I know, it's Punt PI, it's presented by a comedian, it's on the typically liberal BBC. It's light-hearted. It is, perhaps, not appropriate to make a light hearted look at torture-based mind control.
I was immediately sure that Punt PI on Radio four would be a load of rubbish, as soon as i heard it was to be about mind contorl. It followed the CIA establishment line that they simply reacted to Communist evil on their brave boys in korea, although as we all know most of their ideas came from the Nazis and the rest were pre-existing, from Estabrooks and company.
They have a woman claiming we can do very crude implants, but we don't have the technology for mind control. She has, perhaps, not heard of Jose Delagado who was, at least as long ago as the 60s, able to elicit specific emotions and activities from a bull. But, as in all areas of life, I'm sure technology hasn't advanced in the last 50 years, hence the 7 yard long computer I'm typing this on. Yes, technology becoming smaller and more advanced over the course of only a few decades is surely impossible. She claims the CIA "probably aren't" ahead of the wider world on mind control, although as with all the anti- claims in this programme we have only her word to go on. But academics rarely try to control people's minds, while for the CIA it's a full time occupation, whether through deceit, information control, propaganda or implants, hypnosis, narcohypnosis and Radio hypnotic intracerebral control.
Also remember Downard and so forth, testimony to a very long lasting interest by the elites in mind control.
They claim the GIs must have been brainwashed in Korea to make confessions about the US using germ warfare on China, not only (it says) were these confession untrue, but they "couldn't possibly be true", although again it's only his word we have to go on. See William Blum's "Killing Hope": the Americans followed Japanese WWII practice by dropping Shiro Ishii's germ bombs on China. The confessions, in other words, were true.
They quote Estabrooks'(?) statement that anyone who thinks people can only be hypnotised into doing things they'd do while awake needs to review their opinions. They cite the case of the CIA secretary hypnotised into shooting another secretary whilst in an hypnotic rage. Almost had me thinking it was going to be a balanced look at hypno control, but no. Then they had some bloke on who, with no expertise on a par with Estabrooks and with no evidence to support him (although he did say "all the evidence indicates" before making his groundless claims) says the current opinion is that people can't be hypnotised to do what they wouldn't do anyway, which is palpable rubbish. About the case of the CIA secretary he says in "thse sorts of cases" the people would have done the same thing even without hypnosis, although he ignores this actual case in which the secretary was too scared to even touch a gun when not hypnotised. He also claims, by saying the above, that the people the CIA was hypnotising would happily shoot people or throw acid over people for no reason.
Insulin comas; lawsuits against the former head of the APA/CPA/WAMH, etc.; Operation Paperclip, TBMC, none of these get a mention.
I've also just seen a programme upon the Beeb hero-worshipping the mass murderer Deng Xioping. Also claiming he was brave and heroic to put economics ahead of politics and to adopt capitalism without "western style politics", which is one way of putting it.