My take is that the US Air Force and Tavistock were working hand in hand on a variety of troubling projects in the 40s.

The American arm of Tavistock is the Brookings Institute, which is focused on media. There is a similar arm in Australia, but it seems tough to find who and what carried on the work like 'Principles of Mass Persuasion' and other similar endeavors that were published. At the same time sli.mg went down, a lot of Tavistock's stuff also seemed to disappear from the Internet.

However, two things remain of interest to me...

Social dreaming; where Tavistock puts 32 people in a room in concentric circles and they exclaim whatever comes to mind. It is very similar to the stories about Joseph Smith showing people the golden plates. Imagine if these social dreaming sessions, you gathered world leaders, we're doing weird rituals, and then recorded 'the social dream' they shared.

While Tavistock does not detail the exact process, they have provided transcripts from some social dreams. Again, a little hard to find since the purge, but one example was 'a bomb on a train', 'the tube in london', 'it looks like a Christmas present'.

Is that how they engineer false flags? I don't know.

The other area of interest was titled something like 'Tavistock, we have a problem', where it goes on to detail how they analyze and restructure police departments. In one instance, they worked with the Belgians who are famous for covering up the Dutroux case.

So, this private institution, that once researched how to manipulate people into buying war bonds, graduated to social dreaming and organizing government agencies and practically no one knows about them.

Has anyone tied them to Rand or DynCorp?

At this point, the modus operandi seems to be thus:

1. Create instability in a region using intelligence apparatus. One example is Syria, where Israeli, Saudi and US operators were all working together in Eastern Aleppo. Another is Romania, where communism fell and left it's fair share of poverty.

2. Unleash the NGOS. Save the Children. Orphanages. Small business helpers. Et cetera.

3. Now, lobby the fallen and recovering government to fund your NGOS.

4. Now, you've stolen the government money, so it is still broke and in debt to the IMF to run NGOS that don't work. So, the NGOS run out of funding and leave. But, you've already established your trafficking network. Your orphanages and your small businesses (think peanuts in Haiti) are all at the whim of smugglers and whatever organized crime comes in after the departure of NGOS. In the case of Romania and Moldova, the Albanian mob took over.

5. The machine owns everyone, there, now. The trafficking and laundering network is already set up. Everyone leaves and the mob takes over, leaving a layer of separation between criminals and those who set the whole thing up. The money is still getting funneled to the right places.

This is what modern organized crime looks like and, while it has the hallmarks of what we have seen throughout history, there is an element to this crime network that only can exist as a result of modern tools and systems.

The reason people don't 'get it' is because they've been persuaded to think that the CIA and friends deserve legitimacy. If everyone told them to fuck off, like with the Finders case, the case in Hudspeth County, the crashed dregistered planes with cocaine, et cetera, then we wouldn't have these problems.

Since people think they are important institutions and not criminal enterprises, they allow them to do really dark stuff and don't bat an eye.

The solution? Tell these agencies to fuck right the fuck off and force transparency in government. There is no other approach. Left v right. Rich v poor. There is only one cause everyone should be fighting for and that is transparency.

The rest will solve itself once we can see how and why these patterns of corruption exist. That is the only reason secrecy in government exists.

Ask yourself why we still don't know who assassinated Kennedy, even though proof was leaked in the diplomatic cables and not a single news source covers it.