I was reading more of that Rappaport piece from twenty years ago where he was interviewing a propaganda/mind-control and came across this...
~~~~~~~~~~
"A: I’ll give you one in a minute. But do you see what I’m driving at? You can sit
there and say, “Who the hell cares about time, who cares about pace?” You can [missing line]
intrinsic to all human experience that you can’t ignore it. It’s THERE. If we’re too
stupid and “practical” to delve into it, we are the ones who lose. Because other
people are thinking about it.
And those people are trying to control us. If you shed
your stupidity for a moment and think about all the big run‐ups in the stock market,
the news covers that with speed. A speed that exceeds our normal internal sense of
pace. Filled with anxiety, we search around for a solution to that feeling of anxiety.
See? And the obvious solution is GET ON THE BANDWAGON. INVEST. BUY IN.
TAKE THE RIDE."
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now, that by itself doesn't mean anything. So following is the lead-in context, which I'd recommend reading.
I am by not convinced that what we are witnessing is entirely grassroots or organic. Call me overly conspiratorial if you will, but I think it behooves us to be cautious in our readings of reality right now. There is no forum to hold a mirror to this forum, so please allow me to be the idiot saying possibly stupid things. I'm happy to be a fool if it helps in the end:
From page 116-120
A: Now I’m giving you the background on that. Psychological warfare is the
operative term here.
Time and motion studies like you’ve never heard of before.
Q:
Time and motion studies?
A: When I say the cartels want to control lives, I’m talking about minute to minute
in the long run. What are people thinking? How can their thoughts be controlled?
How can their moods be controlled? How can their sense of time be controlled? It’s
all about WORLD shaping. Time shaping.
Q:
You talked about time last week. The creation of time through propaganda.
A: Yes. Let’s take that one step further. Pace.
Q: Pace?
A: Pace and tempo. The media can present stories so that time seems to be moving
fast or moving slow. More fast or more slow than the usual human sense of time. In
either case the result is human anxiety, because the human internal clock tends to
have an acceptable pace, an acceptable velocity. If you exceed that pace, or
underplay that pace, the human being gets nervous. He gets thrown off. He thinks
something is wrong. He thinks there is a problem, and he fishes around for a
solution to that problem.
Q: Even though he doesn’t know what the problem is?
A: (laughs) Yes. When you make people hungry for solutions, they unconsciously
look to the authorities for answers of all kinds. You know the famous unofficial
slogan of the military. “Hurry up and wait.” Well, think about that. You get people to
rush for no good reason, and then they wait around for no good reason, and what
happens? You have trained subjects now who are conditioned to look to their
leaders for all the orders, all the answers. It works. In fact, it works better if the
problem is never really articulated. Which is what happens when you get a full
media dose every day of the news. There is something wrong with this news, if you
look closely at it. It’s too fast, and it’s too slow. The anchors and other people
develop, unconsciously, a method of delivering the news—and the editors and
others who tape it—also develop a weird style of rushing or slowing down the news.
Both. This sets people a little on edge. They are primed for answers, for slogans, for
official assurances.
Q: Most of this is unconscious on the media’s part?
7
A: To produce an anxiety for answers, for solutions.
This is all based on military research
into the reactions of soldiers and civilians too. Hurry up and wait. You see this in
corporate management styles too. Pressure people to produce meaningless work
for unnecessary deadlines. Then have them sit around doing very little. Fast and
slow. Work on that internal sense of human time and pace, and quicken it and slow
it down—for no really good rational reason. This creates anxiety, and questions
with no answers, and a heightened sense of: Give me an answer to ANYTHING and
I’ll take it. Just wrap up this anxiety in a ribbon and I’ll buy it. I’ll buy the answer.
Q: You were telling me earlier about the Afghanistan war as a news story.
A: Yes. First of all, realize that ANY news story can be made fast or slow. Any story
can be shaped that way. Any story can be fleshed out into a thousand details or it
can be shrunk to a one‐liner. So a story to begin with is a flexible reality. It can be
dealt with in an infinite number of ways. The war in Afghanistan could be made into
a slam‐bang thrill a minute deal, or it can be made into a slow tale with a new detail
every 12 hours. The war doesn’t dictate that. The people who create the story do
that. In the case of this war, this was shaped from the beginning as a slow story. I’m
not just talking about media access being slim and the Pentagon holding back facts.
I’m talking about pace. The pace has been made to be slow.
Q: That’s true. Why?
A: Because a slow story makes people want MORE.
Q: More war, in this case.
A: Yes. More action. It creates a desire for more war as the solution to a slow war.
Which is exactly the plan, and not just in Afghanistan. In other countries “that
harbor terrorists.”
Q: So literally, the people who are really shaping this story are pacing themselves,
as they say.
A: Damn right. And that makes people want more. More war becomes the solution
to the anxiety produced by the sensation of a slow war. [read that last sentence a
few more times] Which lines up exactly with the political agenda from the cartels.
Stretch out this “war against terrorism.”
Q: The anthrax OP was that way too.
A: Sort of. It started with a bang. Then it slowed down. Then it sped up again.
Then it slowed down. I could graph it for you. Again, YOU HAVE TO REALIZE THAT
THE ANTHRAX THING COULD HAVE BEEN PRESENTED AS A HARROWING THRILL‐
A‐MINUTE TALE. You see? It could have been done that way. Every story is
infinitely flexible in that way. But time is created with a certain pace, or changing
8
pace, to get people on edge where they will accept without question the answers or
solutions from, in this case, the medical cartel.
Q: What about Watergate?
A: Aha. A perfect example. I would call that one the “gathering steam” approach.
Enron is shaping up to be that way too. Sort of. A flurry. Then a slowdown. Then a
gathering speed‐up. With Watergate, you had these two rookie reporters who were
being managed, without their knowledge, by Ben Bradlee and other people. Bradlee,
the editor of the Washington Post, would never have let these two kids loose on a
story that could destroy his paper’s reputation if they got it wrong. In fact, there
was a whole lot of information available fairly soon after the break‐in. There were
dozens of good leads. But the Post broke the whole thing slowly. Then, after a point,
the stories started breaking every week and then every day. The pace was
monitored. The pace was intentional. At every step, the idea was to exceed or
underplay the innate average time‐pace of the human being. This is a principle of
information warfare. As I said last week, this actually gets us into philosophy and
deep psychology, but most people are too lazy to go there.
Q: Of course, a lot of people would say that the way Watergate broke open was the
result of the Post being cautious about getting the details confirmed and all that.
A: Don’t you think I know that? That’s not the way it really works at the highest
levels. You have to see this in levels. Do you want a good operational definition of a
reporter?
Q: Sure.
A: A reporter is a person who has had his own sense of internal time and pace
tinkered with for so long that he works from that artificial platform in everything he
does. He unconsciously turns out material in such a way that it will speed up or
slow down the public’s innate sense of pace. That is really what a reporter does at
the level I am talking about. If you can digest that, you’re half way there to seeing
the REAL mind control at work here. Do you know how I know that about
reporters? Because I dealt with them for many years. I worked with them through
intermediaries most of the time. And I played on their sense of time. I messed with
them to the hilt. I would give them too little, and then I would give them too much.
And that made them into mind‐control subjects for me. I would extend their already
artificial sense of time and pace. I would stretch it. And that would make them
anxious, and they would instinctively look for solutions to quell that anxiety. And
the primary solution would be what I was offering: MORE INFORMATION. That is
the game. I discovered that, and I played it. I remember once I just broke off all
communication with a reporter. I left town. I took a vacation. I disappeared for two
whole weeks. And then when I came back, I flooded him with more than he could
handle. And then I stopped everything. Now—you don’t have to tell me—I know
this looks like something else. It looks like I’m just holding him on the string with
information alone, or the lack of it. It looks I’m talking about feeding and then not
9
realized it was all about time. Time and pace. That’s the fundamental thing here.
The rate of information flow was the true factor. The less obvious and more
powerful thing is time. You create someone else’s sense of time. Speed it up. Slow it
down. You’ll see what I mean. You know all those Papal edicts and rules and
announcements you can trace down through time issued from the Vatican? Well,
those pieces of information were playing to the crowd of the pros, the Church pros,
the priests and bishops and so on. These edicts were creating their sense of time for
them. That’s the reality of it. We are told by popular historians that the Middle Ages
were a slow period. And that the Renaissance was a fast period. That’s all bunk.
That’s just the way these “news stories” have been presented. You see? With
different senses of time, of pace.
Q: Now, you’re not undervaluing the effect of just telling people lies.
A: Of course not! That’s what I DID for a lot of years. Let me draw you a little map
here. First you have a human being, and you have the world, and most of the world
the human being never sees. He knows very, very little about the world. So you get
propagandists, and their job is to create a virtual world that sits, as Walter
Lippmann once said, between the person and the real world. When you fill that
virtual space with lies, you produce a false picture of the world. Obviously. But in
order to make that happen, to make that virtual creation LAST, you must create time
lines of events, and every event must produce in the audience an emotion. THAT’S
how you create a sense of time in the person, in the human being, in the audience. A
false sense of time, because it comes from outside the person—and because it’s
filled with lies. And now I’m adding another factor, which is PACE. The pace of time.
Too fast, too slow. That is how you get that anxiety in the audience which makes
them instinctively want a SOLUTION, and they don’t really know what solution to
what damn problem they are looking for. Some of the time they do, but a lot of the
time they don’t. On this level of PACE, they are completely in the dark. So they are
“tuned up” to look for answers, and they are going to get those answers from the
people who are hired to do that. Their leaders. The leaders are pawns and dupes of
the cartels. The cartel answers are always in the direction of less freedom and more
control. Okay? See, I could produce a daily news show for TV which would give the
audience the basic facts of the news every day, and I could arrange it so that the
show produces about 1/1000 the amount of anxiety that regular news shows do. I
could pace the news so that it more or less tracks with the person’s own innate
sense of pace, and that way the result would be a general sense of calm. Of course, if
I did that, it would also allow the audience to THINK, and very quickly they would
grasp the real issues, and they would grasp the fact that there are certain choices—
REAL CHOICES—which could begin to eliminate the problems in this world of ours.
The news as we know it forestalls that. There are other techniques involved as well.
Q: Such as?
A: I’ll give you one in a minute. But do you see what I’m driving at? You can sit
there and say, “Who the hell cares about time, who cares about pace?” You can
intrinsic to all human experience that you can’t ignore it. It’s THERE. If we’re too
stupid and “practical” to delve into it, we are the ones who lose. Because other
people are thinking about it.
And those people are trying to control us. If you shed
your stupidity for a moment and think about all the big run‐ups in the stock market,
the news covers that with speed. A speed that exceeds our normal internal sense of
pace. Filled with anxiety, we search around for a solution to that feeling of anxiety.
See? And the obvious solution is GET ON THE BANDWAGON. INVEST. BUY IN.
TAKE THE RIDE. Okay. Here is another news technique. Its purpose is to confuse
us, to befuddle us, to makes us feel that we can’t get a handle on REAL solutions that
actually work. Disjunction.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The pacing of the last two/three weeks of news cycle has really stood out for me as weirdly accelerated; I've sat there and thought, "This is weird!" So when I ran across this piece talking about exactly that, pacing of news as a deliberate control surface, it stood out.
I think it is possible that there is a major manipulation going on right now, and that what we think is happening is NOT happening as we are projecting it in our minds.
Am I being a total fool here? Am I over-thinking?
Maybe. Let me know if I sound nuts. (I've been called in to do some really late nights at work recently, with my sleep schedule interrupted. So it may be that.)
