“There exists in our world today a powerful and dangerous secret cult.”

So wrote Victor Marchetti, a former high-ranking CIA official, in his book The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence. This is the first book the U.S. Government ever went to court to censor before publication. In this book, Marchetti tells us that there IS a “Cabal” that rules the world and that its holy men are the clandestine professionals of the Central Intelligence Agency. Paraphrasing, Marchetti:

“This cult is patronized and protected by the highest level government officials in the world. Its membership is composed of those in the power centers of government, industry, commerce, finance, and labor. It manipulates individuals in areas of important public influence - including the academic world and the mass media. The Secret Cult is a global fraternity of a political aristocracy whose purpose is to further the political policies of persons or agencies unknown. It acts covertly and illegally.”

Others have had this to say:

“The main threat to Democracy comes not from the extreme left but from the extreme right, which is able to buy huge sections of the press and radio, and wages a constant campaign to smear and discredit every progressive and humanitarian measure.” - George Seldes

“There exists a shadowy Government with its own Air Force, its own Navy, its own fundraising mechanism, and the ability to pursue its own ideas of national interest, free from all checks and balances, and free from the law itself.” Daniel K. Inouye, U.S. Senator

“Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.” - Woodrow Wilson, The New Freedom (1913)

Remember: those who are at the top of the heap will always take whatever steps are necessary to maintain the status quo and the way this is done is via “official Pathocratic culture” which is a product of COINTELPRO.

According to analysts, COINTELPRO was the FBI’s secret program to undermine the popular anti-war and equal rights upsurge, which swept the country during the 1960s. Though the name stands for “Counterintelligence Program,” the targets were not enemy spies. The FBI set out to eliminate “radical” political opposition inside the US. This was a high level psychological operation specifically set up to vector “ideological” trends - beliefs of the United States citizenry.

When traditional modes of repression (exposure, blatant harassment, and prosecution for political crimes) failed to counter the growing insurgency, and even helped to fuel it, the Bureau took the law into its own hands. Its methods ranged far beyond surveillance, and amounted to a domestic version of the covert action for which the CIA has become infamous throughout the world.

Usually, when we think of COINTELPRO, we think of the most well known and typical activities which include sending anonymous or fictitious letters designed to start rumors, publishing false defamatory or threatening information, forging signatures on fake documents, introducing disruptive and subversive members into organizations to destroy them from within, and so on. Blackmailing insiders in any group to force them to spread false rumors, or to foment factionalism was also common.

What a lot of people don’t keep in mind is the fact that COINTELPRO also concentrated on creating bogus organizations. These bogus groups could serve many functions which might include attacking and/or disrupting bona fide groups, or even just simply creating a diversion with clever propaganda in order to attract members away so as to involve them with time-wasting activity designed to prevent them from doing anything useful. According to investigators, these FBI programs were noteworthy because all documents relating to them were stamped “do not file.” This meant that they were never filed in the system, and for all intents and purposes, did not exist. This cover was blown after activists broke into an FBI office in Media, Pennsylvania in 1971. The possibility of finding evidence for any of it, after that event, is about zero.

The COINTELPRO files that were retrieved during the above mentioned break-in showed that the U.S. Government targeted a very broad range of religious, labor and community groups opposed to any of its agendas. We can be certain that many groups formed for the ostensible purpose of “investigating 9/11” are of this type.

What seems to be certain is that the Powers That Be (PTB) have developed COINTELPRO to an all new level of Social Shaping, Cultural Brainwashing, and the main targets of this activity would include virtually anyone who is seeking the truth about the shifting realities of our world. The cases of COINTELPRO activities against political groups must be no more than the tip of the iceberg, given that the great bulk of COINTELPRO-type operations remain secret. By all indications, domestic covert operations have become a permanent feature of U.S. politics and Social Programming, and it is hardly likely, considering the evidence, that the 9/11 Truth groups are exempt.

The implications of this are truly alarming. Those who manage to get close to the truth of these matters, despite the many obstacles in their path, face National covert campaigns to discredit and disrupt their research and reputations. Clearly, COINTELPRO and similar operations under other names also work to distort academic and popular perceptions of the problems facing our world. They have done enormous damage to the search for the Truth.

“Terrorism is changing. New adversaries, new motivations and new rationales have surfaced in recent years to challenge much of the conventional wisdom...” wrote Dr. Bruce Hoffman, Director of RAND. And he was right. The only problem is, the reader is largely unaware of the definition of “new adversaries” that might be implied in his remarks. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that Dr. Hoffman may have been referring to “normal humans” as opposed to psychopaths in his remarks about “terrorism.” Undoubtedly, as Lobaczewski has written, to the psychopath, the world of normal people - even if they are the majority - must be rejected and destroyed.

The most effective weapon of COINTELPRO is Ridicule and Debunking. Notice that Marchetti mentions above that this is done via manipulation of individuals in areas of important public influence - including the academic world and the mass media. This includes the members of the REAL cult labeling as a "cult" any group that may generate resistance to their dominance.

"My working definition of a cult is a group that you don't like, and I say that somewhat facetiously, but at the same time, in fact, that is my working definition of a cult. It is a group that somebody doesn't like. It is a derogatory term, and I have never seen it redeemed from the derogatory connotations that it picked up in the sociological literature in the 1930s." J. Gordon Melton.

It’s pretty easy for anybody with two neurons in contact with one another to figure out that use of the “cult label” can be a handy tool of COINTELPRO agents.

In the late Spring - early Summer of 2001, our Cassiopaea website was attacked by a couple of Jewish individuals who accused us of anti-Semitism and began an active campaign of widespread slander and defamation, claiming that Ark was a "cold war nuke scientist" and the astonishing accusation that we were involved in Satanic Nazi Magic because of our association with an individual who had insinuated himself into our lives and work without telling us that this was what he was involved in! I should note here that he certainly had talked about researching these subjects, but the way he presented it was that he was interested in it only from a jounralistic point of view. I never dreamed that he was an active “practitioner” nor that his “magickal network” was as extensive and bizarre as it later turned out to be.

In any event, at the time of this slanderous attack from the Jewish quarter, we stopped in our tracks. When we began to examine the issue, we realized that we could not be associated with such activities because it was diametrically opposed to our own work, and even, in our opinion, dangerous. We let the individual in question know that we could not continue this association as long as he was involved in that sort of thing and basically gave him the choice of continuing to work with us, in which case he would have to publicly distance himself from such activity, or if he felt that this was his true “calling,” then we could have no further dealings with him. No hard feelings, bifurcation of paths.

His reaction to this was shocking, to say the least. He began to publicly “attack” our work, our website, our group, our personal lives, reputations, etc, in a way that was so bizarre as to challenge our ability to understand it. The main accusation was CULT! Initially, this entire incident appeared to be just a couple of individuals who didn’t like our view of reality, but as time passed, and the obsessive attacks continued, even to the point of threatening our lives, we realized that this was something more than just a disgruntled individual. These were people with an agenda, with a view of reality that was so foreign to our own “live and let live” policy that we were hard pressed to understand it.

None of our life experiences up to that point in time could account for the behavior of this individual. None of the normal rules of dealing with a conflict seemed to apply. It was as though we had encountered a different species of human being who appeared to be human like everyone else, who could speak and write like a human being, could convince people that he was human, but, based on our factual knowledge of the actual events in question, we could see that either his awareness of reality was completely alien, or he was consciously lying in ways and to an extent that had never been seen before. That, in itself, seemed entirely inhuman; that someone could have such a well-constructed façade that bore no relation to what was inside him. At least a dozen people knew the actual facts and knew that what was being said by this person was so twisted as to bear no relation to reality. And yet, his façade was complete: he could declare his version with such convincing sincerity that those of us who knew the facts actually began to question our own sanity. It was this latter effect that alerted us to the fact that something truly unusual was going on and we knew we needed to find out what it was.

As we continued to observe this dynamic, we saw how this individual accumulated a “following” that believed his version of events - (even after we had produce multiple “testimonies” and even documentary evidence that he was lying) - in a way that was baffling and even frightening. It certainly could be thought that it was a “conspiracy” between this individual and the Jewish thought police who started the whole thing - it sure looked like we had been “set up” - but we were certain that it was not; at least not in the ordinary sense of the word. It was more like what happens when the fat floating on the top of a bowl of soup begins to clump together following some laws of nature. The individuals involved probably did, once they had accreted as a group around this “spell-binder”, begin to actively conspire to commit acts of psychological and even physical violence against us, but what initiated the accretion was the phenomenon that fascinated us: their ideology presented as paramoralisms. It was as though, by announcing a certain mindset, or worldview, individuals began to “gather around” a “standard” that held resonance for them.

And so, thankfully, we had this experience in the months prior to, during, and following 9/11 which revealed for us in microcosm exactly the same types of events we began to observe in the US political arena. It was clear that the events of 9/11 were a shock that allowed similar individuals to “spellbind” the American public. Curiously, the individual who was at the root of the attacks on us declared in the 9/11 attacks in a lengthy rambling post sent to a rather extensive mailing list:

...on September 11th, … The ringing voice of The Goddess was finally heard at last! Sekhmet…

That was completely nutty, in our opinion, and certainly this group, though they were obviously exulting in the events of 9/11, had nothing “in common” with any individuals involved in high level conspiracies, we thought.

But that was where we were wrong. They did have something in common. But we didn’t know it then, and it was to be a full two years of hard work by dozens of members of our research group before we began to get a glimmer, to begin to perceive the theoretical basis for how and why such conspiracies can and obviously do, exist. But certainly, they do not exist or operate in the way we might ordinarily suspect.

Political Ponerology

A science on the nature of evil adjusted for political purposes

The word “psychopath” generally evokes images of the barely restrained - yet surprisingly urbane - Dr. Hannibal Lecter of “Silence of the Lambs” fame. I will admit that this was the image that came to my mind whenever I heard the word. But I was wrong, and I was to learn this lesson quite painfully by direct experience as described above. The exact details are chronicled elsewhere ; what is important is that this experience was probably one of the most painful and instructive episodes of my life and it enabled me to overcome a block in my awareness of the world around me and those who inhabit it.

Regarding blocks to awareness, I need to state for the record that I have spent 30 years studying psychology, history, culture, religion, myth and the so-called paranormal. I also have worked for many years with hypnotherapy - which gave me a very good mechanical knowledge of how the mind/brain of the human being operates at very deep levels. But even with all of that background, I was still operating with certain beliefs firmly in place that were shattered by my research into psychopathy. I realized that there was a certain set of ideas that I held about human beings that were sacrosanct. I even wrote about this once in the following way:

…my work has shown me that the vast majority of people want to do good, to experience good things, think good thoughts, and make decisions with good results. And they try with all their might to do so! With the majority of people having this internal desire, why the Hell isn't it happening?

I was naïve, I admit. There were many things I did not know that I have learned since I penned those words. But even at that time I was aware of how our own minds can be used to deceive us. Here, I want to relate a story which is paraphrased from the description of an experiment undertaken by Hugh Lynn Cayce and described in his book Venture Inward. I later made my own experiments which flesh out the details:

A subject was told under hypnosis that when he was awakened he would be unable to see a third man in the room who, it was suggested to him, would have become invisible. All the “proper” suggestions to make this “true” were given, such as “you will not see so- and-so”, etc... When the subject was awakened, lo and behold! the suggestions did not work.

Why? Because they went against his belief system. He did not believe that a person could become invisible.

So, another trial was made. The subject was hypnotized again and was told that the third man was leaving the room... that he had been called away on urgent business, and the scene of him getting on his coat and hat was described to the subject under hypnosis... loud footsteps were produced, the door was opened and shut to provide “sound effects”, and then the subject was brought out of the trance.

Guess what happened?

He was unable to see the Third Man.

Why? Because his perceptions were modified according to his beliefs. Certain “censors” in his brain were activated in a manner that was acceptable to his ego survival instincts.

The ways and means that we ensure survival of the ego is established pretty early in life by our parental and societal programming. This conditioning determines what is or is not possible; what we are “allowed” to believe in order to be accepted. We learn this, first, by learning what pleases our parents, and, then, later we modify our belief based on what pleases our society - our peers.. This is “transference”. We transfer our desire/need to please our parents to our society, to our religious leaders, and even to our government.

To return to our story, the Third Man went about the room picking things up and setting them down and doing all sorts of things to test the subject’s awareness of his presence, and the subject became utterly hysterical at this “anomalous” activity! He could see objects moving through the air, doors opening and closing, but he could not see the source because he did not believe that there was another man in the room.

So, what are the implications of this factor of human consciousness? (By the way, this is also the reason why most therapy to stop bad habits does not work - they attempt to operate against a “belief system” that is imprinted in the subconscious that this or that habit is essential to survival.)

One of the first things we might observe is that everyone has a different set of beliefs based upon their social and familial conditioning, and that these beliefs determine how much of the objective reality anyone is able to access.

Realities, objective, subjective, or otherwise, are a touchy subject. Suffice it to say that years of work inside the minds of all kinds of people has taught me that we almost never perceive reality as it truly IS.

In the above story, the objective reality is what it is: there was a third man in the room even if the subject did not believe there was. In this story, there is clearly a big part of that reality that is inaccessible to the subject due to a perception censor which was activated by the suggestions of the hypnotist. That is to say, the subject had a strong belief, based upon his choice as to who or what to believe. In this case, he chose to believe the hypnotist. That put an immediate limit on what he was able to understand via his actual observations.

Now, what beliefs did I hold that made me a victim of a psychopath? The first and most obvious one is that I truly believed that deep inside, all people are basically “good” and that they “want to do good, to experience good things, think good thoughts, and make decisions with good results. And they try with all their might to do so…”

As it happens, this is not true as I - and everyone involved in our working group - learned to our sorrow, as they say. In order to come to some understanding of exactly what kind of human being could do the things that were done to me (and others close to me), and why they might be motivated - even driven - to behave this way, we began to research the psychology literature for clues because we needed to understand for our own peace of mind.

If there is a psychological theory that can explain vicious and harmful behavior, it helps very much for the victim of such acts to have this information so that they do not have to spend all their time feeling hurt or angry. And certainly, if there is a psychological theory that helps a person to find what kind of words or deeds can bridge the chasm between people, to heal misunderstandings, that is also a worthy goal. It was from such a perspective that we began our extensive work on the subject of narcissism and psychopathy.

Of course, we didn’t start out with such a “diagnosis” or label for what we were witnessing. We started out with observations and searched the literature for clues, for profiles, for anything that would help us to understand the inner world of a human being - actually a group of human beings - who seemed to be utterly depraved and unlike anything we had ever encountered before.

As we proceeded through this project, we realized that what we were learning was very important to everyone because as the data was assembled, we saw that the clues, the profiles, revealed that the issues we were facing were faced by everyone at one time or another, to one extent or another. We also began to realize that the profiles that emerged also describe rather accurately many individuals who seek positions of power in fields of authority, most particularly politics and commerce. That’s really not so surprising an idea, but it honestly hadn’t occurred to us until we saw the patterns and recognized them in the behaviors of numerous historical figures, and lately including George W. Bush and members of his administration.

Current day statistics tell us that there are more psychologically sick people than healthy ones. If you take a sampling of individuals in any given field, you are likely to find that a significant number of them display pathological symptoms to one extent or another. Politics is no exception, and by its very nature, would tend to attract more of the pathological “dominator types” than other fields. That is only logical, and we began to realize that it was not only logical, it was horrifyingly accurate; horrifying because pathology among people in power can have disastrous effects on all of the people under the control of such pathological individuals. And so, we decided to write about this subject and publish it on the Internet.

As the material went up, letters from our readers began to come in thanking us for putting a name to what was happening to them in their personal lives as well as helping them to understand what was happening in a world that seems to have gone completely mad. We began to think that it was an epidemic and in a certain sense, we were right; just not in the way we thought. If an individual with a highly contagious illness works in a job that puts them in contact with the public, an epidemic is the result. In the same way, if an individual in a position of political power is a psychopath, he or she can create an epidemic of psychopathology in people who are not, essentially, psychopathic. Our ideas along this line were soon to receive confirmation from an unexpected source. I received an email from a Polish psychologist who wrote as follows:

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen.

I have got your Special Research Project on psychopathy by my computer.

You are doing a most important and valuable work for the future of nations.[…]

I am a very aged clinical psychologist. Forty years ago I took part in a secret investigation of the real nature and psychopathology of the macro social phenomenon called “Communism”. The other researchers were the scientists of the previous generation who are now passed away.

The profound study of the nature psychopathy, which played the essential and inspirational part in this macro social psychopathologic phenomenon, and distinguishing it from other mental anomalies, appeared to be the necessary preparation for understanding the entire nature of the phenomenon.

The large part of the work, you are doing now, was done in those times. …

I am able to provide you with a most valuable scientific document, useful for your purposes. It is my book “POLITICAL PONEROLOGY – A science on the nature of evil adjusted for political purposes”. You may also find copy of this book in the Library of Congress and in some university and public libraries in the USA.

Be so kind and contact me so that I may mail a copy to you.

Very truly yours!

Andrew M. £obaczewski

I promptly wrote a reply. A couple of weeks later the manuscript arrived in the mail.

As I read, I realized that what I was holding in my hand was essentially a chronicle of a descent into darkness, transformation, and triumphant return to the world with knowledge of that hell that was priceless. The risks that were taken by the group of scientists that did the research on which this book is based are beyond the comprehension of most of us. Many of them were young, just starting in their careers when the Nazis began to stride in their hundred league jackboots across Europe. These researchers lived through that, and then when the Nazis were driven out and replaced by the Communists under the heel of Stalin, they faced years of oppression the likes of which those of us today who are choosing to take a stand against the Bush Reich cannot even imagine. And so, since they were there, and they lived through it and brought back information to the rest of us, it may well save our lives to have a map to guide us in the falling darkness. Dr. Lobczewski discusses the value of the close and clinical study of evil in his book:

This new science is incalculably rich in casuist detail... It contains knowledge and a description of the phenomenon in the categories of the natural world-view, correspondingly modified in accordance with the need to understand [many] matters...

The development of this familiarity with the phenomenon is accompanied by development of communicative language, by means of which society can stay informed and issue warnings of danger. A third language thus appears alongside the ideological doubletalk ... in part, it borrows names used by the official ideology in their transformed modified meanings. In part, this language operates with words borrowed from still more lively circulating jokes. In spite of its strangeness, this language becomes a useful means of communication and plays a part in regenerating societal links. ... However, in spite of efforts on the part of literati and journalists, this language remains only communicative inside; it becomes hermetic outside the scope of the phenomenon, incomprehensible to people lacking the appropriate personal experience. [...]

This new science, expressed in language derived from a deviant reality, is something foreign to people who wish to understand this macro-social phenomenon but think in the categories of the countries of normal man. Attempts to understand this language produce a certain feeling of helplessness which gives rise to the tendency of creating ones own doctrines, built from concepts of one's own world and a certain amount of appropriately co-opted pathocratic propaganda material. Such a doctrine - an example would be the American anti-Communist doctrine - makes it even more difficult to understand that other reality. May the objective description adduced herein enable them to overcome the impasse thus engendered.[...]

The specific role of certain individuals during such times is worth pointing out; they participated in the discovery of the nature of this new reality and helped others find the right path. They had a normal nature but an unfortunate childhood, being subjected very early to the domination of individuals with various psychological deviations, including pathological egotism and methods of terrorizing others. The new rulership system struck such people as a large-scale societal multiplication of what they knew from individual experience. From the very outset, they therefore saw this reality much more prosaically, immediately treating the ideology in accordance with the paralogistic stories well known to them, whose purpose was to cloak bitter reality of their youth experiences. They soon reached the truth, since the genesis and nature of evil are analogous irrespective of the social scale in which it appears.

Such people are rarely understood in happy societies, but there they became useful; their explanations and advice proved accurate and were transmitted to others joining the network of this apperceptive heritage. However, their own suffering was doubled, since this was too much of a similar kind of abuse for one life to handle. ...

Finally, society sees the appearance of individuals who have collected exceptional intuitive perception and practical knowledge in the area of how pathocrats think and such a system of rule operates.

Some of them become so proficient in the deviant psychopath language and its idiomatics that they are able to use it, much like a foreign language they have learned well. Since they are to decipher the rulership's intentions, such people thereupon offer advice to people who are having trouble with the authorities. These usually disinterested advocates of the society of normal people play a irreplaceable role in the life of society. The pathocrats, however, can never learn to think in normal human categories. At the same time, the ability to predict the ways of reaction of such an authority also leads to the conclusion that the system is rigidly causative and lacking in the natural freedom of choice. [...]

I was once referred a patient who had been an inmate in a Nazi concentration camp. She came back from that hell in such exceptionally good condition that she was still able to marry and bear three children. However, her child-rearing methods were so extremely iron-fisted as to be much too reminiscent of the concentration camp life so stubbornly per-severing in former prisoners. The children's reaction was neurotic protest and aggressiveness against other children.

During the mother's psychotherapy, we recalled the figures of male and female SS officers to her mind, pointing out their psychopathic characteristics (such people were primary recruits). In order to help her eliminate their pathological material from her person, I furnished her with approximate statistical data regarding the appearance of such individuals within the population as whole. This helped her reach a more objective view of that reality and reestablish trust in the society of normal people. ...

Parallel to the development of practical knowledge and a language of insider communication, other psychological phenomena take form; they are truly significant in the transformation of social life under pathocratic rule, and discerning them is essential if one wishes to understand individuals and nations fated to live under such conditions and to evaluate the situation in the political sphere. They include people's psychological immunization and their adaptation to life under such deviant conditions.

The methods of psychological terror (that specific pathocratic art), the techniques of pathological arrogance, and the striding roughshod into other people's souls initially have such traumatic effects that people are deprived of their capacity for purposeful reaction; I have already adduced the psychophysiological aspects of such states. Ten or twenty years later, analogous behavior can be recognized as well-known buffoonery and does not deprive the victim of his ability to think and react purposefully. His answers are usually well-thought-out strategies, issued from the position of a normal person's superiority and often laced with ridicule. Man can look suffering and even death in the eye with the required calm. A dangerous weapon falls out of ruler's hands.

We have to understand that this process of immunization is not merely a result of the above described increase in practical knowledge of the macro social phenomenon. It is the effect of a many-layered, gradual process of growth in knowledge, familiarization with the phenomenon, creation of the appropriate reactive habits, and self-control, with an overall conception and moral principles being worked out in the meantime. After several years, the same stimuli which formerly caused chilly spiritual impotence or mental paralysis now provoke the desire to gargle with something strong so as to get rid of this filth.

It was a time, when many people dreamed of finding some pill which would make it easier to endure dealing with the authorities or attending the forced indoctrination sessions generally chaired by a psychopathic character. Some antidepressants did in fact prove to have the desired effect. Twenty years later, this had been forgotten entirely.

When I was arrested for the first time in 1951, force, arrogance, and psychopathic methods of forcible confession deprived me almost entirely of my self-defense capabilities. My brain stopped functioning after only a few days' arrest without water, to such a point that I couldn't even properly remember the incident which resulted in my sudden arrest. I was not even aware that it had been purposely provoked and that conditions permitting self-defense did in fact exist. They did almost any-thing they wanted to me.

When I was arrested for last time in 1968, I was interrogated by five fierce-looking security functionaries. At one particular moment, after thinking through their predicted reactions, I let my gaze take in each face sequentially with great attentiveness. The most important one asked me, "What's on your mind, buster, staring at us like that?" I answered without any fear of consequences: "I'm just wondering why so many of you gentleman's careers end up in a psychiatric hospital." They were taken aback for a while, whereupon the same man exclaimed, "Because it's such damned horrible work!" "I am of the opinion that it's the other way round", I calmly responded. Then I was taken back to my cell.

Three days later, I had the opportunity to talk to him again, but this time he was much more respectful. Then he ordered me to be taken away - outside, as it turned out. I rode the streetcar home past a large park, still unable to believe my eyes. Once in my room, I lay down on the bed; the world was not quite real yet, but exhausted people fall asleep quickly. When I awoke, I spoke out loud: Dear God, aren't you supposed to be in charge here in this world!"

At that time, I knew not only that up to 1/4 of all secret police officials wind up in psychiatric hospitals. I also knew that their "occupational disease" is the congestive dementia formerly encountered only among old prostitutes. Man cannot violate the natural human feelings inside him with impunity, no matter what kind of profession he performs. From that view-point, Comrade Captain was partially right. At the same time, however, my reactions had become resistant, a far cry from what they had been seventeen years earlier.

All these transformations of human consciousness and unconsciousness result in individual and collective adaptation to living under such system. Under altered conditions of both material and moral limitations, an existential resourcefulness emerges which is prepared to overcome many difficulties. A new network of the society of normal people is also created for self-help and mutual assistance.

This society acts in concert and is aware of the true state of affairs; it begins to develop ways of influencing various elements of authority and achieving goals which are socially useful. ...The opinion that society is totally deprived of any influence upon government in such a country is thus inaccurate. In reality, society does co-govern to a certain extent, sometimes succeeding and sometimes failing in its attempt to create more tolerable living conditions. This, however, occurs in a manner totally different from what happens in democratic countries.

These processes: cognitive, psychological immunization, and adaptation permit the creation of new interpersonal and societal links, which operate within the scope of the large majority we have already called the "society of normal people." These links extend discretely into the world of the regime's middle class, among people who can be trusted to a certain extent. ...

Exchange of information, warnings, and assistance encompasses the entire society. Whoever is able to do so offers aid to anyone who finds himself in trouble, often in such a way that the person helped does not know who rendered the assistance. However, if he caused his misfortune by his own lack of circumspect caution with regard to the authorities, he meets with reproach, but not the withholding of assistance.

It is possible to create such links because this new division of society gives only limited consideration to factors such as the level of talent or education or traditions attached to the former social layers. Neither do reduced prosperity differences dissolve these links. One side of this division contains those of the highest mental culture, simple ordinary people, intellectuals, headwork specialists, factory workers, and peasants joined by the common protest of their human nature against the domination of a Para human experience and governmental methods. These links engender interpersonal understanding and fellow-feeling among people and social groups formerly divided by economic differences and social traditions. The thought processes serving these links are of more psychological character, able to comprehend someone else's motivations. At the same time, the ordinary folk retain respect for people who have been educated and represent intellectual values. Certain social and moral values also appear, and may prove to be permanent.

The genesis, however, of this great interpersonal solidarity only becomes comprehensible once we already know the nature of the pathological macro social phenomenon which brought about the liberation of such attitudes, complete with recognition of one's own humanity and that of others. Another reflection suggests itself, namely how very different these great links are from America's "competitive society,

This work is so important that I believe that every normal human being ought to read it for their own safety and mental hygiene. I am going to present here some important excerpts from the book soon to be made available in its entirety.

From the Author’s Foreword:

In presenting my honored readers with this volume, which I generally worked on during the early hours before leaving to make a difficult living, I would first like to apologize for the defects which are the result of anomalous circumstances such as the absence of a proper laboratory. I readily admit that these lacunae should be filled, time-consuming as that may be, because the facts on which this book are based are urgently needed. Through no fault of the author’s, these data have come too late.

The reader is entitled to an explanation of the long history and circumstances under which this work was compiled. This is the third time I have treated the same subject. I threw the first manuscript into a central-heating furnace, having been warned just in time about an official search, which took place minutes later. I sent the second draft to a Church dignitary at the Vatican by means of an American tourist and was absolutely unable to obtain any kind of information about the fate of the parcel once it left with him.

This … history … made work on the third version even more laborious. Prior paragraphs and former phrases from one or both first drafts haunt the writer’s mind and make proper planning of the content more difficult.

The two first drafts were written in very convoluted language for the benefit of specialists with the necessary background, particularly in the field of psychopathology. The irretrievable disappearance of the second version also included the overwhelming majority of statistical data and facts which would have been so valuable and conclusive for specialists. Several analyses of individual cases were also lost.

The present version contains only such statistical data which had been memorized due to frequent use, or which could be reconstructed with satisfactory precision. […] I also nurse the hope that this work may reach a wider audience and make available some useful scientific data which may serve as a basis for comprehension of the contemporary world and its history. It may also make it easier for readers to understand themselves, their neighbors, and other nations.

Who produced the knowledge and performed the work summarized within the pages of this book? It is a joint endeavor containing not only my efforts, but also representing the work of many researchers…

The author worked in Poland far away from active political and cultural centers for many years. That is where I undertook a series of detailed tests and observations which were to be combined within the resulting generalisations in order to produce an overall introduction for an understanding of the macro-social phenomenon surrounding us. The name of the person expected to effect this synthesis was a secret, as was understandable and necessary given the time and the situation. I would very occasionally receive anonymous summaries of the results of tests from Poland and Hungary. A few data were published, as it raised no suspicions that a specialized work was being compiled, and these data could still be located today.

The expected synthesis of this work did not occur. All my contacts became inoperative as a result of the secret arrests of researchers in the early sixties. The remaining scientific data in my possession were very incomplete, albeit priceless in value. It took many years of lonely work to weld these fragments into a coherent whole, filling the lacunae with my own experience and research.

My research on essential psychopathy and its exceptional role in the macro-social phenomenon was conducted concurrently with or shortly after that of others. Their conclusions reached me later and confirmed my own. The most characteristic item in my work is the general concept for a new scientific discipline named “ponerology.”[…]

As the author of the final work, I hereby express my deep respect for all those who initiated the research and continued to conduct it at the risk of their careers, health and lives. I pay homage to those who paid the price through suffering or death. May this work constitute some compensation for their sacrifices…

New York, N.Y. August 1984

Dr. Lobaczewski escaped to the United States where he reassembled and wrote down his research before Solidarity brought the downfall of communism:

Fifteen years passed, fraught with political occurrences. The world changed essentially due to the natural laws of the phenomenon described in this book, and due to the efforts of people of good will. Nonetheless, the world as yet is not restored to good health; and the remainders of the great disease are still very active and threatening a reoccurrence of the illness. Such is the result of a great effort completed without the support of the objective knowledge about the very nature of the phenomenon. […]

The author was recognised as the bearer of this “dangerous” science only in Austria, by a “friendly” physician who turned out to be a “red” agent. The communist groups in New York were then set up to organize a “counter action.” It was terrible to learn how the system of conscious and unconscious pawns worked. Worst were the people who credulously trusted their conscious “friends” and performed the insinuated activities with patriotic zeal. The author was refused assistance and had to save his life by working as a welder. My health collapsed, and two years were lost. It appeared that I was not the first who came to America bringing similar knowledge and, once there, treated in a similar way.

In spite of all these circumstances, the book was written on time, but no one would publish it. The work was described as “very informative” but for psychological editors, it contained too much politics and for political editors, it contained too much psychology, or simply “the editorial deadline has just closed.” Gradually, it became clear that the book did not pass the insider’s inspection.[…]

The scientific value which may serve the future remains, and further investigations may yield a new understanding of human problems with progress toward universal peace. This was the reason I labored to retype, on my computer, the whole already fading manuscript. It is here presented as it was written in 1983-84 in New York, USA. So let it be a document of good science and dangerous labor. The author’s desire is to hand this work into the hands of scholars in the hope they will take his burden over and progress with the theoretical research in ponerology - and put it in praxis for the good of people and nations.

Poland - June, 1998

Dr. Lobaczewski left the United States and returned to Poland before September 11, 2001. But his remarks were prophetic:

Nonetheless, the world as yet is not restored to good health; and the remainders of the great disease are still very active and threatening a reoccurrence of the illness.

What “dangerous science was Dr. Lobaczewski carrying with him when he escaped from communist Poland?

He calls it “Ponerology” which the dictionary defines: n. division of theology dealing with evil; theological doctrine of wickedness or evil; from the Greek: poneros -> evil'.

But Dr. Lobaczewski was not proposing a “theological” study, but rather a scientific study of what we can plainly call Evil. The problem is, our materialist scientific culture does not readily admit that evil actually exists, per se. Yes, “evil” plays a part in religious discourse, but even there it is given short shrift as an “error” or a “rebellion” that will be corrected at some point in the future, which is discussed in another theological division: eschatology, which is concerned with the final events in history of the world, the ultimate fate of humanity.

There are quite a number of modern psychologists who are actually beginning to move in the direction of what Dr. Lobaczewski said had already been done behind the Iron Curtain many years ago. I have a stack of their books on my desk. Some of them seem to be falling back into the religious perspective simply because they have no other scientific ground on which to stand. I think that is counterproductive. As George K. Simon, Jr., writes in his book “In Sheep’s Clothing”: (HIGHLY reccommended)

…[W]e’ve been pre-programmed to believe that people only exhibit problem behaviors when they’re “troubled” inside or anxious about something. We’ve also been taught that people aggress only when they’re attacked in some way. So, even when our gut tells us that somebody is attacking us and for no good reason, we don’t readily accept the notion. We usually start to wonder what’s bothering the person so badly “underneath it all” that’s making them act in such a disturbing way. We may even wonder what we may have said or done that “threatened” them. We almost never think that they might be fighting simply to get something, have their way, or gain the upper hand. So, instead of seeing them as merely fighting, we view them as primarily hurting in some way.

Not only do we often have trouble recognizing the ways people aggress us, but we also have difficulty discerning the distinctly aggressive character of some personalities. The legacy of Sigmund Freud’s work has a lot to do with this. Freud’s theories (and the theories of others who built upon his work) heavily influenced the psychology of personality for a long time. Elements of the classical theories of personality found their way into many disciplines other than psychology as well as into many of our social institutions and enterprises. The basic tenets of these theories and their hallmark construct, neurosis, have become fairly well etched in the public consciousness.

Psychodynamic theories of personality tend to view everyone, at least to some degree, as neurotic. Neurotic individuals are overly inhibited people who suffer unreasonable fear (anxiety), guilt and shame when it comes to securing their basic wants and needs. The malignant impact of overgeneralizing Freud’s observations about a small group of overly inhibited individuals into a broad set of assumptions about the causes of psychological ill-health in everyone cannot be overstated.[…]

Therapists whose training overly indoctrinated them in the theory of neurosis, may “frame” problems presented them incorrectly. They may, for example, assume that a person, who all their life has aggressively pursued independence and demonstrated little affinity for others, must necessarily be “compensating” for a “fear” of intimacy. In other words, they will view a hardened fighter as a terrified runner, thus misperceiving the core reality of the situation.[…]

We need a completely different theoretical framework if we are to truly understand, deal with, and treat the kinds of people who fight too much as opposed to those who cower or “run” too much.

The problem is, of course, that when you read all the books about such people as Dr. Simon is describing, you discover that “treatment” really means treating the victims because such aggressors almost never seek help.

Getting back to Dr. Lobaczewski: I wrote to ask for more details as to why this important work was generally unknown. He replied by mail:

[…] Years ago the publication of the book in the US was killed by Mr. Zbigniew Brzezinski in a very cunning way. What was his motivation, I may only guess. Was it his own private strategy, or did he act as an insider of the “great system” as he surely is? How many billions of dollars and how many human lives the lack of this science has cost the world. […]

After reading this work, it is easy to understand why Brzezinski suppressed it. It exposes the Neocons and Pathocrats so completely that they could not allow it to be propagated!

As for who else was involved in this work: in those times, such work could only be done in full secrecy. During the German occupation, we learned to never ask for names though it was well known among us that this was an international communication among some scientists. I can tell you that one Hungarian scientist was killed because of his work on this project, and in Poland, professor Stephan Blachowski died mysteriously while working on these investigations. It is a certainty that professor Kasimir Dabrowski was active in the study, being an expert on psychopathy. He escaped to the US and in New York, became an object of harassment as I had been. He went to Canada and worked at the university in Edmonton.

It is in this context of Dr. Lobaczewski’s work that we finally found the mechanism for how and why “grand conspiracies” can and DO exist, but not necessarily in the way any of us ever imagined. They exist as a phenomenon of Nature and as such a phenomenon, deserve close and careful study.

From the book: Political Ponerology:

Pathocracy

As a youth, I read a book about a naturalist wandering through the Amazon-basin wilderness. At some moment a small animal fell from a tree onto the nape of his neck, clawing his skin painfully and sucking his blood. The biologist cautiously removed it - without anger, since that was its form of feeding - and proceeded to study it carefully. This story stubbornly stuck in my mind during those very difficult times when a vampire fell onto our necks, sucking the blood of an unhappy nation.

The attitude of a naturalist - who attempts to track the nature of macro-social phenomena in spite of all adversity - insured a certain intellectual distance and better psychological hygiene, also slightly increasing the feeling of safety and furnishing a premonition that this very method may help find a certain creative solution. This required controlling the natural, moralizing reflexes of revulsion and other painful emotions this phenomenon provokes in any normal person when it deprives him of his joy of life and personal safety, ruining his own future and that of his nation. Scientific curiosity becomes a loyal ally during such times.

May the reader please imagine a very large hall in some old Gothic university building. Many of us gathered there early in our studies in order to listen to the lectures of outstanding philosophers. We were herded back there the year before graduation in order to listen to the indoctrination lectures which recently have been introduced. Someone nobody knew appeared behind the lectern and informed us that he would now be the professor. His speech was fluent, but there was nothing scientific about it: he failed to distinguish between scientific and everyday concepts and treated borderline imaginings as though it were wisdom that could not be doubted. For ninety minutes each week, he flooded us with naïve, presumptuous paralogistics and a pathological view of human reality. We were treated with contempt and poorly controlled hatred. Since fun poking could entail dreadful consequences, we had to listen attentively and with the utmost gravity.

The grapevine soon discovered this person’s origins. He had come from a Cracow suburb and attended high school, although no one knew if he graduated. Anyway, this was the first time he had crossed university portals - as a professor, at that! […]

After such mind-torture, it took a long time for someone to break the silence. We studied ourselves, since we felt something strange had taken over our minds and something valuable was leaking away irretrievably. The world of psychological reality and moral values seemed suspended like in a chilly fog. Our human feeling and student solidarity lost their meaning, as did patriotism and our old established criteria. So we asked each other: “Are you going through this too?” Each of us experienced this worry about his on personality and future in his own way. Some of us answered the questions with silence. The depth of these experiences turned out to be different for each individual.

We thus wondered how to protect ourselves from the results of this “indoctrination.” Teresa D. made the first suggestion: Let’s spend a weekend in the mountains. It worked. Pleasant company, a bit of joking, then exhaustion followed by deep sleep in a shelter, and our human personalities returned, albeit with a certain remnant. Time also proved to create a kind of psychological immunity, although not with everyone. Analysing the psychopathic characteristics of the “professor’s” personality proved another excellent way of protecting one’s own psychological hygiene.

You can just imagine our worry, disappointment, and surprise when some colleagues we knew well suddenly began to change their world-view; their thought-patterns furthermore reminded us of the “professor’s” chatter. Their feelings, which had just recently been friendly, became noticeably cooler, although not yet hostile. Benevolent or critical student arguments bounced right off of them. They gave the impression of possessing some secret knowledge; we were only their former colleagues, still believing what those professors of old had taught us. We had to be careful of what we said to them.

Our former colleagues soon joined the Party. Who were they? What social groups did they come from? What kind of students and people were they? How and why did they change so much in less than a year? Why did neither I nor a majority of my fellow students succumb to this phenomenon and process? Many such questions fluttered through our heads then. Those times, questions, and attitudes gave rise to the idea that this phenomenon could be objectively understood, an idea whose greater meaning crystallized with time. Many of us participated in the initial observations and reflections, but most crumbled away in the face of material or academic problems. Only a few remained; so the author of this book may be the last of the Mohicans.

It was relatively easy to determine the environments and origin of the people who succumbed to this process, which I then called “transpersonification”. They came from all social groups, including aristocratic and fervently religious families, and caused a break in our student solidarity in the order of some 6 %. The remaining majority suffered varying degrees of personality disintegration which gave rise to individual efforts in searching for the values necessary to find ourselves again; the results were varied and sometimes creative.

Even then, we had no doubts as to the pathological nature of this “transpersonification” process, which ran similar but not identical in all cases. The duration of the results of this phenomenon also varied. Some of these people later became zealots. Others later took advantage of various circumstances to withdraw and reestablish their lost links to the society of normal people. They were replaced. The only constant value of the new social system was the magic number of 6 %.

We tried to evaluate the talent level of those colleagues who had succumbed to this personality-transformation process, and reached the conclusion that on average, it was slightly lower than the average of the student population. Their lesser resistance obviously resided in other bio-psychological features which were most probably qualitatively heterogeneous.

I had to study subjects bordering on psychology and psychopathology in order to answer the questions arising from our observations; scientific neglect in these areas proved an obstacle difficult to overcome. At the same time, someone guided by special knowledge apparently vacated the libraries of anything we could have found on the topic.

Is it any wonder why, nowadays, any group seeking to provide this very knowledge to others would be labeled a "cult?"

Analysing these occurrences now in hindsight, we could say that the “professor” was dangling bait over our heads, based on psychopaths’ specific psychological knowledge. He knew in advance that he would fish out amenable individuals, but the limited numbers disappointed him. The transpersonification process generally took hold whenever an individual’s instinctive substratum was marked by pallor or some deficits. To a lesser extent, it also worked among people who manifested other deficiencies, also the state provoked within them was partially impermanent, being largely the result of psychopathological induction.

This knowledge about the existence of susceptible individuals and how to work on them will continue being a tool for world conquest as long as it remains the secret of such “professors.” When it becomes skillfully popularized science, it will help nations develop immunity. But none of us knew this at the time.

Nevertheless, we must admit that in demonstrating the properties of pathocracy in such a way as to force us into in-depth experience, the professor helped us understand the nature of the phenomenon in a larger scope than many a true scientific researcher participating in this work in one way or another. […]

The natural psychological, societal, and moral world-view is a product of man’s developmental process within a society, under the constant influence of his innate traits. No person can develop without being influenced by other people and their personalities, or by the values imbued by his civilization and his moral and religious traditions. That his why his world-view can be neither universal nor true.

It is thus significant that the main values of this human world-view of nature indicate basic similarities in spite of great spans of time, race, and civilization. It is thus suggested that the “human world view” derives from the nature of our species and the natural experience of human societies which have achieved a certain necessary level of civilization. Refinements based on literary values or philosophical and moral reflections do indicate some differences, but generally speaking, they tend to bring together the natural conceptual language of various civilizations and eras.

People with a “humanistic” education may have the impression that they have achieved wisdom, but here we approach a problem; we must ask the following question: Even if the natural world-view has been refined, does it mirror reality with sufficient reliability? Or does it only mirror our species’ perception? To what extent can we depend upon it as a basis for decision making in the individual, societal, and political spheres of life?

Experience teaches us, first of all, that this natural world-view has permanent and characteristic tendencies toward deformation dictated by our instinctive and emotional features. Secondly, our work exposes us to many phenomena that cannot be understood and described by natural language alone.

Considering the most important reality deforming tendency, we notice that those emotional features which are a natural component of the human personality are never completely appropriate to the reality being experienced. This results both from our instinct and from our conditioning of upbringing. This is why the best traditions of philosophical and religious thought have counseled subduing the emotions in order to achieve a more accurate view of reality.

Another problem is the fact that our natural world-view is generally characterized by a tendency to endow our opinions with moral judgments, often so negative as to represent outrage. This appeals to tendencies which are deeply rooted in human nature and social customs.

We often meet with sensible people endowed with a well-developed natural world-view as regards psychological, societal, and moral aspects, frequently refined via literary influences, religious deliberations, and philosophical reflections. Such persons have a pronounced tendency to overrate the values of their world-view. They do not take into account the fact that their system can be also erroneous since it is insufficiently objective.

Let us call such an attitude the egotism of the natural world-view. To date, it has been the least pernicious type of egotism, being merely an overestimation of that method of comprehension containing the eternal values of human experience.

Today, however, the world is being jeopardized by a phenomenon that cannot be understood and described by means of such a natural conceptual language; this kind of egotism thus becomes a dangerous factor stifling the possibility of some counteractive measures. Developing and popularizing the objective psychological world-view could thus significantly expand the scope of dealing with evil via sensible action and pinpointed countermeasures.

Ever since ancient times, philosophers and religious thinkers representing various attitudes in different cultures have been searching for the truth as regards moral values, attempting to find criteria for what is right, what constitutes good advice. They described the virtues of human character and suggested these be acquired. They created a heritage … which contains centuries of experience and reflections. In spite of the obvious differences among attitudes, the similarity or complementarity of the conclusions reached by famous ancients are striking, even though they worked in widely divergent times and places. After all, whatever is valuable is conditioned and caused by the laws of nature acting upon the personalities of both individual human beings and collective societies.

It is equally thought-provoking, however, to see how relatively little has been said about the opposite side of the coin; the nature, causes, and genesis of evil. These matters are usually cloaked behind the above generalized conclus

Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 13:26:52 0200

Dear Friends:

At the weekend, someone advised me about an international conference which they thought I might like to attend. At first glance, it looked very attractive. Entitled "Psychological Manipulation, Cultic Groups, and Other Alternative Movements", it is due to be held on the campus of Madrid University, Spain, on July 14th-16th this year. Very convenient for me. Just a few hour's drive away.

I have studied these subjects a great deal, especially during the last 20 years. In fact, my whole life has been dedicated to exposing and standing up to psychological manipulation, cults, sects and coercive movements. Here was a conference at which I could meet interesting, like-minded people and exchange ideas... so I thought. That was until I realised the identity of the organisation which lies behind the conference. I immediately recoiled in horror from the idea of attending such a meeting. It would have been like going into the lions' den.

Organised jointly by the "International Cultic Studies Association" and the Psychology Faculty of the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, the conference programme boasts an enormous list of the world's leading lecturers and researchers into cults, psychological manipulation and brainwashing techniques. It is a formidable operation.

However, the "International Cultic Studies Association" (ICSA) is the new name given to the "American Family Foundation" (AFF, which was renamed in 2004). In spite of its cute name (they love using those cute front names because they know they will fool the Christians!), the AFF was started originally in 1979 with the advisors and psychiatric personnel from the old CIA, MK-Ultra mind-control experiments, such as Robert J. Lifton, Maurice Davis, Margaret Singer, and Louis Jolyon West.

After the pretended abandonment of those CIA programmes in the wake of the Senate report which condemned them, the psychiatric advisors in those programmes -- being adepts in the brainwashing, torture and human programming field -- became involved in pretended anti-cult organisations as a front.

I mentioned Louis Jolyon West in my recent article on the CIA (2004), I wrote:

"The famed mescaline trip which gave birth to Aldous Huxley's book, "The Doors of Perception", was supplied by the British surgeon, Dr. Humphrey Osmond. Osmond was a participant psychiatrist in the CIA's MK-Ultra mind-control experiments with LSD. Huxley was also a close friend of *Dr. Louis Jolyon West*, who performed LSD experiments for the CIA, and also with J.B. Rhine, who performed studies in Extra-Sensory Perception for the CIA at Duke University, where Huxley lectured in "parapsychology". [Martin A. Lee, Bruce Shlain, "Acid Dreams: The Complete Social History of LSD: The CIA, the Sixties, and Beyond", p.48].

Although Huxley was not publicly enamoured with the clinical laboratory approach to LSD use, he was certainly rubbing shoulders with many of the big players in the CIA-MK-Ultra psychiatric showhouse. His suggestion to MK-Ultra psychiatrist Louis Jolyon West that his LSD subjects should be hypnotised before being given the drug was enthusiastically taken on board by the CIA. As one researcher states about West: "Dr. West is one of the CIA's most notorious mind control specialists, currently director of UCLA's Neuropsychiatric Institute. It was West who brought a score of mind control specialists of the ultra-right stripe to the UCLA campus". [Alex Constantine, "Psychic Dictatorship in the USA", op.cit., p.58.]

Huxley's friend, West, who died in 1999, was the psychiatrist who was hired by the US government to examine Lee Harvey Oswald's killer, Jack Ruby, for fitness to stand trial. He was also hired to examine Patty Hearst who was kidnapped by the CIA-created Symbionese Liberation Army. As a CIA asset, West could always be relied on to deliver the goods in the preferred manner. As another researcher has put it, West "moved into the role of 'fixer' for the CIA, always on the spot for high profile psychiatric intervention, character assassination, or an off-the-cuff interview when the Agency sought damage control". [Jim Keith, "Mass Control: Engineering Human Consciousness" (Illumi-Net Press, 1999), p.117.]

West -- originally the son of poor Russian Jewish immigrants -- was a close friend of Aldous Huxley. Huxley's connections are intriguing to follow. For there is a plain connection between the mind-altering drugs advocated by Huxley, the activities of the CIA, the Nazi movement and occult magic/satanism. These are all elements of a collective conspiracy to manipulate the human psyche to the advantage of the elites who secretly control the world."

[Extracted from Alan Morrison, "Fooling Most of the People All of the Time", Part I, 2004. Available on the "Articles & Analysis" page of the Diakrisis website, www.diakrisis.org ]

This Louis Jolyon West was one of the key players in the formation and development of the American Family Foundation.

These old CIA/US military mind-control specialists are extremely evil men; and the AFF is an evil organisation posing as a benign one.

Along with people such as the satanist US Army Lieutenant-Colonel Michael Aquino (PSYOPS - psychological operations - advisor to the US military), they propagated for two decades the despicable culture of death, torture and mind-control which lies at the heart of the US governmental, intelligence and military machinery. (They machinated the torment and massacre at Waco, amongst other things).

[The second part of my CIA article goes into the CIA/US military satanism aspect in great detail. This is why I haven't yet published it. It is very exposing but, frankly, it just isn't worth publishing it as there are currently too many treacherous "sleepers" on this e-mail list. That's all I'll say on that for the moment.]

However, my reason for sharing about this conference with you here is because of the way that the work of the "American Family Foundation" fits into a particular syndrome, involving the way that the evil New World Order is not only evil within the confines of its own arcane, institutional structure but that it also even controls the opposition with its evil ways.

Although bogus organisations and fronts like the AFF claim to have been set up to counteract cults (and that is how most people will blindly see them), exactly the opposite is true. The dark powers have set up the AFF to ensure that the secret work of cult-making and the experimental/functional use of brainwashing mind-control techniques can continue to be used by those powers without any real opposition because they then control the opposition!

This syndrome of secretly controlling the opposition is replicable across the world. It works like this: Firstly, if there is no enemy, then the powers start one up themselves so that there actually is one to control!

As we have often shown before, an example of this would be the US forces setting up the bogus organisation, Al Qaeda, and then making it look real and frightening in order to control the population effectively. [As just one example of many informative articles on this subject, see http://www.spiked-online.com/Articles/00000006DFED.htm ].

Enemies are necessary for the effective survival of evil powers. This is like a page out of Orwell's book, "1984". Manufactured enemies serve a purpose, but most never realise how is being manipulated or in what way.

Secondly, if there already is an enemy, then you can simply take it over from the inside in such a way that the outside world never knows. Once that objective has been achieved, you can control everything the enemy says and does, like one big game. It's rather like playing yourself at chess.

You may wonder "Why control the opposition? What's the point?" The point is this: When you control the opposition, there are a great number of advantages - many of them not apparent at first glance. In the case of the ex-"American Family Foundation" -- the "International Cultic Studies Association" -- the purposes of the dark powers themselves controlling the enemy are as follows:-

1) They can collect the names of possible trouble-makers or opposers, which provides the potential to discredit the REAL cult-watchers.

2) They can engage in the gathering of research so that they can misuse the data. It's a great way to gather the world's leading "experts" on manipulation and brainwashing and then garner the findings so they can use it for their own intelligence/research purposes.

3) They can close down the opposition or discredit them from within at any time that it becomes convenient to do so.

4) They can establish in the public mind what is a cult and what isn't. This will one day effect all of us as we begin to be labelled cultists by those who have taken over the anti-cult organisations and then rounded up by their masters.

This "Secretly Controlling the Opposition Syndrome" has been more widespread than many may realise. As a very basic example, take the American gangster, Al Capone, who controlled the opposition to his criminal activities by bribing the Police chiefs and big wheels in City Hall. Some were immediately bribeable - others had to be framed with compromising situations in order to obtain their cooperation. He had them all in his pocket and thus controlled the enemy. (This is why Elliot Ness and company were known as "The Untouchables", because they could not be "touched" by the tentacular bribing of Capone and his successors. We need a few Elliot Nesses in the world and church today!).

Similarly, the Bolshevist revolution and the subsequent communist regime of the USSR was originally bankrolled by Wall Street and other Western financial institutions. [Seehttp://reformed-theology.org/html/books/bolshevik_revolution/ ]. Thus communism and Anti-Communism were both controlled by the same powers. It was a false enemy generated in the same way as was Al Qaeda, in order to control effectively the masses.

Another example is the way that the drugs business of the world is controlled by the US CIA/mafia cabal (as we demonstrated in our recent CIA article). This was even the principal reason behind the US invasion of Afghanistan (as the Taliban was outlawing poppy growing). Yet, the CIA also engages in a vigorous anti-drugs campaign (see www.cia.gov/saynotodrugs/ and http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/press_release/2000/pr10272000.html ).

What a sick joke! (The joke is not lost on those in the know: http://www.consortiumnews.com/2001/030401a.html ).

We have already seen how the mind-control, cult-making people in CIA-manufactured psychiatry also control the supposed Anti-cults movement and ensure that the CIA/US military's own cultic mind-control experiments will not be widely unearthed by mainstream researchers into cults.

We see precisely the same syndrome - for precisely the same reasons - in the way that the CIA has set up the "False Memory Syndrome Foundation" (FMSF), supposedly to root out the wrongful nature of people recovering memories in psychotherapy which showed that their parents or carers had abused them as children, either sexually or satanically. However, the CIA has itself been involved in a major way in vast experimentation in the USA involving hideous abuse scenarios (including satanic abuse) in families and cults which it has organised for mind-control purposes (as revealed in Part 2 of my CIA article) and has deliberately set up the FMSF in order to cover up any accusations which may lead back to them.

They control the enemy.

It is widely acknowledged that the FMSF has on its advisory group many people connected with the CIA and the military. [See, eg., http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/Research/Trauma___Memory/Epidemic/epidemic.html#2 - especially the box in the sidebar on the right-hand side of the page about half-way down]. This stretches right across the USA. Researcher Alex Constantine corroborates this in his book "Psychic Dictatorship in the USA". In a section under "CIA, Satanism and Cult Abuse of Children", he writes:

"The CIA and its cover organisations have a vested interest in blowing smoke at the cult underground because the worlds of CIA mind control and many cults merge inextricably. The drum beat of "false accusations" from the media is taken up by paid operatives like Dr. [Marin] Orne and the False Memory Syndrome Foundation to conceal the crimes of the [Central Intelligence] Agency... The CIA and the Pentagon cooperate in the creation of cults... It is beginning to dawn on the psychiatric community at large that the CIA's mind control clique is a menace reminiscent of Nazi medical experimentation".

Very often all members of a CIA-created cult have to be killed to destroy the evidence. This is what lay behind the massacres at Jonestown and the Swiss and Canadian bases of the Sovereign Order of the Solar Temple. The CIA creates the cults for mind control experimental purposes and then covers its tracks afterwards in order to ensure that no link is revealed - either by carrying out a massacre of the cult members, or by setting up a professional-looking organisation to discredit claims by those who have been victimised in their cult-abuse programmes.

Thus, we see that the False Memory Syndrome Foundation and the American Family Foundation are CIA inventions which have the same purpose - controlling the enemy/opposition - both designed to prevent the discovery of CIA/US military involvement in earlier psychiatric/cult/mind control abuses.

It is not only the secular world which engages in controlling the enemy. It happens in the church too. Satan doesn't merely control the anti-Christian world system; he also controls the vast number of professing Christian churches in the world as well as the mainstream denominations. Even most evangelical and pentecostal churches are controlled by him. Once he has the elders and the pastors, he has the pulpit. Once he has the pulpit, he controls his enemy.

This is why most churches teach either garbage or nothing at all.

There are many well-meaning Christians who believe that the "American Family Foundation"/"International Cultic Studies Association" -- because of its former cute name and because it presents itself as an anti-cult organisation -- is a bona fide group worthy of support. One can understand them being deceived. It is deliberately very deceptive. However, it doesn't mean that anyone who has ever supported the AFF/ICSA at one time or another is to be condemned as part of the corrupt New World Order. That would be too silly and illogical a conclusion to jump to (although that hasn't stopped some "Christian" ministries from jumping to it).

However, if professing Christians continue to support or advocate the AFF/ICSA after they have been shown the truth about it, and especially if they begin to discredit the people who have shown it to them, then one has every right to assume they are also working for the other side.

So now you know. What next?

Do your own research. Don't just sit back and believe me. Be a Berean. Do a Google search on "American Family Foundation", CIA and MK-Ultra. Do a search on "Jolyon West", MK-Ultra and "American Family Foundation". Do a search on Cults and CIA. Do a search on "Al Qaeda" and "US invention". Become a researcher par excellence. You can find all this out for yourself, if you are willing to do so.

I can tell you this: You will notice that once you start to look into all these things for yourself (and I hope you do) and then even tell others about it, you will suddenly find that you begin to bear the brunt of attacks and defamations from the most surprising, unexpected quarters.

In the Christian scene, if you become vocal in your exposés, well-known and much-loved pastors will begin to shun you and concoct outrageous accusations against you. Believe me. It will happen. If you don't believe me, go ahead and try it, then see what comes to pass. You will be amazed. Light blue touch paper and stand well back. It will be fireworks time. You will have joined WhistleBlowers Incorporated -- one of the most fulfilling groups to be part of if you are a truth-lover. (Why do you think they've been fitting up George Galloway MP in the UK in the wake of his stupendous election victory? Why do you think that even the US Senate has been smearing George recently? Discover the answers for yourself and don't be satisfied with smart-alec smears).

Actually once your mind starts to wake up, it is as if the news invisibly travels (and I believe that there is as esoteric satanic activity behind this). Somehow, people will know that you are awake without you even saying a word. The evil posers of the world will know who you are. I tell you, they can smell you a mile away.

Once you've woken up, you only have to walk into a room and you will see certain people shudder at your presence and despise you. It won't be paranoia. To lovers of truth, you will have a sweet aroma; but to those who love falsehood and darkness, you will be the foulest of stenches. Be warned. I doubt that I would have lasted long at that conference in Madrid. Imagine if I'd stayed in one of their two preferred hotels (with the handsome concessionary rate). They would have been crawling with "Company" men. It would have been interesting, to say the least. It proves how awake we have to be in this present world of deception and subterfuge.

Have you woken up yet? (Not a rhetorical question).

Yours, in the cause of God and truth,

ALAN MORRISON
Diakrisis International www.diakrisis.org AM@diakrisis.org

[...]

Comments from an International Member

As I see it , the main idea of this group is research - the understanding of the matrix mechanism . In this case many aspects of this research are based on our own experiences those we will be able to share only in a trustful environment .

In my opinion there is no base in such claim that we are some kind of cult because in the cult there is no such thing as a free will or respect to others or their opinions. And the fact that one of the most important group rules is to respect other believes and opinions already refutes the "cult" theory.

All the people in this group decided to be here because they wish to learn to understand the infinite layers of our reality And it's an enormous and very hard work . Most of the people don't like to work hard and looking for a shortcuts or in the worst case looking to destroy or sabotage . There were several people that tried this tactic in our group . It didn't work and they were throw out of this group .

Now I understand the anger and frustration of those people that couldn't complete their task if they had any agenda at all. (which is obvious that they had). They didn't have any success from the inside so in hopeless attempt they will try anything from the outside including this ridiculous claim as us being a cult . Any intelligent and reasonable person can join this group and see for himself . There is no secrets in this group, only the secrets we are still working to uncover. [...]

Quotations:
bullet

"...if you believe in it, it is a religion or perhaps 'the' religion;
and if you do not care one way or another about it, it is a sect;
but if you fear and hate it, it is a cult." Leo Pfeffer. A humorous quotation, but one that is uncomfortably close to reality.
bullet

"Cults are claimed to be deceitful. They are claimed to be harmful to their members. They are claimed to be undermining American values. Cults are claimed to be just about every bad thing in the book these days, and with the pervasive images of Manson and Jim Jones hanging over us, any group that is called a cult is immediately associated with those two people." J. Gordon Melton.
bullet

"My working definition of a cult is a group that you don't like, and I say that somewhat facetiously, but at the same time, in fact, that is my working definition of a cult. It is a group that somebody doesn't like. It is a derogatory term, and I have never seen it redeemed from the derogatory connotations that it picked up in the sociological literature in the 1930s." J. Gordon Melton.

horizontal rule
Meanings of the word "cult":

The English word "cult" comes from the French "culte," which came from the Latin word "cultus" (care and adoration), which came from the Latin word "colere" (to cultivate).

There is no generally accepted, single, current definition for the word "cult," or for many other religious terms. This leads to confusion over the meanings of certain religious terms, such as Christian, cult hell, heaven, occult, Paganism, salvation, Witch, Witchcraft, Unitarian, Universalist, Voodoo, etc. A reader must often look at the context in which the word is used in order to guess at the intent of the writer.

In the newsgroup alt.usage.english, terms like this one are often called "skunk words." They have varied meanings to different people. In fact, they have so many meanings that they often cause misunderstandings wherever they are used. Unfortunately, most people do not know this, and naturally assume that the meaning that they have been taught is the universally accepted definition of the term.

The term "Unitarian" is a good example:
bullet Pre-1776 CE: Belief in a single God and the rejection of the Christian concept of the Trinity.
bullet Post-1775: A creedless, dogma-free religious organization. The Unitarian Universalist Association, (UUA) is an association of Unitarian congregations.

Utter confusion reigns when an author is using one definition of "Unitarian," while a reader assumes the other meaning. Misunderstandings also happen when an author assumes that both definitions refer to the same organization or belief.

Perhaps the most confusing and dangerous religious term is "Cult". The word is derived from the French word "culte" which came from Latin noun "cultus." The latter is related to the Latin verb "colere" which means "to worship or give reverence to a deity." Thus, in its original meaning, the term "cult" can be applied to any group of religious believers: Southern Baptists or Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses or Catholics, Hindus or Muslims. However, the term has since been assigned at least 7 new and very different meanings. The original meaning of "cult" remains positive; more recent definitions are neutral, negative, or extremely negative:
bullet Positive Meaning:
bullet Theological usage: Oxford English Dictionary defined "cult" as:
bullet "worship; reverential homage rendered to a divine being or beings"
bullet "a particular form or system of religious worship; especially in reference to its external rites and ceremonies"
bullet devotion or homage to a particular person or thing."

This is the historical meaning of the word, but is rarely today heard outside of religious circles. A reference to the "Cult of Mary" appeared in a newspaper report on the Pope's 1999 visit to the Americas. It simply means that the Pope devotes special attention to the Virgin Mary.
bullet Neutral Meanings:
bullet Sociological usage: A small religious group that exists in a state of tension with the predominant religion. Hinduism might be considered a cult in North America; Christianity might be considered a cult in India.
bullet Additional sociological usage: An innovative, fervent religious group, as contrasted with more established and conventional sects and denominations.
bullet The Observer: An English newspaper seemed to use the term to refer to any small religious group, no matter what its age or teachings. 1
bullet General religious usage: A small, recently created, religious organization which is often headed by a single charismatic leader and is viewed as an spiritually innovative group. A cult in this sense may simply be a new religious movement on its way to becoming a denomination. The Christian religion, as it existed in 30 CE might be considered a cult involving one leader and 12 or 70 devoted disciples as followers. The Mormon denomination was started in the 19th century by Joseph Smith and a few followers; it has grown to become an established denomination in excess of ten million members.
bullet Negative Meanings:
bullet Evangelical Christian and Counter-Cult Movement usage: Any religious group which accepts most but not all of the historical Christian doctrines (the divinity of Jesus, virgin birth, the Trinity, salvation, etc.). The implication is that the cult's theology is invalid; they teach heresy. Under this definition, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormons), Unification Church and Jehovah's Witnesses to be cults. But they would not classify Wicca as such, because it is not associated with Christianity. The earliest use of this meaning of the word "Cult" is believed to be a 1938 book "The Chaos of the Cults" by J.K. VanBaalen. On the other hand, new religious groups such as the Mormons, Unification Church and Jehovah's Witnesses generally regard themselves to be the true Christian church. They view all other denominations as being in error. Thus, one groups true church is another group's cult.
bullet Fundamentalist Christian usage: Some Fundamentalists would accept the Evangelical definition of cult defined above. Others might brand any religious group which deviates from historical Protestant Christian beliefs as a cult. This definition would include the Mormon Church, Wicca, mainline and liberal Christian denominations, Islam, Hinduism, and all of the other religions of the world. Over 70% of humanity would belong to cults, by this definition.
bullet Mental Health Groups and anti-cult movement usage: A small number of therapists, research psychologists, self-taught individuals, etc., form the anti-cult movement (ACM) They attempt to raise public consciousness about what they see as dangerous and authoritarian mind control cults and doomsday cults. Many do not care about the faith group's theology. They target only what they see as deceptive practices, and dangerous psychological pressure techniques, such as brainwashing. The ACM appears to hold opinions about the effectiveness of brainwashing that are not shared by the mental-health community generally. They see mind control/doomsday cults as a widespread social problem.
bullet Very negative meaning:
bullet Popular, media usage: (very negative meaning) a small, evil religious group, often with a single charismatic leader, which engages in brainwashing and other mind control techniques, believes that the end of the world is imminent, and collects large amounts of weaponry in preparation for a massive war. Often used as a synonym for mind control religious group or for doomsday cult. The earliest use of this meaning of the word is believed to have been in a 1965 book by Walter Martin "The Kingdom of the Cults" (revised and expanded posthumously by Hank Hanegraaff in 2002).

We have seen "cult" used to refer to Evangelical denominations, the Roman Catholic Church, Unification Church, Church of Scientology, United Church of Christ, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Wiccans, other Neopagans and many other faith groups. The term is essentially meaningless.

Past uses of the term "cult":
bullet The original meaning of the word "cult" was to define a form or style of worship, as described above. It is still used in this way within theological circles.
bullet During the 1920s and 1930s, sociologists who were studying religion started to use it to refer to those faith groups that were not full denominations or sects. According to J. Gordon Melton, "They were a group that just didn’t fit, and they were termed cults. They were treated primarily as esoterica in American religion." 3
bullet During the 1930s, the Christian counter-cult movement (CCM) used the term mainly to describe two groups of faith groups:
bullet Those who were non-Christian.
bullet Those who deviated from conservative Protestantism.

This was the most common use of the term until the 1970s.
bullet During the 1970s, the mostly secular anti-cult movement (ACM) used the term to refer to groups who used advanced psychological tools to manipulative their membership, capture their allegiance, and reduce them to near-zombie status.

The main opposition to the CCM and ACM have been:
bullet Academics who study the emergence of new religions. They have shown that new religious movements have been continually created for millennia. Some grow into unique religions or denominations within existing religions.
bullet Mental health professionals specializing in the study of psychological manipulation. They have studied new religious movements and found that the vast majority are harmless. People join these small faith groups because they feel that the group offers something of value at that stage in their life. Members typically leave after a few years.

The ACM and CCM refer to these academics and professionals by the derogatory term "cult apologists."

horizontal rule
Recommended use of the term "cult":
bullet In 1998-MAY, the Associated Press decided to avoid the use of the word "cult" because it had acquired a pejorative aura; they have since given preference to the term "sect."
bullet In 1990-FEB, an editorial by Terry Muck in Christianity Today -- the largest Evangelical magazine in the U.S. -- recommended that Christians should avoid using the word. He cited three reasons:
bullet "The spirit of fair play suggests it is best to refer to groups of people as they refer to themselves."
bullet "There is also a theological reason for avoiding [the label, for it wrongly implies that certain sinners] are the worst kind."
bullet "It simply does not work well to use disparaging terms to describe the people whom we hope will come to faith in Christ.... In fact, we are commanded to love them as ourselves."
bullet We recommend that the word "cult" never be used in reports, articles, essays, sermons, etc. without careful definition in advance -- and perhaps not even then. The negative associations linked to the word are so intense that its use will automatically lead to confusion and misunderstanding.

We recommend:
bullet Using a term such as "new religious movement," "alternative religious movement," "emergent religion or faith group." These terms are more precise and have not (yet) been burdened by so many negative connotations, as has "cult."
bullet Using a term such as "heretical" or "spiritual counterfeit" to describe a faith group with whom you disagree on theological grounds. But be aware that the words "heretical" and "heresy" are relative terms. If group "A" considers group "B" to be heretical, then group "B" will probably consider group "A" to also be heretical. They will both be right, relative to their own belief system.
bullet An even better usage is to simply refer to the group by its formal name.

Of course, if you are an author, public speaker or teleminister who wants to direct public fear and hatred against a new religious group, then "cult" is an ideal word to use. But the use of the term may be irresponsible and immoral, depending upon your system of values. We suspect, but cannot prove, that some Internet web sites, including many:
bullet Counter-cult groups -- those who mainly attack Christian denominations and sects which promote novel beliefs, and
bullet Anti-cult groups -- those who attack high-intensity new religious movements which require a strong commitment from their members,

intentionally use the term "cult" for manipulative purposes. They hope that their visitors will bring with them fear and loathing of dangerous faith groups, like the former Branch Davidians or Heaven's Gate, and transfer these negative feelings to such denominations as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and the Jehovah's Witnesses.

This web site normally refers only to "doomsday faith groups" -- ones who have experienced loss of life among their membership -- as "cults."

horizontal rule
Meaning of the word "denomination:"

A Denomination is an established religious group, which has usually been in existence for many years and has geographically widespread membership. It typically unites a group of individual congregations into a single administrative body. Denominations differ greatly in the sharing of power between individual congregations and the central authority. Baptist churches have historically allowed individual churches to hold diverse beliefs. (An exception is the Southern Baptists Convention who reversed centuries of tradition and expelled some congregations over their treatment of homosexuals.) Other denominations, like the Roman Catholic Church, centralize authority, and allow congregations little freedom to deviate in beliefs, practices, or policies.

horizontal rule
Meaning of the word "sect:"

A Sect is a small religious group that is an offshoot of an established religion or denomination. It holds most beliefs in common with its religion of origin, but has a number of novel concepts which differentiate them from that religion.

However, in many countries, the term "sect" takes on the negative meanings associated with the word "cult." The two terms are considered synonyms in some cases.

Many religions started as Sects. One well-known example was the Nazarenes. This was an reform movement within Judaism formed by Jesus' apostles after the execution of Jesus circa 30 CE They were largely dispersed or killed some four decades later when the Romans attacked Jerusalem and destroyed the temple.

Perhaps the most obvious North American example of a sect that evolved into a denomination is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Mormons. Their founder, Joseph Smith, had a revelation from God that the ministry of Jesus Christ continued after his crucifixion, as described in what is now called the Book of Mormon. The Mormon sect has since evolved into the Mormon denomination of Christianity with the passage of time and the gathering of increasing numbers of followers. Within a few decades, it is expected to become the dominant faith group in the American west. When statehood was being considered for Utah, a major impediment was the beliefs and practices in the Church regarding polygyny. Shortly after a new revelation from God banned the practice, statehood was granted. This caused a number of small sects to break away from the established church, in order to allow their male followers to continue to have multiple wives. Some of these sects continue to this day in the United States and Canada, although they have been excommunicated by the main Mormon Church. A similar crisis occurred in the mid 1970's when a new revelation from God abolished the church's institutionalized racism against African-Americans. This time, the membership accepted the new ruling; there were no breakaway sects.

Sects can therefore be considered a normal mechanism by which new religious movements are generated. Most sects die out quickly; others linger; still others grow and evolve in to a new established religious movement and are properly called denominations.

There remains a negative connotation for many people to the word sect; they would much rather refer to their faith group as a denomination.

We recommend that the term "sect" never be used in articles, speeches, essays, sermons, etc., unless it is carefully defined in advance -- and often not even then. We suggest that the faith group be simply referred to by its formal name, or as a new religious movement.

horizontal rule
References:

1. An English newspaper, the Observer maintained a page dealing with what they call "cults". Unfortunately, they mixed together a variety of new religious groups, dangerous life threatening cults and small established faith groups. The only common factor among the faith groups that they describe is that they are all small in membership. Many of their essays were not particularly accurate. They were at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/ Unfortunately, this link appears to be dead. their web site was once a useful example of the misuse of a emotionally biased word to raise public fear and hatred against benign religious groups.
2. Walter Martin, Hank Hanegraaff, Ed., "The Kingdom of the Cults," Bethany House, (2002). Read reviews or order this book safely from Amazon.com online book store
3. J. Gordon Melton, testimony in Alameda County Superior Court, starting 1985-MAY-20, involving the Spiritual Counterfeits Project See: http://www.contendingforthefaith.com/

Two Part Article:
Part One
Part Two

From Part Two:

But what was most intriguing above was a curious reference to Rick Ross being involved in the government attack on Waco.

Now, keep in mind, again, we are in no way defending David Koresh and his group or their beliefs - we are just defending their right to have them UNMOLESTED. Those who claim that Koresh was a psychopath or a pedophile may be right for all we know, but due process of law was not applied in the Koresh case. They were literally burned at the stake based on what seems to have been the word of Rick Ross. Men, women and children died because of it. And we certainly can draw a comparison to the present Bush Administration's approach to Iraq and their purported WMDs.

Some of you may recall that the bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma was linked to the Waco incident. At the same time, there were other hints that the Oklahoma bombing was somehow linked to Islamic terrorism. Also of extreme interest is the fact that Rick Ross does not consider Satanists and Wiccans as "cultic," and we are well aware that Wiley, Most et al are heavily invested in promoting Black Magic and infiltrating the Earth Centered Wiccan groups.

I can't take Swerdlow seriously. Why? I am a scientist. I look at things in a somewhat different way than other people. I am more critical. I am even more critical than most of my colleagues. So, when I see a statement like this

"Any channeled information is crap. It is 100% disinformation."

"All channeling is disinformation." And "channeling is a satellite transmission."

I get very suspicious. Why so?

I immediately see that he speaks plain nonsense - in THESE sentences. But when I see someone speaking nonsense in couple of sentences, and when this somebody is so affirmative - THEN I can't take this person seriously in all the rest.

What are the facts? What are the possibilities?

all right, there is a possibility that some (most?) of the channeling TODAY comes via satellites or other means of programming. That IS possible.

The next question is : WHY?

The evident answer is: to twist, to disinform, via New Age-type naive people.

Can the Cassiopaean channeling come the same way?

It is not so easy. We are not naive. We are critical. We think, we analyze. We test and research.

Could SOME of our "communications" have been influenced this way?

YES. There is such a possibility.

Can ALL, or even 95% be received this way?

NO. Because there are too many instances in which the Cassiopaeans were answering questions to which normal "satellite type" of intelligence, without being able to instantly read the minds of everyone on this planet, could not have had access.

Therefore, I think, Stewart's statement that ALL channeling crap and disinformation, and that 95% is via satellites shows that

a)He is not able to think logically,
b) he is not interested in discovering the truth.

And this is the main difference between our approach. While we are ready to question everything, and ALWAYS look for new facts, other individuals declare "WE KNOW THE TRUTH". Here it is! And then we find one or another easily detectable nonsense statement that is claimed to be absolute, and this discredits everything else they say.

I think it is more probable that OUR channeling is similar to old channeling, known for ages. My Mother was talking to spirits using a porcelain dish. Spirits were talking to her. She was scared. She was not in new age, she was a little old lady. There was no point for satellites to waste their energy and computing power to talk to my Mother.

You see what I mean? The devil, as always, is in the details.

Whenever someone claims: "All white is black" - I get suspicious. And I am turned off to everything else they say. Not because "white being black" is impossible, we know there ARE paradoxes, but BECAUSE the person uses this three letter word: "all".

As for parallel realities. Yes, probably this is part of the clue. As for satellites trying, once in a while, their dirty tricks - yes this is possible. And we ARE taking it into account. But ALWAYS we are trying to apply our 3rd density logical thinking, our 3rd density "judgment". This 3rd density reality check is NEVER SUFFICIENT when dealing with 4th density forces, but it is ALWAYS NECESSARY. Which means, in practical terms: 1) ALWAYS USE IT TO THE MAX. 2) NEVER THINK THAT YOU CAN RELY COMPLETELY ON IT ALONE!

What I want to state clearly: this channeling, the Cassiopaean channeling IS different than other channeling. It was different from the very beginning, it continues to be so, and it will continue to be different. We may give it a name: Critical Channeling. It is such by an intent, not by a chance. It is a channeling in which, by an intent, the messenger is as important as the message itself. They are inseparably entangled in a quantum way; an interfering quantum amplitude. They form a oneness, a whole. To separate the message from the messenger would be, in this Cassiopaean quantum experiment, like closing one hole in a double slit experiment. You close one hole, and the whole pattern is different, not just a part of it.

What is this "Critical Channeling?" In what way is it different than other channeling?

It would take a lot of space and time to describe it in details. One day we will do it. But for now, let me just make this observation: the Cassiopaean channeling has characteristics of a scientific experiment. Think of scientists in their lab, working on the great laws of the universe. They perform an important series of experiments. They are trained professionals, they know their stuff, they know their laboratory equipment and its quirks. But they are human beings. Once in a while someone will make some dirty joke, once in a while they will have to discard a series of data, because mice have messed up their equipment during the night. Now, think, what advantage it would be if they would write in their paper the dirty joke, include the mice data, the ink blobs etc. etc.

That is not the way of science. And the Cassiopaean experiment will proceed as a scientific one. With scientific standards in mind. The Cassiopaean channeling is Critical Channeling. It is in this respect that it is DIFFERENT from other channeling. And it will stay so.

The difference is in the approach. We are searching for the truth. Swerdlow is sure that he knows it, and he would like to impose it on other people, or manipulate other people, into believing what he says. When he states something - it comes from Oversoul and God-Mind. But when someone else dares to have a different way of finding the truth - it is necessarily "100% disinformation" and "crap."

We try to share our thoughts, and when necessary, we are ready to learn and CHANGE. And that is what is most important. This attitude of being open.

What if Swerdlow is right? Even if I consider it as highly improbable, what if he IS right? Can he be right?

Of course, being a scientist, and using my brain in order to judge, I had to consider also this possibility, however improbable it may it look to me. And I concluded that he cannot be right. Here is my reasoning: it goes via "reductio ad absurdum" - which is often used in logic and in mathematical proofs. You assume something to be true, and then by a chain of logical deductions you come to the conclusion that your assumption cannot be true. Somewhat tricky - but useful.

Applying this method to Swerdlow and his claim that "all channeling is 100% disinformation because it is coming via satellite". Let us suppose it is true. In order to be true it must include the capability of reading and controlling EVERYBODY'S mind at ALL times.

But if that is the case, then why would Swerdlow be exempt from this control?

Therefore, by logic, Swerdlow is also being influenced by programming and by satellites (if everybody is, then so is he). If so, then what he writes is skewed. And, because he is so loud, and so sure, about this subject, for no valid reason, it is a logical conclusion that what he is telling is NOT true, that it is disinformation.

So we see that starting from the assumption that he is right (satellites affect everybody) we come to the conclusion that what he says is wrong (because he is simply repeating the satellite disinformation). So, here we have reductio ad absurdum.

But we can go even further. Can we see a reason why Swerdlow would say such evident nonsense? Why?

Well, here we can have a hypothesis too. If, as we know by the above analysis, NOT ALL channeling is from satellites, that SOME channeling can provide us with real information from "benevolent higher beings", from "us in the future", or from "Mind-God and Oversoul", call it as you will, then it is only natural that there will be forces trying to discredit THIS channeling. So, we have solved one problem here. He calls channellers disinformation agents, and if he is right, or even partly right, then we have reasons to suppose that Swerdlow is an agent of those forces.

There is one more exercise in logical reasoning and critical thinking that comes to mind. Swerdlow is not clear about what channeling is, so let me take as a particular example using the Ouija board, as described on our pages. Why do we use Ouija board? To screen out the external disturbance. In particular to make it more difficult for satellites, or other programming signals coming from human and hybrid technology, when and if they come, to affect the message. At least two persons are needed. No rituals. Critical thinking, sometimes, joking, often coffee, fresh minds, loud discussion, and the board. Thinking in terms of possible quantum physics involved in mind-matter interactions it is clear to me that the methods we use are more likely to be robust and shielded against deliberate bombarding from outside by mind controlling signals. On the other hand, talking directly to "Mind-God" as Swerdlow does is more susceptible to interference. For example, a weak outside EM signal can be talking directly to a tiny implant in our teeth, and we will take it for on Oversoul....

So, by logical thinking and by critical analysis we came to a working hypothesis. But, please, do not jump to the conclusion that we solved all problems. Important problems are still out there and need to be addressed. The above analysis does not tell us at all WHICH channeling (if any at all) is legitimate. It gives indications. To answer this question a full analysis, that takes into account not one but many aspects, is necessary. Completely different methods must be used. If A is an opponent of B, and if we find that A is wrong, that does not mean that B is right! To see whether B is right or not - is a different problem.

Let me just note that we were discussing many times C's channeling, on these pages and with other groups, and even our present "dissidents" have admitted openly that these C's have an amazing record.

"As a professor of religious studies who specializes in research, writing, and teaching about America's alternative religions, I can tell all of you that the word "cult" has become an essentially contested concept. That is, like many other words, there is no universally agreed-upon meaning.

"Before one can know what the term means one must know the user and his or her context religiously and socially. I tell my students there are four major approaches to using the term: journalistic (tends to be sensational), theological (defines "cult" by some standard of orthodox truth), sociological (uses "cult" to describe groups that self-consciously oppose the mainstream of culture), and psychological (uses a standard of psychological manipulation and coercion).

"What counts as a cult differs by these varying definitions. All three may agree on a certain group being a "cult" such as Jim Jones' "Peoples' Temple." But a theologian might label the LDS church a "cult" simply because it diverges considerably from standard orthodox Christianity, while a sociologist would say it isn't a cult due to its size and influence."

The theological argument seems to hinge upon interpretation of religious texts, with various groups attempting to define the boundaries of what it means to be truly Christian. The argument is unlikely to be resolved any time soon given that none of the warring factors actually possess any conclusive proof.

For example, the theological approach is taken by the Christian countercult movement. It considers the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon) a cult because the church rejects the traditional doctrine of the Trinity, has scriptures in addition to the Bible, and has various other unorthodox beliefs and practices.

In the end, size and influence seem to play a major part in deciding which religious group gets awarded 'cult' status. The Catholic Church, for example, has approximately a 2000 year history, 600 million followers around the world, and vast financial resources at its disposal. It seems that this provides all the protection needed from the threat of 'cult headquarters' ever replacing the term 'Vatican' or 'cult leader' the title of 'Pope.'

Rightly or wrongly then, smaller and newly formed religious groups are much more likely to find themselves the object of scrutiny than larger established mainstream religions, regardless of the evidence or lack thereof for provable 'cultic' behavior (if such a thing even exists from the theological point of view). Of course, given the monotheistic nature and monopoly on belief held by the major organised religions, it is certainly plausible that this situation is most acceptable to them, and that they may even contribute to its perpetuation.

In a recent article for the long established Egypt weekly paper 'AL-AHRAM', Jonathan Cook, a British writer living in Nazareth, makes an interesting point about the similarity of the 'mind programming' effects attributed to 'cults' and the effects of mainstream religion (in this case Judaism). He suggests that the reason the persecution of the Palestinians at the hands of the Israeli military continues unquestioned by the Jewish people is not due to ignorance of the situation but is instead dependent upon various factors, not least of which are the dictates of Judaism, he comments:

"[It depends upon [Jews] passing through an education system that transmits historical and moral values of exclusiveness to the religious and the secular alike: premised for the former on a biblical mission to be realised by God's chosen people; and for the latter on the overriding need to provide a sanctuary for a people blighted by centuries of persecution culminating in the Holocaust.

It also depends on a military rite of passage to adulthood that cements Israelis to their society, itself perceived as their only protection from a hatred, anti-Semitism, to which -- if they are to believe their teachers, media and government -- every gentile in the world is susceptible. This is their unique fate as Jews -- and Israel is their one and only insurance policy.

Israelis who believe this -- and almost all do -- feel that they have no choice but to submit to the collective good. Not a universal good, one of values shared by all mankind, but a collective good reserved only for Jews.

Talk to Jewish anti-Zionists in Israel -- a tiny number of people, barely reaching four figures out of a total Jewish population of five million -- and most will tell you how hard they struggled to overcome the Zionist training they were given from birth. Many say they are still fighting to defeat their own racist assumptions to this day.

Jeff Halper, an academic and leading Israeli activist against army abuses in the occupied territories, recently described to me the decades-long process of "unlearning" his Zionist responses. Deprogramming is what he called it. The kind of thing we read about in the papers when vulnerable youngsters need to be revived from the dangerous ideas implanted by a cult. But how do you loosen the grip of a cult when a whole nation is under its spell?"

The other approach available to 'cult assessors' is the sociological approach. This is the approach taken by most ' and forms the basis of the most serious allegations, as it precludes the theological argument which is fraught with difficulty and in the end coming down to a matter of belief rather than verifiable facts. [...]

1. One to deny that the light bulb needs changing at all.

2. One to attack the patriotism of anyone who says the light bulb needs changing.

3. One to blame Bill Clinton for burning out the light bulb in the first place.

4. One to tell the nations of the world they must support changing the light bulb or face eternal darkness.

5. One to give a billion dollar no-bid contract to Haliburton for the new light bulb.

6. One to photograph Bush dressed as a janitor, standing on a ladder under the banner "Bulb Changing Accomplished".

7. One administration insider to resign and reveal that Bush was "in the dark" the whole time.

8. One to viciously smear No. 7 and reveal his name to Robert Novak and Judy Miller.

9. One to campaign on TV and insist that Bush had a strong
light-bulb-changing policy all along.

10. Finally, one to confuse us about the difference between screwing a light bulb and screwing the country.

In the years since the 9/11 attacks, dozens of books have sought to explore the truth behind the official version of events that day - yet to date, none of these publications has provided a satisfactory answer as to WHY the attacks occurred and who was ultimately responsible for carrying them out.

Taking a broad, millennia-long perspective, Laura Knight-Jadczyk's 9/11: The Ultimate Truth uncovers the true nature of the ruling elite on our planet and presents new and ground-breaking insights into just how the 9/11 attacks played out.

9/11: The Ultimate Truth makes a strong case for the idea that September 11, 2001 marked the moment when our planet entered the final phase of a diabolical plan that has been many, many years in the making. It is a plan developed and nurtured by successive generations of ruthless individuals who relentlessly exploit the negative aspects of basic human nature to entrap humanity as a whole in endless wars and suffering in order to keep us confused and distracted to the reality of the man behind the curtain.

Drawing on historical and genealogical sources, Knight-Jadczyk eloquently links the 9/11 event to the modern-day Israeli-Palestinian conflict. She also cites the clear evidence that our planet undergoes periodic natural cataclysms, a cycle that has arguably brought humanity to the brink of destruction in the present day.

For its no nonsense style in cutting to the core of the issue and its sheer audacity in refusing to be swayed or distracted by the morass of disinformation that has been employed by the Powers that Be to cover their tracks, 9/11: The Ultimate Truth can rightly claim to be THE definitive book on 9/11 - and what that fateful day's true implications are for the future of mankind.