Probable Cause with Sibel Edmonds: How to Detangle the Majority Caught in the Web of Political Conformity?

Welcome to our sixth episode of Probable Cause. For this episode we’ll be revisiting our discussions in the first three episodes-revolution, and combine that with what we discussed during the last two shows. We are going from identifying the ‘what’ to explaining through ‘whys’ and arriving at the important stage of ‘how.’

I am going to discuss one of the biggest impediments we face in translating revolutionary thoughts into actions- Cattle-mindedness, and its ingredients: Learned Helplessness, Conformity and self-fulfilling Prophecy. To illustrate these I’ll present a couple of real-life examples, including the fizzled TSA Opt Out Campaign. I will also include a fun but sobering hypothetical example: The coming Opt Out Clause for the NSA’s surveillance operations and the likely public response.

As always, I will be providing my take based on what I have been observing, through my own personal lens, reasoning and analyses, and will pose important macro questions for you to consider. And as usual our next episode will be based on your reaction, critique, responses and questions posed in the comments section below.

*To listen to our previous episodes on this topic click here

Listen to the full episode here:

A Few Related Links

Whole Body Imaging Technology and Body Scanners

Opting Out of Naked Scans at the Airport: A Protest Movement

Showdown at the Airport Body Scanner

National Opt-Out Day a bust as few fliers reject full-body scans

The Trouble with the Common Core

Common Core Opt Out: Information

Local parents abandoning Common Core

PARCC: What happens if students 'opt out?'


FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING, and by ordering our EXCLUSIVE BFP DVDs.


  1. Mgrdichian says:

    You answered the questions yourself in the podcast: FEAR & FEAR. But the fear parents have in making decisions about their chid’s school experience and deciding whether to opt out of an airport body scan have different roots and are based on vastly different concerns, even if the behavior seems identical.

    Even you acknowledged that opting out of a body scan is still playing into TSA’s game. So really, what purpose does it serve except avoiding the health risk of radiation? Its genesis is 9/11, supported by the shoe bomber, underwear bomber, and the phony war on a perception, i.e war on terror. Unraveling it backward, step by step vis-a-vis opting out, etc. will take forever and you can bet the govt already has contingency plans to “modify” TSA screening in the event of any further resistance. I just found out from a co-worker that you can pay TSA $80 annually to get pre-screened and avoid the entire mess altogether. Since business travelers are the ones the govt fears most will cause problems, $80 is peanuts for them to pay for ease of travel. Smart thinking, TSA. And on and on down the line they are ready to meet resistance. So IMO the way to pop the fear factor balloon related to the war on terror is to get people asking when this war on a perception will end. It has escalated to borderline racism and extreme prejudice against Muslims. It is so unAmerican and IMO needs to be challenged head on. Everything else is spinning our wheels.

    As far as your daughter’s playmate’s mom, you gave us the back and forth dialogue up to her lengthy explanation why she won’t opt out of Common Core, but didn’t give us your response to her sincere, well-reasoned (in her mind) response to your prodding. Its in the response to concerns like hers wherein the answers lie. It’s a hard response to follow up and to her credit, she was honest about her fears.

    It’s all about fear and the antidote is courage, not reasoning. Religious folk get their courage from their God, their religion, and their co-religionists, that’s why they have successfully opted out of public schools for homeschooling or private school. They have no fear.

    I’ve been a follower of yours since you were “Just a Citizen” and I’m embarrassed to say it wasn’t until last month that I read Classified Woman. It is a book of great courage. Sure, the exposé on bloated bureaucracy and CYA was insightful, but any armchair analyst can expound on that. It was your courage that shined in your memoir. What was impressive was not how you reasoned your way though it all, but the courage it took to take it as far as you did.

    So I’d say got back to your daughter’s playmate’s mom and help her with her courage.

    • Mgrdichian,

      “But the fear parents have in making decisions about their child’s school experience and deciding whether to opt out of an airport body scan have different roots and are based on vastly different concerns”- I think same with slight difference. With the former: fear of their children being singled out, with the latter fear of themselves being singled out.

      “So really, what purpose does it serve except avoiding the health risk of radiation?”- Personally, I think a big one, if you consider it the first step; breaking down the task into chunks, rather than taking it on as a whole. First you defeat one, and with its success, you pursue to the next: TSA patdown. One’s success makes the next one’s success more feasible. Again, that’s my thinking (maybe wishful thinking).

      My daughter’s friend’s mother: I did; in a way. She needed more than me. I said I would ‘opt out’ and challenge the system. She wanted/wants to see dozens of others.

      Thank you for your kind/encouraging words re: Classified Woman. It was the same dilemma with the FBI when I was in there. I’d say many of my colleagues saw the ‘wrong.’ Most did not want to come forward because of fear (‘I’ve put 21 yrs into this, and I can’t risk lose my retirement, ‘ or, ‘I am supporting a family of 4 as a single breadwinner, and I can’t …’). With a few others it was: It will be only you, maybe me, and may be another one, and they will lynch us all; our lives. They wanted to see a larger group before they’d join.

      So basically, it is the same dilemma. Assuming we’ll get many more informed, many more into critical thinking as individuals, there will come a point when action is required, and then, it will be the case of people not wanting to be the first, or among the very few. This when group and collective dynamic needs to kick in. This, all based on the psychology of the majority.

      • Mgrdichian says:

        I’d like to add what I think is an important distinction: Leaders vs. followers. We so often talk about sheep and sheeple. Distinguishing between people who are acting like sheep and those who are following the recommendations of leaders is a gray area. Sibel, whether you like it or not, you are a leader. This quality was instilled in you by your father, who from what I’ve learned here was a very courageous man. As Andrei Tudor pointed out below, courage (risk) can’t be learned, it can only be experienced, and you experienced it. People like your father are in the extreme minority. Most people don’t grow up with that type of role model, so they are not conditioned to take those types of risks, they simply follow the advise of people they respect. This is not good or bad. It’s one of those “is what it is” situations. The point I was trying to make was that your personal role is more important than you give it credit for.

        Also, in the two examples above, both the mom and your FBI coworkers wanted to see more people doing what you suggest before they jump in and draw their own line in the sand. This is their way of acknowledging the value of “strength in numbers.” But isn’t that what we are pushing for here — strength in numbers? They see what we see, they’re just not risk takers and/or leaders.

        Andrei Tudor also points out (accurately, IMO) the relationship between sheepish behavior and a the lack of personal responsibility for society as a whole. This goes hand in hand with recognizing our individual roles as part of a society and working to fulfill that role as best we can. (As an aside, sadly, even though I often characterize myself as a RP libertarian, I find the notion of societal responsibility sometimes lacking in that movement, specifically regarding health care services and the environment. But I’m OK with that because I learned not to expect total agreement on all issues).

        So, as a comparison I’d challenge you to contemplate the relative “revolutionary” nature of keeping your child out of public school vs. lighting a fire and leading Bend Oregon public schools to reject Common Core and mandatory vaccinations. Easy for me to say cuz I don’t have kids, so don’t take this as a criticism, rather mental exploration 🙂

        • “They see what we see, they’re just not risk takers and/or leaders” I see what your saying here in the context of your argument and I agree to a certain extent. I think it is a good point and that it is true for some people. But if we take the other mom for example, I don’t think the other mother sees what we see. She sees common core is a bad program. Period. She recognizes the first level, but goes no deeper. For example, she may have no problem with TSA, or may or may not have any substantial understanding on really anything else of substance regarding serious issues, particularly discussed in this podcast series. The thought that common core is bad, is compartmentalized. Stand-alone. She can’t make any real connections with deeper issues, she doesn’t really feel it. She simply knows it’s a bad program, that may hopefully be resolved once her party takes control of Office. Of course, I don’t know this person, but I’m using her as an example to illustrate what appears to the case for majority of the masses. The majority of normal Americans are immune to the serious scrutiny of their own government, the grand central station of all connections and deep layers of issues like common core.

          • Mgrdichian says:

            Jeff, you make some valid distinctions. But distinguish the difference in dynamics between “strength in numbers” for us, and “strength in number” for them. You can define “us” and “them” anyway you want. thnx.

          • Mgr, honestly not sure what you’d like me to do here, this one may indeed have gone over my head. Can you hone in a bit on what you are aiming at? Or if you could expand on the distinction you had in mind would be helpful, for you are the one who brought that up, and I certainly wasn’t arguing against it. But I am curious as to where you were going with this.

          • Mgrdichian says:

            Sure, I’d be happy to clarify. I was attempting to link my distinction of “leaders and followers” with “strength in numbers.” To me, the two are related and inseparable. I see followers as people who typically go with the flow. They are not people who will buck the system on their own. They don’t have the requisite courage to do so, even if they recognize that something isn’t quite right. But, if they see enough people bucking the trend, those same people might be willing to rise above their fears and buck the system, leaning on the courage of the collective — i.e. numbers.

            I also see activists with the same tendency, and I’ll use my self as an example. I’m a person who doesn’t like public street protests. It’s not my thing. You’ll never see me on the street holding a sign with one or two other people. Yet, I was one of the organizers of the two Tea Parties for 9/11 Truth in Boston (2007, 2008). And lo and behold, I pulled together some colonial garb and marched side by side with hundreds of people to dump the 9/11 Commission Report into Boston Harbor. It was the “strength in numbers” that gave me courage to do something I am naturally uncomfortable with.

            So, I see the dynamic as being the same, regardless how deep into corruption one wants to delve. When you said the mom “can’t make any real connections with deeper issues” and “doesn’t really feel it” I’m wondering why you suspect that’s what’s preventing her from bucking the system instead of the fact that maybe she sees things quite clearly and is simply scared and needs other people around her for courage. You also said “She sees common core is a bad program. Period.” I say, “fantastic.” She obviously doesn’t need to reason it any further. What you’re suggesting is that if she more fully understood how deep the problem with CC goes, and how it relates to other problems with govt,, she would have enough courage to buck the system on her own or with a minuscule minority. This is where I think you and I see it a little differently. I think the other example Sibel gave regarding FBI co-workers who know damn well how deep these issues go proves that knowledge isn’t what’s needed to buck the system, so I argued it’s “strength in numbers” that provides the necessary courage that isn’t there for a lot of people, including enlightened activists.

            Hope I made it clearer.

          • “It was the “strength in numbers” that gave me courage to do something I am naturally uncomfortable with.” – This is absolutely true. We see examples of this every single day; all around us.

            May I give one example here? Here it is:

            In 2010, we are in Sydney Australia, in the airport. There is this huge line (at least 80-100 people) in front of the ticketing counter for Coach/Econ passenger. The airline had only 4 computer ticketing desks open (out of 9). Two of those (2 out of 4) were dedicated for First Class & Business Class passengers.

            I totally understand this privilege provided for people who are willing (and can) pay 5 or 6 times more $$$$s. They have to get some perks for those $$$$s.

            However, in this case, during the first 30 minutes standing in the line that was not moving with 100 other people, only 2 passengers came through the dedicated lines, checked in, and then left. So you had 3 agents with two stations, standing there, doing nothing, since there were no other 1st Class & Business Class passengers checking in.

            Anyhow, after grumbling and telling my husband how ridiculous/illogical the situation was, and hearing everyone behind me grumbling the same way, I just walked towards the agents, and very politely, but firmly, explained the illogical situation, and said: “Look, I totally understand that those who paid more come first, as they should. But how about this? You guys begin processing Econ class, and as soon as you see First/Business passengers entering the line, put us on hold, and give all your attention to them. Please!”

            The travel agents kept looking at each other, one of the senior ones called in the supervisor, and within 3-4 minutes, they began doing what I suggested. They opened up two more desks, and began processing econ passengers.

            As I walked back towards the line, almost all passengers began clapping, cheering for me, ‘Yay, mate. Thank you, mate.’

            The question is: “Why no one else took the initiation? While they all say the illogical/ridiculous situation, while everyone bit..ed about it, no one else was willing to walk up to these agents, and try to persuade them to the logical thing?!”

            In this case, the worse scenario would have been: ‘It is against our set protocol and sorry, we won’t change it …’ That’s it. We are not talking about protest/fight, being rude … just taking a stand, and trying to do something about it. Yet, of 100 people, only one was willing to try.

            Now, how do we go about remedying this disease? That’s where I am;-) That’s where we are.

          • Mgrdichian says:

            “Why no one else took the initiation?” There was no one else in line whose father once took on the Persian elite — risking his life.

            It appears what you did in Sydney is way outside the comfort zone of anyone in line (hence the applause) but way inside yours, and pales in comparison to risks you’ve witnessed and personally taken and that are buried deep in your subconscious.

            “how do we go about remedying this disease?” By digging deep and going outside of OUR OWN comfort zones and comparing it to no one except ourselves. By doing so we are then prepared to relate to others about what it feels like to take big risks. And I promise you, the next time the same thing happens to one of those people in line, someone will remember witnessing your initiative and use the experience of watching you to find the courage to take their own initiative. That’s the wonderful thing about being human; sometimes something that’s so easy for us is so difficult for others, and simply witnessing someone else effortlessly do something that we are afraid to do is all it takes to overcome a fear. In this case I don’t look at it as a disease, merely the human condition, which provides a reason for all of us to be here in the first place.

          • Mgr, thanks for clarifying. Understood. Here is where I’m coming from. Strength in numbers is clearly important for virtually any movement and any tipping point. Strength in numbers is all a group needs to take down symptoms of the system (TSA/common-core/etc)… or to simply check in at the airport :), but I’d argue to buck an entire system, that is a government, strength in numbers alone is dangerous. If the ‘numbers’ lack critical thought into the deep understanding of the system itself, a leader will lead followers into… a new system… and the followers will accept the new institutions… that are handed to them ( or forced upon them )… by the new leaders, without critically thinking about anything of substance. ie if the followers of systematic revolution are in it for their a-b-c reasons without any comprehesion of the entire a-z, the new regime need only satisfy or cosmetically modify a-b-c, and the whole rest of the mess can stay or an entirely new, slanted mess takes its place.

            My reasoning on saying what I said regarding the CC-mom story, is based on the mom’s reactions. I may be off (wouldn’t be the first time), but I got the impression she is a perfectly normal indoctrinated citizen. She learned some things about CC and doesn’t like it. But complies. My reason is based purely on the indoctrinated mind and lack of passion. Psychological barriers aplenty, the American masses aren’t typically motivated unless their passionate about it or it’s popular. Alright, so lets assume she is or becomes passionate, and gets strong by the many numbers, and CC is eventually abolished. and in the wake of that successful movement, when the new schooling program pops out of the system’s oven, well, now we have the new Every Child Left Behind program to take down. The a-b-c Common Core fighter is gone, because a-b-c is gone or repackaged differently. I’m not arguing that taking these things down is bad, on the contrary, I find value in it. So I see strength in numbers in two distinct ways here: ‘a-b-c’ ‘numbers’ for symptoms, and a-z ‘numbers’ for disease remedy and system change.

  2. This was a very interesting topic that was covered. While the TSA opt-out movement may have had some impact creating long line and delays, that situation would not be tolerated for long and other options would be used to heard people back into their cages. While it is important to protest or opt-out when we have that option, we also need to be aware of how that option is being undermined and which groups are helping it.

    We can see how this is currently being done with vaccines. The H1N1 scare and attempt to get everyone in line with the program failed miserably. We can also watch in real time as vaccine exemptions have been regularly attacked and eliminated while more vaccines and mandates are added to the schedule. Some states now have mandates for health care workers (regardless of patient contact) while others mandate them for elderly.

    However, more and more people have been exercising exemptions even with the slow erosion of parental rights. To address it, just as is done with any other issue, the propaganda campaign is rolled out and the complicit media goes along. We have seen this with the recent measles campaign. The mainstream makes it a left/right fight (enter Rand) while the “alternative” media – mainly the left – lines up to demonize and marginalize anyone who questions the “science” behind it. Hypocrisy Now! is the latest example and one of the larger offenders of this type of behavior. The way the topic is covered is generally one-sided (or raises enough question about the other point of view to marginalize it) and lines up the left-liberal mushhead listeners and supporters to attack those who don’t buy this crap. Whether it be these media-manufactured epidemics so people will demand their rights as parents and individuals be taken away, shooting events so we can get more gun control or others who will demand geoengineering and aerosol spraying to save us from Global Warming. The patterns and playbook are the same.

    While opting out is currently an option in many cases for most of us and should be exercised, knowing how the agenda is furthered with the help of the media, propaganda, pysops, etc. is also important.

    • “While opting out is currently an option in many cases for most of us and should be exercised, knowing how the agenda is furthered with the help of the media, propaganda, pysops, etc. is also important.” – Most definitely. That’s the power of propaganda. They have the power to turn a couple of isolated incidents into an endemic proportions. The other day I got an e-mail from my sister who wrote after a link to one of these measles articles it said: ‘These hippies and church-ies want to turn the clock back by 200 years, and bring back all the old plagues …’

      I am not sure which category she put me in. Hippies? Church-ies? She represents that ‘majority’ we’ve been talking about.

      As a side note: three girls, same parents, same countries, same schools … how in the world did we end up so different from each other? Basically it excludes nature & nurture, and says there is something else out there!!!

      • Harry Stulemeijer says:

        I think every serious communication or relation starts with empathy, the wish or preparedness to listen and to mutual understanding. Psychological factors like attitude, appearance, terminology, tone, emphasis are immensely important to get access to people, to useful communication and progress. A thorough analysis and design of strategy about how to approach individuals, audiences and specific groups is indispensable. Also an appeal to take ones own responsibility must not lack. In the case of opting out, I think, one should look at specific groups like, for instance, the parents of school children. Ask them what a precious education means, if their children will be locked up in a tyrannic society?
        Kind regards, Harry

      • 344thBrother says:

        Why are you and your sisters so different Sibel? Here’s one thought on it.

        I once attended a week long group therapy program for a friend. During the course/therapy sessions the primary topic was “Co-dependency” (The tendency of people who love an addict to become part of the addictive process by not letting the addict “Hit bottom” and then hopefully recover.)

        One of the parts of that group was the claim that children in a family have a tendency to find archetypal roles for themselves. “The Hero” “The clown” “The ghost” “The rebel” etc. . and that if a role is filled when they come into the world, a child tends move toward another of those positions and fills it. This resonated heavily with a majority of the people in the group including myself.

        Does that make sense to you?


  3. Why would people not opt-out? You said it all, very well. The barriers, based in fear – of confrontation, of being single-out, of ridicule; terrorized by ‘terrorism’ and peer pressures. Is conformity one of the main impediments? Absolutely. So how can we overcome all of these psychological barriers, these spectres in the minds of the many. Well the long road and the long answer is in something we’ve been discussing and something alluded to in your podcast music, ‘We don’t need no thought control.’

    But other than the education system itself, what kinds of actions can we take today? Well, in regards to the TSA x-ray machine, not only did the X-ray implementation go according to plan, but the ‘opt-out’ movement… barely moved anything. Or did it? Perhaps it did in fact plant some seeds that may flower at a later time in some minds of the masses with more and more nourishing. And Mgr brings up a good point, the demonstration of courage. That makes impressions, even on beef cattle.

    But in addition to the psychological barriers and pacification, I’d add one of the psychological tactics embedded in the ‘opt-out’ option, is that it is often, in a way, a false positive, and in some cases, the worse of two evil options. Using the example of the TSA, the opt-out is a gross violation of personal physical space. The analysis of my naked body is certainly invasive as well. But the point is, the ‘opt-out’ is not a bed of roses, in this case, its a bed of nails, keeping the masses moving through those expensive ‘imaging’ machines.

    I’d say something we can do and most likely actually are doing is to lead by example. Actually act. In the case of Sibel’s TSA example, you actually acted and informed people on ‘opt-out’. Met with opposition and ridicule, but did it no less. Fearless. In the case of education, actually homeschool or opt-out of common core. And again with this example, we are merely sowing the seeds. It’s the slow road, but it is a solid path.

    The problem with addressing something like in the example of the TSA, is that the TSA is merely a symptom of a much bigger problem and I know you mentioned this, but if a TSA movement was successful, would that have any real lasting effect on the attitudes of the masses? Is the TSA an ingredient in the system? Or simply something that came out of the oven? What are the ingredients of the TSA meat loaf? I suppose this is a full circle, as I see the ingredients comprising mostly of the people themselves. The psychological barriers. But perhaps by soothing over a symptom, that may create the energy needed to make more energy for bigger healing moves at the core.

    • “I’d say something we can do and most likely actually are doing is to lead by example.”- Exactly. I am with you. Those of us from this camp be willing to be those ‘First’ ones. And as you said, to keep at it. Regardless of discouraging results, don’t let it fizzle. I guess the acceptance of ‘it won’t happen over night.’ Of course, easier said than done. Ask my husband, after each Opt Out experience, I spend a few hours being ‘disgusted’ with the majority, keep saying, ‘look at them, and you wonder why we are where we are today??!!’ …

      “the TSA is merely a symptom of a much bigger problem” – you bet. TSA= one of the symptoms. This is one of the most important topics: trying to address and chasing the symptoms rather than tackling the darn main disease . This is why I emphasized that the two examples (Opt Out) are two mini small steps, that ‘may’ bring us closer to the beast. I guess it boils down to: tacking the entire system as a whole, at once, versus, tackling little bits and pieces here and there. We have to consider both. For many people, with the macro one, the disease itself, the objective becomes too big and overwhelming to consider. And for those I throw in these Opt Out examples as opportunities ( easier ones) to participate in and tackle. With the irate minority, us, it goes up to the macro causes.

      • ‘We have to consider both.’ Definitely, I see value in this now. I’ve always approached this as a symptom/core-problem issue, in that, I would say forget the symptoms, and just focus on the core. But if the symptoms are so vast and in such numbers as we see today, perhaps we need address symptoms as we tackle the core. In other words, if peoples’ fears are ingredients that go into the baking of these damned muffins(eg. TSA) in the kitchen of governement, we can tackle the poisonous muffins and the very ingredients used to make them(us/fears), and of course the farm fields (schools/education) from which these ingredients flourish. And in doing this, we make great changes… and we haven’t even addressed the kitchen yet… interesting, so maybe the kitchen goes out of business? Or simply with more… healthy ingredients, produces healthy muffins…. hmmm food for thought i suppose.

  4. Sibel: I’d like to go off topic for a few sentences before I get to My “OPT OUTS”.
    I just realized last night that THIS THREAD WITH YOU AS ANCHOR IS A REVOLUTIONARY ACT!! Why? There is NO blog wherein the KEY PRINCIPAL(that would be YOU) INTERACTS on a minute by minute basis with the COMMENTERS IN REAL TIME!! And we happen to have THE MOST CLASSIFIED WOMAN IN AMERICA and an author with INTEGRITY! Don’t get me wrong here. Of course I am offering deep respect for you, but I am also a little selfish–I wish to hang/comment with intense commenters-namely the ones we have here for the last 5 episodes. This inspires me. Further–and this means a great deal for me-PLEASE ASK ANY PERSON WITH A “NAME’ to simply MAKE A COMMENT IF THEY WANT ON THIS THREAD. Granted, I’ve “been around”, etc., but any known person-e.g., James C.(his brilliance notwithstanding), Peter B., Gavin, Guillermo, et. al on your blog should NOT BE INTRODUCED AS “EXPERTS” .Hell, I don’t care if it is N. Chomsky, Chris Hedges, M. Hudson, Max Keiser and Stacy, Vladamir Putin, or the bloody queen of England! They get to COMMENT just like the rest of us. For me it is SIBEL AND CO. NOBODY IS AN EXPERT HERE.
    THIS IS HOW WE KEEP THE THREAD REVOLUTIONARY, IMO. As long as we stay the way we are, which includes semantic entanglement , uncertainty, arguing-WE STAY ON THE CUTTING EDGE OF SOMETHING
    And obviously, being a paid subscriber-no matter how little-keeps the trolls at bay. Of course, if we get too threatening, the DEEP STATE will generate all kinds of crap. ‘Cross that bridge if we come to it. My suggestion to all who read this comment is to think of yourselves as “in the Revolution” whenever you comment!
    Regarding your “opt outs”, I really can’t say much about the TSA opt out. Of course, it’s part of the ever growing Police state-but I seldom fly these days–I’m on a fixed income, so the act of opting out for that policed item is not close.
    COMMEN CORE? this is a beast for concerning parents. If this were going on some 45 years ago, I don’t think I would simply tell the “authorities” that my precious child will “opt out” from COMMEN CORE and let her go off to school and be ostracized. I would figure out a way to get in their face! Many of my friends would be doing the same thing. This was Berkeley in the 60s-70s! My daughter would be ostracized only if they could get through me and a little help from my friends. Ergo, I suggest that parents who wish to opt out today get in touch with an OPT OUT NETWORK if it exists, and commit to having you or a representative of you visit the school regularly! The public school system is already a ” prison”. Opting out may wind up being “solitary confinement” for a small child! That is a huge NO-NO!!
    As for my OPT OUTS, I’ll simply mention one. After living in S East Asia 62-64 (peace corps, Philippines) I saw the horror of Viet Nam coming and when I returned home I had to deal with my Draft Board, since I wished to OPT OUT of Military service. I’ll spare you the details…but it was a challenge–‘never did wind up in the military, though.
    THANKS SIBEL: I think you got something here. Let’s see if we can make it last.

    • Ron, I feel the same. In the last 6-7 years (Since 2008), I’ve turned down 90% of interview requests (99% of this 90% from the alternative outlets). After 6 years of being asked ‘Tell us about why you blew the whistle and your journey’ … I simply can’t stand going over that again. It feels like being a storyteller or entertainer. That’s why whenever I give speeches (rarely) I start with 10-15 minutes of intro, and then I say: Now we’ll continue this with @Q & A session. For me, the Q & A session means interaction, it means a two-way street: we ask each other and we learn from each other. Believe me or not, in many cases, I have left a session feeling that I’ve learned more than them.

      So, yes. Most definitely. I have been thirsty/hungry for this.

      And you are right about our community here. I encourage you to go and visit the last few episodes on James C.’s YouTube’s comment section, including the interview with me. I could never, ever, post a comment or response in forums like that. It gets ugly, shallow, and discourages participation from people who can contribute a lot. For example: I consider myself a big opponent of Israel as a state and Zionist. But some people there use some very ugly language attacking religion, Jewish people, in such a way that hurts and damages any legitimate critiques of Israel.

      Did you get a chance to visit Vietnam? I lived there for a year. You may like this blog site I documented some of my travels and activities (kind of anonymously):

      We implemented mobile libraries in village schools, and I researched and filmed Agent Orange, victims and related activists ….

      Schools: Well, you are looking at my current ‘local’ activism project. I may be eventually pushed out, but I ain’t going away that easily;-)

      • No, I never visited Viet Nam–it was beginning to get “hot”(fire fights/small battles anywhere!)in June of 1964. And being used to living off the grid(no electricity) in the Southern Philippines- half way to Borneo from Manila, I would’ve wanted to explore the hinter areas. But I knew I would get shot, eaten, or whatever-not knowing if the shooter was a Vietnamese Revolutionary(i.,e., part of the NFL–National Liberation Front) or a Special Ops American sniper. It was what we called a “shit storm”–excuse my French. So I headed to Hong Kong, Japan(the “friendly western
        climes as per J.C.), Hawaii then the mainland. Seems like a dream now

      • 344thBrother says:

        Off subject but ON Vietnam and Agent Orange:
        Sibel, I have heard that when the USA left Vietnam, they had lots of unused barrels of Agent Orange left over and they dumped them into drinking water sources. (“Down the wells”) have you heard anything about this.

        Horrific, but not unlike the pattern we see with deep well injection of toxics for “Fracking”.


        • Dave, I am not aware of that, but plausible.

          Another deadly leftover: mines; left everywhere. So many farmers lose legs/arms, while farming the mined land (including those in the water; where they still use water buffalos). The number of people on wheelchairs is mindboggling …

    • arealjeffersonian says:


      All I need to say is BRAVO, so well said.

      • Arealjeffersonian, thanks man! “need to keep this baby movin’

      • Ron,

        I’d like to second Arealjeffersonian’s “Bravo”! I have been intently following Sibel’s new series and these magnificent discussion threads (although I haven’t posted much myself). Until recently I was convinced that intelligent discourse in America was dead, however, I am thrilled to know that pockets of critical thinkers still exist (I guess we are all frogs who realized that this damn water is getting hot)! And to have Sibel responding in real time is an honor to say the least!


  5. arealjeffersonian says:

    Now we get to the meat of the issue – barriers to revolution. And you’ve defined them so well. How do we, those who see the system as failed, go about convincing those who agree but are unwilling to act, to act? Maybe all we can do, and should do, is to simply do our part, however small, so others will see that they are not the first, or the only one, to engage in whatever action is appropriate to the moment, whether that is opting out of the x-ray scanner on our next trip through an airport, or opting our children out of Common Core testing, or speaking up at the next PTA meeting, or participating in a local protest movement, or if we have the means and conviction – tossing our hats in the ring and running for local, state or national office, knowing full well the obstacles – or posting comments on this site to share our views with others. Who knows how many others will see or hear each of us and reach their comfort level to rise to their own convictions.

    Sibel, you do us all an enormous service, and I for one, will opt out of the x-ray scanner at the next opportunity – see, its already working.

    • arealjeffersonian; it appears like you answered your own question. Your hat is in the ring! If you build self-consciousness daily always falling back on your own integrity as a base, as it were…you will by definition become more of a calm, cool Revolutionary. This is because you will be constantly working on your earlier brain programming. For most of us this programming was at least 20 years! And for too many, unfortunately it lasts for life. This subconscious brain programming takes WORK to partially dissolve–one has to actually realize it in an existential sense–feel it …actually somehow verify it and struggle not to fool yourself…energy and a certain discipline are required–precision, even.
      “My brain has been programmed…the MSM won’t stop, social mores, peer pressures, meeting expectations of others…etc., etc., “the slings and arrows”… This stuff is relentless…so I stay more and more aware…I make mistakes…I stumble…I lose my self, then comeback…”
      A crucial dynamic develops. Most humans cannot see it. It cannot be measured. If you keep at it, you will leave a “wake” behind your time line. This “wake”(as in a ship’s wake) is crucial. Take Sibel, for example–she leaves an INTEGRITY WAKE. She may be convinced that 99.9% of the people she met in Bend, care little about her comments. My money says more than a few people there will fleetingly remember something she uttered. These few/several then begin to wonder. You have no idea how many people came to a realization about something you DID or said. Integrity will create ripples and the Locked-in zombies who run the deep state fear you. “A frightened dog will bite!” So we need to know “the enemy.”

  6. treefrog12 says:

    Sibel, are body scanner Opt Out leaflets, like the ones you distributed in the airports, still available? And if so, where can I find them? I’m wondering if providing the information to people with whom we are already acquainted, before they even enter the airport, would be a slightly more effective way to inspire protest?

  7. The system we are in, here in the US, is weighted down with institutional inertia and becoming ever more so. Revolutionary change absent widespread discontent is challenging — akin to dog paddling out to to bow of an aircraft carrier intent on altering its course. Whether it’s the TSA with its intentional humiliations or Common Core’s departure from common sense, these institutional forms typically do not arrive by happenstance. The TSA and body scanners came in as a response to the infamous “underwear bomber” and anyone who has heard Kurt Haskell’s eyewitness account of that event understands it to be a fraud. John Gatto repeatedly stated that there is no correlation between standardized testing (a CC staple) and future success — hence, another fraud. Elite private schools — you know, where Gates’ kids go — have dropped standardized testing excepting as a pro-forma basis, and certainly don’t rely on them to measure progress. After the WMD hoax-war and the shock and shame of the US torture program I really started looking at 9/11. Wherever one comes down on that, the lying is/was manifest and the facts we as a community have gathered do not support the official narrative. A huge fraud that cleaves the nation, “Either you’re with us, or you’re with the terrorists.” As an aside, in one of Gatto’s lectures he suggests that when WH spokesman Ari Fleischer warned at a news conference that, in response to some heated questions and skepticism, people “should be careful what they say”, somebody should have pulled a gun and shot Fleischer through the forehead (some hyperbole on John’s part). So then I think “what else are they lying about?”, and it sets me off to look at every major event I can think of since JFK’s assassination when I was 7. In nearly each and every case there exists substantial evidence to support typically fatal, alternative narratives. Well that’s quite a pickle. Sibel talks about it, we all have, of the disconnect and isolation one feels after losing so many illusions and trying to share what you’ve discovered with those still immersed in the myths.

    “Whatever you do, regardless of how insignificant it may seem, it’s important that you do it.” — Gandhi

    Opt out? Hell, yeah, every time. Courage is contagious.

    “Be the change you want to see in the world.” — Gandhi

    A long friend of mine actually refined Gandhi’s sentiment and says:

    “You change the world by living in it.”

    Like the ripples in a pond one has NO CHOICE but that their life will reverberate and influence others whether in good ways or otherwise. Those ripples are our immortality. There’s some really good ripples rolling around in here.

  8. andrei_tudor says:

    Here’s one other reason for the sheepish behavior: no sense of responsibility for society. Mgrdichian said it well, it takes courage to be different, and courage comes from deep convictions, be they religious or of a different kind. Courage can come from the belief that there are bigger stakes in the world than one’s material / mental comfort, and from the realization that one’s behavior has relevance. Once this idea has been internalized, it becomes easier to accept the so-called “negative” consequences of standing out.

    I suppose the incessant consumerist propaganda that we’re being bombarded with has eroded our sense of responsibility for the world we live in. We are conditioned to see ourselves as the sum of the egotistical impulses we feel, and as such fulfillment in life is equated with satisfying as many of these impulses as possible – satisfaction being most easily be achieved by consumption. The added benefit of staying in this mindset is acceptance by society, the feeling of being “normal”, with normalcy being defined by the same ads that push us into consumerism (and other means, such as public education). I guess what I’m trying to say is that there’s a conscious effort to provide a definition for what a human being should be, and that definition is purposely manipulated for the twin purposes of profit making and pacification. Any impulse that runs counter to these aims is outside the box that defines normal behavior. “Brave New World”, anyone? I have to read that book again.

    How do we counter this type of conditioning? I’m not sure. It’s effective, because it rests on basic human instincts – greed, need for acceptance, envy. I guess it starts by recognizing that, while the impulses that drive us into this instant gratification mindset are real, and powerful, there is more to each one of us. We are also capable of self restraint, sacrifice, and critical thinking, and we have been conditioned to emphasize the former and bury the latter.The payoff for living consciously is far greater than material gratification, but this is something that needs to be experienced – the first few steps must be taken first.

    Hopefully this rant made some sense.

    • I think you summed it up rather well, andrei_.

      I’m thinking in prior times the King or sovereign was accustomed to turning to the clergy to “say something” to calm or alternately stir the masses. Mass broadcast media has only been around 100 years or so and newspapers a bit longer. My guess would be that the elite understood quite early the value of controlling the media and its messages.

    • tonywicher says:

      Andrei, I wouldn’t call your “rant” a rant. I would call it a thoughtful statement. It makes plenty of sense to me. I hope this response also does: Yes, there is consumerism instead of a sense of responsibility for society. There is no sense of “we” as a country caring about each other, through our public institutions such as public education, or – as we once had – a national bank to regulate the national economy for the purpose of economic growth and prosperity for all. This feeling of being part of a nation now only comes in the context of war.

      • andrei_tudor says:

        I just thought of some terms that better express the meaning I was trying to convey in the original post: users of society vs. builders of society. My feeling is that we cast ourselves, mostly subconsciously, into one of these two roles in our relationship with the society we live in. A user’s rational modus operandi is to cope with the existing state of affairs as best they can, since there is no hope of influencing its direction anyway. A builder on the other hand is more likely to consider the effects of his / her actions not just on themselves, but on society at large as well. So now, if we take two well meaning individuals, one from each group, and put them in a body scan line-up, who is more likely to opt out?

    • Andrei….Not a rant at all…much good ,real stuff in your words. Anyway here and now(the clock is ticking) “RANT” some more!!

    • “We are conditioned to see ourselves as the sum of the egotistical impulses we feel, and as such fulfillment in life is equated with satisfying as many of these impulses as possible – satisfaction being most easily be achieved by consumption.” – See more at:

      Andrei –
      Briliant statement and so accurate! Your post sums up the last 100 + years going back to people such as Edward Bernays and Ivy Lee who arguably helped usher in the age of amnesia – anesthesia that we currently occupy – and that is what scares me to death. I feel as if we are firmly entrenched in Huxley’s Brave New World – somma anyone?


  9. andrei_tudor says:

    Learned helplessness plays a part in the lack of initiative as well. We’ve come to expect institutional solutions to all our problems. Feeling sick? Go to the doctor. Child needs to learn how to skate? Take him to skating lessons. Need food? Go to the supermarket. The upshot of this reliance on institutions is that we just don’t know any more how to act outside a controlled, unregulated setting. This is especially true in an urban environment, it may be different in the countryside where the institutional mesh is not so tight.

  10. tonywicher says:

    I have loved the Pink Floyd song since my college days in 1967. That was where I tuned on, tuned in and dropped out with Tim Leary. Even with all the LSD, I somehow made it to a master’s degree, but it was only by sheer inertia. I have never dropped back in. I like it out here. I am proud of being an independent thinker, a light to myself. I follow no one, but keep an open mind and listen to what others have to say. A lot of people are right about some things, but nobody is right about everything, and we all have to think for ourselves. Not to do so makes one a sheep instead of a thinking human being – one who will ultimately be sheared and led to the slaughter. Our school are turning out such sheep, and things have been getting steadily worse since that song came out.

    The U.S. public school system was once the envy of the world. It was the essence of the promise of equal opportunity on which our country was founded – the idea that even the poorest, most uneducated families could send their children to a school where they would receive an education equivalent to that of rich and educated families. Our second President, John Adams, said “The whole people must take upon themselves the education of the whole people and be willing to bear the expenses of it. There should not be a district of one mile square, without a school in it, not founded by a charitable individual, but maintained at the public expense of the people themselves.” Is this “socialism”? Well, yes. Adams regarded it as national social priority for every single citizen to be educated. An educated citizenry is the foundation of both democracy and a growing economy. These fine ideas, at the time very new to the world, were adopted and practiced for two hundred years. They were good ideas and they are still as true as ever. What happened to our public education system? I would say it is the same thing that has happened to our whole society. We have lost our revolution and lost our republic to what is historically the same corporate oligarchy against which we revolted, and our school system reflects the values of this corporate ruling class, which wants sheep, not thinking citizens.


  11. Damon Bean says:

    I really have not had the time for an adequate response to to these podcasts and excellent comments, but I do have the time to share a great article and suggest that the oath keepers organization is actually taking action ( and not just talking) on many of the points that have been made in this whole discussion. Its an education in action and reflection that has been going on for several years. It is worthy of all of our attention as things unfold, if not our active support .
    (This article was written by Brandon Smith and originally published at

    My work and my thoughts lately have turned toward a now constant focus on the concepts of organization, more in respect to underlying philosophy rather than hard, fast rules and structures. If you are one of the slithering acolytes of political theory elitist Saul Alinsky (and you haven’t felt the inclination to jump face first into the nearest punji pit), then the primary tool of organization for you is to lie, and to lie often. Tricking people into action using false premises, telling people what they want to hear rather than opening their eyes to reality, is perhaps the easiest way to build a movement. Of course, that movement will eventually destroy itself as the lies begin to inhibit progress rather than inspire it. But in most cases, by the time the organization self-destructs it has already been exploited for the nefarious purpose it was intended.

    For the liberty movement, the movement against globalization and forced centralization of financial and political power, lies are simply not an option. The internationalists have already cornered the market on lies, so we must take a completely contrary approach. We must organize around the truth, no matter how painful it happens to be. This is a much more difficult prospect, one many people don’t understand or appreciate.

    There are a lot of complaints in the movement about the lack of what they consider effective organization, and the frustration is in some ways beginning to evolve into fear. Here are some core inconsistencies I believe are at the heart of organizational problems within the liberty movement and what we can do to solve them.

    Re-examining Our Concept Of Real Organization

    For multiple generations, Americans and most of the rest of the world have been conditioned to believe that organization is a top-down affair that requires a central leadership that hands orders across the ranks of a rigid structure. The people within the structure operate as parts of a greater machine, and the success of the machine is (supposedly) directly related to how close the smaller parts (people) work together and follow those orders. Unfortunately, many activists in the liberty movement also assume that this is what an organization is and how it works.

    Surely, there is a need for people with a talent to inspire others to thought and to action. But these men and women are nothing unless they can motivate individuals to eventually take their own initiative without orders. A true leader is a teacher — nothing more. And if he really cares about the future prosperity of the people he is teaching, that teacher’s objective will be for his students to exceed his own capabilities and to become independent in their accomplishments.

    For a movement driven by a desire for the preservation of freedom and sovereignty, organization requires structure, but not rigidity or centralized leadership. The collectivist model of the human machine or hive is a flawed model that oppresses individual contributions that could be revolutionary. The corporate model, for instance, is a perfect example of an organization built mostly on lies (just look at the inconsistencies of real debts versus real profits for most major companies) and that fuels itself on the integration of people as replaceable gears and bolts on a rusted, shuddering Ferris wheel ride. Corporations might appear to make money, but they never meet their ultimate potential as organizations because most of the people within them could not care less about the purpose or even health of the system as long as they continue to draw a paycheck. When an organization merely limps along on the thin thread of the survival principle, this is the opposite of success.

    The liberty movement has to abandon outmoded and ill-conceived notions of mainstream organizational models and take more stock in decentralized activity. A lack of an arbitrarily designated pecking order or the pyramid scheme of top-down branching management is a good thing for our cause, not a disadvantage.

    Legitimate Structure And Purpose

    Just because a movement is decentralized does not mean it should lack a foundation, and that foundation should be composed of a primary purpose and a primary plan of action. This is where some liberty activists seem to become most nihilistic in their thinking.

    They have been looking for top-down leadership, which doesn’t exist and shouldn’t exist. They have been looking for a set plan of attack, which no one can seem to agree on. And they moan relentlessly about what they see as the lack of a singular, universal vision of what the ultimate goal should be. I have heard the argument more than once that the liberty movement will fail because victory would require us to all agree on one ideological vision and a rather singular strategy. What they don’t appear to realize is that a vision and strategy already exist that most of us agree on.

    Again, our society has been conditioned to see through only a very narrow window of what constitutes organization that demands we adhere to the top-down philosophy. However, most liberty activists already agree on the bottom-up goal of self-reliance and self-sufficiency in all things, from food and water to education, security and governance.

    There will be no mass majority movement on Washington in a “V for Vendetta”-style march led by some heroic masked man. And even if there were, it would accomplish nothing unless the top of the globalist pyramid was toppled (Occupy Wall Street is a good example of how such theatrics fail). This goal of a mass awakening is a common fantasy and an impractical one; but self-sufficiency, mutual aid and mutual defense are realistic efforts, given the likely short amount of time we have left. The universal vision is right in front of our faces and always has been: to break away from the corrupt mainstream system, to remove our dependency, to provide our own necessities and, thus, to remove our consent.

    Every liberty proponent in America should be able to pursue this goal without prompting from any centralized leadership, and it encompasses every aspect of the fight against tyranny. Make your family self-sufficient and secure without aid of government. Make your neighborhood self-sufficient and secure. Make your town or county self-sufficient and secure. If the elites try to stop you, fight back and from a position on the moral high ground. If enough communities defend themselves the prospect of martial law or totalitarian control becomes systemically impossible, politically and strategically. I rarely run into liberty advocates who disagree with this plan, yet they do nothing and refuse to even make the attempt because they are still waiting around for someone to give them a plan. Stop waiting around for the next Gandhi or George Washington and do what you already know needs to be done. It is truly as simple as that.

    Changing Our Idea Of Leadership

    As stated earlier, you do not need a man on a white horse to ride in and save you from the terrifying idea of self-responsibility. If you are waiting for someone to come down off the mountain with magical stone tablets and lead you to the promised land, you are going to find yourself rather disappointed. Despite popular belief, men do not organize other men; only ideas given focus organize men. Men rally around that which they love or that which they hate. Leadership is often incidental, or sadly, manipulative.

    So, by extension, we can conclude that to develop a strong organization, the ideal must be honest and honorable, the plan must be decentralized and natural for individuals to implement, and those who coordinate the organizational efforts must do so with the realization that they are stewards of the principles of that movement and that those principles are more important than their glory. If activists plan to become followers of anything, it should be solid principles. Leaders are secondary.

    Destructive Egomania

    In my time in the movement, I have seen relatively good men with sound ideals exhibit insane behavior and absurd motives when exposed to a mere 15 minutes of fame. Ego is truly the greatest Achilles’ heel of any activist organization. This is a fact that corrupt governments are highly aware of.

    If you look into the history of the FBI’s subversive Cointelpro efforts from the 1950s onward, you will find a common tactic used to dismantle anti-establishment groups, which is to sow discord among organizers and coordinators by feeding egos and turning them against each other. Like the ring of power in the “Lord of The Rings” books, the desire for leadership can blind people to the greater cause. They develop delusions of grandeur, thinking they are the next guru, the next prophet, the next man to lead the charge to permanent historical stardom. Each person believes that if only he had the ring, if only he were the leader, he could resist the temptations of power and achieve what others could not. And so he refuses to work with others or to share the stage, or he even attempts to subvert or co-opt the legitimate accomplishments of more capable men.

    The only solution is to cast off the ring forever, to care nothing for the supposed glories of leadership and to work only for the betterment of others.

    I have also seen people within the movement fall victim to the admiration of their own fan base. Positive feedback from readers is certainly helpful, but I would be writing everything I write now even if every email I received were laced with vitriol (sometimes they are). The truth does not require fans; it functions fine without them. Liberty champions do, on occasion, receive letters of adoration — from being compared to Thomas Paine all the way to being labeled the next Jesus (the former being flattering and the latter being just plain weird). The problem is not public appreciation; it is the cult of celebrity that many Americans have grown too attached to, as well as the fact that some activists in more public positions have a hard time handling positive attention without their heads expanding 10 sizes too big.

    The fact is I don’t matter, liberty leaders and personalities don’t matter, the limelight doesn’t matter, and the level of our fan base doesn’t matter. All that matters is how effectively and efficiently we can get the facts to the public. Organization suffers when the cult of celebrity takes over, whether in the minds of activists or in the minds of the people who represent them in the media.

    Fear Of Risk Leads To Inaction

    In my work with groups such as Oath Keepers and its Community Preparedness Team program, I have taken what some might consider sizable risks, and I have witnessed others who have gone even further. And in this risk I have seen the kinds of progress in organization I have never seen anywhere else. Without risk, there can be no organization against tyranny and, thus, no chance of success. If you are afraid to be put on the naughty list in the National Security Agency database, if you are afraid you might lose your job, if you are afraid you might be labeled an “extremist” or if you are afraid of uneducated public perception and this has prevented you from building mutual aid and defense groups where you live, then you have already lost everything. Fear leads to inaction, and inaction is death.

    I have even witnessed members of organizations attempt to prevent others from taking positive measures like training for community defense because they are so fearful of what might happen due to their affiliation they will actually work against the better goals of the people around them. All I can say is that fear-driven people have to be removed from organizational environments, or they will poison the waters until the entire venture flatlines. Risk is inevitable. It is unavoidable. All anti-establishment, anti-tyranny movements depend on it. The more people willing to take risks, the more effectively “safe” that risk becomes. This includes the fear of defense and the fear of losing one’s life in the process. Every scenario, even the worst-case scenario, has to be considered and then set aside as irrelevant. Fear has no place in the minds or actions of liberty champions. Remove fear, and world-changing organization becomes possible.

  12. arealjeffersonian says:

    For those of you who have not seen it, I urge you to click on the link Sibel provided “”, then scroll down to the “Agent Orange, Apocalypse Still ” section and watch the video.

    Be forewarned – its not easy to watch in its entirety, but it is the most effective video on the continuing horrors of war that I have ever seen.

    And Sibel, we hear your voice in the background during the most disturbing 2nd half of the video, but who else was with you – doing the recording, and/or just there for support? Perhaps you could do a podcast at some point just on the story behind this video.

    • Jeffersonian, When I was in the other room, interviewing the parents, I had my Vietnamese translator/friend.

      For filming the boys: I was all alone. Filming, talking, and trying not to fall apart; not to cry.

      It was one of the most emotional moments in my life.

      We drove an hour, and then, we had to walk through the fields (no walk paths, just mud/plants) for 2.5 miles, after fighting an angry field buffalo who was not happy to see us there … under the sun, 110F with 95% humidity … while carrying my camera bags …. in order to reach the house. Not knowing what awaited for me in that room.

      It is one of those days/images that gets ingrained in your memory/psyche forever.

      • With your help, Sibel, we address the hidden initiatives of State and the nefarious means and motives employed. It can be a hard ‘sell’ to describe and explain some of what goes on behind the scenes to those here in the US who can’t imagine it or who don’t want to know. Then we have the gruesome consequences of State action that aren’t hidden at all — Vietnam — right there in plain sight for anyone to see. Thank you for carrying yourself and your heart to Vietnam and bearing witness.

  13. tonywicher says:

    It was the Kennedy and King assassinations and above all the endless pointless butchery of the Vietnam war that destroyed the constructive patriotic spirit of the youth of the nation back in the 60’s of Pink Floyd. Our love of country was destroyed by the fact that our leaders were liars and murderers, and their talk of “freedom and democracy” was disgusting hypocrisy. The nation has never recovered. Now perhaps it is time for the youth to realize that they cannot continue to exist as dropouts and anarchists who eschew power. They must organize to take power from those who murdered their leaders, crushed their spirits and sent them to war.

  14. dancingbrave says:

    Thank you Sibel to welcoming me to BFP in the third Probable cause.

    Difficult to progress on what has already been said in the comments on how you change peoples minds when the obvious is staring them in the face. I am sure if the mainstream media started to talk like the real alternative media on 9/11 then 90% of people would soon believe different from what the government are telling them, in only days.

    To have critical thinking is useful but how much critical thinking do you need to question whether a plane crashed at Shanksville, a five year old would say where’s the plane or where do you mean and look puzzled or amused if an adult showed photo’s of the crash site. The majority of grown ups habitually jump straight into conspiracy theory mode used as a derogatory term, which then instantaneously proves to themselves that whoever suggests that a plane never crashed is a little strange and an object of amusement. The strange thing of course is that by making somebody else the object of amusement they have then halted any further critical thinking of there own and missed the blatantly obvious- no wreckage means no plane crash!

    The fear of being laughed at seems a like a trivial way to view why people don’t even try to believe alternative views but satire is powerful and fear of being made fun of by your peers can also contribute. This could be just me but when Bush the younger said ‘Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists’ it was creepily funny, everyone knows no-one wants to be on the side of the terrorists. The fact that there was no plane but we are being told to believe there is, is creepily/funny. I think there is more to the creepy/funny side of this.

    • 344thBrother says:

      I hate to bring up George Orwell/Eric Blair but the guy was just so damned prescient.
      Crime-stop: A reflexive panic stop button in your mind that gets pushed whenever you’re beginning to think about anything that could be considered “Thought-crime”.

      And Double-think: The ability to simultaneously hold two opposite thoughts and call one into consciousness at a moments notice while letting the other subside and while believing both at the same time.

      The smartest people I’ve ever met in real life were victims of both of these mental firewall systems. One was a “Fracture safety Engineer” in other words he studied the breaking and shearing strengths and forces when applied to a variety of metals (In particular in military applications like landing gear for get planes etc. .) He was a fine man and a friend. It took me literally months to break through his conditioning to get him to admit that there was something wrong with the way the WTC towers shattered like uncooked spaghetti.

      First it was crime-stop: He would get mad and start shouting, or storm out or talk over me. Then it was double-think and he would proceed to tell me how much he knew about Fracture Safety and all the projects he worked on while ignoring the issue that the WTC Towers were total anomalies.

      Finally after lots of screaming and gnashing of teeth, he looked at me and said quietly “David I know what you’re saying but I just cannot go there”.

      So much for science and engineering.

      creepy/funny much?

  15. There is no more important component of control than peer pressure to conform to propagated norms. One way to enhance control is to gradually “evolve” norms towards the basest, darkest, most cowardly regions in the spectrum of human tendencies. Someone in this comment stream spoke of Liberty, a wonderful thing. The parasite PTB drag the meaning of Liberty through the gutter by redefining it as license. I fully expect in my lifetime to hear pedophilia defended in the state controlled media, in the name of Liberty, equal rights, free expression, and God help us, “diversity”.

    I grew up the 1960s when counter-culture became a “thing”. In practice, for those that weren’t there, it largely amounted to an alternative set of peer-pressure-enforced norms. I don’t think we had the term “controlled opposition” back then, because no one would have believed that was what was happening. They were saying, “do your own bag, man”, but in fact there was really just one big bag. Now that we’ve seen what children of the Sixties have do with political power, it’s a bit easier to see they were rooted in a synthetic revolution.

    We have a TSA because the majority tolerates it. We have a horrendously destructive War on Drugs because the People have failed to pull the rug out from under it via jury nullification, another wonderful thing and in fact a vital aspect of Liberty. We have a War on Terror which is in fact a War OF Terror, because the truth of how it was spawned and how it works is so horrific as to be The Secret Which Keeps Itself. If the truth is sufficiently unsettling, the mind retreats into denial, to the point of cognitive dissonance.

    Sibel speaks of a gradual revolution through increasing awareness, countering the public mis-education system in various ways, and so forth. Yes, good. Vital, in fact. However, it should be anticipated that it’s virtually impossible for this kind of thing to have a gradual, linear trajectory until it “wins”. The entrenched parasitic system it will be encroaching against is not made of stone and static, like some mountain which merely needs to be scaled one foothold at a time. The ruling culture is an amalgam of savage arrogance and unspoken fear bordering on panic, with a draconian internal expectation and enforcement of conformity. They not only fear the truth in the broadest sense, they fear each other simply because they’re savages who eat their own. They can be expected to react savagely to a perceived threat when it reaches some level of saturation.

    Pushing their fear buttons and making them react is definitely better than doing nothing, because anyone who plays chess knows the value of keeping your opponent on the defensive. When they are forced to react, there’s potential for them to make mistakes.

    A journey of a billion minds starts with one more person pulling their head out of … darkness, to put it politely. If I didn’t believe light ultimately conquers darkness, I wouldn’t be a subscriber nor commenter. That simple conclusion, believe it or not, is the final (I hope) outcome of an argument I’ve been having with myself.

    Too old, seen too much, but not giving up. Not ever.

    • “If the truth is sufficiently unsettling, the mind retreats into denial, to the point of cognitive dissonance.” – Another macro point that deserves its own episode. Excellent.

      Here is one of my analogies: You know how people develop amnesia after countering certain experiences/shock? Let’s say, a person who suffered sexual abuse by his/her father during childhood repressing that memory? It is the mind defense system/shield against reality to difficult/hard/harsh to face and absorb/process.

      We see examples of this within the state inflicted ugly shocks as well.

      I know so many people, no matter the evidence, cannot, do not want to, even consider the notion of their own state/gov inflicting horrifying shocks/actions to its people.

      Do you know how many times I have heard people saying: ” … but are you saying our gov participated, or even contributed, to the event of 9/11? That is despicable- for anyone to even entertain such thoughts …’

      Same with education: “How could you even think that the State can design a system for our kids meant to do negative A & B & C …?” or “Our gov would never knowingly allow poisons being approved and delivered to its people by pharma!”

      You are absolutely right, and I am glad you made the point here @ BFP. We shall expand upon that soon.

      • 344thBrother says:

        @Sibel you wrote:
        “”Do you know how many times I have heard people saying: ” … but are you saying our gov participated, or even contributed, to the event of 9/11? That is despicable- for anyone to even entertain such thoughts …’””

        Yep, crime-stop. And in the case of 911 I believe that it was installed with trauma based mind control via the media and the horrific tower collapses shown a thousand times to us all while we couldn’t sleep and just stared exhaustedly at the images on TV with Oh My God! and Screaming and shocked people wandering helplessly and the images of the 19 “Hijackers” being shown endlessly. And later the name of “Saddam Hussein” being used over and over in the same sentence as 911 while admitting in the same breath that he wasn’t involved in 911 resulting in over 70% of Americans believing he WAS involved in 911. Oh, we have been played like lab rats and it must have been endlessly amusing for them. The sick bastards.

        Once they got their nice hot wars going, it was all about “Support our troops! They fight for our freedoms!”

        Remember “They hate us for our freedoms.” G. Dubya Bush? Coincidence?


    • 344thBrother says:

      There is darkness everywhere, lots of it and it surrounds us all, but it only takes one candle to illuminate an entire room.

      I always liked that visual.

  16. 344thBrother says:

    OK I just watched episode 7, then 5 and 6 in that order. Not optimal, but that’s the way it worked out.
    I’m going to throw out the briefest possible comments on 5 and 6 here.

    Episode 5.
    Yes, Yes and Yes the School system supports the MCI, Big Pharma and the government. That seems glaringly obvious to me.

    See! I can be brief.
    Episode 6. Brief? Or not…
    On the question of why people conform even when it’s against their best interests and even when they don’t like it and have the option to opt out, I see 2 issues.

    1. We are taught conformity in schools. Big time. Surveillance for instance. When students take tests, what is the teacher doing? Surveilling the students so they don’t cheat. So students grow up believing that they’re not to be trusted as a group and that surveillance of them to make sure they’re not cheating is necessary. So much so that it’s not even questioned.

    Since we’re still on the issue of schooling, I’d like to mention my own experience as a teacher in Emergency Medical Services. I taught mostly Native American students who had very negative experiences in school. Reservations have pretty low academic standards overall. I would compare them to poor inner city schools in general.

    Anyway, so I had adult students who were terrified of taking tests. Most of them had marginal to poor reading skills and no public speaking skills at all and very poor writing/spelling/grammer skills. I had to teach them a highly technical skill and knowledge set and see that they performed lots of programmed skills tests with 90% success and an 80% pass/fail written test success rate.

    So, I did a lot of different things to try and get the students involved, but what I found most effective was to give a quiz every week, and instead of multiple choice tests, I would test on what we had discussed in class and read in the texts that week and about 90% of the questions were short (or long) answer with a few (Very few) TF or multiple choice questions thrown in. (I never asked a false question either, I wanted to make sure that the students remembered what was TRUE.)

    I would then have the students immediately grade their own tests. SHOCK!

    And they WERE shocked when I first did that. My view on this was, these are ADULTS (But the same should be said for school children) who would be treating patient’s life threatening emergencies with very little guidance in the field and far from the hospital. If they couldn’t be trusted to grade their own damn tests how could they be trusted with someone’s life? So, We went around the room and took turns reading the question and the answer the student gave. If it was unclear, or incorrect, I would ask if anyone else had a different answer.

    And then I would give the correct answer and there would be some discussion. If half of the class got the answer wrong, I assumed that the fault was with my teaching and not their learning and would throw that question out and we would discuss what I wanted them to learn right there and then (They were allowed to take notes on their test paper during grading). For those who had an answer that was significantly different from MY “Correct” answer I had a standing deal with the students that if they could argue that their answer made sense in the context that they understood the question and explain it to me out loud “In public” adequately, I would give them half credit for their answer. Most tests were 20 written answer questions with 5 points possible for written answer and 1 point for a TF or multiple choice question.

    Grading their own tests and arguing the issues encouraged them to debate me over my question, how they understood the issue, how they understood the language, or how they presented their rebuttal, and it held my feet to the fire to know the material better than they did. It also encouraged them to speak openly in the class without any penalty. What I found was that they really enjoyed grading their own tests and debating their answers with me and each other. Just to encourage class participation, I also told the students that if their answer was appropriate to the question and they could make me laugh, even if it was wrong, I’d give them a point.

    They then totaled up the scores, handed the tests in, I recorded the scores and handed them back immediately so they could study from them for the final and mid term.

    In the ten years that I taught EMS and related courses, I had a few people voluntarily drop out for various reasons but I never had anyone outright fail the final exams that were given by the certifying agency. So it must have worked. And it was fun. And I believe that it installed some pride that they hadn’t received from their regular schooling.

    So, there’s that. Critical thinking, public speaking, debate, humor, language and reading skills and trust all in one caboodle. I thought it was pretty cool. I loved teaching.

    Lastly, on the subject of “Why don’t people opt out and why conform?”

    I do know one psychological reason.

    This was proven when a famous violent crime case was studied In New York City in the 70’s or late 60’s.
    A young woman was stabbed to death in public, in front of 31 people and none of the people did anything to help. Psychologists tried to figure out why this was by using test subjects who were unaware they were being tested, they thought they were applying for jobs. There were groups of varying sizes in a cubicle filling out “Job applications” when a woman actor would start screaming for help in an adjoining cubicle. The Psychologists found that the larger the number of Job applicants there were in the cubicle the LESS likely anyone was to get up and respond to the pleas for help. They would look at each other, look around nervously and return to their paperwork once a certain critical mass of inertia was reached. I don’t recall the actual numbers, but the trend was clear. The more people there were in a public place the less likely any of those people were to help.

    That would surely apply to the public area of the TSA checkpoints and also the public area of school classrooms. If the adults are afraid of being singled out, I assume that fear would be transmitted to their children and one generation of conformists becomes the next generation teaching conformity.

    Very good and informative episodes once again Sibel. You do not disappoint and when I was off line through 3 whole episodes, I was really jonesing to get back and catch up. Probable Cause was the first place I came and the first downloads I made. I also find that I listen to them multiple times, because your delivery is so easy to follow and nicely thought out. You’re very easy to listen to and understand. I like your sense of humor as well. I’m very glad I joined the group again.

    Now, later today I will go back through the comments and try not to flood. For now, Hasta la vista.

    and Peace on earth

  17. Quoting Peter M. (above)
    “institutional inertia and becoming ever more so. Revolutionary change absent widespread discontent is challenging — akin to dog paddling out to bow off an aircraft carrier intent on altering its course. – What am image! Brilliant I’d love to see Jamiol turn that into a picture.

    Quoting Damon Bean (above)
    “Changing Our Idea Of Leadership As stated earlier, you do not need a man on a white horse to ride in and save you from the terrifying idea of self-responsibility. If you are waiting for someone to come down off the mountain with magical stone tablets and lead you to the promised land, you are going to find yourself rather disappointed. Despite popular belief, men do not organize other men; only ideas given focus organize men. Men rally around that which they love or that which they hate. Leadership is often incidental, or sadly, manipulative. So, by extension, we can conclude that to develop a strong organization, the ideal must be honest and honorable, the plan must be decentralized and natural for individuals to implement, and those who coordinate the organizational efforts must do so with the realization that they are stewards of the principles of that movement and that those principles are more important than their glory. If activists plan to become followers of anything, it should be solid principles. Leaders are secondary.” … to achieve such victory I think participants acting from within the system such as 344thBrother (above) crucial because it is the form of organizing that is in part the subliminal criminal here. (censorship as form etc.)

    Chinese New Year is here so I have the pleasure of catching up on my information intake and BFG is always a first stop for a mass overdose of food (for thought) and I must say these threads are INSPIRING for many reasons: thanks to Sibel for this new podcast series it is a revolutionary treat and thanks to all of the commenters.
    Not that you need thanks a poem maybe…feel the rusty cogs in my mind grunting to one another, gesturing grind. Turn, turn, turn comes the echo from within and then c o n s c I o u s n e s comes as the cogs reel,revolution hums.

  18. It’s been interesting to follow the discussions above regarding leaders and followers. For whatever reasons, historical, family and/or inborn traits, Sibel is a leader, and against conformity.
    With respect to followers against common core, the MIC, dubious wars, indoctrination, CIA torture and so forth, I have basically one question, which I’ll come to:
    (Question) Let’s say I phrase this for today, for people who desire to migrate to the US from South Korea, from Canada, from countries in Europe with medium to “high” standard of life (as understood in socio-economic or “materialist” terms), I sometimes wonder if they know things are wrong in major ways in the US and knowingly “walk-into” a “rigged system”, or alternatively, these migrants DON’T KNOW how rigged the USA system is at the top-level, and harbor the ideal “go to the US for a better life, because the US is the freest and best country in the World” ?
    I ask this because Iive across the Vermont-Maine- New York State US border with Canada in the Province of Quebec. Having come to some sort of “enlightenment” journey over 10 years and more, I personally very much prefer living in Canada. It’s not about the US people, it’s about TPTB in the US. And I’m in no way implying that Canada doesn’t have its faults; for me, I know Canada (and the faults) somewhat well, so why bother moving?

    • Mariotrevi,

      You bring up an excellent point. Another one to consider as a sub-topic for a podcast edition. I am going to try, and come up with a few possible explanations/hypotheses as a first generation immigrant:

      1- I’d say majority of immigrants come here for ‘economic’ reasons. I have met, know, hundreds of first generation immigrants who have come here for econ opportunities. Many of them, the ones I know, do not like various aspects, and say things like: “As soon as we make enough money, have savings, we want to go back because …’For some that ‘because’ is: tradition and values. For ex: This country is hell for older people; in our home country you have human touch, you are not thrown into isolation/unwanted once you reach certain age.

      2- Many immigrants come from countries far-far worse: war-torn countries, monarchies, military dictators … and many things in life being ‘relative’: this is the land of freedom and safety/security; a refuge.

      3-Back to the point of ‘relativism’: I can tell you from my own experience, based on education in 3 other countries, with all its terrible characteristics and shortcomings, the school system is better with more freedom (For ex: corporal punishment was a norm in those countries).

      The question boils down to: do we compare an entity to those much worse, and say ‘hey, it is so much worse in X, Y, Z, places … stop complaining and count your blessings?’ or, do we say: ‘We always, constantly, try to achieve better.’?

      When I compare the public schools here to those in Scandinavian nations, and its success, I say, ‘Why don’t we?’ I know it is not a matter of cost; we spent far more, far-far more than them. Then what is it that prevents us?

      Back to the notion of ‘It is bad, and so much better than X, Y, Z, so we should overlook its bad.’ I have had a few proud nationalistic Americans telling me: ‘Seriously, you of all people should appreciate what we’ve got here and stop complaining, considering where you came from.’ Some even go further, ‘You don’t like it, then get out and go back to the hell hole you came from!’ I’m serious.

      Again, astute observation and question. Also, it is so good to have BFP members from UK, Canada, Turkey, New Zealand … even South Africa, bringing in their experiences, perspectives; enriches us all.

      • mariotrevi says:

        I appreciate your positive feedback. Because of my on-line activism in telling things as I see them regarding the US under my real name, and also because of stories of police misbehavior in the US, I admit to being cautious-minded about hypothetical travel to the US, say for tourism.
        I studied in California 1986-1991. I never imagined then that some day I’d think twice before going to the US. However, today it’s just not the same, especially if the hypothetical tourist travel to the US was just me, on my own.

  19. steven hobbs says:

    Social / psychological obstacles that disincentivize opting out or acting toward change are learned helplessness, conformity, and self-fulfilling prophecy. In a previous post, a distinction was made between belief and thought, the former not requiring thinking or evaluation. Let’s add belief to the list (although it may be subsumed under conformity). This is to make a distinction that truth, thought, and awareness don’t matter to some. They will believe what they have believed no matter the evidence; even if they see it with their own eyes, thought doesn’t matter, awareness is out of the questions, what matters is belief. “No Galileo, there are no moons circling Jupiter.”

    Cognitive science posits: fact matters little for political opinion. What matters is fear response, and emotion arising from believed narratives, save for critical thinkers. “Group think,” that is, conformity of thought is not mediated by conscious awareness of choice, let alone critical thinking. It’s also interesting to note that authoritarians, and those with little intelligence, have greater stress (and little tolerance) with cognitive dissonance. Those who are highly socially conservative (as opposed to laze fair conservatives) abhor change, and likewise have difficulty with countervailing or iconoclastic evidence. To threaten someone’s core beliefs in beneficent big brother, may be so intimidating to their existential foundations of identity and safety that they may kill the messenger.

    I spoke with a cop once about the reasons some cops become so enraged and brutal with protesters. I suggested that the cops were intimidated. He couldn’t get the concept. Sometimes, ideas are intimidating and authoritarians choose to eliminate the propagation of ideas.

  20. Akihito Mekata says:

    Hello,Sibel-San, your site is fantastic. What I learned is in short word ”Critical Thinking” and also “Opt out” which relates to most people follow crowds, so government can easily control and brain wash, as most of us are now being used to being sheep.

Speak Your Mind