Son Of Sam (David Berkowitz; Conspiracy?; Cult?)

[Analis]

Human memory and descriptive powers are poor. Try, for example, to remember the face of the cashier who last served you at a supermarket. Now try to describe her to me in such detail that I could prepare a worthwhile sketch of her.

I certainly could not give a reliable description in most cases.
While despite having poor recollection and lacking time to spot enough details, witnesses often give enough inifrmation to allow for precise sketches is not explained by such simplistic assertions as «witnesses are unreliable». Many psychological factors are at work : the desire to please an authority figure (including the inability to resist pressure from an investigator who's asking for results), the fear to bother the same figure ; and, what I would call the 'performance pressure', the shame to admit that one is not up to the task required of them ; or, if you prefer, to admit that one is a poor observer or has a poor memory, the fear to look like an idiot or merely useless for being unable to help.
Indeed, the failure to recognize that they can not help often lead people to try to do too well, sometimes with serious consequences

 

[Dr_Baltar]

It seems that such a statement was indeed made to Robert Ressler of the FBI.

I believe he also claimed to have targeted women so they wouldn't have unwanted babies like himself. He was a very disturbed man and I wouldn't particularly believe any of his explanations over any other.

 

[maximus otter]

I certainly could not give a reliable description in most cases.
While despite having poor recollection and lacking time to spot enough details, witnesses often give enough inifrmation to allow for precise sketches is not explained by such simplistic assertions as «witnesses are unreliable». Many psychological factors are at work : the desire to please an authority figure (including the inability to resist pressure from an investigator who's asking for results), the fear to bother the same figure ; and, what I would call the 'performance pressure', the shame to admit that one is not up to the task required of them ; or, if you prefer, to admit that one is a poor observer or has a poor memory, the fear to look like an idiot or merely useless for being unable to help.
Indeed, the failure to recognize that they can not help often lead people to try to do too well, sometimes with serious consequences

All true.

As an interesting aside concerning how witnesses' memories work, and how cunning crims can exploit that, take a look at the "Wanted" poster of Randy Woodfield, the "I5 Killer" in Post 4 above. I selected this purely on the basis of its easy availability on Google Images, but it makes a point: close examination of 4 of the 12 alternative images shows that the suspect depicted was wearing an Elastoplast across the bridge of his nose. Woodfield did this deliberately. Despite having no injury or mark to be concealed, he'd apply the bandage before committing an offence, hoping that witnesses - desperate to pick out a unique identifying feature about the offender - would remember and fixate on the dressing. That it appears in 33% of the sketches shows that he might have been evil, but he was far from stupid.

maximus otter

 

[Mythopoeika]

*Chuckle* I have heard that Harlan Ellison was a difficult character. Has anyone checked him out as a possible serial killer?

Careful. He's a serial litigator.

 

[Mythopoeika]

Harlan Ellison once phoned me up at work - true! I used to work for a science-fiction magazine, as a sub-editor/writer, and was in the office on my own one evening when the phone rang; I picked it up and it was the great man himself calling from the USA. The notoriously difficult and famously litigious writer was calling to complain/put us right about something we'd written concerning the creation of the film The Terminator. Luckily I'd just been reading some of his work the night before - The Glass Teat, if memory serves - and we got on superbly. He even called me a 'cool m*****f*****'! I sweet-talked him, calmed him down and we got him to write a piece for the magazine! Result.

That would be the job of my dreams, really it would.

 

[Gambeir]

What constitutes a film "of note"?

Noteworthy would be a matter of what one considers significant.

Cloud Atlas is more than a film, it's a future forecast, it includes the end of civilization and how we get there from where we are now. There are alternatives for a select few but not for everyone. It's clearly foretelling the future and it's not using symbolism on the whole to tell us this future, which is actually a forecast as seen through the eyes of the powers that be specialists. For those reasons I called it noteworthy.

 

[GNC]

Noteworthy would be a matter of what one considers significant.

Cloud Atlas is more than a film, it's a future forecast, it includes the end of civilization and how we get there from where we are now. There are alternatives for a select few but not for everyone. It's clearly foretelling the future and it's not using symbolism on the whole to tell us this future, which is actually a forecast as seen through the eyes of the powers that be specialists. For those reasons I called it noteworthy.

I'm not so sure a film that doesn't know Volkswagen Beetles can float is that trustworthy on such other details. Had they never seen Herbie Goes Bananas?!

 

[Gambeir]

No cult can be a black op. Black ops are developed as a rapid insertion rapid exit mission for the most part. Human contact is limited as much as possible in a black op. Cults must be at least semi-permanent, which means they need to use a more Espionage/Terror cell system, and that means employing the Organized Crime business model. It is exponentially harder to cover up a secret, the more people become involved.

Now you correctly suggest that there is a link between Espionage and Cult activity, but you put the wagon before the horse imo. Spies use cults as cover, not the other way round. The classic example if Dr. John Dee (allegedly the original agent 007), who traveled the Royal Courts of Europe posing as an eminent occultist, while using his weird writings and Enochian Keys as the ciphers of his spycraft. It was a great cover. Similarly the historical ninja families of Japan, the Koga and Iga Shinobi used to rely on local superstition and demonology to scare people away from their operations scooby doo style. This was also a tactic employed by the Roman Areani, who were their recon/elite services. As the quote goes "Yea tho I walk through the Valley of the Shadow of Death I shall fear no evil for I am the meanest sonofabitch in the valley" i.e. you don't need to fear the supernatural when you are the scariest thing going bump in the night. Similarly the classic Espionage recruiting system of MISE (Money Ideology Sex Ego) can all be easily facilitated through the cover of a cult. There is even reason to believe that Aleister Crowley was spying on Mussolini for the British from his cult base at the Abbey of Thelema on Sicily. Allegedly Mussolini was personally insulted and mortified when he heard that Crowley was a vocal proponent of fascism, which is hilarious. I have made a close and historical critical study of the role of Freemasonry and the so-called Illuminati conspiracy in the USA, and it is immensely exaggerated and was far more Christian than anyone seems prepared to admit. Most people are unaware, for example, that Freemasonry doesn't admit atheists.

A black operation is defined as a covert program. It isn't necessary for it to be a quasi-paramilitary operation in the sense you've taken. A black operation might be one which is working on projects outside the law. A black operation may be an unethical program that would put a company or individuals at risk socially or economically. A black operation may involve supposed areas of national security such as mind control programs.

The whole idea here is to see a cult as a tool used to exploit the the un-awares. A cult, as such, would be an accessory to a control model. It would be independent of a running program and unrelated to that program. Example; "Those people deserved to die. They were all pedophiles." Charles Manson.

The idea here is that the cult leader and even the followers aren't aware of their roles. Thus they are truly independent of a black operation. These groups/cults may receive support in the form of lucky breaks, houses to live in and so forth, so as to continue providing a supportive role or to exist when called upon to be exploited for other ends.

Thus there's no physical connections to a cult which can then be linked back to a black covert program. The Son of Sam case seems to be illustrating a connection to a group of killers (cult). Berkowitz appears to be an insane person acting independently (probably driven insane by the same program that eventually uses him as a patsy to pin the murders to) and the victims are likely random targets except for one or two whom I presume were whistle blowers, or liabilities of some great concern that could expose the black program.

There's nothing true about secrets being exponentially harder to cover up. The route to success in that area is well mapped and time proven. There's many avenues to success in this matter. The reason this cult link rings with me is that it can be seen in the Charles Manson case.

I'm not sure I'm explaining this well enough just yet. In the Charles Manson case there's at least two cults involved, and really one could say there are three. One is Manson's own group of idiots. The other is the satanic sex cult that the victims are involved with, and the third is the victims cult of profession which is film making.

Somewhere's along the line the victims spiral out of control. It's supposed to be the function of the sexually deviant quasi-satanic group/cult to act as the black mail container control group to quell these people, to compel them to keep their mouths shut, or to entice them with more deviant desires to do so. So by nature the victims are involved with a secret in the first place, which in the Manson case involves film making somehow, and then they are lured in to a cult/group by desires and that link is there to act as the instrument of black mail if all else fails. If this fails then a secondary group is employed to eliminate the suspected whistle blowers or liability. This secondary group/cult has no knowledge of what the secret is that the victim is/was involved with. They only know, if they know anything at all, is what they are shown or told which provides the logical pretext or reason for murdering them.

 

[Gambeir]

All true.

As an interesting aside concerning how witnesses' memories work, and how cunning crims can exploit that, take a look at the "Wanted" poster of Randy Woodfield, the "I5 Killer" in Post 4 above. I selected this purely on the basis of its easy availability on Google Images, but it makes a point: close examination of 4 of the 12 alternative images shows that the suspect depicted was wearing an Elastoplast across the bridge of his nose. Woodfield did this deliberately. Despite having no injury or mark to be concealed, he'd apply the bandage before committing an offence, hoping that witnesses - desperate to pick out a unique identifying feature about the offender - would remember and fixate on the dressing. That it appears in 33% of the sketches shows that he might have been evil, but he was far from stupid.

maximus otter

There's an idea that serial killers in particular are prone to try to express or to demonstrate their superior intelligence. They do believe they are superior to others. Many criminals think they are smart and clever. This bandage scheme wasn't one I was aware of but it is indeed clever.

 

[Gambeir]

I'm not so sure a film that doesn't know Volkswagen Beetles can float is that trustworthy on such other details. Had they never seen Herbie Goes Bananas?!

I too was struck by the incongruity. Everyone knows Volkswagens float. Legendary really. My Grandfather had a beautiful little Beetle and I remember how airtight that sucker was when you closed the door. Maybe it's a sign of our age that such a noteworthy quality of an automotive icon could be so over looked. A kid born in the 1990's wouldn't know this most likely. Who knows but it really is a glaring error.

Not to side track here but it goes back to Maximus Otter and post #25 about the bandage scheme, and that's the level of stagecraft executed in Cloud Atlas. I caught the film on cable clueless about any of it's history. It was only afterwards that I became aware of all the roles a handful of actors portrayed.

There's a lot of images showing the staggering level of stagecraft makeup but here's two quick and blurry ones just to make the point. We are so conned with a false reality that I seriously doubt we know the half of it.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a7/51/92/a751928918e3ac03defaa4ffb27278c6.jpg
https://i.pinimg.com/564x/a1/99/ae/...39e--cloud-atlas-quotes-cloud-atlas-movie.jpg

 

[gerhard1]

I believe he also claimed to have targeted women so they wouldn't have unwanted babies like himself. He was a very disturbed man and I wouldn't particularly believe any of his explanations over any other.

Something similar to this came out through informants, but he is only said to have done it one time for this reason.

 

[gerhard1]

To the esteemed Mr Otter I would ask this: is it confirmed that the two composites were of Ridgeway or were they of someone that the victims were seen with? I guess what I am asking is: how do we know the person the eyewitness saw was Ridgeway? They were prostitutes for the most part and they had a lot of contacts with men.

And before anyone jumps in with I'm saying that their being prostitutes justifies or excuses what happened to them; I am most emphatically not saying that. Also I don't question Ridgeway's guilt in the least.

Please keep in mind that Ridgeway was not found due to eyewitness evidence; it was particles of paint that came from the Kenworth factory near Seattle and DNA samples found in the victims that led the King County Police (later, Sheriff) to him. He struck a plea bargain with the prosecutor and entered a guilty plea in exchange for a life sentence.

 

[Dr_Baltar]

Noteworthy would be a matter of what one considers significant.

Cloud Atlas is more than a film, it's a future forecast, it includes the end of civilization and how we get there from where we are now. There are alternatives for a select few but not for everyone. It's clearly foretelling the future and it's not using symbolism on the whole to tell us this future, which is actually a forecast as seen through the eyes of the powers that be specialists. For those reasons I called it noteworthy.

Either that, or it's a decent film based on an enjoyable work of fiction by David Mitchell concerning the eternal predaciousness of human nature.

 

[AlchoPwn]

There's nothing true about secrets being exponentially harder to cover up. The route to success in that area is well mapped and time proven. There's many avenues to success in this matter. The reason this cult link rings with me is that it can be seen in the Charles Manson case.

I thought your position was well argued, with the notable exception of this point. The fact is that it can be shown that conspiracies have a critical mass of potential members before they unravel by losing control of the information flow. Remember that conspiracies are criminal, and as a result have been studied by Criminologists and Organizational Psychologists.

This link is to a study paper that covers the dynamics of the problems that a conspiracy faces, and why the larger a conspiracy gets, the more likely it is to fail:

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0147905

I have made this link available more generally in a new thread so more people on the forum have access to this somewhat obscure topic.

 

[Gambeir]

Thanks AlchoPwn, but maybe the issue is how the conspiracy is packaged?

For example, recall here that the USAF keep a secret stealth aircraft secret for at least 18 years and no on ever got a photo, drawing, or accurate depiction of the aircraft. The idea here being the use of patriotism played an important role in maintaining the secret. So now what we would have to figure here is what tools might be used and how effective those tools would be.

Keeping in mind here that in the event of leak, the the best solution to a run away problem is to eliminate the leak, and then to eliminate the assassin themselves: Curtain behind curtains. This wouldn't be too difficult if the killers are selected for their other qualities. Just about any criminal with a record could be offed and then have drugs planted on them to make it appear they were killed in drug deal gone bad, but that's just one example. Writing an ending for those types of people are endless: Stole a car and crashed, was shot in a home invasion, ect to infinity.

 

[Gambeir]

Either that, or it's a decent film based on an enjoyable work of fiction by David Mitchell concerning the eternal predaciousness of human nature.

Yes, well you put me in a difficult position because the idea here in making this reply is not to come across like some pompous jackass. Please attempt to overlook that which seems offending as it's unintended. Now I would say that; if I were to begin teaching a class in literature I would begin with saying something like the following, and I would say this because, of course, similar words passed my ears by a more enlightened person once upon a time many years past.

Literature which is intended to be art, and writing is an art form, is written on many levels. Great literature is never intended for one age or epoch in a person's life. It is intended to grow and evolve with the soul of those who love the work so that when the story is re-read, years later, it's seen anew as though it were being read for the first time though the story is itself already familiar to the reader. Literature which is art is thoughtfully designed and written as though it flowed spontaneously but of course it's been written with great labor and pain.

I'm reminded of something my father said to me about calligraphy when I complained that writing this way was physically painful, and he replied that if it wasn't hurting you weren't doing it right. Only by long effort is the skill acquired where the lettering flows without pain and so it's normally true of great writing as well. Not always of course, but for most of us this is a developed art form like becoming a ballet dancer. You do not simply wake up and say today I will be great.

I believe Tom Hanks assembled the actors and filmed this over the course of three years. Now I must stop or I will be lecturing and no one is paying me for lecturing just yet, but the idea I'm trying to pass on is to expand the view and understanding for it is there.

 

[Dr_Baltar]

Yes, well you put me in a difficult position because the idea here in making this reply is not to come across like some pompous jackass. Please attempt to overlook that which seems offending as it's unintended. Now I would say that; if I were to begin teaching a class in literature I would begin with saying something like the following, and I would say this because, of course, similar words passed my ears by a more enlightened person once upon a time many years past.

Literature which is intended to be art, and writing is an art form, is written on many levels. Great literature is never intended for one age or epoch in a person's life. It is intended to grow and evolve with the soul of those who love the work so that when the story is re-read, years later, it's seen anew as though it were being read for the first time though the story is itself already familiar to the reader. Literature which is art is thoughtfully designed and written as though it flowed spontaneously but of course it's been written with great labor and pain.

I'm reminded of something my father said to me about calligraphy when I complained that writing this way was physically painful, and he replied that if it wasn't hurting you weren't doing it right. Only by long effort is the skill acquired where the lettering flows without pain and so it's normally true of great writing as well. Not always of course, but for most of us this is a developed art form like becoming a ballet dancer. You do not simply wake up and say today I will be great.

None of that beautifully crafted prose changes the fact that Mitchell wrote the book as a study of human nature (no doubt with great care, effort and pain), not a prediction of the future as you'd earlier indicated. You are free to see it that way, of course, it's just not the intention of the fiction.

By the way, I found nothing offensive or offending about your post.

I believe Tom Hanks assembled the actors and filmed this over the course of three years.

No, that would be Tom Tykwer, assisted by the Wachowskis. Hanks did help with his enthusiasm for the project when it looked like they would have difficulty securing the finances.


Anyway, apologies all, this has drifted seriously off-topic.

 

[maximus otter]

...is it confirmed that the two composites were of Ridgeway or were they of someone that the victims were seen with?

I chose the illustration for reasons of convenience after a quick Google.

That having been said, I've just checked my copy of Ann Rule's Green River Running Red and found that the sketches are, in fact, of men seen with murdered women, rather than of Ridgway as described by escaped potential victims.

maximus otter

 

[gerhard1]

I chose the illustration for reasons of convenience after a quick Google.

That having been said, I've just checked my copy of Ann Rule's Green River Running Red and found that the sketches are, in fact, of men seen with murdered women, rather than of Ridgway as described by escaped potential victims.

maximus otter

Thank you. I appreciate your honesty.

 

[AlchoPwn]

Thanks AlchoPwn, but maybe the issue is how the conspiracy is packaged?

Sure. There are strategies that can limit the vulnerability of a system. Ultimately entropy always wins though.

For example, recall here that the USAF keep a secret stealth aircraft secret for at least 18 years and no on ever got a photo, drawing, or accurate depiction of the aircraft. The idea here being the use of patriotism played an important role in maintaining the secret. So now what we would have to figure here is what tools might be used and how effective those tools would be.

I just fact checked that and you are not entirely correct. Stealth technology was postulated in the 1964s by Pyotr Ufimtsev in his paper Method of Edge Waves in the Physical Theory of Diffraction in the journal of the Moscow Institute for Radio Engineering. This was only the intellectual principle that made the technology possible however. During the 1970s, Lockheed analyst Denys Overholser found Ufimtsev's paper. Prior to that the USA had no stealth program. The program to develop stealth tech didn't begin until 1975 with the first successful prototype taking its maiden flight in 1977. This was by no means a combat-ready aircraft. The decision to produce the F-117A was made on 1st November 1978. The flight of F-117A was in 1981 the first production F-117A was delivered in 1982, some 4 years later. The aircraft was made public in 1988, only six years after that. Those who were paying attention, noticed the existence of the F-117A some 3 years prior to that in 1985 thanks to Australia's JORN system detecting the craft and inquiries being made with the US military to avoid shooting it down. Furthermore, the information had penetrated US academia and was an open secret prior to that, so many "spook watchers" and military aircraft enthusiasts were in the know too. The notion that a stealth aircraft had been kept under wraps for 18 years is therefore incorrect. The simple fact is that from the beginning of the program in 1975 until the official public unveiling was only 13 years, and for the first 5 years there was no actual aircraft to keep secret, and I suspect that the interested elements of the world public were in the know as of 1984, meaning the secret was kept for 3-7 years not 18.

Keeping in mind here that in the event of leak, the the best solution to a run away problem is to eliminate the leak, and then to eliminate the assassin themselves: Curtain behind curtains. This wouldn't be too difficult if the killers are selected for their other qualities. Just about any criminal with a record could be offed and then have drugs planted on them to make it appear they were killed in drug deal gone bad, but that's just one example. Writing an ending for those types of people are endless: Stole a car and crashed, was shot in a home invasion, etc to infinity.

This model assumes that the leak is detected, and action is possible before a revelation is made. While any number of dirty tricks are possible for assassinating an informant in an undetectable fashion. COINTELPRO is a fine example of such techniques applied in the USA, but the fact it is known about should tell you plenty. When a leak is made, the possibility of it being detected in time for action to be taken is a luxury most conspiracies will never know, even if they have infiltrated local law enforcement, unless the informant is very naive and thus the conspiracy is very lucky. On most occasions, a conspiracy is limited to strategies of information hygiene and damage mitigation when there is a leak. This is why many organizations, such as spy rings, have a "need-to-know-only" policy for their operations so that there is information hygiene on captured operatives and how much they can tell their captors. The best strategy is the cell strategy, which means that only 1 person, the leader, reports to the higher-ups in the organization, so even if the whole cell is captured, there is something of a firewall between the operatives and the rest of the network. This strategy has also been useful for terrorist operations, however the idiots will still use their mobile phones and get themselves droned on a semi-regular basis.

 

[Gambeir]

The thread has drifted off topic? It's expanded to discuss the hypothesis of how a cult could be involved. Then we started with examples of keeping secrets which AlchoPwn thinks was freely available information. However if we could time slip backwards this supposedly free information simply didn't exist as portrayed.


Tempest in a Toy Box : The Stealth Fighter Is So Secret the Pentagon Won't Admit It Exists
http://articles.latimes.com/1986-10-19/magazine/tm-5852_1_f-19-stealth-fighter
October 19, 1986
Extract.
"Last spring, the Testor model kit company of Rockford, Ill., introduced its model of the super-secret F-19 stealth fighter and immediately created an international sensation. Newspapers around the world ran front-page stories. Dan Rather featured the model on the "CBS Evening News." An irate congressman held up the kit during testimony from the chairman of Lockheed and demanded to know how a toy company was able to sell plastic models of a plane that members of Congress weren't allowed to see."

As for the secrets of stealth technology it's not 1988, or even 1998, it's 2018 with a global information system at our fingertips. Information simply wasn't available like you've depicted in your post. The Soviet Empire didn't even collapse until Dec of 1991 so any information from Russia sources was very unlikely to be available to any but a select few. To now go back tracking on all the now available data gives an inaccurate depiction of reality.

This is about secrets and about keeping secrets. Very few people had any real knowledge of stealth technology. A few people understood some basic concepts and some primitive notions. These were reflected in the popular media. Yes there were rumors, but no one had any clear images, drawings, or technical information, and if you did you sure weren't going to be blabbering long about it.

No on had a clue what the rumored secret radar invisible airplane might look like. John Andrews had freelanced a design for Testors called the F-119. Monogram Models their version on toy shelves for several months before their offices and warehouse was raided by U.S. marshals. Afterwards spooks in dark glasses showed up at a trade shows and confiscated all the models from those. They told Monogram that they were violating the law by selling a model of an aircraft that didn't exist!

Some more on this here.
http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4374&view=print

Here's the Revell model version

Even today the understanding of stealth technology is told in very simplified terms and not many people have a clear grasp of the why and how certain materials and designs act to produce the desired outcome. Stealth technology is usually explained in fairly simplified terms. We are way beyond this now, and yes the information is out there but again, it's not in the popular media, nor is it explained in any comprehensible way by scientific types. However, unlike 1988 we do have the ability to at least track down scientific white papers which are related, so long as you are aware of how these papers actually do relate.

This last statement moves the whole mode of secrecy in to another realm.

Sure. There are strategies that can limit the vulnerability of a system. Ultimately entropy always wins though.



I just fact checked that and you are not entirely correct. Stealth technology was postulated in the 1964s by Pyotr Ufimtsev in his paper Method of Edge Waves in the Physical Theory of Diffraction in the journal of the Moscow Institute for Radio Engineering. This was only the intellectual principle that made the technology possible however. During the 1970s, Lockheed analyst Denys Overholser found Ufimtsev's paper. Prior to that the USA had no stealth program. The program to develop stealth tech didn't begin until 1975 with the first successful prototype taking its maiden flight in 1977. This was by no means a combat-ready aircraft. The decision to produce the F-117A was made on 1st November 1978. The flight of F-117A was in 1981 the first production F-117A was delivered in 1982, some 4 years later. The aircraft was made public in 1988, only six years after that. Those who were paying attention, noticed the existence of the F-117A some 3 years prior to that in 1985 thanks to Australia's JORN system detecting the craft and inquiries being made with the US military to avoid shooting it down. Furthermore, the information had penetrated US academia and was an open secret prior to that, so many "spook watchers" and military aircraft enthusiasts were in the know too. The notion that a stealth aircraft had been kept under wraps for 18 years is therefore incorrect. The simple fact is that from the beginning of the program in 1975 until the official public unveiling was only 13 years, and for the first 5 years there was no actual aircraft to keep secret, and I suspect that the interested elements of the world public were in the know as of 1984, meaning the secret was kept for 3-7 years not 18.



This model assumes that the leak is detected, and action is possible before a revelation is made. While any number of dirty tricks are possible for assassinating an informant in an undetectable fashion. COINTELPRO is a fine example of such techniques applied in the USA, but the fact it is known about should tell you plenty. When a leak is made, the possibility of it being detected in time for action to be taken is a luxury most conspiracies will never know, even if they have infiltrated local law enforcement, unless the informant is very naive and thus the conspiracy is very lucky. On most occasions, a conspiracy is limited to strategies of information hygiene and damage mitigation when there is a leak. This is why many organizations, such as spy rings, have a "need-to-know-only" policy for their operations so that there is information hygiene on captured operatives and how much they can tell their captors. The best strategy is the cell strategy, which means that only 1 person, the leader, reports to the higher-ups in the organization, so even if the whole cell is captured, there is something of a firewall between the operatives and the rest of the network. This strategy has also been useful for terrorist operations, however the idiots will still use their mobile phones and get themselves droned on a semi-regular basis.

 

[gerhard1]

Actually the thread has drifted off-topic very badly. I started it to look at the possibility that other people were involved in the Sam killings and now it is about a secret US Air Force fighter.

Definite thread drift.

 

[Gambeir]

Actually the thread has drifted off-topic very badly. I started it to look at the possibility that other people were involved in the Sam killings and now it is about a secret US Air Force fighter.

Definite thread drift.

Yes, I understand and I do want to return to the crux of the thread. However recognize the position Alchopwn's has taken defines what level of conspiracy can be discussed. It implies that complex organizations are incapable of maintaining secrets. Alchopwns' position is it's not possible to keep secrets of any significance or scale because they grow over time and by the numbers of people involved. That might be true of people wandering the street working at an ordinary job, but that's not the sort of people whom would be involved in covert operations.

Alchopwn's ideas limits the scope of discussion as to what is and is not possible. It castrates the potential to explore complexity since it categorically denies that complex secrets involving large numbers of people can be sustained. Thus any cult involved in the Son of Sam murders would then have to be a small group by that definition. It denies that multiple agencies and hundreds or even thousands of people may have some knowledge. Using the example I did was an attempt to break through this notion.

Originally I suggested that one or more of the victims was very likely chosen for some reason while the rest were murders to obscure that fact. What we might look at are some of the possible reasons one of the victims may have been murdered. For example, in gangland style murders a lower minion is selected for assassination whom represents an important VIP. So this is one potential explanation.

 

[maximus otter]

...it can be shown that conspiracies have a critical mass of potential members before they unravel by losing control of the information flow.

Bletchley Park, the HQ of the Ultra decryption service that broke the Germans' Enigma machine output, employed scores of thousands of people during WWII. In January 1945 alone there were ten thousand staff working there.

Its secrets were kept until 1974.

maximus otter

 

[Gambeir]

Actually the thread has drifted off-topic very badly. I started it to look at the possibility that other people were involved in the Sam killings and now it is about a secret US Air Force fighter.

Definite thread drift.

So my position on this right now is that the murders may have all been done by Berkowitz, but this in no way rules out larger and more involved collective of others participating in these crimes.

Let's just run through a couple avenues as SOP (standard operating proceedure) in matters like this one. First employ some anagrams. Berkowitz used a Charter Arm's 44 special to commit the murders.

An anagram for special is Plaice.
Plaice is a flat bodied fish eaten as food.

Anagram for Berkowitz is: Be Zit Work
*8 letter Anagram for Berkowitz is Reitboks: any of several reedbucks (especially Redunca arundinum) of southern Africa having a bushy tail and in the male small ringed horns that curve forward. Antelopes from the genus Redunca.

The Dog's name was Harvey. Anagrams for Harvey: Ah Very or Ha Very
The name Harvey grabbed my attention because of it's association to film involving an invisible giant rabbit.

Harvey
Harvey is a 1950 comedy-drama film based on Mary Chase's play of the same name, directed by Henry Koster, and starring James Stewart and Josephine Hull. The story is about a man whose best friend is a pooka named Harvey – in the form of a six-foot, three-and-a-half-inch tall invisible rabbit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_(film)

A pooka is a mischievous or malignant goblin or specter held in Irish folklore to appear in the form of a horse and to haunt bogs and marshes.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pooka


James Stewart plays a character named Elwood drinks and might also be mentally ill.
Elwood is another repetitive name in film. An anagram for Elwood is dewool; to remove the wool.

"A Dr. Sanderson convinces Elwood to come into his office where he will receive a serum called Formula 977 that will stop Elwood Dowd from "seeing the rabbit". As they are preparing for the injection, Elwood's sister is told by their cab driver about all the other people he has driven to the sanatorium to receive the same medicine, warning her that Elwood will become "just a normal human being. And you know what stinkers they are."

She goes back an stops the doctor from injecting Elwood with the serum.

"As Elwood is leaving, A Dr. Chumley asks Elwood for Harvey's help, and Elwood, being the obliging fellow he is, makes no objection. Dr. Chumley, arm in arm with an invisible companion, asks "Have you ever been to Akron?"

"In the final scene of the film, Elwood (along with everybody else) arrives back at the hospital. By this point, Dr. Chumley is not only convinced of Harvey's existence, but has begun spending time with him on his own, with a mixture of admiration and fear."

 

[AlchoPwn]

Yes, I understand and I do want to return to the crux of the thread. However recognize the position Alchopwn's has taken defines what level of conspiracy can be discussed. It implies that complex organizations are incapable of maintaining secrets. Alchopwns' position is it's not possible to keep secrets of any significance or scale because they grow over time and by the numbers of people involved. That might be true of people wandering the street working at an ordinary job, but that's not the sort of people whom would be involved in covert operations.

My aim was to bring some basis of scientific reality into an area of interest, namely conspiracies, which is normally the subject to some of the most ridiculous speculation human beings are capable of. Most of the time, people who incorporate conspiracies into their worldview seem to think that they are up against covert supervillains, when in fact conspiracies IRL are, by and large, extremely fragile. The fact is that real conspiracies have been studied by criminologists and their point of failure has been identified and quantified, and there is a logically deducible point at which they will fail. If you think this isn't the case, then as you are going against the science, I suggest that your claims need to be supported by solid evidence Gambier. There are plenty of genuine conspiracies that have been uncovered out there in the historical record to draw upon, and I have read about most of them.

Alchopwn's ideas limits the scope of discussion as to what is and is not possible. It castrates the potential to explore complexity since it categorically denies that complex secrets involving large numbers of people can be sustained. Thus any cult involved in the Son of Sam murders would then have to be a small group by that definition. It denies that multiple agencies and hundreds or even thousands of people may have some knowledge. Using the example I did was an attempt to break through this notion.

LOL, castrates? I prefer to see it as providing some basis for keeping things within the realms of sanity i.e. grounding the discussion in facts, not in idle speculation. Most discussion of conspiracies rapidly turn into a cult-like echo chamber where members feed each other's paranoia and absurdism in a very destructive group-think dynamic that even a small amount of critical thinking would reveal is ridiculous. For this reason it is important that there needs to be a onus of proof made on the person who makes a speculative claim to provide evidence in support of their idea. The better the evidence, the more support you will get from me, guaranteed, but there needs to be a basic threshold of credibility reached first.

The suggested evidence for cult involvement is not strong in the Son of Sam murders. The small suggested group , the Carrs, don't really qualify as a cult so much as a couple of fellow travelers. I would also point out that 4 members is a safe number for a conspiracy, which the Carr family + Berkowitz make up. On the other hand, if a cult were involved, Berkowitz has really good reasons not to tell anyone, but he did. Also, if there was a cult involved, murdering for the sake of murdering, then how come the murders stop with Berkowitz's incarceration? To make this position stick, there would need to be a pattern of ongoing similar killings after Berkowitz is captured, and I am not saying that there weren't, somewhere, but surely some evidence is required to support this theory?

Originally I suggested that one or more of the victims was very likely chosen for some reason while the rest were murders to obscure that fact. What we might look at are some of the possible reasons one of the victims may have been murdered. For example, in gangland style murders a lower minion is selected for assassination whom represents an important VIP. So this is one potential explanation.

As a modus operandi this isn't very good for an organization that wants to keep themselves hidden. Surely a single clean hit where the victim appears to have met with a lethal accident would have been more practical if this was the case? Gangland hits are normally performed with the intention of "sending a message", and so are made public enough that the message is sent, and the low level operative spends his time in jail and is considered a "made man" when he gets out. Organized criminal syndicates can perform clean hits, but they generally choose not to.
The Son of Sam murders don't follow that pattern.

 

[AlchoPwn]

Bletchley Park, the HQ of the Ultra decryption service that broke the Germans' Enigma machine output, employed scores of thousands of people during WWII. In January 1945 alone there were ten thousand staff working there. Its secrets were kept until 1974. maximus otter

Allow me to disabuse you of this notion. The Soviets knew all about Bletchley Park etc. soon after it was established in 1938 thanks to the Cambridge network (Burgess, Philby, McClean). In fact the information was leaked by the Soviets to the Nazis who subsequently increased the complexity of Enigma as a result. Having some residual patriotism the Cambridge network didn't subsequently mention Bletchley Park again until the USSR was in the war. Not exactly Son of Sam related maximus otter.

 

[Gambeir]

Allow me to disabuse you of this notion. The Soviets knew all about Bletchley Park etc. soon after it was established in 1938 thanks to the Cambridge network (Burgess, Philby, McClean). In fact the information was leaked by the Soviets to the Nazis who subsequently increased the complexity of Enigma as a result. Having some residual patriotism the Cambridge network didn't subsequently mention Bletchley Park again until the USSR was in the war. Not exactly Son of Sam related maximus otter.

Of course, it was said that Stalin sometimes knew what was on FDR's desk before FDR knew. Many believed in the socialist dream then, and many still do today, Antifa members for example.

 

[Gambeir]

My aim was to bring some basis of scientific reality into an area of interest, namely conspiracies, which is normally the subject to some of the most ridiculous speculation human beings are capable of. Most of the time, people who incorporate conspiracies into their worldview seem to think that they are up against covert supervillains, when in fact conspiracies IRL are, by and large, extremely fragile. The fact is that real conspiracies have been studied by criminologists and their point of failure has been identified and quantified, and there is a logically deducible point at which they will fail. If you think this isn't the case, then as you are going against the science, I suggest that your claims need to be supported by solid evidence Gambier. There are plenty of genuine conspiracies that have been uncovered out there in the historical record to draw upon, and I have read about most of them.



LOL, castrates? I prefer to see it as providing some basis for keeping things within the realms of sanity i.e. grounding the discussion in facts, not in idle speculation. Most discussion of conspiracies rapidly turn into a cult-like echo chamber where members feed each other's paranoia and absurdism in a very destructive group-think dynamic that even a small amount of critical thinking would reveal is ridiculous. For this reason it is important that there needs to be a onus of proof made on the person who makes a speculative claim to provide evidence in support of their idea. The better the evidence, the more support you will get from me, guaranteed, but there needs to be a basic threshold of credibility reached first.

The suggested evidence for cult involvement is not strong in the Son of Sam murders. The small suggested group , the Carrs, don't really qualify as a cult so much as a couple of fellow travelers. I would also point out that 4 members is a safe number for a conspiracy, which the Carr family + Berkowitz make up. On the other hand, if a cult were involved, Berkowitz has really good reasons not to tell anyone, but he did. Also, if there was a cult involved, murdering for the sake of murdering, then how come the murders stop with Berkowitz's incarceration? To make this position stick, there would need to be a pattern of ongoing similar killings after Berkowitz is captured, and I am not saying that there weren't, somewhere, but surely some evidence is required to support this theory?



As a modus operandi this isn't very good for an organization that wants to keep themselves hidden. Surely a single clean hit where the victim appears to have met with a lethal accident would have been more practical if this was the case? Gangland hits are normally performed with the intention of "sending a message", and so are made public enough that the message is sent, and the low level operative spends his time in jail and is considered a "made man" when he gets out. Organized criminal syndicates can perform clean hits, but they generally choose not to.
The Son of Sam murders don't follow that pattern.

To be honest, the numerous misrepresentations of the previous exchange leave me more prone to disbelieve your other ideas than to disbelieve what you might also consider ridiculous speculation. What ideas about the cult theory do you consider ridiculous speculation?

For example is it ridiculous speculation to say that the so called other cultists might have had connections to a mind control program of some kind?

 

[Gambeir]

Either that, or it's a decent film based on an enjoyable work of fiction by David Mitchell concerning the eternal predaciousness of human nature.

You must have seen another film or read a different book than I did because that's not what I'm seeing. Predation is a an important critical part of the film, but to assign evil to predatory is a leap, they are two different qualities, and to assign both to human nature is another matter altogether. The Asian couple living in a dystopian world and who die fighting against that world are neither evil nor predatory. The character that ends up on another world with the woman he falls in love with is neither predatory nor evil. In fact, throughout the film the conflict is between good and evil. He shows us this evil and that it is a man made evil. The author shows us that our personal choices effect those around us and that through our personal acts the final outcome of this world is written. He is clearly using past, present, and future to make a predictable forecast for the future as the author sees that evil is guiding the chain of events instead of people themselves guiding the chain, and it's his plea to change the course as the outcome otherwise is inevitable.