Thursday, December 25, 2008

Milgram Experiment, Psyops, and you. PT 1

Film of the Milgram Experiment. Above is part one of five.

Part Two Part Three Part Four Part Five

This article appeared in the San Jose Mercury News on Dec 21, 2008. It detailed the repeat of the famous or infamous Milgram Experiment. It was apparently a followup piece to a story that ran on Reuters dated Dec 19, 2008. The Reuters piece can be viewed here. The article has spread throughout the US via various news agencies and can be found on many websites.

What I found disturbing in reading both stories is that the authors seemingly tried to avoid making the people who administered the shocks culpable for their actions. Instead the blame seemed to be shifted to, as the Mercury News piece said, "situational forces".

That sounds an awful lot like, "Befehl ist Befehl". "I was just following orders".

Those of us who have been watching situational changes in American public affairs have also noted FEMAs attempt to enter America's churches and co-opt them as propaganda organs. Click here for a link to documentation.

Lew Rockwell recently has an article entitled, "Question 46, Revisited". "The Survivalist Blog" also had a piece on the subject recently. If you are not familiar with the extremely controversial combat arms survey where US Marines were questioned on whether or not they would be willing to fire on US Citizens in a gun confiscation effort, you can read the background information and view the actual survey here at Col. Metcalf is one stand up American Patriot.

I find the timing curious with the coincidental militarization of Homeland Security. NORTHCOM has been attached to Homeland Security and will be staffed currently with he 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team. “Right now, the response force requirement will be an enduring mission. How the chooses to source that and whether or not they continue to assign them to NorthCom, that could change in the future,” said Army Col. Louis Vogler, chief of NorthCom future operations. “Now, the plan is to assign a force every year.” That is a quote from a piece that USED to be found at It is missing at this point, but a copy of The Army Times article can be located here.

The Army Times points out that active duty units were engaged in assisting in the aftermath of Katrina. What The Army Times does not point out is that Katrina was an emergency, and that the units were not assigned as a domestic operational force, which would have been in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act. They may have been tasked with police duties when activated during an emergency, but it was not their mission. Homeland Security, essentially a civillian federal police agency, will have an active combat unit assigned to them. Again, from The Army Times, “Now, the plan is to assign a force every year.” That sounds an awful lot like a direct contravention of the Posse Comitatus Act and a conscious effort to break down any resistance from tradition and older staff to domestic operations.

The Posse Comitatus Act is defined by the Department of Defense as:

The Posse Comitatus Act - Prohibits search, seizure, or arrest powers to US military personnel. Amended in 1981 under Public Law 97-86 to permit increased Department of Defense support of drug interdiction and other law enforcement activities. (Title 18, "Use of Army and Air Force as Posse Comitatus" - United States Code, Section 1385)
DoD Dictionary of Military Terms, 200

The 1981 amendment ( which essentially nullified the law) was to permit the use of the military in the so called "war on drugs".

Recently Homeland Security has gone on the offensive against the Posse Comitatus Act. Homeland Security refers to the act as a "myth". The entire piece entitled "The Myth of Posse Comitatus" is available here. The article attempts to essentially weasel around the restrictions in the same manner as used by our politicians in restricting our rights as affirmed by the Bill Of Rights.

Recently, a study entitled "Known Unknowns: Unconventional "Strategic Shocks"in Defense Strategy Development" hit the news. The entire study can be downloaded here. The synopsis on the before referenced page states:

"The author provides the defense policy team a clear warning against excessive adherence to past defense and national security convention. Including the insights of a number of noted scholars on the subjects of “wild cards” and “strategic surprise,” he argues that future disruptive, unconventional shocks are inevitable. Through strategic impact and potential for disruption and violence, such shocks, in spite of their nonmilitary character, will demand the focused attention of defense leadership, as well as the decisive employment of defense capabilities in response. As a consequence, the author makes a solid case for continued commitment by the Department of Defense to prudent strategic hedging against their potential occurrence."

The overwhelming animosity generated here in The United States when the $700 Billion Bailout was proposed tipped the people who run the show off to the fact that Americans are getting pretty well fed up with all their antics. Several politicians who voted for the bailout had their homes vandalized and allegedly even more received threats. The recent riots in Greece and the sympathetic outbreaks of violence in other European nations, the growing unrest in China and Russia, the growing problems in the Middle East, and even the protests that have occurred in Iceland, all point to a growing threat to the existing political and financial power structure.

The people who run the show believe that the threat against the existing system is not just confined to the mindless, angry mob in the street, it is all of us who have done what we can to isolate ourselves from the system as it currently exists.

I think the Strategic Shocks document is designed to address the threat against today's "Corporatocracy".

1 comment:

Ken said...

...mornin' Catman...sorry for the lazy anon post...was me
...another good read,thanx...folks may lose control if they gotta fire on their own 'colors'..."can anyone say 'balcanisation',i bet ya can"