Psychological abuse
More on the weaponisation of behavioural psychology, featuring a 2019 Guardian article on domestic abuse and a 1973 Amnesty International report
Dear Church Leaders (and everyone else)
Further to this post from last June, featuring a letter I wrote to my church leaders two years earlier…
I read with interest this recent article from Co-Chair of HART Dr Jonathan Engler:
He highlights a 1957 paper — Communist Attempts to Elicit False Confessions from Air Force Prisoners of War — written by US sociologist Albert Biderman in the context of the Korean War:
And asks:
Did Governments follow a recipe for effective torture against their populations during “covid”?
Adding:
It sure looks like they were trying to break the will of their citizens.
He presents this table — often called Biderman’s Chart of Coercion — featuring the methods described in the above paper:
And he points to this comparison of Biderman’s Chart of Coercion and “covid measures” — one of many such examples circulating in independent media during the covid era:
If you haven’t seen anything like this before, it’s worth reading carefully.
A 2019 Guardian article on domestic abuse
Engler highlights this 2019 Guardian article discussing Biderman’s Chart of Coercion in the context of domestic abuse:
And particularly this paragraph:
When Biderman released his findings, people were incredulous. Could people really be manipulated so easily? Was he sure there was not something he had failed to detect? But Biderman was adamant: “Probably no other aspect of Communism reveals more thoroughly its disrespect for truth and the individuals,” he wrote, “than its resort to these techniques.”
I find those words particularly striking in the context of what happened in the covid era.
Firstly:
“People were incredulous. Could people really be manipulated so easily?”The answer to that became clear in 2020. And I doubt it would have surprised the behavioural psychologists on government committees.
I am reminded of the weaponisation of behavioural psychology that I discussed in this post:
And secondly:
“Probably no other aspect of Communism reveals more thoroughly its disrespect for truth and the individuals than its resort to these techniques.”Quite. And those responsible are not even trying to hide it:
But many people are apparently still incredulous.
Including a lot of church leaders, who would in other contexts have no hesitation in making the case from the Bible that the human heart is deceitful above all things and hard to understand, that minority reports are often right, that agents of evil masquerade as servants of righteousness, and that we should beware wolves in sheep’s clothing.
The psychological abuse we have endured is so sophisticated that most of the victims don’t even realise that they have been abused.
I am reminded of the words of J L Fuller that I quoted here in what I wrote about God over Government:
One of the major factors in people not speaking up is Stockholm syndrome — a condition in which people under rule by coercion or tyranny will often develop an attachment to the oppressors, called “trauma bonding”, where a sense of loyalty or even a perverse love occurs — kind of like an abused wife. Why? Because they see no other option and because on a subconscious level, the whole surreal world they are no living in makes no sense at all unless their rulers are doing the right thing. Therefore, their leaders must be right, they have to be right. All in all, many people are subconsciously asking this question: “Would I rather wake up and therefore see the mass insanity all around me, or would I prefer to stay asleep and follow orders and pretend that this is the best course of action?” They choose the second option and take part in a big social “emperor’s new clothes” contract to go along with it. That also explains why people can get very angry if you question the official narrative. Sadly, genuine Christians are not exempt from this…
The behavioural psychologists understand Stockholm syndrome all too well.
As I noted in the God over Government post, the above description certainly fits with my own experience.
The final sentence again reminds me of what happens about half way through this extraordinary two-minute clip (I recommend turning the sound off if you are averse to foul language!):
A 1973 Amnesty International report
Engler also points to this 1973 Amnesty International report on torture:
And particularly this section on page 38:
‘Giving up’ could also take other forms: men became susceptible to illnesses like bronchopneumonia, to psychosomatic diseases such as duodenal ulcers, asthma and bronchitis, to coronary disease, T.B., and even to cancer.
I am again reminded of the covid era — any discussion of which needs to take into account the basic and easily verifiable fact that, before the government ordered us into panic mode, the number of registered deaths in England and Wales was at normal levels for the time of year:
I fail to see why any respiratory virus — man-made or otherwise — that had been circulating for months without causing more deaths than usual would somehow become intrinsically much more deadly after a change in government policy.
We will never know exactly how many of the deaths in the covid era were due to neglect, or to lack of regular treatment for those with regular respiratory illnesses, or to the administration of midazolam, or to other medical interventions, or to anything else.
But we can surely say that it is plausible that at least some of the “covid” illness and death was due to stress induced by government policy.
In a recent paper, Canadian academic Denis Rancourt makes the case (emphasis added) that:
…the likelihood of fatal transmissionless pneumonias in the elderly and persons with comorbidities increases significantly with environmental changes or assaults that cause biological stress... My hypothesis is that this proposed phenomenon is amply sufficient to cause epidemics, pandemics and seasonal mortality, always targeting the frail and sick, and that Covid was exactly such a case, completely caused by institutions and governments.
As to the bigger picture, I am reminded of UK academic Dr David A Hughes, featured in this post:
In answer to Engler’s title question — Did Governments follow a recipe for effective torture against their populations during “covid”? — he cites the abstract of one of his book chapters:
Increasing evidence has come to light of trauma-based mind control exercises performed on children in ritual abuse settings. Those exercises involve torture, near death experiences, and making victims feel responsible for the death of others. The traumatised child is made to feel completely powerless and dependent on the abuser for their survival.
Highly disturbingly, similar techniques — involving psychological torture, intentional traumatization, and false rescue — were carried out against the public during “Covid-19.” Psychological torture techniques include the inculcation of chronic stress and the mandatory wearing of face masks (originally deployed against inmates at Guantánamo Bay).
The public was traumatised by fear of death from the “virus” and was made to feel responsible for the deaths of others. A trauma bonding was instigated, intended to last decades and to bind an infantilised population in loyalty and obedience to its “omnipotent” masters. Predatory transnational power came to the false rescue in exchange for the surrendering of liberties.
But I don’t recall hearing much on the subject from Amnesty…
Related:
Dear Church Leaders most-read articles
Some posts, including a shorter version of this one, can also be found on Unexpected Turns
The Big Reveal: Christianity carefully considered as the solution to a problem