"A government plot to turn ordinary citizens into programmed killers."
In this episode, Ventura claims to have uncovered a CIA conspiracy to create real-life Manchurian Candidates, brainwashed assassins who kill under orders but without any conscious intent.
This is an interesting case, because we know for a fact that the CIA at least attempted to do this in the 1970s as part of project MK-ULTRA. It's also true that many people with psychiatric issues can perform complex actions (like committing murder) while in a fugue or dissociative state. And furthermore, the act of committing murder could certainly create traumatic amnesia, such that the killer truly does not remember having killed someone.
And finally we have the entirely plausible theory that these killer are lying in order to get a reduced sentence.
Faced with all these possibilities, and with the understanding of humanity as a vast and complex population, "CIA mind programming" honestly seems like the least likely explanation. It's like Dr. House says - if you're in Central Park and you hear hoof beats, think horses, not zebras.
Another argument against sleeper assassins is that the phenomena of post-hypnotic suggestion is actually a fairly flimsy one. It's true that you can (as they demonstrated on the show) make someone limp after hearing a trigger word.
But limping is an emotionally-uncharged act, and a simple one. As a "proof of concept" demonstration, it's pretty weak. It's a big jump from this parlor trick to assassination - a complex act with lots of steps, forethought, planning, scheduling, purchasing, hiding, and so forth. And it ends with shooting someone, an act so counter to most people's psychology that it would take a lot to overcome that.
Even the experts interviewed on the show agree that it would take several years to turn a normal person into a sleeper assassin. Which begs the question: why? Surely it would be more efficient - in time, in resources, in efficacy of results - to just use a regular assassin for something. If you want to kill John Lennon, then send an assassin to kill John Lennon, and instruct him to lie about his memories afterward.
The typical explanation for sleeper assassins is that they can "blend in with the normal people." But this is the case with regular old non-sleeping assassins, too. Witness the recent case of a Russian spy who was exposed from her normal life in suburban Virginia. And no doubt we are surrounded by other spies, both our own and those from other countries.
The fundamental problem is that both "lying" and "a psychiatric disorder" are both far more likely explanations. Between those two perfectly understandable causes, how much territory is left for "secret CIA programming"?
Probably the most damning case against sleeper assassins is that if it really worked, people would be using it. Imagine being able to kidnap a trusted advisor, program him to become a sleeper assassin, then return him to his native country to kill his leader. If this were possible, we would long since have gotten rid of Castro, Kim Jong Il, and Bin Laden. The fact that there are un-assassinated CIA assassination targets left in the world is proof enough that it's not a real thing.
This is an interesting case, because we know for a fact that the CIA at least attempted to do this in the 1970s as part of project MK-ULTRA. It's also true that many people with psychiatric issues can perform complex actions (like committing murder) while in a fugue or dissociative state. And furthermore, the act of committing murder could certainly create traumatic amnesia, such that the killer truly does not remember having killed someone.
And finally we have the entirely plausible theory that these killer are lying in order to get a reduced sentence.
Faced with all these possibilities, and with the understanding of humanity as a vast and complex population, "CIA mind programming" honestly seems like the least likely explanation. It's like Dr. House says - if you're in Central Park and you hear hoof beats, think horses, not zebras.
Another argument against sleeper assassins is that the phenomena of post-hypnotic suggestion is actually a fairly flimsy one. It's true that you can (as they demonstrated on the show) make someone limp after hearing a trigger word.
But limping is an emotionally-uncharged act, and a simple one. As a "proof of concept" demonstration, it's pretty weak. It's a big jump from this parlor trick to assassination - a complex act with lots of steps, forethought, planning, scheduling, purchasing, hiding, and so forth. And it ends with shooting someone, an act so counter to most people's psychology that it would take a lot to overcome that.
Even the experts interviewed on the show agree that it would take several years to turn a normal person into a sleeper assassin. Which begs the question: why? Surely it would be more efficient - in time, in resources, in efficacy of results - to just use a regular assassin for something. If you want to kill John Lennon, then send an assassin to kill John Lennon, and instruct him to lie about his memories afterward.
The typical explanation for sleeper assassins is that they can "blend in with the normal people." But this is the case with regular old non-sleeping assassins, too. Witness the recent case of a Russian spy who was exposed from her normal life in suburban Virginia. And no doubt we are surrounded by other spies, both our own and those from other countries.
The fundamental problem is that both "lying" and "a psychiatric disorder" are both far more likely explanations. Between those two perfectly understandable causes, how much territory is left for "secret CIA programming"?
Probably the most damning case against sleeper assassins is that if it really worked, people would be using it. Imagine being able to kidnap a trusted advisor, program him to become a sleeper assassin, then return him to his native country to kill his leader. If this were possible, we would long since have gotten rid of Castro, Kim Jong Il, and Bin Laden. The fact that there are un-assassinated CIA assassination targets left in the world is proof enough that it's not a real thing.