John Lennon would be 70 today

[Albert Doyle]

[Because mind control programming involves, at the very least, a programmer and a subject.

If someone takes drugs and becomes psychotic, that person has not "MK-ULTRA programmed himself". Your statement is highly misleading.

I'm sorry I disagree with this. My reasons were more than clear and already explained. I've already explained that in Chapman's particular case, especially considering his direct surroundings that would have forced the necessary conditioning, technically, he could have done something similar to MK-ULTRA programming on his own. In that case it is valid to use MK-ULTRA programming as an example since it is the main issue we are talking about in this case.

I don't think it is that misleading, especially after it's been explained. Honestly I don't see the draconian need to force the terms so precisely and specifically. Since this has been explained and elaborated, and doesn't really take that much mental effort to understand, why force the issue into this quibbling over semantics? I see this as a debate over semantic interpretation rather than what is being gotten at. If I failed to explain myself clearly I apologize but I do not back down from the use of the terms. If people want to force the entire issue of Mark David Chapman's being mind controlled into terse debates over the exact, precise definition of the use of the words "MK-ULTRA programming" I can't stop them from doing it but I can add my opinion that it doesn't really add to the substance of what is being said and serves preferred critiques over the greater issue. To me the idea that the words "MK-ULTRA programming" can only be used in the intellectually martinet case of strict clinical manipulation using teams is preposterous and violates the freedom of abstract speech generally assumed amongst gentlemen of words. And since this has been elaborated clearly and isn't difficult to understand I believe it is these people who are the ones "muddying the waters" so to speak. I believe the problem here is people assuming ALL references to "MK-ULTRA programming" must strictly, and always, refer to classic clinical teams, however there's no reason for that nor is there any reason to assume it can't be used in the abstract manner. And I believe what I wrote could only be explained as "highly misleading" if one ignores the entire text explaining what was meant and focuses only on words and semantics.