Exposing myself - a near-blind "control" for comparison

[Phil]

In experimental studies with populations of individuals, a control group is necssary for comparison. While my special lady friend is not COMPLETELY ignorant of the "community" (hence "near-blind"), she don't know David icke from Adam (literally the one from the bible...she knows very little of that too)...and I don't even think she watched all of this one, let alone any other video in the "community"...certainly hasn''t read a word...and the bits and pieces I've talked to her about I tried being careful not to influence her thought to much in hopes of drawing authentic experiences.

I almost put this in healing, and definitely would have if I'd ask Christine to do this first rather than Ben. Ness was traumatized most as a kid by her mom's brother-in-law, Uncle Eddie (name Americanized for her protection )...who terrifies her to this day. Note: I do not ever believe a single word she (or anyone in her family...or most people for that matter) say, not at face value or on the surface. So Uncle may or may not have "gotten to her" successfully (physically), but mentally and emotionally for her entire life scared her so much she changes as a person when she finds out he's in town---she's 40 now, just starting to work this all out.

He family is built around lies, the one truth of it being that at some point, and I'm piecing this together from the worst story tellers (and biggest liars) ever, is that momma (referring to Ness' mom) was bought a house in America to raise her 4 daughters if she'd raise the kids of Uncle E'...he at least has a son (not sure if there are siblings). I think this was around the time when daddy (college professor from Alabama--pretty psychopathic from what I can gather) as she put "was banging a girl her age" (she was 15)...the abuse never phased momma, but the shame of being cheated on was horrid enough to have her try to make her daughters all hate him....she was successful with all but Ness...so, daddy issues on top.

Anyhow, she came to America in her mid-teens, outwardly an "American" slutty party girl...inwardly a victim in love with lying and appearances needy for attention and approval. She LOVES the match.com story, though her version I think is more to justify her being with dudes a bit longer than she originally told me from what I gather. The beginning of our relationship was all the story of how she wanted me to believe her life was, including the "fact" that her ex was a good daddy.

I'm REAL fact...he is not only stereotypically the Italian-American abusive control freak, he's one of the worst people I've ever met, on many levels. He's a terrible dad, only thing he's good at is imposing his will on others...and as soon as I learned and pointed that out we began working on making it ineffective, making his borderline-personality disorder especially problematic as he was constantly trying to hur/control her (us) more every time he failed the time before...it sucked, but we got through it grew....together....a lot.

[Phil]

Anyway, I'm laying all this out as the baseline to the "control"....the (lifelong) trauma is there, I included only details I can verify from my experience, to have her tell them (if you gain her trust) the stories will be embellished (we're working on that though) like Uncle E is a billionaire. He is definitely close enough, they come and go (to India, Ecuador, America, and vacation in any other country) constantly. The big family secret is that he may or may not have been molesting black sheep ness....which is kept in place by "good mommy" support from the other daughters and cousins that "know about" uncle E but think it is ok enough to keep their own small kids away from him as best they can while sucking up and being friendly to his face.

This is coming to a head now in that Ness blew up on her mom (in front of some of the sisters) about how fucked up it is for her that they play this game...of course it didn't go smoothly and the result is that she doesn't get to see any of her family anymore..they all chose "Uncle E's" side...which is the delusion that mommy is a good person and worthy figurehead matriarch for their happy family.

Yes, I am a rescuer. No, I wouldn't choose to be dealing with this if I hadn't gotten "snatched" and invested before I realized how deep this all was....sure, I should probably get out and often explain why to her face. Not sure what she assumes but I explain I work out EVERYTHING openly, I always wonder how she'd react if she started reading (starting with my early writings on PA). But this past weekend when her "BFF" good sister (the 4 of them split, the two oldest call themselves the "good sisters" as they judge the wild choices Ness and the other who was even worse teen) came to town and stood her up for the lunch date that was the only hour she would give her (rest of the time was with family, and Uncle E)

It crushed her that her sis couldn't even give her a couple of hours, choosing to maintain the status quo....black sheep not worth bothering with, "family" more important (she live in the UAE, I believe because it is not only trendy but because they have slaves....I'm sorry, maids....like the upper-middle class Ecudoreans they grew up as. Very sad but she handled it well. Also, this is the first time he has been in town and there hasn't been crisis created from the change of personality that happened every prior time ness learned/felt the dude was in town. So we're making progress. This was an attempt to have something solid in the discussion...our relationship is a project, I don't want to live trapped in her victimhood, and refused even before she blew up on them to play their games, so she knew I always a ticking time bomb waiting for the opportunity to have this convo where it belongs, in front of Uncle E and mommy.

Oh one other thing: the lie is held together with the emotional blackmail that I guess the whole family believes. The admired sister of mommy, who is supposedly this great person super smart and sweet and charitable and all that...is also so "fragile" that she would kill herself if she knew any of Ness' truth about her husband. It's so weird being part of that of family dynamic, other than the HUGE LIE that they all keep up so well, you'd never suspect any of it.

I tell all you of this as a sort of therapy for myself, and disclosure for those with wilder, wore stories. There's always a context deeper than is apparent, and I want to focus on the trauma-based of "paranormal" phenomenon. There is a reason why (especially female) experiencers tend to have wild storied of their childhood they never want to talk about. I think getting a handle on them is important, the sensitivities/powers/vision that gets unlocked stays "out of control" and terrifying for them until they can learn to let go of the habit of lying to themselves...which I believe more often than not is self defense mechanism, going to their "happy place" when something terrible happens to them, and it becomes a pathological behavior when they apply it to EVERY other aspect of their life, which seems to have been the case with my love.

Cuz that's what it ultimately comes down to: recognizing that we all are worthy love. Even when your whole family is more in love with the love with the lies of pedo Uncle E, they are people too, traumatized in their own way. I believe only truth heals, and it's not always pleasant to anyone involved, but we need to crack this culture of lies if we expect to live in anything different, and all we can do is our part in the existence we live in.

So switching gears, I wanted y'all to have a background to hear how the stories she told me that seem completely unrelated, ghost stories, demons, growth hormones, telekinesis, telepathy, prescience....even a sort of abduction episode (that gets more garbled than the rest )...also know that while I share all the negative, there is TONS of positive. I don't weigh the pros/cons when considering staying with the relationship....I merely tell her my truth, my perspective, and guage the response to see how willing she is to do the work to change/grow.

We've come a long way, it's been quite a trip. I love her and my family very much....even consider her extended family part of my own, though won't personally take the responsibility in exposing their lies except by proxy telling ness my perspective on it. I wa blessed with either mundane (or better hidden) family secrets, minimal trauma....it was so hard to relate to even "average" level abuse before I met my ex-wife, ever since then it's like a new lesson every day.

So in the interest of study, here is what an attention-needy traumatized 40 year old American middle class woman tells a stranger about her anamolous experience....and what I'm trying to do is separate the reality she creates from the actual existence we all share and would be able to agree upon/experience...any insight would be appreciated:

[youtube]https://youtu.be/BNQM_KxuOu8[/youtube]

[Phil]

Here's my thoughts from yesterday:

[quote author="@admin" source="/post/295/thread" timestamp="1468251773"]I haven't taken the time to review the video again, which I will do soon...but a couple of things occur to me:

This day and age, where we are drowning in information but starving for practical, useful, clear/not confusing truth that woud empower us....or at least help our lives....the controllers of information, who are the real "masters of the universe" that I inhabit, had to get creative.

Back in the day, there were a handful of people that gathered enough data (on the abduction phenomenon) and presented it in a coherent enough way to be taken with any seriousness at all by anyone....Bud Hopkins, John Mack, Karla Turner, Barbara Bartholic (sp?) come to mind. And that was only because they were able to get a decent enough sample size of people with like experiences (with a sharp, open minds and good writing/presenting skills).

In this day and age, we have the tech available to us that anyone should be able to do it. Probably because those "controllers" can easily monitor this information stream that they've made available to us, and taint it whenever it suits them. In other words, anyone that can gather data like those peeps the community holds in high esteem is easily marginalized, and I'd guess any appealing (false) "data" can be promoted and made more attractive than it'd otherwise be with the minimal thought/focus put toward it.

It also seems an emotional charge has been so effectively attached to the subject matter....which my current best theory is that the concept attacks an idea we rarely consider is an underlying theme of very existence: that we are at the top of the "food chain". Why else would any of these ideas be difficult to hash out?

By ingraining since birth...especially here in the States, where "we're #1" is a friggin' motto...that we are the penultimate of all of creation, the peak of current evolution, without really making that blatantly clear (or fashionable to mention), we don't have a clear picture of the instinctual fear of having a "higher level" predator, our more evolved consciousness present in our reality.

Since our limited mundane senses either are unable to detect, are artificially limited/poisoned, or are overridden by lies to ourselves or malicious programming...the emotions push a "self-defense" mode where to most people anything beyond them (the mundane 5 or so senses) is offensive for most to even talk about.

It seems like that is changing though. Sure, we have tons of people locked in mideaval and earlier dark age ideas of "good vs. evil", where anything not easily seen is of the "enemy"....and maybe there is even something to that....but not evolving our thoughts...and more importantly, emotions--as in: not taking it so personally...limits our ability to get a handle on even the most common of "phenomena" that we have plenty of data...and to my eyes, plenty of personal experiences that should bring some of them into the "scientific" realm, as there is more solid than some of things we just accept without being able to verify (particle colliders come to mind here).

Which all comes back to the weaponization of information. Which to me is the "hiding of truth". "Truth" (capital and/or lower-case) is anything to me that an overwhelming majority would have a hard time disagreeing on. Which us plebes are left with things like this car runs on fossil fuels...while the "truth" is that there are probably a number of ways that it could run more efficiently....in my studies I found that anything over a certain energy-efficiency is classified, presumably for "national security"....the "truth" of which seems to be that Individuals that make decisions that control populations.

I guess my point of re-stating what I believe should be obvious for the umpteenth time is to clarify one of my more "altruistic" purposes in this exercise (getting ness--a stranger to the community, to talk to a stranger publicly of her experiences) is to try to steer change in the behavior patterns of the way we share, consume, and analyze data.

I'm doing what I can to expose whether or not it is "ok" or safe or whatever to share "anamolous" experiences. Whether it be safety from ridicule of others thinking it's ridiculous, scorn from those that assume people just lie for attention, or actual threats like we like to assume is there from "them" when real empowering information is presented that may free us the bondage of the confusion "they" (or we?) create.

I didn't expect it to be like the end of "Pump up the Volume" where this behavior would instantly go viral, but hoped to start an appealing fork in the road where our paths go in a direction where if we "intuit" someone is lying, we say so and speculate why (rather than just "oh she's lying"). Where our attention span lasts longer than the "interesting" new bit of info is lost to the next one, not properly put into context and forgotten. Where instead of just getting interpretations of "data" and experiences from people with the same baseline of information, we explore a little further afield and recognize that there's a broader experience outside what's become acceptable in the community.

The Macks and Turners of yesterday were (supposedly) able to bring data from the "wider" world together to put something together that was like a base of information for a particular experience. The community that puts that in the base-line beliefs of their experience has these days "evolved" into a sort of CULTure looking for more and more "far out data" (added complexity...perhaps one of the most effective tools of those that would control a populace?)...so what Ben is doing to me is a super-important component.

Analyzing those putting "data" out there from as many different angles is super-important IMO....I like his angles and his style is similar to mine, which is why I chose him, rather than first trying with two other friends who get more attention (Shane and Christine...who I think would give extremely valuable and different angles if I could get them--and Ness--to agree to talk...which I may just try)...anyway I'm getting muddled here....his (monologue) analysis of the celebs is markedly different from the way he talks directly to people, and he tries to be different than the celeb-interviewer types that are more concerned with whether peeps will come talk to them than asking real questions....we all need work obviously, I was shocked at some of the "lies"/loose truths he let go in this one

Anyway I'm babbling now...I was trying to show my appreciation for the Chanter, and the direction I hope those of us who want something different can go if we find it a useful path. I am willing to not only put myself out there, but my loved ones...my family as well. I will not live in fear of sharing my experience, and I will not live with those that want to live lies. One of the personal, selfish reasons for doing this was a baseline to start analyzing some of the stories Ness likes to tell.

One thing I learned in this virtual insanity, how important it is truly know yourself. I am not someone that can live in a reality where telling lies is a "value", where it is ever accepted...even the "white lies" and "family secrets" that seem to have good intent. I don't believe there's a such thing, there is not existence I can relate to where hiding the truth is better than exposing it. I hope to do my part in being the change I want to see.
[/quote]

[Naga_Fireball]

Hi Phil,

Well it seems you have a big mess on your hands.

Imo #1 priority is cutting off relations with this Uncle E.

Ness will never get better if that man is not held to account or removed from her life.

Another small detail, there is no such thing as child abuse that is "no big deal". Especially sex abuse or the threat of abuse from the opposite sex. She will never stop this embellishment if people just normalize it or ignore it, worse yet, they depend on their abuser !!

Just curious though about why the general statements about women with childhood trauma. Girls are literally abused more. Try 4 out of 5.

Does that statistic diminish our spiritual lives or invalidate our beliefs? What a dangerous thing to say... Considering the lies of men tend to be short term. Ie lying for sex or to hide an affair from the" inferior" woman....

Take it from me , its better to be single than exhausted.

I hope things get better for you both and after confronting this pos uncle she might be able to calm down.

If she refuses to give up contact with the majority of his supporters it will never get better unless he is prosecuted.

[Phil]

Yeah well I've been dealing with that situation before I ever got enmeshed in the "community", and her handling of the situation is going in the right direction. I think Truth is the right direction....learning how lying (to herself and others) no longer serves her, recognizing how ingrained a pattern it has become, which is why I orchestrated this little "experiment"...to analyze the residuals of the habit...oarticularly as it relates to her relationship with "reality".

To see some of the patterns and archetypes that emerge from traumatized people (not just women), specifically in "paranormal" manifestations, is one of the links that binds the "community". Rather than have these story-telling behaviors be marginalized as just "liars" looking for attention or manifesting their issues, I am trying to see where otherwise seemingly irrelevant phenomenon may be demystified a bit to see their role in the mechanics of what can be seen from the outside as a game.

We want "full disclosure"? We need to be able to walk the walk and provide it ourselves. We suspect "disclosers" of lying? It may be even more interesting and practical looking at why...than even the most fantastical believable stories.

Family secrets are there whether anyone talks about them or not. As above, so below....if we can break through those "little" issues like an extended family, it's worthless to waste our time imagining breaking the bigger cycles. Does something "from above" effect the effort to correct this on the "as below" level? Or is it ALL in us?

In other words, is she...or her demons/entity/manifestation of her trauma....creating the "ships" she sees (during the day even) and the creepy creatures she "sees" in the corner of our room at night? Are the stories others tell, like PC and hermit and my friend from PA....dependent on their past traumas, or is that shit going on all the time just outside the not-as-traumatized's point-of-view?

Or in even other words: is it arrogant to think some suburban schlub from nowhere America hit the "random sample" lottery of some giant experiment/conspiracy/agenda?

Where does the "go within" end and the exterior shared reality begin?

[Phil]

Another thought: What BR and KC were doing with Project Camelot could have very easily been a serious project not unlike the people who back in the day (Mack, Hopkins....even maybe Eva Lorgen?....etc) laid out as scientific as they could get case studies of these people sharing their experiences.

The issue most people have with them is that left as the smattering of random individual interviews, instead of serious reference, they became a sort of "magazine" for entertainment....truth nuggets dropped with little to no context and very little follow up.

In fact, the only people that come up lately from that now seemingly long-ago time in our discussions is Eva (agape) who never left PA and is very vocal and sharing--and somehow marginalized, mainly ignored by the humble host....Barry King used to participate, the "supersoldiers" did their own thing--looking a lot like most of the negative stereotypes that get projected onto "whistleblowers"....but very few (if any) you can see a thread of where they came from and where they are going....especially in the case of David Wilcock, and his unique role within the "disclosure" community

I was fascinated to watch the journey of Jessica Schaub, who did a PC vid as a crystal child....only to reject the label (and the community as she shacked up with some dark cult-leader type. Who latched on to the Cameron girl who spent her energy coming out on the "cultishness" of the Teal Swan/Scott/whatever circus. Say what you want about her, she actually documented a lot of what she went through so that you could actually see where she came from and how she got to where she is now.

It's not that I have delusions that I can solve/fix the issue with anyone with trauma and extra sensory perceptions that it comes with from being influenced by a cult leader type...I mean hell, that might even be the dynamic going on in my own house, right?...I just think that we have the means to create an environment where we share things a healing, problem=solving approach that makes the loops that we are used to that trap us in the madness that necessitates constant exposure of lies.

The biggest problem of a pathological liar, to both the liar and the lied-to, is that more often than not (if not ALWAYS), the lie is WORSE than what actual reality is, once it is examined from a detached point of view. Rather than simply exposing lies, I think we need to use our "lie detection skills" to show liars how reality we all share is probably preferable to the one they create. At least that's what I'm trying to do on an individual level.

[Naga_Fireball]

....Barry King used to participate, the "supersoldiers" did their own thing--looking a lot like most of the negative stereotypes that get projected onto "whistleblowers"....but very few (if any) you can see a thread of where they came from and where they are going....especially in the case of David Wilcock, and his unique role within the "disclosure" community

I was fascinated to watch the journey of Jessica Schaub, who did a PC vid as a crystal child....only to reject the label (and the community as she shacked up with some dark cult-leader type. Who latched on to the Cameron girl who spent her energy coming out on the "cultishness" of the Teal Swan/Scott/whatever circus. Say what you want about her, she actually documented a lot of what she went through so that you could actually see where she came from and how she got to where she is now.

It's not that I have delusions that I can solve/fix the issue with anyone with trauma and extra sensory perceptions that it comes with from being influenced by a cult leader type...I mean hell, that might even be the dynamic going on in my own house, right?...I just think that we have the means to create an environment where we share things a healing, problem=solving approach that makes the loops that we are used to that trap us in the madness that necessitates constant exposure of lies.

The biggest problem of a pathological liar, to both the liar and the lied-to, is that more often than not (if not ALWAYS), the lie is WORSE than what actual reality is, once it is examined from a detached point of view. Rather than simply exposing lies, I think we need to use our "lie detection skills" to show liars how reality we all share is probably preferable to the one they create. At least that's what I'm trying to do on an individual level.

I get what you are saying.
But there are at least three grades or degrees.

The very imaginative and scared person,
The runaway imagination/scared shitless person,
The true habitual pathological liar

Within the alt comm. IMO.

Take for example my nosy neighbor whom i overheard embellishing a story about seeing me on our street.

In her version I am running away and in truth I was walking. But it is a huge fucking detail she changed, I can see how this behavior would frustrate tremendously.

Like a hypochondriac.

[Phil]

I think the only difference is in the intent. Which changes within the individual at every situation. MOre often than not, Ness used to tell the story she thought sounded best...the selfishnes in her intent in wanting acceptance/attention.

Which I guess I sort of agree, my ex was always doing it to further her own agendas through manipulating others. She didn't care about whether she was "liked/loved" as is so important to Ness. She just wanted control of the situation,which spilled over into wanting to create her own reality because she could.

The biggest difference between those two though....is that ex worked hard at self awareness, studied the disorders she was diagnosed with, and so gained enough control over herself to be able to contain it around her kids, and more often than not, me. In fact, I think she liked being with me in that I was able to see through her bullshit, Ness hated that I could at first.

The ex started the process and I wasn't mature/self aware enough to handle it...and probably no one is, as last I talked to her she's still lying about herself to the people that love her. Life came full circle with Ness, I need her to (continue) to grow up and know herself better if the relationship is going to work.

That is a huge contrast in the relationships as well...Ness is obsessed with the relationship, more in love with it than even me ( and I do know she loves me a lot)...huge attachment issues. I was the one attached to the marriage, even when I was pushing her away and hating every choice she made.

Two things stand out from that period in my life, which was years before I'd study any weird phenomonon: one time she told me about a ghost she saw watching over me from the foot of the bed, out of the blue. In fact, looking back now I think she hoarded pets not just for the unconditional love she sought (but more often than not the next animal she brought in either favored me or didn't fit whatever criteria she was looking for until she found a super damaged evil min-pin), but it may have distracted or kept at bay any unseen critters...she wasn't open about that stuff...

...except one day I can't even remember what serious discussion we were having but out of the blue she gave me a look I will never forget and told me "I don't even feel human". I was like "What??", and she says I don't feel like I can relate, I'm not like you or anybody else.

Of course that can be the hundreds of entries from the DSM VI or whatever it's called that she earned in the hundreds page long personality profile she supposedly was going to let me read (or may have never existed, but should have)...but how many diagnoses are the result of actual things that happen that can are you crazy?

Anyways, as therapuetic as it is to reflect on my relationships and the rescuer stereotype I'm working hard to stop behaving as, the other purpose of all this is to sort of connect the "paranormal" phenomona to the mundane human nonsense...and I think one of the huge things I have dropped the ball oh was in researching the "growth hormone" claim, which has been relatively consistent in most of her tellings...though we will have to more conversations when the opportunities arise because she has lots more tid bits that make it even scarier.

She WAS tiny as hell, unnaturally like a SMALL little person in photos with her peers....half size, almost comical. When I asked her to get any documentation that her dad might have, and this was early on when she was still talking to him (he is on gubmint cheez with pretty much no one down in Alabama, and never failed to crush Ness' feelings asking about the sisters that have rejected them their whole life when she tried to connect with him), he ended up sending all the newspaper clippings he'd been mentioned in and letters/correspondences from big shots or about his achievements...which didn't help me in any way other than confirm what a narricist the dude was.

The week of Uncle E (and Ness snubbing her, causing there to be that uncomfortable absence in the "happy good" family gatherings...her mom and sisters always go on about how important their great family is) was just in town makes it difficult, her mom ain't gonna want to be talking to me (or her) any time soon. Ness is fed up with daddy and don't talk to him, so that avenue is more difficult, I should have followed up earlier. And damn it would be easier if Ness was more curious than scared to learn the truth, but I will have to approach her about it again and get her on board for some old fashioned research...there weren't too many computers back in early 80's...but I gotta think records exist.

I guess part of getting this out there is a long shot hope for synchronisty that someone from (or that knows about) that program is out there and reads it, how cool would that be? I mean, Shane says he recognizes peeps from his youth, stranger things have happened, right?

[Phil]

So I talked to her dad yesterday, I took that step I procrastinated for two long and did what I could to VET HER STORIES. How many of us never got around to doing that with a story we "resonated with" until after we found out the source was questionable. I dropped the initial data I gleaned here:

http://openuptoday.freeforums.net/thread/35/vanessa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It was an interesting call, I had a pretty good idea about her father's personality, he's the really self absorbed narcissist type, who is as into "control" as any other high on the "psycho/socio -pathic" end of the scale, but totally respects "authority" and isn't as apparently sadistic as that label generally is associated with. Actually really pleasant to talk to.

It's funny, I am probably getting along with him better than she is with her mom...her latest snub when the "happy family" got together struck home for momma how the hurt is not some emotional blackmail or game they are so used to playing, I am sort of sensing that her (and Ness' sisters) are starting to realize that she is not gonna play along and put up the appearances ANY more, that their paradigm is a shifting a little bit...but that's just my gut, I guess we shall see....denial runs DEEP.

It's funny though, I guess it is how it works: she gets a good handle on her dad, figures out how to not let him get to her...shows REAL progress with her "daddy issues"...and the mom issues rise up challenge her. She's handling it fairly well, but mostly with space...not talking to her (which is a new development, rare even when issues were at their worse). Of course she is the one that has any documentation for any of the claims on the medical end of the story, and we're not on good enough terms to bug do them at the moment. Always something

[Phil]

So what I'm really getting out of all this a sort of further clarification of where distinctions need to made in ideas that have sort of congealed into generalities...mainly based on the concept of how good we are at lying to ourselves:

The stories we like to tell, that we pieced together from other people's stories. Latching on to details that "resonate" and building a narrative around that. And then telling it so much we even start to believe it. I have a silly example from my youth...for some reason it stuck with me. I had a crack in my patio outside my house when I was a small kid, and saw a little garter snake so small it could have fit in the hole in the ground...

I remember being surprised there'd be a snake on our property, and that they could be that small. But for some reason, I wanted to tell the story that the snake came out of the cracks and went back in it. I'm sure there's plenty of Freudian shit there but what struck is me how is tried to tell myself the lie over and over...to make myself believe. I never could but for some reason I can remember trying. I really think I was trying to relate to what I observed other people doing, I never could understand how people could tell a story I was involved in SO differently than I remembered it happening, and it was a punch a face whenever I recognized people actually BELIEVED what they were saying (when I knew it was so far off)

That distinction kinda ties in with the one that needs to be made in the intent of people telling "their" stories. Ness' stories are usually non-negotiable, until I turn them around analyzing them as if they were true. That's where we make headway in getting her (and I apply this to everyone, my kids come to mind as #2 in dealing with this). In this arena though, not only did we rarely see a celeb or witness question their own stories, the audience prefers to "prove the lies", attacking the story by trying to place it into their own understanding of logic and reality. I think this shifting, and may be I'm just projecting here about meaningless bullshit, but I am going to shift perspectives on to the story teller's benefit of the doubt that what they are saying is true...playing it out is where we find gaps. Having the story on "our side" rather than the adversarial the skeptical normally take might get us closer to an agreeable truth....I mean, we're all in this together after all.

Another distinction that I think needs to be cleared up is MKULTRA type mind control programming and trauma based mind control. The former has seemed to become a stand-in when the latter may be more appropriate. The biggest difference is in the intent of the "applier". In the latter case, there is no INTENTIONAL one, it is an abusive "authority" in the victim's life being themselves, not TRYING to program SPECIFIC behaviors but imposing their will wither selfishly (sadism, rapey-ness) or controingly to get them to behave within the acceptable to the abuser's world view. A rejection from daddy or grope from a gross uncle is probably often as or more effective than any physical torture the sickest of individuals can devise

Of course the evidence is shaky for the actual existence of either...but I'm watching the results of extreme trauma and the program's picked up from it in real time. There was no "operator" determining what the split personalities were to do on command, but the split is there, and behaviors/programs were picked up, and never easy to break/correct. This distinctions begs the further investigation into "targeting", as in targeted individuals...the behaviors may have similarities but if there is as much to the TI thing as is made out in the "alt community"...it would behoove us to pay close attention to the distinction there. This may find relevancy in the passing of Max Speirs...one of the "super soldiers" from a group of them share the story that seems that they were part of a bigger population that was in fact MKULTRA-ed. I don't know too much about him but I hope he is resting in peace and would like to pass condolences to anyone suffering his loss

Anyways I sort of lost my train of thought and have a matter to attend to so I'll leave it here for now, sorry for any incoherency in my ramble...