remainder of
Almost any culture claims to believe in, fight for and live by
"virtuous words." These "words" are normally associated with deeply
set attitudes and ideas. In the USA, such words include:
civilization, civic, morality, justice, equality, Americanism, God,
Christianity, good, proper, right, democracy, patriotism, family,
motherhood, fatherhood, science, medicine, health, natural and love.
For the purposes of propaganda/disinformation analysis, call these
virtue words "Sparkling Generalities" focusing attention upon the
dangerous characteristic that they have: They mean different things
to different people; thus they can be used in different ways. The
trick being in the controlling of context or association of the
Disinformationists prey upon the selected words, as we typically
understand them or relate to them. Through scientifically styled
means/methods/techniques, disinformationists prostitute the
cherished words and beliefs and attitudes of unsuspecting people.
When Americans hear the word ‘democracy,’ they typically think of
their own definite ideas about democracy, the ideas learned at home
and school. "Mom, apple pie and the girl next door" come to mind.
The typical reflex is to assume that the term is being used in that
particular sense. The ‘virtue word’ lowers the 'caution threshold,'
deferring any suspicion or mistrust; particularly when listening
about the things 'the United States must do to preserve democracy.'
However, when one hears of ‘democracy’ in 2003 Iraq, the proverbial
‘red flags’ pop into view. The term is the same, the ‘association’
is different; very different. The image of a burning Humvee comes to
mind, along with the image of dead or wounded GIs.
In essence, the employment of the "Sparkling Generality" is the
reversal of "Name Calling." Name Calling seeks to make us fear
and/or reject the cited entity. The intention is for the targeted
audience to formulate a judgment to reject and condemn the victim of
the name-calling, without bothering to examine the evidence. The
Sparkling Generality device, conversely, seeks to make us identify
with, approve and accept the generality without examining the
Exporting American Democracy to Iraq sounds noble to the typical
American. However, given the "Patriot Act," what is actually being
exported? In examining the "Sparkling Generality Device," all that
is said regarding Name Calling / Labeling must also be kept in mind.
The observer should ask:
What image is the ‘virtue’ word intended to convey?
Does the presented idea in question have a legitimate connection
with the general/typical meaning of the word?
Is this an attempt to prostitute an idea which does not serve the
observer’s best interests?
Is it being "sold" or "spun" through its being given an
association or name that the typical and reasonable observer isn’t
likely to buy into?
Omitting the "virtue word," what is contained in the remainder of
An attitude is an imbedded personal style of dealing with
information or events. Think to the common expressions:
"Why should I?"
"What’s in it for me?"
"I could care less!"
and let live."
"No shame in my game!"
In that context, Americans are routinely conditioned to respond to
information and events with a conditioned ATTITUDE. In the ‘first
up’ style of the 9-11 presentation, America predictably responded in
With the conditioning of such horrors as the 1993
bombing of the WTC and the Oklahoma City bombing, the mass media
presentations stirred a revenge reflex; America seemingly had
suffered enough "terrorism." The ATTITUDE was highly predictable -
"I’ve had enough! Nobody is going to get away with this!"
A popular belief system asserts that it is wrong to ‘lay’ your
expectations on another, demanding a specific accommodation.
However, a clear mind quickly remembers that there is an animal
known as the ‘reasonable expectation.’ For example, fidelity in a
relationship or marriage. Reasonable expectations are all around us
– but they are quickly being deleted from the American culture.
America regularly witnesses the exporting of the USA critical
economic infrastructure. America’s sovereignty is being dissolved
faster than Americans can detect the unmistakable pattern. Whatever
‘forces’ may be in operation, Americans are facing lower-paying jobs
– if any. Political discussions of job ‘numbers’ evade any
discussion of job ‘quality.’ The ‘normal’ job benefits are more
routinely being subsidized by the employee – if any benefits are
The sovereignty of America is discounted, versus a strange and
methodical imposition of an American "global responsibility," which
routinely excludes the welfare of Americans!
Thus, one of the apparent rules of the ‘system’ is, "…destroy all
expectations; reasonable or otherwise."
One of the deadliest of these efforts was the overturn of the
American "Equal Protection" clause in the U.S. Constitution. In the
Michigan college reverse discrimination case, the ruling hinged on a
"compelling interest" in removing the equal-protection provision as
the issue pertains to reverse discrimination in school admissions.
What America didn’t notice was the ‘style’ of the language; and what
that language is destined to mean. Specifically, that phrase
"compelling interest," is destined to be applied to the selective
enforcement of all American laws. That "selective enforcement" has
been a relative norm for quite a while in American society. Now,
however, there is essentially a Supreme Court precedent to anchor
the debate for the "compelling interest" in enforcing the law only
as "Politically Convenient."
In essence, "social obligation" will be openly transferred to
political "obligation," in the controlled style of "political
When disinformationists use sparkling generalities and name-calling
symbols, they are attempting to impress their targeted audience with
vivid, emotionally stimulating words. In certain situations,
however, the disinformationist attempts to pacify the audience in
order to make an unpleasant reality more palatable. This is
accomplished by using words that are bland and euphemistic. The
brutal is converted into the ‘kinder and gentler.’
America changed the name of the War Department to the
Department of Defense.
"Queer" became "gay."
civilian casualties are referred to as "collateral damage," and the
word "liquidation" is used as a synonym for "murder."
became "person of interest."
The U.S. Constitution was almost
destroyed by the "Patriot Act."
From the Vietnam War, "combat
fatigue," or "shell shock" became "post-traumatic stress disorder;"
the descriptor being completely disconnected from the reality of
The "suicide bomber" became the "homicide bomber."
"Muslims" (connected to Osama bin Laden) of the American/NATO Balkan
campaign became "Ethnic Albanians."
Back to Contents