I see this particular line of thinking as mostly motivated by a desire to make our mental health system look bad (which it definitely is). I doubt it gets to the core understandings behind these incidents.
All these very public incidents are portrayed (by - the story tellers?) as done by lone kooks. That they were all kooks to some degree…
I see this particular line of thinking as mostly motivated by a desire to make our mental health system look bad (which it definitely is). I doubt it gets to the core understandings behind these incidents.
All these very public incidents are portrayed (by - the story tellers?) as done by lone kooks. That they were all kooks to some degree is probably correct. But a LOT of people are kooky and never end up doing something like this. There is another dimension to many of these incidents, and a few of them have been researched enough that we know without a doubt that there was more involved.
Oswald, though a bit kooky himself, was set up to be JFK's killer but was unlikely to be one who fired the shot or shots that hit Kennedy. Likewise, the guy accused of the MLK shooting was probably not even the person who shot the bullets. On top of that attorney Bill Pepper found some evidence that King was actually killed by a doctor at the hospital he was taken to. Sirhan Sirhan has always maintained his innocence in the RFK shooting, though he was there and had a gun. There is some evidence in several other shootings that the "lone kooks" did not in fact act alone.
Because the "official stories" in all these cases have never been fully resolved, I think it is safe to assume that this official story is incomplete.
We know that practices exist that enable a person to be secretly controlled by others who remain undetected. Most are based on more or less aggressive forms of hypnosis. Others may rely more on drugs, implants, or "psychotronic" technologies. I don't know that any of these methods have been fully connected to a real world incident. But there are many stories floating around that this is the case.
The basic procedure, then, for a planned shooting would be roughly as follows:
1) Some power group decides that an incident is needed to forward their agenda.
2) The incident is planned, and the order goes out to locate someone who can be blamed for the incident.
3) Operatives locate one or more likely "patsies" and arrange for them to have some sort of secret influence installed in them. "Kooky" people are sought out, as the cover story will be stronger. Friendly psychiatrists may be used to help locate such persons.
4) The secret control technology is installed (with psychiatric help?) and the incident is planned and carried out. If possible, the patsy is killed so he can't talk or be "un-hypnotized."
5) The cover story is released to news outlets.
6) "Alternative media" tries to dig out the truth, but various propaganda techniques are used to "debunk" their efforts. This has sometimes resulted in the death of one or more journalists or witnesses involved with the investigation.
Some analysts - perhaps in an overabundance of enthusiasm - assume that all such incidents follow this pattern. I doubt this is true, and has resulted in some very poor results - as those surrounding the Sandy Hook incident. I don't know that any incident has been totally pinned down as following this pattern. Maybe the MLK shooting comes the closest. We should get to the bottom of this. It definitely plays a role in the larger subject of ponerology.
I'd agree with what you are saying - look at the Port Arthur massacre in 1996 in Hobart, Tasmania. Martin Bryant fits the profile (somewhat) as Harrison describes, but many multiple head shots, hardly any misses, from multiple directions, from a kid who doesn't know how to handle a rifle??? Expert marksmen couldn't explain how he did it. He was a patsy. Emergency response comes in with almost supernatural expediency - was a set up. Subsequently Australia was disarmed.
Some good examples from you two. The question in my mind is: is there something about this "type" that makes them particularly susceptible to the types of influences and/or programming that such patsies are subjected to?
We are talking about people with autistic traits - diminished left/right hemisphere activity, 'isolated' regions of the brain that are more highly developed yet lack sufficient integration with other major neural pathways. There's probably something about this particular atypical neural architecture that offers unique opportunities to employ these people as patsies. Broad social awareness is dull and often misunderstood, but once a concept is grasped it's pursued with vigor (often a left hemisphere crusade that doesn't get the message from the right that there's serious negative social implications). Without the checks and balances of good hemispheric integration could these people be more easily set on a path (like becoming a shooter) with little consideration of consequences and only focused on the task (a distinctly left hemisphere trait, believing it's always right, even if that pesky right hemisphere is screaming that things are not OK - the left hemisphere thinks the right hemisphere is a conspiracy theorist lol)?
I'm just thinking out loud here - I'd have to do a deep dive into the literature to vet the concept. And is this atypical neural architecture more prone to suggestibility? Possibly - I really don't know (although I'm sure there are studies out there to verify or not).
There's also the type that wants notoriety and/or money, also the suicide by cop variety. Some don't realize it's a suicide mission. Others do. At 20, reasoning skills aren't fully developed.
Good question. I am not aware of any direct data from Hubbard on suggestibility.
His general observations were somewhat along the lines of "most people are already in a hypnotic state."
His major parameter used for personality analysis is Tone Level. The higher your tone level, the more "awake" you are, and presumably more resistant to external influences.
On his Chart of Human Evaluation, he does have Column 17 - Hypnotic Level. This is from work he did in 1951 and earlier. At "Tone 4.0" one is "impossible to hypnotize without drugs." Below those levels, one becomes more susceptible to hypnosis.
At higher tones, the person may refuse to follow a hypnotic command ("negate") or deny that he was ever hypnotized. At tone 1.1 (just above total Fear) the person is "In a permanent light trance, but negates."
Below this level (Grief, Apathy, Deep Apathy) the subject is "very hypnotic." At the lowest level, "equivalent to a hypnotized subject when awake." These levels are roughly equivalent to chronic depression or anxiety. The lowest is roughly equivalent to catatonia. You would not expect an active shooter to exist at that level. However, at grief or apathy it is quite possible.
Hubbard used hypnotism in his earliest research but refused to teach his students to do it, as he considered it too dangerous.
It is impossible to judge to what extent such techniques are used in these shooting cases. When the shooter is killed during the incident, he cannot be interviewed. And even if he (usually a man) is interviewed, it is likely that the interviewer is not adept enough to check for prior hypnotism on the case, or many even be colluding with the actual perpetrators.
In this society, where most of our telepathic abilities are totally dead, it is very difficult to be aware of what is really going on "over there." We can keep secrets rather easily and in fact make a game of it. Most of our dramatic entertainment is based on keeping and breaking secrets. In a telepathic society, such games would be nearly impossible. In our society this lack of ability allows for inordinate amounts of deception.
It's always possible this guy actually acted alone. But the case has some gaping holes in it. Have alternative journalists come up with any firm evidence about any of it?
There's many hours, and books, of compelling evidence that this would more likely be some sort of black ops than a kid acting alone. To be honest it's been years since I did a deep dive into it all, but there's good balistic evidence that there were 2 shooters from different vantage points who were highly skilled in their craft (if you can call it a craft). When I say 'evidence', anything official has been buried, but some have gleaned their own data from photos, video, first hand reports, and physically looking at the location, putting together time-lines, etc.
It's our version of the JFK assassination in terms of intrigue and things just not adding up.
Agree with you. Remember The Day of the Jackal? There are people who are professional assassins as we all know. We often hear about political hitmen. South Africa is full of them. The mafia were famous for it.
This bloke who tried to assassinate Trump was no professional, I suspect he was promised a lot of money and that he would be helped to escape. It was planned and a Kooky bloke was the fall guy. Maybe he was caught doing something he was ashamed of and blackmailed. Who knows? He was shot so he couldn't talk ic my opinion.
'Subsequently Australia was disarmed.' Absolutely correct.
This is the typical response for Marxist type personalities. We see it everywhere where despots or tyrants are given power. We see it now where the socialist Lula da Silva was installed.
They know that they will be shot for what they are planning.
I see this particular line of thinking as mostly motivated by a desire to make our mental health system look bad (which it definitely is). I doubt it gets to the core understandings behind these incidents.
All these very public incidents are portrayed (by - the story tellers?) as done by lone kooks. That they were all kooks to some degree is probably correct. But a LOT of people are kooky and never end up doing something like this. There is another dimension to many of these incidents, and a few of them have been researched enough that we know without a doubt that there was more involved.
Oswald, though a bit kooky himself, was set up to be JFK's killer but was unlikely to be one who fired the shot or shots that hit Kennedy. Likewise, the guy accused of the MLK shooting was probably not even the person who shot the bullets. On top of that attorney Bill Pepper found some evidence that King was actually killed by a doctor at the hospital he was taken to. Sirhan Sirhan has always maintained his innocence in the RFK shooting, though he was there and had a gun. There is some evidence in several other shootings that the "lone kooks" did not in fact act alone.
Because the "official stories" in all these cases have never been fully resolved, I think it is safe to assume that this official story is incomplete.
We know that practices exist that enable a person to be secretly controlled by others who remain undetected. Most are based on more or less aggressive forms of hypnosis. Others may rely more on drugs, implants, or "psychotronic" technologies. I don't know that any of these methods have been fully connected to a real world incident. But there are many stories floating around that this is the case.
The basic procedure, then, for a planned shooting would be roughly as follows:
1) Some power group decides that an incident is needed to forward their agenda.
2) The incident is planned, and the order goes out to locate someone who can be blamed for the incident.
3) Operatives locate one or more likely "patsies" and arrange for them to have some sort of secret influence installed in them. "Kooky" people are sought out, as the cover story will be stronger. Friendly psychiatrists may be used to help locate such persons.
4) The secret control technology is installed (with psychiatric help?) and the incident is planned and carried out. If possible, the patsy is killed so he can't talk or be "un-hypnotized."
5) The cover story is released to news outlets.
6) "Alternative media" tries to dig out the truth, but various propaganda techniques are used to "debunk" their efforts. This has sometimes resulted in the death of one or more journalists or witnesses involved with the investigation.
Some analysts - perhaps in an overabundance of enthusiasm - assume that all such incidents follow this pattern. I doubt this is true, and has resulted in some very poor results - as those surrounding the Sandy Hook incident. I don't know that any incident has been totally pinned down as following this pattern. Maybe the MLK shooting comes the closest. We should get to the bottom of this. It definitely plays a role in the larger subject of ponerology.
I'd agree with what you are saying - look at the Port Arthur massacre in 1996 in Hobart, Tasmania. Martin Bryant fits the profile (somewhat) as Harrison describes, but many multiple head shots, hardly any misses, from multiple directions, from a kid who doesn't know how to handle a rifle??? Expert marksmen couldn't explain how he did it. He was a patsy. Emergency response comes in with almost supernatural expediency - was a set up. Subsequently Australia was disarmed.
Some good examples from you two. The question in my mind is: is there something about this "type" that makes them particularly susceptible to the types of influences and/or programming that such patsies are subjected to?
We are talking about people with autistic traits - diminished left/right hemisphere activity, 'isolated' regions of the brain that are more highly developed yet lack sufficient integration with other major neural pathways. There's probably something about this particular atypical neural architecture that offers unique opportunities to employ these people as patsies. Broad social awareness is dull and often misunderstood, but once a concept is grasped it's pursued with vigor (often a left hemisphere crusade that doesn't get the message from the right that there's serious negative social implications). Without the checks and balances of good hemispheric integration could these people be more easily set on a path (like becoming a shooter) with little consideration of consequences and only focused on the task (a distinctly left hemisphere trait, believing it's always right, even if that pesky right hemisphere is screaming that things are not OK - the left hemisphere thinks the right hemisphere is a conspiracy theorist lol)?
I'm just thinking out loud here - I'd have to do a deep dive into the literature to vet the concept. And is this atypical neural architecture more prone to suggestibility? Possibly - I really don't know (although I'm sure there are studies out there to verify or not).
There's also the type that wants notoriety and/or money, also the suicide by cop variety. Some don't realize it's a suicide mission. Others do. At 20, reasoning skills aren't fully developed.
Good question. I am not aware of any direct data from Hubbard on suggestibility.
His general observations were somewhat along the lines of "most people are already in a hypnotic state."
His major parameter used for personality analysis is Tone Level. The higher your tone level, the more "awake" you are, and presumably more resistant to external influences.
On his Chart of Human Evaluation, he does have Column 17 - Hypnotic Level. This is from work he did in 1951 and earlier. At "Tone 4.0" one is "impossible to hypnotize without drugs." Below those levels, one becomes more susceptible to hypnosis.
At higher tones, the person may refuse to follow a hypnotic command ("negate") or deny that he was ever hypnotized. At tone 1.1 (just above total Fear) the person is "In a permanent light trance, but negates."
Below this level (Grief, Apathy, Deep Apathy) the subject is "very hypnotic." At the lowest level, "equivalent to a hypnotized subject when awake." These levels are roughly equivalent to chronic depression or anxiety. The lowest is roughly equivalent to catatonia. You would not expect an active shooter to exist at that level. However, at grief or apathy it is quite possible.
Hubbard used hypnotism in his earliest research but refused to teach his students to do it, as he considered it too dangerous.
It is impossible to judge to what extent such techniques are used in these shooting cases. When the shooter is killed during the incident, he cannot be interviewed. And even if he (usually a man) is interviewed, it is likely that the interviewer is not adept enough to check for prior hypnotism on the case, or many even be colluding with the actual perpetrators.
In this society, where most of our telepathic abilities are totally dead, it is very difficult to be aware of what is really going on "over there." We can keep secrets rather easily and in fact make a game of it. Most of our dramatic entertainment is based on keeping and breaking secrets. In a telepathic society, such games would be nearly impossible. In our society this lack of ability allows for inordinate amounts of deception.
Wow, what a story! I was totally unaware of it, as is common in the U.S. for events that happen in other countries.
I've just jotted down a bit of a note about it here https://escapingmasspsychosis.substack.com/p/on-patsies-and-conspiracies - no details, as you can gather that from some great investigative journalism that's been done over the past 20 something years.
It's always possible this guy actually acted alone. But the case has some gaping holes in it. Have alternative journalists come up with any firm evidence about any of it?
There's many hours, and books, of compelling evidence that this would more likely be some sort of black ops than a kid acting alone. To be honest it's been years since I did a deep dive into it all, but there's good balistic evidence that there were 2 shooters from different vantage points who were highly skilled in their craft (if you can call it a craft). When I say 'evidence', anything official has been buried, but some have gleaned their own data from photos, video, first hand reports, and physically looking at the location, putting together time-lines, etc.
It's our version of the JFK assassination in terms of intrigue and things just not adding up.
Agree with you. Remember The Day of the Jackal? There are people who are professional assassins as we all know. We often hear about political hitmen. South Africa is full of them. The mafia were famous for it.
This bloke who tried to assassinate Trump was no professional, I suspect he was promised a lot of money and that he would be helped to escape. It was planned and a Kooky bloke was the fall guy. Maybe he was caught doing something he was ashamed of and blackmailed. Who knows? He was shot so he couldn't talk ic my opinion.
'Subsequently Australia was disarmed.' Absolutely correct.
This is the typical response for Marxist type personalities. We see it everywhere where despots or tyrants are given power. We see it now where the socialist Lula da Silva was installed.
They know that they will be shot for what they are planning.
Reading up on Bryant "IQ of 66" but found competent to stand trial, that's Australia for you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Bryant
RFKjr doesn't think it was Sirhan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Robert_F._Kennedy#Second_gunman_hypothesis
Thane Eugene Cesar
Good on pointing that out. I thought that was his position on it.