Comments on: Mental Robots

By: doug

doug — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 05:47:41 +0000

Yes. In fact, I’ve chatted with Gunderson on a couple of occasions. I even went so far as to confirm with the FBI that he was indeed in their employ.
Ted is a true believer.

By: Fitz

Fitz — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 15:49:38 +0000

Along parallel lines, you’ve seen the interview that Richard Metzger conducted with Bryce Taylor, with commentary by another Satanic Conspiracy pusher, Ted Gunderson, yes?

By: seekue

seekue — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 06:48:51 +0000

Process Propaganda from the Utah complex on National Geographic Channel:
http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/dogtown/
Aside from the obvious profiling of their Hell Hounds, I am sure there is subliminal text during the programme, so make sure to record it and rewatch the series frame by frame.

By: Plasmafist

Plasmafist — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 20:00:06 +0000

Yeah, exactly (about “a big question”). Short of what is externally derived from the false memories, there is the self’s own greed for something. Where in the want gave way, those he was trusted to aid in healing thus become secondary victims to a perverse conspiracy under the sole guidance of one Dr. Hammond. And to go to such dramatic lengths as saying he’s the one with the smoking gun ,… your right, the power trip this psycho was on is quite mind blowing.

But I guess this just all can just reverts back to the idea that nothings to bizarre or unbelievable, to keep people from believing it. Satanic cults,… no less believable the story of Joseph Smith. Its all just feeding a sick need, a perverse disease; the delusional believer and the willful liar, as you said, are one in the same…

By: doug

doug — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 23:15:37 +0000

“For what gain were the patients led?”
That’s actually a big question and the simple answers prove unsatisfactory. I’m sure that this cult conspiracy research wasn’t terribly lucrative, nor did it bring fame. It seems that the conspiracy crowd does appreciate what marginal recognition their “research” brings, but their behaviour (like Hammond’s antics in facing the corner during deposition) often doesn’t indicate the mind of a shameless ham. I once made a distinction between two types of conspiracy-monger: the willful liar and the delusional believer. But, more often than not, those I have spoken with have seemed to be both at once. They were delusional believers who were willing to lie to prove that which they “knew” to be true.
More mind-blowing to me than the idea that Hammond could do nothing better with such dire information than bring it to more therapists, is the fact that he claimed to know the name of the man in charge of the whole evil operation… but opted to withhold it.

By: Plasmafist

Plasmafist — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 11:11:04 +0000

“He described a savage, blood-thirsty cult operating at the highest levels of society and in the United States Government.”
And yet, his main interest is:
“It’s time to share more information with therapists.”

I also found it kind of interesting that only after the “first international congress where ritual abuse was talked about”, he later becomes aware of a patient he’s treating that is a ritual abuse victim, “we hadn’t gotten that deep yet”.

As for your questions near the conclusion, rhetorical as they may be, I think they really descry a most poignant aspect. For what gain were the patients led? “Sickness will surely take the mind, where minds can’t usually go.”

Interesting post.

By: doug

doug — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 06:33:45 +0000

The Utah Processeans seem to have had detractors well before they were completely “outed”. In one case there was a disgruntled former employee of the animal shelter who provided lurid tales of occult crimes to the conspiracy underground. This may all stem from her. Tales of aerial photographs have come up more than once during the course of my research also.
Thinking about this posting today, I came home with a mind to re-word a few of the paragraphs. Now that I look at them, I don’t feel as strong of a need, but I would like to clarify a few things. I worry that my wording gives the appearance of credibility to the pseudo-science of Neuro Linguistic Programming (NPL). I’m not sure that a tone of irony can readily be inferred from my description of NLP as “subtly coercive”. For those who aren’t aware, NLP’s original claims actually have been put to scientific scrutiny, and it has failed. This is detailed in an excellent (if somewhat dry) book titled “Tall Tales about the Mind & Brain” edited by Sergio Della Sala.
I also feel that my posting here may also give too much implied “credit” to the idea of hypnosis as a type of brainwashing technique required for the implantation of “false memories”. I mention “quibbling” about the definition of hypnosis in a footnote, but the quibbling was all my own as I grappled with my own wording. In fact, the fact that these “hypnotherapists” were acting as therapists at all manufactured a situation in which they could convince their patients of their bullshit stories. A hypnosis-style dialogue is unnecessary in implanting “false memories” (as described in the what-colour-t shirt example). The “hypnosis” was probably only a convenient circumstance in which the patient was allowed to reveal the “repressed” memories that their therapist wanted to hear.
Of course, this post covers a lot of material in a short space. I think anybody can see that this could be elaborated in many directions.

By: FatalTwilight

FatalTwilight — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:59:07 +0000

Damnit. There will allways be people like that I guess…

That is kinda creepy about the aerial photos though.