Obama is Hypnotising the Masses -Theory

reply to post by SpectreDC


Your video certainly does address a portion of the material presented in the PDF. But, word choice is only a portion of what is being presented. The rest has to do with actual hypnosis techniques; such as anchoring, pacing, leading and distracting.

It should be noted, for those who have yet to read the document, we are NOT talking about "sleep" hypnosis. This is known as "Conversational Hyponosis" as developed by Dr. Milton Erikson, aka "Eriksonian Hypnosis".

Here's a helpful link on Milton H. Erickson and his hypnosis techniques:

en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 4/17/2010 by this_is_who_we_are]

Obama is hypnotising the masses-fact? Who do you, (OP) exclude from the masses, apart from yourself, that is, those that can't be hypnotised.

reply to post by smurfy


Tricky question... Read the document and you'll find your answer as to who is likely or unlikely to fall prey to neuro-linguistic programming and under what circumstances. I can't answer all of these questions when they've already been answered... too exhausting.

Originally posted by SpectreDC

Originally posted by SaturnFX
heh, funny topic.

It takes a special kind of idiot to suggest the only way you can lose an argument is by the other side using magic.

Thats really my only contribution to this thread...I got to go dress up like a chicken and shoot the queen at a baseball game now...not sure why..just...must...

....You're calling someone an idiot when you're calling hypnotism magic?

close enough...hypnotism = magic...a trick that is half bull, half just suggesting what people want to do anyhow. psychologists even attest to this, that hypotism doesnt really work unless the person wants it to work to begin with..or feel they wanted to admit but needed that extra little push, etc.

I am highly skeptical of the science, because I seen how it is used firsthand.

reply to post by kozmo


Excellent post Kosmo!

This paper explains many things I have picked up on (not only with the messiah) but in advertising. 90% of the time, I key in on them and ask

"what is it about this ____ is setting me off?
"why do these people look and smile like this? NO ONE DOES THAT!"

Usually, it irritates the piss out of me! I get very indignate and aggressive toward stimulus "x".

The head tilt is a BIG piss me off stimulus!

I have witnessed others in situations. i used to call it "people watching"- now I call it "social surveylence".

I watch how they operate. I notice in places (Walmart is the worst!) how people walk in a trance. Some more than others. My wife and I call it the "evil" store ,not because of trade practice or management, because we believe they use some sort of hypnosis. Brightly colored "smiley faces", TV's at every turn, ect. We have had more than once went into the store happy and left nearly tearing each others throats out.

Notice employee's at the store sometime.

When we were outside for a bit we would ask "WTF? We dont do this!"

We clued in!

We rarely go in and when we do we limit time to no more than MAYBE 30 minutes. Its all good then.

I believe that some of our "awareness" is due to meditation and just being "aware of surroundings".

SandF kosmo!

Originally posted by SpectreDC
While I haven't read the pdf, I think I have an understanding of what the OP and the pdf is talking about as I have pretty good knowledge on the subject and while using the term hypnosis and mind control are certainly a bad choice in words, in a way it isn't incorrect although again not quite right. You just need to understand it in a different context.

I understand what you are saying and I am not knocking hypnosis itself but as you agree, if we can just call this hypnosis with no real scientific reasoning, then we can call it magic too. One poor choice of words only invites similar comparisons.

In a different context, it is a different story about different people doing different things to different effect. In this context, it is magic.

Originally posted by kozmo

Originally posted by K J Gunderson
I tried to open it 3 times and it locked up my browser all 3 times. It could be me but my adobe reader is still working and my browser is still working with everything else. Perhaps you can sum up the most salient points?

My apologies regarding your difficulty. I've no problem opening it. Regarding your request... it would be a HUGE disservice to even attempt to do so.

The only way that spreading information could be a disservice to that information is if someone does not grasp it well enough to translate the idea.

The document can be, at times, very technical in nature and is written to progressively introduce information that builds upon itself. Can you recommend another method for me to give you access to it?

Well, I can recommend that you attempt to understand it before you even try to promote and defend it. 5 pages and so far you cannot actually seem to bring the ideas in your document into the real world in words that you understand.

I had no problem with any other PDF files today so I am not going to kill myself to get yours.

I understand you are going to whine about people defending Obama without reading the paper and all but as of yet, I see no proof that even you read it, let alone understood it.

If you can make a valid point or argument instead of just being a link merchant, you might get some of that credibility you acknowledge in the OP you lack in spades around here.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by kozmo
Typical!

A half dozen or so posts defending Obama without even reading the PDF!

The 60 page PDF that claims Obama has the power to control minds because his a good speaker? The same PDF file that claims hypnosis is somehow ideologically linked? The same 60 page PDF that sources from blogs?

By all means continue to defend the file Kozmo. It just shows to what lengths of desperation you are prepared to go to politically smear.

Does it matter who wrote the PDF?

For such a 'scientific' claim? Yes it matters! If somebody claimed all Ron Paul supporters are racists from a psychological stand point, would it matter their credentials and their sources, research over the matter?

Does anyone become concerned with who writes text books?

Should they not? Are you to suggest nobody should be concerned for sources or references over such claims? To me it just sounds as though you want everybody to readily take your smears as they are.

as long as the information is factual and correct - and this PDF is both.

So in your conclusion:

-Hypnosis is ideological discrimminating.
-All Obama supporters are irrational and easy to control.
-Sources and credentials over such claims are of little to no importance.

right.

[edit on 17-4-2010 by Southern Guardian]

OK. I've read enough trash towards the OP. Obama is just ONE of MANY that are trying to get into our heads.

It seems that "something" has gotten into alot of the Obamatons....just as it did with the Bushbots!

I was talking to a friend the other day that is fairly "tuned in". He said that he was watching a speech by the messiah. He said after a bit, he realized that he was smiling like a complete idiot about a topic that he was dead set against!

Whether you call it NLP, hypnosis, or MKULTRA...is just freaking semantics people! Far too many of you are missing the complete point of the OP and seem to be doing the Leftist pass time of Ad Hominem attacks.

I don't really give a damn about what party you are a part of. I'm an independent. I think they all suck!

Wake up, tune in, drop out! Take your red pill and get a grip!

Pay attention to commercials. If you say they are not a form of hypnotism you are (at least)intellectually dishonest. His is the same. The thing with all of these idiots "swooning" before the "one" is either

1. People are freakin stupid ( my personal mantra)
2. There is some sort of subliminal crap going on.

[edit on 18/4/10 by felonius]

Persuasive. Hypnotic. Charismatic. Engaging. Masterful Speaker. Skilled Orator.

There are many ways to describe the same phenomena. Ericksonian is an odd concept in that anyone would take credit for developing a technique known since the first Shaman (Witch Doctor) lead a tribe around by their nose using only the power of his personality and a bag of sulfur.

All skilled Politicians, all skilled speakers, talk show hosts, radio personalities, preachers, salespersons and spokespeople on the planet use these techniques, even if they are unaware of it.

Erickson simply pointed out what many already knew instinctively.

Is this method used to influence how we vote? Of course it is. By all successful Politicians it is, be they R's, D's or whatever they subscribe too.

We see its power and effect every time we go shopping. We walk by brands unknown to us and throw a known brand in the shopping cart, even though they contain identical products and the known brand costs more, why? This method is applied to us in such an effective way, all throughout our lives, that we can't control ourselves no matter how logical we are.

Every political candidate who makes it to high office is a master of these techniques, or has the sense to hire speech writers who are.

Some of us are more immunized to this sort of control than others. Skeptical people for instance have a built in safeguard it seems while some seem to have almost no defense against it.

I'd say that paper is spot on. It would have been spot on regarding Bush also. There are people on both sides, from both extremes who are easy targets, easy victims.

What determines the winners though is how effective they are in engaging the independently minded among us. That is where the battleground of minds takes place. Those who are destined to vote for one side over the other, in every election, almost don't matter. Only those who question everything can or do protect us from ourselves.

Interesting topic and read. Too bad this thread was disrupted by knee jerk responses from people trapped in one ideological stance.

Originally posted by K J Gunderson

Originally posted by SpectreDC

Originally posted by SaturnFX
heh, funny topic.

It takes a special kind of idiot to suggest the only way you can lose an argument is by the other side using magic.

Thats really my only contribution to this thread...I got to go dress up like a chicken and shoot the queen at a baseball game now...not sure why..just...must...

....You're calling someone an idiot when you're calling hypnotism magic?

The idea of the type of mass hypnosis put forward by this thread is not substantiated by any real science so magic seems plenty fitting.

One mans science is a another mans magic. They are both capable of being religions as well.

Originally posted by felonius
One mans science is a another mans magic. They are both capable of being religions as well.

You got me there.

I guess the OP just has to make his case that any scientific based hypnosis is actually going on.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

if he's using hypnosis, why do half the people hate him?

I'm one of those people that far from being taken in by hyponosis, notices the strange language structures and hand gestures and starts analysing the speech as spoken, not the meaning of the speech, to try and figure out the real purpose of the speech.

I've noticed with several politicians that some are just idiots, being vague to avoid the issues, whilst others are very deliberate when they speak to say certain words/phrases in a certain way, etc.., and conduct their body language in such a way as to convey a message, but alas, even this is flawed and in them trying to hide certain thoughts/emotions during a live interview, actually end up revealing precisely that which they don't want to be known! Others are just obvious in what they're trying to achieve (such as Obama).

If you wantched his speech from a couple of weeks ago when he was in Afghanistan, his speech was rather odd then, talking at the troops rather than to them.

saturnFX:

hypnotism = magic...a trick that is half bull, half just suggesting what people want to do anyhow. psychologists even attest to this, that hypotism doesnt really work unless the person wants it to work to begin with..or feel they wanted to admit but needed that extra little push, etc.

It is magic! They're out to con you. The question is, what is the con?

I think the answer to this question is the reason I'm not affected by their tactics used to try and swing me. First and foremost, they're politicians, so they're lying automatically. They are also cunning, and will and try and persuade me without actually saying anything of meaning. From that point, it is a question of how are they trying to con me/everyone? It comes down to two things: use of spoken language, and body language.

It was asked just a couple of days ago why the UK political parties will not campaign online. The reason is that online uses the written word, and it is much harder to persuade anyone of anything without using actual facts (that are easily verified).

@felonius: Right on!!

[edit on 18-4-2010 by mirageofdeceit]

Is he hypnotizing the masses?

Or is Fox News hypnotizing the masses to hate the man?

Your call

reply to post by joey_hv


Yes, 40% of the population are like battered wives, they know exactly what has and is being done to them and they go back for more. I have never understood how people can totally deny reality and praise someone while that same person is abusing them on a daily basis.

I recognized early on that Zero was using some kind of mind control techniques and I refused to listen to him at all. Makes me ill to hear him speak, its bad enough just to see his comments in print.

reply to post by Blaine91555


Thought? Actual, genuine, reflective thought?

It does still exist! I was getting worried there for a while.

I watch every one of Obama's speech. I really like his policies and his expression are alluring. YES WE CAN!

My gf told me a story how when she was 12 and her sister 14 they went to visit a cousin of theirs in D.C. who's step father was a retired CIA agent, he told them that he also wanted to go into the CIA and that his step father had given him a book about hypnotizing people without them even knowing, he had just told them about it casually and never said he would show them nor was he asked yet later that day as they were talking about something else he suddenly told them that he liked their necklaces and said it would be nice if they would give them to him, without much thought they both took off their necklaces and handed them to him, he immediately put them away, quickly shifting to another subject he went on as if there had been no transfer and never brought it up again.

What is interesting is upon recalling this happening she says she felt as if she were dazed and could never understand why she gave him her necklace as the necklace was her most prized possession because it was her late grandmas gift to her as a last gesture of her love just before passing away. It was the only thing she had left of her grandma. She knows now that he hypnotized them, but at the time she felt an overwhelming desire to give him what he wanted.

[edit on 18-4-2010 by Sheeper]

Originally posted by Aggie Man
Yeah right...

Above all, the person must be willing. No one can hypnotize you if you don't want to be hypnotized. Your natural defenses in your mind will prevent this from happening.

That is a big lie, right up there with no one can rape you unless you want them to



[edit on 18-4-2010 by m khan]

Yeah, you sure convinced me. [sarcasm off]