MIND CONTROL, MIND FREEDOM

FEBRUARY 7, 2006. This is a backgrounder for my upcoming tele-workshop, MIND CONTROL, MIND FREEDOM.

The workshop is, in a way, an answer to many questions I've received over the last two years about mind control (MK).

In 1995, through a series of events---including a lecture at the old Deep River bookstore in Santa Monica, California---I began meeting people who claimed to have been subjected to CIA, military, and even corporate MK.

Their stories, of course, varied, but there was a common theme. They had been put under duress. They had been coerced. They had been held captive. They had been "treated" with pain.

I have long held that force/pain is the primary instrument of this kind of MK. Why? Because it makes a person into a slave. It gets him/her to agree to things.

You can also view this in the context of certain family situations, where the parent is the controller who uses force. Without any sophisticated knowledge of MK technique, control can be achieved.

When pain is used to produce fear, people will agree to many things.

In our wider society, when THE POSSIBILITY OF fear is feared, before anything concrete has happened, people will tend to knuckle under. "Oh, I might experience fear. Therefore, I'll do what I'm told to do."

Actually, we are talking about a whole range of so-called negative emotions which can make a person submit to a narrow view of reality which has been "chosen for him."

These emotions are not natural. That is to say, they are not an inevitable part of what a soul is.

You have to understand something about mind controllers. They actually revel in experiments which bring these negative emotions to the fore in other people. They see these experiments as confirmations that humans are really only animals, are really only stimulus-response machines that can be manipulated for any end.

That is what these controllers are trying to prove over and over again.

They want to believe that the human race (everyone not part of the "elite") is of a vastly lesser stature. What better way to show this than to provoke fear and the other negative emotions?

Sometimes these fears are a prelude to inducing other emotions. When you have a whole population stung by fear, you can get them to, for example, go to war. You can say, essentially, "We can take away your fear. We can point you in the direction of the people who made you afraid. We can then send you to kill those people and their allies. Then you will be free again. You will be free from fear."

Notice that the controllers are doing all this, and they are pointing at the instigators of fear as part of a big lie. The controllers, of course, provoked the initial fear. Those named "instigators" are the patsies, the dupes, the invented enemy.

It's a trick as old as planet Earth.

And it's a form of mind control.

It works.

The whole process of mind control, in its various forms, is a world within a world. It's a world of narrow provocations and knee-jerk responses. It's a world of the daily news, the latest events, the issues chosen for the masses to think about and react to.

The news does need some kind of reality to sink its teeth into. Often this reality is composed of staged events concealed to look like natural happenings.

Here is a formula you can watch unfolding---

Stage an event.

Issue an official response to the event.

Have the news comment on the event and shape its perception, thereby causing certain troubling emotions to spring forth in large numbers of people.

Arrange for controlled debates about the staged event and about the official response to it. Make sure the debate doesn't wander outside the pre-set boundaries. Create the illusion of disagreement about "important factors."

Issue more official responses to the event, declarations which are basically repetitions of the first response. This has a hypnotic effect on the masses.

Launch an official action to deal with the event.

This may be a war, for example.

From this point on, the future is written in stone. The war will be reported in a narrow way, and although there will arise much opposition to the war as it continues, the goal will be achieved.

And what is the goal? Victory?

Not quite.

Although victory may be declared many times and in many ways, the objective was always to bring about a DEMORALIZATION among the people.

Actually, it's demoralization mixed with the illusion of complete triumph.

Why demoralization? Because it reduces the life force in many people. It weakens the nation and the status quo and takes it to a lower level, where it looks like what has gone before but is actually more soft and more easy to shape and sculpt and fill with new lies.

It's a downward process. It's part of mind control.

The gradual weakening. The provocation of more negative emotions.

This whole process mirrors the trauma-based CIA MK I alluded to earlier, only it is carried out over the whole range of a population.

One war follows another.

More demoralization, more weakening.

Why do this?

Just look at the people coming home from the war. Look at their mental states and their physical condition. Look at the families of the dead soldiers. Look at the whole scene.

AFTER THE DELIVERY OF SUCH A SHOCK, THERE IS A GREATER TENDENCY TO WANT TO FIT INTO THE SYSTEM, THE OFFICIAL SYSTEM, THE OFFICIAL "CONSENSUS LIFE" ADVERTISED AND PROMOTED BY THE ELITES WHO SECRETLY PROVOKED THE WAR.

Gradually, generation by generation, war by war, there emerges a favored form of life and society, a kind of Collective that requires its citizens to knuckle under to a method of living and desiring and working and agreeing and hoping----ALL WITHIN CERTAIN PARAMETERS.

This is how you shape a whole society by degrees.

Eventually the elites say that the society cannot continue to survive by itself. It must become part of a wider "alliance of nations dedicated to peace and security." In other words, each society is hooked up to every other society, and the result is, as always, the rule over the many by the few.

Now, within each society, there are individuals who are not buying into this controlled state of mind. They are casting about, looking for an escape route. They want out of the Collective. At some level, they can feel that their individuality is not the favored point of view.

But because they have lived inside so many systems over the years, they tend to believe that the answer is a new system, a better format.

They have neglected to realize that what is at stake is the life force within them, and that this life force is sustained and increased, at the deepest level, by the very opposite of mind control: mind freedom.

Well, what is mind freedom? Is it a neutral condition in which wider choices are possible? Is that all it is?

No. If that were the whole story, there would be no way to increase life force and extend it over a fantastic range.

Mind freedom is an OPPORTUNITY. It's a chance to imagine and create the future.

At the deepest level, the entire program of mind control, in all its aspects and forms, has the effect of spraying a hypnotic mist over the creative impulse---to a point where most people don't even know what the creative impulse is or how to connect with it.

That's REAL mind control.

There are ways out of this. Part of the workshop involves describing these ways out of the dilemma.

You can have all the specific strategies in the world, but if you aren't finding ways to increase and feel the LIFE FORCE that is part and parcel of what you are, you will wander back into the overall operation called MK, mind control.

This backgrounder is just a small slice of what I'll be covering in the workshop.

This site, for the last five years, has been dedicated to elucidating the LIFE FORCE and the CREATIVE IMPULSE. These two factors make answers and solutions and great adventures and futures and satisfactions and joys and exhilarations spring up all over the place.

I hope you'll be there for the workshop.

JON RAPPOPORT www.nomorefakenews.com


STRAVINSKY, THE RITE OF SPRING, THE REVOLUTION, AND THE MEANING OF IMAGINATION

FEBRUARY 7, 2006. On May 29, 1913, in the Theatre des Champs-Elysees in Paris, a riot broke out.

After the curtain went up on the premiere of The Rite of Spring, it took only a few minutes for the tumult to begin.

Boos, hisses, catcalls, people throwing objects at the stage... The roar of the crowd quickly became so loud, the dancers lost their cues.

And the music. It was a whisper, a pounding scream, sheets of brass sound, harsh relentless rhythms breaking against one another, shifting cliffs suddenly colliding and collapsing in the air.

The police arrived and shut the program down.

Stravinsky, at 28, had arrived on the world scene.

Forget that never again would he compose music so challenging, or that later in his life, after he had taken up a position as a champion of new classicism, he would conduct a recording of the Rite that was modulated to a bare shadow of its former self.

The revolution had happened.

Much has been written about the premiere and the Rite. A great deal of programmatic explanation has been offered to "make sense" out of the piece of music: after all, it was a ballet with a plot, and the themes had to do with primitive ritual sacrifices in a fanciful pagan world.

This is called watering down the effect. It has been done by linking the music to a tale/myth. The tale, when told is, of course, much more sober and distant.

You can also find scholarly work on the structure of the Rite, indicating a possible borrowed background of several Eastern European folk melodies.

I bring this up because creations of imagination are often diluted by referring the audience to other works and periods of time and influences---to explain the incomprehensible.

But the fact is, to absorb a work of imagination, one has to use his own imagination.

Since this is considered unlikely, pundits earnestly help us with step-down contexts, so that we can understand the work in pedestrian terms. In other words, so we can reduce it to nothing.

However, the work itself resists such translations. Fundamentally, every outcome of great imagination is its own world. It immediately and finally presents itself as a universe apart from easy references and tie-ins and links.

So when you listen to the Rite, you are, gratefully, alone with the music. In this regard, I recommend one recording. The 1958 Leonard Bernstein-New York Philharmonic, available as Sony SMK 47629. It's the 1992 Bernstein Royal Edition. Le Sacre Du Printemps.

Bernstein, one of the geniuses of the 20th century, was no stranger to encountering imagination with imagination. And yet, as the conductor, he had no need to distort the score. If anything, he was more faithful to it and the composer's great intent than any other conductor, past or present.

In 1912 and 1913, Stravinsky had composed the Rite in a reckless frame of mind. This did not mean he abandoned all he knew; it meant he wanted to show everyone how dim the perception of music had become. "To hell with all of them."

He took the large orchestra and shredded the conventional relationships between its various sections. Instead, he made it an ocean in a storm. He crossed all lines. He crashed together old sounds and new sounds. He destroyed pleasant mesmerizing rhythms.

But there was nothing primitive about his undertaking. He made something new, something no one could have predicted.

As you listen to it, you may find one part of your mind repeating, this is not music, this is not music. It doesn't matter. Just keep listening. Five times, 50 times, 100 times.

There are artists like Stravinsky, like the Spanish architect Gaudi, like Edgar Varese (I wrote briefly about him the other day), like the often-reviled American writer Henry Miller, like Walt Whitman (although Whitman has been grotesquely co-opted into a Norman Rockwell-like prefect), like the several great Mexican muralists---all of whom transmit an oceanic quality.

As in, The Flood.

There is a fear that, if such artists were unleashed to produce their work on a grand scale---and if the societal chains of perception were removed---they would take over the world.

This is the real reason there was a riot at the Theatre des Champs Elysees on May 29, 1913. Even though Stravinsky was presenting a universe of his own making, people instinctively felt that the music could spill over into the streets of Paris...and after that, where would it go? What would stop it?

Their fear was justified.

Although you won't find a reference in the thousands and thousands of books written about art, when the artist creates a separate and new world, a crossover occurs.

A most natural crossover.

Our world, contrary to all consensus, is meant to be revolutionized by art, by imagination, right down to its core.

That this has not happened for the best is no sign that the process is irrelevant. It is only a testament to the collective resistance.

Who knows how many such revolutions have been shunted aside and rejected, in favor of the shape we now think of as central and eternal?

We are living in a default structure, the one that has been left over after all the prior revolutions have been put to sleep.

And still, it takes imagination and creating to give us what we have now. But mostly, it is a harnessed imagination that accedes to a stolid esthetic that replaces daring and vast improvisation with classical forms and formats, long after their time.

We peek between the fluted columns to see what the future might hold. We speculate, for example, that information itself might be alive and might flow in from our own DNA to bring about a new cyber-brain step in evolution. Information? What further evidence do we need that our society is heading down a slope to the swamp?

If Rite of Spring and other works of that magnitude are information, a wooden duck on a doily is Shakespeare.

Mere information is the wood scrapings and the stone chips Brancusi swept up in his studio and put out in the alley. Information is the dried flattened tubes of paint Matisse disposed of with the old newspapers. Information is the heap of wires Tesla tossed in the garbage.

Information is the neutral boil-down left over after the artist has made his mark.

Creation is not neutral.

It flows out into the atmosphere with all its subjective force.

That is what happened on May 29, 1913.

And that is what evoked the mass fear.

JON RAPPOPORT www.nomorefakenews.com