Strokes and a variety of other forms of maltreatment /crimes can be made obscure, but only for an unsuspecting person.
Strokes can be silent but only because people are not sufficiently aware. Some of that problem is a matter of awareness directly, a matter of too much comfort zone. However this is not all. It is also that people are not knowledgeable enough to identify the problems they perceive. They may dismiss something because they don’t see its significance or because they are not well informed owing to medical opinions that do not reflect the truth.
To understand the “silent” effects it is important to see the symptoms firsthand for yourself but in a manner that will not cause harm.
The first symptoms we can observe are gradual and increasing memory loss as to cause confusion and even disorientation. This would happen only to an older person you say, not so! Certainly the senior citizens are easy targets because they are vulnerable but they are by no means alone in possibly suffering such harm while they are ignorant of the foul play.. everybody can be. To see this in its most dramatic and frightening manner I will discuss how a healthy adult, at the prime of their life, can be abducted out of a busy shopping centre, without a struggle and without anyone noticing anything amiss!
The emotion that is the “industry standard”.. fear of course, is used. Remarkable as it may sound to you, and contrary to medical opinion, intense fear can be used without the person really knowing that they are even afraid. Here again information is the key. If the danger that is posed by relationally entangled criminals that danger will be unconsciously perceived, except in a very small number of cases. The 99% of people will not consciously perceive the danger. The danger that is first posed is mild, vague but progressively that danger can be steadily increased. How? It is done solely through intent but not the intent of the armed criminal. Certainly the armed criminals will hold criminal intent. However it is the intent of the chief offender, the person closely related to the person targeted that makes the difference because only they can present ideas that can be consciously perceived, even if in some cases very fleetingly.
Once the person is place in danger that is not apparent they will remain in the early stages of fear. This is the stage in which they will be perceptive but not discriminative yet. We gather information and then we think about it and decide what to do. This stage is used extensively in foul play. The ideas that are presented in this case are quite subtle to begin with. These are ideas that indicate the person saw something and then can’t remember it. In abduction the offenders have the targeted person in their sight. And they may be standing quite close but remain unseen because the targeted person doesn’t know them. They are just people in the crowd. The chief offender may or may not be on the scene. If they are not on the scene then they will be kept up to date with the targeted person’s movements and surroundings, these days by mobile phone or even in conjunction with video so that they may incorporate the use of a tablet. Using an internet connection the chief offender can be in another country, on another continent and yet have video images that put them right on the scene.
The scene is used against the targeted person. And remember the person who is “calling the shots” knows the target well. They know what their likes and dislikes are, they know their hopes and fears, they know what sort of shopping they normally do, they know if they have a weakness for something, candy or new shoes or a music CD etc. All this information is used and used to effect. It can be so skilfully used that the target person would swear it is their own thinking. However once you get to see the difference between your own thinking and the presented ideas and indeed also the ideas that you put forth in response to presentations, then you can recognize right at the outset just what is happening. One thing you will have seen is that we do no keep a running dialogue or monologue in our minds of what is going on around us. Dialogues and even monologues are the result of foul play, either in the immediate or as a result of conditioning.
If for instance there is a clock in view, the chief offender may present the idea “wonder what the time is?” the unsuspecting person may look at their watch or the clock or both, if they are in the habit of checking their watch. Immediately that the person looks away there is the another idea presented of “what was it?” and “ah can’t remember.. just gone blank”. This will cause the person to look again. Remember the person is under fear conditions, they are perceptive but NOT DISCRIMINATIVE! The person will also mostly likely suffer a blow to their confidence and that has an additive effect. Thus the next time it will be even more devastating. However what the person doesn’t know is not only that they are under fear conditions but before the next presentation is made the danger posed is stepped up, which means their fear is intensified. This in turn means that the brain will disable some of its functions in order to give perception a more concentrated effort.
I’m going to stop here to mention another application of this step.
This method can be used to cause a person to begin to lose their memory, especially an older person who may become reliant on another or in a situation where that person may have assets that the other person wants to exploit.
If you do this as an exercise you will find that either you will have a measure of difficulty in remembering or you may not remember whatever it was that you were going to do. It is a nasty trick when it is repeated over and over because the person is affected both by continual states of fear, re-programming of the neural networks /circuits in the brain out of this experience and that includes the loss of confidence. Over a year or two of such circumstances considerable damage would be done. I suspect thought that given knowledge and the removal of the foul play the person may recover.
An abduction is well planned and made to look like a normal event, so much so that other people don’t notice anything amiss. And if they do notice something it is most likely to find fault with the person abducted. They may look groggy or “out-of-it” as to be considered to be on drugs or under the influence of alcohol. The people who approach her are strangers to her, but they are more than likely relationally entangled.
The strangers that approach the targeted person, a woman in this example, are called “the pick-ups”. They will look friendly and they will uphold friendly ideas but they are a vital part of the game. There will however also be ideas presented by the chief offender. This time the ideas will be of reassurance and trust. Remember almost all things can be manufactured, reassurance and trust are no exceptions. She may have already been prepared by some incident in the recent past where stranger actually helped her. The whole thing would be part of the game but the woman would have seen it as an isolated event. She can even be made to feel compelled to accept help from strangers. It would be under threat of death and the use of anxiety, which conveniently is made to disappear when the strangers approach and offer help. Deception is the name of the game so at some future time she feels compelled but doesn’t understand why.
The GCI follows on behind because they need to keep her in fear. If the fear was to subside then she would, firstly not need their help and secondly and most importantly she would be discriminative again. They will walk her out of the shopping centre and into their car without anyone noticing, let alone seeing something amiss. If someone does look a bit closer they may only see her as someone needing help and the two with her as good citizens that are doing their good deed for the day. Indeed a stranger has no idea even if they are related or not and they won’t question that she must know them if she is with them. A subsequent police call to the public asking if anyone saw anything strange will yield nothing. Most probably many people saw her but as they saw nothing strange they would not even remember.
When you do this as an experiment you must be sure that the subject, who is to be abducted, does not have a clue as to what the experiment is about. They must be kept completely in the dark. If a person who does know the experiment is used as a subject, and you will want to be involved because you need to see the effect first hand, then you must not be told or know the timing of the event. You must be misled completely. You may recognize the symptoms but if time has passed and you are confronted in this way unexpectedly you will experience what a pitfall it may be to someone inexperienced and unknowing of the foul game play. It is extremely important to do the experiments to understand and realize the effects because this sort of game play is used in many different applications.
To be continued.