Non governmental organizations (NGOs), governments, police and intelligence firms, corporate interests, and even sectarian and religious and hate groups like the Anti Defamation League (ADL), with its tentacles in the NGOs and their related industries are using non -consensual, unethical ,and possibly illegal “middle man attacks ” of web browser searches online to target people they dont like. And, those online operations come offline too.
Related Story: CAIR Los Angeles sues the government for disclosure about how LA is spending the $425,000 government grant allicated for “countering violent extremism (CVE )” programs. These programs include onlune and offline “redirection and disruption ” of individuals who fall into these targeting programs.
These religion based hate groups and their compatriots in the altRight, a hodgepodge of occulted religious orders working through activist circles, police, intelligence firms, and private contractors aka DHS /FBI/Mi5-6 private contractor spies are employing(deploying ) varying levels of “extrinsic religion ” as we saw with former FBI director James Comey and his allegiance to theologian Rienhold Niehbur; and using programs like Moonshot CVE, and the Palantir octopus of “predictive policing” technology and internet monitoring “tools” to “target individuals” and whole demographics with non-consensual “internet redirection”online, based on Google search language; and then, its associated unconstitutional “proactive policing” offline.
This “redirection,”and military “psychological operations ” waged against non-consensual subjects is what “mind control” actually is in the extant literature, and by definition and an example of what is commonly known as a, “black program,”in military and intelligence circles, and in these dangerous, mind manipulating black ops, we now see them privatized, wholly unaccountable to anyone .
Related Story: anti-Muslim bigot and terror manufacturer Rita Katz and her gang of intelligence /security thugs pops up at the site of many strange mass shootings, and other mayhem both BEFORE and AFTER,these events, almost as if she had written the script: Search ROGS for cases yhat examine “mind control”, strange internet happenings, and the terminology or weaponized use of of pornography.
And, these corporate operatives, police, and others like British Intelligence (GCHQ-JTRIG) widely use internet forum infiltration, hacking, redirection, and more to manipulate speakers, cyberstalk, harass, defame, and otherwise “control” people and their choices too.
Psychology and the quaint, pre-internet, pre-redirection, post “free will” internet, and post-MKULTRA era notion of “free will”
The average citizens chances of encountering “spies” used to be nearly impossible, whereas today, the chance of “average, normal people” encountering spies and their assets is a 1/30 chance, EVERY DAY, according to the numbers on the rosters of US based security industry, intelligence, and policing agents, who act in hidden capacities online and off. That means there is one security /intel /police agent per US person, compared to the general population, and that number does not include retired police and military agents who are still active in organizations like ATAP, LEIUs, Citizens on Patrol, or the often cited anti -democracy FBI -Infragard.
The anti-democratic FBI Infragard is behind every internet switch, using cowardly police state, Fusion Center monitoring and provocateur manipulation of real-time conversations on social media, and more to alter, redirect, and otherwise “influence” the minds, and choices of individuals that they target online.
And then, after that, comes their offline, real time harassment of activists as documented by the ACLU, dissenters, and first amendment speakers. Like this, for example.
So: Why do psychologists resist using the term “mind control” in discussing the above mentioned psychological manipulation of targeted audiences, and targeted individuals? Is it only because the APA squashed the research into that topic in the 1980s, or that they are deliberately stuck in the past, struggling over the legitimacy of not just the legitimacy of claims of mind control, but especially narrative control, post MKULTRA, and at the height of the Ronald Reagan/Edwin Meese-pornography and Moral Majority era?
- Dualism makes the problem insoluble; materialism denies the existence of any phenomenon to study, and hence of any problem.
The short bus answer, is that psychologists are simply and often deliberately out of touch with the reality of the internet and its hidden speech police, as we see with Dr.Lorraine Sheridan, Vaughan Bell, et al., but also focus on the following examples of gang stalking denialism by Vaughan Bell, et. al. because these were written at exactly the time that the US -FVEYs were actually torturing human beings in Iraq, and imprisoning-and drugging – men in Guantanamo Bay Cuba, which many argue is a mere ectension of MKULTRA programs providing torture porn to people like US vice president Dick Cheney.
Laypersons, public relations industry persons, sociologists, movie script writers, and others call these types of targeted “non-consensual alterations of human perception, aka perception management” mind control because the targets dont have a “choice” in these matters. And its at this juncture where we can make educated guesses that anyone who calls targeted, non-consensual internet experiences anything other than “mind control” is likely getting research grants from government or other “vested” resources.
So, lets examine gang stalking denialism from the perspective of the related concept of mind control denialism.
Psychology has almost always been nearly junk science, because its purely subjective* and relies heavily upon the subjective opinions and diagnoses of biased, non-objective, primarily white christian and Jewish observers.
As such, it is an inneffective tool with which to analyze delusions in any form other than the white Jews,and christians who adhere to those “beliefs ” and the exigent religion based societies that enforce those beliefs, as this analyses relies upon cultural observers who themselves are denying the experiences–and story telling conventions and traditions– of the other two thirds of the worlds population.
But also, because it is entirely subjective, not objective in the clinical sense at all, because of that glaring Jewish -christian bias inherent in the research at its foundations.
Lets look at a few of the infamous Western Holy War era psychological studies that sought to “question” the narratives of people who had claimed mind control experiences online, what some studies called MCEs, and correlate these studies with the well known and oft repeated gang stalking memetic, that “psychologists are in on it,” which they generally are, bbased in what they read(such as these studies below), and their strange belief systems, like the,absolute “good” of government funding.
So, ROGS,asks: is the “government” part of some “conspiracy” to deny the ample evidence of “non-consensual redirection and psychological and influence operations,” stated above (and stated in millions of internet and MSM sources too)?
Lets ask the US National Institute of Health, and the National Library of Medicine about their “mind control denialism” study from 2006, and a few others, and, as usual, ROGS asks you, the reader to decide for yourself. But also, if your lawter, shrink, parole officer, medical doctor, social worker, etc. says you are “delusional”, point them here to these junk science papers, written by pseudo-scientists, aka psychologists:
‘Mind control’ experiences on the internet: implications for the psychiatric diagnosis of delusions
Vaughan Bell et al. Psychopathology. 2006.
Background: The DSM criteria for a delusion indicate that it should not include any beliefs held by a person’s ‘culture or subculture’. The internet has many examples of people reporting ‘mind control experiences’ (MCEs) on self-published web pages, many of which suggest a community based around such beliefs and experiences. It was hypothesized that some of these reports are likely to reflect delusional beliefs and the hyperlinks between web reports were likely to show evidence of social structure, demonstrating the ‘culture or subculture’ exemption to be increasingly redundant in light of new technology.
Sampling and methods: Texts from web sites reporting MCEs (n = 10), experience of cancer (n = 10), depression (n = 10) and being stalked (n = 10) were identified, and were blind-rated by three independent psychiatrists for the presence of delusions. Hyperlinks from web sites reporting MCEs were used to create a network structure; this was compared with a size-matched, randomly generated network and known social networks from the literature using social network analysis.
Conclusions: The sampled web-published accounts of MCEs are highly likely to be influenced by delusional beliefs. Social network analysis suggests there is significant evidence of an online community based around these beliefs. The fact that individuals can form a community based on the content of a potentially delusional belief presents a paradox for the DSM diagnostic criteria for a delusion, and suggests the need to revise and revisit the original operational definition in the light of these new technological developments.
Heres a few more moldie oldies from the War on (manufactured) Terror era of endless money spent on junk science and psycholigy to justify that illegal war, and likely beneficiaries like Vaughan Bell:
Bells pre-masterpiece of fraudulent (or merely uninformed and pandering)junk science, pondering “delusions” that the governments of the western world and their propaganda agents are manipulating our online experiences:
‘Internet delusions’: a case series and theoretical integration
Vaughan Bell et al. Psychopathology. May-Jun 2005.
Heres some other crackpot junk science pushing shrink from that era too:
Why do people with delusions fail to choose more realistic explanations for their experiences? An empirical investigation
Daniel Freeman et al. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2004 Aug.
ROGS CHALLENGE: ROGS,dares,any and,all gang stalking denialists, and mind control deniers, and “internet delusions” espousing psychologists, therapists and others, to refute the evidence above, that proves definitively that “psycholigists are in on it,” fat as rats, and thick as thieves.
* Subjective, meaning that most diagnoses of various “mental illnesses” ranging from personality disorders to delusions, and Type 1&2 errors, are largely derived from Jewish-christian culture and its flawed, biased, incentivized cultural observers.
So, while issues like physical brain damage, Alzheimers, aneurysms, and other “organic” brain disorders have observable effects,and affective symptoms, backed by actual science which can be analyzed using the scientific method, issues like “delusions,” or ratings of narcissism, schizo-affect, and other western gibberish have less than scientific interpretations, are wholly an opinion, and are not consistent across cultures.
So, organic brain disorders are observable across cultures, and separate from so called “mental disorders” based in some square pegs opinion about cogs in wheels.