I’m posting the following observations from one of our zapper customers (we don’t sell WakeUp! but a new link on our site directs people to Doc von Peters to get it) who agreed to field test a bottle of WakeUp! in exchange for feedback–my response follows his notes:
I wanted to let you know more of my experiences with WakeUp and related
I decided, after using half the bottle, to try an experiement. I put the
WakeUp down, to see what would happen. I wanted to see if the effects would
last, and I was particularly interested in the effects the WakeUp had in the
mental and emotional arenas; namely, the effects of becoming more
open-minded, and taking a more proactive approach to new information. The
WakeUp also had the effect of a lessening of fear and resistance to actually
diving in and really examining new concepts. I wanted to see if these
effects were only active while one was taking the WakeUp, or if they would
last if one stopped it.
I am very happy to report that the effects have certainly lasted; the WakeUp
is, therefore, at least for me, a toatlly non-addictive item!
My personal experience in this regard has been most rewarding. I believe
WakeUp is something that has the most beneficial effect of strengthening the
discernment of one who takes it. It has the effect (for me) of actually
enhancing one’s ability to listen to one’s intuition! So, one can take it
when one knows it is time, and put it down when it is time. It enhances
one’s sense of what is appropriate, when it is appropriate, and the why of
the matter, if one wishes for it to, does eventually make itself known.
This was an area of concern for me since I had heard of various substances
which seemed to work wonders, (the monotomic gold comes to mind) but then it
was found that one had to either a) increase the dosage of the substance or
b) the effects would last for a comparatively short period of time and then
reverse themselves or c)both a) and b). The WakeUp does not do that, nor
does it erode any of the reasoning processes. If anything, it enhances the
head and the heart to work together.
The effect of the increased discernment has led me to some rather
unpleasant, but needed, discoveries. I cannot speak for everyone who takes
the WakeUp, but by speaking of my experiences I am wanting to assist others
in some of their discoveries.
When my discernment abilities began to be awakened (WakeUp is appropriately
named!) and I started to trust my observations more, rather than doubting
myself so much, (which I think we have all been trained to do) I started to
pay much closer attention to people’s use of language, and I started to
really pay attention to what I say and how I say it.
One thing I have noticed is the phrase, “…part of me…”. One of my
acquaintances had started using this phrase repeatedly in her speech. We
would be talking about something, and she would say, “Well, part of me
thinks that…”. After the fourth time I heard her use this phrase in as
many days, I asked her, as gently as I could, “Janie, (not her real name)
um, why do you use that phrase, “part of me”? I am always interested in
people’s use of language, and I’m thinking about taking some language
classes, so I’m paying attention to speech patterns.” I was always tempted
to ask her, “Which part of you is thinking what, Janie? What do you do when
your left foot says the opposite of what your right foot says? Do you get
paralyzed and unable to walk?” Happily I never said that- it might have
been nastily amusing at the time, but would not accomplish anything really
I did not want her to feel like I was attacking her. I did not want her to
become defensive, because then I would not get the reason why she was
choosing those words. She explained that her use of the phrase came from
Gerdjieff (sp?) studies.
Evidently her parents were among the sixties hippies who wanted to “buck the
Establishment”, ran away to the Northwest to grow and smoke pot and study
esoteric religions. They got sucked into the mire that is Gerdjieff, and
according to Janie’s explanation, we all have several "I"s. I asked her to
explain just what Gerdjieff meant by that. She said that we are one way
when interacting with say, a parent, another way when interacting with an
employer, another way when interacting with a sibling, and so on and so
She really believes the stuff, and her language reflects it. She offered to
lend me one of his books. If you have ever attempted to read all the way
through the gobbledegook that is Letters To Beelzebub, you would well
remember how long that sentence was! The entire book is one long sentence.
I could only get through two pages and returned the book to her, saying that
I didn’t want to lose it, and that I just could not make the time to read it
The book probably has some items worth noting in it, but I value my time
immensely, and do not want to squander it slogging through a huge book only
to find a few grains of worthy information.
I do not agree with Gerdjieff’s idea that we all have several “I”'s; the
latest I have been given to understand is that if an individual has several
"I"s that individual suffers from a multiple personality -or
split-personality- disorder, usually brought on by horrible circumstances in
It does lead one to wonder if Gerdjieff was promoting a multiple-personality
Janie is not, however, the only individual I have heard use that phrase,
"part of me". I have heard it used by people who have not studied the
Gerdjieff books. They come from all over the country, but they do share
some common traits in their backgrounds.
They are often interested in alternative forms of healing. Almost every
single one of them is in favor of the legalization of pot. If you attempt
to get them to be very specific in their explanations of something
(anything!) that could be viewed as a controversial subject, such as the
requirements for certifications for yoga teachers, they almost always
verbally founder; contradicting themselves several times in the same
You can tell them a plain fact (usually something they do not wish to hear)
several times, on different days, and each time you tell them they appear
to not remember that you have told them this item before. It can be
disturbing, to say the least.
Such observations have led me to think that the way we use language, and the
ways we have been taught to use language, shapes our thinking processes much
more profoundly than was previously explored. As you speak, therefore you
Before using the WakeUp I had never thought to explore this arena very much
at all. Now I am finding it very important for me. It has helped me
understand some of the things people say and do, and to be more
compassionate and less judgmental of them. At the same time, interestingly
enough, it has also helped me to be firm in my resolve, and not give in on
someone else’s whim.
For example, if I have planned to go do one thing, and someone calls me and
says, “Let’s do this.”, I no longer give in to their wishes which would
interfere with my plans. I can politely say “No, I have other plans at the
moment. Let’s get together next week- do you have your calendar handy?
Let’s make a date for it now.” Gradually people are starting to realize
that trying to do impulsive planning does not work with me, and they are
starting to plan in advance as well.
It has been an unpleasant discovery to see how many people are so vague in
their language and in the day to day aspects of their lives. I have decided
to try to be as gracefull with these people as I can, but still put my foot
down with some force, if needed. I think that when people are this vague in
their thoughts, then they can be rather easily led to think anything someone
would wish for them to think.
I am hoping WakeUp will assist others in their quest for discernment, and
that it will spark a desire for becoming more discerning in their day to day
lives. Wen they start doing that, they will be much more encouraged in
taking responsibility for their lives.
I am looking forward to more insights with WakeUp and shall keep you posted.
Meanwhile, keep up the great work you all are doing, do well, and be well!
Cheers and Blessings, Kulwant ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Kulwant, the folks who most adamantly claim that language isn’t important, I think, are the ones who are voluntarily under the influence of mind control protocols. Gurdjieff was perhaps Crowley’s Russian counterpart, and he offered some very interesting information, for instance his discourses on the significance of musical notes, along with a whole lot of programming. I wasn’t aware of the institutional schizophrenia aspect, thanks, but you probably see that this is also the basis of Monarch programming (CIA’s vast, international mind control program that’s based on childhood sexual trauma-induced dissociative behavior among millions of victims). The CIA has set up and runs evcery conceivable cult, including most of the ‘new’ fundamentalist Christian ones, for reinforcing the programming and as fronts. Before the CIA, masonic organizations set up a large number of churchy cults in the 1800s in the US as a way of mounting the wave of new religious fervor in those days and the next explosion of Christian religious cultism in the West in the late 1960s (that’s the ‘other shoe’ that dropped in those days) was apparently built on that past effort and the new Monarch Program. It seems obvious to me that these cults mainly attract people who have already been dissociative-programmed as children. The explosion of Day Care in the late sixties is another feature of the expansion of Monarch since then, according to a lot of documented evidence collected in the last three decades. The use of language is important in these cases because programming is based largely on redefining common language terms. This used to annoy the hell out of me in the sixties because millions of lockstep-programmed drones had the appearance of being capable of discussing the bigger realm intelligently but turned out to be mere ideologues, parroting clever, new mind control triggers. I spent my highschool years abroad during the time they were programmed with all that happy hippie horse$#!+. So I didn’t see the dark underbelly of the movement right away and all I knew about pot was what my ex-cop/CIA stepfather told me about it from his days on the street in the 1940s, which wasn’t much. He was in the intel-gathering business in my highschool days in the Western Pacific, which was pretty remote in those days before the internet and even live TV. If you have the misfortune of knowing mostly people who are still programmed that way, my heart goes out to you but I’m happy to say that these don’t represent the entire human specie and, thanks to the internet, we can all personally connect with substantive people now. Maybe they don’t live nearby but it’s a comfort to know that there are a few. I’m not above spiking a city’s reservoir with healing remedies–I once did that with flower essences in Ashland, Oregon and got some interesting results. I don’t know if that would affect these hardcore hippie types in a positive way, though. There’s just something about proselytes that is so off-balance that I’m disinclined to help them, personally. i consider avoidance of this sort to be a blessing and I think it’s a disfavor to humanity in general to even allow them an audience. YOu might see them as poor unfortunates but that doesn’t mean that they’re not also wolves in sheep clothing. Nobody twists their arms to preach that crap, after all. It might seem harsh to some, but my approach to their activity has been to explicitly expose it and to not condone it. I rarely point at individuals, of course, because 1) it distracts from what I’m trying to communicate and, 2) it victimizes the predator, which is counterproductive. We all want to support a victim’s side, after all. Holding proselytes accountable for their speech and actions is a favor to them, in my view, and an act of real friendship. It’s best done privately, I think, unless the proselyte is doing a lot of damage, socially, or posting that crap on a public forum. They well know that if they’re not challenged their actions and beliefs will be perceived as representing everyone on the board. That’s how the programming has been designed and engineered and it’s worked pretty well until lately. Contrast their approach with someone who says, ‘I believe this because of that,’ and who doesn’t insult our intelligence with formulaic slogans. See how inoffensive an honest, heartfule expression of belief is? See the contrast between that and all the tired, tiring tirades by religious fundamenatlists and other cultists? In this genuinely new age we’re all more accountable than before, not less as the programmers want us to believe. I don’t feel that predators who use language as social poison should ever be presented as victims. Lots of us washed out of Monarch programming, after all, because we chose not to be predators on any level for the world odor. We won’t be caught using mind control formulas in discussions. I don’t think WakeUp’ is intended to cause us to have intellectual integrity and I doubt it would have an effect on proselytes, other than to cause them to avoid taking WakeUp! altogether. I could be wrong, though. One wouldn’t be breaking any real laws to spike a town reservoir with any homeopathic or flower essence remedy, of course, becuase it’s harmless stuff. The behavior effects I noticed in Ashland during the days following that pre-orgonite clandestine gifting sortie in 1998 were very gentle, by the way. It kind of reminds me of how the town of MOscow, Idaho (a hotbed of Monarch programming) was distinctly nicer during the time my faster motor was working in the kinetic radionics device in the backyard, three years ago. Part of WakeUp!'s MakeUp, though, is herbal and I doubt that lends itself to expanding the effect by putting it in a body of water the way homeopathic and flower essence remedies might. I think guerrilla warfare tactics have now found their higher expression in littering. ~Don