[PAULYPOKER]

Americans Target Of Largest Media
Brainwashing Campaign In History

By Lonnie Wolfe

Executive Intelligence Review

Introduction: Are You Brainwashed?

Are you brainwashed? What about some of your neighbors, are they brainwashed? Before you answer that, let us ask you a few preliminary questions: Do you believe that the United States was struck by a terrorist attack on Sept. 11? Do think that the people behind that attack were "Arabs" and that its "mastermind" was this fellow Osama bin Laden, operating from a cave in Afghanistan? Do you believe that the way to stop terrorism is to hit them hard, to hit them at their "bases" in such places as Afghanistan, and to hit the nations who might sponsor them, like, say Iraq?

And what about the economy? Do you think that the recent fall of the stock market, and the weakness in the economy, have been caused by the Sept. 11 attacks? Well, if you answered "yes" to any of these questions, you probably are brainwashed! If you answered "yes" to more than one, you are definitely a "goner."

"But," you, reply, "isn't that what most people think? Wouldn't they answer those questions the same way I do? Well, the answer to that is, yes. But, we would remind you: Just because the majority of people might BELIEVE something to be true, doesn't make it true. All it means, is that you and most of your neighbors are suffering from a mass delusion--or, put more bluntly: YOU ARE BRAINWASHED. So, the question is, really, how did you get this way? How did you come to believe things like those statements in the first questions were true? "Well, I heard it on.... Well, I saw it on.... Well, I read it in...."

You needn't bother finishing those statements; we can do it for you: You, and your neighbors were told the "truth" by the mass media. The American "news" media, which is so proud of calling itself "free," and has been patting itself on it back for the wonderful job it has done for all us during and after Sept. 11, is the largest, most expensive, mass-brainwashing machine ever assembled in human history. It is a machine that so completely brainwashes the nearly 300 millions Americans, that the Nazis' infamous Propaganda Minister Josef Goebbels would be envious.

Here are the essential facts of what happened on Sept. 11: According to Democratic Presidential pre-candidate Lyndon LaRouche, whose assessment is shared by many competent specialists on terrorism and irregular warfare, in this country and around the world, what took place was not a terrorist attack, but strategic, covert special operation, organized to have the appearance of a "terrorist" attack.

Mr. LaRouche and others concur that, given both its scope, and the extent of the cover-up and misdirection which followed, such an operation could not have been organized by any Arab terrorist cells or networks, nor by an Arab or Middle Eastern state, nor any combination of the above; it had to be organized from within the United States, with the participation and connivance of a rogue network within the Anglo-American intelligence and military establishment.

As with any such covert special operation, there is a psychological warfare component, intended to maximize its effectiveness against a targetted enemy, to confuse that enemy and misdirect him. In the case of the Sept. 11 attack, the targetted enemy is the POPULATION OF THE UNITED STATES AND ITS CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT.

The "psywar" component of the operation is being carried out by the American media-machine, with the intent to brainwash the American people INTO ACCEPTING THE ONGOING COUP D'ETAT AGAINST OUR CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT.

Does that mean that the directors of the U.S. mass media are involved in the operation? No; it doesn't work that way. As EIR explained and documented in a 1997 special report, the U.S. media are controlled and run as a cartel, by the Anglo-American establishment. As such, it routinely serves the interest of that establishment, reporting what it wants, and suppressing what it doesn't want reported; or slanting reporting to conceal reality. Thus, the media's performance before, during and after Sept. 11 could be prediscounted by those who planned the operation, so as to become a feature of it; it were merely required to insert certain specific "psyops" content into this media-brainwashing apparatus, for it to be spread far and wide with the desired effects on you and your neighbors.

The brainwashing methods are relatively simple and classic. First, use the terror itself to put people into a state of shock, making them more susceptible to suggestion. Then resort to the "Big Lie" technique to repeatedly hammer home your psywar message--those affirmative answers to the questions we first asked. And most importantly, lie, by suppressing all counter-evidence, by refusing to report anything that might point to the assessment shared by Mr. LaRouche and others: the cover-up. All this has been done, along with initial softening of the population to the mass delusional suggestion of the enemy image and the alleged capabilities and motivations of the so-called terrorists, PRIOR TO THE LAUNCHING OF THE ATTACK ITSELF.

Don't be so hasty in dismissing the possibility of your own brainwashing. The enemy knows your profile and uses it. Doesn't that make you a bit angry--maybe for the right reasons, for the first time in a few weeks?

Our report below is designed to give you a view from inside this brainwashing process, to see how it has worked on you and your neighbors. And, while we can't yet say who precisely is behind what was done to this country--is still being done--we can show you how they think about brainwashing and use your weaknesses against you.

Psychological Terror as a Means of Warfare: Dresden Redux Before discussing the brainwashing operation itself, we provide a little background on the use of terror against mass civilian populations.

Not surprisingly, this was pioneered by the brainwashers of the Anglo-American establishment.

As commentators on the scene at "Ground Zero" of the World Trade Center (WTC) attack on Sept. 11 surveyed the devastation, they reached for metaphors to describe the incredible scene. "It looks like Dresden," said one, referring to the firebombing of that German city by the Allies in 1944.

Dresden had no military value as a target. For centuries, it had been a center of German cultural heritage--a heritage that had everything to do with positive developments in human civilization, and nothing to do with the Nazi disease that had been imposed on Germany by the Anglo-American financial elite. Dresden was chosen for destruction as an act of TERRORISM, directed, not against the Nazis, per se, but the German people.

The firebombing of Dresden, creating a raging inferno of destruction that slaughtered more that 100,000 human beings, was conceived and directed by a group of social psychiatrists at the Strategic Bombing Survey, affiliated with the Special Operations Command of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS). This group was effectively overseen by the head of the British Psychological Warfare Directorate, Brig. Gen. John Rawlings Rees, the director the Tavistock Clinic in London, which, since the 1920s, had served as a center of psychological warfare operations of the British Empire.

The team at the Strategic Bombing Survey, which included a host of U.S.-based Tavistock operatives, such as Kurt Lewin, Rensis Likert, and Margaret Mead, theorized that the terror inflicted on the German population through the "message of Dresden" would break their will to fight, leaving them fearful, frightened, and disorganized. They projected that it would have a lasting effect on Germany, removing that nation from among the great states of Europe, making it a permanently psychologically scarred entity. The German people, they argued, would be made to realize that "all that is German" could be wiped away, all of its culture and history, in an instant, as it were, by powers who would oppose an assertive future Germany.

In his 1941 book, "Time Perspective and Morale," Kurt Lewin described the psychology behind the use of this terror tactic for mass effect:

"One of the main techniques for breaking morale through a `strategy of terror' consists in exactly this tactic--keep the person hazy as to where he stands and what just he may expect. If, in addition, frequent vacillations between severe disciplinary measures and promises of good treatment, together with the spreading of contradictory news, make the cognitive structure of this situation utterly unclear, then the individual may cease to know when a particular plan would lead toward or away from his goal. Under these conditions, even those individuals who have definite goals and are ready to take risks will be paralyzed with severe inner conflicts in regard to what to do."

As the pilots and their crews came to realize what they had done--the creation of a raging inferno, burning civilian targets and civilians--many returned to their bases horrified. At the instruction of the psyops warriors, the crews had not been fully briefed on the mission. Now, they were greeted by teams of psychologists and others, who would profile their responses to the terror they had unleashed; they were told, as the crews who later dropped, unnecessarily, atomic bombs on two Japanese cities, that it would "shorten the war."

As one former intelligence officer remarked decades later, "we killed for pure terror, slaughtered people as A TERRORIST WOULD. And, it had no effect on shortening the war. In fact, it seemed to help rally the German people to the Hitler government. The fools who designed this mission probably extended the war" (emphasis added).

The attack on the U.S. Sept. 11, in particular the WTC attack, was designed for a similar PSYWAR brainwashing effect.

The Sept. 24 issue of "The New Yorker," commented that, according to "defense experts," the Sept. 11 strike "was clearly an example of what military strategists call `psyops'; that is, a brand of warfare whose aim is not to disable military targets, but to sap the overall will of a nation and its people."

The article goes on to quote from a 1999 paper by military strategist and analyst Joseph Cyrulik of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C., "Asymmetric Warfare and the Threat to the American Homeland": "By killing and wounding people, damaging and destroying their homes and communities, disrupting their jobs and economic livelihoods, and undermining their confidence and sense of security, an enemy can inflict pain to the point that people demand a change in their government's policies.

"Used at the right time and place ... an attack could destroy the people's faith in their government, their military, and themselves. It could become a decisive attack against the political will of an entire populace."

Cyrulik is part of a network of "thinkers" who seek to change all military doctrine to meet alleged 21st Century threats; in so doing, this network wants to activate psyops, including "covert warfare" such as assassinations. While we can't say that such people are directly responsible for what occurred on Sept. 11, their assumptions about strategy, tactics, and the elevated value of psychological warfare, as well as the misdirection involved in their ascribing powers to "terrorist organizations" or "rogue states" fit nicely into the overall operation.

There are new methods, not available at the time of the Dresden attack, for maximizing the psychological effects of a TERROR CAMPAIGN that parallel standard brainwashing techniques.

One involves the repetition of terrifying images, the kind that would make a person recoil, and then compelling that person to continue viewing them. Such terrifying images weaken the ability of the mind to reason, making it more susceptible to suggestion and manipulation.

In the hours following the attack on the World Trade Center, every television media outlet in the United States broadcast, again and again, the images of the airplanes smashing into the Twin Towers, from all conceivable angles, and then, the shots of the two towers collapsing. It was easily the most terrifying real-life image that most Americans had ever seen.

A population induced into a state of terror and shock was then bombarded with SUGGESTION: images started to appear, the mugshot-like photos of the alleged perpetrators, and the image of the "evil mastermind" behind the deed, Osama bin Laden.

And, you still believe that you weren't brainwashed?

The Movies in Our Heads "God, this is just like a movie," exclaimed CBS anchor Dan Rather as the first of the World Trade Center towers collapsed. "Only, it's the real thing." Did you have the sense, as you were witnessing the horror of the WTC attack, that you, too, had seen this before? You probably had--and that is part of the brainwashing operation.

In the last five years, there have been at least a half-dozen movies, whose plots have centered on a terrorist attack on the United States. Hollywood statisticians have estimated that these have been viewed, both in movie theaters and home videos, by more than 100 million people. And, many of these movies, in the recent period, have portrayed "Arabs" or "Islamic fundamentalists" as being behind the terrorist assaults.

Each of these latter films has some "expert" advisor, usually a "former counterterrorism expert" and, in some cases, someone who has worked in the military. While it would be a leap to say that the movie-production companies or the "experts" are necessarily witting accomplices in the current plot, the movies, with their "steered" scripts helped people believe that "Arab" terrorists might be capable of what was done on Sept. 11.

Long before there was television, images were placed, for "playback" in America's memory banks--first by the print media, and then, starting early in the 20th Century with the first of the real mass media, the movies. Hollywood is a component of the Anglo-American media cartel, a point made more obvious by recent creation of "entertainment conglomerates" through mergers and acquisitions. Thus, a mere handful of companies, with interlocking boards, comprised of people within the Anglo-American establishment, controls all of what we see in the multiplexes, on television, in the print media, and, more lately, on the Internet.

As movies were becoming a truly mass-media phenomenon, the Anglo-American commentator Walter Lippmann described their power, along with the popwer of media generally, in shaping "public opinion"--what you and your neighbors think. In his 1921 "handbook" on the mass manipulation of the public mind, "Public Opinion", Lippmann, who had been trained by Rees, among others, at the British propaganda directorate during World War|I, writes in his introductory chapter, "The World Outside and the Pictures in Our Heads":

"Public opinion deals with indirect, unseen, and puzzling facts, and there is nothing obvious about them.... The pictures inside the heads of these human beings, the pictures of themselves, of others, of their needs, purposes and relationships, are their opinions. Those pictures acted on by groups of people, or by individuals acting in the name of groups, are Public Opinion with capital letters....

The picture inside [the head] so often misleads men in their dealings with the world outside."

Somewhere in your memory banks, were planted the "pictures in your head" of the WTC attack. New Yorker film critic Anthony Lane writes in the magazine's Sept. 24 issue, "How often have we listened to these words [since Sept. 11]. The statement of fact: `The worst terrorist bombing since Oklahoma City.' The promise: `Make no mistake about it--we will hunt down the enemy, we will find the enemy, and we will kill the enemy.' The caution: `You can't fight a war against an enemy you can't see.' And the ominous look ahead: `This is a time of war; the fact that it is inside our border means that it is a new kind of war.' We have learned such sentiments like a script; that we have heard it again and again [in the days since Sept. 11] has not diminished the sternness with which we have given our assent.

"Just one problem: it IS a script. All the lines quoted come from `The Siege,' a 1998 thriller directed by Edward Zwick."

The plot of that movie involves a network of "Arab" terrorist cells, which commit acts of increasingly violent intensity, against civilian targets in New York City. Video clips of President Clinton commenting on the attacks launched, by his administration, against the networks of Osama bin Laden are spliced into the movie footage. As the terrorists wreak more havoc and kill more people, New York City is placed under martial law; anyone who looks "Arab" is rounded up and placed in internment camps, even as the violence continues.

In the end, the movie becomes a sermon on how to moderate attacks on the Constitution, and on ethnic profiling of Americans, while the nation goes on to fight the foreign, "Arab"-terrorist enemy.

When "The Siege" opened in November 1999, it was greeted with protests from the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee, who charged that it "portrays Arabs and Muslims as an homogeneous, threatening mass," and labelled the film, produced by Rupert Murdoch's 20th Century Fox, "dangerous and incendiary."

Despite such protests, and relatively poor reviews, the movie sold several score millions of dollars worth of tickets and has done well in its video release. In remarking how successful the movie-brainwashing effort has been, Lane noted, in the "New Yorker," that the majority of Americans reacted to those events with the same kind of unreasoned emotion that they express at the multiplex or in the home theaters:

"And the exclamations from below, from the watchers of the skies caught on video, as they see the aircraft slice into the side of the tower: where have you heard those expressions most recently--the wows, the whoohs, the `holy shits'--if not in the movie theaters, and even on your own blaspheming tongue." Hollywood, through films like the "The Siege" and "Die Hard," writes Lane, has provided a "sensory education ... fed to a hungry public."

In the days following the attack, President Bush's approval rating shot up to above 90%, and stayed there, especially after his nationally televised address of Sept. 13. Following the speech, a CNN commentator observed that President's approval was so high because he was behaving the way Americans expected him to: "Like the President in `Independence Day' [a blockbuster movie about an attack on Washington and the U.S. by aliens] or the guy from the `West Wing' [a popular television show]."

And, you think you haven't been brainwashed?

`Morphing' the Enemy Image Take a close look at the image of Osama bin Laden, as it appears on the television screens, in this time of a new "war." In psyops terms, bin Laden has become the image of the enemy--the picture that a targetted population keeps in mind as the person, or, specifically, the type of person it is fighting. There is the swarthy complexion, the beard, the burnoose, the weapons in hand--it is all there, all as expected, an ideal subject for the projected rage and hatred of an injured nation. No matter that bin Laden is not really the "evil mastermind."

In the days and weeks leading up to the attack, media-watch organizations reported that the major U.S. television news outlets, including the cable networks CNN and Fox News, devoted an inordinate amount of what passes for their "international" coverage, to bin Laden, describing him as a "terrorist mastermind" or "terrorist controller," almost always accompanied by a photo or video clips.

But his creation by the media as "terrorist mastermind" doesn't really begin there. To understand what happened, one needs to look at a nearly 30-year span of news reporting, that led us to this point, where some character, a former and current asset of U.S.-British-Israeli intelligence networks, operating from "caves" and other bases in one of the most remote and isolated areas of the world, has become U.S. "Public Enemy Number One."

Look at the bin Laden enemy image as a morphing process that begins with the television image of the Black September terrorists of the 1972 Olympics. Then, continue to the 1973 images of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat; later, there are the images of Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini and the fanatic mullahs.

Think of someone in Hollywood central casting, trying to find a person to portray the terrorist archetype, given these past figures and images: An oil-rich, almost mystical clerical type (although he holds no religious position), who looks like a morph of "enemies" Arafat and Khomeini, gets the "part."

The population has also been pre-conditioned to accept the "storyline" that terrorists who would do such things as took place on Sept. 11 MUST BE ARAB AND/OR MUSLIM FANATICS, as thousands of televised hours of misreporting has repeated. Arab organizations in this country report polling results showing that, by a large margin, Americans believe, even without supporting evidence, that any act of terrorism has "Arab" origins and "Arab" perpetrators.

As one intelligence source said this week, within minutes of the World Trade Center attack, Americans had decided that this was done by "Arab terrorists" connected to "terrorist mastermind" bin Laden. "They didn't need to be told to think this," said the source. "They had already been conditioned to believe it." Are such people not "brainwashed?"

We are told that our press is "free." But isn't that a lie? How "free" can it be, if the most important event of our time is lied about, at almost every turn, misreported; if the truth is nowhere to be found among the smorgasbord of news outlets that comprise our glorious, "free press."

In Nazi Germany, Propaganda Minister Josef Goebbels boasted that the press was free to report whatever it wanted. But, that press was "coordinated" through the operation of a "press trust," that encompassed all media. The Nazis planted stories in the press to suit their ends, and the trust dutifully reported them, with various spins that might give the appearance that not all media were receiving information from the same spigot.

While Americans might find it hard to believe, THERE IS NO PRACTICAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PROPAGANDA OPERATION OF THE NAZI PRESS TRUST AND THE ANGLO-AMERICAN MEDIA AND ENTERTAINMENT CARTEL. It is not hard to slant the coverage of any event to suit almost any purpose--as long as that purpose fits the needs of those elites that control the media. All it takes is the planting of a few key items of content, which are then flushed down through the media sewer pipes. Before you know it, the poor citizen is deluged. In a certain sense, the Nazi operation was less insidious, because it was more overt; only fools would fail to realize that they were being fed the "line" by Goebbels and his crew. Here, the appearance of choice, the appearance of a flood of information, confuses the average citizen into believing that he MUST BE GETTING THE TRUTH, FROM SOMEWHERE.

But, even a cursory content analysis of all, or most of our news sources, especially the major television providers, shows that the general content line from all sources is basically the same. This has been the case, for example, in coverage of Lyndon LaRouche and his policies; in the major media, the coverage of LaRouche has followed the line dictated by the late Lazard Freres-linked Katharine Graham of the "Washington Post" to never cover LaRouche, unless it is to slander him. Similarly, the decision to black out the present global depression and financial collapse. While there may be no formal meetings among the controllers of the media cartel, where such policy is laid out, a policy consensus, nonetheless, ruthlessly enforces the content of the "news."

In periods of crisis like the current one, however, some of the controls become more visible; less is left to chance.

It has been reported by some sources, that within a few hours of the Sept. 11 attacks, Executive Orders were issued that put the U.S. media under effective wartime censorship. That is not to say that government auditors of news reporting actually issued orders censoring reports; it is to say that they moved quickly to block any reporting that might have veered away from the official "line."

(There was also coordination on the extent of coverage as well. It was reported that all broadcast media were given the recommendation to cease normal programming in favor of 24-hour coverage of the "Terrorist attack on the United States" and "America at War," as the "ID logos" that appeared on all the networks. It is also reliably reported, that the White House and national security operatives participated in the decision to cancel all major sporting events.

What this translates into, we have been told, is that a muzzle has been placed on government sources, and that all information coming out about the attacks and the investigation, is under top-down control. This is understood by those who control the news reporting of the major media outlets, who have thus submitted to a voluntary censorship.

And you, of course, have managed to understand the truth in this brainwashing environment? As they say, "Give me a break."

Beating the Drums for War There was a brief interval, that morning of Sept. 11, as the great brainwashing machine allowed for the visual impact of the terrorizing message to sink in, before the signal was given for the talking heads to pronounce the name of the enemy.

If it appeared to some that no matter which channel--broadcast or cable--you tuned to in those first hours, you saw the same dozen or so spin doctors, you weren't mistaken: This has been confirmed by various media-watch outfits. For example, one media-watch organization tallied more than a dozen appearances by former CIA Director James Woolsey in the first few days after the attack, each repeating the message about the need to wage war against Iran, Iraq, and anyone else who allegedly sponsored the likes of bin Laden. An only slightly less strident Sen. John Warner (R-Va.) appeared numerous times; we lost count on Henry Kissinger.

As the media-watch group, Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) stated, following Sept. 11, any hope that the media would present an unbiased account of what happened, that it might resist the drive for an ill-defined war, went out the window. Instead, FAIR documented how the print and broadcast media issued emotional tirades for war, echoing what they believed to be the sentiment of the American people; in so doing, there were no contrary views presented, and, in effect, Americans still have no clear idea about what happened, or exactly what the Bush Administration is proposing to do to protect them from future terrorist threats.

Look at these following selected examples, which could be amplified by many more:

* Kissinger-clone Larry Eagleburger, appearing on CNN, on the day of the attack: "There is only one way to deal with people like this, and that is you have to kill some of them, even if they are not directly involved in this thing."

* The "New York Post", the next day: "The response to this unimaginable 21st-Century Pearl Harbor should be as simple as it is swift--kill the bastards. A gunshot between the eyes, blow them to smithereens, poison them if you have to. As for the cities or countries of these host worms, bomb them into basketball courts."

* Sept. 14 op-ed in the "Washington Times" by Defense Intelligence Agency officer Thomas Woodrow: "At a bare minimum, tactical nuclear capabilities should be used against the bin Laden camps in the desert of Afghanistan. To do less would be rightly seen by the poisoned minds that orchestrated these attacks as cowardice on the part of the United States and the current administration."

FAIR commentator and media watcher Norman Solomon commented that many of the same people who were now calling for a "war against terrorism" and anyone who might support it (including many of the analysts who were appearing as talking heads and op-ed columnists) were themselves involved in assisting terrorists, including Osama bin Laden, when such efforts were official, if then-secret U.S. policy. "How can a long-time associate of terrorists now be credibly denouncing `terrorism?'" he asks. "It's easy. All that is required is for media coverage to remain in a kind of history-free zone that has no use for facets of reality that are not presently convenient to acknowledge."

One of those "inconvenient facts" was the well-documented involvement of U.S. "special ops" people, and the Zbigniew Brzezinski crowd; then, later, Ollie North and the Bush people, with bin Laden, dating back to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, which amounted to the biggest "state sponsorship" of terrorism, or at least sponsorship by a then-dominant faction of our government and intelligence community. FAIR and other media-watch groups report that almost no one mentioned these "inconvenient" matters, amidst the vast flow of war propaganda; and if they did, it was only to lie that it was a policy that had long since been abandoned.

Similarly, much attention was given to reports about FBI and other agencies work in putting together the "conspiracy" behind the attack. To this date, no one in the major media outlets of the United States has mentioned that there is even a possibility of involvement of U.S. elements. Instead, the reporting has focussed on a combination of "spade work" on clues and leads, as well as, alleged connections to the bin Laden networks.

FAIR remarked on such coverage, saying that the shots of bin Laden and his camps gave the impression that there had been more than circumstantial evidence linking them to attacks. The only proof offered was from "intelligence leaks" coming from the wartime propaganda apparatus created by the Executive Order or from assertions made by the talking heads and other "experts."

The only characteristic, universal to all the coverage, is the cover-up of any possible trail leading to a domestic source for the control of the terrorism.

Is all reporting being so "coordinated and steered?" It is clear that some of the wackos, like Fox News's Bill O'Reilly, a particularly vile character, are simply being given free rein to vent their lunacy.

On Sept. 17, O'Reilly demanded that, if the Taliban do not turn over bin Laden, "the U.S. should bomb Afghan infrastructure to rubble--the airport, the power plants, their water facilities, and the roads....

"This is a very primitive country. And taking out their ability to exist day to day will not be hard. Remember, the people of any country are responsible for the government that they have. The Germans were responsible for Hitler. The Afghans are responsible for the Taliban. We should not target civilians. But if they don't rise up against their government, they starve, period."

He went to advocate, in that broadcast and others, to make the "Iraqi population suffer another round of intense pain" and to blockade Libya from all food supplies: "Let them eat sand."

As is typical with a "grey psyops" propaganda campaign, the most extreme ravings are played off against those only slightly less lunatic, to make the latter appear sane by comparison. Thus, an O'Reilly makes a Woolsey look like a sober analyst, as he calls for a war to take out governments that support terrorism, and for "careful" and "calculated" escalating response against bin Laden.

To hold people's attention, to keep them on "message," it were necessary to keep them in a highly emotional state. To do this, there was a steady stream of "human interest" stories about the grief of affected victims, about the courage of rescue workers and those who perished, along with shots of grieving citizens. While the courage and grief are real, the constant bombardment of these images is BRAINWASHING CONDITIONING. Without them, you would have, after a few days, turned off CNN and the "news" coverage.

Do you still insist that neither you, nor your neighbors, have been taken in by this?

`
Crash? What Crash?' Lost amid the war hysteria, or more precisely "spun" inside of it, is the coverup of what would otherwise be the biggest story of the day: the full-scale crash and blowout of the financial markets. The markets, at last look, had plunged nearly 20% since Wall Street reopened on Sept. 17. A fall that precipitous is normally called a "crash," engendering widespread panic, not only among traders and brokers, but among the general population. But in the two weeks of this crash, not one commentator on a major network has used the term! Moreover, we are told, it is our patriotic duty to have faith in the eventual recovery of both the markets and the economy.

"We can't let the terrorists defeat us and bring our economy down," said financial commentator Louis Ruckeyser on his televised "Wall Street Week."

As Lyndon LaRouche has stated, the crash would have occurred anyway, given the bankrupt state of world financial system, even without the Sept. 11 events. However, now the financial analysts who appear on the television news and in the print media are universally blaming most, if not all of what happened, on "Osama bin Laden." This was to be expected, they claim, given what happened on Sept. 11, in what is the biggest "Big Lie" of them all.

As one trader reported, "My God! The bottom has fallen out and nobody calls it a crash. It's like it's your patriotic duty not to mention the word. Hell, the Dow's lost more than 1,500 points--that's a CRASH. But, if I'm overheard saying this, people look at me: `Where's your American flag? Remember who you are and what's going on. Do you want to help Osama bin Laden in his plot to destroy our economy?' Unbelievable!"

But, as like many other media-brainwashed Americans, this trader was, in his words, "going with the program. It's not a crash, it's a terrorist event."

A Clockwork Future? Several nights after the Sept. 11 attacks, CNN flashed images on the screen of National Guard personnel patrolling the streets of Washington, and heavily armed special police in New York City, inspecting cars at a tunnel entrance. Then, images were flashed of Israeli military personnel on the streets of Jerusalem, inspecting cars. The voiceover, by CNN news-witch Greta van Susteren, a regular featured personality of that media sewer, along with Mossad-asset Wolf Blitzer, spoke of America, in response to the "terrorist threat," becoming an increasingly "policed society," where civil liberties had to be sacrificed for the protection of its citizens.

We have seen this before, she said, not just in Jerusalem, but in Belfast, Northern Ireland, as a response to "political terrorism" of the IRA and Protestant militia. After a while, people get used to it, she said. "Life goes on." Interviews were presented with Israelis who seemed to concur with the sentiment that, under conditions of "internal war with terrorists," one needs to adjust to sacrifices in civil liberties.

"Americans will get used to it, just like we did," the Israeli said.

Thus, the media prepares--or more precisely, conditions--the country to accept a form of police state, justified by a threat that has not really been dealt with, and whose true source has been covered up. Not surprisingly, when Attorney General John Ashcroft, proposed legislation for a sweeping abridgement of civil liberties, it was given relatively short shrift by the same media. FAIR reports that two of the three network news broadcasts never reported it at all; while it was hardly mentioned on CNN or Fox News. The print media, while reporting it, maintained the theme of the "necessary sacrifice" of civil liberties for personal safety and security.

Back in the mid-1970s, Eric Trist and Fred Emery, two leading Tavistock brainwashers and "experts" on the effects of mass media, forecast that, by the end of the century, the United States were likely to become just such a fascist police state.

The two developed a theory of "social turbulence," by which a society is delivered a series of "shocks"--administered as shared, mass phenomena--energy shortages, economic and financial collapse, and TERRORIST attack. If the "shocks" were to come close upon each other, and if they were delivered with increasing intensity, then it were possible to drive the entire society, into a state of mass psychosis, Trist and Emery said. They said that individuals would become disassociated, as they tried to flee from the terror of the shocking, emerging reality; people would withdraw into a state of denial, retreating into popular entertainments and diversions, while being prone to outbursts of rage.

That rage could easily be steered, said the two brainwashers, by those who had access and control over the means of mass communication, most notably television.

It was the view of Trist and Emery, in two works widely circulated among the networks of brainwashers and social psychiatrists associated with Tavistock, and among the psychological-warfare operatives of the U.S. and Britain, that the process of watching television was itself a brainwashing mechanism.

They cited their own studies, that regardless of content, habituated television viewing shuts down the cognitive powers of the mind, and has a narcotic-like effect on the central nervous system, making the habituated viewer an easy subject for suggestion and manipulation; in addition, they found that such effectively brainwashed "zombies" would hysterically deny that there was anything wrong with them, or, even, that such manipulation of what they "thought" were possible.

In a chilling metaphor, Trist and Emery proposed that the terrorized, violent society of the Anthony Burgess book, "A Clockwork Orange," made into a movie by Stanley Kubrick, was the logical societal outcome for an America that would, by the end of the century, have been subjected to more than 50 years of mass brainwashing by the "boob tube." Burgess's world is one of perpetual violence and terrorism, as a daily part of life; it is accepted that, if you go out at a certain time, or walk in a certain neighborhood, you will be attacked and/or killed.

There is no purpose to the violence--it is random and meaningless, and therefore all the more terrifying. The wealthy are protected; everyone else is told to go about their business with knowledge of the risk.

With terrorist youth gangs roaming the streets, people stay home, watching their televised entertainments, or go only to certain areas, which are heavily protected by police and military. The most sickening thing about Burgess's image is the sense of hopelessness, of inevitability, that nothing can be done about it--it is just "the way it is," as Dan Rather's predecessor as CBS News anchor, Walter Cronkite, used to remind us each night, as he closed his broadcast.

While the Trist-Emery thesis is not exactly required reading in the caves of Afghanistan, it is quite familiar to the psywarriors and brainwashers who have launched a war on the American population. There is a particular kind of oligarchical evil that would think like this, that would see a Clockwork Orange society as a necessary outcome, to protect their continued privilege and power. Are we Americans already so brainwashed that we would allow this to happen? The next weeks and months will determine whether we truly do have the moral fitness to survive.

"The end of the world. Details at 11. Now back to your regular programming."

Remember: The first step in deprogramming yourself from mass-media brainwashing, to freeing yourself and your neighbors, from its evil clutches, is to recognize that you and they are, indeed, brainwashed. It gets a lot easier, and things begin to get much clearer from there on.

[onacloud]

[KingJD31]

Pauly relax, take a pain killer eat some watermelon, do what you got to do it's gonna be ok.

[PAULYPOKER]

Pauly relax, take a pain killer eat some watermelon, do what you got to do it's gonna be ok.

[MartinBlank]

Pauly, do you really think anyone here is going to read your post?

Seriously?

You need help, lots and lots of help.

[hydrosmak]

Pauly, do you really think anyone here is going to read your post?

Seriously?

You need help, lots and lots of help.

Yeah seriously...

[PAULYPOKER]

Cognitive DissonanceAvoidance, Denial, & Rationalization is the very reason why people are easily controlled by government..........

If there is a lot of built up psychological stake in a certain position or attitude and a piece of solid evidence comes in which conflicts with that position, it may be easier, psychologically, to dismiss the new information than alter the existing structure.
You can imagine how ingrained psychological structures can be when a human being is raised within a certain country, system, or reality. Growing up in the US, or any culture, for that matter, you will absorb an overwhelming number of messages about what is true, what is possible, and what is important.
Many of of these messages are absorbed subconsciously and become part of the basic structure of our reality. It becomes very difficult to question the fundamentals when opposing messages only come in small doses from the “fringe.”


Consider these two examples:

• Believing that your friend is trustworthy (having built up that attitude over years of experience) is a cognition that would be dissonant with the sudden discovery of your friend stealing money from you. As a result, you might seek to dismiss or minimize the importance of this new information—maybe telling yourself it was a freak thing, a joke, or an accident, or that he was broke or desperate or on drugs. You might even try to forget that you saw it.
• In presenting new, contradictory (dissonant) evidence concerning 9/11, it is frustrating how many people immediately begin to bring up rationalizations and excuses in order to dismiss the significance of the information. You can often witness cognitive dissonance in action as these skeptics try to avoid the psychological turmoil of facing the very disturbing implications of 9/11 Truth. The collapse ofWTC 7 is an interesting example. Skeptics are likely to quickly dismiss this piece of evidence rather than acknowledge the suspicious fact that the destruction of a third skyscraper was essentially blacked-out of the official story of 9/11 by the government and media.

“Conspiracy theories” seem to be the quintessentially cognitive dissonant concepts of our culture. For many people, the idea that JFK was killed by the government or “9/11 was an inside job” threatens the entire fabric of their consciousness. These things simply cannot be true and people will bend over backwards and resort to irrationality and ridicule to avoid considering them.

[JohnGalt2341]

Most everyone is Brainwashed to a certain extent I suppose. I like to think that I'm not Brainwashed at all but I know that I am wrong about this. However, there are different levels of Brainwashing. To me, convincing a group of terrorists that they will be met with 72 virgins in paradise for pleasing Allah is the ultimate form of brainwashing. But of course there are plenty of people that would argue that terrorist attacks have nothing to do with this and they are probably right for the most part. But still... 72 virgins? Who in their right mind would believe in such nonsense? It's even more absurd than believing in virgin births and talking snakes.

Now, there are others that think that 9/11 was an inside job. Did they come up with this theory on their own? Or did someone else Brainwash them into thinking it was true? The US Government is absolutely terrible at virtually everything they do(compared to the private sector at least). There is no way in hell the US Government could have ever pulled off something like 9/11 without everyone figuring out it was an inside job.

[PAULYPOKER]

Most everyone is Brainwashed to a certain extent I suppose. I like to think that I'm not Brainwashed at all but I know that I am wrong about this. However, there are different levels of Brainwashing. To me, convincing a group of terrorists that they will be met with 72 virgins in paradise for pleasing Allah is the ultimate form of brainwashing. But of course there are plenty of people that would argue that terrorist attacks have nothing to do with this and they are probably right for the most part. But still... 72 virgins? Who in their right mind would believe in such nonsense? It's even more absurd than believing in virgin births and talking snakes.

Now, there are others that think that 9/11 was an inside job. Did they come up with this theory on their own? Or did someone else Brainwash them into thinking it was true? The US Government is absolutely terrible at virtually everything they do(compared to the private sector at least). There is no way in hell the US Government could have ever pulled off something like 9/11 without everyone figuring out it was an inside job.

Who has the most technologically advanced military in the world?

Next........

[MartinBlank]

Pauly's rockin' the foil tonight....

[2daBank]

luckily i was more than likely in the middle of a drugged out or alcohol induced haze during all that shit (hard to keep track of my drug of choice over the years), thus didnt really pay much attention, until i started hearing all the BS they were gonna start doing in the name of "safety", that when i got worried cause all this meant to me was whoever is/was responsible for attacks meant jack shit cause these assholes clearly were gonna use it to invade my privacy and take away yet more of my rights...

bottom line i dont know who was responsible for what but i do know ever since 9/11 these pricks have dealt fear like crack to morons so they could basically rape the constitution and any rights we used to have under that document..

while im sure you will be called a crackpot for all this, these bitches that run the show been brainwashing idiots on various subjects since the beginning of time, refer madness rings a bell, still morons out there that act like weed is bad as they sip their ice cold bud and smoke a cig... GOD BLESS THIS STUPID COUNTRY ...speaking of "god" that would be what i meant when i say the powers that be been brainwashing idiots since the beginning of time...what do you expect? still a very high percent of ppl believe in this imaginary man in the sky, not like these ppl are hard to manipulate as clearly they love fairy tales and believing BS..

just give up Pauly, you cant win, just realize it doesnt matter and just do you, fukk the consequences of this socialist police state...

[2daBank]

Most everyone is Brainwashed to a certain extent I suppose. I like to think that I'm not Brainwashed at all but I know that I am wrong about this. However, there are different levels of Brainwashing. To me, convincing a group of terrorists that they will be met with 72 virgins in paradise for pleasing Allah is the ultimate form of brainwashing. But of course there are plenty of people that would argue that terrorist attacks have nothing to do with this and they are probably right for the most part. But still... 72 virgins? Who in their right mind would believe in such nonsense? It's even more absurd than believing in virgin births and talking snakes.

Now, there are others that think that 9/11 was an inside job. Did they come up with this theory on their own? Or did someone else Brainwash them into thinking it was true? The US Government is absolutely terrible at virtually everything they do(compared to the private sector at least). There is no way in hell the US Government could have ever pulled off something like 9/11 without everyone figuring out it was an inside job.

not any more so than convincing ppl if they act a certain way/ believe certain things that they will go to a fluffy heaven in the sky, or the alternative of a fiery hell if they dont follow a moral code made up by a couple manipulative jerkoffs..

[JohnGalt2341]

not any more so than convincing ppl if they act a certain way/ believe certain things that they will go to a fluffy heaven in the sky, or the alternative of a fiery hell if they dont follow a moral code made up by a couple manipulative jerkoffs..

I agree with you. I just think it's SLIGHTLY more absurd.

[PAULYPOKER]

luckily i was more than likely in the middle of a drugged out or alcohol induced haze during all that shit (hard to keep track of my drug of choice over the years), thus didnt really pay much attention, until i started hearing all the BS they were gonna start doing in the name of "safety", that when i got worried cause all this meant to me was whoever is/was responsible for attacks meant jack shit cause these assholes clearly were gonna use it to invade my privacy and take away yet more of my rights...

bottom line i dont know who was responsible for what but i do know ever since 9/11 these pricks have dealt fear like crack to morons so they could basically rape the constitution and any rights we used to have under that document..

while im sure you will be called a crackpot for all this, these bitches that run the show been brainwashing idiots on various subjects since the beginning of time, refer madness rings a bell, still morons out there that act like weed is bad as they sip their ice cold bud and smoke a cig... GOD BLESS THIS STUPID COUNTRY ...speaking of "god" that would be what i meant when i say the powers that be been brainwashing idiots since the beginning of time...what do you expect? still a very high percent of ppl believe in this imaginary man in the sky, not like these ppl are hard to manipulate as clearly they love fairy tales and believing BS..

just give up Pauly, you cant win, just realize it doesnt matter and just do you, fukk the consequences of this socialist police state...

Being called a crack pot goes with the territory my friend,I don't mind it, I know this is the only way Sheeple can deal with cold hard facts,their very weak psyche can not handle the truth.........

[JohnGalt2341]

Who has the most technologically advanced military in the world?

Next........

And how much of that technology was originally created by the Private Sector? Most of it.

[PAULYPOKER]

And how much of that technology was originally created by the Private Sector? Most of it.

Your point?

[2daBank]

I agree with you. I just think it's SLIGHTLY more absurd.

i mean not really, if given the option id take the 72 virgins ..unfortunately i know what awaits after death, nothing..and what really sux about that is all these believers in whatever will never know they were wrong, id like to apply for job of getting a 5 min window after someone dies to explain to them all that stuff was just a load of shit, goodnight. what great fun that would be if possible

[2daBank]

the funniest part of all this shit is no matter who or what was responsible, somehow our dickwad gov has managed to make ppl actually believe all these things they doing to fukk us over actually make it safer..safety is a fukkin illusion, if a "terrorist" or whoever doenst mind taking himself out he can pretty much fukk up lots of ppls worlds whenever he sees fit regardless of how many of our rights are stripped in the name of "safety"..


im done with this cause it just pisses me off, stop firing me up Pauly..keep fighting the non winnable good fight tho!

[statnerds]

There are cold, hard facts, and then there is lunacy.

islamic fukks weren't behind the 72 Olympics either, right? And the Holocaust never happened?

on the real though, how dare those bastards use the clean, innocent, blood free, war free religion like islam

[2daBank]

^^^^ their religion has no more or less blood on its hands than America's religion of choice..

[PAULYPOKER]

the funniest part of all this shit is no matter who or what was responsible, somehow our dickwad gov has managed to make ppl actually believe all these things they doing to fukk us over actually make it safer..safety is a fukkin illusion, if a "terrorist" or whoever doenst mind taking himself out he can pretty much fukk up lots of ppls worlds whenever he sees fit regardless of how many of our rights are stripped in the name of "safety"..


im done with this cause it just pisses me off, stop firing me up Pauly..keep fighting the non winnable good fight tho!

C'mon Bank! you are much tougher than this for the fact you have a clue,never give up my friend, the battle has only just begun........

[JohnGalt2341]

i mean not really, if given the option id take the 72 virgins ..unfortunately i know what awaits after death, nothing..and what really sux about that is all these believers in whatever will never know they were wrong, id like to apply for job of getting a 5 min window after someone dies to explain to them all that stuff was just a load of shit, goodnight. what great fun that would be if possible

I suppose you're right. But the reason why I think it's SLIGHTLY more absurd is like... If I were to try to convince people that my 7 year old son can throw a 110MPH fastball or my 3 year old daughter can throw a 150MPH fastball.. they both are absurd. But one is even more absurd than the other in my mind.

[eidolon]

How can you read all of that with that intro paragraph?

[texhooper]

Being called a crack pot goes with the territory my friend,I don't mind it, I know this is the only way Sheeple can deal with cold hard facts,their very weak psyche can not handle the truth.........

but this is where you lose people, though.

[2daBank]

C'mon Bank! you are much tougher than this for the fact you have a clue,never give up my friend, the battle has only just begun........

i put my time in bro,,i tried to fight the only war that really was waged on me, the war on drugs, and clearly i lost...these pieces of shit control everything and do whatever they want, nothing gonna change that, not while we still alive anyways..let me know when tide starts turning and im on board, until then i rather just smoke my various strands of green, eat my pills, gamble, and work like a reg guy so i can pay for worthless trash that rather not pay for themselves all while waiting for next time these assholes incarcerate me for choosing not to give a flying fukk about "their" laws......

[JohnGalt2341]

Your point?

My point is... the US Government rarely ever does anything successfully on their own. They either LEARN from the Private Sector and copy them or they get help from them. If 9/11 was an inside job I would think they would have to pull it off on their own and I don't think that they could without people figuring it out.

[2daBank]

My point is... the US Government rarely ever does anything successfully on their own. They either LEARN from the Private Sector and copy them or they get help from them. If 9/11 was an inside job I would think they would have to pull it off on their own and I don't think that they could without people figuring it out.

i find who was responsible to be irrelevant, it is how these jerkoffs have exploited it for their own agendas that is the problem..

[PAULYPOKER]

My point is... the US Government rarely ever does anything successfully on their own. They either LEARN from the Private Sector and copy them or they get help from them. If 9/11 was an inside job I would think they would have to pull it off on their own and I don't think that they could without people figuring it out.

This was 1962 for Christ's sake...........


Read this declassified document,then try and tell yourself that the US government is not capable of erasing existence of its own people.........
Operation Northwoods


Operation Northwoods was a series of false-flag proposals that originated in 1962 within the United States government, and which the Kennedy administration rejected. ^[2] The proposals called for theCentral Intelligence Agency (CIA), or other operatives, to commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities and elsewhere. These acts of terrorism were to be blamed on Cuba in order to create public support for a war against that nation, which had recently become communist under Fidel Castro.^[3] One part of OperationNorthwoods was to "develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington."
Operation Northwoods proposals included hijackings and bombings followed by the introduction of phony evidence that would implicate the Cuban government. It stated:
"The desired resultant from the execution of this plan would be to place the United States in the apparent position of suffering defensible grievances from a rash and irresponsible government of Cuba and to develop an international image of a Cuban threat to peace in the Western Hemisphere."
Several other proposals were included within Operation Northwoods, including real or simulated actions against various U.S. military and civilian targets. The plan was drafted by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, signed by ChairmanLyman Lemnitzer and sent to the Secretary of Defense. Although part of the U.S. government's Cuban Projectanti-communist initiative, Operation Northwoods was never officially accepted; it was authored by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but then rejected by President John F. Kennedy.
None of the Operations Northwoods proposals became operational.

Content

In response to a request for pretexts for military intervention by the Chief of Operations of the Cuba Project, Brig. Gen. Edward Lansdale, the document listed methods, and outlined plans, that the authors believed would garner public and international support for U.S. military intervention in Cuba. According toJacob Hornberger:

“

The plan called for U.S. personnel to disguise themselves as agents of the Cuban government and to engage in terrorist attacks on the U.S. base at Guantanamo Bay. It also called for terrorist attacks within the United States that would be conducted by pro-U.S. forces disguising themselves as Cuban agents.One of the most fascinating aspects of Operation Northwoodsinvolved the proposed hijacking of an American passenger plane. The JCS proposed that a real plane containing American passengers would be hijacked by friendly forces disguised as Cuban agents. The plane would drop down off the radar screen and be replaced by a pilotless aircraft, which would crash, purportedly killing all the passengers. Under the plan, the real passenger plane would be secretly flown back to the United States.[14]

”

More specifically, the plan called for the following:

1. Since it would seem desirable to use legitimate provocation as the basis for US military intervention in Cuba a cover and deception plan, to include requisite preliminary actions such as has been developed in response to Task 33 c, could be executed as an initial effort to provoke Cuban reactions. Harassment plus deceptive actions to convince the Cubans of imminent invasion would be emphasized. Our military posture throughout execution of the plan will allow a rapid change from exercise to intervention if Cuban response justifies.
2. A series of well coordinated incidents will be planned to take place in and around Guantanamo to give genuine appearance of being done by hostile Cuban forces.a. Incidents to establish a credible attack (not in chronological order):
   
   1. Start rumors (many). Use clandestine radio.
   2. Land friendly Cubans in uniform "over-the-fence" to stage attack on base.
   3. Capture Cuban (friendly) saboteurs inside the base.
   4. Start riots near the base main gate (friendly Cubans).^[15]
   5. Blow up ammunition inside the base; start fires.
   6. Burn aircraft on air base (sabotage).
   7. Lob mortar shells from outside of base into base. Some damage to installations.
   8. Capture assault teams approaching from the sea or vicinity of Guantanamo City.
   9. Capture militia group which storms the base.
   10. Sabotage ship in harbor; large fires—napthalene.
   11. Sink ship near harbor entrance. Conduct funerals for mock-victims (may be in lieu of (10)).
   
   b. United States would respond by executing offensive operations to secure water and power supplies, destroying artillery and mortar emplacements which threaten the base.c. Commence large scale United States military operations.
3. A "Remember the Maine" incident could be arranged in several forms:a. We could blow up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba.b. We could blow up a drone (unmanned) vessel anywhere in the Cuban waters. We could arrange to cause such incident in the vicinity of Havana or Santiago as a spectacular result of Cuban attack from the air or sea, or both. The presence of Cuban planes or ships merely investigating the intent of the vessel could be fairly compelling evidence that the ship was taken under attack. The nearness to Havana or Santiago would add credibility especially to those people that might have heard the blast or have seen the fire. The US could follow up with an air/sea rescue operation covered by US fighters to "evacuate" remaining members of the non-existent crew. Casualty lists in US newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation.
4. We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington.^[16]
   The terror campaign could be pointed at refugees seeking haven in the United States. We could sink a boatload of Cubans en route to Florida (real or simulated). We could foster attempts on lives of Cuban refugees in the United States even to the extent of wounding in instances to be widely publicized. Exploding a few plastic bombs in carefully chosen spots, the arrest of Cuban agents and the release of prepared documents substantiating Cuban involvement, also would be helpful in projecting the idea of an irresponsible government.
5. A "Cuban-based, Castro-supported" filibuster could be simulated against a neighboring Caribbean nation (in the vein of the 14 June invasion of the Dominican Republic). We know that Castro is backing subversive efforts clandestinely against Haiti, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, and Nicaragua at present and possible others. These efforts can be magnified and additional ones contrived for exposure. For example, advantage can be taken of the sensitivity of the Dominican Air Force to intrusions within their national air space. "Cuban" B-26 or C-46 type aircraft could make cane-burning raids at night. Soviet Bloc incendiaries could be found. This could be coupled with "Cuban" messages to the Communist underground in the Dominican Republic and "Cuban" shipments of arm which would be found, or intercepted, on the beach.
6. Use of MIG type aircraft by US pilots could provide additional provocation. Harassment of civil air, attacks on surface shipping and destruction of US military drone aircraft by MIG type planes would be useful as complementary actions. An F-86 properly painted would convince air passengers that they saw a Cuban MIG, especially if the pilot of the transport were to announce such fact. The primary drawback to this suggestion appears to be the security risk inherent in obtaining or modifying an aircraft. However, reasonable copies of the MIG could be produced from US resources in about three months.^[17]
7. Hijacking attempts against civil air and surface craft should appear to continue as harassing measures condoned by the government of Cuba. Concurrently, genuine defections of Cuban civil and military air and surface craft should be encouraged.
8. It is possible to create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civil airliner en route from the United States to Jamaica, Guatemala, Panama or Venezuela. The destination would be chosen only to cause the flight plan route to cross Cuba. The passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday or any grouping of persons with a common interest to support chartering a non-scheduled flight.a. An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with the selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone.b. Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rendezvous south of Florida. From the rendezvous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly into an auxiliary field at Eglin AFB where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status. The drone aircraft meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan. When over Cuba the drone will begin transmitting on the international distress frequency a "MAY DAY" message stating he is under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by destruction of the aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow ICAO radio^[18] stations in the Western Hemisphere to tell the US what has happened to the aircraft instead of the US trying to "sell" the incident.
9. It is possible to create an incident which will make it appear that Communist Cuban MIGs have destroyed a USAF aircraft over international waters in an unprovoked attack.a. Approximately 4 or 5 F-101 aircraft will be dispatched in trail from Homestead AFB, Florida, to the vicinity of Cuba. Their mission will be to reverse course and simulate fakir aircraft for an air defense exercise in southern Florida. These aircraft would conduct variations of these flights at frequent Intervals. Crews would be briefed to remain at least 12 miles off the Cuban coast; however, they would be required to carry live ammunition in the event that hostile actions were taken by the Cuban MIGs.b. On one such flight, a pre-briefed pilot would fly tail-end Charley at considerable interval between aircraft. While near the Cuban Island this pilot would broadcast that he had been jumped by MIGs and was going down. No other calls would be made. The pilot would then fly directly west at extremely low altitude and land at a secure base, an Eglin auxiliary. The aircraft would be met by the proper people, quickly stored and given a new tail number. The pilot who had performed the mission under an alias, would resume his proper identity and return to his normal place of business. The pilot and aircraft would then have disappeared.c. At precisely the same time that the aircraft was presumably shot down, a submarine or small surface craft would disburse F-101 parts, parachute, etc., at approximately 15 to 20 miles off the Cuban coast and depart. The pilots returning to Homestead would have a true story as far as they knew. Search ships and aircraft could be dispatched and parts of aircraft found.^[19]

James Bamford wrote on Northwoods:

“

Operation Northwoods, which had the written approval of the Chairman and every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called for innocent people to be shot on American streets; for boats carrying refugees fleeing Cuba to be sunk on the high seas; for a wave of violent terrorism to be launched in Washington, D.C., Miami, and elsewhere. People would be framed for bombings they did not commit; planes would be hijacked. Using phony evidence, all of it would be blamed on Castro, thus giving Lemnitzer and his cabal the excuse, as well as the public and international backing,

Next............

[TheCentaur]

The US Government is absolutely terrible at virtually everything they do(compared to the private sector at least). There is no way in hell the US Government could have ever pulled off something like 9/11 without everyone figuring out it was an inside job.

This

[JohnGalt2341]

Point taken Pauly. But let me ask you this... is the Government more incompetent NOW or was it more incompetent in 1962? It's likely to continue to get worse.

[PAULYPOKER]

Point taken Pauly. But let me ask you this... is the Government more incompetent NOW or was it more incompetent in 1962? It's likely to continue to get worse.

Let me ask you this,If a government has no interests of the people in mind will they then deliberately run the country into ruins?

[JohnGalt2341]

Let me ask you this,If a government has no interests of the people in mind will they then deliberately run the country into ruins?

Well that's one of the biggest problems with the Government. They think they know what's best for people. And they don't. If the Government got out of the way and let people run their own lives and make their own mistakes this country would be SO MUCH better off.

[PAULYPOKER]

Well that's one of the biggest problems with the Government. They think they know what's best for people. And they don't. If the Government got out of the way and let people run their own lives and make their own mistakes this country would be SO MUCH better off.

You and I have this choice along with the rest of "We the People",the only problem is the American majority has been brain washed to believe otherwise..............

"We the people are the rightful masters of
both Congress & the courts, not to over-
throw the Constitution, but overthrow the
men who pervert the Constitution."
--Abraham Lincoln--

[2daBank]

post #32 and #33 were top notch...

[cleaveland]

These sites are fantastic for researching these topics:

http://www.whale.to/
http://vigilantcitizen.com/
http://www.redicecreations.com/

This article is beyond brilliant: http://www.taroscopes.com/miscellano...s/weapons.html