Latest / The Dustlight Archives / The Dustlight Archives Book Club: Sinister Forces: The Nine: Chapter 8 and Appendix (Unlocked)

Transcript

The Dustlight Archives Book Club: Sinister Forces: The Nine: Chapter 8 and Appendix (Unlocked) · The Dustlight Archives

• 0:21
  SPEAKER_01: Hello, guys.
• 0:22
  SPEAKER_01: Welcome back to the book club on Sinister Forces.
• 0:28
  SPEAKER_01: We have finally made it to the end of Book One, the Nine, and we will be wrapping that up this week with the final chapter, Rosemary's Baby, as well as the appendix on the wandering bishops.
• 0:45
  SPEAKER_01: And then the we're gonna go ahead and do the foreword and stuff for a warm gun too, which is the second book, uh, just to get us prepared for next week when we start the second book proper.
• 1:02
  SPEAKER_01: And uh we've got we got some pretty good stuff in this chapter, I think, in this episode, in this appendix.
• 1:11
  SPEAKER_01: Um it starts out talking about the story of Mary Pinchot Meyer, who was originally married to Cordmeyer for like 13 years, who would later go on to be the head of the CIA.
• 1:30
  SPEAKER_01: And then she also started a relationship with JFK for a while, and they had a bit of a fling.
• 1:41
  SPEAKER_01: And I will say, you know, I don't want to repeat myself.
• 1:46
  SPEAKER_01: I know I've gone over some of this before, but like he does start out this chapter with him in once again my least favorite mode, which is just romanticizing the counterculture.
• 2:02
  SPEAKER_01: Uh, I I disagree with him so so much when he does this.
• 2:07
  SPEAKER_01: And he he like hand waves away the idea that Timothy Leary was uh an asset of the CIA, which is mind-blowing to me because there's like I there's a lot of evidence for that, including uh Timothy Leary, I mean, flat out saying it at a certain point.
• 2:33
  SPEAKER_01: So I I don't know exactly what he's on about here.
• 2:37
  SPEAKER_01: He obviously seems to, if I'm being generous, he has like an emotional attachment to Timothy Leary and to the general concepts Timothy Leary was promoting, uh, which wouldn't completely blow my mind because I mean Lavenda would have been a young man during that time period, and I think I think we all I think it's very natural to uh give stuff that was popular in the moment when you were kind of in your teenage years or your young adult years, you know, extra weight.
• 3:17
  SPEAKER_01: So that that might be it, or he might just be a total huckster with this bullshit.
• 3:22
  SPEAKER_01: I don't know, but like the idea of hand waving it away, like I was just thinking about like at a base level, like uh I it whether it is Timothy Leary's pre-LSD work as a psychologist at the Human Ecology Fund, which I mean was a CIA front, the fact that he had easy access to LSD at a time when it was tightly controlled, and Sydney Gottlieb through the CIA's Technical Services Division was expressing interest in large-scale psychedelic tests, or that you know, he massively pacified dissent, which fits perfectly in line with the goals of US intelligence at the time.
• 4:05
  SPEAKER_01: Or even if you wanted to ignore all of that, ignore the fact that he actually does admit to having ties to the CIA at a certain point in his life, the man also goes on to do like a late career pivot into like Silicon Valley.
• 4:20
  SPEAKER_01: Like, I I don't know how any serious researcher, particularly one who fancies himself a parapolitical researcher, could really even seriously argue this stuff about Timothy Leary.
• 4:34
  SPEAKER_01: And like, I do think it is important to, you know, if a system is what it does, uh what he did more effectively than anything else was he pacified the the culture at a time period when you know there there was real uh a certain level of militancy, a certain level of uh real political rebellion going on, you know, like as uh as complex as some of that might be, and as much as you could maybe get into the nuance of, you know, what was legitimate political rebellion and what was AstroTurf or whatever, there was something going on there, and his turn-on tune-in dropout bullshit is just like I mean, it it couldn't be more effective if it had just been flat out ridden by a member of the intelligence community themselves, and it for all I know it very well might have been.
• 5:49
  SPEAKER_01: But that is that is one of my least favorite modes of his, and he does go on about that for a while.
• 5:56
  SPEAKER_01: Uh, I think he calls uh heard on to drop out a uh sly phrase at a certain point, and like I uh would agree with him, but I don't think in the way that he means it.
• 6:20
  SPEAKER_01: Either way, uh, I would say his stuff on Mary Pinchot Meyer is pretty interesting and pretty well done.
• 6:29
  SPEAKER_01: He it's all more or less accurate.
• 6:32
  SPEAKER_01: She did die violently, and when her sister, who is also married to the Washington Post editor Ben Bradley, because man, these circles are forever just incredibly tight, uh, showed up at her house, she finds James Jesus Angleton already there looking for her diary.
• 6:52
  SPEAKER_01: He took the diary and he either destroyed it or he vaulted it.
• 6:56
  SPEAKER_01: And I mean, Mary Pinchot Meyer was so keyed in, and almost certainly somebody powerful wanted her dead.
• 7:04
  SPEAKER_01: So none of this is surprising.
• 7:06
  SPEAKER_01: But I would say that where Levenda does miss the mark here is that her connections to all of these circles of power are to me what is worth talking about and is what is interesting, and instead he gets really focused on whether or not she gave JFK LSD at some point, which like I literally who gives a fuck?
• 7:37
  SPEAKER_01: Like that doesn't, it's just such a non-starter, and I I really don't believe it was related to the murder or the cover-up.
• 7:50
  SPEAKER_01: Like, that's just not how these things work.
• 7:52
  SPEAKER_01: Nobody is sitting there worried about JFK getting turned on to LSD, like they're they're worried about his foreign policy, they're worried about these weird interfactional disputes or whatever.
• 8:09
  SPEAKER_01: Like it's stupid, stupid, stupid.
• 8:12
  SPEAKER_01: Um but he does get a lot of the main facts accurate, like I said, and I think if you just take the base story, if you just take the fact that this woman had all these connections, she was murdered violently, and then her sister with her own weird connections runs into James Jesus Angleson trying Angleton trying to steal her diary.
• 8:38
  SPEAKER_01: Uh, there, I mean, that's there's something there, and that's definitely worth talking about.
• 8:44
  SPEAKER_01: Uh as far as uh next up, he talks a little bit about Jose Delgado and the 1960s demonstration where he put electrodes in a bull's brain and he had it charge at him, and then with seconds left, he hit a button, causing the bull to immediately stop charging, relax, and turn around.
• 9:08
  SPEAKER_01: And I'm really a little bit conflicted by this because like I there's a part of me that really does believe that we would probably, you know, the old glowing eyes Dave McGowan meme of if only you knew how bad it really was, I think might apply to the ability they have to kind of control our emotional responses and to control our brains and the way that they work.
• 9:43
  SPEAKER_01: But it's not exactly what happened here, at least in the way that it's presented, because the way it's presented is like that what the demonstration proved was that with the electrodes he put in the bull's brain, that he made the bull not mad anymore.
• 10:06
  SPEAKER_01: And what he really did was he cut off the bull's ability to charge, like he cut off whatever was whatever connections there were in that bull's nervous system that just had it barreling forward, really.
• 10:26
  SPEAKER_01: Like, there's no actual proof that that the bull changed emotionally, it was more like an off switch as far as as far as its ability to move fast, which is interesting in its own right, but I do think that there is a significant difference there.
• 10:49
  SPEAKER_01: And then I don't know, I've been really surprised, like I hope I hope this podcast is interesting to people, and I hope that I don't just sound like, well, let me tell you what's wrong with this next part or whatever in every section of uh that I go through this book, but I've been really surprised it I knew Levenda was gonna have problems, but it they're deeper and more substantial than I thought that they would be originally, and I think that we can see that again when he jumps from that to talking about L.
• 11:37
  SPEAKER_01: Ron Hubbard, and he he does this in order to open up a discussion about the Scientology offshoot the process church, which is uh its own very heavy, very fascinating, very complicated subject.
• 12:00
  SPEAKER_01: And he actually doesn't get into that as much as I was hoping he would in this chapter.
• 12:06
  SPEAKER_01: I do think he's going to, based on the intro stuff for a warm gun, I do think that that might come up more.
• 12:14
  SPEAKER_01: It seems like the Son of Sam killings in particular uh play a big role in that second book.
• 12:22
  SPEAKER_01: But either way, he does touch on them here a little bit.
• 12:25
  SPEAKER_01: And when he brings up L.
• 12:27
  SPEAKER_01: Ron Hubbard, he also like kind of hand waves him off as somebody with serious intelligence ties.
• 12:37
  SPEAKER_01: Like he acts like that's probably not really the case, and that he was more just a con man who showed up at Jack Parsons' door, which I will tell you also, I very firmly disagree with.
• 12:49
  SPEAKER_01: Like, to believe that ignores the fact that he was, in fact, a documented Office of Naval Intelligence agent in the early 1940s.
• 12:58
  SPEAKER_01: Later, people who knew him would claim he was sent to Parsons OTO Lodge specifically to destroy this black magic cult that was being reckless with classified rocketry secrets, uh, which he did successfully, and that his early Dianetics Research Foundation was crawling with members of the defense industry.
• 13:18
  SPEAKER_01: And particularly, I don't know, like on just a vibes-based level, the idea that he was the the Jack Parsons, when you look at it all holistically, and you go, the the magic ritual stuff that Jack Parsons was doing was making him be reckless with rocketry, which in turn has real significant defense applications that as we talked about before, he very well may have been selling secrets to places like Israel.
• 13:54
  SPEAKER_01: Uh and I absolutely the most logical the mo the most logical uh explanation I could come up with for why L.
• 14:09
  SPEAKER_01: Rod Hubbard shows up at his door would definitely be that he was sent there by somebody from the military at best to keep an eye on him and at worst to actually dismantle this thing.
• 14:26
  SPEAKER_01: And given how it all plays out, I think that there's a lot of reasons to believe that that is the case.
• 14:40
  SPEAKER_01: I would also say, like, if you wanted to get more into the process church right now, I think there are a lot of great resources on it that I would definitely recommend.
• 14:52
  SPEAKER_01: I know I've recommended What is the Process by Rodding Jewels before.
• 14:56
  SPEAKER_01: I don't know when she's going to do more episodes of her podcast.
• 15:00
  SPEAKER_01: She hasn't in a while, but there are quite a few episodes on there, and I think they're very good.
• 15:05
  SPEAKER_01: I think they're very well researched.
• 15:08
  SPEAKER_01: And uh another place you could definitely go is you could definitely go to Recluse from the Farm in his Vice Up blog, V I S U P.
• 15:18
  SPEAKER_01: He has a multi-part section on the process church, and I think they come to some different conclusions, which is interesting to me because I have a ton of respect for both of them as researchers, and I believe they're both genuine.
• 15:34
  SPEAKER_01: I believe that they're both intelligent and thoughtful, and it's it's interesting to me that even in this case, there there is a level of division amongst how much culpability the process church has, exactly what they were involved in, exactly how deep it goes.
• 16:00
  SPEAKER_01: I will say, me personally, if I were a betting man, I fall more on the uh rotting jewels side of the spectrum.
• 16:13
  SPEAKER_01: I think that Maury Terry in the Ultimate Evil and Ed Sanders in the family, Ed Sanders less so than Maury Terry, have some issues, some legitimate issues, especially with Maury Terry.
• 16:32
  SPEAKER_01: Once Ted Gunderson starts getting involved in like the back third of the ultimate evil, it it it really muddies things because I think Ted Gunderson is like a uh disinformation agent, but still a ton of good research in there, a ton of good research in Ed Sanders, the family.
• 16:52
  SPEAKER_01: And while I don't buy every claim in either one of those books, and my own personal philosophy would probably fall between several of these other researchers I've mentioned.
• 17:09
  SPEAKER_01: I I think it's an incredibly fascinating subject.
• 17:13
  SPEAKER_01: I only hesitate to spend more time on it than is necessary, especially if he does get into it more in the second book, just because I think people who've spent a lot more time looking at this than I have have already done incredible research on the subject that I would definitely encourage you to check out.
• 17:34
  SPEAKER_01: And I just, like I said, I'll definitely be combating or agreeing with or whatever, examining uh Levenda's claims as they come up about the process church as we move forward, but I don't know how much I have to add to the discussion that others have not already really uh fleshed out quite well.
• 18:06
  SPEAKER_01: Uh I will say that I do find if we're talking about the little bit Lavenda does talk about the Process Church in this episode, that he seems to be overly skeptical, yet again, in a moment where actual evidence seems to contradict him.
• 18:29
  SPEAKER_01: Like, for instance, he claims while writing this book in 2005 that the process church hasn't existed for 30 years, which is it just demonstrably false.
• 18:40
  SPEAKER_01: And in fact, besides the fact that they absolutely did exist in I mean, the last 30 years, we're talking 1975, and I think that is an incredibly early date to place as the end of the process church, given just the evidence that's out there.
• 19:05
  SPEAKER_01: But certainly, I think you could even make a strong case that it still exists in some form today.
• 19:13
  SPEAKER_01: Especially, I mean, it changed names, it moved around, but you'll find the same core group of people for the most part, particularly Mary and De Grimston.
• 19:25
  SPEAKER_01: It does seem like Robert de Grimston maybe uh went a different path at a certain point.
• 19:32
  SPEAKER_01: But I mean, she still has that uh best friend's animal society, which is a huge uh animal sanctuary and a very big chain of animal shelters, which is something that I do think maybe maybe that would be an angle if I ever did look at the process church.
• 19:55
  SPEAKER_01: I might I might dig into that a little bit because I don't know how much that has necessarily been directly covered, and I will say that I find it to be incredibly strange that a group that has had rumors swirling around it for so long that they sacrifice animals and magic rituals now has a uh set of animal shelters that they run.
• 20:29
  SPEAKER_01: I don't know, it's it's it's very weird.
• 20:32
  SPEAKER_01: Either way, the idea that they haven't existed since 1975 is nuts, and he does also kind of tie this into these wider claims where he tries to separate the seedier elements of these groups from the leadership in a way that I find to be very disagreeable.
• 20:56
  SPEAKER_01: Like uh he'll claim that they're the elements of like the Church of Satan or the Process Church or the OTO that have done some of the worst things are fringe elements that are unassociated and unendorsed by the leadership.
• 21:15
  SPEAKER_01: And this really first of all, it ignores how sketchy the leadership and the organization's associations actually are.
• 21:23
  SPEAKER_01: Uh, you know, their writings, their actions, their friends, they all kind of put the lie to this.
• 21:33
  SPEAKER_01: Um I mean, I you don't have to look that far into Anton Levet or the De Grimstons or Alistair Crowley to realize that these sorts of people that were the modern Genesis, I mean, even Helena Blavatsky to a degree, even if maybe less so uh the these were if These are the seed that your group grows out of.
• 22:03
  SPEAKER_01: It's not surprising where that group went at best.
• 22:07
  SPEAKER_01: And I think that you know, you could argue about exactly where their level of culpability lies, but it certainly doesn't it certainly there is a level of culpability there, I guess I would say.
• 22:32
  SPEAKER_01: And I I will say though this does require balance.
• 22:36
  SPEAKER_01: Like one of my issues with Maury Terry, for instance, is that he can tend to see everything as a giant centralized program when in reality it is usually a series of decentralized nodes.
• 22:48
  SPEAKER_01: But that doesn't mean the people who birthed these nodes are not culpable or that the violence and the murder and the trafficking of various sorts wasn't their intention.
• 23:00
  SPEAKER_01: You know, for instance, 4P is a more extreme offshoot of the process church.
• 23:05
  SPEAKER_01: In the same way the process church grew out of Scientology, but at no point are any of these groups not just different flavors of the same root epistemology.
• 23:14
  SPEAKER_01: They often involve many of the same people, and even if I'm giving them the largest benefit of the doubt while still accounting for the evidence, their parent group's role in their creation is murky.
• 23:27
  SPEAKER_01: In fact, he tries to make this case by saying, I and I thought this was wild because it's almost like it's a real self-own.
• 23:35
  SPEAKER_01: He tries to say, and this is a quote, George Washington was a Mason, and so was Robert Treat Payne.
• 23:41
  SPEAKER_01: Does that mean the Freemason started the American Revolution?
• 23:46
  SPEAKER_01: And uh yeah, I mean, I mean, basically, yes, yes, the Masonic Lodge structure was fundamental to the American Revolution.
• 23:55
  SPEAKER_01: Many of those who let it are Freemasons in American iconography, it's full of Masonic symbolism.
• 24:04
  SPEAKER_01: In a weird way, I think that this is actually kind of the perfect analogy for the balance that needs to be struck when talking about these things, because I would agree that saying just the Freemasons did the American Revolution, it lacks nuance, but also it is a hell of a lot closer than claiming that they weren't responsible for the American Revolution at all.
• 24:32
  SPEAKER_01: He also even kind of tries to take it a step further when he is trying to absolve them of culpability, when he makes the absurd claim that drug dealing isn't a cult activity, even when all the given members are involved in dealing drugs, unless drug dealing is in their book of shadows.
• 24:54
  SPEAKER_01: And like, what?
• 24:56
  SPEAKER_01: Like, this would be like claiming a business cannot commit financial fraud, even if the entire board is committing financial fraud through the business, unless their charter says in quotes, commit financial fraud.
• 25:11
  SPEAKER_01: Or I know saying the CIA didn't kill JFK unless we find a memo that says kill JFK.
• 25:18
  SPEAKER_01: Like if your standard for evidence is a group is not responsible for something unless they have commit crimes written down in their official rulebook, then why are you even writing about deep politics?
• 25:30
  SPEAKER_01: Like, I know I've already used it once this episode, but a thing is what it does.
• 25:35
  SPEAKER_01: And if everybody in your cult is dealing drugs, that is a drug-dealing cult.
• 25:42
  SPEAKER_01: You do not have to have it fucking written down.
• 25:44
  SPEAKER_01: Like, give me a break.
• 26:01
  SPEAKER_01: Next is our guy Levenda is wanting to do, he jumps around once again and he starts writing about Ira Levin's Rosemary's Baby, and you know, because if you didn't know already, before it was a Roman Polanski film, it was a very popular novel.
• 26:23
  SPEAKER_01: And he connects the place and the timing to a story from Malachi Martin's hostage to the devil that took place 10 years later, and that is a story there, there's a story in it, I guess I should say, of a woman named Marianne K and her exorcism.
• 26:41
  SPEAKER_01: And he treats this with a level of weight that I uh think it doesn't necessarily deserve because there are just some pretty basic logical flaws as far as his line of thinking in this goes, because basically his line of thinking is that there is something spooky or supernatural or synchronistic, maybe about these two stories, one purported to be fiction and one purported to be non-fiction, and sharing a lot of thematic similarities happening ten years apart in the same place.
• 27:32
  SPEAKER_01: And I would say that first of all, we don't know who Mary MK is, and so I'm not inclined to, given that there's no outside sources that can verify anything in Malachi Martin's hostage to the devil, I'm already inclined to view it with a certain level of skepticism, but then certainly as well I mean the story itself could have purposely been placed exactly ten years after Rosemary's Baby in the same place because Rosemary's Baby would have been an incredibly popular book in recent history, and since nothing in this book is independently verifiable, the hostage to the devil book, I don't see any reason at all to not just assume that this was intentionally put there by the author.
• 28:47
  SPEAKER_01: It wasn't like he did not have any awareness of Ira Levin's Rosemary's Baby.
• 28:57
  SPEAKER_01: And then he spent some time connecting Kenneth Anger and his films with Charles Manson, primarily through Bobby Boussolet.
• 29:04
  SPEAKER_01: And I do genuinely find Boussolet is a very weird, interesting note in the whole 60s counterculture movement.
• 29:10
  SPEAKER_01: You know, like I feel like Charles Manson or Sadie Hawkins or Tex Watson maybe get more mainstream visibility as far as the uh hate la bianca killings go.
• 29:34
  SPEAKER_01: But I think that Bobby Bousselet probably should get more focus than he does because if you really think about it, like he spends time living with the filmmaker Kenneth Anger, just steeped in crowli and magic, because that was also uh what Kenneth Anger was in at the time, and he's filming movies with him.
• 29:54
  SPEAKER_01: In fact, he is specifically cast as Lucifer and he embodies him in Lucifer Rising, the short film.
• 30:01
  SPEAKER_01: He does softcore porn, and then he also ends up killing Gary Hinman, which in a lot of the narratives of the Tayla Bianca murders is one of the main motivators for them happening at all.
• 30:14
  SPEAKER_01: He is still in prison to this day, so that does imply that I he was maybe disposable, but he was so connected to so much of Sus 60s counterculture, and I wonder what he would know if he ever did decide to talk.
• 30:39
  SPEAKER_01: He also brings up Robert Evans as the producer of Rosemary's Baby, and I am interested to see if he ever returns to Robert Evans, because you know, in the Nexium series I've been doing, we talked about Catherine Oxberg's incredibly strange nine-day marriage to him, and I'm curious if whatever else there may be to learn about Robert Evans might illuminate that more so because it is such a such a weird thing, you know.
• 31:13
  SPEAKER_01: When I do cover it in my Catherine Oxenberg episode of the Naxium series, which if you want to learn more about that, I would definitely encourage you to check that out.
• 31:26
  SPEAKER_01: Uh after that, he gives a brief summary of the Emanchurian candidate directed by John Frankenheimer.
• 31:34
  SPEAKER_01: John Frankenheimer, who had dinner with Roman Polanski, Sharon Tate, and RFK, and even drove RFK to the Ambassador Hotel the night he was shot, which is a very spooky convergence of events that at the very least shows how insular and tight-knit these groups are, and may I mean I don't think it's out of the question that there might be implications there that uh people knew things or were involved on some level, too.
• 32:13
  SPEAKER_01: We already covered Sir and Sirhan's connection to the occult in an earlier episode, so we probably don't ever have to go over and reiterate it here.
• 32:24
  SPEAKER_01: However, one important note of interest is that Dr.
• 32:27
  SPEAKER_01: William Joseph Bryan, who some have theorized to be Sirhan Sirhan's hypnotist and mind controller for a variety of reasons, is in fact a wandering bishop.
• 32:38
  SPEAKER_01: And these accusations that he was Sirhan Sirhan's hypnotist have been made because he was a high-profile hypnotist who worked on several major cases, and he was theorizing the assassin was hypnotized on the radio almost immediately before the shooter's identity had even been revealed in the RFK assassination.
• 33:04
  SPEAKER_01: And I would say the best bit of evidence that he is connected to Sirhan Sirhan in the RFK assassination is a weird passage in Sir Han Serhan's notebook where he writes the name Andrew DeSolvo.
• 33:24
  SPEAKER_01: And Andrew DeSolvo is definitely a verified patient of Dr.
• 33:31
  SPEAKER_01: William Joseph Bryan.
• 33:34
  SPEAKER_01: He is also the Boston Strangler, and I have no idea how or why that would be written in Sirhan Sirhan's notebook in this time period, unless somebody connected to the Boston Strangler was also in contact with him.
• 34:03
  SPEAKER_01: The most obvious candidate, obviously, being Dr.
• 34:07
  SPEAKER_01: William Joseph Bryan.
• 34:12
  SPEAKER_01: Also, interestingly, Dr.
• 34:14
  SPEAKER_01: Bryan was a consultant on the Manchurian candidate film, and this is especially interesting considering a few denominations existed of the uh wandering bishops, which we can get into that a little bit later.
• 34:29
  SPEAKER_01: But Brian and Fairy belonged to two different sects, the former to the old Catholic Church, and the latter to the American Orthodox Catholic Church.
• 34:41
  SPEAKER_01: But these groups regularly interacted and swapped ordinations and consecrations all the time, so there's a reasonable chance that they all knew each other, which is a very interesting prospect.
• 35:13
  SPEAKER_01: Then as we leapfrog again, we move to the story of Candy Jones, and we can kind of I think I'll probably lay out the basic story of Candy Jones first, as far as she would tell it, and as far as Long John Neville, her husband, would tell it, and then we can kind of go over some of the specific facts.
• 35:39
  SPEAKER_01: But the story of Candy Jones goes something like this: like she was an army pinup who gets sick and ends up in a military hospital in the Philippines.
• 35:48
  SPEAKER_01: She eventually recovers and marries Harry Conover, where they share modeling offices next to each other.
• 35:56
  SPEAKER_01: And he eventually steals a bunch of her money and runs off to a hotel with teenage models.
• 36:02
  SPEAKER_01: During this time, she meets Gene Tunney, a former prize fighter who has his office broken into.
• 36:10
  SPEAKER_01: Through him, she meets a guy she refers to as the general that basically asks her to allow FBI mail to be dropped off at her office.
• 36:20
  SPEAKER_01: And this goes on for a while, with somebody occasionally picking up the mail, until one day she gets a call from the general asking her to take the mail and drop it off to somebody.
• 36:32
  SPEAKER_01: And it gradually becomes clear that she's been dealing with the CIA and not the FBI.
• 36:37
  SPEAKER_01: When she's told to go to an office on Cypress Street in Oakland where she is hypnotized.
• 36:44
  SPEAKER_01: And that is her basic story, at least the first part of it.
• 36:53
  SPEAKER_01: And I will say I think it gives her story a lot of credibility that she's making these claims first in a series of hypnotic regression tapes in the early 70s with her husband Wong John Nebel.
• 37:06
  SPEAKER_01: And a lot of it would be corroborated when MK Ultra was revealed publicly in 1975 to 1977.
• 37:14
  SPEAKER_01: Her book would drop in 1976, right in the middle of the MK Ultra revelations, but her story would be independently corroborated from these tapes, many dating back to years earlier.
• 37:27
  SPEAKER_01: And I understand a skeptic would point out the fact that uh a lot of people just don't really believe in hypnotic regression, period.
• 37:38
  SPEAKER_01: I think that is you have to be careful, but to not believe in it at all, uh it goes up to the line of not believing victims.
• 37:55
  SPEAKER_01: I don't I think there is a place for hypnotic regression.
• 37:59
  SPEAKER_01: I do think memory is weird.
• 38:01
  SPEAKER_01: I do think, especially when you were talking about things like dissociative identity disorder or things that happened to people when they were children, that stuff can be repressed, and that we know this.
• 38:19
  SPEAKER_01: The other point of criticism that I think people will make as far as Candy Jones goes, is that her husband Lug John Nebel had a radio show that was about the parapolitical and about conspiracies and stuff like that prior to these tapes being made and prior to these revelations coming out.
• 38:48
  SPEAKER_01: And on the one hand, I definitely can understand skepticism there.
• 38:54
  SPEAKER_01: On the other hand, I would also say that I don't know who would be better equipped to believe a person that maybe this really happened to than somebody who already is in a mindset, already in a paradigm where this is something that they see as possible.
• 39:18
  SPEAKER_01: So I don't know.
• 39:20
  SPEAKER_01: I obviously wasn't there.
• 39:22
  SPEAKER_01: I can't say for certain I'm not endorsing absolutely everything that uh is in Candy Jones's book or everything that she's ever said, but I do think there's some smoke there personally.
• 39:39
  SPEAKER_01: Um and I'm more inclined to believe her than I am to not believe her, uh, like I said already, kind of because she was calling stuff out that was not public knowledge before it was public knowledge, and uh it's kind of corroborated by other independent people's stories and stuff too over time.
• 40:09
  SPEAKER_01: And the basic idea behind the Candy Jones story, for instance, is that so like she has a handler who goes by the pseudonym Gilbert Jensen who creates an alternate identity in her name, Darlene, and Arlene will wear a black wig and act very different than the blonde Candy Jones, and the basic idea is that uh manipulating dissociative identity disorder in a way where there are multiple personalities inside of a person, and uh different ones have different information, and you know you could imagine the usefulness of this if, say, you had you gave Arlene information to deliver to somebody else in say another country or something like that to do spy work, and then you have Candy Jones go out there, and Candy Jones, according to her book, actually they ran tests on her to see if this information could be taken out of her, and it wasn't unable to be.
• 41:28
  SPEAKER_01: Like if Arlene is the only one who has this information, then the idea is that you could do anything to Candy Jones, you could torture her, you could conjole her, you could convince her, and she wouldn't be able to give you the information because Candy does not have it, Arlene has it.
• 41:45
  SPEAKER_01: And a lot of the time, I think the idea behind this too, and like I said, I think it's a complicated subject.
• 41:52
  SPEAKER_01: I'm not a hundred percent saying that all of this is I'm totally endorsing all of this, but I am you know explaining the idea that like she does like you would oftentimes have one author, in this case it would be Arlene, that would sort of have all the information or most of it, and oftentimes would even have kind of a condescending relationship towards the more naive, say Candy Jones author, and you know, like and this comes from uh George Esther Brooks was a big uh proponent of this theory and of the idea of doing this, and you know, another way you could imagine it too is like let's say you had a spy who was anti-communist who worked for the US and he's over in Russia, and you create an altar, or you have, or actually, like let's say you take a communist and then you create an altar that's anti-communist, and then the person when they are in these communist circles gathering information and stuff, they don't even have to act, they don't have to lie, they don't have to fake anything because they actually are communist, but then they have this other altar that if you know how to release it, it can come out and it can then relay the information that the original person learned in these communist meetings, for instance.
• 43:40
  SPEAKER_01: And one thing that I think Levenda kind of poo poos uh is a story about weird CIA hypnosis sessions that Candy tells involving overt racism, such as like racial slurs and stuff like that.
• 43:57
  SPEAKER_01: And he kind of writes this off as Well, if it happened at all, it was probably that the people who were doing it were just racist or they were, you know, messing around and they weren't being supervised that well or something.
• 44:15
  SPEAKER_01: And I this is definitely, I think it's vibes-based to a degree, but I'm inclined to believe there's probably a little bit more going on here.
• 44:25
  SPEAKER_01: I don't know exactly what, but I would say that first of all, uh, if you've ever read Gravity's Rainbow by Thomas Pinchon, which also, you know, was written prior to the MKUltra revelations.
• 44:47
  SPEAKER_01: That is something that uh is a major facet in Slothrop's mind control.
• 44:57
  SPEAKER_01: And I find it interesting that it pops up in multiple places amongst people who would conceivably maybe be in the know.
• 45:09
  SPEAKER_01: Uh and so that right there gives me pause.
• 45:16
  SPEAKER_01: And then I don't know.
• 45:17
  SPEAKER_01: I have this thing I can't quite I don't know if I can quite articulate it in the way that I want at this point, but it is definitely something I've thought about where uh so much of this stuff is about breaking boundaries and crossing lines and seeing if you can get somebody to violate social norms.
• 45:48
  SPEAKER_01: So in a way, the the racism seems to tie into that in a way as well.
• 45:55
  SPEAKER_01: But I I mean, I don't know.
• 45:58
  SPEAKER_01: Like I said, I to me personally, and I know I know it's a fictional book, but I do I am one of those people who thinks that uh Pinchot put stuff in his writing that he can't necessarily overtly say, but it's there, and especially given the fact of when it was written, I I do think that crossover is uh interesting to me.
• 46:31
  SPEAKER_01: There's also the idea that I do agree with Peter Levenda about in the book where he talks about the idea, and this is another kind of Esther Brooks idea, to be honest, another one that that uh kind of originates with George Estebro's uh is the idea that some skeptics will say that somebody who is hypnotized will not do something that they would otherwise refuse to do.
• 47:09
  SPEAKER_01: So if I were hypnotized, the idea being like if I were hypnotized and I were told given a gun and I was told kill this person, if I would not be comfortable killing a person as my regular self, I would not be comfortable killing a person hypnotized.
• 47:29
  SPEAKER_01: And I think what the what the Astorbrooks kind of method gets into that makes a lot of sense to me, and I believe it has even had some you know peer-reviewed kind of scientific tests along these lines too that kind of verify this.
• 47:46
  SPEAKER_01: Like the workaround for this is just that you alter the larger situation the person feels like they're in.
• 48:00
  SPEAKER_01: So, yes, if you hand me a gun and say murder this person, I might not do it even under hypnosis.
• 48:09
  SPEAKER_01: But if I am in a hypnotic state, which keep in mind the sorts of hypnotic states they're talking about, usually they'll say less than 20% of the population is vulnerable to that.
• 48:23
  SPEAKER_01: I don't know if that is true or not, but uh I I do think that is relevant as well.
• 48:30
  SPEAKER_01: We're talking about a very deep sort of hypnotic state, and they uh what you would do instead is you would hand me a gun and you would say, This is a water gun.
• 48:43
  SPEAKER_01: And then you would say, spray that person in the face with water, at which point I would shoot them in the face and kill them.
• 48:51
  SPEAKER_01: And that would be sort of the uh the work around to this idea of uh not being able to get somebody to do something that they would otherwise not do in their regular life.
• 49:08
  SPEAKER_01: There are some weird stories as well about Candy Jones.
• 49:20
  SPEAKER_01: She has one memory of like being in a room with a bunch of uh members of who she assumes are the military-industrial complex, as these psychiatrists show off how well they can control her when she's in a hypnotic state, and they actually like insert a candle into her vagina.
• 49:52
  SPEAKER_01: Once again, I wasn't there.
• 49:56
  SPEAKER_01: I don't know.
• 49:57
  SPEAKER_01: I certainly think it's possible.
• 50:01
  SPEAKER_01: I certainly think it seems like it is in the general ballpark of stuff that has been done.
• 50:09
  SPEAKER_01: I mean, you have to keep in mind this is the exact same time period where you know they're doing stuff like Operation Midnight Climax and all of that as well.
• 50:20
  SPEAKER_01: Like they are there there is a weird sexual component.
• 50:24
  SPEAKER_01: And certainly, I mean, when you get into something like the story of Candy Jones, a an overtly sexual component a lot of the time to this stuff.
• 50:36
  SPEAKER_01: So it's once again, it's something that I can't 100% verify, but I also don't write off.
• 50:44
  SPEAKER_01: I uh think one great bit of evidence, personally, for parts of her story being true, is that she tells a story at one point about being told to go to Paradise Island and to jump off a cliff, kind of when they were done with using her, in order to kill her, get rid of evidence, and she ends up not doing it because she ends up being stopped at the airport and uh I believe by her husband.
• 51:29
  SPEAKER_01: And the thing that's very interesting to me about this is out of all of the places she could have chosen, she chose Paradise Island.
• 51:37
  SPEAKER_01: And Paradise Island is part of Resorts Unlimited, which was originally the Mary Carter Paint Company, and is uh a uh CIA front, it is a intelligence front, it has been for a long time.
• 51:57
  SPEAKER_01: That's not necessarily widely known, it wasn't necessarily widely known back then, and obviously, if you were going to have her kill herself, having her do it at a place where she could be surrounded by intelligence because the place itself is is a front for intelligence.
• 52:24
  SPEAKER_01: That all that makes sense to me and definitely lends her some credibility.
• 52:34
  SPEAKER_01: And lastly, I think as far as chapter eight goes, I just would also mention the fact that Lavenda talks about a book called The Coven that's written by E.
• 52:47
  SPEAKER_01: Howard Hunt, that has somebody who seems to be a stand-in for Candy Jones, who is uh alternates their personality based on whether they have uh dark or blonde hair.
• 53:04
  SPEAKER_01: And the wider story is about a satanic cult in Washington, D.C.
• 53:09
  SPEAKER_01: I do think that E.
• 53:11
  SPEAKER_01: Howard Hunt, he wrote under a nom de plume.
• 53:14
  SPEAKER_01: I I forget what it is offhand, I should have written it down, but I've never read any of his fictional books, and I would definitely be interested to because I think a lot of the time, you know, that fiction can, especially when it's fiction by somebody who is in these circles, you can end up finding some pretty interesting little nuggets in there, and you know, maybe we'll do one of e Howard Hunt's books at some point.
• 53:44
  SPEAKER_01: I think that would be kind of cool.
• 53:49
  SPEAKER_01: Now, after this, we have the appendix, which is a field guide to wandering bishops, and I don't know, it's about 10 pages, and I've really kind of grappled with what is the best way to tell this story because the way it's written, it almost necessarily requires just a million names, and that's really hard in a podcasting format.
• 54:27
  SPEAKER_01: It's hard in a I mean, it's hard to read, to be honest.
• 54:31
  SPEAKER_01: Like it's uh so certainly, you know, if you're listening to this at work or something, it's just gonna go in one ear and out the other.
• 54:39
  SPEAKER_01: And I wanted to try to find a way to simplify it, and I think I basically did as far as okay, they're basically three lines, broadly speaking, and these lines are not they're not straight lines, they intersect, they're they are a web in a lot of ways, and they also don't cover everything, but they do cover a lot of the basics.
• 55:09
  SPEAKER_01: So if you kind of just break these apostolic lines into into three different categories, I think that can help.
• 55:19
  SPEAKER_01: Uh the first comes from Dutch old Catholic bishops that left the Roman Catholic Church.
• 55:27
  SPEAKER_01: One of the bishops began consecrating without permission from leadership.
• 55:32
  SPEAKER_01: And there are names for all of these people.
• 55:35
  SPEAKER_01: I'm just leaving them out because, like I said, I just don't think they would be useful in this format.
• 55:40
  SPEAKER_01: He consecrated about 15 people, they consecrated more people, and eventually it ended up in the U.S.
• 55:46
  SPEAKER_01: Some of them incorporated Theosophy at some point, or I don't know, I guess I should say some theosophists became consecrated and started working the Catholic Mass into their rituals.
• 56:00
  SPEAKER_01: One of these bishops began consecrating women, which created a feminine line of wandering bishops, and one of them would actually be the wife of Gunther Rosbacher, who was involved in the Iran-Contra affair, which is very interesting.
• 56:15
  SPEAKER_01: There is the second line that originates in the Malinkara Syrian Orthodox Church due to a bunch of convoluted internacene fighting involving Rome trying to force the Portuguese to pledge allegiance towards bishops in France and Italy, it causes a defection.
• 56:36
  SPEAKER_01: This resulted in some bishops being consecrated outside of the Roman system that then spread around Europe and very quickly hit a group of voodoo practitioners and OTO members in France who developed the Gnostic Catholic Church.
• 56:51
  SPEAKER_01: They would also consecrate some of the women in the apostolic line mentioned under the Dutch Old Orthodox Church, showing, which, like I said, actually Levenda says this.
• 57:00
  SPEAKER_01: I should give him credit for this, that this is a web and not three straight lines.
• 57:06
  SPEAKER_01: And the third line, which we already covered a bit earlier, is where Orthodox churches split from their mother churches during and after the Russian Revolution because of, I would say, justified Soviet distrust of the Roman Catholic Church.
• 57:22
  SPEAKER_01: These spread to other countries like Russia, where they were known as the Russian Orthodox Church outside Russia, sometimes referred to as the ROCOR or the Synod.
• 57:34
  SPEAKER_01: And really, I mean, I think the big takeaway here is, and we we kind of have talked about this before, so hopefully I'm not repeating myself too much, but I think this is something that when you hear the name wandering bishops and when you hear the basic idea, it seems it seems insane at first.
• 57:57
  SPEAKER_01: Like, try talking to your random co-worker about the fucking wandering bishops and see where it gets you, you know.
• 58:05
  SPEAKER_01: But like, I I really do think the more you look into it, the more you understand the actual on-the-ground implications of this, it makes more and more sense.
• 58:17
  SPEAKER_01: Uh, partly because there is actual credible evidence for it.
• 58:23
  SPEAKER_01: Uh, you know, we we do have the names of a lot of these people, we do have the apostolic lines of a lot of these people.
• 58:31
  SPEAKER_01: It's this weird thing where they are technically officially consecrated, although sometimes that even gets a little weird or sketchy because there's different levels of legitimate consecration, too, where some of these people come from lines where it's pretty undeniable.
• 59:00
  SPEAKER_01: And some of when you consecrate somebody, you're really supposed to lay hands on them.
• 59:05
  SPEAKER_01: And one issue that comes up too is some of these lines uh were getting like consecrations by mail and things like that.
• 59:14
  SPEAKER_01: And it makes this an even more tangled web because you have people sometimes who got a consecration by mail and then wanted something more legitimate and had somebody else lay hands on them later.
• 59:27
  SPEAKER_01: You have weird stuff where they're mixing apostolic lines and two consecrated bishops are consecrating each other.
• 59:36
  SPEAKER_01: And I guess I guess what I would say is that this this we know this exists, like I don't think there's a serious historian that could deny it.
• 59:56
  SPEAKER_01: And on the one hand, I think it works great as an intelligence uh something for intelligence to use, something for as spy craft, and on the other hand, I think that uh religions and esoteric practices can get very weird and can you know create their own very deep mythologies and lures and epistemologies and beliefs, you know, ontologies and all of this stuff.
• 1:00:35
  SPEAKER_01: So like it doesn't it doesn't seem unreasonable to me.
• 1:00:44
  SPEAKER_01: Uh and I don't think it should seem unreasonable to anybody who actually looks at it enough.
• 1:00:52
  SPEAKER_01: And it's just it's also not it's relevant, but it's also more of a weird tangential fascination, maybe, than something that is at the center of parapolitics, if that makes any sense as well.
• 1:01:17
  SPEAKER_01: Like, I do think at a certain point, you know, you have to uh understand the complexities here.
• 1:01:26
  SPEAKER_01: Like, let's say, like, several people involved in the JFK assassination were wandering bishops.
• 1:01:33
  SPEAKER_01: JFK was not assassinated because of some scheme of the wandering bishops.
• 1:01:38
  SPEAKER_01: These are two these he was assassinated almost certainly by a confluence of the CIA and uh Cuban expats in the mob.
• 1:01:56
  SPEAKER_01: And what you're really seeing here is you're really seeing the the crossover between various intelligence operations or various intelligence utilities, and so I think we can acknowledge these things exist without also losing our minds and trying to attribute too much to a weird system like this.
• 1:02:28
  SPEAKER_01: It really is more on the fringes than near the center of you know deep politics.
• 1:02:43
  SPEAKER_01: And then I don't know, we we we have the uh foreword in the introduction to a warm gun, Lavenda's second book.
• 1:02:55
  SPEAKER_01: And I really felt like there wasn't a lot here.
• 1:02:59
  SPEAKER_01: I mean, Lavenda basically just lays out what he's gonna get into in a warm gun.
• 1:03:06
  SPEAKER_01: So, in particular, what he wrote, I just don't think it's the right time to really get into that.
• 1:03:13
  SPEAKER_01: Uh, I I did think it was interesting.
• 1:03:15
  SPEAKER_01: The foreword was written by Dick Russell, and Dick Russell is an interesting character because he wrote I I had actually had read a long time ago, The Man Who Knew Too Much.
• 1:03:27
  SPEAKER_01: And it is a very interesting book that's pretty well researched, that focuses on a specific actor in the Kennedy assassination that doesn't get a lot of uh attention otherwise, that is a really fascinating guy named Richard Case Nagle, and he the story goes as far as, if I remember correctly in that book, that this guy is a double agent working for the KGB and working for the US, and he basically stumbles upon the Kennedy assassination, and he stumbles upon the idea that Oswald is going to be a patsy in it, and so he reaches out to the KGB, and the KGB is like their first thought is they're like, you know, because of their whole weird relationship with Oswald and Oswald traveling there, they're worried this is going to be used as an excuse to start a war with them.
• 1:04:42
  SPEAKER_01: And so they're like, you need to stop this.
• 1:04:44
  SPEAKER_01: You need to either convince Oswald of what's going on and get him to stop hanging out with these like anti-Castro Cubans and to get out of this milieu, maybe run away.
• 1:05:02
  SPEAKER_01: Or if that doesn't work, you need to kill him.
• 1:05:05
  SPEAKER_01: And so this guy, Richard Kay Snagel, tries to do several things, and these are documented, where he's, you know, writing to the FBI, he's writing notes to other people trying to let them know, and he ends up getting to a point where he is worried his own life is in danger and that he is going to be killed as part of this operation.
• 1:05:33
  SPEAKER_01: So he goes into a bank and he shoots a gun twice in the air, and then he goes and he sits outside.
• 1:05:39
  SPEAKER_01: And this is like two months before the Kennedy assassination.
• 1:05:43
  SPEAKER_01: And what this did was it got him in prison for bank robbery so that he was well outside of the blast radius of anything involving the Kennedy assassination when it happened.
• 1:05:58
  SPEAKER_01: And after It happened, he came out and he said, I've got all of this stuff proving I knew about this ahead of time.
• 1:06:07
  SPEAKER_01: And he does, and a lot of it is documented, and it's a super fascinating book.
• 1:06:12
  SPEAKER_01: Uh, when I saw that he was the guy writing the foreword, that was interesting to me.
• 1:06:18
  SPEAKER_01: I do think he's a little bit of a complicated guy.
• 1:06:21
  SPEAKER_01: I do think he has gotten he went from being somebody I would describe in maybe like in the realm of like a Tom O'Neill or something like that, where I'm like, he's a little bit of a limited hangout, but he's doing real journalistic work and he's a serious like gumshoe journalist to doing this kind of hop, uh conspiracy theory sort of stuff.
• 1:06:56
  SPEAKER_01: Like he wrote several books with uh Jesse Ventura.
• 1:07:04
  SPEAKER_01: He uh wrote a very uncritical biography of RFK, so I don't know exactly what his journey is.
• 1:07:14
  SPEAKER_01: He's certainly an interesting figure to write the foreword for the second book, and I think that you know he captures a lot of the same contradictions that Lavenda does, so it's it's very fitting.
• 1:07:29
  SPEAKER_01: And I think that's where I'm gonna leave it for this week.
• 1:07:34
  SPEAKER_01: We will be back for book two in two weeks, and we are marching right along through this thing.
• 1:07:44
  SPEAKER_01: This thing is a door stop, and we are a third of the way through it.
• 1:07:48
  SPEAKER_01: I'm excited.
• 1:07:50
  SPEAKER_01: I'm excited to get into part two.
• 1:07:51
  SPEAKER_01: There's gonna be Son of Sam, there's gonna be Jonestown.
• 1:07:57
  SPEAKER_01: There's gonna be, I'm curious.
• 1:08:00
  SPEAKER_01: Charles Manson and JFK seem to be the through line.
• 1:08:02
  SPEAKER_01: I think there's gonna be some more of that too.
• 1:08:04
  SPEAKER_01: Uh, but I I am particularly interested.
• 1:08:07
  SPEAKER_01: I'm really interested in what his Jonestown take is.
• 1:08:10
  SPEAKER_01: I feel like the Son of Sam thing is gonna be a lot of stuff, probably pulled from Maury Terry, but who knows?
• 1:08:19
  SPEAKER_01: And yeah, we're just we're gonna keep rolling through this thing, and I will see you guys next week.
• 1:08:31
  SPEAKER_01: You guys are already subscribers, so that's great.
• 1:08:34
  SPEAKER_01: I really appreciate you subscribing.
• 1:08:38
  SPEAKER_01: Uh, I hope you enjoy what I'm doing.
• 1:08:40
  SPEAKER_01: As always, I mean, reach out to me, leave comments, uh, let me know what you think of these episodes.
• 1:08:49
  SPEAKER_01: That would mean a lot to me.
• 1:08:50
  SPEAKER_01: I am a pretty accessible person, and I might not write back immediately, but I will write back.
• 1:09:00
  SPEAKER_01: You know, I'm doing this for me, but I'm also doing it for you guys.
• 1:09:03
  SPEAKER_01: So, you know, any any thoughts are definitely, you know, something that I will mill on and think about.
• 1:09:14
  SPEAKER_01: And I will see you next week with my next episode in the Nexium investigation.
• 1:09:23
  SPEAKER_01: And uh got some big things coming up in the future.
• 1:09:27
  SPEAKER_01: Very excited for that.
• 1:09:28
  SPEAKER_01: And uh, thank you.