ADDING MORE DOCUMENTATION TO THE TRAUMA BASED MIND CONTROL. (6 DEC 2016)

Recently, I have been pleased that my “…Formula” (1996) book on the t.b.m.c. has been been popular. That a twenty year old book is still on the cutting edge of exposing the t.b.m.c. shows how well the abusers have been in shutting down most opposition. From what I can tell, the therapeutic community has gone backwards from where they were when I published it. On pgs. 61-64 of the Formula book, I quote George H. Estabrooks’ 1946 book on hypnotism in warfare. In that quote, he talks about using 3 taps to induce a trance (which is commonly done in t.b.m.c.) and how he can hypnotize someone against their will, and can create a super spy. I have been perusing the paperwork Estabrooks left behind when he died. He was in contact with the FBI, OSS, MI-6, CIA, and Canadian Military Intelligence concerning hypnosis. J. Edgar Hoover wrote him dozens of letters in the ’30’s & 40’s at in one paper he states that the FBI is fully aware of all aspects of hypnosis. This article will delve deeper into what Estabrooks discovered and did with hypnosis. While this info does not shed new light on the ins & outs of the capabilities of slaves controlled by t.b.m.c., it does, I believe, provide us with a better paper trail on what has gone on.

BACKGROUND. George H. Estabrooks (1895-1973) repeatedly bragged, “I can hypnotize a man — without his knowledge or consent — into committing treason against the United States.” Bear that in mind when you see all these riots & false flags! During WW 2, he was used by the U.S. military to hypnotize agents, and from looking at his notes it looked like he went to Canada & worked with German P.O.W.s. Also from his notes, it was clear that even in the 1920’s, he was experimenting with hypnotic methods that could be applied to military applications. He recognized that each child was different, and came up with a number system to grade them on suggestibility. He also did lots of research into subconscious motivations & needs, and how to manipulate those. He definitely was learning how to get into a child’s mind for purposes of controlling it. In a recent post, I attached a letter showing that a government orphanage was willing to supply him with all the children he wanted for experiments.

“WILL HYPNOTIZED PERSONS TRY TO HARM THEMSELVES OR OTHERS” a 1939 article by Loyd W. Rowland publ. in the Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology. Loyd W. Rowland (1902-1981) worked with Dr. Spock & the Hogg Foundation immediately after WW 2 to instruct new parents of the baby boom generation not to discipline their children. Spanking your child was described by literature written by Rowland & Spock as “traumatizing to a child”, & the major cause of mental illness. The program Rowland created to promote Dr. Spock’s advice for childrearing was the Pierre the Pelican program launched in 1945. Prior to this, in the late ’30’s, Rowland, a hypnotist, had carried out a series of experiments that proved that hypnotism could be used to cause a subject to kill someone. Estabrooks, in his communication with the various govt. agencies listed above, repeatedly referenced Rowland’s experiments as proof of what hypnotism could do.

MPD, ITS CREATION BY HYPNOSIS. As I have recently written, Estabrooks studied in detail how the mind constructs its concept of the self, and then he determined how the mind through hypnosis could deconstruct the self, thereby allowing another personality to be constructed. My Formula book quoted where Estabrooks said he could create extra personalities, (although in that quote he doesn’t use the term MPD). However, in his papers he gives more information. He describes in his notes and also a fictional story “Death In the Mind” how he would create MPD. In a paper entitled “The Military Use of Hypnotism” (p. 4) by G.H. Estabrooks he writes, “One curious phenomenon of hypnotism is its ability to produce dissociation, seen in its extreme form as multiple personality. With some subjects we can duplicate the picture of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, minus, of course, the change in physical appearance.” Skipping to the next page, we read, “This Dr. Jekyll-Mr. Hyde split in personality is a definite possibility with certain subjects…The possibilities of this technique for sabotage, espionage, fifth column activities, even assassinations are too many to be pleasant.” In a paper entitled “The Super Spy”, he states, “…we will use hypnotism to induce multiple personality….Perhaps we had better start by defending our position. Is it unethical? Perhaps, but science merely states the facts….One of my closest friends is an authority on modern explosives, so is he a criminal?” In another paper entitled “The Future in War”‘ pg. 2, Estabrooks states, “Next, since this use of hypnotism might be against the accepted rules of war, the Geneva Convention, we must make sure that no one ‘talks’.”

CONT. On page 4 he describes, “We are quite familiar in hypnotism with what we term multiple personality. “The Three Faces of Eve” is a very excellent example of what we mean. It became evident that multiple personality, under control, could be a very potent factor in the military use of hypnotism….It was simply a matter of refining a technique.” Well, his papers don’t really describe trauma as helping…but he does go into how children are better candidates for hypnosis, how trauma can help make someone dissociative, and how one can use a sensory deprivation tank [oh boy, they use those tanks for foundational programming in children! See my book.] …in other words, he flirts with the ideas that actually got employed (or should I more accurately say misused) to program children with t.b.m.c.

ESTABROOKS LETTER TO COL. WILLIAM (Wild Bill) DONOVAN (head of OSS) JAN. 1, ’42. (The letter was sent, by the way, to Washington, D.C. rather than the HQ located at Room 3603, Rockefeller Ctr. NYC.) Estabrooks states (p.1), “The old theory about hypnotism is that no one under its influence will commit any act he would not normally do in the waking state. This in my opinion is nonsense, but old ideas die hard…” [I don’t think the programmers really want the public to think any differently, as this false “old idea” continues even today in 2016.] As a additional comment by me (Fritz), you will note that it was Donovan that convinced Pres. Truman to allow the new CIA to do more than gather intelligence, but to also run covert ops!

THE MIND CONTROL PERSON CAN’T BE HYPNOTIZED. In a paper entitled “Splitting army officer”, Estabrooks explains how the personality that spies will be impervious to any torture or interrogation or hypnosis to get his information. At another pt. he says, “We would, of course, remove from the subject all knowledge of ever having been hypnotized and render it impossible for anyone else to throw him in the trance.” In working with victims of t.b.m.c., a number of them told me (Fritz) that they had never been hypnotized & could not be hypnotized, and yet it was blatantly obviously the person (actually persons) were very suggestible & dissociative (i.e. excellent candidates for hypnosis). In other words, what had happened to them was exactly what Estabrooks describes in a number of papers & letters. In the previous quoted paper “The Future in War” (p. 3), he explains how a person can be trained to be in trance & look normal. “…when the subject goes into trance he will act perfectly ‘normal,’ with, of course, training.” This is why the dissociative states and alters of the programmed multiples can be hard to detect to the untrained eye.

POLITICIANS. Estabrooks on pg. 7 The Future in War, discusses how to make sure politicians don’t deviate from their programming! He writes, “Someone described an honest politician as one that stays bought. This threat is perhaps the greatest facing any intelligence department.” What amazes me is that people like Estabrooks seem to have no concept that what our Constitution was about was that a politician could change his mind! Obviously for the alphabet intelligence agencies, politicians who might think on their own is “the greatest threat”….So much for these agencies protecting “democracy!”.

HE SUMS IT UP. Estabrooks sums up the future of war (p. 14): “Hypnotism in war? Propaganda, brain washing, subliminal stimuli, the various uses of multiple personality….These merely scratch the surface. The human mind of the future here gives a somewhat grim picture.” True. And his help to the alphabet agencies certainly contributed to that “grim picture”.