One of the many falsehoods from which Satanic Ritual Abuse mythology is woven, is the pervasively repeated claim that mental health patients and others who allege a history of Ritual Abuse, therapists who treat Ritual Abuse claimants, and persons who “advocate for” Ritual Abuse claimants by evangelizing belief in Ritual Abuse mythology, are all continuously being harrassed and threatened by “the cult”.
“Active cult members continue to threaten and harm adult survivors in a multitude of ways in order to force them to remain silent, most are threatened with death should they disclose their ritual abuse, and many have seen those who threaten them murder others and thus their fears are justified” – Ritual Abuse propaganda site.
Also, Ritual Abuse and Dissociative Identity Disorder claimant-advocates sometimes allege that unnamed skeptical debunkers of SRA and DID have threatened them in some manner, supposedly out of desperation to “shut them up” and prevent them revealing “secrets” that could destroy the world’s ruling elites - if enough people were informed of ”the truths” that only SRA-DID claimants can tell. Or some such fanciful nonsense.
Are these claims of living under constant threat of harm or even murder really valid? If they are not valid claims, why would these RA-DID claimant-advocates make up such stories?
The truth about Ritual Abuse patients and therapists experiencing threats - The Dilemma of Ritual Abuse; Cautions and Guides for Therapistsedited by George Fraser is an expensive and hard to get hold of book, these days, but well worth the expensive or trouble to obtain. Published in 1997, this book contains essays on a number of RA related topics, written by some of the foremost practitioners in the treatment of DID and SRA patients - not by SRA-DID skeptics or debunkers. Written by people like Dr Richard Kluft, and George Fraser himself, these essays reveal and document some very uncomfortable truths about RA-DID patient-claimants – truths personally observed and recorded by medical practitioners who likely treated more such patients than any others (any others who didn’t get sued for generating false SRA memories in their patients). Here is some of what they reveal:
SRA-DID patient-claimants, and/or their supporter-advocates,have been the people making threats against patients and their doctors! Richard Kluft provides some illustrative examples, on page 36:
“I had the further experience of receiving repeated threats on my life.For example, on many occaisions during a two month period when I answered my phone personally, a deep voice would say that I was getting too close to cult secrets and would be killed if I did not back off. Although these phone calls were extremely disquieting, after a brief period of serious concern I sensed a pattern in them. I confronted the patient I suspected was either making or instigating the calls. Although I got no admission or confirmation, I never received another threatening call”.
“On one occaision, an inpatient reported that she was receiving telephone messages from the cult instructing her to kill one of my colleagues and/or me…I arranged for the patient to be kept away from the telephone for a few days without the patient being aware of this intent. She continued to report receiving calls from the cult“.
George Fraser reports similar experiences. One of his patients claimed she was receiving threatening postcards, with “self-desctruct” mind-control commands secretly coded onto them, mailed from various foreign countries. Fraser became suspicious, and a close examination of the postcards revealed that the foreign postal-markings were faked! The patient had been mailing the doctored postcards to herself, confessed one of her “alters”.
Ritual Abuse and Dissociative Identity Disorder claimants themselves have been exposed as the real authors of the threats that they and/or their therapists received, in case after case - but other members of RA-DID “support groups” that many claimants have been involved with are also suspected of concocting and perpetrating elaborate campaigns of threatening harrassment against a range of persons in some claimants lives – including; their therapist’s or treatment facility’s other patients, friends, family members, clergy and community support services workers . Richard Kluft issued informed and insightful condemnations of these non-clinical Ritual Abuse victim claimant “support” groups and networks. From pg. 45:
“I am particularly wary of leaderless or peer-facilitated support groups for dissociative disorder patients and others who allege that they are survivors of ritualistic groups. I have tracked the course of more than a dozen of these groups over the years, and all but one were unmitigated disasters…the proclivity of these groups for overwhelming their members with one another’s traumatic material, excessive dependency, and unbridled requests for support and nurture…and the possibility that members will, under the aegis of group forces and their own vulnerabilities, come to believe that they too have experienced what others represent as their personal histories”.
“But I can share the personal observation that among those MPD (DID) patients and allegers of satanic ritual abuse whom I have treated, those who have networked extensively with fellow patients or allegers invariably take longer to treat than those who do not, and their treatment runs a stormier course. I currently refuse to treat patients who insist on participating in [such] potentially contaminating and countertherapeutic activities”.
Right here, in this youtube video: “David Shurter speaks for testify project…” You don’t even have to watch much of it, Shurter makes the claim only 20 seconds in.
On his blog, Shurter now says that his father was not involved in cannibalism and any suggestion that Shurter said he was would be “so way off base”. But the evidence is right here for you to see and hear. Shurter says that his father was High Priest of a satanic cult operating in Omaha…”and as his son I participated in and witnessed cannibalism, blood sacrifice and murder at his side…”. He can’t even remember what lies he has told about his family & childhood – all the proof that anyone needs, to know that this man is a liar and a fraud!
David Shurter defends convicted pedophiles and slanders child victims!
This hypocritical fraud calls himself a child sex abuse victim advocate, which just makes my blood boil. He rants on & on in his blog postings about child sex trafficking being a huge problem and a terrible evil that nobody cares about but him, but IN HIS BOOK – “Rabbit Hole” – he calls convicted pedophiles Walter Carlson and Mark Andersen his friends and claims they were “set up” for wrongful prosecution by child prostitutes and their parents. Quoting from his book;
“It was also during Project Clean-up that Mark and Walt were charged with crimes against children, which I found to be ridiculous. Mark had invited three hustlers to spend the night on his living room floor and had either inadvertently or intentionally touched one boy’s butt. The boy’s parents tried to extort money out of Mark and failed, then turned to the police and pressed charges.”
“Suddenly, the Omaha World-Herald, whose owner Harold Andersen was reportedly involved in the Larry King/Franklin Credit Union scandal, began touting Walt, the shyest person I’d ever met, as the Pied Piper of Pornography, and Mark and Walt were proclaimed as menaces to society by the local media”.
“Having to buy a plane ticket two weeks in advance, I spent the next two weeks sobbing, waiting to fly back to Omaha to say goodbye to everyone in my life. Omaha media stories that week said David was killed by his roommate Mike James, for reasons unclear; John Joubert was convicted and sentenced to death; and Mark Andersen and Walt Carlson were convicted and sentenced to spend years in prison”.
“No real evidence linked Mark and Walt to any crime, but Omaha had become a circus dictating justice from a kangaroo court. The fact that the parents of the boy had tried to extort money from Mark before going to the police (which came out in court), was insufficient to save him and Walt from prison”.
Shurter calls himself an advocate for child sex abuse victims, but when his friends were charged with crimes against children, did he believe the children? NO! Even now, when he wrote this book, he dismissed the child victim’s disclosures as “ridiculous”. He goes on to refer to the three boys, who were 11 and 12 years old*, by the derogatory term of “hustler” rather than as child sex trafficking victims – which is what they would be, if they really had been prostituting themselves.
*[Quoted from Mark Andersen's appeal, click on State vs Andersen link further down; "Mark G. Andersen appeals his jury convictions and sentences on two charges of first degree sexual assault and three charges of sexual assault on a child. The victims were three preteenage boys in Omaha, J.M., B.T., and S.M...Andersen at time of trial was a 38-year-old homosexual male; his alleged victims, J.M., B.T., and S.M., testified truthfully to Andersen's sexual behavior toward them; and at the time the offenses occurred, J.M. and S.M. were each 11 years old, and B.T. was 12 years old."]
He insinuates that because the boys were supposedly involved in prostitution, that would make them more likely to be lying about his good friend Mark Andersen abusing them! Some sex trafficking victim advocate he is – what a fraud! Shurter shows no understanding at all, that when an adult pays a child for sex that makes the adult guilty of child sex trafficking, and that the child is always victimized by such a transaction. He even commits the infamous sex crime denialist rationalization of minimizing the seriousness of the children’s accusations, saying that Andersen might have either ”inadvertently” [HAH!] or intentionally “touched one boys butt” – but only one boy and he only touched it, he seems to be saying.
Shurter then goes on to slander the victim’s parents as extortionists, and dismiss the victim’s disclosures as payback for Andersen not paying the alleged extortion! He repeats this slander several times, even falsely claiming that it was established as fact in the trial.
Most outrageous of all, Shurter dismisses all of the victim’s disclosures and testimony, and all of the child pornography seized by police, as: “No real evidence linked Mark and Walt to any crime”.
Well, that’s a crock of BS - as this appeals court ruling against Mark Andersen demonstrates with great detail and thoroughness -
“Each boy’s testimony corroborates the testimony of the other two. All three boys testified as to the defendant’s invitations to stay overnight and the fun places the defendant took them. Each boy related the sexually explicit content of the movies they were shown until late at night and testified of being awakened by the defendant’s sexual acts. Two victims testified that the defendant required them to remove all but their underwear before sleeping in his bed with him. This evidence establishes a “modus operandi” and helps corroborate the victims’ testimony. Andersen’s testimony in large part also corroborated the victims’, except he denied sexual misconduct”.
“Sexual assault on a child is an extremely serious and deplorable crime. Andersen’s suggestion that he should receive a lesser penalty because he chose as his victims children whom he claimed had already been subjected to sexual contact is abominable. Andersen, in his brief, points to nothing in the record indicating that two of his victims were, in fact, previously subjected by others to the type of sexual abuse that Andersen inflicted upon them”.
“Neither the trial record nor the presentence investigation reflects any mitigating factors justifying lesser sentences for Andersen’s criminal conduct as determined by the jury in its verdicts. If anything, considering the magnitude, number, and frequency of the crimes the record shows Andersen committed, and considering the impact upon the victims, as shown by the presentence investigation, more severe sentences might well have been justified”.
I’ve been noticing an aggressive internet propaganda campaign about Dissociative Identity Disorder, apparently being waged by certain members of International Society for the Study of Trauma and Dissociation (ISSTD), using mental health journalists - who happen not to be mental health professionals themselves – as ‘fronts’. Specifically, there are several quasi-interviews with Bethany Brand PhD – a member of the ISSTD Journal of Trauma and Dissociation Editorial Board – purporting to be concerned with ”dispelling myths about Dissociative Identity Disorder”.
One example of this campaign can be found on the PsychCentral website. Titled ”Dispelling Myths about Dissociative Identity Disorder” and written by Margarita Tartakovsky, M.S., it is located here:
This article by Margarita Tartakovsky portrays itself to be a matter of public health education, intended to ‘correct’ myths and misunderstandings about DID that “the public” is supposedly confused by;
“(DID), known previously as multiple personality disorder, is not a real disorder. At least, that’s what you might’ve heard in the media, and even from some mental health professionals. DID is arguably one of the most misunderstood and controversial diagnoses in the current Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). But it is a real and debilitating disorder that makes it difficult for people to function”.
Tartakovsky & Brand begin their myth and misunderstanding expose with an obtuse Strawman;
“Why the controversy? According to Bethany Brand, Ph.D, a professor of psychology at Towson University and an expert in treating and researching dissociative disorders, there are several reasons. DID is associated with early severe trauma, such as abuse and neglect. This raises the concern over false memories. Some people worry that clients may “remember” abuse that didn’t actually happen and innocent people may get blamed for abuse. (“Most people with DID don’t forget all their abuse or trauma,” Brand said; “sufferers may forget episodes or aspects of some of their trauma,” but it’s “fairly rare not to remember any trauma at all and suddenly recover memories of chronic childhood abuse.”) It also “pries into families’ privacy,” and families may be reluctant to reveal information that might put them in a negative light”.
Innocent persons being falsely accused of sex abuse crimes against children, based on false memories, is indeed a legitimate concern in our society. However, Tartakovsky and Brand are contending that DID is a controversial diagnosis/ research subject/ treatment specialization, because DID is alleged to arise out of the trauma of childhood abuse & neglect, and “families” [readers are intended to infer "abuse perpetrating family members"] don’t want information about abuse & neglect to be revealed.
The strawman here is an insinuation that the only reason for DID to be “controversial”, is that child abusers don’t want to get exposed by adult survivors of their abuse. Extend the insinuation…DID skeptics must be child abusers! The ongoing recourse to this type of slanderous crapola by DID therapists, researchers and ‘advocates’ only demonstrates that they possess no valid evidence for the legitimacy of DID and must resort to slanderous insinuations against those who expose the truth about it.
This is a review of “The CIA Doctors: Human Rights Violations by American Psychiatrists“, originally published as “BLUEBIRD: Deliberate Creation of Multiple Personality by Psychiatrists” by Colin A. Ross M.D.
Part One – Insinuation, manipulation, and lies
Immediately following the table of contents, this book has a page headed by a string of random letters and numbers, (ooo-eee-ooo! a secret code? what can it mean?), followed by yet another series of quotes from the MKUltra subproject 136 proposal, strategically chosen to be maximally suggestive of “mind-control” experimentation on child subjects. For the truth about subproject 136, refer to “MKUltra subproject 136 – the surprising reality revealed” article also on this site.
The next chapter is “Acknowledgements”, essentially an essay on “why I admire the CIA” by Colin Ross. I don’t share Ross’s fawning admiration for the CIA & its OSS predecessor. I think the OSS spent as much time & effort laying the groundwork for Operation Gladio and similar enterprises, everywhere they went, as they dedicated to actually assisting the fight against our WW2 Axis enemies. The CIA was an illegitimate organization from day one, a cadre of hopelessly incompetent, insanely paranoid anti-communists zealots, responsible for the slaughter of at least 100,000 non-combatant socialists around the world, (not counting all the millions of tragic, pointless military and civilian casualties of the wars they caused to occur), between 1947 and 2000. There was never any need to brainwash or mind-control the CIA’s cold-warriors, they happily committed a continuous process of ideological lobotomization upon themselves, of their own volition. All of the CIA’s leadership and black ops personnel, up to 1995, ought to have been tried for War Crimes, Crimes Against Humanity, treasonous usurpation of American government policymaking powers, treasonous violations of American law, or treasonous violations of their mandated prohibition against domestic operations. In my opinion.
Next is a chapter on Operation Paperclip – the illegal recruitment and off-the-record immigration of surviving Nazis, with some knowledge or skill of use to the American military-industrial complex. That is very old news, of course. What was new, and interesting, was this frank admission:
“An unanswered question is whether any Nazi psychiatrists or mind control experts were brought over under PAPERCLIP or related projects”, and then this -
“There was a round of declassification of mind control documents in the 1970′s, which were the foundation of books published in the 1970′s and 1980′s. These documents and books did not examine the possible role of German PAPERCLIP psychiatrists in mind control experimentation. The subject remains untouched by scholarly and investigative hands, but is an essential part of the historical background”.
In other words, Ross doesn’t know if any Nazi psychiatrists or “mind control experts” were actually recruited to North America or not. He has no proof, no documentary evidence, that any such persons ever came here. This doesn’t stop Ross from insinuating that there ought to be evidence, that there surely must have been some such persons brought over to America, as suggestively as he can. This is a pattern repeated over & over in this book – hence the title of this review.
Another annoying feature of the book, is the constant repetition of the phrases; “mind control” and “manchurian candidate”, throughout the entire narrative – including sections where they have no appropriate relevance to the subject Ross is discussing. A rather transparent, low-tech “brainwashing” technique. I suppose, if you can’t actually prove the core hypothesis of your book, you can at least saturate the consciousness of your reader with buzz-words that will ensure they come away with an indelible mental association between “mind control” and whatever/ whomever you’ve discussed along the way.
The next two chapters present information about the Tuskeegee Syphillis Study, (on behalf of American public health agencies), and various radiation related experimentations on unwitting human subjects, (on behalf of American military researchers). Colin Ross is absolutely right in condemning these as horrific examples of unexcusably unethical research practices, and regretably these are not the only examples from that time period. The superfluous repetition of “mind control” and “manchurian candidate” are particularly glaring in these chapters.
The chapters on Projects BLUEBIRD and ARTICHOKE, as well as the further discussions about hypnotically induced alternate identities, amnesia barriers, and the relationship to MPD in this book, will be addressed in Part Two of this review.
Chapter 5: MKULTRA and MKSEARCH, contain statements by Colin Ross that are of particular interest and concern. On page 62, in a discussion of various MKUltra subprojects, Ross states: “Four of the MKUltra Subprojects involved research on children; 102,103,112 and 117….The fact that CIA funded research on children has not been documented previously. Given that the mind control research declassified to date is certainly an incomplete account of everything done, it is unknown whether other mind control experimentation on children was ethical or harmful. An unanswered question is whether children were ever subjects in Manchurian Candidate experiments”.
Here again Ross substitutes suggestive insinuations for evidence or proof, with the deceptive wording: “…other mind control experimentation on children…” In the following paragraphs Ross describes the four listed subprojects; 102, 103, 112 and 117 – preceded by this disclaimer: “The four MKULTRA Subprojects on children were benign and did not involve unethical experiments“. As Ross describes these projects, it is evident that none of them had anything to do with “mind control” experimentation. So, although it may be true that declassification of research which Ross defines as “mind control experimentation” is incomplete, the question should be – whether or not there had been mind control experimentation on children at all, and if so, whether it was ethical or harmful.
But only four pages later, on page 66, Ross totally contradicts himself : “Manchurian Candidate work was done under MKULTRA Subproject 136…The deliberate creation of multiple personality in children is an explicitly stated plan in the MKULTRA Subproject Proposal…”. What happened to : “An unanswered question is whether children were ever subjects in Manchurian Candidate experiments”, only four pages earlier? Does Ross know the answer, or doesn’t he? If it was unknown, unanswered, whether children were ever subjects in Manchurian Candidate experiments, on page 62, why is he claiming that children were the subject of Manchurian Candidate experiments on page 66? And, if MKULTRA subproject 136 involves research on children explicitly, why didn’t he include it in his list of subprojects involving research on children? Ross stated there were four such projects, and 136 wasn’t in his list. Is he now saying that there were five such projects? Or is this an admission that 136 did not involve research on children explicitly?
More importantly, these statements: “Manchurian Candidate work was done under MKULTRA Subproject 136…The deliberate creation of multiple personality in children is an explicitly stated plan in the MKULTRA Subproject Proposal…” are bald-faced lies!
How convenient for Ross, that he only reproduced a few select sentences of the subproject 136 proposal in his book – preventing his readers from immediately detecting this outrageous deception on his part. If those are the only portions of the proposal they ever do see, no doubt they will believe him! Fortunately, the complete MKUltra subproject 136 proposal is available on this very site, under “MKUltra subproject 136 – the Surprising Reality Revealed”, so anyone reading this review can confirm with their own eyes that Ross’ statements are false.
MKULTRA Subproject 136 is not about “Manchurian Candidate work”, it is about determining whether or not ESP really exists and if so, whether or not promising ESP subjects can be taught to fully control their latent abilities. It is not about “deliberate creation of multiple personality in children”, nor is there an “explicitly stated plan” nor even a subtly hinted at plan, to create multiple personality in children anywhere in that document. The word “children” only appears once in the entire proposal document – in a list of source groups from which data will be drawn, with regard to group experimentation intended to establish whether or not test scores of individuals can be predicted using psychological or physiological scales.
Furthermore, as documented by the chart of funding applicant “status” provided by Ross in the appendixes, the persons who developed this proposal and presumably carried out experiments related to it were unwitting recipients of CIA funding for this study. These researcher/experimenters did not know that the ultimate source of their funding was the CIA, they believed they were being funded by an independent science promotion foundation. These researchers were not, therefore, knowingly conducting this study on behalf of the CIA or any “manchurian candidate” production programs the CIA might have been planning or running.
Part Two – Hypnosis, dissociative states, identities versus personalities
MKUltra subproject 136 could well be the most widely referenced of all the 149 subprojects developed under the auspices of “Project MKUltra, the CIA’s program of research in behavioral modification”. Search engines return hundreds of listings for “MKUltra subproject 136″, ranging from; government hearings reports on a variety of subjects, declassified US intelligence agency documents, academic research publications, scholarly investigative journalism , speculative journalism, exploitative-crank journalism, personal injury claimant stories, speculative psychology dissertations, etc. Surprisingly, very many of these diverse listings repeat the same or similar falsehoods, mistaken assumptions or deliberate misinformation, about subproject 136. If you believe that you have understood what MKUltra subproject 136 was about, what it’s purpose was and what was intended to be carried out under it’s auspices, you are most likely mistaken.
Read the document - if you haven’t actually read the subproject 136 proposal and funding application, (which is the only existing legitimate documentation about that project), then please accept that your understanding of subproject 136 could be based on inaccurate or fanciful hearsay. The subproject 136 proposal document will be posted on this article, for everyone to read. This is the same copy of the document that anyone else has ever had access to, redactions included.
Understanding what the document actually says – the subproject 136 proposal/funding application was written by an academic & researcher, who very likely cared more about documenting the theoretical underpinnings of his work than about writing carefully laid-out proposals. The wording could easily cause misunderstandings, if not read very carefully.
It is clear, however, viewing the document in its entirety, that the purpose of this project was to investigate ESP phenomenon and the possibility of teaching-enticing promising subjects to manifest control over whatever ESP ability might be latent in them – and not “to generate multiple personality disorder victims”, as some persons have falsely alleged.
At the start, the document delineates three separate studies;
1) group experiments,
2) developing methods for subjects increased control over latent ability, and
3) intensive study of particularly promising subjects.
Immediately after this, the document discusses the necessary correlation between student subjects in previous studies liking their teacher-experimenter and the acheivement of higher test scores. Having established this as a given, it would be absurd to interpret anything else proposed in the document as intentionally carrying the potential for turning the subjects against the experimenters, via some form of cruel or sadistic treatment.
Next, the document talks about “preliminary learning studies” in which “feedback of results and other kinds of reinforcement are utilized”.
Then come this famously misconstrued statement:
“That in working with individual subjects, special attention will be given to disassociative states which tend to accompany spontaneous ESP experiences. Such states can be induced and controlled to some extent with hypnosis and drugs”. Note that it doesn’t say will be “induced and controlled…with hypnosis and drugs”
There follows a discussion of the problems posed by random probability of positive results and subects “guessing habits”. And then…
“The data used in the study will be obtained from group ESP experiments which have yielded significant results, high scoring subjects (including control series and records taken after they ‘lost’ their ability, from special groups such as psychotics, children and mediums, and from psychological and educational tests in which answers are of the multiple [unreadable] ”
That statement, above, delineates 4 sources of data;
1) “[previous] group esp experiments…”
2) “high scoring subects…”
3) “special groups such as psychotics, children and mediums”
4) “psychological and educational tests…”
The four sources of data delineated above, clearly corresponds with the first study proposal: “group experiments”, the purpose of which was to establish whether or not a subjects test scores could be predicted using psychological or physiological scales.
“Psychotics, children and mediums” are simply listed as one of four sources of data.
The document does not say: “electric shock, drugs, hypnosis, and “psychological tricks” will be administered to three groups–psychotics, children, and mediums–to induce various states of dissociation, including multiple personality”, as “Franklin Scandal” author Nick Bryant has claimed. Carol Rutz, author of “A Nation Betrayed”, manipulates the meaning of several passages in the subproject 136 proposal with a deceptive contraction, blatantly constructed to support her personal victimization narrative rather than accurately report the wording of this proposal; “That in working with individual subjects, special attention will be given to disassociative states which tend to accompany spontaneous ESP experiences. Such states can be induced and controlled to some extent with hypnosis and drugs . . . The data used in the study will be obtained from special groups such as psychotics, children and mediums . . .”
At around this point in the proposal, there is the following statement;
“Learning studies will be instituted in which the subject will be rewarded or punished for his overall performance and reinforced in various ways – by being told he was right, by being told what the target was, with electric shock, etc”. Does this sound sinister, to you?
The author of this proposal is describing classic conditioning techniques for enhancing learning - presumably, learning to control their “innate psychic ability”. But what about this “electric shock” - is he talking about torturing people through repeated, maximum charge, electroconvulsive shocks? No. Either intentionally or through ignorance, people like Carol Rutz mistake the slang term for electroconvulsive therapy – “electroshock” – with “electric shock”. If the author had meant “electroconvulsive” shock, he would surely have used that terminology.
In the context of a “learning program”, taking place in the early 1960′s, the phrase “electric shock” clearly refers to use of the aversion therapy electric shock device popular at that time. You can read all about this, (outdated) approach to enhancing learning, here:
A small box run by a 9-volt battery, with tiny litte electrodes that are stuck to the calve of the leg or the thumb. NOT AT ALL THE SAME AS THIS:
The aversion therapy shock box can’t be used to “fry someone’s brains”, as electroconvulsive therapy is sometimes described. However, if used repeatedly, involuntarily – against the will of the person on the receiving end – that could indeed cause lasting trauma. Gay men who were forced to submit to aversion shock therapy “treatments” intended to cure them of their homosexuality, have reported this experience to be a hellish torment for them. There is nothing in this document suggesting that the experimenter intends to use “electric shock” learning reinforcement involuntarily.
This discussion in the document clearly corresponds with the second study proposal: “developing methods for subjects increased control over latent ability”. There is no reason to believe that these “learning studies” were to involve the children or psychotics mentioned in reference to the first study, i.e., the group experiments.
Then there is this remarkable statement:
“…the main consideration will be the attitude and disposition of the subject. Wherever possible, every attempt will be made to tailor the tasks required to his preference and his estimate of good working conditions”.
“…tailor the tasks required to his preference and his estimate of good working conditions” - doesn’t sound like involuntary torment, does it? It sounds more like the subjects described here would be voluntarily submitting to the proposed techniques, because they want to enhance and control their psychic abilities & believe these techniques can do that.
And then another statement, famously misconstrued by some :
“The experimenters will be particularly interested in dissociative states, from the abaisment de neveau mental to multiple personality in so-called mediums, and attempts will be made to induce a number of states of this kind using hypnosis”.
A clear statement that attempts will be made to induce dissociative states, but using hypnosis – NOT through rape or torture or any other form of traumatic inducement. Nor is there any suggestion of exploiting dissociative states that might occur in a study participant, to implant a false identity, or generate an alternate personality, or cause the participant to unconsciously obey the will of the resarcher-experimenter for the rest of their life. There is no discussion of intention to create “Manchurian Candidates” or “mind controlled sex slaves” or multiple personality disorder victims.
This part of the discussion clearly corresponds with the third study proposal: “intensive study of particularly promising subjects”. There is no reason to believe that these “particularly promising subjects” were to come from the children or psychotics mentioned in reference to the first study i.e., the group experiments.
Deliberate misrepresentations about the wording of this document – for many years, the “CIA-satanic cult, trauma-based mind control” true believers have used excerpts from this document to create the impression that they have proof for their thesis – that the CIA and supposedly associated satanic cults systematically tortured little children, (including repeated, sadistic rape), not only to provoke dissociative states in the victims but also to generate full-blown programmable alter-personalities. They would never reveal the whole document, however. You can see why, now. It’s because the document doesn’t say what they’ve always claimed that it said.
“Franklin Scandal” author Nick Bryant said this:
“The Subproject 136 documentation discusses administering electric shock, drugs, hypnosis, and “psychological tricks” to three groups–psychotics, children, and mediums–to induce various states of dissociation, including multiple personality, which the researchers thought would enhance the subjects’ extrasensory perception. The Subproject 136 document demonstrates that the CIA was willing to carry out truly cruel and sadistic mind control experiments on children.”
That is false. This document does not describe any intention to abuse children.
Carol Rutz said this:
“My heart practically stood still the day that I read this [MKUltra subproject 136 proposal]. It described perfectly what I had remembered and journaled when I was taken in 1952 at four years of age from my grandfathers home, and delivered to Sidney Gottlieb of the CIA, Dr. Noe and Dr. Black. To use a child to investigate these possibilities I find so morally reprehensible, that I have a difficult time fathoming how anyone could even consider using children. They Did!!!! I am but one of the many children who were the CIA’s convenient experimental subjects. Because of our youth and the severe traumatization we were put through, these men felt we would never tell our stories; and if we did, they felt we would never be believed”.
That’s very unfortunate for her, to have claimed that this document ”described perfectly what I had remembered and journaled”, when it is quite apparent that it does not support her victim narrative at all. She could only be grossly mistaken, or a liar.
The common and deliberate misrepresentation of Subproject 136 as CIA directed “mind-control” experimentation, intended to cause Multiple Personality Disorder in child subjects and turn them into mind-controlled sex/crime/assassination slaves, is very easily disproved. The persons who developed this proposal and presumably carried out experiments related to it, were unwitting recipients of CIA funding for this work, as the chart of funding applicant “status” in Colin Ross’ “The CIA Doctors” documents. These researcher/experimenters did not know that the ultimate source of their funding was the CIA, they believed they were being funded by an independent science promotion foundation. These researchers were not, therefore, knowingly conducting this study on behalf of the CIA - so they could not have intended it to serve any ”manchurian candidate” production programs the CIA might have been planning or running. If they didn’t know the money was coming from the CIA, then they could not have been working directly under & for the CIA.
The identity of the author of this proposal, is not a mystery - who wrote up this proposal? Who’s experiment was this? We can never know – correct? Wrong. This person’s identity is known to many. He has denied being the author of it, however, and expressed very reasonable fear that “whomever might be the researcher” involved in this project would be in great peril if their identity was broadcast across the internet’s considerable conspiracy adherent whacko community – considering that this document has FALSELY come to represent the greatest evils of the CIA’s nefarious experimentations, both real and imagined.
Some excerpts from a presentation by Kathleen Sullivan at The Fourth Annual Ritual Abuse, Secretive Organizations and Mind Control Conference, August 10 – 12, 2001 – wherein Sullivan asserts that abuse victims have false memories from the time when their childhood abuse was taking place. Ritual Abuse & Mind Control victim advocates call these false memories “screen memories”.
“Katherine Sullivan, age 46, is a survivor lifelong sadistic abuse, ritualized torture and mind-control experiments. She is working towards a degree in social work and is co-founder of PARC-VRAMC. Her topic is : “Memory Recovery and Screen Memories.” ”
“Now I want to share some of the things I’ve learned over the years about externally induced screen memories and memory scrambles. I learned about both, as an involuntary assistant to programmers and as a victim of ritual abuse and mind control.
Some memories can seem absolutely valid to me when they first come up, but when I talk about them to my support system, they look at me funny or with sympathy or disbelief, or they abruptly change the subject or walk away. Their reactions are sometimes a big clue that what I am remembering is so far away from “normal” reality that the memory may be a screen memory.
Here’s an example of an acted-out scenario or screen memory. When I was very young, dad created a false previous life in my mind. Over time, he convinced a part of me that I was born in Australia and had lived in a house with no windows. I believed I had loving parents and many brothers and sisters in Australia. Several years later, I was made to believe that bad people killed my parents, that my siblings disappeared or were killed, and that I sailed to America on a large wooden boat.
On many occasions, from early childhood through my adult years, dad and other perpetrators told several of my alter-states that I was one of many illegitimate children of John F. Kennedy. Since I believed these adults, their words had a tremendous affect on my life, especially after the president’s death. I felt obligated to serve the White House, since I believed my father the same man who emphasized serving our country. Because so many people reinforced dad’s words over the years, the idea that JFK could be my father has especially hard to let go of. I wanted to believe JFK was my father
In Washington DC, I was allegedly taken several times to a movie theater named Janus that is allegedly owned by the CIA. A middle aged male handler sat to my right and quickly put me in a hypnotic trance. As I watched the large movie screen, he told me that the movie was real and that I was one of the characters in it. I believed him, and the movie became another screen memory”.
Note that Sullivan is talking about false “screen” memories, induced by people around her through very simple techniques such as repeated suggestion. This is no different from what the False Memory Syndrome Foundation claims can take place during therapy.
Why do Ritual Abuse & Mind Control victim advocates promote the idea that abuse victims have false memories?
Reverend James Bevel moved to Omaha, Nebraska, in November 1990 as the leader of the “Citizens Fact-Finding Commission to Investigate Human Rights Violations of Children in Nebraska”, a group associated with the Lyndon Larouche organization, to advocate for imprisoned ritual abuse & mind control victim claimant Paul Bonnaci. In May 2007, James Bevel was arrested in Alabama on charges of incest committed sometime between October 1992 and October 1994 in Loudoun County, Virginia; Bevel was living in Leesburg, Virginia at the time and working with LaRouche’s group, whose international headquarters was a few blocks from Bevel’s apartment.
The accuser, one of his daughters, was 13–15 years old at the time, and lived with him in the Leesburg apartment. Three of his other daughters have also alleged that Bevel sexually abused them, although not with intercourse. Charged with one-count of unlawful fornication in Virginia, which has no statute of limitations for incest, Bevel pleaded innocent and continued to deny the main accusation. His four-day trial in April, 2008, included “testimony about Bevel’s philosophies for eradicating lust, and parents’ duties to sexually orient their children”. During the trial, the accusing daughter testified that she was repeatedly molested beginning when she was six years old. He went to trial in April, 2008 and, although he denied the charge, Bevel was convicted of unlawful fornication and sentenced to 15 years in prison and fined $50,000.
Devin Ray Norris was a libertarian activist, radio broadcaster and advocate for Ritual Abuse & Mind Control victim claimants. Norris took his desktop computer to Best Buy in Raleigh in December 2008 for repair, and the store’s Geek Squad technicians contacted law enforcement officers after finding child pornography on the computer, prosecutors said. Norris was arrested the day before he was to have had Franklin Scandal authoor Nick Bryant on his radio show. Federal agents then searched the computer and found more than 3,000 pornographic images and 86 explicit videos, prosecutors said. An analysis of Yahoo! Messenger chats revealed that Norris planned to trade child pornography, prosecutors said. Norris surrendered a second computer and several CDs to authorities, and they found hundreds of other pornographic images on the CDs, prosecutors said. That computer had already been scrubbed of all images and videos, they said. Norris pleaded guilty to transportation of child pornography and was sentenced to 12 years.
Is this the reason why Ritual Abuse & Mind Control therapists and advocates promote the idea that abuse victims have false “screen” memories? So that no one will believe their cult’s child porn and incest rape victims?
I’m tired of encountering this type of hypocritical bs, on various blogs and websites;
“There is no medically, or clinically, recognised diagnosis of ‘False Memory Syndrome’. The concept was invented in the USA by the False Memory Syndrome Foundation (FMSF), a group of ‘accused parents’ – mainly fathers – whose adult daughters had confronted them about sexual abuse in childhood. Having created this fictional concept of ‘false memory’ to defend themselves against these allegations, this group then went on to sell it to the media”. [CWASU false memory page]
…so I’m going to debunk it.
[I don't belong to or work for FMSF, although I know people who do, so I won't be discussing that organization or the meaning & validity of the term "False Memory Syndrome" from their perspective. This discussion will be about the inherent hypocrisy of Ritual Abuse therapists, advocates, and victim claimants, denouncing the idea that there might be false memories in RA-Mind Control victim narratives. It is my personal perspective on the subject]
Ritual Abuse therapists, advocates and victim claimants ‘invented’ the idea that false memories had been “implanted” into victimization narratives, many years before FMSF was founded in 1992.
They have all professed to believe in implanted false memories, since at least 1988, and continue to publicly promote belief that RA-Mind Control victim’s recollection of their abusers and abuse experiences may be tainted with implanted false memories, to this very day.
Ritual Abuse therapists, advocates and victim claimants invented the idea of implanted false memories, to explain away all of the demonstrable falsehoods uncovered in virtually every RA-MC victim narrative. Once RA-MC therapists and their victim claimants started parading their fantasies on major media, skeptics started investigating the validity of their statements and – surprise, surprise! – many of the alleged people, places and events in those statements turned out to be imaginary. People that RA-MC ‘victims’ claimed to have murdered or to have seen the murder of, were alive & well! Women who claimed to have bred dozens of sacrificial babies for satanic slaughter turned out to be virgins! Alleged secret satanic temples turned out to be never-developed empty fields, and so on & on. To explain all of these lies, therapists and victim claimants invented the idea of Satanic-Mind Control cults deliberately implanted misleading, false memories, in their victims minds. Here’s a typical explication of this ‘theory’ ;
“Memories of Satanic ritual abuse may be at least partially “screen memories” intentionally created by others. Some therapists and attorneys point to mind-control projects performed by the CIA and other groups in the 1950s and 60s. MK-ULTRA and Bluebird were two of the best known projects. Documents obtained by Alan Shefflin and others under the freedom-of-information act confirm that the U.S. government put some effort into creating “Manchurian candidates” who would perform dangerous missions for the U.S. government after they had been programmed through hypnosis and mind control. It is hypothesized that stories of Satanic rituals were implanted as screen memories in case these subjects began to remember being programmed. The idea behind this theory is that the ritual abuse memories are so far-fetched that nobody would believe them. They may have been created using staged rituals, Hollywood makeup, and props in order to plant a memory that would “emerge” later“.
It is very common to find some version of this false “screen” memory theory, on the very same blogs & websites where you find angry & slanderous denounciation of FMSF and False Memory Syndrome! The very same Ritual Abuse therapists, advocates and victim claimants promoting the idea that RA-Mind Control abusers routinely implant false memories in the minds of their victims, expressing outrage over any suggestion that false memories related to their RA-Mind Control victim narrative might have arisen, even accidentally, through their therapy. “How dare anyone suggest therapy-implanted false memories – they must be child abusers or apologists for child abusers, trying to discredit victim’s memories…trying to cast doubt on the reality of child sex abuse altogether!”
Ritual Abuse therapists, advocates and victim claimants don’t reject the concept of false memories in victimization narratives – in fact, they embrace it and promote it! – so long as they can find some way to make that concept support the RA-MC mythology they are evangelizing. Which is fine with me, until they start simultaneously accusing other people of having invented the concept of False Memories (and somehow, specifically to facilitate child abuse), and then denouncing that concept – the same concept that they profess to believe in when it serves their purposes - as a fiction!
Why would anyone believe anything that such self-serving hypocrites have to say, on any subject?
“It is great being such an abject failure in my life. I have fucked everything up – accomplished nothing- and lost everyone. I wish I wasn’t such a loser – and that people who know me loved me- but that isn’t the case” – David Shurter
A liar, a fraud and a charlatan – it all began back in 2008, when David Shurter started posting his crappy, slanderous, lunatic videos. This one starts with Shurter holding a sign that reads: “I need help in solving a murder I was forced to commit in 1979″. The first part of that statement – “I need help” – was, and remains, a fact…but all the rest of it is bullshit:
Shurter claimed to be a murderer in these early videos, but also that he did not know the identity of the man he supposedly killed nor did he have any proof that such a murder actually took place. Shurter claimed that he had ‘repressed’ the memory of this murder until 2007, when he allegedly “remembered” the event “in a dream”. In a dream! (As “everyone knows”, dreams are actually 100% accurate recollections of real events in our lives – right?)
As time went on Shurter’s fantasies, or paranoid delusions, or plain old lies, evolved a grandiose mythology about himself and his family during his childhood. His father was supposedly the leader of a large & powerful satanic cult operating in Nebraska, (and Michigan, he would later claim). He had been victimized by the same CIA MKultra mind control cult operating out of Offut Air Base that Paul Bonacci claimed to be a victim of, (although he would later denounce Bonacci as a lying ‘poser’). He was “raised to be the Anti-Christ”, and inherit not only his father’s satanic empire but that of Michael Aquino as well, (he claims to have been personally ‘trained’ in various Black Arts by Aquino). He had been raped and tortured, his family had traveled the US commiting kidnappings, rapes, sacrifices and cannibalism (that’s where the missing children of his childhood went, he claims – he and his family ate them all!).
All of these claims Shurter has made are falsehoods, of course. Only one member of his family supports any of these allegations – a sister, who appears to control David from behind the scenes like a puppeteer. David’s parents were not satanists, there was no maniacal satanic cult operating in Nebraska, there was no Monarch mind-control project operating out of Offutt air base, and David never met or had contact with Michael Aquino in his childhood.
David likes to claim expertise in a wide range of subject matter, but his incoherent and rambling writings and videos betray a near complete ignorance of those subjects. Shurter was confronted about his alleged satanic cult past on a topix forum not long ago. He had been ranting about calendar dates related to lunar cycles and how important they supposedly were to satanic cults. When asked why lunar cycles would be of any importance to satanists, he replied that “everyone knows” lunar cycles are important to them – that it’s ”all over the internet”. It turned out, however, that the calendar dates he was so concerned about coincide with SOLAR cycles – not lunar cycles. Even the lowliest acolyte in an occult study group would know the difference between lunar & solar cycles – but not David Shurter the alleged expert on all things occult or satanic, the supposed heir apparent to the entire “satanic underground” of the USA, allegedly trained personally by Michael Aquino. Shurter is nothing but a liar, a fraud and a charlatan.
A UK man named Colin Batley was sentenced to 22 years imprisonment in 2012. He was alleged to have exercised a Manson-esque domination over three women; his wife Elaine Batley, Jacqueline Marling and Shelley Millar – who were all convicted of related offences in the same trial. Judge Thomas said:
“You set yourself up as the ruler of a sick little kingdom surrounded by three women who danced as your willing attendants regarding you as their master.”
The “head prosecutor” said; “The prosecution was able to show that Colin Batley was at the centre of this activity and it is right that his sentence reflects this.
“However, all of those sentenced today are guilty of horrific crimes and therefore it is also right that they have received lengthy sentences.”
All four were convicted of sexual offences involving minors, and the group was labelled a “sex cult” in press reports. Batley was accused of raping the victims – two boys and four girls – of forcing them to commit sexual acts with the women and each other, and of prostituting some of the victims to other persons in the community who were not members of the group.
Batley is said to have claimed: “I’m in a cult”, and to have controlled his victims in part through threats that “the cult” would murder them if they did not do whatever he told them to do. The ‘cult’, however, seems to have consisted solely of Batley and the 3 women – although one victim claimed to have undergone an involuntary initiation into membership in the group as a young child. She described this initiation as a brief lecture “on the occult” after which Batley raped her.
Some of the victims, who are all now adults, talked about Batley and the women being enamored of Aleister Crowley and some of his writings especially the scripture-poem called The Book of The Law. Batley is said to have professed that passages from Crowley’s writings justified his criminal and abusive activities. The group sometimes dressed in robes and read from The Book of The Law, and then they would disrobe and have sex, according to witness testimony.
Some blog commentators are proclaiming this case to be “the UK’s first real satanic ritual abuse crime conviction” and that “ritual abuse has been proven to be real”. Are these claims really justified?
Fraudulent ritual abuse & mind control victim claimants, therapists professing to specialize in treating such persons, and their pseudo-academic allies, have been writing-compiling & promulgating blatantly self-serving mythologies and false history for many decades.
One of the more widely disseminated of these false histories, concerns very distorted interpretations of events during the satanic panic period, and the motivations of persons and organizations involved in exposing fraudulent testimonialists and victim claimants during that time.
They are particularly fixated with the false notion that opposition to the promoters of Satanic Panic begins and ends with the False Memory Syndrome Foundation – founded in 1992. You can find the following statement (with the exact same wording in most cases) on many of their websites:
“An American study found that between 1992 and 1994, following the founding of the FMSF, 85% of articles on child sexual abuse in leading magazines focused on false memories and false accusations. This contrasts with only 7% of articles during 1982-4”.
Sometimes they will mention that a University of Michigan sociologist named Katherine Beckett is alleged to be the author of this study, although they never quote from or cite the study itself – they are mis-quoting a journalist referencing the study in an article of his, and not attributing the quote.
Here’s another version:
“A study published last year  by a University of Michigan sociologist, Katherine Beckett, found a sharp shift in how four leading magazines – Time, Newsweek, U.S. News & World Report, and People – treated sexual abuse. In 1991, more than 80 percent of the coverage was weighted toward stories of survivors, with recovered memory taken for granted and questionable therapy virtually ignored. By 1994, more than 80 percent of the coverage focused on false accusations, often involving supposedly false memory. Beckett credited the False Memory Syndrome Foundation with a major role in the change”.
In the paranoid fantasy that SRA evangelists try to pass off as “history”, there were no SRA debunkers prior to the founding of FMSF and FMSF was solely and directly responsible for any/all changes in media coverage & perspective during that time. Those ideas are demonstrably false.
More than anything else, changes in media perspective resulted from the fact that so many major media organizations had allowed themselves to be conned by fraudulent testimonialists such as Mike Warnke and fraudulent victim claimants such as Lauren Stratford (or both together, such as Ruth Bailey and Edna Moses). Media had invested faith & trust in these and many other satanic panic promoters, and came to realize how badly they were ‘burned’ & betrayed by these frauds after the truth about them started breaking into mainstream news. Major media had been betrayed and made to look naive, gullible, stupid and unprofessional. Naturally, they attempted to “save face” by belatedly focusing on the falsity of various claims and allegations. The process of exposing the frauds did not begin in 1992 with FMSF, however. It began a decade or more earlier, carried out by researchers both professional & ‘amateur’, in many cases very ordinary people from various ‘walks of life’.