Speaking of "Street Crimes," Riots, etc...

[Hervé]

Since these "things" are on the rise and on the news... this thread will give you an idea as to where they are originating and the blue print/template for any country world wide.

This thread is also a follow up on this other one: "While you were out... business as usual."

Somewhere in there you'll also learn what the real intention for water fluoridation is all about...

From Sue Arrigo:


I want to mention one other way in which I learned about the Finder’s Experiment. The name Finders comes from a CIA slang word that was popular about the time this experiment started.

It was F***ed Into Not Denying (FIND). A boss at the CIA would tell an employee “Go find out who did this”.

It was like a game of musical chairs. Everyone would deny that they did it until finally somebody was the scapegoat and was f***ed into not being able to deny it.

So the Finders acronym was a warning to people in the CIA to be careful and not get made into a fall guy for this whole Project by letting a word out about it. A person leaking such stuff usually got blamed for the stuff itself—as people outside the agency couldn’t tell who was above whom and where the buck stopped.

The first time I heard about the Finders Group was at a party. Some kids were brought in to a fancy DC estate dressed up almost in Halloween type costumes-clowns, witches, ghosts, etc. But the costumes had big buttons on back panels over the bottom so that the kids could easily have their private parts exposed. The kids were trick or treat age. But it was not fall.

There were about 15 of these kids brought into an upscale party of people in tuxes. I arrived on the arm of the DCI Colby. Men started messing with these kids sexually, putting them on their laps with their panels unbuttoned. They did not even go into a separate room to do it. I felt uncomfortable with that - it reminded me of my own abuse as a child—and I went out on the front steps to look at the night sky and imagine being on some other planet for awhile.

Colby came out and asked me if I wanted to go home—that meant back to his bed. I just couldn’t get away from this issue. I got a little mad at him and asked him who brought the kids, as if I didn’t know as a remote viewer. He was defensive and then admitted that they were part of a CIA experiment and this was their “coming out” test—their graduation test to see if they could seduce DC politicians (to stay alive).

Those who flunked the test were liquidated. I had been in that system all my life—be useful sexually or die. I was not amused. Colby went into the technical details of the experiment and a “Wasn’t it a good idea?’ type of pitch to me.

I threw up my dinner on the front steps of the estate and excused myself to go wash up in the bathroom. I was good at throwing up on cue.

What was it that Colby had said to me?

Colby explained to me that the point of the Finders' Experiment was to train children to be like drug sniffing dogs—only they were to sniff out who would make good pushers for not just drugs, but illegal weapons, sex slaves, etc.

The CIA was looking for a down line in these businesses and it wanted to use expendable agents. The CIA was having trouble explaining how many of its operative died. It never put names on the gold stars in the marble panel in the entrance way because that panel was a bald faced lie.

The CIA had lots of deaths in action of its officers. The gold stars were propaganda for the novices to con them into a sense of false security—like that the CIA cared about them. The CIA did not care how many of them died. The Rockefellers wanted their deaths. It was the GAO who cared.

Training agents was expensive. Covering up their deaths was even more expensive than that because of the expense of finding the loose ends and tying them off. So the CIA had decided, even before Colby became DCI probably, to go to the cheaper expendables to foster its trade in contraband. The kids were divided into two groups—those that received training on how to pick the people to become a pusher and make them into one, or no training.

In the no-training group you tell the kid, under hypnosis and torture what you want them to accomplish and let them figure out how to accomplish it. I grew up in that model—General Patton used it. It was cheaper. Kids died all around me. But some figured out what to do to succeed.

It had a kind of intelligence logic to it that was “if the kid has to figure out what to do on their own, maybe the KGB won’t have seen that strategy before and it will work.”

Next I want to talk about the type of training that the kids received if they were assigned to get any at all. The training consisted of two weeks of hard torture during which they were taught how to do blow jobs, spread their legs, ask for contraband to be moved and sign alias names to the right places on contract forms to “witness” them.

The contracts bound the pusher to work for the CIA front company without being able to sue. Let me say that another way. Both groups were tortured using electricity and severe pain for two weeks.

The trained kids, in addition to being told that they had to move contraband because their lives depended on it, also had a couple of hours worth of instructions and practical guidance on how to do it. What do you think were the results of the experiment?

The CIA found from this experiment that it made no appreciable difference whether the kid was trained or not. Its reports made no mention of the two weeks of torture as that was “off the record” after the 1977 MKULTRA Hearings.

They also made no mention of the type of training as the CIA wanted to hide from possible future Congressional prying eyes, that the kids were to move contraband by finding buyer-pushers.

Instead, the CIA documents said that the point of the experiment was to detect which kids could “succeed in life” and whether any training that the CIA gave them could make a difference in that.

[...]

By the way, the guards that work there are mind control subjects, “graduates” of that University Research facility. The research there has been going on a long time. It was one of the early MKULTRA facilities.

Georgetown University should be called CIA U. The mental research facility is not on the main campus near the regular college students. It is on a separate piece of land that makes it harder to run away from. The name of it is not Georgetown, but it is part of Georgetown University.

Some people at the CIA have complained that attention deficit disorder is associated with the fluoridation of water and that the CIA refused to release the data on it in order to keep getting so many almost normal kids delivered to the door of their mind control clinics around North America.

They also complain that the CIA knows the treatment for attention deficit disorder, a drug to chelate the fluoride and expel it from the body and refuses to publish that data as well.

It is true that there are a number of books on the subject for internal consumption at the CIA. An ordinary epidemiologist could look at the issue and find out if those rumors within the CIA are true.

The reason everything was limited to two weeks was that was the length of time that the in-hospital psychiatric hospitalization could maximally be extended to, to run basically healthy kids “through testing of their condition”. The CIA developed a bunch of bogus tests to run on ADD kids to justify their two-week hospitalization like “withdrawing them from sugar, food dyes, etc.”

When this University facility’s history in mind control comes to the public’s attention, it will be a little hairy. Hundreds, no thousands, of parents will suddenly want to know if their child, grown or otherwise, was a mind control subject or in the control group. I will mention in passing three fairly reliable methods of knowing that.

That information comes from CIA reports about what to do to confuse parents if they get to another therapist later, ie what disinformation to give them to prevent them from uncovering that the kid was mind controlled.

That first piece of disinformation is -- "No one can tell if a person is a mind control victim—certainly not regular family and neighbors, only a qualified therapist could know and since they can’t tell no one can."

That is given because the CIA found out that 56% of the children were discovered to have been uncovered by relatives and family members as "robotic" or "messed up in their minds" or "with inexplicable behaviors that came from outside of themselves."

Teachers were particularly good at distinguishing control kids from experimental kids, and a number of teachers near that facility were killed by the CIA—on the order of a dozen in a decade.

The second piece of disinformation that the CIA primed therapists around the world have dispended is that it is "normal" for kids to act out in their teenage years by cross-dressing. It turned out that just the opposite is true of normal teenagers. They want to define their sexual identity and not cross dress.

Teenagers are the most intolerant to cross dressing per CIA research. Unless of course, they are mind control subjects and have been trained to sexually please chicken hawks by boys dressing as girls. There is no market for girls dressed as boys so the cross dressing only goes in one direction.

Surprisingly, the CIA research showed that homosexual boys rarely cross dressed on their own at that age - unless they had been used by porn filmmakers, chicken hawks and mind controllers. So the presence of cross-dressing in a teenage boy is highly predictive that he is a mind control or abuse victim.

The third piece of disinformation that the CIA fed therapists in journals to fool them and the parents is a bit subtler. The disinformation said "There is no normal age at which children should be told about sex. Sex education can occur at any age — it is up to the parents to decide. And sex education may be bad for kids so maybe we shouldn’t have it in our schools..."

The CIA spent a lot of money to convince parents, churches, and schools not to have real sex education classes. The reason was that when kids were allowed to freely talk in a group about their sexual experiences or fantasies or theories of sex, the kids themselves could see that some of them had very different levels of exposure to and sophistication in these matters.

So if sex education had to be taught the CIA wanted canned talks in which the kids were not allowed to talk. It thus trained sex educators to control the amount kids could talk and tried to make it taboo for the kids to talk to each other afterwards.

The CIA also found out that there was a best age for sex education –about the start of puberty. So then they fostered some campaigns to force the education to be earlier. The reason for that was that some young child whose native curiosity would not lead to sophisticated knowledge of sexual action, were coming out with it in front of parents and therapists.

It was better for the CIA if they could say that the kid learned it in a sex education class than from CIA prostitution of them. So although it sounds contradictory, the CIA’s bottom line on sex education disinformation was—don’t have sex education classes, but if you must have them have them very early and don’t let kids talk at them. Make it a more taboo subject by the way you skirt it or only allow it to be taught in a very short segment and never referred to again.

The CIA sponsored conferences for sex educators under a front company call “First Dating Experiences” if I remember correctly. Or maybe just “First Experiences”. When the abstinence only people objected the name of the front company was called something like “Wait for Marriage, Inc."

It was the same front. The same staff, address etc. The CIA also pushes abstinence and marital fidelity fronts while not practicing these things themselves. It does that to increase the effectiveness of its blackmail ops.

Sexual blackmail only works when the society is condemning towards others. It is not the abstinence of fidelity that the CIA is after, it is the condemning of others it is after.

Condemning is a form of hate and the CIA provokes hate and condemning as a way of controlling others. It is a mind control technique that can then be used to get people to fight wars etc against their best interests.

The CIA is looking for “handles” into a person’s psyche—an emotional issue that drives a person to act. Then it exploits it. It also creates handles by funding songs and lyrics into existence. That is another whole level of mind control directed at a population instead of individuals.

I have gotten off track some here. This is useful information but not staying focused on the main topic.

[tests to run on ADD kids to justify their two-week hospitalization] It was a total scam. They just needed something so difficult that parents couldn’t easily do at home to con the parent into letting Johnny stay at the hospital. They withdrew the food alright. They barely fed the kids at all. They fed them out of boxes, pre-packaged potato chips like Pringles and called that a sugar free diet. The last day the parents would come to pick the kid up and the interaction was observed carefully to see how well the kid could lie about his stay and what he had eaten in the hospital.

It was a complete fantasy. The kid had been down in the basement without a bed, clothes, or single hot meal. The kids that passed had incredible abilities to make believe. So good that they even believed it. They were multiples just like me. They had gone through an hour’s hypnosis at the end of that torture and with the help of the hypnotist had imagined all that had happened to them in that two-week period of time.

The parents were told that they couldn’t see the kids because the kids needed to learn a new way to relate to them to help their ADD, and that had to be learned well before they saw them again.

The parents wanted a break from their ADD kids for 2 weeks so it worked. And the kids did relate to their parents differently after two weeks of hard torture without a hot meal. Meanwhile, some say the CIA did actually give them the fluoride chelating drug—a pill once a day so that the ADD was better. The program was popular with parents.

The University facility touted its benefits. Researchers forged results to show how effective it was and others studied how to torture the kids and split their minds more reliably.

Not all kids split well enough to pretend, or keep up the pretense. These are the ones people know of as the Finder kids. They were taken away from their parents. They were not able to find pushers in their communities, so they were sent to be sex slaves and drug mules where they didn’t have to perform at as high a level.

If they couldn’t even do that, they were killed. They were not one-use kids for the sexual/torture use of the Ultra-rich, they were already used goods. The kids that Bush Sr. was expending were kids that came to that facility that were selected to be held in reserve for his use and his use only. Their parents had applied for their son’s hospitalization but the “application had been held up.”

Bush, Sr. had a certain look of boy he liked, like the youngest boy “Eager to Beaver” in the Brady House Boys (?). They looked like he looked when he was a boy before “it happened to him” at age 6. He kept on sodomizing kids like his dad sodomized him. His father kept it up much longer than others can imagine. He kept it up until he was close to death. Some things run in families.

Would you want to see your dad if that continued to be what you had to submit to? Dark and ugly secrets that even the principals might not know—what with multiplicity being what it is. Bush, Sr. — does he even know that he goes to that base and why? I leave it to your remote viewing skills and imagination to decide.

I was not at the CIA because of my ability to imagine what loose ends there were. I was there to know what loose ends there were and failing to know could cost me my life and more than that.

The actual results were that the CIA training was not adequate in amount or quality to do anything to train a kid in pushing. So the experiment was not a test of that at all. The experiment was a cover story for how to get the kids into one’s hands.

There were lots of experiments on how to mind control kids, but it was mainly a matter of trial and error, not scientific research. There was a lot of variability due to the skills and personalities of the individual torturers. The CIA even poorly studied whether using multiple personality torturers was better to make multiple personality kids. That seemed to have some advantage sometimes—it depended on which personality they were in.

Since that was not always easy to control, it was a bit hit or miss if you used multiples for the torturers. They didn’t always know the protocols and follow them, because they were not in the personality that knew them. Yet they might still feel intuitively that it was dangerous to admit ignorance of the protocols. In the end the CIA rarely used multiples as torturers in experiments—they were too unreliable. One multiple helped a child escape and that caused a big flap.

That multiple was me. Bush, Sr. wanted me to torture a child in his family into being an "oracle" like I had been tortured into being an oracle. This was just one of several attempts that Bush, Sr. made to try to get "my" powers to belong directly to his family. I was training officers in remote viewing just fine without any torture or brainwashing at all.

[…]

Oh, I said that I would say something about the lives of those kids that went through that university facility. The torture was unimaginable bad for two weeks.

After that they had to report once a week or so to a CIA case officer on a corner near their school to give him a signed contract. If the kid did not deliver—did not seduce his parents friends and blackmail them into pushing for the CIA, or in some other way get a person that week to agree to push drugs, hand guns, or pimp girls, then the CIA put the heat on him. That could take a variety of forms and was largely up to the imagination of the case officer.

The simplest method was to bully the kid by twisting his arm or threatening him or his parents with death, dismemberment or torture. That was usually enough to get the kid to deliver. The kids ranged in age from about 6 to 16. The case officers preferred the younger ones—about age 8 to 10—they still tried to obey without a lot of flak. There was a quota system. The kid had to make a certain amount of money for the CIA each month.

If he didn’t he could be disappeared into the "Finder’s Den". Those kids had it much worse. Sometimes a case officer would take the kid to see those whorehouse drug dens to impress upon the kid not to screw up. The kids that ended up in the Finder’s Den were already severely traumatized before they arrived. Torture, whether it is consciously remembered or not, has a crippling effect on the mind. It is worse than broken bones. Bones heal up. Violated trust does not.

The kids made a kickback, a small "finder’s" fee for delivering each pusher. It amounted to about a 100 a month. It was a lot of money for poor kids. Occasionally a parent figured out that the kid was being paid; and not for mowing lawns either.

A few parents sent other of their kids into the program to get a second dividend coming into the household. More often other kids noticed this extra money and wanted to know how to get it. As a result some kids got sucked into this CIA net to make money not knowing what was involved.

This was a national program. I am only talking about one facility. The failures ended up at Finder’s Dens, or dead. These kids were not usually sold into sexual slavery to independent brothel owners in the US.

They had been mind controlled at a fixed facility and had they remembered that it could have exposed that affiliated university to negative publicity and lawsuits. They were however sold overseas if they screwed up.

Part of the reason the CIA ran this program was because it felt like it was losing too much of the contraband profits to the middle men. Using kids like that, got rid of most of that expense.

It was against the child labor laws but the CIA and multinational Cabal did not care. If the kid was arrested by the police, the CIA just cut him loose and denied that they knew him. The kid could not prove it was the CIA. The case officers did not show them their badges or meet them at headquarters. A kid who was arrested spent time in juvenile detention. Sometimes they committed murder and big offenses to move the goods and ended up in the adult prisons.

At one point I looked at the issue of crime in the US. About 40% of crime in the US is directly due to the CIA. These kids were a major part of that.

The CIA only wanted to run them about 2 years. Then they were too streetwise to be easy to handle. After that they had to go independent or work for the competition if they wanted to continue making money that way. Some had no mental freedom to do otherwise because the mind control was not undone—it was merely not re-enforced and maintained.

Many ended up as pimps even at age 12 to 16. The CIA was having them sell tricks on the street for girls in its brothels or in any hotel room that it housed a sex slave in.

When the CIA turned the children loose, they sold their sister or their girlfriend, or the mentally retarded girl down the street. They knew by then how to hustle. They knew how to lie. And many of them figured out how to bribe the police to look the other way. They learned those things from the case officer and the pressure they were under not to get washed out to sea in the rip current to a foreign land.

Why end up as a sex slave in Saudi Arabia if you could live at home and work for yourself? Some sold their own bodies on the street. But they couldn’t usually make enough dough that way to satisfy the quota.

It was mainly a side line in case they couldn’t move the goods and had to make up a little on the side. The quota amounted to a profit of about $3,000 a month for the CIA, or about $40,000 per year. It was more than an average man’s income at the time. The bosses got roughly $33,000 per kid—about a full adult salary. So 3 kids were 100,000 a year for them, 30 were a million, 300 were 10 million, 3,000 were 100 million, and 30,000 were a billion. This was a worldwide operation, although in poorer countries the financial yields were different.

The drug trade is a big business. These kids were the child soldiers in it. They died of gun shot wounds, of suicide, of high speed get-away car crashes in stolen cars, of AIDS, of gang rapes, and of gang warfare. About 30% were dead by the time the CIA wanted to let them go two years later. It was about 20 times the expected death rate.

The CIA tried to figure out how to make 90% of them “phased out” of life by then so they couldn’t talk later. They fostered gangs and fueled gang warfare to do it. They supplied the names of the kids on the opposite side and gave bounties for their deaths of about $800. They got the extinction rate up to almost 90% by the end of the kids “useful life” to them.

Talk to the kids that survived in LA in the Bloods and the Crips. Talk to them about how they decided who to kill next.

To join the gang you had to kill. To make top dog you had to keep killing. The names were delivered with the money and the goods to sell. If you didn’t move goods you didn’t stay free. To move goods you had to have them.

To get them you had to kill a person on the list you got before the next delivery of goods or you didn’t get any. The reason for killing them was explained as “they are hurting our business—they are working for the opposition. Get them.”

The CIA was running both the Bloods and the Crips in LA. The opposition was a mirage. They wanted the kids dead after two years.

The CIA already knew where the kid lived and who it was selling to. If they wanted a kid gone, they made one call. The police came to the house and arrested the child or the CIA kidnappers arrived at the school and stole the kid.

Some kids tried to run and some managed to stay underground. But most did not understand that it was a nationwide and global problem. Setting up business in another city didn’t necessarily protect you.

I want to say a little bit more about how I knew about this “kill the kid” scheme because it is relevant to the issue of how trust worthy the information is. The CIA wanted me, as a past child assassin, to train some of these kids. They figured that since they had forced me to kill as a child of 9, that I should be able to help them force these kids to kill for them. It was almost a reasonable assumption. But it was also true that I had learned as a child how not to kill people starting at age 10, even while I was inside the CIA. That was a much harder thing to learn to do because the pressure at the CIA was all running in the direction of killing.
The assignment was handed to me by the DCI Gates, the DCI for Bush Sr. as President. He wanted me to go to Bakersfield, California, about a 3 hour drive from where I lived and train a gang of kids how to kill.

To be specific, Gates at a meeting told a group of us, senior CIA people, about the new initiative—the plan to phase out the “down-line” kids after 2 years instead of cutting them loose. He explained that this was necessary because the kids were too unruly and uppity after two years to obey the CIA officer.

However, cutting them loose meant that a good 20% of them ended up working for the opposition or for themselves. They thus became competition and cut into the Cabal’s profits. I pointed out that the 2-year limit was arbitrary and it was unfair to waste the kids. In fact, about 40% continued to be good producers and obedient. So even if one ascribed to the idea that the unruly should be killed, which I did not, this 2-year policy was blatantly unjust. And the 60% were unruly criminals only because the CIA had made them that way starting from kids they had selected as well-behaved and intelligent.


But Gates refused to change the policy, which was set by the Cabal on the recommendation of an independent think tank on how to maximize Cabal profits. So even though 3 times in this meeting of about 15 people, I object to this program for various moral reasons I got nowhere.

I recommended that the CIA at least study how to assess these kids as to which were worth retaining with an eye to their moving up into the CIA later. It was a stalling maneuver on my part to try to delay the execution order. Gates would not consider it. He was going to obey this execution order without delay. The kids were to do the executions of each other.

It reminded me of the purge when I was 9, when only 3 of over a thousand of us survived the purge. I wanted to cry. I stared out the window of the 7th floor at the tops of the trees in the distance while Gates kept on talking. He complained that I was ignoring him. I wasn’t ignoring him. I was thinking about what it would take for me to throw him through the glass pane to his death.

After I figured out how I could do it, I thought about whether it would actually stop the kids from being executed by the Cabal. When, sadly, I saw by looking at the future that it would not, I gave up the plan.

At that moment, Gates turned to me and told me that I was to be one of his bodyguards that night. That was not an unusual assignment—I often did some bodyguard work for DCIs at night—usually while in their beds. Fortunately, Gates was not requiring me to do it from his bed. He just wanted me with him that night so he could get me to play a Russian Chess master. I mention that because as I was in the middle of playing Gufeld (sp) and winning, it occurred to me that if I could beat a competent chess master using my remote viewing skills I should be able to figure out how to outwit Gates and prevent the execution order from going forward the next week.

The next day, instead of throwing Gates out of a window of the 7th floor, I threw his chess set out the window. I was accused of littering. I used the opportunity to get out of the rest of the meeting, the second part on implementing the execution order.

As I picked up the chess pieces, I was crying and imaging them to be those children. I put them in the box and then feeling rather irrationally that I had just accidentally put them in prison, I took them out and lined them up on the sidewalk as if to start a chess game. A high-ranking analyst, the equivalent of the number 2 man in the dept. happened by and we started playing a game of chess on the sidewalk.

Part way through as he was losing he said, “You seem upset. This isn’t like you. Is there anything I can do to help?”

I burst into tears and then explained the execution order. He listened patiently and then he said, “Oh, I think that I could hold that up for at least a good 6 months.” He was as good as his word. He managed to initiate “crucial” studies of the cost-benefit ratio of the plan.

Unfortunately, even his own analysts concluded that it was more cost effective to kill them all after 2 years than to have the case officers assess them as to which should not be terminated. The logic of that went something like, “If the officers have to decide which to save, they will want to save their favorites. And having decided to save the kids that they personally are screwing in their beds, they will be tempted to save some others as well.

Since any one of them talking could destroy the revenue stream of the Agency, then none should be excluded from this necessary measure.” That appalled me.

The only reason that the CIA could think of for saving a person was to go on screwing them in bed. I thought about that with respect to my own position in the CIA. As useful as my remote viewing skills were, it was true that I, as a slave, probably would not have survived had I not regularly been in the beds of the DCIs.

I did go to Bakersfield and meet with the gang of largely 13 year olds. I did not teach them how to kill well. I taught them how to die well. I was quite honest with them. I explained to them that the CIA wanted them dead after two years on the job and intended to get them to kill their buddies.

There was only one gang in Bakersfield to speak of and I had been sent to that city because the CIA was not sure how to get a single gang to kill itself. They assumed that I would figure out how to split it in two in a divide and conquer strategy.

When I finished explaining this to these normally loud and restless youths, the recreation hall was dead silent. One of them asked me what I recommended they do.

They could see for themselves that it was easy to split them into warring fractions and get them to fight other. I told them that I recommended that they learn to die protecting each other.

“Against the whole CIA?” one girl asked anxiously.

“Why not?” I asked. “It doesn’t matter how many people you have gunning for you if you can have the satisfaction of dying to protect a friend.”

They understood that. These teenagers that had been running drugs and pimping for the CIA, understood that they could get personal satisfaction from helping a friend.

So I taught them how to die for each other. How to put their bodies in front of another while others aimed a gun at them or swung two by fours at them.

We practiced it a couple of hours together. That was all the time I had with them.

The execution order came down about 8 months later. The CIA sent in another person into Bakersfield to divide and conquer them. He tried and then wrote a report saying that he didn’t know what I had done, but the kids had such solidarity with each other that nothing he did to divide them worked.

None of those kids died. The CIA could not get them to kill each other and by the grace of God, the police refused to arrest them. I heard later that as a group they voted to go straight and stop pimping for the CIA.

No doubt the CIA recruited other kids through mind control measures. It was only a small victory against evil but it was a victory none-the-less.

I managed to report this intervention on my part as an important research study on non-violent resistance and since the CIA had some interest in learning about the methods that could be used against them, they accepted that explanation. It was because of good skills that I managed to survive.

Not long after the execution order went into effect, there was backlash against it from the case officers in the field. Some quit.

Some refused to carry it out and some simply carried it out so ineffectively that is was like not carrying it out at all. In some cases warring gangs figured out what was going on and created truces to stop it.

But mostly, the gangs fought each other and children in the US died like they did in third world countries of the US policies of men who care for Profits, Not People (see Chomsky’s book of that title.) Children died alone of gunshot wounds in back alleys afraid to go to the hospital for fear of arrest, or worse—the torture they had suffered at the hands of the mind controllers.

Children got pregnant and had babies while they themselves were 11, 12, and 13 because the CIA had in effect forced their brothers to prostitute them to stay alive. And a whole safety of culture, of believing that a child could walk to the corner store safely, died under the CIA’s villainy.

Corrupt politicians and agencies led to violence on the street and disruption of family life. American went from a society where one could leave one’s house unlock to one in which it was not safe to let your children out of one’s sight. And it happened in a single generation from the start of the CIA in 1947 until now.





So, I guess that Cameron will have to get rid of the British intelligence services if he really wants to efficiently fight street crimes... see: https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post284146

Never mind the "War on Drugs" bit.

[Lord Sidious]

I read the first few paragraphs and that was enough.
The '''people'' who run this ''programme'' make the darkness in me stir.
The urge to be the hangman/axeman for them is strong, very strong.
It is that judgement thing again, or is it the protection of the weak thing?
Dunno, but keep your eyes on me when these guys are around and hide anything sharp.

[Hervé]

Posted by Lord Sidious (here)
I read the first few paragraphs and that was enough.
The '''people'' who run this ''programme'' make the darkness in me stir.
The urge to be the hangman/axeman for them is strong, very strong.
It is that judgement thing again, or is it the protection of the weak thing?
Dunno, but keep your eyes on me when these guys are around and hide anything sharp.

Here are the stats regarding these people:

Posted by Amzer Zo (here)
[...]

REVERSE CHRISTIANITY - THE RELIGION OF PRESIDENTS, POLITICIANS & DCIs

They go on practicing Christianity by mouth by day, and satanism by night in their deeds. Some of them are mind controlled by the trauma and drugs at the initial ceremony and do not even know later that they are satanists. Others do know.

I would say that about 20 percent are fully aware that what they are doing is evil and wrong and just don't know how to stop it. About 50 know what they are doing but deny that it is evil.

They excuse it as their right to be pagan and uninhibited. Then about 10 percent are full multiples and are clueless during the day as to what is happening at night.

Then about another 20 percent are too lazy and apathetic to think about what they are doing. They are just doing it because others do it.

[...]

The only trouble with depriving them of a functioning body is that, then, no one would know where the hell they gonna walk into... as in hands-on influencing... so, there would need to be a welcoming committee on the other side as well.

Sue's solution, from an RVer point of view, is quite elegant and effective: Get enough people to accurately read the Akashic Records in order to nail them and prevent them from hiding behind lies... that way you could prevent you blood from reaching its boiling point.

[Hervé]

Considering this section:

When this University facility’s history in mind control comes to the public’s attention, it will be a little hairy. Hundreds, no thousands, of parents will suddenly want to know if their child, grown or otherwise, was a mind control subject or in the control group. I will mention in passing three fairly reliable methods of knowing that.

That information comes from CIA reports about what to do to confuse parents if they get to another therapist later, ie what disinformation to give them to prevent them from uncovering that the kid was mind controlled.

That first piece of disinformation is -- "No one can tell if a person is a mind control victim—certainly not regular family and neighbors, only a qualified therapist could know and since they can’t tell no one can."

That is given because the CIA found out that 56% of the children were discovered to have been uncovered by relatives and family members as "robotic" or "messed up in their minds" or "with inexplicable behaviors that came from outside of themselves."

Teachers were particularly good at distinguishing control kids from experimental kids, and a number of teachers near that facility were killed by the CIA—on the order of a dozen in a decade.

The second piece of disinformation that the CIA primed therapists around the world have dispended is that it is "normal" for kids to act out in their teenage years by cross-dressing. It turned out that just the opposite is true of normal teenagers. They want to define their sexual identity and not cross dress.

Teenagers are the most intolerant to cross dressing per CIA research. Unless of course, they are mind control subjects and have been trained to sexually please chicken hawks by boys dressing as girls. There is no market for girls dressed as boys so the cross dressing only goes in one direction.

Surprisingly, the CIA research showed that homosexual boys rarely cross dressed on their own at that age - unless they had been used by porn filmmakers, chicken hawks and mind controllers. So the presence of cross-dressing in a teenage boy is highly predictive that he is a mind control or abuse victim.

The third piece of disinformation that the CIA fed therapists in journals to fool them and the parents is a bit subtler. The disinformation said "There is no normal age at which children should be told about sex. Sex education can occur at any age — it is up to the parents to decide. And sex education may be bad for kids so maybe we shouldn’t have it in our schools..."

The CIA spent a lot of money to convince parents, churches, and schools not to have real sex education classes. The reason was that when kids were allowed to freely talk in a group about their sexual experiences or fantasies or theories of sex, the kids themselves could see that some of them had very different levels of exposure to and sophistication in these matters.

So if sex education had to be taught the CIA wanted canned talks in which the kids were not allowed to talk. It thus trained sex educators to control the amount kids could talk and tried to make it taboo for the kids to talk to each other afterwards.

The CIA also found out that there was a best age for sex education –about the start of puberty. So then they fostered some campaigns to force the education to be earlier. The reason for that was that some young child whose native curiosity would not lead to sophisticated knowledge of sexual action, were coming out with it in front of parents and therapists.

It was better for the CIA if they could say that the kid learned it in a sex education class than from CIA prostitution of them. So although it sounds contradictory, the CIA’s bottom line on sex education disinformation was—don’t have sex education classes, but if you must have them have them very early and don’t let kids talk at them. Make it a more taboo subject by the way you skirt it or only allow it to be taught in a very short segment and never referred to again.

The CIA sponsored conferences for sex educators under a front company call “First Dating Experiences” if I remember correctly. Or maybe just “First Experiences”. When the abstinence only people objected the name of the front company was called something like “Wait for Marriage, Inc."

Now, go have a look at this one: https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post285497

Who do you think is behind this "tolerance" scam?