Hypnosis Used Illegally. This Looks Familiar.

UFOLOGY

http://ktla.com/2017/01/18/disturbing-video-shows-attorney-apparently-trying-to-hypnotize-clients-for-sexual-pleasure/

Watching the news package in the above link about a divorce attorney who used hypnosis to sexually abuse female clients got me back to thinking about ufology’s own David Jacobs. Specifically, how he was caught on tape asking a female subject under hypnosis to send him her soiled panties and not remember she had done so. And at another time, offered to buy her a chastity belt with nails at the vaginal opening he found at a sex shop he frequented, to keep away rapey alien/human hybrids. He had convinced her such beings existed in her life through numerous hypnotic sessions conducted after telling her all about them from other subjects he had put under.

When Jeff Ritzmann and I exposed this those many years ago, there was a lot of resistance from within the ufological community. Friends stuck by him, of course, and some podcasting and radio people. UFO conventions hosted him. MUFON gave him a lifetime achievement award. It was an embarrassing wakeup call the likes of which might completely fall on deaf ears today, when we’ve got a president-elect who was caught on tape bragging about grabbing women by the pussy and getting away with it because he’s famous.

From sexism to sycophants to friendship to preservation of a cottage industry that ran on many of the memes culled from alien abduction hypnosis–there was no shortage of reasons for people to turn a blind eye to Jacobs’ unethical behavior. But there was one excuse given–that even Jacobs trumped up a bit–that bothered me in that I couldn’t figure out if it was true or not. It was the notion that a subject under hypnosis is still in control because they are self-aware. If true, then she is allowing this to happen. It’s her dirty secret. This is how people give themselves permission to act out repressions that are taboo.

She wanted it. That old rapey chestnut. And the answer hadn’t come to me until watching the above video package. The answer is this: self-awareness and self-control are two different things. They are so intertwined that it’s easy to forget they can be pulled apart.

Ever take a psychedelic? Scream all you want from the back of your mind–you ain’t snapping out of it on command. Ever have a lucid dream where you think you have full control because you’re aware you are asleep, then find out you don’t? Ever struggle with sleep paralysis where you cannot even in waking consciousness will your own body to move? There are certain spiritual experiences where this is the case as well, such as talking in tongues, spontaneous movements–go down the list. You’re there and not in control. Why would we assume it is otherwise with hypnosis?

Clearly the police officers in that video did not assume it. And neither did the judge. Heck, even the man accused admitted to what he was doing. He didn’t blame the victims because he knew there were several and he wasn’t one of them.

Now apply this to other forms of mesmerism. Like television and dictatorial speeches. Sporting events. Mob mentality. Think how controllable we all are in masses if not individually. Some people most certainly let go their repression and act out in the right circumstances. But most? Not most. To say most is to ignore all of the hard work and dedication our own intelligence community has put into fostering hypnosis as a means of controlling people. (I say with a nod to the work of Jack Brewer.)

We have not and will likely not get legal justice in Ufology Land for all the damage done by numerous amateur hypnotists. What we are left with is ourselves and our responses to unethical behavior. It’s never too late to give up the sacred cows and change our minds with the facts. I’d argue that our response is our responsibility. In this, we are in full control.

Fake News In Perspective

Fake News In Perspective

By Guest Blogger,
Tyler Kokjohn, Ph.D.

image-1What is fake news?  A simple question that is not so easy to answer.  The extreme forms featuring outright fabrications can be identified quickly, but some stories are far more difficult to categorize.  Because true and false information can be blended together easily and harnessed to serve a variety of goals, fake news in one form or another has been around for quite a while.

A recent article featuring thoughts from a writer who reports on such matters suggests “the origins of ‘fake news’ go back to the 1950s when UFO newsletters from organizations like the Aerial Phenomenon Research Organization reported on alien abductions and government coverups.” Jumping from UFO groups to radio programs and beyond produces a simple straight line extrapolation leading to Breitbart News.

The UFO community has experienced quite directly the negative impacts of fake news.  Charlatans and hoaxers have prospered on fertile grounds while poisoning progress toward meaningful comprehension of the phenomena.  Misinformation and deliberate disinformation have agitated leaders and the rank-and-file alike.  Unable to establish much of anything in the way of reliable, agreed-on fact, the community has devolved into small profit center fiefdoms.

Ufology has been plagued by fake news from without and within, but that device certainly did not originate in UFO interest group newsletters.  To make such a claim is to ignore a great body of history that reveals forms of fake news have been with us for centuries.  ‘Yellow’ journalism helped drive the United States into war with Spain over a century ago as publishers William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer tried to out sensationalize each other’s news stories.  Edward Bernays wrote the book on the dark aspects of propaganda – ‘engineering public consent’- nearly 25 years before Coral and Jim Lorenzen founded APRO.  Thomas Paine’s pamphlet Common Sense, published in 1776, pushed the American colonies on the path to independence.

Fake news may be purpose built, but it can also come about through journalistic carelessness.  Experts consenting to interviews must take care to provide informed perspectives and interviewers/authors may wish to vet the assertions carefully.  It seems possible that Long John Nebel might have influenced Art Bell, but what evidence is there that chain extends forward through persons like Rush Limbaugh and beyond?  Maybe it is just as valid to postulate later day radio personalities were influenced by Harry Emerson Fosdick and the many evangelists of the airwaves who followed him.  Lacking corroboration these statements seem more akin to a conspiracy theory than an evidenced explanation of the history of fake news.

The take home lesson is clear; fake news is pervasive, some of it may not be intentional.  Manage it by honing your critical thinking skills.

###