It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
From "The Committee of 300" by Dr. John Coleman: "An outstanding example of social conditioning to accept change - even when it is recognized as unwelcome change by a large population - in the sights of the Stanford Research Institute, was the advent of the Beatles. The Beatles were brought to the United States as part of a social experiment which would subject large population groups to brainwashing of which they were not even aware.
"When Tavistock brought the Beatles to the United States, nobody could imagine the cultural disaster that was to follow in their wake. The Beatles were an integral part of the Aquarian Conspiracy, a living organism which sprang from "The Changing Images of Man"... it was a carefully crafted plot by a conspiratorial body which could not be identified, a highly destructive and divisive element brought into a large population group targeted for change against its will. "New words were introduced by the Tavistock Institute.. words such as "rock", "teenagers", "cool", "discover", and "pop music" were a lexicon of disguised code words signifying the acceptance of drugs that arrived with and accompanied the Beatles wherever they went, to be "discovered" by teenagers."
I believe the Beatles were surreptitiously used as terrorists in a conspiracy. Their outer appearance was a cover and a false disguise ("false" and "fake" Beatles 'replacements' aren't a clue here?) so we would accept them and find them "cute". If we knew, really knew, who was behind the bombing or detonation of the twin towers, would it become okay to us if they were "cute" and sang some pretty songs along the way?
The Invisible Assassins Bresler interviewed Arthur O'Connor, the lieutenant who was commanding officer of the twentieth precinct of the New York police that dealt with Lennon's murder. He quotes O'Connor as saying, "As far as you are trying to build up some kind of conspiracy, I would support you in that line. Like I said originally over the phone, if this gentleman [Chapman] wanted to get away with it, he could have got away with it. There was the subway across the road and no one around to stop him." Instead, once Chapman had accomplished his task, he calmly sat and waited for police to come. "Why one method rather than the other, the amateur as against the professional? Because that way you avoid any awkward questions. If Lennon had been gunned down by a professional killer, the whole world would have known: such swift expert assassinations carry their own individual hallmark. It would have been obvious what had happened and, with Lennon's history of anti-government radical political activity, there would have been [an in-depth investigation]." "But if you program an amateur to do the job, a so-called 'nut', very few questions are asked."
Why not as James and Stella about their dad?