Post by Gene Ward SmithPost by ChuckWe do know from the public records that the CIA
conducted a large number of these subject area research projects.
History does not record a single example of similar research, by the CIA
or anyone else.
I suppose the depends on what you mean by the word "history". If that
includes Senate Committee Hearing sworn testimonies, public documents,
statements, corroborations, journalistic reports, etc.
Because you don't want to believe something, so you discount any information
in regards to the subject of your hysterical denial, that does not mean that
it never happened.
Fear laden smirking smugster headshakers like you have been making fools of
themselves since the beginning of time by denying scary new revelations that
threaten to shatter your cherished delusions.
Post by Gene Ward SmithThis perhaps is due in part to the fact that getting it
to work would probably be impossible.
The CIA snookered the US Congress into providing them with immense and
seemingly limitless funding on the claim that this "research" was vital to
our national security, because espionage agents had reported that the Soviet
Union was conducting these experiements with great success. Every
sleazeball shrink or member of the psychiatric community who had a half of a
clue knew that all they had to do was promise any result, no matter how
far-fetched that would suit the mood of the times. Your naivete in
presuming that our or any government, especially the security agencies
acts with efficiency and accuracy is rather glaring and significant.
"These studies weren't conducted merely to satisfy the CIA's
scientific curiosity -- the Agency was looking for weapons that would give
the United States the upper hand in the mind wars. Toward that objective,
the Agency poured millions of dollars into studies probing literally dozens
of methods of influencing and controlling the mind. One 1955 MKULTRA
document gives an indication of the size and range of the effort; the memo
refers to the study of an assortment of mind-altering substances which
would:
"promote illogical thinking and impulsiveness to the point where the
recipient would be discredited in public"
"increase the efficiency of mentation and perception"
"prevent or counteract the intoxicating effect of alcohol"
"promote the intoxicating effect of alcohol"
"produce the signs and symptoms of recognized diseases in a reversible
way so that they may be used for malingering, etc."
"render the indication of hypnosis easier or otherwise enhance its
usefulness"
"enhance the ability of individuals to withstand privation, torture
and coercion during interrogation and so-called 'brainwashing'"
"produce amnesia for events preceding and during their use"
"produc[e] shock and confusion over extended periods of time and
capable of surreptitious use"
"produce physical disablement such as paralysis of the legs, acute
anemia, etc."
"produce 'pure' euphoria with no subsequent let-down"
"alter personality structure in such a way that the tendency of the
recipient to become dependent upon another person is enhanced"
"cause mental confusion of such a type that the individual under its
influence will find it difficult to maintain a fabrication under
questioning"
"lower the ambition and general working efficiency of men when
administered in undetectable amounts"
"promote weakness or distortion of the eyesight or hearing faculties,
preferably without permanent effects"
*******Few of MKULTRA's objectives were realized,***** but the very
conduct of these experiments caused many critics of the CIA to argue that
successful or not, CIA scientists shouldn't pry at the doors of perception.
http://www.meta-religion.com/Secret_societies/Conspiracies/Mind_Control/mkultra.htm
We then have the added difficulty
Post by Gene Ward Smiththat while it was hardly necessary for research purposes, you've got a
manuscript written by some unidentified genius. Where did the CIA get
this person, and why did they feel it was necessary to introduce an
anonymous genius into the mix? What interest did the CIA have in
influencing religious ideas in America and elsewhere on a long-term
basis? It seems you are postulating they wanted to introduce an
alternative to mainstread Christianity, but not one which seems to confer
any benefits to the CIA or to American interests.
Post by ChuckI agree that a great effort would be required, and at the time there
was
Post by Chucka great effort afoot, it was the Vietnam war effort and there was a
divided country. The so called "Peace Movement" was making inroads
into public opinion about the war which was counter to the interests
of the executive branch and the military-industrial complex.
This is, of course, irrelevant as ACIM was not helpful towards combatting
the Peace Movement; in fact, it's a good deal more helpful to pacificism.
This is like a conspiracy of the CIA to support the (traditional, not
Nixonian) Quakers.
Post by ChuckThere is
also the interest by the government and the military in the use of
religion as a tool of manipulation against POWs.
Can you document any such interest on behalf of the US government circa
1970? And again, as a tool of manipulation ACIM, which does not believe
in organized religion, is a singularly inappropriate tool. It's the CIA
supporting the Quakers theory yet again.
Post by ChuckI was trained to use
religion as a tool of manipulation and trained against its use on me,
and I was threatened with punishment if I supported the "Peace
Movement" in any way.
Oh, really? Care to expand on this? The military, are you claiming, was
using religion to manipulate Americans and American policy?
Post by ChuckI think your conclusion begs the question of whose value system is in
play. From what is known of the MK-ULTRA programs, there were
projects that resulted in no apparent benefit and carried huge risks,
so this argument isn't supported by the record that we do know, IMO.
There is no record of them taking a risk of this size, which might have
destroyed the CIA. It's a lot more risky to play around with subverting
traditional Christianity than it is to feed some schlub LSD. People
simply would not stand for it.
Post by ChuckI don't consider someone playing an ostrich to be rational.
Then you don't consider yourself to be rational, since burying your head
in the sand over the question of Katie's uncertain grip on sanity is your
stock in trade.
Post by ChuckTo suggest
that Katie is my mentor, much less render it explicit as you have done
above, is the epitome of crazy theories.
It's not a theory, but an observation all of us here have made.
Post by ChuckWhatever your talents
may be, sizing people up is obviously not one of them.
A person who hangs out with Katie, calls her a friend, and considers her
to be a reasonable person is in no position to say this.