Snap Out of It - Obama is using Clinical Hypnosis on You!

reply to post by SkipShipman

The following is a quote from Zbigniew Brzezinski found on the first few pages of "Operation Mind Control" written by Walter Bowart, 1978 Fontana Publishing. The original quote comes from "Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era." - Zbigniew Brzezinski

"In the technotronic society the trend would seem to be towards the aggregation of the individual support of millions of uncoordinated citizens, easily within the reach of magnetic and attractive personalities effectively exploiting the latest communication techniques to manipulate emotions and control reason."

Zbigniew Brzezinski,
National Security Advisor to Jimi Carter


Zbigniew Brzezinski is the man (handler) behind the presidential candidate "Barack Obama." Brzezinski is the author of "The Grand Chessboard," & "Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era."

This phenomena is know as a synchronicity. It's meant to draw your attention towards something you need to know.

Marcus E. Lee
T.L.G.

P.S., I'm not interested in discussing this. I just thought I would point it out.

[edit on 19-10-2008 by marcuselee]

Obama and Mccain are both members of the CFR (Council On Foreign Relations).

Enough said there.

Elections are meaningless.

Its all staged.

This is great! And now I understand why ALL flippin' politicians suffer from group-think! They're all using this technique on each other. So, a newly elected politician goes into Washington, saying, "I'm gonna change this - I'm gonna change that..." All they end up doing is thinking the same thing as everyone else on the Hill. Makes a lot of sense. Thanks

I honestly can't believe people are buying into that this is some sort of conspiracy.

Honestly folks....hand gestures? Pacing? Body language? Rhythm of speech? Those are hardly "hypnotism." That's just basic speech techniques. I've learned of such techniques in College AND in high school. It's important to be captivating. It's important for every public speaker and every politician to be coached in these techniques. It's simple persuasion. If you're thinking these skills are some sort of technique that "hypnotizes" you to follow obama against your will, then well, I'm baffled and don't really know what to say.

You don't think McCain tries utilize it as well?

The article uses grandiose words like "hypnotic anchorage" for really simple concepts. The term hypnotic anchorage sounds quite intimidating, but in reality we all use it to varying degrees. It's quite simply, the concept of relating to your audience or more specifically, (this coming straight out of my school text book - once again indicating that this is nothing archaic) the relation to your audience by association of common memory.

Ever felt like someone you've just meant, could have very well been someone you've known for all your life? If you have, then this is most probably because the person you've just meant resembles very closely to someone you've known before. Association by common memory here, people.

Every presidential candidate and president have used this technique i.e., Trying to cast the image that they're an average Joe, trying to seem "homely," or approachable...they try to achieve this through the oh-so-devious-method-of-Hypnotic-Anchorage

Originally posted by grover
reply to post by SkipShipman

 

I don't know which is more pathetic... that you are using this as an excuse as to why Obama is going to win.... or the people who would believe it.

Obama is going to win because people want change and after 12 out of the past 14 years in control of congress and the past 8 in the White House people don't believe that the Republicans can deliver anything other than more of the same.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Counting your chickens already are ya,, I remember when people were saying the same thing about Kerry.

Obama is going to win because people want change

Ya know, I get so tired of hearing this mantra about change, as if Obama has the monopoly on the concept. Change is a constant regardless of who gets in. Obama talks about McCain voting along with the President 98 % of the time yet fails to detail what those votes were about. You know, tightening up freddie mac and Fannie mae, supporting the troops, giveing a modicum of health care to babies born alive after failed abortions rather than treating them like death row inmates. I know euthanizing the family Dog gets more compassion than Obama would offer these human beings he can't seem to recognize as such because the complex issue is above his pay grade.

You know, the kind of stuff Obama votes "Present" about when he isn't voting along party lines 99% of the time. Pretty convenient when you consider never voting for anything 95% of the time means you can honestly say "I didn't vote for the Iraq War - Barack Obama"

Or anything else important but that part he leaves out of the "subliminal message"

So the Democrats are going to deliver are they? what gives you that Idea? That stellar job they have been doing backing up their pelosian bravado the past few years. Obama wants change,, Pffffffft


Screw change,, I want IMPROVEMENT

We aint going to get that by voting the most unqualified, untested, inexperienced, Presidential Candidate during the most critical time in our Nations History. Yeah that's just BRILLIANT!

Regardless of his experience as a Chicago Community Agitator errr organizer, being from Chicago, we have a different word for it. I think if he does get elected, I would like to see words like "The Race Card" and this insane practice extoling mediocrity in leiu excellence in academia due to affirmative action to finally come to an end.

Obama isn't using any form of hypnosis, all he is doing is chanting the word change to an American Public so desperate for it, they don't care who the Bozo is going to change it much less considering the KIND of change this socialist student and protege of Saul Alinsky is going to effect.








[edit on 20-10-2008 by MAINTAL]

What I witness during an Obama speech is his habit of pausing and stuttering while saying "Uh", "Um, and "Ah". He did get much better at doing away with this first and Major No-No of Public Speaking 101, but he reverts back to it from time to time. During the Final Presidential Debate, for about 40-45 Minutes you could tell he was extremely flustered at Senator McCain's barrage. Senator Obama suddenly lost the Polished, Fluent speech style which he had honed over the previous few months, and we witnessed the "Natural" Freshman Senator re-emerge once again.

I also notice how he will constantly begin a statement or start on a certain topic, but he never finishes the sentence. He keeps piling everything together like a jumbled batch of goodies, simply so he can keep everyone enthralled until he finally concludes a point. This is called "Double-Talk", and it represents complete non-sensical speech, but if done properly most will fall for it. This does not make you "dumb" or "uneducated" if you fail to spot it, it simply means that you succumbed to a tactic often employed by those with very little to say. I once heard a professor employ such tactics when speaking to students, and they all looked at him in complete awe, as if he had every answer to their Scientific questions. However, I knew the subject upon which he spoke, and everything that came out of his mouth was little more than jumbled word-play, which was an obvious compensation for his complete LACK of knowledge.

As for this "phenomenon" known as Senator Obama, it does no service in my view that he appears so famous. A Leader, whether it be a President or Prime Minister, should not be treated as though they are some Rock Star. There is something inherently wrong with this, and downright disturbing. Even President Ronald Reagan, a man who won nearly every single State BOTH times he ran, was not gawked at in this manner. There are more extremists in support of this candidate than ever seen before as well. From the average loud-mouth whacko that destroys property and yells in your face, to actual terrorist organizations, Senator Obama counts them as his most fervent of supporters. We are also witnessing Citizens actually referring to this candidate as the "Messiah", "Jesus", and "God Chosen". Most of us used to joke about Senator Obama in this manner, but the longer this campaign race has gone on, the more serious and adamant these proclaimers have actually become.

On a similar note, why is it that Senator Obama can start a speaking point, but by the time he actually reaches a conclusion, you most often forget what he originally started out in saying?

Originally posted by beammeup
I am not refernceing the proud granny who proudly reports she whitnessed the "chosen" ones birth in Kenya!

Yes you are. You just referenced it right there. I'm actually quoting your reference to Obama's grandmother. Your technique needs a little work but you'll get there.

For heavens sake......wake up Obama people!

What? Is it can be trance over time now plees?

Originally posted by merky

This load of crap really takes the gold star. It seems like a fair share of you are buying into this.

WOW, Ya talk about sheep. Just because of this rag article and you believe it to be true.

My god, give me a break. You must be the biggest fools on two feet. IMO

Major LMAO at you ....ah....folks...

You are joking aren't you? You are really trying, reading the data? Hopefully you and others who agree with you would pause, be objective, and goes through the article.

I red all document. Somebody has spent days on writing it I have to say that every good public speaker knows and to some extent is using many of techniques presented. Also using these techniques does not automatically make you evil. They can be used to achieve something good.

Thanks for the post anyway

Originally posted by FIFIGI
I red all document. Somebody has spent days on writing it

I have to say that every good public speaker knows and to some extent is using many of techniques presented. Also using these techniques does not automatically make you evil. They can be used to achieve something good.

Thanks for the post anyway

You are welcome. Now for many people who have said it is about "good public speaking," and "Dale Carnigie Training," please read the specific context and matching terms that indicate "Clinical Hypnosis." Then reconsider the swooning crowds, the devotion of Obama supporters, the fainting during speeches. Look and study history. You could tell a follower of many historical figures exactly what they were doing, and they would not listen nor would they believe or even look at anything you were saying. If the same thing happens with Obama supporters, all I can say is get ready for a wild ride. "Those that do not learn from history will be condemned to relive it."

What do I wish for Obama? I wish him well, despite all these things, and I hope he will bring his audience back to critical thinking, because that is what change takes.

Give Peace A Trance

I'd just like to remind everyone that on ATS, we welcome all opinions, provided they are expressed in accordance with the AboveTopSecret.com Terms And Conditions Of Use.

If you agree with the premise of the original post, that's fine. If not, that's also fine.

What you choose to believe or disbelieve is entirely up to you, as well it should be.

But if you do disagree, please refrain from the temptation to use insults as a substitute for civil discussion. Trolling accomplishes nothing other than attracting the negative attention of members and staff.

Instead, you can win friends and influence people by simply offering intelligent opinions backed by well-corroborated sources. That attracts the positive attention of members and staff -- and applause, if the contribution is exceptional.

No Jedi mind tricks required.

Originally posted by SkipShipman

Originally posted by FIFIGI
I red all document. Somebody has spent days on writing it

I have to say that every good public speaker knows and to some extent is using many of techniques presented. Also using these techniques does not automatically make you evil. They can be used to achieve something good.

Thanks for the post anyway

You are welcome. Now for many people who have said it is about "good public speaking," and "Dale Carnigie Training," please read the specific context and matching terms that indicate "Clinical Hypnosis." Then reconsider the swooning crowds, the devotion of Obama supporters, the fainting during speeches. Look and study history. You could tell a follower of many historical figures exactly what they were doing, and they would not listen nor would they believe or even look at anything you were saying. If the same thing happens with Obama supporters, all I can say is get ready for a wild ride. "Those that do not learn from history will be condemned to relive it."

What do I wish for Obama? I wish him well, despite all these things, and I hope he will bring his audience back to critical thinking, because that is what change takes.

I have, as stated before, read the article and watched the videos. While you may believe that this is "proof", all it shows is that he employs these techniques . . . which I have concede to. It DOES NOT show intent or malice. You (sic) perceive intent or malice, which goes to an unstated bias or belief that these techniques or inherently "evil" or bad.

People fainting is of NO consequence . . . it happens at church services and rallies ALL the time. It's something that goes along with letting yourself get "caught up" in the emotion of the speaker. This says more about us, as humans, and our willingness to give ourselves over to the will of someone, we perceive, as an authority.

Yes. Being extremely excited can trigger a sudden large surge of adrenaline and other stress hormones. Your heart rate speeds into overdrive, sends a "fight or flight" message to the brain, which then sends a message back to slow down. As a result, heart rate slows, blood pressure drops precipitously, and the brain gets momentarily deprived of oxygen and glucose. Standing in one place makes it worse because blood has already pooled in your lower extremities. You might feel lightheaded, clammy, and a bit nauseated before your vision dims and the world goes black

source

These reactions are no different than the large instances of people, at McCain/Palin rallies, who shout out "Terrorist, Kill'em," etc. The only difference is Obama is instilling feelings of hope and McCain/Palin are instilling fear. Hence, the fainting at Obama and the mob mentality and anger at McCain functions.

I'm sorry you seemed so concinved of the nefarious nature of Obama's speech, but this "article" is propaganda, at best. It's twisting actual research for the puposes of fear.

To restate again, for the THIRD time, hypnotic states DO NOT put us under ANYONE'S control. People are in full control under hypnosis and simply OPEN to suggestion. When we "obey" the hypnotist, we do so willingly . . . no amount of spin makes this fact untrue. People are still following their will. Obama's speech can't make someone do anything they don't really want to do.

To reiterate on my previous posts . . . I don't support either candidate. This "article", which is UNDOCUMENTED by the way, was put out by an ultra-right wing Christian dime rag (The Penny Press of Las Vegas). This was not something done under the umbrella of science, it's done to instill fear . . . If you have "concerns" that this is something to fear . . . you've fallen for the author's "suggestions" or been "hypnotized". Illusion and Ignorance: deny!

reply to post by SkipShipman


To add . . . and close.

It just seems odd to me that the OP, regardless of a poster saying that they have understood the document and watched the videos, continues to push for this being something UNIQUE to Obama. It's actually very condesending to myself, and other posters on this thread, that because we don't "believe" the document . . . we somehow don't "understand" what we are really looking at. I'm not a clinician, but I do have a B.S. in Psych . . . and I suspect, from their responses, others that disagree have a strong backround, as well. This subject (hypnosis, be it conversational or otherwise) is not new . . . these are well known devices that are used consciously and sub-consciously by all humans. Hypnosis is not control, nor is it bad/good. It just is . . . and more common than most people realize, unfortunately.

Originally posted by solomons path
reply to post by SkipShipman

 

To add . . . and close.

It just seems odd to me that the OP, regardless of a poster saying that they have understood the document and watched the videos, continues to push for this being something UNIQUE to Obama. It's actually very condescending to myself, and other posters on this thread, that because we don't "believe" the document . . . we somehow don't "understand" what we are really looking at. I'm not a clinician, but I do have a B.S. in Psych . . . and I suspect, from their responses, others that disagree have a strong background, as well. This subject (hypnosis, be it conversational or otherwise) is not new . . . these are well known devices that are used consciously and sub-consciously by all humans. Hypnosis is not control, nor is it bad/good. It just is . . . and more common than most people realize, unfortunately.

What I am talking about is not simply this document, but also the historical background on the hypnotic speaker, and I do not mean to "condescend," by asking people to study the document. The document itself may well be irrelevant, if you will, the pattern of swooning crowds, people who will not listen to anything, for those who favor anything he says regardless of whether he switches his positions, all of these things simply give a caveat, a warning, and to tread with caution. Do not forget that the United States has put many new laws granting dictatorial powers to the Executive branch. Whether or not Obama does anything with those powers, may depend upon those who have sponsored him, people we do not know.

For crying out loud just exercise discretion, common sense, horse sense, and maybe the good old "I'm from Missouri, I've got to be shown." Just because other speakers use "hypnotic technique," does not make them Obama. Is this the "ability to inspire?" Well there is a "snap out of it," that Obama can use to return his audience to it's critical thinking. Where there is no skepticism, criticism, peer review, there is little growth of knowledge.

JFK asked the press to "correct him when his administration was wrong." Obama's followers ask the people to arrest anyone who simply wants to debate about Zbigniew Breschinski. It does not sound like JFK to me although Obama was not directly involved, he should rebuke these people.

These reactions are no different than the large instances of people, at McCain/Palin rallies, who shout out "Terrorist, Kill'em," etc. The only difference is Obama is instilling feelings of hope and McCain/Palin are instilling fear. Hence, the fainting at Obama and the mob mentality and anger at McCain functions.

The Secret Service said no one shouted "kill him," about Obama.

[edit on 20-10-2008 by SkipShipman]

reply to post by SkipShipman


I'm just not sure what your actual point is, at this juncture. At first, you were simply posting this shocking document, which insinuated that Obama was somehow manipulating and taking over the masses through some sort of wizardry. But, despite the title and the (now irrelevant) document, you passive-agressively back out with the following close . . .

For that matter if you must, go ahead and vote for Obama, just recognize what he is doing between the lines. Once you get past that, vote for the substance of what he wants to do, not because you are emotionally compelled to do so. If you must vote for McCain, apply the same principles.

"Leading" one to believe, supported by the subsequent posts, that this was some sort of calculated manipulation . . . thus, making sense of the support Obama receives. Obama receives his support through the beliefs of his followers . . . Just as McCain or Bush or Hitler. It is not due to these methods, as it's been proven (and is failed to mention by the author) that people have full control over their actions. Hypnotized people due what they want . . . even if led there by suggestion. You're argument also hinges on the ASSUMPTION that using these techniques is, somehow, dishonest or unethical. They are not . . . the methods for effective persuassion aren't dishonest or unethical . . . people that use them are. Thus your bias or fear of what Obama is or will be is manifest in the connection to Obama, these tactics, and something negative. And the whole "bring them back to critical thinking" argument is straw man, as there are plenty of studies that prove that hypnosis does not equal control. If the "subjects" aren't under control . . . there is no need to "bring them back to reality". These people are in full control of there faculties, to suggest otherwise is demeaning their intelligence while elevating your own. Again, showing your bias towards him and his support. The swooning and fainting is not from hypnosis, it's from being caught up in an emotional moment, surrounded by others sharing that emotion/energy. Just ask those other "evil hypnotists" the Beatles, Elvis Presley, or any Pope.

Now . . . you claim the document, which without we wouldn't be equating these methods to Obama anymore than McCain or the Pope, is irrelevant and your real concern is historical precedence and what that will bring. I'm assuming you are talking about those other charasmatic wizards of evil MLK, Ghandi, and Jesus? Or are you equating Obama, disregarding that EVERY public speaker, et. al, use these techniques, with something bad for society. Even though you claim to not like or dislike him . . . ? I'm sure you disagree, but using these methods is not a bad thing . . . the message can be bad. However, we all have free will and even if you know these techniques, they still work on you. It's clear to me that fear is causing this crusade . . . if not for hypnotism, why would they follow a/an (insert paranoid stereotype here). So, how did you come across this gem for the LV Penny Press . . . if you are a subscriber, that explains a lot. If not, where exactly can it be found on their site . . . which issue. I'm still having trouble locating it, on the site.


[edit on 10/20/08 by solomons path]

reply to post by SkipShipman


You and other supporters of this theory also fail to take into consideration that the "perils" of these devices are observed under clinical and controlled conditions . . . where the subject is under "deep" hypnosis, something not easily accomplished amongst the distraction of being in a crowd.

Also, history's evil precidents have more to due with control over the population through promoting fear, seperateness, and pride . . . it's not accomplished by hypnosis. You should watch a documentary called "Five Steps to Tyranny" and then let me know if you still think "hypnotic methods" are the real reason for "evil" leaders . . . or is this document just subverted science used for propaganda.

Five Steps to Tyranny

Look at the spikes on the graph from Google Trends when you enter Obama Messiah:

www.google.com...

Farrakhan on Obama: 'The Messiah is absolutely speaking'

"You are the instruments that God is going to use to bring about universal change, and that is why Barack has captured the youth. And he has involved young people in a political process that they didn't care anything about. That's a sign. When the Messiah speaks, the youth will hear, and the Messiah is absolutely speaking."

'Obama quote strategically ripped from a Jan. 7 speech at Dartmouth College just before the New Hampshire Primary in which he told students, "… a light will shine through that window, a beam of light will come down upon you, you will experience an epiphany, and you will suddenly realize that you must go to the polls and vote" for Obama."

"MSNBC anchor Chris Matthews is among the many members of the media enraptured by Obama, admitting he felt a "thrill going up my leg" listening to an Obama speech."

"Columnist Mark Morford of the San Francisco Chronicle writes that Obama has a charisma that goes beyond "his youthful vigor, or handsomeness, or even inspiring rhetoric."

wnd.com...

These are the results when Obama and fear are entered:

www.google.com...

larison.org...

The typical Obama-praise is paired with an immediate statement of Obama-fear:

“Obama is a wonderful proponent of liberalism, and I would much rather live in an America with Obama liberals, but he is so wonderful that he may destroy the right for a generation.” This is a bit exaggerated, but this is basically the refrain one hears."

"Obama undoubtedly generates a lot of enthusiasm, especially among the young and the unthinking, but what is striking is how little enthusiasm he generates among bloggers, pundits and activists on the left. For example, Kos can barely bring himself to vote for him, and emphasises that he will not be “supporting” him actively."

"If Obama were the Democrats’ Reagan and the leading progressive candidate in the race, this would almost be equivalent to the editor of Human Events grudgingly saying that he would support Reagan if he really had to do it. Therein lies an important clue."

"But it is unmistakable that there are many on the right who seem certain that an Obama nomination spells doom for them, yet they seem willing to welcome that doom because Obama makes them feel good, whether it is feeling good about themselves or about America or about something else all together. Nothing could better capture the confusion and disarray of the American right than this emergence of a conservative Obama admiration society."

b-Good points in article/blog worth reading.

reply to post by ballast


What is your point and how does it relate to the topic?

McCain "messiah" Google trends
McCain "fear" google trends

Seems you've posted evidence pointing towards group think and party in-fighting . . . The point of the argument, at this time, is Obama is doing something unique to him and dangerous to the people. The OP is asking for us to "remember our history" . . . yet, everyone is acting like this is A) a new concept or technique and B) as evidenced in the last two posts, doesn't happen every election year, with every candidate, in some for manner or fashion.

Someone that believes in this propagandist theory, please show me empirical evidence to support this articles claims. Show me causality. Show me evidence of intent. Stop the fear mongering . . . We are not in control of what will happen in this country, currently, but it has nothing to do with who sits as president . . . or what party they are from. Red just gets us there on a faster track than blue.


[edit on 10/20/08 by solomons path]

[edit on 10/20/08 by solomons path]