The Uses of Panic.
Panic is also a range of conditions. However they differ significantly from anxiety states. In anxiety there is a time factor to consider the danger posed. Even in the last stages of anxiety that border on panic there is certainly urgency but the person still sees a need to think about it and resolve the matter. In panic this time consideration is gone. All panic states are created with an element of immediacy in the danger posed. This creates the very big differences between anxiety and panic. And this difference is reflected in the biology, which I will discuss in length later.
To demonstrate panic states it is not necessary to consider the extreme states or what are known as panic attacks. These certainly have a demonstrable debilitating effect on an unsuspecting person. And in cases where the person has been harassed over a period of time serious health issues may eventuate and even death. The reason they are not seen as such is because the medical industry does not associate panic attack with other medical conditions such as heart attacks and autoimmune reactions. I will discuss many of them later but here I will discuss the lesser states of panic. These begin where serious anxiety ends.
Panic manifests as very serious stress. It is a condition by which the person feels that they cannot move, whether in doing something or not doing it because either way they feel obstructed and with a sense of immediacy. These cheats are used in many ways For instance they can be used to force someone to refrain from doing something or to cause them to over-react and do something that they would not have ordinarily done. A large part of this is the very fact that in the initial stages of fear the executive function is limited or even temporarily suspended as the brain rationalizes its fuel and activities to what are perceived to be the most needed areas. Perception is the highest priority until enough information is gathered. Thus there is a blind spot created in which a person is incapable of thinking and reasoning properly and sometimes not at all. In addition to that they are presented with ideas in very cunning ways as to make them appear reasonable and /or urgent. And it is important to appreciate that ideas, which are perceived or considered to be valid reasoning, can and do act as directives to the body. How these conditions apply is best seen by way of example.
To see the seriousness of the situation we can look to the political arena and the public service, rather than the personal and familial areas. In this way you can see how you can be seriously affected when someone you don’t know and have never met, nor even are ever likely to meet is maltreated with panic states. When key people in the public service, such as police are affected then every decent/ humane person in the community is affected. Police are really a nation’s internal army, whose function is to enforce the laws of the land and thus to provide citizens with protection against criminal activity. If the situation goes from “police culture” that is bad to criminals dominating the force then they become the source of danger.
Let us take a police force of any country and I want to stress here that I am not talking about third world. I am talking about anywhere in the world. Indeed this corruption occurs more commonly in the first world than in the third world. In the third world crime is more openly done. A police force, like any other organization, whether public or private has a mix of people as employees. Some may be humane people and dedicated to the job, some may be, owing to their circumstances (most often generated for the purpose of corrupting them), vulnerable to corruption. Others may be greedy to one extent or another and prepared to “do whatever it takes to get ahead”, and then there are those that are toxic. Toxic people are really criminals but they do not do crime in the usual way that common criminals do crime. Thus they are not seen as criminals. Many look and behave as if they are model citizens.
By evil and criminal I am not talking about the “honest to goodness corruption”, as has been seen only too often. As for instance empires within the police force of prostitution, drug dealing and illegal gambling. These are serious crimes but not in the same category as evil.
I am talking about criminals existing inside the police force of a nation, such as can be employed to murder, systematically and serially. For instance to carry out assassinations for political reasons and it looks like natural causes because the crimes are white washed at autopsy. They may help overthrow of a Government or remove a political leader from office while it all looks democratic and just “business as usual”.
Let’s say, for argument’s sake, that a problem arises for the toxic under-culture such that honest and humane police suddenly become a grave disadvantage. One way to “fix the problem” is to make sure that there are no police that would act in any way that may expose the toxic networks and expose this form of corruption. I will discuss the toxic under-culture in more depth later as it is impossible to understand the problems posed for a community that have to do with health without discussing them. One way to “clean up the force” is to “stress out maximally” those that are good and thus encourage them to leave and to apply what they call “the carrot and the stick” approach to those that are vulnerable or who can be made vulnerable and thus corruptible and lastly to those that are greedy.
The “carrot and the stick approach” means the person is first stressed but only just as much as is needed in each particular case. Thus some may be stressed much more than others. And the form of stress used is usually anxiety states. Then the person is offered some reward. If they take the reward the stress is removed. If they reject the reward they are stressed some more. Thus when they finally take the reward, they experience a good feeling but they have been also given to understand subliminally that they cannot “go back on the deal”. They have been conditioned and “given a message” that should they have second thoughts they would experience much more stress and worse than before and no more carrots will be forth coming. Indeed they would be either dismissed on some pretext if they don’t look like talking or if they “look like they may be trouble” they would be “disposed of”, which means they suffer a sudden and fatal stroke or heart attack. That way they know to do what they are told; To be obedient or else. This however is the lesser case and it only applies to those that can be corrupted. Not everyone can be corrupted. Those that cannot be corrupted, who are made of sufficient moral fiber, are removed but of course not asked to leave but “seriously encouraged to leave”. This is done by the use of severe stress or panic states. How can this be done?
An experienced, competent police officer and one that has been in the force for many years can be easily and savagely stressed when underhanded criminal means are used. And the reason is that by these means the person’s life is threatened suddenly, in real terms and inexplicably. First “a situation” is created. The toxic police or what are known within the toxic under-world as “people who know criminals” arrange for some criminal to be present at some place and begin to threaten someone. From what I have seen, in any foul game all the players are toxic. This means that the “someone”, who is threatened by the criminal, is also a toxic person and “in the game”. He or she calls the police to the scene and points out the problem. The offender is armed and threatening with a gun. The situation calls for an experienced officer to handle the matter and preferably disarm the man and make an arrest. This is not achieved without back up and back up means that the experienced officer must have other police officers to defend him, to provide protection and to co-operate in the overall effort. Police work is always team work. If in the back up that he has, there is an officer that is in on the game then the experienced officer is really in “no man’s land”. A trusted colleague or someone that the experienced officer depends on has a very powerful position. They are not trivially relationally entangled. In holding a position of trust they are very closely entangled so an idea presented by the corrupt back up officer to the experienced officer will be consciously perceived by the latter.
The officer is also in danger as the offending criminal is armed and threatening to shoot, so they will experience fear. If the situation is not clear to them and the more serious danger is posed by the corrupt back up police officer then the fear will be acute. The experienced police officer will experience extreme fear and believe that this is due to the offending criminal. In such circumstances an idea that seems natural can be presented to push the experienced officer’s fear to maximal levels. For instance the idea of “I shouldn’t shoot him”. This may seem to the experienced officer to be his own thought because they are trained to try to disarm and not shoot unless absolutely necessary. However what he doesn’t know is that this thought is not his thinking but a perception of an idea presented to him. And it is cunningly presented because with a little almost imperceptible pause and a slight tonal difference, the idea can appears as reasoning as in “I shouldn’t… ” and that followed by a go ahead idea of “shoot him”. Another way is to make it a question and answer as in “I shouldn’t? ah, shoot him!” Remember the experienced officer’s executive function is not fully operational and if the fear is acute enough may even be temporarily suspended. So ideas that seem like reasoning may be taken as such. However no matter how the idea is presented and how he perceives it, it will have the effect of escalating his fear. He will find this hard to understand because unbeknown to him he is in a dialogue with the corrupt officer behind him, who is the one posing the real danger. And as they say “accidents can happen”. One police officer shooting another won’t be a crime if it is seen to be an accident. The only thing that may happen to the corrupt officer is some re-training, particularly if he puts up a public face of being grief stricken. He may even get some leave on full pay for his trouble.
What about if the police officer shoots the criminal offender? Surely he wouldn’t be in the game if he is going to be shot. Well firstly he won’t know it. However in the toxic under-world everyone is disposable. This is well understood. Why wouldn’t they then expose the corruption? The reason here is that once recruited and part of the underworld “the only way out is in a wooden box” and they all know it.
Is the experienced officer in danger? I will discuss the dynamics more in depth later but I will say here that when a condition is accepted in mind, in some sense a door is opened because an action is allowed. It doesn’t stop it from being a crime since deception is used and not free and open compliance. However that doesn’t help the person facing the danger. Only with knowledge of foul play can the person decipher the problem and either take sufficient corrective action at the start or arrest the situation swiftly, before they suffer harm. And of course severe stress or panic is harm, especially if they end up having to give up their career in the end.
To protect one’s self it is important to understand many things, including the foul play. In foul play ideas of themselves cannot be used without changes in meaning. Thus ideas are presented in general terms and then meaning is presented more slyly. Often the general suggestion is repeated but with tonal differences as to present another meaning. One needs to understand that meaning is where it counts and not in the words. We have dictionaries and talk about “words having meaning” but in actual fact it is the other way around. We use words to express meaning. Meaning is primary. So the words “I shouldn’t shoot him” can have more than one meaning depending on how they are used. Firstly, it needs to be recognized that the words are a general suggestion and not specific. Who is “him”? The suggestion does not specify who “him” is. It could refer to the criminal offender but it could equally refer to someone else. Then we have variations in meaning depending on how the words are said as I explained above. A pause and a tonal change can change the meaning. Thus if they understand what is going on, then they can notice the meaning they perceive and it becomes a red flag. If the experienced officer is to see this then they would immediately know that they are dealing with a toxic colleague who is posing the real danger and not the criminal. And there are ways of countering the problem. Unfortunately without understanding the foul play and believing the medical misinformation the police officer that is maltreated in this way really has no options. They do not have any real support because these means are not obvious and thus the person is blamed for “how they feel” or that “having done
this kind of work for a long time, the job gets too stressful”. All of which of course is garbage. Working for a long time as a police officer they get more experience and thus better able to cope, UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES. And normal circumstances mean that there is real team work and not colleagues threatening to shoot them in the back.
It is also important to appreciate that these means are white washed by the medicos. So the only relief or “help” the stressed out officer gets comes in the form of drugs. And here too there is corruption that may add to the game. On the next page I will discuss a similar matter but one where the police officer is more seriously panicked so as to cause them to shoot someone. This can affect every officer in a cities police force. How?