The latest strange developments about Elizabeth Smart.

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: Millennium

I can tell you don't understand things at all. Brainwashing isn't something that just magically causes you to do a complete reversal in your beliefs. It is a systematic breakdown of everything you know and believe. For it to happen you have to ALLOW it. Many POWs in Vietnam were put through rigorous torture and never gave in. Part of you has to start accepting what you are told. Hey the German people did what they did voluntarily. They didn't have to do it, nor allow Hitler to continue his crap.

Every POW held in the Hanoi Hilton told their captors everything they wanted to know. They signed every document put before them. The vietnamesse were not trying to brainwash their captors they were trying to punish and extract information. To be brainwashed you do not need to allow it to happen you simply have to be traumatized emotionaly/mentally enough to break down the cognitive reasoning control so that programability occurs. You simply cannot avoid this. Everyone can be broken. Every single person in this world is capable of being reprogrammed in this manner. Give me two months in a nice dark room with you in chains and I could break you and rebuild your personallity into something completely opposite of everything you believe in. All it takes is the proper amount of emotional and physical stress along with properly executed programming.

I suggest you consult sources before you comment on this again. May I suggest you do some reading on the Stanford Prison experiment conducted as a research project in 1971. Here is a Link to a website devoted to it.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: rahvin

Originally posted by: Millennium

I can tell you don't understand things at all. Brainwashing isn't something that just magically causes you to do a complete reversal in your beliefs. It is a systematic breakdown of everything you know and believe. For it to happen you have to ALLOW it. Many POWs in Vietnam were put through rigorous torture and never gave in. Part of you has to start accepting what you are told. Hey the German people did what they did voluntarily. They didn't have to do it, nor allow Hitler to continue his crap.

Every POW held in the Hanoi Hilton told their captors everything they wanted to know. They signed every document put before them. The vietnamesse were not trying to brainwash their captors they were trying to punish and extract information. To be brainwashed you do not need to allow it to happen you simply have to be traumatized emotionaly/mentally enough to break down the cognitive reasoning control so that programability occurs. You simply cannot avoid this. Everyone can be broken. Every single person in this world is capable of being reprogrammed in this manner. Give me two months in a nice dark room with you in chains and I could break you and rebuild your personallity into something completely opposite of everything you believe in. All it takes is the proper amount of emotional and physical stress along with properly executed programming.

I suggest you consult sources before you comment on this again. May I suggest you do some reading on the Stanford Prison experiment conducted as a research project in 1971. Here is a Link to a website devoted to it.

Not true. Sorry, but they all DID NOT break. The rest of your mindless paragraph was pure chest beating and an attempt to discredit me without a single shred of evidence. I guess you are still mad when I told you that she WAS taken out of state and that would give the Feds jurisdiction. They had some dickless moron on MSNBC that tried to say the Feds and Utah would have concurrent jurisdiction. Not likely.

BTW, I first read about the Stanford Prison Experiment three of four years ago. It still doesn't change my opinion. It is ONE study and nothing more. I suggest YOU do some reading on those who have Stockholm Syndrome or who are battered(Karla Holmolka, Patty Hearst, David Ray's victims and his wife, and numerous other people). Thanks you, but I have done plenty of research and your opinion is based on one study.

Were you going to give me a link to your BULLSH1t claim that all those POWs in Vietnam were broken?

 

[amexblue]

Okay. She was under this guy's spell, some kinda syndrome, brainwashed, etc., I believe till this point. She recites some verses, tells the Cops that she is not Ms. Smart, etc., ok she is still under his spell.

How come she gets out of his spell after Cops take her into custody (or whatever)? how come she remembers her parents, siblings, etc.,
She is all smiles in the photographs with her family. Weird syndrome, this is...

 

[styrafoam]

Did anyone see the kidnapper's x-wife, stepdaughter, and children on Larry King? Wife was beaten, told by her church leaders not to leave the relationship, work things out. Step-daughter was molested and told "if you don't want this to happen to your siblings you will keep quiet", facts came out after the divorce. Charges were dropped. Biological son and daughter were abandoned, they said they basicly had nothing to do with him, did not love him, and wanted no contact with him.

 

[Morph]

Originally posted by: styrafoam
Did anyone see the kidnapper's x-wife, stepdaughter, and children on Larry King? Wife was beaten, told by her church leaders not to leave the relationship, work things out. Step-daughter was molested and told "if you don't want this to happen to your siblings you will keep quiet", facts came out after the divorce. Charges were dropped. Biological son and daughter were abandoned, they said they basicly had nothing to do with him, did not love him, and wanted no contact with him.

I really don't think you have your story straight, because I heard the step-daughter speak on the news and she clearly said that she left the home because she didn't feel comfortable with the way he acted towards her, but she was never molested by him. Unless this is a different stepdaughter.

 

[styrafoam]

She was blonde and wore lots of makeup. It was on Friday night 7:00pm MST. Lary interviewed all 4 of them at the same time for around 15 minutes. Her exact words were "He sexually molseted me." when asked about her relationship with Mitchell.

 

[Morph]

Ok, the one I saw on the news was a redhead. How many times was this guy married?

 

[jaeger66]

Originally posted by: Millennium

Did you have an argument or did you just feel like writing a paragraph of half-truths? Maybe in your old age you forgot how to think and it is affecting you ability to create a cogent argument. I didn't say they should have revolted. I said their own choices in WWI led to Hitler's rise to power and no one had the balls enough to stop him before it got too late. You can empathize with them all you want, but it doesn't change the facts of what happened. The Germans were 100% responsible for what happened, just like Patty Hearst was.

My argument is that you know nothing about the topic you're commenting on. You're just spouting the same G.I. Joe rhetoric that you always do. If I point a gun at your face and tell you to shut up, are you going to keep talking? No, I think not. Until you've lived enough to understand adversity, moral dilemmas, and personal responsibility you should probably just be quiet.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: jaeger66

Originally posted by: Millennium

Did you have an argument or did you just feel like writing a paragraph of half-truths? Maybe in your old age you forgot how to think and it is affecting you ability to create a cogent argument. I didn't say they should have revolted. I said their own choices in WWI led to Hitler's rise to power and no one had the balls enough to stop him before it got too late. You can empathize with them all you want, but it doesn't change the facts of what happened. The Germans were 100% responsible for what happened, just like Patty Hearst was.

My argument is that you know nothing about the topic you're commenting on. You're just spouting the same G.I. Joe rhetoric that you always do. If I point a gun at your face and tell you to shut up, are you going to keep talking? No, I think not. Until you've lived enough to understand adversity, moral dilemmas, and personal responsibility you should probably just be quiet.

So you still don't have an argument then? Just more chest beating... and telling me I am young. I have problem faced more adversity in the past few years than you have in your life all while taking full responsibilities. That is pretty funny because you are the ONLY person who has ever tried to use that argument on me. Must people don't have a chip on their soldier because they are old, but obviously you do. Not sure why.

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: Millennium

Not true. Sorry, but they all DID NOT break. The rest of your mindless paragraph was pure chest beating and an attempt to discredit me without a single shred of evidence. I guess you are still mad when I told you that she WAS taken out of state and that would give the Feds jurisdiction. They had some dickless moron on MSNBC that tried to say the Feds and Utah would have concurrent jurisdiction. Not likely.

BTW, I first read about the Stanford Prison Experiment three of four years ago. It still doesn't change my opinion. It is ONE study and nothing more. I suggest YOU do some reading on those who have Stockholm Syndrome or who are battered(Karla Holmolka, Patty Hearst, David Ray's victims and his wife, and numerous other people). Thanks you, but I have done plenty of research and your opinion is based on one study.

Were you going to give me a link to your BULLSH1t claim that all those POWs in Vietnam were broken?

The prisoners themselves acknowledge
that eventually ?all capitulated to
some extent.? But they had a code of
behavior which demanded ?the realistic
objective . . . of holding out as long as
possible, then giving as little as possible,
and using the breathing spell that normally
followed a period of torture to
recover strength for the next bout.?
There were a few men, but only a few,
who failed this test and collaborated willingly
with the enemy. That, too, forms
part of this comprehensive story.

http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/jfq_pubs/2229.pdf

I'm not mad at you, I simply think your an arogant moron who believes he can not only predict the future but is aware of every circumstance of the present including those details he has no personal knowledge of. I have no need to discredit you because your own statements serve to do that without my help.

BTW making the assumtion that I said the stanford prison experiment was my only basis of opinion only makes you look like an ass. Assuming that I'm not aware of Hearst and all the other Stockholm syndrome cases including the one the name derives from again makes you yet again look like an ass. Try making less Assumtions about what I know and provide more evidence to back up your opinions, it will serve your cause better than devoting all your text to attacking the person who made the comments.

 

[jaeger66]

Originally posted by: Millennium


So you still don't have an argument then? Just more chest beating... and telling me I am young. I have problem faced more adversity in the past few years than you have in your life all while taking full responsibilities. That is pretty funny because you are the ONLY person who has ever tried to use that argument on me. Must people don't have a chip on their soldier because they are old, but obviously you do. Not sure why.

You have a serious case of "I know everything" syndrome, and your argument amounts to nothing more than that. If you were a man who has lived a long, full life of experiences both good and bad then I might accept that sort of argument as being reasonable. But you're not. You're a child. I suppose you also hold the 9/11 airline passengers partly responsible? I mean, 3 out of 4 planes hit their marks..so why didn't the passengers just rise up and stop it?

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: rahvin

Originally posted by: Millennium

Not true. Sorry, but they all DID NOT break. The rest of your mindless paragraph was pure chest beating and an attempt to discredit me without a single shred of evidence. I guess you are still mad when I told you that she WAS taken out of state and that would give the Feds jurisdiction. They had some dickless moron on MSNBC that tried to say the Feds and Utah would have concurrent jurisdiction. Not likely.

BTW, I first read about the Stanford Prison Experiment three of four years ago. It still doesn't change my opinion. It is ONE study and nothing more. I suggest YOU do some reading on those who have Stockholm Syndrome or who are battered(Karla Holmolka, Patty Hearst, David Ray's victims and his wife, and numerous other people). Thanks you, but I have done plenty of research and your opinion is based on one study.

Were you going to give me a link to your BULLSH1t claim that all those POWs in Vietnam were broken?

The prisoners themselves acknowledge
that eventually ?all capitulated to
some extent.? But they had a code of
behavior which demanded ?the realistic
objective . . . of holding out as long as
possible, then giving as little as possible,
and using the breathing spell that normally
followed a period of torture to
recover strength for the next bout.?
There were a few men, but only a few,
who failed this test and collaborated willingly
with the enemy. That, too, forms
part of this comprehensive story.

http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/jfq_pubs/2229.pdf

I'm not mad at you, I simply think your an arogant moron who believes he can not only predict the future but is aware of every circumstance of the present including those details he has no personal knowledge of. I have no need to discredit you because your own statements serve to do that without my help.

BTW making the assumtion that I said the stanford prison experiment was my only basis of opinion only makes you look like an ass. Assuming that I'm not aware of Hearst and all the other Stockholm syndrome cases including the one the name derives from again makes you yet again look like an ass. Try making less Assumtions about what I know and provide more evidence to back up your opinions, it will serve your cause better than devoting all your text to attacking the person who made the comments.

Wow nice attempt at dodging the arguments. I give you a 10. So do you know who Karla Holmolka is? What about David Ray? What happened to his victims? The part you took from the PDF says that very few went as far as to collaborate with the enemy, which was my whole point to begin with. It is unrealistic to expect that every single person would not in some form or another give in to certain things. They did not break, however, to start committing crimes like Karla Homolka, David Ray's girlfriend, or Patty Hearst. Being broken does not mean you give in at all, but rather you 'break' and no longer keep what is dear to you. Thanks for your time, but I think you are 100 times more arrogant than I could even attempt to be.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: jaeger66

Originally posted by: Millennium


So you still don't have an argument then? Just more chest beating... and telling me I am young. I have problem faced more adversity in the past few years than you have in your life all while taking full responsibilities. That is pretty funny because you are the ONLY person who has ever tried to use that argument on me. Must people don't have a chip on their soldier because they are old, but obviously you do. Not sure why.

You have a serious case of "I know everything" syndrome, and your argument amounts to nothing more than that. If you were a man who has lived a long, full life of experiences both good and bad then I might accept that sort of argument as being reasonable. But you're not. You're a child. I suppose you also hold the 9/11 airline passengers partly responsible? I mean, 3 out of 4 planes hit their marks..so why didn't the passengers just rise up and stop it?

So did you have an argument? I guess not. The 9/11 passengers have nothing to do with Stockhold syndrome, nor does it have anything to do with people being responsible for their crimes.