Below
is "Apocalypse of Coercion," a new article by mujca.com coordinator Kevin
Barrett analyzing 9/11 as a psy-op. The article draws on media guru Douglas
Rushkoff's book Coercion: Why We Listen to What "They" Say. Rushkoff,
an NYU professor and Esalen Institute teacher, is one of the world's most
celebrated media commentators:
http://www.rushkoff.com/ Barrett sent him a copy of
"Apocalypse of Coercion" and asked if he thought of 9/11 as the kind of
coercive psy-op his book analyzed. Rushkoff responded:
"Yeah - terrific stuff. I began thinking about this sort connection, myself,
when I saw the documentary Power of Nightmares. He's got a lot more to say
about it than I do; pretty much all my opinions on the matter are just
watered down versions of his. Have you seen it? I'm assuming you would
have, given your area of interest."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apocalypse of Coercion: Why We Listen to What “They” Say About 9/11
By Kevin Barrett, http://mujca.com
Summary
“Apocalypse of Coercion” uses Douglas Rushkoff’s landmark book Coercion
as a touchstone for understanding 9/11 as a psychological warfare operation.
Rushkoff’s well-researched insights into the mind-control techniques of car
salesmen, spin doctors, cult leaders, and CIA psych-war specialists explain
how 9/11 was designed as a war-triggering “New Pearl Harbor.” These insights
also explain why so many people can continue to believe the official myth of
9/11 in the teeth of the overwhelming evidence against it. Perhaps most
importantly, Rushkoff predicts that new communications technologies promise
to put an explosive end to the era of pervasive coercion. His prophecy of
the coming apocalyptic end of coercion explains why the coercers were
desperate enough to try to re-infantalize the public through 9/11 in order
to maintain the old coercive structures of social control. In predicting
doom for the coercers, Rushkoff provides us with a roadmap to a
post-9/11-truth world.
Apocalypse of Coercion: Why We Listen to What “They” Say About 9/11
“That’s just like hypnotizing chickens.” --Iggy Pop, “Lust for Life”
“Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice...uh...(long pause)...we won’t
get fooled again.” George W. Bush
They say suicidal Muslim fanatics did it. They say those radical Muslims
hate our freedoms. They say the country is full of sleeper agents who could
wake up and kill us at any moment, as soon as their little
red-white-and-blue “I hate the USA” wristwatch alarms go off.
They say that Saddam Hussein had something to do with it—he’s Muslim, isn’t
he? They say invading Afghanistan and Iraq was the appropriate response; we
had to do something, right? They say if you’re not with us, you’re
against us—and if you’re against us, you’re on the side of the evildoers.
They say those cunning, devious suicide hijackers defeated America’s
defenses using flying lessons and box cutters. They say it was ordered by a
tall, dark, handsome, sinister, hooknosed kidney patient in a cave in
Afghanistan—a ringer for the evil vizier Jaffar in the Disney film
Aladdin, but with a thicker beard to signify “Islamist.” They say it was
masterminded by a real bad dude named KSM. They say they finally caught KSM,
and that the whole story, enshrined in the official 9/11 Commission
Report, is based on what KSM said under interrogation—so it’s all right
from the horse’s mouth.
They say it happened because our defense and intelligence systems didn’t see
it coming, despite all those urgent warnings from dozens of countries as
well as whistleblowers from our own agencies. They say that nobody was
really to blame, so nobody had to be prosecuted or fired or even
reprimanded. They say that by promoting the very people who made the most
outrageously improbable blunders, and giving the screw-up agencies a whole
lot more money, we’ve ensured that they’ll do better next time.
They say that anybody who questions what they say is a conspiracy theorist.
“Who, exactly, are ‘they,’ and why do they say so much? More amazing, why do
we listen to them?”
—Douglas Rushkoff, Coercion: Why We Listen to What “They” Say (NY:
Penguin, 1999)
Rushkoff’s Coercion is a sizzling exposé of mind control, American
style. Unlike Chomsky’s Manufacturing Consent, Rushkoff’s book
provides a detailed guide to the nuts-and-bolts techniques employed against
us every day by advertisers, marketers, public relations specialists,
Hollywood filmmakers, salespeople, pyramid-scam artists, and cult leaders
—the very same techniques applied for decades, and gradually perfected, by
CIA interrogators and psychological warfare experts. These techniques are
designed to disable rational thought and manipulate behavior at the
unconscious and emotional levels. Anyone curious about why so many otherwise
rational people have believed the official story of 9/11 for so long, in the
teeth of the overwhelming evidence against it, should start by reading
Coercion.
The secret of mind-control is simple—so simple that Rushkoff can sum it up
in one sentence: “In whatever milieu coercion is practiced, the routine
follows the same basic steps: Generate disorientation, induce regression,
and then become the target’s transferred parent figure” (64). Hard-sell car
salesmen, CIA interrogators and psychwar ops, and cult leaders have long
used this technique. Under coercion, millions of otherwise rational people
can be persuaded to act against their own interests—whether by shelling out
big bucks for an overpriced lemon, betraying a comrade and a cause, or
allowing a gang of criminals to destroy their nation’s Constitution and
launch criminal wars of aggression.
How do they do it? Let’s start by zooming in on your local automobile
dealership. The car salesman carefully leads the mark to be dissatisfied
with his current car, and by extension his current life—and as the mark sees
his current life through newly dissatisfied eyes, he begins to experience
disorientation. The salesman then takes the mark on a test drive and, at the
right moment, asks “Is this the type of vehicle you would like to own?”
Rushoff quotes a car-salesman-turned-whistleblower:
And anyone will tell you this, the vacuum cleaner salesman, the car
salesman—the customer has a split-second of insanity. The mind goes blank,
the body paralyzes, the eyes get glassy, dilated. And you’d be surprised how
many people have an accident at just that moment! Ask any car dealer. We
always joke about it. (43)
The car salesman’s question, like the well-timed words of a good hypnotist,
triggers a sudden intensification of the customer’s dissociated, suggestible
state. Rushkoff explains: “The customer is already in a vehicle, being asked
to imagine himself owning the same type of vehicle. It’s the same as if I
asked you if this is the kind of book you can imagine yourself reading. Your
current situation is reframed in fantasy. It creates a momentary confusion,
or dissociation, from the activity you’re involved in. That’s why so many
drivers crash” (43).
If the customer answers no, he gets the same treatment in other cars until
he answers yes. Then he is brought back to the dealership and infantilized,
as the salesman becomes his transferred parent figure:
He is told where to go, how to walk, where to sit. One training manual
instructs the salesman to give the customer coffee whether he wants it or
not: “Don’t ask him if he wants a cup of coffee—just ask him how he takes
it.” In this way, the customer is trained to obey, and given his fear and
disorientation in the sales environment, he welcomes the commands and their
implied invitation for him to regress into the safety of childhood. (43)
Once the customer has been infantilized, he is controlled by various tricks.
One of the best-known is the “common enemy” technique. The salesman pretends
to be conspiring with the customer against the nasty head of the dealership,
or against another salesman who is greedy and dishonest. The “common enemy”
technique is also used by the CIA—one interrogator, the “good cop,” teams up
with the subject against the other interrogator, the “bad cop.” Governments,
of course, use the same technique: The illegitimate son-of-a-Bush of August,
2001 doubled his approval ratings by infantilizing the American public on
9/11 and rallying them against the “common enemy” of evildoing Muslim
extremists.
The CIA, like the automobile industry, has long been refining coercive
techniques aimed at eliciting compliance. Whether the Company wants to
coerce an interrogation subject into spilling the beans, or a whole nation
into supporting a war, the techniques are basically the same as those used
by hard-sell car salesmen: Generate dissociation through disorientation,
induce regression, and become the target’s transferred parent figure.
In an interrogation, the CIA begins by disorienting the subject:
As the minutes, hours, or days go by, the “sights and sounds of an outside
world fade away, [and] its significance is replaced by the interrogation
room, its two occupants, and the dynamic relationship between them” (CIA
Interrogation Manual) which is why interrogation rooms are generally
devoid of windows and free of all references to the outside world, including
time of day and day of the week. The subject becomes completely dependent on
the interrogator for all external stimuli and, accordingly, his sense of
self (35).
After the subject’s sense of self has been broken down, the CIA interrogator
chooses from a grab bag of techniques that accomplish the same thing as the
car salesman’s line “Is this the type of vehicle you would like to own?”
These techniques induce a sudden state of radical confusion by disrupting
the target’s familiar emotional associations. The CIA manual explains: “When
this aim is achieved, resistance is seriously impaired. There is an
interval—which may be extremely brief—of suspended animation, a kind of
psychological shock or paralysis...that explodes the world that is familiar
to the subject as well as his image of himself within that world.
Experienced interrogators recognize this effect when it appears and know
that at this moment the source is far more open to suggestion” (qtd. In
Rushkoff, 36). At this moment, the interrogator encourages the subject to
regress to a childlike state of mind, and becomes the subject’s transferred
parent figure.
This is a very good description of what was done to the American people on
and after September 11th, 2001. The images of the planes crashing into
landmark buildings, and those buildings exploding into powder and shards,
created a state of extreme confusion, “a kind of psychological shock or
paralysis.” The bombs that brought down the Twin Towers and WTC-7 literally
exploded the world that was familiar to us, and our images of ourselves in
that world. We experienced a moment of dissociation, which is why we can
still recall where we were and what we were doing when we learned of the
attack. As the psychological warfare experts who designed the operation knew
very well, this left us radically open to suggestion—to mass hypnosis. Our
old world had been annihilated, and we were ready to be hypnotized, and to
have a new world created for us. We desperately needed a parent figure to
tell us how to make sense of the madness.
The government, of course, became that transferred parent figure. The
presidency, instituted by George “father of his country” Washington, is a
paternal institution. Even an illegitimate son-of-a-Bush could briefly
become our idealized national daddy. We believed what “they” told us about
9/11, with little or no effort to discern the actual facts, because we had
been coerced and infantilized. When Susan Sontag spoke out against the
absurd infantilization of the American people post-9/11, she was subjected
to vicious attacks by intelligence-asset pseudo-journalists. Why? Not
because what she said wasn’t true—it obviously was. The reason Sontag had to
be ripped to shreds by the CIA rag National Review and its epigones
was that she was getting too close to understanding that 9/11 was a
psychological warfare operation by US and allied intelligence agencies, not
a “terrorist attack” by anti-American foreigners. Sontag understood that the
American public had been subjected to induced regression. By calling
attention to this fact, she was indirectly calling attention to the psy-op
man behind the curtain.
The choice of September 11th as the date of the attacks was obviously made
by a psychological warfare expert who wanted to make the American people
suffer induced regression and put childlike faith in their government. The
number 911 has overwhelming emotional associations in the mind of every
American. From early childhood, we are taught that this is the magic number
we can call in the event of an emergency. If anything terrible or deeply
threatening happens to us, all we have to do is push those three buttons on
the nearest telephone, and a benevolent parent figure—the government—will
come rushing to help us. With the ongoing breakdown of the family and its
authority, and the widespread consciousness of abuse between family members,
the number 911 represents the government that has become our real daddy. The
planners of 9/11 took advantage of this fact, enshrining their false-flag
attack with a number that evokes our desperate, childlike need for the
government to be the daddy who comes racing to help us in an emergency.
Every time we hear “9/11” we are enveloped in subconscious emotional
associations of a benevolent, fatherly government that can be counted on to
save us from catastrophe. Unless we have learned how to defend ourselves
against coercion, it is these emotional associations, not facts, that
condition how we think.
Once our old world had been exploded, our minds regressed to a childlike
emotional level, and our faith placed in the transferred parent figure of
our government and its paternal figurehead, we were ready to be bombarded by
hypnotic words and images. The hypnotic inculcation of thoughts, beliefs,
and attitudes is a simple matter. The key is repetition: Repetition,
repetition, repetition. In the Alice-in-Wonderland world of the
so-called war on terror, “what I tell you three times is true.” They tell us
over and over that 9/11 was like Pearl Harbor; we accept the paradigm and
prepare for a righteous world war. They tell us over and over that Bin Laden
did it, and we internalize that belief, without reference to evidence. They
tell us over and over that Bin Laden is America’s enemy, and we accept the
story, even though many of the world’s most prestigious journalistic outlets
have told us that Bin Laden spent the first two weeks of July, 2001 getting
treated at the American Hospital in Dubai and meeting with CIA Station Chief
Larry Mitchell. They tell us over and over that the guy in the grainy video
confessing to 9/11 is Bin Laden, even though there is very little
resemblance between this overweight impostor and the Osama Bin Laden of
other photos and videos. They tell us over and over about the 19 suicide
hijackers, and we believe them, even when we find out that many of these
alleged hijackers are still alive, that these individuals were/are not
Muslims at all but intelligence agents, and that the “flight schools” they
trained at were actually CIA drug import airstrips. They tell us over and
over that (whore-chasing, boozing cokehead) Mohammad Atta put a bizarre
parody of an “Islamic terrorist’s last will and testament” into a suitcase
and checked that suitcase on board his suicide flight—say what?!—and
that the suitcase was mistakenly put onboard a different flight so it could
be quickly discovered and offered as “evidence.” They tell us that other
“suicide hijackers” conveniently left a car full of evidence at the airport.
They tell us that a hijacker’s passport miraculously floated down from the
inferno in the Towers to be discovered as more “evidence.” They tell us that
the fact that the “hijackers” spent the night of 9/10/2001 in a motel right
across the street from the gates of the National Security Agency
headquarters is just a weird coincidence. They tell us that a good Samaritan
burglar happened to “steal” the briefcase containing the “evidence” of the
“hijackers” concocting their plot in Hamburg, Germany, and felt compelled to
deliver the briefcase to the German police. (What they don’t tell us is that
the German police are rolling on the ground laughing at the absurd pretext,
and have publicly stated that the “burglar” was an intelligence agent.) They
tell us over and over that the World Trade Center collapsed from
diesel-fuel-induced fires, despite the fact that no high rise steel frame
skyscraper has ever collapsed due to fire, including much worse ones
than those on 9/11. They tell us over and over that Hani Hanjour, who could
not fly a Cessna training aircraft, somehow executed an amazing stunt
maneuver in a hijacked 757 in order to hit the empty, newly-reinforced wing
of the Pentagon and cause minimal damage—instead of just diving into the
roof and killing thousands.
Even more important than the repetition of such ludicrous propositions, has
been the bombardment of the public with words and phrases designed to
disable rational thought: terror, terrorism, the war on terror, hate our
freedoms, hate our values, patriot, patriotic, Patriot Act, evildoers,
extremists, security, anthrax, homeland, biological weapons, Islamo-fascist,
dirty bombs, weapons of mass destruction. These emotionally-charged
terms, drummed incessantly into our brains, reinforce the unconscious
emotional predispositions that govern our thoughts. They literally force us
to think certain thoughts, and render us literally incapable of even
entertaining others. Just as the car salesman’s coercive question “How do
you take your coffee” literally forces 90% of non-coffee-drinkers to
obediently accept a cup of coffee, the psych-war experts’ attack of
disorientation, regression, and parental transference literally forces 90%
of the American public to think patently ludicrous thoughts, adopt those
thoughts as a model of reality, and cling to those self-evidently absurd
thoughts in the teeth of overwhelming factual evidence.
The question remains, who are “they” ? The answer is obvious—just read the
Project for a New American Century’s manifesto Rebuilding America’s
Defenses, published in September, 2000, which openly calls for a “New
Pearl Harbor.” The 9/11 “New Pearl Harbor” was brought to us by the
neoconservatives, who believe that all human beings except themselves are
governed by irrational emotions and incapable of evidence-based reasoning.
The neoconservatives are Zionist extremists and cult followers of the
demented philosopher-guru Leo Strauss, whose worldview can be summed up in
the adage “if you can’t beat Hitler, join him.” They apparently believed
that a massive dose of coercion, in the form of 9/11, could motivate
Americans to preserve and expand their imperial domination of the planet in
general, and their commitment to a belligerent, expansionist Israel in
particular.
Oddly enough, 9/11 was apparently designed with the help of focus groups:
...The trick only needs to work long enough to win (or avoid) a war. Even if
“the truth” emerges sometime later, at least the primary objective has
already been achieved...when American corporate and governmental interests
adopted these techniques for use against the American people, they needed to
cloak their assault in a seemingly benign manifestation: the focus group.
About ten “average” members of a target population are brought into a room
and asked to discuss an issue while a team of researchers, clients, and a
camera record their responses from behind a one-way mirror. A researcher
stays in the room with the subjects, asking them questions and pushing them
in new directions...
Bob Deutsch, an anthropologist [and legendary psy-op focus group guru] who
worked for the Department of Defense...led focus groups revealing Americans’
irrational beliefs about Japan. “You want to uncover in your audience what I
call a “spasm of sentiment,” he explained. “It’s their illogic—their
emotional logic.” He told us how in focus groups with average American
citizens, he learned that most people still associate the Japanese with
Pearl Harbor: “People say, for example, “Japan took our lives in 1941, and
they took our livelihoods in 1991.” Because Japan disrupted America’s
self-mythology of being invincible, the nation would never be forgiven in
the irrational American sentiment. (140)
The authors of 9/11 needed a horrifyingly spectacular, murderous attack on
the American “homeland”
in order to elicit this “Pearl Harbor effect.” They needed to “disrupt
America’s self-mythology of being invincible” so that Arabs and Muslims
“would never be forgiven in the irrational American sentiment.” They were
not interested in triggering just one quick war in Afghanistan, or a second
one in Iraq. They were after “the war that will not end in our lifetimes”—an
ongoing war that would remove Americans’ Constitutional liberties, massively
increase military expenditures, and legitimize attacks against Middle
Eastern nations for decades into the future, on behalf of Israeli
expansionism and the petrodollar hegemony on which it depends.
9/11, in short, was an apocalypse of coercion. It was a psy-op on a scale of
murderousness and mendacity to make the Reichstag Fire look like a kid
playing with matches.
Play with fire, however, and you just might get burned. This “apocalypse of
coercion” could end up being an apocalypse for its authors, and for coercion
itself. The neocons have been revealed and reviled as pathological liars,
and only the flimsiest film of reticence is preventing the major media from
exposing the 9/11 psy-op and triggering the greatest scandal in world
history, and a Constitutional crisis light-years beyond anything in the
American experience. As people awaken to 9/11 truth, they grow psychic armor
that renders them invincible to coercion in any form. Recoiling from the
sheer horror of such murderous coercion, their psychic immune system is
strengthened. It is a safe bet that no 9/11 skeptic will ever buy a lemon
from a car salesman—or even accept an unwanted cup of coffee. The 9/11
truth-awakened individual will not succumb to the blandishments of
advertisers, political pundits, cult leaders, politicians, or Fox News
commentators. He or she will smell coercion coming from a mile away, and
tell the prospective coercer into which orifice their coercion may be
inserted.
The simple truth is, coercion doesn’t work any more, and future historians
will view 9/11 as its final implosion. In the mid-1990s PR guru Howard
Rubenstein saw that the internet had made damage-control coercion obsolete,
and began advising clients that they had no choice but to let the ugly truth
hang out. Need a coverup? “The lesson is not to do it. Sure, people will
come to you and say, ‘Let’s set up a committee and we’ll call it so-and-so,
and we’ll hire someone to run it,’ and my attitude is: What’s known is
known. Simple. What is known gets published. So it’s foolhardy to set up a
fig-leaf committee and hope nobody will look under the fig leaf and see
what’s there” (160). Unfortunately, the Bush Administration didn’t take
Rubenstein’s advice when it set up the 9/11 Commission.
The word “apocalypse” denotes the cataclysmic end of the world, but its
original Greek meaning is “unveiling.” By unveiling the truth of 9/11, and
the mechanisms of coercion it employed, we can avoid the apocalyptic future
of endless war that the New Pearl Harbor was designed to trigger. Less
obviously, we can expose and discredit the mechanisms of coercion that
governments and corporations use to dehumanize us. It is time for
coercion-savvy media specialists like Rushkoff and Rubenstein to join the
9/11 truth movement and help us figure out how to communicate 9/11 truth,
turn the 9/11 apocalypse of coercion against its perpetrators, and ensure
that in our shared human future, communications technologies will be used to
empower people, not enslave them.
/fontfamily>Kevin Barrett
Coordinator, MUJCA-NET: http://mujca.com
Please
Support MUJCA-NET MUJCA-NET needs your support. We are a
non-profit organization and the scale of our activities depends
entirely on your generosity. We would like to get copies of David
Griffin's two 9/11 books (see above) into the hands of every
religious leader in America. And we would like to push 9/11 truth
onto the front pages of every newspaper in America. But we can't do
it without your help. If you would like to donate to MUJCA-NET,
click here.
TOP
|