A rumination for the conspiracy-minded . . .
Consider, if you will, an imaginary technique that could be used to solicit personal information from you in public without your awareness nor permission. Is this a Fourth Amendment violation, or not ? See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution for details of the Amendment.
The basic paradigm is this:
6) Repeat steps 3,4,& 5 as needed
7) Release and access shutdown
A simple example might be:
You are in a restaurant with a friend. You are the Subject. The Psyop team is positioned so that you can hear their voices, but not too closely.
1) They gain access; it could be the name of a secret lover, an old or current telephone number that you recognize (the guiltier the better!) or any number of personal phrases that would activate the "Automatic Attention" signal. You vountarily give attention to the things at the table, conversation, etc., but the automatic attention happens without your awareness. We tend to attenuate such automatic signals, because we have a goal set that requires our attention to the things happening in front of us, so to speak. But the mind recognizes the automatic trigger and is "curious" about it. This is NOT analogous to ringing someone on the phone or knocking on their door, because it is most effective when you are distracted or are involved in an attention-absorbing activity, such as reading, talking, or vectoring physical movements.
2) They gain control. this involves the dissociative response to secrecy, guilt, or some other kind of emotional distress. This part could go any number of ways, but the use of a trauma base is usually most effective. It could be from guilt, childhood trauma, or your desire to keep secrets. The exact tactic used is not important. It might involve standard audio embeds used in the media, or something known to be significant to the subject. Sometimes a trigger is installed at this time. The trigger is linked to the trauma or guilt codes so that access and control can be cued by the trigger. One example would be, "When you hear me tap twice, [tap . . . tap] I control you with my voice . . .".
3 & 4) Testing & Evaluation. Again, the variations here probably number as the stars of the sky, so let's stay with our example. The testing and evaluation (of your responses) is a positive feedback arrangement that zeroes in on the desired topics and sensitivities. It might be a list of standard phrases: "I hate myself . . . I am HIV positive . . . I killed somebody . . ." to elicit responses that are characteristic of deception, or guilt, or some other indicator of the veracity of the statements as they apply to the subject. It tells the Team what you care about, are afraid of, or what simply makes you anxious. And all without your awareness or consent!
5 & 6) Solicitation: What they really want to know (as per our imaginary example) is the amount of your bid on a federal construction project. So they use the T&E (3 & 4 above) to shape you into your own polygraph. And then, the real operation begins: they might possibly start at $100,000 and audibly mention amounts in increments of $100,000; when the true amount is reached, you will give the conditioned response, thereby revealing it to them within $100,000 of the real amount. It is then obvious how they could narrow it down to a few thousand, as desired by the Team.
7) At this point they could simply stop and leave the subject, but an ethical operation would seek to calm the subject and "wake him up"; possibly with affirmatory statements, or with a suggestion, such as "Come back to reality and feel good", etc. It can also be used to install an access code or trigger to be used later.
Guilt programming or other simple programs can actually be embedded on music CD's to condition people en masse. This kind of program loosely follows the paradigm above, or is similar to Monroe Institute programs. These are self-contained, automatic, and work over time to condition the subjects.
Well, as I said, it's just imaginary . . . . :-x