Disney, MK Ultra, Subliminal Seduction with Paranoid American

the Paranoid American podcast. And as I'm here again, I just want to say thanks to all of the new subscribers. I see you, and I see that you're sharing all the stuff, so that's good. I also want to remind you that if you aren't currently a follower of the show,

you can go ahead and do so right now. And Boundless Authenticity is available on Spreaker, Spotify, Apple, Rumble, and sometimes YouTube when they aren't centoring me for telling you the stuff that the Internet doesn't want you to know yet, so I highly recommend you use the Spreaker app because it's free to listen. You don't have to sign up

All you have to do is hit play. Subscribing to the podcast is not only going to let you know when the next episode comes out, but it will also help the show to reach a wider audience, which means we can attract some more of the guests that you've been emailing me about and they're like, oh, I can't come on because your show is not big enough yet, and I'm like, okay, we'll screw you. So we got

to get those people. You can now look forward to three episodes of Boundless Authenticity every month on the sixth, sixteenth, and twenty sixth, some mark your calendars. What's going on, mister paranoid American?

pick them apart. So let's let's start with mk ULTRA first, just because that one is a little bit more clearly defined. So mk ultra was the end form. This was like the final form of this slow progression towards mind control research.

It basically started sometime around nineteen forty five, and this is when the US Navy Technical Mission that was like the name before there was a CIA and OSS and all this this like Naval Intelligence group, they found these papers that were used at the Dachau concentration camp that mentioned the use of mescaline, and from there they start revealing that the Germans were basically giving people all these very strong psychedelics psychoactive substances in order to help try

and get them to find some sort of truth serum, so that if they captured someone they would talk, even under duress, even if it were something they would never want to reveal. And while the efficacy and regardless of how ethical it is I'm talking about, like how efficient it was, that is still kind of under debate and whether they stuck to that or it expanded, but that was the very original seed that you can kind of

trace this back. The US had known about mescaline since at least the eighteen eighties, when they, you know, Native Americans were using it, they were selling payote by mail. But it wasn't necessarily targeted or even seen as a specific chemical at that point. It was just some weird folk medicine and over a slow progression based on some of the stuff that we've talked about in our last show, that kind of like coalesced between the late eighteen hundreds

and then like the nineteen thirties. So now you've got maybe ten years after that, right nineteen forty, nineteen forty five, and like, okay, well, this compound, this mescaline that we've already isolated, We already understand where it come from and how it's used and how it binds with receptors, or at least as much as they knew about it in the forties and this they're saying, Oh, but the Nazis are using this for some sort of a military edge.

They're getting information maybe they if that's even one percent possible that they're doing that, and we're not. Now, all of a sudden, we're behind the game. So the US military they just start ramping up. So originally this discovery that they got in forty five from a concentration camp, that evolves into something called Project Chatter, which the name is in that unique you know, it's to get people talking. So they called it Project Chatter, and this was under

the guise of the Navy. Then it turns into Project Bluebird, which gets a little bit more attention. He might have heard this one before. And this was organized by Richard Helms, who was at the CIA at the time. And then from Bluebird, once Helms goes out and Alan Dulles comes in, he kind of takes all this different research from Chapter and Chatter and Bluebird and he combines it into something called Project Artichoke. And then Project Artichoke explodes so much

in scope. Now all of a sudden, it's not just about this one thing about finding a truth serum or psychedelics and interrogation. Now it's just like, let's throw some stuff at the wall and see what sticks. And this is essentially what mk ultra is. Mk Ultra becomes the massive umbrella term for all these hundreds and hundreds of subprojects that started as just like a single subproject. So that's the most like, you know, bird's eye view of mk ultra that I think would be useful for now.

fiction writers. They were actually documenting the very real, sort of lost history of these Germanic tribes and just Germany and Bavaria in general, and a lot of that information had been lost to time or it was just slowly evaporating generation by generation, and they kind of reinvigorated the German people's fascination with their own history through these folk tales and through Disney. He kind of makes that a worldwide phenomenon. Now the entire world cares about Germanic folklore,

whereas before maybe it didn't so much. I mean, Grim's Brother's Fairy Tales was only outsold by the Bible. For a long period of time, it was the most popular book, and I mean I would almost argue there was probably the book that was read more often, even though if you bought a Bible, a lot of those people that had on the shelf maybe weren't reading it as often.

But if you add kids and Grim's fairy Tales, you're probably open in that you're cracking that open more so than the Bible, right, because you probably don't just have it for appearances, you have it because you're actually reading it. So this is hard to understate how impactful and how

like burrowed if you believe in epigenetic memory. For example, if you believe that enough of your ancestors all thought or read the same things that somehow it just kind of like through generational osmosis, ends up in your brain, then this would fall directly out of that category. And even if you don't believe in epigenetic memory like that,

which is maybe a pseudoscience. If you don't believe in that, you could still say that the cultural impact serves as like an environmental programming, so that even if your family doesn't care about Grim's fairy tales, just it being incorporated at such high levels throughout all of society and just everything that you come in contact with, the inspirations that brought that about show some of these traces of like

Germanic folklore. All this to say that there might not have even been a revolt in the Weimar Republic, and there might not even even been a rise of a nationalist socialist party in Germany if it hadn't been for Walt Disney helping sort of normalize this resurgence of Germanic folklore, which also would have happened with the Grim's fairy Tales. So you can draw a direct line, in my opinion, from Grim making this resurgence to Disney making it global,

to then World War two and the Nazi Party. And now I'm not saying that Walt was like a direct influce. He wasn't any Henry Ford right where they shared framed the pictures of each other on him in Hitler's desk. But Walt did reinvigorate the Germanic peoples in this way.

And it's just an interesting connection that right around the tail end of this conflict that happened because of this revigorated interest in dramatic culture, that now we've got some of the most potent Disney films that ever come out.

And the best example might be Alice in Wonderland as the direct intersection between these two worlds, because it came out right around the time in which mk Ultra was at a fever pitch when they were like, all right, we're throwing all of our money at this thing, let's just see how far it can go. And there's even mk Ultra paperwork that reference what they call Alice in Wonderland programming. So if you had to put a single pinpoint on where the argument is the closest between these

two worlds overlapping. I would say it's right around that time, which I think is like fifties and sixties. And this is also when wall is still involved enough with Disney that you could call it like Walt Disney Productions. If we talk about Disney right now, or if we're talking about Disney in the eighties or nineties, it's Disney, but it's the corporate eggregore of Disney. It's no longer like

the Walt Disney. And I do think that those those two entities couldn't be more different in a lot of regards.

but it's not very factual. They always just stop shy of getting into the real deal.

so weird. The first three sound different than these three. And what you do is you look and see who the producer was of the album, who, like what the name of the person that was playing the drums on the album or if you like the drums. And I kind of do that with my conspiracy research, where like you come across something you're like, well, I don't think tex Mars like personally discovered this information, So where did he get it from? And then where did they get

it from? And once you get far back along you can kind of find out like who the producer of that album really was, and then go and look for all the other things that they've done. And that's kind of, in my opinion, that's the best tip as to getting to the bottom of some of the weird conspiracy claims that come out, and then the sources just like just trust me, bro I read it, like where did you get it?

just the headline aspect of it all. But then to be like okay, and to verify this, here's a seven hundred page book that's not a fun read, and you got to read that whole thing, and then you'll get the context on what the title of the thing means.

And it's like there's a huge drop off if you were to visualize on a graph the people that start on page one and make it the page seven hundred and read through the entire thing, right, it's not one hundred percent, it's not a straight line of every single

person that interacts with it. And this comes up even on like conspiracy podcasts, where why is it that the headline shows or just let's read through today's headlines and give our quick takes on it seem to do better than real big deep dives, And it's really just because it's not as fun. It's not as fun to dispel some of the rumors about conspiracy theories and start looking into like the nuances. And because at a mass level, at a wide scale, nuance isn't really fun or interesting

or entertaining. It means that you've got to take a stop and what you're doing and like think about something and come up with a judgment, and then there's a really good chance that your interpretation isn't going to match every single other person, So now you'll see like a drop off an audience. So the best way to avoid that is to just like, you know, Disney's programming your kids. Like if you just say Disney's programming your kids, so many people are like, oh, yeah, of course, and I

agree with that too. It's such a massive broad statement that anyone could agree with it, which makes it popular. But then if you start getting very specific and like, well, how exactly what movie, what message did that movie give? What were the actual real world effects, it's it's just loses some of its novelty. So and I don't think

there's any one particular person to blame. I'm not sure if there's like an Illuminati watchdog that's like, hey, you better simplify that article, you know, to everyone that's writing something. I think it's a self perpetuating issue where the masses alone, they will relate to something more and more the more like surface level it is. So why why would you not lean into that if you know that that's just

something that we're all predisposed to. So that's why I'm kind of saying it's like a two way street where maybe certain types of industry lean in or they plant really salacious stories that like will drive a headline, uh, talking about something that would be easily knocked down later, right, like just lob a nice little underhand that's like Disney's you know, killing kids or something, and then Disney can come out it might be back example, but Disney can

like plant that story and then come out and be like, here's all records, We're not killing anyone. Look, if anything, they're doing better if youve got all these money and resources or something. If you make a specific claim, then it can be denied. But if you make broad claims, then they just have much more length to them, Like they run for way longer.

message into this movie for this reason. Once you get into all those specifics, now you're inviting people or you're almost like challenging yourself to go and do all that research improve it, which is far less interesting than just making the claim. And like everyone pats you on the back and you move on to the next claim. You can very easily just string together claims like Disney's program in your Kids and go to the next one. And

there's an endless number of topics. And I think the ultimate point being is that we also invite ourselves to that party. Like if you entertain that even if you agree with it, there is something more than just like a top ten hits, Right, you don't know the band if you only listen to their Greatest Hits album and that's the only thing you've ever heard from them, right, Like, you don't get all the extra nuance. And I think that it's similar when it comes to like research.

I mentioned when that comes up. What do you think is worse for your kid that they saw maybe the word sex for literally fifteen frames, so like half a second they see this word. First of all, congratulations if your kids can read that at the age where you find that they're like so impressionable, but they see the words and then there's like maybe a dick castle on

the back of the Little Mermaid poster. Do you think that would be more traumatic to a kid and turn them into like a prostitute, like now they're going to be a sex addict for the rest of their lives. Or is it the fact that Disney is basically doing this Disney proxy thing where they kill the printal figure, or they kidnap the kid and put the kid into an actual state of panic in their real world life,

and then start selling them things. They start showing them intellectual property that is then going to show up as Happy Meal toys and lunchbox designs and you know, Halloween costumes. I guess I would just argue that the ladder of those right, conditioning someone by weaponizing nostalgia to just sell them crap for the rest of their life is more damaging than they might have seen the word sex like float by in the sky for half a second somewhere.

It's not like you got to pick and choose. You don't have to have either one of those, but it just it's it seems that the Easter Egg type like sort of insertions of these these dicks into the cartoons and into the marketing material that if anything, I see

as like a like a subversion of Disney. Like some artists out there was like, Haha, I'm gonna stick a dick in in your pr and you're gonna spend millions of dollars and then I'm gonna know there's a dick in there, which is usually what a lot of those claims come down to is they're Easter eggs that were added by rogue animators as opposed to someone high up in a boardroom was like, you better put a dick in there, because we're trying to program these kids to be,

you know, like like sex ravaged animals.

because it's really just the emotional content. But when it comes to this stuff about seeing sex, it's really more about what the subconscious mind is doing with that repetitively when it's exposed to that over and over. There's something about the word sex that makes anybody give you their unconscious attention for about twenty five minutes. You can tell them whatever you want to tell him, but whatever the

animators do with that I really don't know. I agree with you where it's just like but probably a bunch of weirdos that were like, let's put a cock over here, you know, and see what everybody does. But to say that anybody knows for sure exactly why that was done or what the purpose of something like that is, I don't know.

sort of analogue hand drawn Disney revival style. But they found a way to actually blend those two methods where it was computer assisted but it was hand drawn particle effects. So if you take a step back and watch that scene in detail, let's say that there's no word that comes up at all, no letters that are discernible. The fact that that was created by hand assisted digitally was an achievement according to that particular group of animators at the time, Right, they were like, Wow, that was a

lot of work. I can't believe that we were able to pull that off and make it look good. So it was. So again, this is the official story. The unofficial is that, Yeah, they put the word sex in there to program your kids and maybe get their attention artificially for twenty twenty five minutes. Counter, which I've heard

come up before. Does that mean that if they're just reading the dictionary and they come up on the word sex, now for the next twenty minutes, every other word they read in the dictionary is going to have somehow like a more profound impact on them for the rest of their life. And if you were to just cheat code yourself, you just had a little card that said sex on it and you just look at it every half hour of your day, right, Like, does this change your your

like mentality in some way? Maybe there's a secret to the formula when it's done subtly, right, where like you don't realize that you're seeing it, and then you're seeing it. So there's all like it's hard to tell exactly what the real answer.

and stuff is just there to get your attention. But like you were saying, at what point does that stop working? Or when does it get really bad? And when is it really good? And that part I actually don't know for sure. I know that there's a book by Wilson Brian Keyes and a much older book where he talks about subliminal seduction and he gives the example of the Gilby's Gin commercial. Are you familiar with that?

the silhouette of like a voluptuous woman. Right, And that was supposed to be like, I don't know what it is about this advertisement, but I think I would like that product, right, that's part of it.

And so I don't even know what's the point in just trying to boycott Disney rnything, because I've seen a lot of that lately.

a good example. I haven't paid for anything Disney almost ever, right, Like even when I worked there, I was taking money from them, So technically I'm still like they're in the black. I guess a little bit on me. But one person not going to see one movie or rented off of Net or watch it on Netflix and they don't get their like forraction of a penny from someone watching it and put on their kids, it immediately gets dwarfed by someone in the park that just bought like a forty

dollars Hamburger. Right, So it's the boycott would have to be so multifaceted. It wouldn't just be about the movies. And this is actually leading into what Here's where I put my tin andfoil hat on. When it comes to Disney. I might not care as much about if your kid can read three letters and gets traumatized because he read a word that maybe that's a little bit on you. But what Disney is doing is that they are so large and so profitable now and own such a large

portion of real estate in your actual brain. Even if you boycott them, they still own They get free rent, right, Disney gets free rent no matter you like them or not, just because of how large and influential they are. And I think that allows them to maybe not care about how much profit this next movie makes, or even this next quarter makes, or this next ten years makes. Obviously there's people on the board that care about that stuff for the shareholders, But I'm talking about Walt Disney, his

DNA and just the DNA that he passed on. As Disney became like a corporate eggregor it realizes almost in a Fabian society way. I don't care about profits over

the next thirty years. I care about that your great great grandkids when I say Cinderella or snow White or any other public domain thing that's been around for four centuries or more in some cases, I care that when I say that, you think about Disney owned proprietary ip that I can trademark, I can own, and I can charge you money for just conjuring that particular one up or in a more nuanced version, when you go into your metaverse VR world and you want to role play

as Alice in Wonderland, like you're buying the Disney trademarked version of that Alice in Wonderland. And I feel that that is probably the scariest thing that they're doing, is that they're literally owning, like like they are trademarking folklore that predates any of us, predates our great parents and you know, great great grandparents, and the fact that they're able to like literally own that, you know. Little Mermaid wasn't a Disney creation. It was a Hans Christian Anderson book.

It has actual occult, deep meanings to it about the nature of the human spirit, and how all these other monsters like mermaids are they're monsters are really just trying to steal the human soul because they don't have enlightenment or you know, like a knowledge of God or whatever you want to fill in that hole. It's just all about this natural world that's constantly trying to steal what's

unique to humans. That gets glossed over. And again, I would argue that that's probably more damaging to us as humanity as a whole, that they're removing these deep messages that were in these original properties and now it's just about dick castles and now it's just about dei and like selling you the next Krabby Patty, you know, like

happy meal to me. That's way more egregious, that has far more reaching damage that's going to last for generations more so than like, oh there's a dick on that poster the right, Like now we don't really understand the nature of human consciousness because it's been weeded out. It didn't sell Coca cola as fast, so they just cut that part. And that's really that is Disney DNA. Even Old Wall he did the exact same thing when Jungle

Book they adapted it. He told everyone on his team, don't read If you've never heard about this before, great, don't read it. I don't want anything about the original story. We're just leveraging these known characters and a setting and a title, and we're just gonna shoehorn in our own mythology into that. And that's really what Disney has been doing. And I feel that's the most dangerous part of Disney.

something you said earlier. Because it's kind of like how they sell people ozempic for example, they're tapping into something. Maybe you've heard the original song that they've changed for that commercial. You know, like there's something about these art forms or whatever, whether it's a nice piece of art, a song, you know, a crazy record that did really well, but everybody knows it and it gets downloaded somehow into

everybody's consciousness. So every baby that comes playing out in this world, they're gonna be like, how zimbic because the song has been downloaded into our consciousness just by pure popularity alone. Does that make sense to you?

it were these like oldies kind of songs. It was something that you'd listen on the radio in like the fifties and sixties, right, and then it slowly started turning seventies and eighties, and now car commercials are like remixing boys to men and like sir mix a lot right, Like now they're into like the nineties era, and you can just tell it's like, oh, they they're targeting you know, forty and fifty year olds. Now that's all it is.

And it's such a genius way of doing it because they'll just find some earworm that everyone was forced to listen to no matter where you were at, right if you went to a school function or a bowling alley, or you went grocery shopping, Like you're hearing this damn song over and over again, and now that exact song is gonna sell you a zimpic and it's gonna sell you a no new like you know, four f one fifty or whatever the thing is. And it's just like

the most bear basic NLP anchoring. It's saying like, hey, here's a sound that you liked, and it brings you back to a point in time when you didn't have back pain. Isn't that great? Hey? By the way, Coca Colas on sale on Aisle seven, Right, Like, that's sort of how that whole trajectory works. And right now, audio is probably the easiest way to do that because you can't really shield yourself from that. You maybe put like ear plugs in or something, right, but if it's visual,

you can look away. If it's audible, you can't. Like, there's no version of look away from that until we all have some sort of AI ear sets that will like dynamically filter stuff out. The next iteration of this, it's still fairly untapped, is like your old factory sense because your old factory sense ties to memories way deeper than any other of our senses. It's like a shortcut to it. But it can only affect a certain area.

And also like there's a certain nuance, Like you can't just drop like a crazy amount of smell on someone and overwhelm thems their senses, because even if it's a pleasurable smell that links them back to you know, Grandma or going being in church as a kid, or something very specific, if it's too much, then your body's like, whoa, this is too much, Like it'll it'll overflow, it'll saturate

your senses. So one of the examples that I think they think they mentioned this in Food Nation, but if you go by like a fast food restaurant, for example, some of them actually just emit. They have like a

send of what a burger grilling smells like. They're not actually grilling burgers, or if they are, it doesn't smell great, and it's just like a steam that evaporates within like a hundred foot radius, right, But they will find like a chemically created version of fresh fries or fresh chicken or whatever this food is and then emit that into the air. So now as you drive by, you're smelling it and it's like, oh, man, I remember the last time I had a burger or whatever like it, like

it'll link you back to that. So audio is the easiest way to do that. But I think that like they're constantly finding ways to make that a full sense experience. But I think we notice it way easier when it's like an earworm or a song.

by a Starbucks. If it just smell a little like it smell a little more burt in this day or a little sweeter on that day, or they like mixed up the formula here and there, it wouldn't have the same, uh like very potent effect that it does when it's very consistent, because it's like drilling the exact same old factory, like programming the same anchor you over and over, just like a magical ritual. Right, the more you do it, the stronger it gets over time.

just own for how However, long sacred geometry. Are they that powerful of a group that they've the same way again, I guess like the Germans right now, the Nazis for maybe the rest of our lifetimes, and I don't know how much longer they own one of the oldest shapes of the procession of the equinoxes that humankind has ever known. If you just sit down and plot the equinoxes over

and over, you get this swastika symbol. Right, But because a reprehensible group did something so bad and associated themselves with it in such a way, like we're just it's hands off for us, Like we just have to be ignorant of the procession of the equinoxes for another couple centuries until that the heat died down. And I just don't know if I'm willing to give up the golden

ratio to pedophiles so easily. And if anything, this was something denoted by like an FBI handbook, And I get like, if we're talking about like Podesta pizza or whatever the hell the name of it was, right, that had like a.

of my face. You know what I mean?

mentioning this Alison Wonderland programming. I think this was from a declassified document from like nineteen sixty three or so, and the Alison Wonderland in particular. It's an interesting one. Basically, it's just giving someone a whole bunch of random synchronicities and like false patterns and such a large amount. I think if this were like a logical fallacy, there's something called the Gish gallop fallacy, and this is when you

just drop like factoid after factoid. If I just drop fifty factoids at you now all of a sudden, the onus is like on you to sit there and go through every one of those fifty things, and you're obviously gonna get caught up, especially if I've got them all pre rehearsed and I have cherry picked them in such a way. And it also completely distracts whatever we were talking about. Now, well, guess what. Now you're just gonna have to go through and knock down these fifty things

that I just dropped on your ass. That's sort of a Gish gallop. It's a very useful rhetorical technique. But it kind of negates the original conversation. And that's sort of what this Alice in Wonderland programming is. It's dropping so many different things on somebody that they no longer have the ability to find like a pattern in it.

And then you use them in that state when they're grasping the fine logic and so thing, and now you give them the actual programming, Like you give them something that just has a modicum of logic and they can kind of grasp on to that, like a person drowning at sea getting thrown a life raft, right, even the life raft is made out of like barbed wire and like razor blades. I mean, like your mind has gone into a completely different mode when that's secondary, Like that's fine,

I'll cut my hands up or whatever. Maybe it's a strained analogy, but it's sort of what happens in this Alice in Wonderland programming. But one of those references, the fact that the CIA was referencing Disney, does make it more easy to be like, oh, now there's Peter prarin programming and Disney Princess programming. I think the difference, which I'm still looking for, is at any point did Disney

play into that feedback loop. Did Disney say, oh, here's CIA mind control programming, let's take that and put it into our movies. I don't think they did. I think Disney was already so much better at programming than the CIA ever could have hoped to be. The CIA was just taking notes. They're just analyzing what other people in the world are doing that's effective and trying to repeat that in different you know, like like military related settings.

But I don't think that Disney needs the feedback loop of the CIA. They don't need to take CIA technology and put it into their movies. Like their leagues ahead, they don't operate under the same limitations as the CIA does. So that's where these two worlds combining get a little odd. But it also meet like if you were to take Fritz Springmyer at his word, let's say there's Peter Pran and there's Disney Princess programming. Of course there is, dude,

because it's an archetype. If you're releasing a product into the market, right anyone that's ever tried to do this before, if it's a new product, there's a phase call. I think it's like customer education, and this is where you've got to spend time and money to just tell people about what your thing does before you even try and

sell them on it. They might have a problem that they don't even know about, so you got to like educate your customer base and then be like, Okay, now here's the solution to this thing that you just that you now know about. And I think that's kind of where all this this power would go into. It's like educating them about what the thing is going to be before you even present the solution to them.

reading this. And when I read it in the late nineties, to me, I was like a teenage I was like thirteen or fourteen probably I was reading it and I was just now starting to become familiar with computers, and there was so much of that book that he was relating to actual computer programming that did make sense. So and I don't even know if Fritz Springmyer himself was

a computer programmer. He clearly knew someone else that was if he didn't have this knowledge, But the way that he was able to explain the human mind and how to program the human mind direct like with a direct analogy with real computer programming, it gave it this extra credit in my mind, not in that it made him more right, but the things that he was saying it seemed like it made more sense to me. It wasn't these crazy things a conjecture. And then when I discovered NLP,

which actually came before him. If anything, Fritz probably was familiar with NLP and then incorporated some of that without directly citing a lot of it because it was fairly unknown. So you could almost seem like you're this authority on this new novel thing. You're like, oh, by the way, I got that from these three books by Richard Bandler

and John Grinder. But like, after I discover NLP somewhat close to reading Fritz Springmeyer, I kind of realized, like, oh, this is more of that, but without talking about like assassins. Now we're just talking about how can I sell you like a printer or something, right, how do I sell you a timeshare? But it's the exact same programming, and it's the same way of thinking about things and compartmentalizing

stuff and making these like keywords and triggers. So I think Fritz was like released that book at the perfect time because it could speak to like total skitzzos, but it also had some credibility. But like what you're saying, you actually try and dig deep, Like he makes claims about where some of these Project Monarch facilities were under ground, under like the Denver International Airport. Like once you get into those specifics and then it kind of falls apart.

But again, it's not fun to drill into those specifics and disprove conspiracy. That's kind of like like you're being a bummer at that point, right, you're being the sober guy at like a party if you're like, hey, wait a minute, like can't we actually disprove this part?

about the niceties and about relating to someone else. So someone's like, man, Disney's programming us and you're like, yeah, man, that mwana spiral right, And someone else is like, yeah, bro Epstein, Bro did you hear like Disney had someone to do with Epstein? And if you can just kind of kick that ball around. It's sort of fun, right, But if you're trying to like sharpen your teeth, if you're actually trying to convince a noormy that walks by

and they're like, you guys are skitzos? Right to actually be like no, no, no, wait a minute, there's something to this. It might not be at your behest to be like, all right, look at this FBI symbol and now look at this Mowana logo. Isn't that just enough proof? Like you're probably not gonna get someone unless they're already

so far down the rabbit hole. So I think, if anything, over the years, my fascination has become more on like how do you get the surface level normies into the fold so that they can at least be confronted with like the Mowana pizza symbols. I don't know if that's

the thing that's gonna sell anyone. That's when like you're already sold in on everything, but you can definitely get them and be like, oh, maybe teaching my child that their toys have souls and to not throw them out, and that only like license Disney toy This is the premise of Toy Story, by the way, that only licensed toys from the manufacturer have souls, and that if you're using like offhand ones, or if you're that weird creepy kid that takes broken toys and reassembles them into new toys,

you're Frankenstein right, Like you're creating monsters that are going to hurt you out in the world. Be safe. Go to the store and buy like the licensed packaged you know, like buzz Lightyear that has all the working buttons and everything. Otherwise you're putting your family in danger. Like that's an actual message that gets conveyed over toy story one, two and three, and I feel that that's the real damage. That's something that they're actually doing to us.

in like academics. Because there's an example from my school days where we had to do this Shakespeare presentation and the teacher was like, you can use the cliff notes if you want, and I knew it was a trick because everybody went out and bought the cliff notes and everybody failed, right, And I learned that if you try to take the shortcut on something, then you're not going to get anywhere near close to being able to answer any real questions about it, and you're going to get

into a lot of trouble. Right. So I think that got me at an early age, and so I've always been kind of like, Okay, whatever it is, I better go read about it. Like I was having this conversation with a client just this morning and somehow they started talking about transgenders and how it's a genetic problem and all this stuff, and I'm like, oh, God, you don't know what. You don't know because you haven't read anything, right, you just heard it somewhere and you agree with it.

And that's how it is most stuff.

And people do that with like the transgender stuff too, like the transvestigators, where they're just out in public or they're just reading magazines or watching TV or whatever, and it's like that bone structure. I bet that dude's a chick, and I bet that chick's a dude. And like, what you're doing, though, is you're actively training your brain to

become an expert. Might be the wrong word here, but you're training your brain to like make it so you're always in that mode and now you're gonna to process all information through this very weird lens. And that is that is actually changing the way that your brain works and how you're perceiving the world in a non reversible way. There might be like a year or two some of these people were like, man, all I was thinking about

was just like who has a dick or not? For two full years, what else could I have been learning in that time, right, you didn't learn how to fix the carburet or anything. You're just learning how to like check out chicks dicks like out in public. And I think that it's its own programming, right like that, Like when when you were saying maybe some of this is

planted or is this like designed? That very well could be like planting that seed to make people obsessed with spirals and dicks NonStop, like just them being obsessed with it might be the only programming they're looking for, because now that's what's going to be on the mind of a non zero segment of the population. And all that ever does whenever they like they segment or compartmentalize us, it's just for the convenience of targeting. In my mind,

that's the only thing they're doing. So now they can target you with like, hey, are you afraid everyone's got a dick? Here's you know, here's a product for you. That's kind of what it's going to come down to. Yeah, is that a cameltal or is that a bulge? If you have a special X ray glasses will light up a rat or light up green to let you know if you're looking at a real guy. Or a real girl, like you know what I mean, that's that's like a

farc farcical version of that, But it's it's content. Content's the actual product. Because now it's just so much easier to be like, oh, here's something that you'll sit your ass down and watch two hours of.

so they're extremely paranoid. But also, like, if we circle back to the Alison Wonderland thing, I knew a girl when I was growing up that she had all these different problems at home and stuff, and Alice in Wonderland was her favorite movie, the one with is it Johnny Depp was in that one. I never actually yeah, yeah, I never actually saw that a version more than five minutes, and so I don't know what I'm talking about when

it comes to that. But she would constantly put it on cover to her place and she would just be walking around like cleaning the house or doing whatever. Regular chores and it would be playing and she would be talking along with it. Every line, line by line worked for a word, no mistakes, and I didn't I don't want to say that something was clearly wrong with her, because I don't like to say that something's wrong with

somebody just like that. But she had a lot of issues with her parents and stuff, and I can't really remember what the full story was, but I saw that as like a trauma response somehow. And I feel though, even though that was really weird to experience, I feel like that's the way that a lot of people live their lives anyway. With anything else, they're just parrot the narrative, parent the narrative.

different pills and tea's and tinctures. And this is in my mind, if you were to say, like, well, what would be the bad version, like what's with the swat analysis, Well, like the cons of this is that it is on a deep, subconscious level is kind of baking in this idea of it. Whatever you're going through, there's a substance that you can ingest which will somehow counteract the thing

that you're going through. If the world seems too big, you can take a pill that now you're as big as the world, and vice versa, and all of these different aspects it and this concept that you're always under

the gun. You've got the rabbit that she's constantly chasing and he's constantly late for things like all the like that this is just adding stress, right, but this is a common theme in TV and movies and just everyday life is that ticking this ticking timer dynamic and all of this combined into this one story made visceral through like all of these cartoons, I think that this one

really does have the possibility. And even if we're talking about the story or the original Disney animated version or the Johnny Depp you know, Tim Burton style remake, it's still the exact same archetypes that are going over it. And like the Johnny Depp one, it just adds a little bit on top because now if you know, if it's we're talking about a girl that you knew she had like an attraction of Johnny Depp because of Edward scissor Hands or Sleepy Hollow or any of this other thing.

Like he's on Tiger and teen Bop magazine, and he's also in this thing that already occupies really state in your brain. So now it's like doubling down. Now the six or the nine year old version of you is just as interested in as the fifteen or the twenty five year old version because of this like Johnny Depp link. So again, it's Disney constantly making sure that they own real estate in your brain. Like they they've actually got a non zero portion of your thoughts at these different

phases of your life. There's a very real chance that like as we get into our fifties and sixties, there's like a much more adult version of Alice in Wonderland. I believe that was one of the unreleased projects from Marilyn Manson was he was also working on his own version of Alice in Wonderland, which would have been like this adult iteration of it, which would kind of like fill that gap, right, you'd have like the baby's version, the angsty teen early twenties version and then like an

adult version. Coh Man, you just said the wrong thing. Marilyn Manson's another guy that you could just go off on. Well, he actually did this knowledgeably. There was an with him that I think was genius, and he was talking about the remix they did of Sweet Dreams, which was originally by the Rhythmics, right, and I can't remember the name

of the album. It was like Smells like Candy or something, but the entire album was was Willy Wonka themed, and he knew in this interview he was like, I know that us covering this Rhythmics song is what's going to

get our foot in the door. Like your ten year old is going to be singing along to this, and as a parent, you'll be like, oh, I know this song sweet Dreams, and this is like a cool remix, not realizing that like every other song on an album that's like kill your Parents, workship Satan, you know what I mean, like had like much darker themes to it. But he realized that that one song was the foot in the door because it was so innocuous. It was so like family friendly in a way, even though it

was Marilyn Manson. It was like candy coated and bright colors, and it had like a Tim Burton esque kind of feel to it, and it was the perfect trojan horse. So then like you know, the gateway drug into listening to Antichrist Superstar, right. So, like it was a very conscious way of saying, Hey, I know that this is my least offensive thing that has the most mass pop appeal, and even though this the one thing doesn't represent what I'm really about, it's the best way to get my

foot in the door. And I kind of see that as exactly what we're talking about and all these other iterations and stuff.

he's soon to nail this. But if you realize that someone had actually had like a full scaled out plan of all right, we're gonna find the perfect song that is going to not offend people, and then we're gonna release it this way and make that the highlight and then get them to buy albums. Like, once you realize that there's like a master plan behind some of it, then that's kind of where conspiracy comes in. Right now, It's like, oh, how far back does this go? Who is in on this?

handle it and it'll actually split away from itself. It'll create a new version of paranoid American that doesn't have the recollection of this horrible thing that he just went through. And now, like, my name is Sally, and then something horrible happens to my fake personality Sally, and now there's like a Jimmy, right, and Jimmy can store information that Sally doesn't know. And it's a way of compartmentalizing somebody and stuffing them full of memories or programming or whatever

it is. And Fritz spring Meyer's version of this, it gets really dark. And actually recreate this somewhat in one of my comic books and Times Samplers issue three, it kind of details this entire process, but at a high level.

Spring Mere talks about snatching up these kids, either like right after they're born or grabbing them off the streets basically when they're still developing, like the world around them, and they would put them in this thing called a woodpecker grid, and the Woodpecker grid, similar to what we were talking about the Alison Winterland programming, where you just

like randomly throw stuff know what's coming next. The Woodpecker grid did this at a physical level, where I had electrified cages that would just shock you at random intervals, random in that you couldn't attact the pattern and like brace yourself, like up, it's been five minutes and embrace myself. There was no pattern to it. So if you spent enough time in one of these electrified Woodpecker grids that

your mind would just give up. It would just be like, you know, I don't know when the next time I'm getting shocks coming. I give up. Just whatever you're gonna do to me, just do it to me, because I can't handle this anymore. As soon as that would happen, they would send in the programmer or this perceived authority

figure which would save them from this Woodpecker grid. So now they've got this like superhero savior bond they're developing with the subject, and as the subject is looking at them like you know, you're my savior, thank God, you saved me. Everything's good now, then the programmer does something horrific to the person and it's a complete inversion. They went from looking at someone as if they were their savior and now they're doing the worst possible thing ever

to them. In the Barbie movie, they reenact this in kind of a genius way. It's the very end of the movie and Barbie is realizing that Ken has been programmed by like toxic masculinity out in the real world and he's bringing it into Barbie world. And it's like, you know, like go make me a sandwich, babe, or like, oh, you know, I'll give you, you know, seventy cents out

of the dollar if we do this job. It's very very much like the most cliche version of this toxic masculinity patriarchy thing, and Barbie's like, how do we unprogrammed Ken?

And the way that they do it is they invite Ken over to play her song and it's like all these different like the Black Canon, the Asian Can, and the Hispanic Can, like all the different Kens match up with their corresponding barbiees, and Barbie is like inviting him to serenade on the beach and he like learns how to play guitar, and essentially it's a tender moment like Ken amongst this, this patriot, this patriarchal like toxic masculinity

ego that he's taken on and adorned. Like the most vulnerable he can make himself is like sitting down and singing a sweet song to his girlfriend. So Barbie kind of like pushes this right and feeds into it and like, yeah, yeah, open up to me, Ken, you know, be vulnerable. That's what I need right now. I need a guy that's vulnerable. And he does all this and as soon as he finishes his song, she basically laughs in his face and

it's like, wow, your that song sucked. You are such a weak, like poor excuse for a man like does the exact opposite of what Ken was hoping for. Regardless the fact that his guard was completely down. He made himself so vulnerable, and at that most vulnerable moment, Barbie goes on for the attack and does not let up.

She's absolutely brutal to him. This is about as viscerals they can make in the Barbie movie, Like she's not like physically assaulting him, but you can extrapolate what this would look like in like a dark sea ungeine right, like someone at their most vulnerable you go and save them. You get them into their safe space, and then you

attack them in their safe space. And as soon as that happens in the movie, you actually see Ken like glitch out, and then Barbie starts planting all of her programming what she wants Ken to act like into this new like personality that gets created by this absolute schism. Fritz Springmeier describes this as a divide by zero, so she gets Ken to divide by zero like he was a calculator that glitches out. And now here's what you should really be acting like, here's what your thoughts should be.

So I mean, that's what I think about the Barbie movie is actually pretty phenomenal, and that it explains in a g rated way how this programming really can work, how you can create a personality in someone like monarch style.

let's let's let children's cartoons be children's cartoons. But yeah, frit Fritz either have sort of inside connection or he was just an absolute prophet, And I would probably air towards the former, right that he probably came across some sort of documentation, heard something, was privy to how things were actually working, and then was able to sort of retell it like there's there's absolutely a game of telephone quality to the book that he put out right, like

like he's rehashing so much and he's blending things in, but it also has like for the early nineties, it has kind of groundbreaking revelations that just get ascribed to sort of things that would be hard to prove. But the techniques that he describes are are efficient, like they actually work.

comes out. And it hasn't happened to me yet, but I wonder when that day is going to come where I'm just in somebody's mind and then there's like a government cap on something, you know.

the Simpsons predicted that. Well, actually that episode came out after Donald Trump came down that escalator. It was it was a Simpsons animating something that had already happened. But then it just gets clipped by one person that says, oh, this came out a year before, which isn't true. But everyone kind of jumps on board because The Simpsons has made so many I mean, the South Park had an entire episode called Simpsons Did It or They're just like

any idea? And this was the South Park creators like they're frustration of they would come up with this funny gag or like a really funny episode idea and start fleshing it out just to realize like the Simpsons had already done that episode idea like ten years ago. Because they've had like hundreds and hundreds of episodes, they've kind of gone through the full gamut of every single trope you can come up with. But the Simpsons also has

a very real access to things that are coming. And this is one of my fun connections is Bohemian Grove. So the guy that does the voice for mister Burns and Auto and a whole host of Simpson's characters from day one, right, this guy, Harry Shearer, he's the one that does Mister Burns most recognizably, and he was a guest member of Bohemian Grove, which means that he got to go and attend to Lakeside Talk. And if anyone isn't familiar with this, you've probably heard of Bohemian Grove.

This is the place that Alex Jones infiltrade in the nineties and he got footage of all of these industry titans and politicians like literally wearing hooded robes and participating in this pagan sacrifice ritual where they burn an effigy and the voice of Walter Cronkite literally comes through these redwood trees and talks about, you know, how they're chasing away the cares of the world. It's very very pagan.

It's very like you just worked, like walked in on like a Phoenician ritual to Molik essentially, like it's a very old school sort of ceremony. But at this when they're not doing that ceremonial stuff, they have talks. It's like going to a convention. And one of those talks is called Lakeside talks, and it's when politician or a president or someone at the height of industry comes and says, here's what we've been working on, and here's what you

can expect over the next five to ten years. And you act like this is some deep insider knowledge, like I guarantee you there's people making like stock buys based on the stuff they hear at these Lakeside talks. But ultimately it's just to say like, hey, you're in the club, and here's one of the benefits of the club is you get a heads up on these sweeping changes they're going to be going through industry and culture and government

and everything. And if you've got a writer of The Simpsons at one of these Lakeside talks taken notes, it's like, oh, here's all the things that are happening in the next

five to ten years. So now working some of those changes they heard about into their storylines not only lets them write about something where they can get the jump start where now they're not competing with South Park writers because they actually know something crazy that's about to happen that they'll they'll be topical by the time they're done working on it, right, But it also means that there is a member of the Simpson at least one, probably

a lot more than one, that gets inside better knowledge and can incorporate this into And now you can feed into this idea that The Simpsons is more than just a cartoon. It's a prophecy, Like why would you not lean into that if you get a royalty check from every single time someone references it or every time someone watches like a repeat, especially if you were in there since season one, right if you're the original mister Burns

and auto. So I think that there's like a self serving aspect of that that yeah, they are prophetic, but also the general population feeds into that. All they got to do is like make the most general and vague of claims, and the internet does the rest of the work for them. They'll put together all the little pieces and be like, here's the proof, right, and no one's going to stop them from doing that because it works out for everybody.

we could to find it. Or you go read it and you're like, okay, yeah, well we found out this information, but it was actually inconclusive, right.

with those ones. So this comes up in mk ultra, where just because the military did a study on a particular thing doesn't mean that that thing is valid or even efficient. In fact, one of the and I guess into like the boring debunking area where it's like I don't want to hear that, man, I don't want to hear that every single thing I've ever read about mk ultra is just all true because that makes the world more fantastic, right, But even one of their sort of

like star programmers, Doctor Lewis Jollyton West. They just call him Jolly West. He kind of made a claim, dubious claim because his dubious person, but he basically stated that out of all the weird mk ultra like torture and interrogation techniques and drugs and everything that they could do to a person, sleep deprivation was like the most reliable, Like you didn't have to go and farm out or get a chemist in the room or sort of like

weird hypnosis techniques. If you just prevent someone from sleeping for about seventy two hours by just randomly waking them up with loud noises or lights or not allowing their body to even figure out its normal circadian rhythm, like they don't know if it's night or day. After about three days, the human mind just becomes a sponge grasping on again. It's like that drowning man at sea that'll

just grasp onto anything. Three days of no sleep, you can just start planting ideas in someone's head and they won't even remember it afterwards. And if you can develop like an actual technique, like a structure, and put someone on a regiment of doing this constantly, that's just as potent as any weird like strange chemical that they might come up with in some rainforest, right, just don't let

them sleep for three days. So I think that that's something to keep in mind too, is that it's not always complex and just every single study that's ever been done is in proof of that study.

flag behind him conveniently, and things like that. Now I have a very different perspective on Donald Trump because from the age of four to fourteen, I spent every single one of my summers in Manhattan with my uncle and he basically lived near Trump Towers, and so I've seen

Donald Trump come out. He'd wave at us. So I've seen the actual person in real life, whereas the most people that talk shit about Donald Trump's never actually seen him in real life and never been acknowledged by him as a person at all in any way big or small. So I've come across people that, you know, my uncle knows and stuff that they call, yeah, Donald Trump's a really nice guy, you know, and you get all these different conflicting opinions. So it's just it's weird just talking

about Trump. I'm not pro Trump, but it's just weird when I hear people.

in order to get some building like put up or something. So, yeah, he's as nice as a guy that works with the mafia could possibly be, right, And I think that he also represents this like the there's a version when the four five hundred comes out, or like the Richest People in the World lists come out, right, and it's like there's the people that are rich and their name is in the magazine, and then there's people that are rich and their names not in the magazine that are probably

even richer than the ones that do have their names in it. And Donald Trump is like one of those people that still looks like a human because he's willing to be like, hey, it's me, I'm the rich Donald Trump guy. Like he actually plays the same persona instead of being this like behind the shadows kind of figure. And I think that that is its own archetype, Like that's a more powerful archetype for the normies because he

gets to be a figurehead of capitalism in this way. Right, he's like the rich real estate New York developer guy that really likes gold. Like that just becomes his persona and now he's like a household name. Now he's like a brand name, Like he was an actual brand name for you before he even runs for president. Like you're mentioning like why was he in home alone? Why was

he in people? Why did rappers constantly throw his name out there because just by being like Donald Trump, it conjures up the idea of gold and power and like ruthless business acumen and just embracing capitalism. So I think that he kind of realized at a certain point, like, oh, I'm an archetype, Like my reputation of my name and my brand precedes me as a person. And it was a genius stroke to like convert that capital into political capital because now he has an actual dynasty that's he's

building towards that can outlast generations. Right now, there's a much better chance. And one hundred years from now World War three aside, Right, But like if someone with the last name and lineage of the Trump family and one hundred years from now, after we're all dead and our grandkids are dead, if they run for president, they have a much better chance than someone with a name that no one's ever heard of before, just just brand recognition.

And I think that he's enough of a capitalist to understand how the markets work that it's not going to change that much in one hundred years, Like people are still going to fall for the same brand recognition techniques that they would today.

If I'm like, oh, George W. Bush is such an idiot, now I'm the dumb one because I'm underestimating someone that clearly has more acumen than I'm giving them credit for. And if you train yourself to be that way, to just look around and be like, everyone's so much stupider than I am, it might be self serving, but now you're gonna get swindled way easier, right, because you're assuming that you're like a leg up on everybody. So if anything, assume everyone is way smarter than you. Assume you're the

dumbest one in the room. And then at least it's like you can pleasantly surprise yourself maybe, but at best you can be on guard more. You can actually be like, damn, dude I'm about to talk to is probably an NLP freaking master right now. You can kind of have your defensive up a little bit.

You never really know who's who and what they're religenda is, especially if they have a lot of money and people are right now they're losing their shit. I haven't even really bothered to pay any more attention to what's going on because they seem to be phrasing things in a way like it's it's Donald Trump and it's only Donald Trump alone that's doing these things to America.

a criminal. I mean, look at Bill Clinton, right, Bill Clinton was a rapist, and a criminal, but he just knew how to play those cards and like, ah shucks, here listen, he played saxophone and he saw me up on the mediaccenttro right, Like he can play that stuff off with like this weird southern charm, which I would argue that's just NLP, but maybe naturally, he just naturally has charisma and knows how to build rapport with people

without halving to take an NLP class. But someone else can learn how to do those things and achieve sort of the same goals. But I think you want that person. You don't want someone that isn't a killer. That's kind of what he came out with the first time that I'll like, oh, this guy is a little bit different. Someone asked them was like how dare This was before he ran in twenty sixteen, I think, And it was like, are you saying that our CIA has you know, done

horrific things that they're war criminals? And he paraphrasing, he was like, the CIA are killers? You think killers don't do killers?

the CIA murderers and criminals. But like we need them to do that job, because if we don't, if America doesn't have murders and criminals out in the world, then like we have a we're not a leg up on Russia and China and all the other countries that have no qualms about that. So part of it is like, do you want me to just lie to you and your face right now? Is that what you're really looking for or are you trying to gauge whether or not

I know about this? And I think that Trump in a way like he's making the so eric exoteric in some ways, Like I'm sure he's got his own secrets, and I'm sure like his like his art of the deal in the Roy Cohne training, like he's probably not going to let that out of the bag as easily as some of the other things that he's got going on. But I think that he's like, I'll be your gangster prince. I think that's what Alistair Crowley called it in one of his works where the breakdown of like the Golden

Bow or the Golden Bough. Shout out to my friend David Charles' plate that put me onto all this, But like the Golden Bough is essentially when a challenger from a foreign kingdom comes the challenge a new king, and the Golden Bow is like he's pulling down this branch on this family tree and ripping that branch off. That's him like removing the current king and sitting in his place. That's you taking over a kingdom, and that over time.

Alistair Crowley argued that this challenger could no longer be someone that was like fully virtuous. It can't be the fool that's like never done anything wrong in his life and has no dirt to be like an al Capone. It needs to be a Robin Hood, like someone that is literally like, yeah, I'm out here stealing, but I'm stealing from rich people and I'm giving it to poor people. I'm doing like the right kind of stealing. I'm the

right kind of criminal. And that's sort of the archetype that I think Donald Trump represents and which is a stark contrast to every other person's run for president. They're like, oh, I'm virtuous. I've never even like coughed without excusing myself. I would never do anything bad. You know, I wouldn't be a war criminal, no way, I wouldn't support any of that. And then Donald Trump comes out, He's like, yeah, yeah, I think I am. I think I am a war criminal.

But it's good for me and it's good for you. Like he has this different energy to him, and I think that's the dangerous part. And I also think that that is seen as more egregious than anything that he actually does, is the fact that he's willing to own it, and it's he's seen his crass right, He's seen as like not fit for office. But I do think that like that's the version we need. We need like the al Capone style president at a certain point, and people

are ready for it. Clearly they're ready for it.

bit of gas on the fire. But if I'm doing that same swat analysis and I'm listing pros and cons for me in a selfish way, the pros are people are now more interested in the JFK assassination than they've ever been in my entire lifetime, maybe excluding the release of the Oliver Stone movie with Kevin Costner. There was like a slight peak for maybe like five or six years when people cared about JFK assassination, and then it went back to like, ah, that's my grandpa cared about that.

I don't care about that. Now that's back in sort of the news. And I think that it's a net positive to have an inherent distrust and intelligence agencies, just as like a blanket statement, And I don't know if we would have had that same sort of scrutiny the same thing where like now people are being forced to

talk about the merits of completely dismantling the irs. Right, This isn't something that has even been part of public discussion since JFK was in office, and I can't remember what happened to him, but for some reason they didn't get rid of the irs while he was president. I think he got voted out or something. But now this is now the very first time ever that these conversations are being had again, and I feel that they're like

long overdue. So in that selfish regard, like from a conspiracy theorist standpoint, I feel that this is like the golden era of conspiracy theories, for better or worse. But I like that. I think that that's a net positive for all of us. I don't know if he's going to make eggs free or eggs are going to cost like a dollar eighty nine. I don't know if that's

on the trajectory. I think that he would be an idiot not to make the claim, not to make that promise, and if it would help him get some extra votes, but I don't think that he's he's writing you know, checks or letters to the grocery stores. It's like, all right, knock off ten bucks off those eggs, guys, like let's get this in order. I don't think that's really his role.

And if you if you voted on him because you thought that was then he did his job right, like the campaign did its job and making you think that, But really he's here to do something different.

video games and movies and all the things. So, yeah, come over and listen to some of the stuff that I got.