The 5 Myths of Terrorism---Why terror doesn't work

 

The 5 Myths of Terrorism—Including That It Works

Why terror doesn't work

By Michael Shermer

 

inShare12

Share on Tumblr

Image: Matthew Hollister

 

 

Because terrorism educes such strong emotions, it has led to at least five myths. The first began in September 2001, when President George W. Bush announced that “we will rid the world of the evildoers” and that they hate us for our “our freedoms.” This sentiment embodies what Florida State University psychologist Roy F. Baumeister calls “the myth of pure evil,” which holds that perpetrators commit pointless violence for no rational reason.

This idea is busted through the scientific study of aggression, of which psychologists have identified four types that are employed toward a purposeful end (from the perpetrators' perspective): instrumental violence, such as plunder, conquest and the elimination of rivals; revenge, such as vendettas against adversaries or self-help justice; dominance and recognition, such as competition for status and women, particularly among young males; and ideology, such as religious beliefs or utopian creeds. Terrorists are motivated by a mixture of all four.

In a study of 52 cases of Islamist extremists who have targeted the U.S. for terrorism, for example, Ohio State University political scientist John Mueller concluded that their motives are often instrumental and revenge-oriented, a “boiling outrage at U.S. foreign policy—the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, in particular, and the country's support for Israel in the Palestinian conflict.” Ideology in the form of religion “was a part of the consideration for most,” Mueller suggests, “but not because they wished to spread Sharia law or to establish caliphates (few of the culprits would be able to spell either word). Rather they wanted to protect their co-religionists against what was commonly seen to be a concentrated war on them in the Middle East by the U.S. government.”

As for dominance and recognition, University of Michigan anthropologist Scott Atran has demonstrated that suicide bombers (and their families) are showered with status and honor in this life and the promise of women in the next and that most “belong to loose, homegrown networks of family and friends who die not just for a cause but for each other.” Most terrorists are in their late teens or early 20s and “are especially prone to movements that promise a meaningful cause, camaraderie, adventure and glory,” he adds.

Busting a second fallacy—that terrorists are part of a vast global network of top-down centrally controlled conspiracies against the West—Atran shows that it is “a decentralized, self-organizing and constantly evolving complex of social networks.” A third flawed notion is that terrorists are diabolical geniuses, as when the 9/11 Commission report described them as “sophisticated, patient, disciplined, and lethal.” But according to Johns Hopkins University political scientist Max Abrahms, after the decapitation of the leadership of the top extremist organizations, “terrorists targeting the American homeland have been neither sophisticated nor masterminds, but incompetent fools.”

Examples abound: the 2001 airplane shoe bomber Richard Reid was unable to ignite the fuse because it was wet from rain; the 2009 underwear bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab succeeded only in torching his junk; the 2010 Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad managed merely to burn the inside of his Nissan Pathfinder; and the 2012 model airplane bomber Rezwan Ferdaus purchased faux C-4 explosives from fbi agents. Most recently, the 2013 Boston Marathon bombers appear to have been equipped with only one gun and had no exit strategy beyond hijacking a car low on gas that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev used to run over his brother, Tamerlan, followed by a failed suicide attempt inside a land-based boat.

A fourth fiction is that terrorism is deadly. Compared with the annual average of 13,700 homicides, however, deaths from terrorism are statistically invisible, with a total of 33 in the U.S. since 9/11.

inShare12

Share on Tumblr

Finally, a fifth figment about terrorism is that it works. In an analysis of 457 terrorist campaigns since 1968, George Mason University political scientist Audrey Cronin found that not one extremist group conquered a state and that a full 94 percent failed to gain even one of their strategic goals. Her 2009 book is entitled How Terrorism Ends (Princeton University Press). It ends swiftly (groups survive eight years on average) and badly (the death of its leaders).

We must be vigilant always, of course, but these myths point to the inexorable conclusion that terrorism is nothing like what its perpetrators wish it were.

This article was originally published with the title Five Myths of Terrorism.

 

Detroit is your problem, too

SALON

Friday, Jul 19, 2013 5:12 PM UTC

Detroit is your problem, too

If the Motor City defaults on its general obligation bonds, governments everywhere will pay the price. Here's how

By Edward McClelland

Topics: Detroit, bankruptcy, Mitt Romney, Michigan, United States, U.S. Economy, Cities, Business News, Politics News
 

(Credit: Reuters/Rebecca Cook)

In 1990, Israeli-American author Ze’ev Chafets published a book entitled “Devil’s Night and Other True Tales of Detroit,” in which he interviewed Oakland County Prosecutor L. Brooks Patterson, a suburban prosecutor who made his political bones by leading the fight against school busing to integrate Detroit and its suburbs. Oakland County, the auto executive bedroom community where Mitt Romney grew up, is one of the wealthiest suburban enclaves in the nation, with a per-capita household income twice as large as Detroit’s.

“In no sense are we dependent on Detroit,” Patterson told Chafets. “They are dependent on us. The truth is, Detroit has had its day. I don’t give a damn about Detroit. It has no direct bearing on the quality of my life. If I never crossed 8 Mile again, I wouldn’t be bereft of anything.”

(Patterson was the negative image of Detroit Mayor Coleman A. Young, another racially divisive politician who began his 20-year mayoralty with a speech telling all the city’s thugs to “hit 8 Mile Road.” Instead, all the white people did.)

Patterson was just elected to his sixth term as Oakland County Executive, with the same down-on-Detroit rhetoric that has defined his career. (He recently called Detroit’s attempts to lure businesses from Oakland County “moving furniture around on the deck of the Titanic.”) But Detroit’s bankruptcy has finally proven him wrong. Detroit’s bankruptcy affects Oakland County, the state of Michigan, and really, every state, county and municipality in the nation. If Detroit defaults on its general obligation bonds, governments everywhere — but especially in Michigan — may end up paying more to borrow money, as the bond market responds to the precedent set by a major city returning pennies on the dollar to investors. When a state’s largest city goes bankrupt, it creates an increased risk for all the governments around it — including the state itself.

Detroit’s bankruptcy could result in interest rate hikes of a quarter of a point on the $19 billion of general obligations held by Michigan’s governments. That would cost the state’s taxpayers $47.5 million a year.

Michigan’s refusal to share responsibility for Detroit’s finances goes all the way back to the 1970s, when Republican governor William Milliken proposed a regional tax base — only to have the plan shot down by the state legislature. Had Milliken been successful, Detroit would not be in bankruptcy today. In the 2000s, the state cut revenue sharing to Detroit, costing the city $200 million a year. Detroit has run budget deficits ever since. The bond market has noticed Michigan’s neglect. Richard Larkin, director of credit analysis at Iselin, New Jersey-based Herbert J. Sims & Co., told Bloomberg BusinessWeek that Gov. Rick Snyder and other leaders are “washing their hands” of Detroit.

“Investors will begin exacting a premium from any borrower that has Michigan’s name on it,” Larkin said. “From this point, Detroit’s name in the muni market is probably mud.”


L. Brooks Patterson built a career out of telling his constituents that Detroit’s problems were not their problems. Now that they are, his constituents are going to pay for it.

Edward McClelland is the author of "Young Mr. Obama: Chicago and the Making of a Black President" and "Nothin' But Blue Skies: The Heyday, Hard Times and Hopes of America's Industrial Heartland." Follow him on Twitter at @tedmcclelland. More Edward McClelland.

What killed Detroit? Let’s not forget the ‘who.’

Washington Post

On Leadership

What killed Detroit? Let’s not forget the ‘who.’

By Jena McGregor, 

Published: July 19 at 12:35 pm

 

(Carlos Osorio/AP)

The finger-pointing for Detroit’s decades of decline usually starts with the 1967 race riots. High pensions for unionized workers get its share of the blame, as does the global economic trends that upended the auto industry. Meanwhile, racial politics and white flight to the suburbs rightly earn a place as a driver of the city’s blight.

But so much focus on what happened can leave behind the “who.” Yes, a confluence of economic and cultural forces unquestionably led to Detroit‘s decline and its filing, on Thursday, for the largest municipal bankruptcy in the history of the United States. But Detroit also failed as a city because of the leaders who failed Detroit.

Some names are obvious. There is former mayor Kwame Kilpatrick, who could face 20 years in prison after being convicted for crimes such as extortion, bribery and racketeering. Obviously, decades of decline preceded the “hip-hop mayor,” but the corruption of his tenure certainly didn’t help. While Kilpatrick was in office, Detroit’s credit ratings returned to junk status.

There is Coleman Young, the combative five-term mayor who led the city for what Daniel Okrent has called, in Time, a “corrosive two-decade rule of a black politician who cared more about retribution than about resurrection.” Though Young’s tenure is caught up in racial divisiveness that some believe make him misunderstood, it’s clear he stayed in office for far too long, did little to try and mend fences broken down along racial lines, and led the city when its debt rating first reached junk status. 

But it would be simplistic to point only to two elected officials. This is a city where, for decades, delusional auto industry executives ignored global economic forces, attempts at regulation, and consumer needs and tastes, refusing to evolve their business until it was far too late. It’s a city where union leaders have long held unrealistic and short-sighted goals which, combined with their unparalleled power, exacerbated the industry’s problems and the city’s employment prospects.

It’s a city where some of the region’s representatives in Washington have historically been so defending of those industries and their unions that they failed to diversify its economic base. Here’s Okrent again, admitting other politicians have done the same but reserving a special enmity for the country’s longest-serving Congressman, Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.): “By so ably satisfying the wishes of the auto industry–by encouraging southeastern Michigan’s reliance on this single, lumbering mastodon–Dingell has in fact played a signal role in destroying Detroit.”

More recently, this is a city where there have been five police chiefs in five years. Where a report by the city’s emergency manager called Detroit’s operations “dysfunctional and wasteful after years of budgetary restrictions, mismanagement, crippling operational practices, and, in some cases, indifference or corruption.” Where one city council member walked away from his mortgage, mailing in his keys and abandoning yet another home in Detroit, while another was stripped of the council’s presidency after disappearing amid allegations of an inappropriate relationship with a teenager. (No charges have been filed, and the teen’s family has asked the police to suspend its investigation, but the former council president’s accounts are being audited.)

This is a city where leaders have failed it time and time again. One can only hope that its extraordinarily powerful emergency financial manager, Kevyn Orr; the next mayor of Detroit (its current one gets credit for some of his efforts, but has already said he won’t run for reelection); and any more of the Motor City’s other leaders do not in this time of great need.

Jena McGregor is a columnist for On Leadership.

Most Thieves Are White

Most Thieves Are White

Cross posted at Daily Kos. Please recommend this diary.

Posted on July 12, 2013


George Zimmerman called police 47 times between 2004 and 2012. Fifteen of those calls were for “suspicious activity.” Seven of those calls involved “suspicious” individuals. One of those individuals was white. Six were black.

In one of those calls, Zimmerman made his famous statement about “break-ins” which had occurred in the development. I will go out on a limb and speculate that he believed the thieves were “probably black.”

He would be wrong.

Here’s how I know. The State of Florida Department of Corrections has a website. On that website you can do huge searches by category of crime and race. You can also look by incarceration status — probation/parole, released from incarceration, and presently incarcerated. I looked at the raw numbers of everyone under the offense category “theft” for white, black, and hispanic offenders.

White thieves outnumber black thieves in the DOC database by 50%.





Interestingly, it seems the State of Florida hands out stiffer sentences to black thieves. This leads to the perverse result that more known thieves who are white are out on the street in even greater numbers.






This data destroys the most powerful motivator for white bigotry, namely fear of “black crime.” There is simply more “white crime.”

As for why Zimmerman was frustrated in his efforts to find the thieves in his gated community, we now have a really simple explanation.

He was looking for the wrong people.

If Trayvon Was White, Zimmerman Would Have Offered Him A Ride Home...

If Trayvon Was White, Zimmerman Would Have Offered Him A Ride Home...

~Michael Skolnik

When Trayvon Benjamin Martin was shot by a bullet through his heart, his dead body laid in the wet grass for over two and a half hours. Covered by a yellow tarp, the lifeless body of this teenage boy was comforted by nothing but his torn hoodie that had ripped apart by the heat of a 9mm semi-automatic handgun. Just six houses away from where he was staying, he never made it home that night. Checked into the morgue as a "John Doe," the Sanford Police Department didn't think Trayvon belonged in the neighborhood either, as not a single door was knocked upon asking if anyone knew this child. He was just SIX HOUSES away from his home. A different home awaited him on the evening of February 26th, 2012. Met by Malcolm and Martin, Medger and Emmett, Bobby and Jack, and four little girls, Trayvon was welcomed home by men and women whose lives drastically changed the course of American history.

Where were you on Saturday, July 13th at 9:59 p.m., when a six person jury in Sanford, Florida delivered a verdict of NOT GUILTY to the man who shot and killed Trayvon Benjamin Martin? The verdict brought back painful memories; of Amadou Diallo and Yusef Hawkins, both shot dead while unarmed. It recalled Medgar Evers, shot dead in his driveway 50 years ago this June, and Emmett Till, whose open casket forced a nation to face the shame of lynching. Horrific moments in history that moved a nation to tears. The verdict reemphasized the need for change in our country. The need to take a serious look at race relations; the need to rethink our gun laws, and the need for fairness in our police departments and our courts. But none of this will happen if we are silent.

Silence. Silence is an American tradition when it comes to race. A tradition as traditional as killers of black young men walking free out of court. A tradition as traditional as police departments believing that unarmed black kids are guilty even after they are killed. A tradition as traditional as profiling black teenagers as potential burglars instead of potential presidents. This silence has rained down on America like the rain in Sanford, Florida on the eve of Trayvon's death, making the trail to top of the mountain seem like it is impossible to climb.

However, if we are to reach the top of the mountain realizing that every young person, regardless of race, class, color or creed, has the right to walk safely home with a nothing but a bag of skittles and a can of ice tea in their hands, America, especially white America, must realize that Trayvon was our son too. A son born in Miami, Florida, trained in the American school system and buried in American soil. If Trayvon was white would we think that him and his friends come from a "different world?" Would the police department have believed that he might have actually lived in the neighborhood that he was shot dead in? Would the jury have related to his fears of being followed by a scary stranger? Or before any of this even happened, maybe George Zimmerman would have offered him a ride home to get him out of the rain?

It is our son that didn't receive justice on Saturday night, and we can no longer be silent. Many older, white Americans are content with being silent, because if they raise their voice, the new America just might pass them by. It is the silent cries and the silent yells from a new, multiracial generation that will create a new American tradition. A generation that is not content with being strangers to each other. A generation that who will create a tradition that never looks at a young, black teenager again as being suspicious when they are walking home in the rain with their hoodie up.

~Michael Skolnik

Michael Skolnik is the Editor-In-Chief of GlobalGrind.com and the political director to Russell Simmons. He is also on the Board of Directors of the Trayvon Martin Foundation.  Previously, Michael was an award-winning filmmaker. Follow him on twitter @MichaelSkolnik

More on: racism, Trayvon Martin

George Zimmerman Was Lying

Daily Kos

Conceptual GuerillaFollowRSS

Daily Kos member

Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 09:22 PM PDT

George Zimmerman Is Lying

by Conceptual GuerillaFollow

Cross posted at Working Man Radio.  Please recommend this diary.

Watching the Zimmerman trial, the images coming out of the courtroom seem to be convincing some media observers that Zimmerman's self-defense claim is colorable.

Zimmerman's case is that Martin jumped out some bushes, said "what's your problem," and then punched Zimmerman.  According to Zimmerman, Martin then jumped on top of Zimmerman and began slamming his head into the sidewalk ... leaving no blood, and causing no concussion.

This is becoming the media's narrative, making the case whether Zimmerman was in sufficient danger to warrant using deadly force.

There is just one problem with Zimmerman's defense.  He's lying about who was the aggressor in starting the fight.  He's lying, and the proof is right in front of everybody.

Let me just lay out the relevant facts and evidence.  It's very simple.
Trayvon Martin was on the phone when the fight started.  He was talking to Rachel Jeantel.

You don't have to believe Rachel Jeantel, there are phone records that show the call.  Furthermore, her description of the call are entirely consistent with the known facts.  Here is what she said about the call -- the only thing you need to know.

“Trayvon said, ‘What, are you following me for,’ and the man said, ‘What are you doing here?’ Next thing I hear is somebody pushing, and somebody pushed Trayvon because the head set just fell. I called him again, and he didn’t answer the phone.

We know that Zimmerman was following Trayvon Martin.  

 So it is entirely believable that Martin would ask "why are you following me."

We know that Zimmerman suspected Martin of being a burglar or something.

 We know that Zimmerman complained about "these assholes always get[ting] away."

So it is entirely believable that Zimmerman said "what are your doing around here?"

And we know that Zimmerman and Martin fought each other .... making it entirely believable that Rachel Jeantel heard them scuffling.

That's all you need to know to make George Zimmerman a liar.  Phone records show Martin on the phone with Rachel Jeantel, and Jeantel testifies to facts that are entirely consistent with undisputed facts.

Trayvon was on the phone with Rachel Jeantel.  Which makes Zimmermans story about Martin jumping out of bushes so much hogwash.  It also disproves Zimmerman's claim that Martin threw the first punch.  Martin was talking on the phone.  Talking on the phone and starting fights are mutually exclusive activities.

And that's it.  Zimmerman's a liar. Whatever he says about any alleged attack, whatever he says about being punched in the nose, whatever he says about the "danger" he was in, whatever he says to make out his self-defense claim, George Zimmerman is a liar.  Beyond a reasonable doubt.

Do not underestimate the value of proving that George Zimmerman is a liar.  In order to acquit him, the jury must first believe him.

The video below summarizes the facts above . . . so I have omitted the transcript.  I do recommend it, because frankly, the video presentation is much more powerful than this cold written description.  And make sure you like it, subscribe to it, and share it.

And if you like a good, hard hitting audio podcast, check out Working Man Radio.  Available on iTunes.

http://www.youtube.com/...

10:26 AM PT: It is always an honor to make the rec list.  In this case, I am a little surprised.  The diary didn't seem to be doing that well.

I also appreciate the spirited, but mostly civilized discussion, in the comments.

Originally posted to Conceptual Guerilla on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 09:22 PM PDT.

Also republished by Trial Watch.

Tags

Uncover and Manipulate Your Triggers to Optimize Your Work and Life

lifehacker

 

Uncover and Manipulate Your Triggers to Optimize Your Work and Life

 

 

Thorin Klosowski

 

5/10/12 8:00am 5/10/12 8:00am

 

 

 

You're surrounded by all types of triggers. You see a vending machine and your stomach growls; the sight of a stapler invokes all the stresses of work; looking at that one book always gives you ideas. These triggers prime a response in your brain for all types of habits. Giving your environment an overhaul—with your triggers in mind—can make you more productive, happier, and goal oriented.

 

Here's how.

 

We're talking about the simple, external triggers you run across every day. These triggers can influence your decisions, make you recall memories, or even cause stress. These external, environmental triggers have an affect on your day, and it's possible to use them to your advantage. In short, you can remove the bad triggers and spotlight the good ones. We'll show you how to find and categorize the triggers around you, but let's start with a basic look at how your brain reacts to what you see before we move on to a step-by-step process for optimizing your environment.

How Your Brain Responds to Triggers from Objects, Ideas, and Advertising

 

 

When you look at an object, you're not just seeing the optical qualities of it. Your brain is also processing a ton of information to comprehend what the object is, even building your history with an object or idea. Sometimes when you see something, that object also triggers an emotion or thought and then re-fires your brain in a new way to prime a response. In effect, a trigger is essentially an external influence that directly precedes an action, emotion, or habit.

 

You see an object or idea that reminds you of an action and then you take that action. Your actions can be positive, negative, or neutral. The triggers aren't inherently good or bad, they just exist, but you can manipulate your triggers so you're weighted toward a more positive outcome.

 

For instance, if you keep cookies on the counter, you're probably going to eat more cookies. If you surround yourself with objects that trigger creative responses (books, pictures, quotes, whatever works for you) you could see an increase in your idea generation. In the case of advertising, triggers are the essence of how products get sold to you.

We've talked before about how ads manipulate you, and one of those manipulative tactics is to trigger a need to purchase something you didn't know you wanted. This is done in all sorts of ways, from glorified price dropping ("Buy now, one day only!" or "Buy One Get One Free!") to actually triggering an emotional response that makes you want to buy something.

The truth is ads use the same tactics you do to yourself. Your environment is filled with positive and negative triggers—the knick knacks on your desk; the rotten banana in the fruit basket; the unused running shoes—all of these things have a slight impact on your decision making on a daily basis.

What really matters is that you can control these triggers to a point. As Psychology Today points out:

[E]ven the slightest outside stimuli—such as a sound or a smell—can trigger changes in the firing rate of neurons in a way that changes the flow of information between different parts of the brain and alters one's perceptions.

With that in mind, let's start tracking and labeling your personal environmental triggers.

A Step-by-Step Guide to Tracking the Triggers in Your Environment

Since most triggers are entirely subconscious you have to make a mental effort to find where they're coming from. This means you have to dedicate time where you're mindful of your environment and your habits. The end goal is to remove as many of the negative triggers as possible (you can't get them all) and try to find your positive triggers so you can accent your environment with more of them.

Step 1: Track Your Triggers

 

 

The first step is to find, track, and think about your triggers. This is a lot harder than you'd think and it's not possible to get them all. Still, a little work now can make it so you can optimize your environment in the future.

Start by keeping basic notes of your habits, random (but useful) thoughts, and even odd emotions. Keep an eye out for: memories, ideas, habits, and tasks triggered by objects. Write them down in a notepad with as much information as you can. Include the following:

• Location
• Time
• Your Emotional State
• The Action Preceding it
• Result
• Any Additional Notes on the Environment (weather, smells, sounds, etc)

Don't worry about rationalizing any of this data right now. The first step is just collection. Chances are that more often than not you're not going to recognize a trigger, but if you track all the right information you'll start to form a bigger picture.

Step 2: Evaluate Your Notes and Figure out the Real Triggers

Triggers are not an exact science, and everyone has different triggers with different reactions. The trick now is to take a look at your data and try to find what triggered a reaction. If your notes are anything like mine, they're partly nonsense. You'll have seemingly worthless bits of information like:

• Location: Stairway
• Time: 8:15
• Emotional State: Anxious
• Preceding Action: Bathroom
• Result: Suddenly felt anxious
• Any Additional notes: None

If you didn't find a trigger at the time, return to the scene, take a look around, and see if you find something new. In my case, standing in my stairwell and actually paying attention revealed a framed picture that I forgot was there. After thinking about it I realized the picture was likely the cause of the anxiety.

Once you have an idea of what the triggers are it's time to decide if they really matter.

Step 3: Categorize and Grade the Triggers

You can't control the entire world. Instead, you can decide where to reduce the effect of certain negative triggers and then look at how to integrate more positive triggers with a simple 1-10 scale.

Grab your spreadsheet and categorize each trigger as actionable (the picture on the wall, the cookies on the table), or non-actionable (the bad weather, the morning commute). For the actionable tasks, rate them on a scale of 1-10, where 10 is a positive trigger and 1 is a negative trigger. The top and bottom numbers on the list are what you really care about. Say you notice your kitchen is filled with a bunch of triggers that bring out a lot of bad behaviors. That means you need to work on that area of the house. Let's take a look at how to take action on your results and optimize your space accordingly.

Optimize Your Environment with the Information You Gather

Now comes the fun part. It's time to get rid of all the triggers that create negative habits or emotions and fill up that space with the positives. You can't force ideas with objects, but you can prime your subliminal and give your willpower a break by creating a good environment. The end goal is to create an environment that reflects what really matters to you and get rid of the rest.

Revise Your Home and Workplace

 

Start by taking out your list and visiting the places where those negative triggers primed you for bad habits or memories. Throw everything in a box (or away, if need be). When you're done, you'll probably have a lot of empty space to fill.

 

Now take a look at your positive triggers. Ask yourself one question: are they located in places you go often or are they hidden away? If they're hidden away, you should move them to fill in those negative spaces.

 

For myself, a lot of this work was done in the kitchen. I moved certain types of pots that were hidden away to a pot rack so I remembered they existed. I picked up a fruit basket so I'd remember to eat my fruits. I completely rearranged my little pantry closet so I'd stop forgetting what was in there.

I took small steps like moving my running shoes by the door so I'd remember I like jogging. I also moved a couple instruments out of my little studio so I'd remember to play around every day. Photo by Alexander De Luca.

Revise Your Digital Workspaces

Of course, the real world is just part of your environment. Chances are you also spend a good amount of time staring at a screen. You can use these same ideas for your computer or phone as well. Our guide to a minimal desktop is a great place to start if you're always distracted by different programs or websites on your computer. Start with a minimal desktop and then add programs as you need them. If keeping Photoshop in your dock reminds you that you need to learn Photoshop, do so.

Additionally, I'm a huge fan of minimizing the amount of apps on your phone, a process we've shown you how to do before. Doing this systematically gets rid of all the useless junk on your phone that triggers bad behaviors and leaves just the apps that are useful to you.

Triggers are also a great way to manage your to-do lists. As Fast Company points out, it's a trick used by Getting Things Done author David Allen:

He advises people to avoid a single master to-do list; instead, he recommends a series of context-dependent lists (such as a "calls list," so when you phone a potential customer, you're also reminded to call your A/C repairman and your sister for her birthday). The lesson: If you have something you don't want to forget, don't scrunch up your brain and try really hard to retain it; just install an environmental trigger to do the remembering for you.

The idea is the same as the environmental approach: plant ideas in your mind by using lists and objects that trigger a reaction.

 

The last big subliminal trigger is ads online. You can use these to your advantage as well. Sure, you can easily block ads with Adblock Plus, but an even better solution is to replace those ads with a positive triggers. Adlesse and Overapps are both cross-platform extensions that allow you to replace ads with widgets. These widgets include art, famous quotes, or random facts.

---

By the end of all this you'll have a comfortable workspace or home that reflects your real goals. If all goes well, it's a place where your positive triggers—the things that keep you on track for goals—are easily accessible, and the bad ones—the triggers that keep you from those goals—are gone.

After doing this for a week myself it's astounding how many things I got rid of or moved around even though I never thought of certain things in my home as negative triggers. I took down pictures, moved others to new places where I would actually see them, and completely rearranged my kitchen. It's hard to say how long this will work, but I imagine a yearly review will keep things fresh and interesting.

What is the mind?

                                    ?

howStuffWorks

 

What is theory of mind?

by Josh Clark

Emotion Image Gallery

You probably imagined that something has made this man despondent, instead of assuming he was placed in that position by a larger man. That assumption suggests that you're capable of theory of mind.See more emotion pictures.

Michael Blann/Getty Images

Back when you were a child of 2 or so, you were virtually mindless, at least compared to how you are now. In the first few years of life, your primary focus was you: You wanted food, comfort, a colorful toy -- and you were willing to cry very loudly to get what you wanted. In return, you offered nothing but potential quiet. You were what can be called egocentric, one of the definitions of which is extreme self-centeredness. You can hardly be blamed for this, however; you hadn't developed to a point where you could look past your own needs.

Then, at about age 3 or 4 -- if you're neurotypical, meaning your mental development was comparatively normal -- you underwent what seemed like a magical transformation. You became a genius at mind-reading. You suddenly were capable of looking past yourself and could take into account others' wants, needs, knowledge and mental states. You had developed what some researchers call theory of mind.

You'll note that theory of mind is missing a "the" ahead of it. That's because this term doesn't refer to a theory on the mind. Formally, the academic concept that relates to it could be called the theory of theory of mind. It refers to a person's ability to create theories about others' minds -- what they may be thinking, how they may be feeling, what they may do next. We are able to make these assumptions easily, without even recognizing that we are doing something fundamentally amazing: We are making predictions about what is going on in other people's heads and, even more amazingly, these predictions most often prove correct.

Consider this. Let's say you're on your way to get a book from the bookcase in the living room and you enter a room where a loved one is seated with her chin to her chest, not engaged in any visible activity. You may rightly believe that this loved one is sad and stop to ask what's wrong. But what forms the basis of this belief? What is it about sitting quietly and alone, with one's head down, that suggests sadness? More importantly, what is the point of not only being able to broadcast this sadness to others, but for them to be able to receive this transmission and stop what they are doing to see what's the matter? The answers to those questions probably lie in the evolutionary benefits theory of mind could bestow.


     

 

 http://science.howstuffworks.com/life/34151-could-you-survive-mind-mouth-muscle-video.htm

In addition to theory of mind, there are other explanations to how we can essentially read another person's mind to get to the bottom of how they'll act.

Colin Anderson/Getty Images

Evolution and Theory of Mind

If evolution is correct -- and science holds that it is -- then traits or abilities that are found among related species suggest that these traits survived natural selection. Crudely put, the trait was found beneficial to the survival of the species and therefore those members who carried the trait lived to reproduce and pass it onto their offspring.

Such is the case with theory of mind. Indeed, the term was first coined in a 1978 paper by primate researchers who concluded that higher apes like chimpanzees couldn't understand the mental states that lead to action on others' parts, though later research has found that they likely can [source: Call and Tomasello].

So what is the evolutionary benefit of theory of mind? As communications professor Francis F. Steen describes it, by considering others' motives to predict their actions, an animal can determine whether a predator is moving toward it to attack and eat the animal. Conversely, when it appears the predator is too hot to move on a particularly warm day, such a mechanism allows the animal -- which is likely hot too -- to rest easy as well and not expend any unnecessary energy running away from a predator that has no interest in pursuing it [source: Steen]. Anyone who has seen footage of a lion and a gazelle lying down, panting and watching one another only yards apart has seen this mechanism in action.

This ability has served humans as well. Yet cognitive researchers don't necessarily think that animals like gazelles and lions possess the capability of theory of mind. Most consider only humans and most likely higher apes in possession of this far more advanced intellectual analysis. More to the point, if you've ever looked at a lion and considered that it looked happy or that it wished it were free, you've just proven yourself capable of the kind of higher order thinking that theory of mind is based on.
There are rivals to theory of mind in explaining how we learn to predict others' behavior. One of these follows the animal model. The concept of mental simulation says that we predict others' goals and actions based on creating mental constructs of what we would do if we were in their shoes. We use our past experiences to construct a mental model of the situation, essentially using our brains' processing power to analyze the available data and then make our prediction.

Theory of mind goes much farther than mental simulation in imaging how we read the minds of others, and it finds support in the study of autism.
 

Tests of children with autism show that they have trouble considering the perspectives and needs of others, a condition called mindblindness.

Charly Franklin/Getty Images

Autism and Theory of Mind

The theory of theory of mind stands apart from other theories that seek to explain how we can attribute mental states to those we deem as "others." Specifically, it states that at some point around age 3 or 4, we become aware that other people hold different attitudes, beliefs and knowledge than we do. It becomes apparent to our minds that knowledge can be compartmentalized (we may know something someone else doesn't and vice versa). We realize that there is such a thing as pretense (the ability to create falsehoods). And we realize that other people may feel differently than us, meaning we do not all share the same mental and emotional states and beliefs simultaneously. This is the first, huge step toward metacognition, or thinking about thinking [source: Wiley-Blackwell].

The skills associated with theory of mind don't emerge in all humans. People on the autism spectrum have long been observed to have mindblindness, characterized as an inability to consider others' points of view, wants, needs and desires. This has often been linked to a lack of empathy, although that idea has come under fire in recent years. Instead, researchers have come to believe that people with autism lack theory of mind skills.

To test this, researchers have given autistic children false-belief tests. These tests go something like this:

Sally is playing with her ball in her room. She gets up to go to the kitchen for a while and places the ball in her top dresser drawer. While she's gone, her mother comes in Sally's room and moves the ball from dresser drawer to the toy box. When Sally comes back from the kitchen, where will she look for her ball?

A neurotypical child would correctly guess that Sally would look in the drawer for her ball, since that's where she left it. This answer shows a child has developed an awareness that others may not have knowledge she has, a hallmark of theory of mind. Although that child knows Sally's mother moved the ball, Sally doesn't. Children with autism generally tend to answer that Sally will look in the toy box, which is where they know the ball has been moved.

Autistic children are even more prone to fail second-order false belief test. These elaborate on the Sally test, where children are asked what they think a second character thinks about another character; for example, what John thinks Todd knows is in his lunch box [source: Baron-Cohen].
Theory of mind is an interesting concept; perhaps further study of autism will yield more answers to how we arrive at that amazing state of being able to think about others.

Lots More Information

Related Articles

• 5 Unsolved Brain Mysteries
• How Your Brain Works
• Autism Guide
• What is friendship?
• Why do we love?
• Why are humans altruistic?
• How effective is non-verbal communication?
• Have scientists found a way to read your mind?

Sources

• Ananthaswamy, Anil. "Language may be the key to the theory of mind." New Scientist. June 23, 2009. http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17352-language-may-be-key-to-theory-of-mind.html
• Baron-Cohen, Simon. "Theory of mind in normal development and autism." Prisme. 2001. http://www.autism-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/TOM-in-TD-and-ASD.pdf
• Call, Josep and Tomasello, Michael. "Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? 30 years later." Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2008. http://email.eva.mpg.de/~tomas/pdf/TICS30.pdf
• Knobe, Joshua. "Theory of mind and moral cognition: exploring the connections." University of North Carolina. Accessed March 21, 2011. http://www.unc.edu/~knobe/x-phi/tics.pdf
• Orrigi, Gloria. "Theories of theory of mind." Universita di Bolonga. Accessed March 22, 2011. http://host.uniroma3.it/progetti/kant/field/tom.htm
• Papaleontiou-Louca, Eleanora. "Metacognition and theory of mind." Cambridge Scholars Publishing. 2008. http://www.c-s-p.org/flyers/9781847185785-sample.pdf
• Seyfarth, Robert. "Theory of mind." YouTube. May 19, 2010. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDtjLSa50uk
• Soraya, Lynne. "Empathy, mindblindness and theory of mind." Psychology Today. May 19, 2008. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/aspergers-diary/200805/empathy-mindblindness-and-theory-mind
• Steen, Francis F. "Theory of mind." UCLA. Accessed March 21, 2011. http://cogweb.ucla.edu/CogSci/ToMM.html
• Wiley-Blackwell. "Young children's 'theory of mind' linked to subsequent metacognitive development in adolescence." Science Daily. August 17, 2008. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/08/080814154429.htm

Mind Control - Is somebody thinking for you?

Mind Control - Is somebody thinking for you?

        Is there really such a thing as "brainwashing," or "mind control?"  What kind of person is susceptible? What exactly is a "cult" and how are followers controlled?   How can one recognize an organization that engages in such practices, and should such organizations be held responsible for the damage intentional manipulation can cause?

        The most insidious threat to our basic freedoms, such as freedom of mind and freedom of speech, is a little-known phenomenon known as mind control.   "Mind control" refers to all coercive psychological systems, such as brainwashing, thought reform, and coercive persuasion.    Mind control is the shaping of a person's attitudes, beliefs, and personality without the person's knowledge or consent.   Mind control employs deceptive and surreptitious manipulation, usually in a group setting, for the financial or political profit of the manipulator.   Mind control works by gradually exerting increasing control over individuals through a variety of techniques, such as excessive repetition of routine activities, intense humiliation, or sleep deprivation.
        "Cult" refers to a destructive group which uses mind control to deceivingly influence its members.  It has become fairly standard to use this term for any organization or group which uses mind control on its members. Cults are not necessarily religious.  A cult may form around any theme, such as a political, racial, psychotherapeutic, or even athletic agenda.
           For the protection of our basic human and constitutional rights, I hope to provide a fundamental education on the subject of mind control so that you can protect yourself and your loved ones from any individual or organization that is engaging in this kind of manipulation.     Satan implemented his mind control scheme on the human race along time ago.   Dumbing us down using various mediums.    And it is time to recognize them.

How does Mind Control work?

A technical overview of mind control tactics:

[This document, in substance, was presented to the U.S. Supreme Court as an educational Appendix on coercive psychological systems in the case Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology 89-1367 and 89-1361.   The Wollersheim case was being considered related to issues involving abuse in this area.   In this document coercive persuasion is the professional term being used to describe the nature of coercive psychological systems. Wollersheim case-specific details have been deleted.]

        Coercion is defined as, "to restrain or constrain by force..." Legally it often implies the use of PHYSICAL FORCE or physical or legal threat. This traditional concept of coercion is far better understood than the technological concepts of "coercive persuasion" which are effective restraining, impairing, or compelling through the gradual application of PSYCHOLOGICAL FORCES.

        A coercive persuasion program is a behavioral change technology applied to cause the "learning" and "adoption" of a set of behaviors or an ideology under certain conditions.   It is distinguished from other forms of benign social learning or peaceful persuasion by the conditions under which it is conducted and by the techniques of environmental and interpersonal manipulation employed to suppress particular behaviors and to train others. Over time, coercive persuasion, a psychological force akin in some ways to our legal concepts of undue influence, can be even MORE effective than pain, torture, drugs, and use of physical force and legal threats.

        The Korean War "Manchurian Candidate" misconception of the need for suggestibility-increasing drugs, and physical pain and torture, to effect thought reform, is generally associated with the old concepts and models of brainwashing. Today, they are not necessary for a coercive persuasion program to be effective.    With drugs, physical pain, torture, or even a physically coercive threat, you can often temporarily make someone do something against their will.    You can even make them do something they hate or they really did not like or want to do at the time. They do it, but their attitude is not changed.

        This is much different and far less devastating than that which you are able to achieve with the improvements of coercive persuasion. With coercive persuasion you can change people's attitudes without their knowledge and volition.   You can create new "attitudes" where they will do things willingly which they formerly may have detested, things which previously only torture, physical pain, or drugs could have coerced them to do.   The advances in the extreme anxiety and emotional stress production technologies found in coercive persuasion supersede old style coercion that focuses on pain, torture, drugs, or threat in that these older systems do not change attitude so that subjects follow orders "willingly."   Coercive persuasion changes both attitude AND behavior, not JUST behavior.

THE PURPOSES AND TACTICS OF COERCIVE PERSUASION

        Coercive persuasion or thought reform as it is sometimes known, is best understood as a coordinated system of graduated coercive influence and behavior control designed to deceptively and surreptitiously manipulate and influence individuals, usually in a group setting, in order for the originators of the program to profit in some way, normally financially or politically.   The essential strategy used by those operating such programs is to systematically select, sequence and coordinate numerous coercive persuasion tactics over CONTINUOUS PERIODS OF TIME.   There are seven main tactic types found in various combinations in a coercive persuasion program.   A coercive persuasion program can still be quite effective without the presence of ALL seven of these tactic types.
TACTIC 1. The individual is prepared for thought reform through increased suggestibility and/or "softening up," specifically through hypnotic or other suggestibility-increasing techniques such as: A. Extended audio, visual, verbal, or tactile fixation drills; B. Excessive exact repetition of routine activities; C. Decreased sleep; D. Nutritional restriction.
TACTIC 2. Using rewards and punishments, efforts are made to establish considerable control over a person's social environment, time, and sources of social support.  Social isolation is promoted. Contact with family and friends is abridged, as is contact with persons who do not share group-approved attitudes. Economic and other dependence on the group is fostered. (In the forerunner to coercive persuasion, brainwashing, this was rather easy to achieve through simple imprisonment.)
TACTIC 3. Disconfirming information and non-supporting opinions are prohibited in group communication. Rules exist about permissible topics to discuss with outsiders. Communication is highly controlled. An "in-group" language is usually constructed.

TACTIC 4. Frequent and intense attempts are made to cause a person to re-evaluate the most central aspects of his or her experience of self and prior conduct in negative ways. Efforts are designed to destabilize and undermine the subject's basic consciousness, reality awareness, world view, emotional control, and defense mechanisms as well as getting them to reinterpret their life's history, and adopt a new version of causality.

TACTIC 5. Intense and frequent attempts are made to undermine a person's confidence in himself and his judgment, creating a sense of powerlessness.

TACTIC 6. Nonphysical punishments are used such as intense humiliation, loss of privilege, social isolation, social status changes, intense guilt, anxiety, manipulation and other techniques for creating strong aversive emotional arousals, etc.

TACTIC 7. Certain secular psychological threats [force] are used or are present: That failure to adopt the approved attitude, belief, or consequent behavior will lead to severe punishment or dire consequence, (e.g. physical or mental illness, the reappearance of a prior physical illness, drug dependence, economic collapse, social failure, divorce, disintegration, failure to find a mate, etc.).

        Another set of criteria has to do with defining other common elements of mind control systems. If most of Robert Jay Lifton's eight point model of thought reform is being used in a cultic organization, it is most likely a dangerous and destructive cult. These eight points follow:

Robert Jay Lifton's Eight Point Model of Thought Reform

1. ENVIRONMENT CONTROL. Limitation of many/all forms of communication with those outside the group. Books, magazines,
letters and visits with friends and family are taboo. "Come out and be separate!"

2. MYSTICAL MANIPULATION. The potential convert to the group becomes convinced of the higher purpose and special calling of the group through a profound encounter/experience, for example, through an alleged miracle or prophetic word of those in the group.

3. DEMAND FOR PURITY. An explicit goal of the group is to bring about some kind of change, whether it be on a global, social, or
personal level. "Perfection is possible if one stays with the group and is committed."

4. CULT OF CONFESSION. The unhealthy practice of self disclosure to members in the group. Often in the context of a public gathering in the group, admitting past sins and imperfections, even doubts about the group and critical thoughts about the integrity of the leaders.

5. SACRED SCIENCE. The group's perspective is absolutely true and completely adequate to explain EVERYTHING. The doctrine is not subject to amendments or question. ABSOLUTE conformity to the doctrine is required.

6. LOADED LANGUAGE. A new vocabulary emerges within the context of the group. Group members "think" within the very abstract and narrow parameters of the group's doctrine. The terminology sufficiently stops members from thinking critically by reinforcing a "black and white" mentality. Loaded terms and clichés prejudice thinking.

7. DOCTRINE OVER PERSON. Pre-group experience and group experience are narrowly and decisively interpreted through the
absolute doctrine, even when experience contradicts the doctrine.

8. DISPENSING OF EXISTENCE. Salvation is possible only in the group. Those who leave the group are doomed.

COERCIVE PERSUASION IS NOT PEACEFUL PERSUASION

        Programs identified with the above-listed seven tactics have in common the elements of attempting to greatly modify a person's self-concept, perceptions of reality, and interpersonal relations. When successful in inducing these changes, coercive thought reform programs also, among other things, create the potential forces necessary for exercising undue influence over a person's independent decision-making ability, and even for turning the individual into a deployable agent for the organization's benefit without the individual's meaningful knowledge or consent.

        Coercive persuasion programs are effective because individuals experiencing the deliberately planned severe stresses they generate can only reduce the pressures by accepting the system or adopting the behaviors being promulgated by the purveyors of the coercion program. The relationship between the person and the coercive persuasion tactics are DYNAMIC in that while the force of the pressures, rewards, and punishments brought to bear on the person are considerable, they do not lead to a stable, meaningful SELF-CHOSEN reorganization of beliefs or attitudes. Rather, they lead to a sort of coerced compliance and a situationally required elaborate rationalization, for the new conduct.

        Once again, in order to maintain the new attitudes or "decisions," sustain the rationalization, and continue to unduly influence a person's behavior over time, coercive tactics must be more or less CONTINUOUSLY applied. A fiery, "hell and damnation" guilt-ridden sermon from the pulpit or several hours with a high-pressure salesman or other single instances of the so-called peaceful persuasions do not constitute the "necessary chords and orchestration" of a SEQUENCED, continuous, COORDINATED, and carefully selected PROGRAM of surreptitious coercion, as found in a comprehensive program of "coercive persuasion."
        Truly peaceful religious persuasion practices would never attempt to force, compel and dominate the free wills or minds of its members through coercive behavioral techniques or covert hypnotism. They would have no difficulty coexisting peacefully with U.S. laws meant to protect the public from such practices.

        Looking like peaceful persuasion is precisely what makes coercive persuasion less likely to attract attention or to mobilize opposition. It is also part of what makes it such a devastating control technology. Victims of coercive persuasion have: no signs of physical abuse, convincing rationalizations for the radical or abrupt changes in their behavior, a convincing "sincerity, and they have been changed so gradually that they don't oppose it because they usually aren't even aware of it.

        Deciding if coercive persuasion was used requires case-by-case careful analysis of all the influence techniques used and how they were applied. By focusing on the medium of delivery and process used, not the message, and on the critical differences, not the coincidental similarities, which system was used becomes clear. The Influence Continuum helps make the difference between peaceful persuasion and coercive persuasion easier to distinguish.

VARIABLES

        Not all tactics used in a coercive persuasion type environment will always be coercive. Some tactics of an innocuous or cloaking nature will be mixed in.  Not all individuals exposed to coercive persuasion or thought reform programs are effectively coerced into becoming participants.  How individual suggestibility, psychological and physiological strengths, weakness, and differences react with the degree of severity, continuity, and comprehensiveness in which the various tactics and content of a coercive persuasion program are applied, determine the program's effectiveness and/or the degree of severity of damage caused to its victims. For example, in United States v. Lee 455 U.S. 252, 257-258 (1982), the California Supreme Court found that "when a person is subjected to coercive persuasion without his knowledge or consent... [he may] develop serious and sometimes irreversible physical and psychiatric disorders, up to and including schizophrenia, self-mutilation, and suicide."

WHAT ARE THE CRITERIA OF A COERCIVE PERSUASION PROGRAM?

A).   Determine if the subject individual held enough knowledge and volitional capacity to make the decision to change his or her ideas or beliefs.
B).   Determine whether that individual did, in fact, adopt, affirm, or reject those ideas or beliefs on his own.
C). Then, if necessary, all that should be examined is the behavioral processes used, not ideological content. One needs to examine only the behavioral processes used in their "conversion." Each alleged coercive persuasion situation should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.   The characteristics of coercive persuasion programs are severe, well-understood, and they are not accidental.

COERCIVE PERSUASION IS NOT VOLUNTARY, PEACEFUL, RELIGIOUS
PRACTICE OR CENTRAL TO ANY BONAFIDE RELIGION.

        Coercive persuasion is not a religious practice, it is a CONTROL technology. It is not a belief or ideology, it is a technological process. As a PROCESS, it can be examined by experts on its technology COMPLETELY SEPARATE from any idea or belief content, similar to examining the technical process of hypnotic induction distinct from the meaning or value of the post-hypnotic suggestions. Examining PROCESSES in this manner can not violate First Amendment religious protections. Coercive persuasion is antithetical to the First Amendment.   It is the unfair manipulation of other's biological and psychological weaknesses and susceptibilities.   It is a psychological FORCE technology, not of a free society, but of a criminal or totalitarian society.   Any organization using coercive persuasion on its members as a CENTRAL practice that also claims to be a religion is turning the SANCTUARY of the First Amendment into a fortress for psychological assault.    It is a contradiction of terms and should be "disestablished."    Coercive persuasion is a subtle, compelling psychological force which attacks an even more fundamental and important freedom than our "freedom of religion." ITS REPREHENSIBILITY AND DANGER IS THAT IT ATTACKS OUR SELF-DETERMINISM AND FREE WILL, OUR MOST FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOMS.

$ The Illuminopoly $

        Using a monopoly on the money supply our enemy, the illuminati, set about gobbling up other areas of society, all of which was done while the public slept unawares of the conspiracy.    ALL people must know the information contained within this DEBRIEFING and on this site. The Illuminati managed to get this far off of the ignorance of the people. We must be ignorant no more!

        There are other things we can do as well. We need to keep pressing the politicians for change and keep them on their toes. Our ultimate goal is to educate the people and turn the outer ring against the inner core with truth until it cracks. We can capture the technology and make a good use of it.   In the right hands, this technology can let the blind see and the deaf hear.  Once it is readily available then protective technologies will also emerge.   Finally, we need to realize that what the enemy is doing is fear tactics.  We should never give in to blackmail and fear tactics, even when our own loved ones are used for blackmail because when we give in then someone else, somewhere, is going to be tortured because of our weakness.  If you know for a fact someone who is engaged in this mind control business then turn them in before they kill someone else.  Serial Killers do not need to be protected and "national security" is a joke considering there's a One World State which usurps national governments anyway.

        Imagine this, a very secret society, corrupted and hell-bent on world-wide domination, sets up ground based and orbital satellite transmitters, perhaps using MASER'S. The purpose of these are to brainwash, from birth, the citizens of the world with posthypnotic suggestions to make them operate the way the secret society wants them to with just a few key word commands.   Which words and commands? How about "sleep," "forget," "obey only my voice," and "I am your master" just to start with! It is said that a person will only go so far with hypnosis and that you can't do anything against your will. This is true, but how much willpower do you have when you're an infant and don't know anything!    And how much willpower would you have if, in ignorance, you heard voices in your head and believed them to be... your God! Programming someone in such a way is similar to how COMPUTERIZED TROJAN HORSE PROGRAMS work in computer viruses. They've created a 'backdoor' into your mind from birth that only they have access to.

        I have met some people who ignorantly insist that the mind of man cannot be controlled.   Oh but it can under certain circumstances! A man's mind is normally controlled by a correctly functioning mind under their own belief system.  But weaken the correct functions of the mind, use their own belief system unknowingly against them, and also maintain around them a circled wall of ignorance and they will do just about anything for you if they feel that it is justified. They will obey commands willingly.   In the past we've had cult leaders such as Hitler, Manson, and Jim Jones use simple mind control techniques on their PUPPETS with great success proving that men can be manipulated and controlled to do things they normally wouldn't do.   You can imagine the hell that this new unregulated technology can produce in the hands of vampiric political leaders!   That hell is NOW because what you may or may not know is that these games are already in progress and hundreds of people are getting burned by them.

        Haven't you ever wondered why you have to work so hard to get ahead while the elite seem to have it made?

        "Give careful thought to your ways. You have planted much, but have harvested little. You eat, but never have enough. You drink, but never have your fill. You put on clothes, but are not warm. You earn wages, only to put them in a purse with holes in it." Haggai 1:5-6. When they inflate the money supply your "purse" gets more holes. When they deflate the economy and cause a recession or depression, you stand a good chance of losing your "purse" through "corporate down sizing" and loss of jobs.

        So what do they do with all this free money?   Why they kill people by creating wars in other countries, brainwash the mass populace, and corrupt the laws of the land. There is an unspoken rule that the best money to be made is to loan money to countries at war because any country at war will bankrupt itself to survive. And after the war you have a few devastated nations that are under your thumb. Anytime usury, debt based monetary systems, fractional reserve banking, and fiat money coexist together they lead to mass murder, war, corruption, and the breakdown of society.

IS SOMEONE TRYING TO INFLUENCE YOU?
THE INFLUENCE CONTINUUM

The Controlled Media - Government - Educational Institutions -

Method Of Influence	Techniques
Mode of Influence: Choice-respecting (emphasis on message)
Educative/Therapeutic	Reflection Clarification Discussion Information Giving Directed Questioning Creative Expression Advisory/Therapeutic Commenting on Problem or alternatives Suggesting Ideas Recommending solutions Rational argument (message oriented) Hypnosis (some forms)
Mode of Influence: Compliance-Gaining (emphasis on response)
Persuasive/Manipulative Rational Argument:	compliance oriented Emotional appeals Compliance tactics: consistency, reciprocation, social proof, authority, liking, scarcity (see Cialdini. 1985) Hypnosis (some forms)
Controlling/Destructive Isolation from social supports	Selective reward/punishment Denigration of self and of critical thinking Dissociative states to suppress doubt and critical thinking Alternation of harshness/threats and leniency/love Control-oriented guilt induction Active promotion of dependency Debilitation Physical restraint/punishment Pressured public confessions

      

 Basically what happened is that in 1913 this country instituted criminal banking fraud. Some believe it happened through secret societies. Once they had the power, they used their endless supply of interest money to buy both sides of the political spectrum. Whereas the public sees two or three parties, there is really only one hidden power that controls things behind the scenes. They have usurped your vote.  Doesn't really matter who you vote for if they control the politicians on all sides of the fence. They've used their money to buy a controlling interest in the stock of the major media companies to fuel their propaganda machine. And since 1913 they've also gone after and attained control of the schooling system, the medical community, the scientific community, the military, the law, the courts, the entertainment community, and have been busy trying to slowly rewrite history to further their agenda. Did you know any of this? Probably not, unless you've kept your eyes open because knowledge has been controlled and knowledge is power. Most likely you've only known what they've wanted you to know, unless you've purposely sought out this information all on your own.

"Stop watching TV, and start thinking for yourself."

        "He who controls the money supply controls that nation."   If you're in the center of things and control when the market expands or contracts then you know ahead of time what to do financially. The money is there for the taking. Take control of the money system, buy out the politicians on both sides of the political fence, buy a controlling interest in the stock of the media companies, change the laws of the land to escape justice, control the schools and keep the populace dumb. The definition of communism is : A system in which political and economic power is concentrated in one party or ruling class. In America that ruling class is the Federal Reserve and those that control it. Democracy in America is an illusion, one that is perpetuated with mass genocide. Now that we have a world central banking system and an IMF there is no such animal as democracy. In reality it is a world communist state, a New World Order.

        You are literally paying people with your taxes to steal from you and use the stolen money to sponsor wars which then kill your children.

MIND CONTROL AND RELIGION

        Coercive persuasion is secular conduct. Insofar as it is recognized as coercion and "undue influence," it is illegal conduct. Prohibition of this specific conduct will protect the State itself and the free exercise rights of all citizens without infringing on the free exercise rights of religious organizations.

        Coercive persuasion is antithetical to the First Amendment. It achieves much of the harmful result of fraud, false imprisonment, coercion, undue influence, involuntary, servitude, intentional infliction of emotional distress, outrageous conduct, and other tortuous acts.

        Coercive persuasion is unfair manipulation of the biological and psychological weaknesses and susceptibilities of one's fellow men. It is an opposite to charity and kindness. It is a psychological modus operandi of a criminal or totalitarian society.

        Coercive persuasion is not a religious practice. It is a covert control technology. It is not a belief or an ideology. It is a technological process that impairs rationality.

        As a process it can be examined separately from any message content that may be associated with its practitioners. This is like examining the technical processes used in hypnotic induction separately from examining the meaning or value of any hypnotic suggestion given during hypnosis. Examining processes, never beliefs, will not violate anyone's First Amendment religious protections.

        John Dewey believed that, "the human power to respond to reason and truth protects democracy." Any organization using coercive persuasion on its members that also claims to be a religion is turning the sacred trust and privileges of our democratic First Amendment sanctuary into a fortress for psychological assault. It is covertly twisting "religious freedom" to deny our more basic constitutional right to unfettered rationality in our freedom of thought and free will.

        Freedom of religion cannot exist without first having an absolutely protected freedom of thought. Freedom of religion without freedom of thought is an absurdity.

        "... [a] church cannot seek the protection of one constitutional amendment while it allegedly deprives citizens of the protection of other constitutional guarantees." --Robin George v. International Society of Krishna Consciousness 473 F, Supp. at 312, U.S. 89-1399.
        As you will learn from other pages on this site, the Illuminati own and operate several big companies which make an enormous amount of money and this money is used to finance their evil empire.