SIX locations, but only FIVE identified
On October 2, 1982, another contaminated Tylenol bottle was discovered by police from a batch of bottles removed from a drug store in the Chicago suburbs. Thousands of other bottles were undergoing testing for traces of cyanide. Investigators had no idea how many other bottles might have been tampered with. In an effort to put an end to the senseless deaths, J&J offered a $1,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the terrorist.J&J offered a WHOLE thousand dollars for information leading to the terrorist. [SEE NOTE at the end.] That was generous. We wonder about that "undisclosed" retail outlet. And yes, terrorists always chose their locations and dates for mysterious reasons. Who doesn't look at the calendar now and notice every 5/5 and 5/11 and every other damn date that has any possibility of looking good with some teevee graphic, that hasn't been "used" yet, and wonder if this is the Big Day, when some crazy terrorists decide to make their point.
Investigators discovered that the cyanide-laced capsules were placed in six Chicago area stores: Jewel Foods in Arlington Heights, Jewel Foods in Grove Village, Osco Drug Store in Schaumburg, Walgreen Drug Store in Chicago, Frank's Finer Foods in Winfield and another undisclosed retail outlet. Each store contained one tampered bottle with approximately three to ten tainted capsules, except for Osco Drug Store where two cyanide laced bottles were recovered.
It was suggested by the police that the bottles were randomly placed. However there was also a possibility that the terrorist may have purposely chosen those specific locations for unknown reasons. Some speculated that the terrorist could have held a grudge against the producers of Tylenol, society in general or even the stores in which the tainted bottles were found. It was further suggested that the killer many have lived within the vicinity of the drug stores, where the tampered bottles were placed.
^^^^^^^
One suspect: James Lewis.
A couple of unknown college students (?) trying to conduct this interview have not got any basic facts in command, but no worries. He waves a book around, a book written by an expert: John Douglas, Brilliant FBI Profiler and Catcher of Many Bad Guys....He barely lets Lewis get a word in edgewise as he gushes about Douglas and FBI profiling. In the book, Douglas was trying to figure out the motive of who would do this and the guy who did this..."was a loser, was angry at the world and was lashing out." And that something must have happened in September right before the murders, and that something triggered the murderer's anger. He didn't do such a sophisticated job at putting the cyanide into the pills, so he wasn't very sophisticated. Nor was he very organized, and he surely drove a five year old car that needed some work.
Although we don't know about that "undisclosed" location. Perhaps brilliant FBI profiler Douglas didn't investigate that part?
"And so he ruled out everyone in Johnson & Johnson.... someone in the higher ups..." [waving hand dismissively...] But that still left all the ordinary slobs at J&J to be suspects.
Mmm hmm.
And how does he know this? Well it's a science. You'd have to be an expert to appreciate it, or at least read an expert's book with your knee pads strapped on securely, and then it would be very obvious.
Douglas has worked on over 5,000 cases. Of those 5,000 cases, he’s never been proved wrong on the guilt or innocence of a suspect. Not once. “I think that’s probably the biggest pressure, is the possibility of being wrong and why I got sick”, Douglas tells me.
In the January issue of Maxim, Douglas said he was convinced that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are innocent.
Well, we think not. We think she's quite the little actress, or rather, she thinks she's quite the little actress rotating through her repertoire of four or five expressions that range all the way from
Our gut instinct says she got away with murder. But we are no expert. We don't have access to the court evidence, which is why we can be dismissed, but regardless, using our HUMAN INSTINCTS, we think her guilt is written all over her face. And Mr. Douglas, who has access to anything he needs, has never been PROVEN wrong, not even once according to legend. And he says she's innocent. What more do you need to know?
We live in a society governed by the Rule of Law /eyeroll/. If the experts say you're guilty, you're guilty; and if they say you're innocent, you're innocent. You don't have to be going on with your own OPINIONS based on you thinking your own thoughts and using your instincts like some God-damned conspiracy freak.
There's NO EVIDENCE for any opinions other than the ones put forth by the people with access to the evidence. It's so simple as long as you go along and have no independent thoughts.
Regarding courts and their evidence, please see Robert Canup's page which explains how courts create the maximum chance that the guilty will be found innocent, and the innocent will be punished.
I HAVE to get away with this....
(dimples = smile muscles at work)
to
I really hope I get away with this....
to
I am SO getting away with this...
and everything in between.
Our gut instinct says she got away with murder. But we are no expert. We don't have access to the court evidence, which is why we can be dismissed, but regardless, using our HUMAN INSTINCTS, we think her guilt is written all over her face. And Mr. Douglas, who has access to anything he needs, has never been PROVEN wrong, not even once according to legend. And he says she's innocent. What more do you need to know?
We live in a society governed by the Rule of Law /eyeroll/. If the experts say you're guilty, you're guilty; and if they say you're innocent, you're innocent. You don't have to be going on with your own OPINIONS based on you thinking your own thoughts and using your instincts like some God-damned conspiracy freak.
There's NO EVIDENCE for any opinions other than the ones put forth by the people with access to the evidence. It's so simple as long as you go along and have no independent thoughts.
Regarding courts and their evidence, please see Robert Canup's page which explains how courts create the maximum chance that the guilty will be found innocent, and the innocent will be punished.
But Amanda Knox happened many years after the Tylenol tampering incident of 1982, and we digress.
Quotes from the video:
"The letter was addressed to Johnson & Johnson."
...Parent of McNeil Laboratories...
"I was not trying to get a million dollars. I was trying to get attention focused on a bank....[crosstalk]... Illinois bank."
The Continental Illinois Bank, Chicago, IL.
American Fraud: The Suspects
The fifth suspect, James Lewis, became a suspect after sending an extortion letter to J&J demanding that the company deposit $1 million into an account at the Continental Bank of Illinois if they wanted "the killings to stop." However, Lewis had no access to that account, which was a business account, closed five months earlier, for Frederick Miller McCahey, heir to the Miller Brewing Fortune. Court documents state that Lewis wrote the extortion letter to expose what he believed were McCahey's "fraudulent business dealings." Lewis had moved from Chicago to New York City three weeks before the Tylenol murders....The judge in Lewis's extortion trial said that there was not a "shred of evidence" that Lewis committed the Tylenol murders.
Also see this interview with Scott Bartz. Highly recommended. Bartz is the guy who worked for J&J, became a whistleblower on their business practices, subsequently read everything about this Tylenol case and wrote a book, a book we will be reading soon.
In the interview we learn:
Authorities turned the evidence -- the tainted capsules -- over to J&J, where they were destroyed. Investigators then used that valuable time, early in the investigation while the evidence still existed, to go after people who were all later exonerated.
One of the victims, Mary Reiner, got her capsules from a hospital where she had just given birth. Those capsules were "unit-packaged," ie: she got a blister pack or something similar with eight pills. She did not purchase a bottle from a store like the other victims, a critically important detail. The tainted capsules were thus in a hospital supply chain, and not just in retail stores, which changes everything. The killer would have to be a little more sophisticated than the "profile" suggests.
Q: You point out a number of inconsistencies and, in your estimation, absurdities that have been perpetuated since the 1982 and 1986 poisonings.
A: Number one would be the madman-in-the-retail stores hypothesis. My findings debunk this hypothesis, and point instead to a repackaging facility in the channel of distribution as the location where the tamperings occurred.
We are so glad that someone unpacked this psyop, because that what it was. We realized it as soon as our child told us that they learned about it in school. We thought about it for two minutes and realized that this incident changed everything. The fear led to tamper-resistant packaging, something we all take for granted now. A good thing? Yes, we suppose tamper-resistant packaging is a good thing.... because it keeps you safe from the grudging crazies roaming around the streets who will put poison in your products for no good reason....? And THEREFORE, with relief, you TRUST the manufacturer of the products, and are GRATEFUL for the new, improved packaging, and remove them from all suspicion should something ever go wrong, heaven forfend... ?
Something like that?
Looking at the social engineering transaction (problem - reaction - solution), we see the purpose:
RANDOM CRIME ==> MORE FEAR / DECREASED TRUST OF EACH OTHER IN SOCIETY ==> RESOLVED BY INCREASED TRUST IN CORPORATIONS WHO NOW PROVIDE 'TAMPER-RESISTANT' PACKAGING
You don't have to worry about what is in the package. It's safe, and God knows it's safely packaged.
You don't have to worry about what is in the package. It's safe, and God knows it's safely packaged.
Shorter: Trust other humans less and trust big corporations more. WIN WIN WIN.
Meanwhile, this happened so long ago, and the truth has been buried in mountains and mountains of WORSHIP for J&J's handling of the incident. Do a little googling and see for yourself. See how many pages of results you can go through until you find something other than, WOW THAT WAS TOTALLY AWESOME HANDLING.
Given all the other things going on, who would take time out to look at this old thing that happened in 1982. And yet, to see the truth of it helps to recalibrate the time scale of exactly how long we've been in the social engineering laboratory and what sorts of experiments have been going on, and who has been conducting them and cooperating with them.
Back when these murders happened, we remember people couldn't wrap their minds around someone so evil, who would do something so random? Who could comprehend such a monster? People believed psychopaths were exceedingly rare and more inclined to do grisly serial murders.
A whole narrative exists about these serial killers, a narrative we're all familiar with.
The way the logic works, if you're not a fuck-up from a broken home, chances are you can't be one of these serial killers, by definition. Because serial killers, "most of them," "seem" to have been abused as children.
Getting back to our recollection of the Tylenol incident, what was this random killing with medicine about? As we recall, we did not comprehend this crime, so unlike the grisly murders of Jeffrey Dahmer, also incomprehensible but somehow less so. This killing without any connection was so strange, so depersonalized. Because it didn't matter who died as long as people died.
We read this about Lewis:
The intense fear caused by the random nature of the crime led to the tamper-resistant product packaging ubiquitous ever since -- a permanent change.
They had no evidence to pin it on Lewis, but he was still a perfect patsy. The patsy only has to "work" for a period of time. Once the thing blows over, people get wrapped up in the next psyop and NO ONE CARES about the facts anymore.
The killer has never been caught. And Mr. Douglas was on the case way back then, profiling the Tylenol killer and using his mysterious profiling expertise to eliminate all the higher ups at J&J? It had to be some pissed-off nobody. BY DEFINITION, it could not be a successful executive. Successful executives are not angry slobs, by definition. If serial killers are mostly angry slobs, successful people like politicians and executives have been excluded in the Venn Diagram.
That's how the narrative works. Successful people cannot be psychopaths by definition, and if there's any overlap with the "known" dirty qualities of anger and dysfunction, here and there, they have been overcome by personal excellence. Those people become "self-made" men, heroes, icons. You don't have to be aware of the logic involved. In fact, the social engineers know that the less aware you are of the logic, the easier they can pimp it.
J&J, meanwhile, well... Tylenol made a hero of that company. Yup. Lucky lucky lucky. Google searches return pages and pages of this classic business case study in brilliant PR. "Consumer product company's worst nightmare..." blah blah blah. Marketers predict the company's demise, but a year later J&J makes a complete comeback. Reminds us of the nuclear industry overcoming Fukushima. Worst nightmare for whom? CEO widely praised for his handling, according to the narrative. Once known for baby shampoo, J&J is now a pharmaceutical powerhouse. HOO boy. The MBAs love that shit.
They say it was very expensive, this "worst nightmare," but all it cost was $100 million ---- and the lives of seven random people!
Is $100 million a lot of money to a company like J&J? Today net income is about four billion. Are seven random people -- not even employees -- a big price to pay for a company to become an unstoppable pharmaceutical powerhouse?
2/22/11: Scientists make mistakes... Vioxx deaths estimated at 60,000 worldwide.... Merck still making billions...
Let's get real. The $100,000 reward for information J&J put out has never been claimed either. WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN.
Jeffrey Dahmer -- cannibal.
A whole narrative exists about these serial killers, a narrative we're all familiar with.
Most of them seem to have had a dysfunctional family setting and were abused as children — emotionally, sexually or verbally. It’s as if this activates some psychological trigger in their minds, increasing the feelings of inadequacy or worthlessness, and causing them to seek out their own heinous form of release.There may be many others who have killed more people, but nevermind that. Please stick to the approved list: Manson, Bundy, Berkowitz, Dahmer...
There have been hundreds of serial killers in the history of America, and there are a few that tend to stay in the minds of citizens, becoming “famous.”Here are just a few of the (in)famous serial killers that have walked the streets of our nation, in no particular order. There may be many others that are notorious or have killed more people, but we picked a few of the more famous killers that truly shocked us.
The way the logic works, if you're not a fuck-up from a broken home, chances are you can't be one of these serial killers, by definition. Because serial killers, "most of them," "seem" to have been abused as children.
In other words, a world of abused children is a world of potential pasties for actual, successful psychopaths.
Getting back to our recollection of the Tylenol incident, what was this random killing with medicine about? As we recall, we did not comprehend this crime, so unlike the grisly murders of Jeffrey Dahmer, also incomprehensible but somehow less so. This killing without any connection was so strange, so depersonalized. Because it didn't matter who died as long as people died.
They understand that the way to murder someone and get away with it is to not care who they kill, how they kill them, or when they kill them. Such people set up conditions where someone will be 'accidentally' killed and wait for the circumstances to occur.A totally bewildering thought process to normal people, regardless of intelligence, and yet totally normal to the intelligent psychopath.
We read this about Lewis:
Lewis' troubles began early in his life. In the 1960s, he was treated at a psychiatric facility after reportedly chasing his mother with an ax, attacking his stepfather and then trying to commit suicide by taking 36 headache tabletsHe's perfect!
The intense fear caused by the random nature of the crime led to the tamper-resistant product packaging ubiquitous ever since -- a permanent change.
They had no evidence to pin it on Lewis, but he was still a perfect patsy. The patsy only has to "work" for a period of time. Once the thing blows over, people get wrapped up in the next psyop and NO ONE CARES about the facts anymore.
The killer has never been caught. And Mr. Douglas was on the case way back then, profiling the Tylenol killer and using his mysterious profiling expertise to eliminate all the higher ups at J&J? It had to be some pissed-off nobody. BY DEFINITION, it could not be a successful executive. Successful executives are not angry slobs, by definition. If serial killers are mostly angry slobs, successful people like politicians and executives have been excluded in the Venn Diagram.
J&J, meanwhile, well... Tylenol made a hero of that company. Yup. Lucky lucky lucky. Google searches return pages and pages of this classic business case study in brilliant PR. "Consumer product company's worst nightmare..." blah blah blah. Marketers predict the company's demise, but a year later J&J makes a complete comeback. Reminds us of the nuclear industry overcoming Fukushima. Worst nightmare for whom? CEO widely praised for his handling, according to the narrative. Once known for baby shampoo, J&J is now a pharmaceutical powerhouse. HOO boy. The MBAs love that shit.
They say it was very expensive, this "worst nightmare," but all it cost was $100 million ---- and the lives of seven random people!
Is $100 million a lot of money to a company like J&J? Today net income is about four billion. Are seven random people -- not even employees -- a big price to pay for a company to become an unstoppable pharmaceutical powerhouse?
2/22/11: Scientists make mistakes... Vioxx deaths estimated at 60,000 worldwide.... Merck still making billions...
Let's get real. The $100,000 reward for information J&J put out has never been claimed either. WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN.
[NOTE: Evidently, it's $100,000. And it's still available. We don't know if it was originally $1,000 and they upped it out of embarrassment at some point, because that's the sort of mistake paths make -- tone deaf with any emotional message other than fear. But there it is. Funny they didn't give it to Bartz, huh?]