by Judy Wall
excerpts from Nexus Volume 5, Issue 6
October/November 1998
from Raven1 Website
About the Author:
Judy Wall is Editor and Publisher of Resonance, the Newsletter of the Bioelectromagnetics Special Interest Group. pp.11--13,15-16 |
This article shows clearly the military's intent to use every possible thought-influencing technology. This technology is largely classified but there are leaks, like this article.
We involuntary test subjects can tell you from first hand experience that far more invasive devices now exist.
This article represents one of the two parallel "tracks" on which thought-influencing technology is being used and further developed:
PSY-OPS WEAPONRY USED IN THE PERSIAN GULF WAR
For years, rumors have persisted that the United States Department of Defense has been engaged in research and development of ultra-sophisticated mind- altering technology. Confirmation of this came to me recently in the form of two ITV News Bureau Ltd (London) wire service bulletins.[1]
The March 23, 1991 news-brief, “High-Tech Psychological Warfare Arrives in the Middle East”, describes a US Psychological Operations (PsyOps) tactic directed against Iraqi troops in Kuwait during Operation Desert Storm.
The maneuver consisted of a system in which subliminal mind-altering technology was carried on standard radiofrequency broadcasts. The March 26, 1991 news-brief states that among the standard military planning groups in the centre of US war planning operations at Riyadh was “an unbelievable and highly classified PsyOps program utilizing ‘silent sound’ techniques”.
The opportunity to use this method occurred when Saddam Hussein’s military command-and-control system was destroyed. The Iraqi troops were then forced to use commercial FM radio stations to carry encoded commands, which were broadcast on the 100 MHz frequency. The US PsyOps team set up its own portable FM transmitter, utilizing the same frequency, in the deserted city of Al Khafji.
This US transmitter overpowered the local Iraqi station. Along with patriotic and religious music, PsyOps transmitted “vague, confusing and contradictory military orders and information”.
Subliminally, a much more powerful technology was at work: a sophisticated electronic system to ‘speak’ directly to the mind of the listener, to alter and entrain his brainwaves, to manipulate his brain’s electroencephalograph i.e. (EEG) patterns and artificially implant negative emotional states-feelings of fear, anxiety, despair and hopelessness.
This subliminal system doesn’t just tell a person to feel an emotion, it makes them feel it; it implants that emotion in their minds.[2]
I noticed that the ITV wire service was from outside the United States. Readers of Resonance may recall that in the Electromagnetic Weapons Timeline in issue no. 29, reference is made to the documentary video, Waco: The Big Lie Continues, which contained video footage of three EM weapons. This segment of the film was from the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). I wondered if there was any significance to this.
At the library I pulled up back issues of my local newspaper for the same time-period of the Gulf War to see what the American wire services had said, if anything, about the use of this special PsyOps weapon.
There was nothing said about it directly, but three news articles seemed related. In a news release from Associated Press during the same timeframe of the Gulf War truce, I read:
“The American pilot who shot down the second Iraqi warplane in 48 hours said Friday that continued Iraqi flights suggested that US warnings were not filtering down to Iraqi pilots…
He said he hopes Saddam gets the message now.
‘It’s really too bad that these people have to die for their unwillingness to heed our warnings... What I really think is, they don’t communicate down to the people,’ he said. ‘If they have a communications problem, I suggest they fix it.’” [3]
That may have been coincidence but two earlier news articles, dated March 1, 1991, apparently have a common origin with the ITV news bulletin.
The first article[4] tells us that approximately 100 members of the US 101st Airborne Division, fluent in Arabic, talked the enemy into surrendering. These soldiers rode in the Apache helicopter gunships that were involved in the longest helicopter-borne assault in history.
They told the Iraqi troops that they would be slaughtered if they didn’t give up.
“They got the point,” one soldier is quoted as saying.
This all sounds very unremarkable, except when you read the editor’s note:
“The following dispatch was subject to US military censorship.”
Now why would they want to censor such a mundane tactic, except out of embarrassment that the US Army fighting forces had fallen to the level of a cheer-leading squad?... in which case they would have nixed the thing entirely.
But upon re-reading the article, we may pick out certain key phrases:
“He [the soldier interviewed] was one of dozens of Arabic speakers that played a key role in the allied ground attack against Iraq, and part of an attempt by the US Army to use finesse, intelligence work and tactics to complement brute strength.”
If we fill in the missing blanks with such descriptions as “the megaphone was used to direct psychoacoustic frequencies that engaged the neural networks of the enemy’s brain, causing him to think any thought and feel any emotion that the Americans chose to lay on him”, then it starts to make sense.
And it would no longer seem so surprising that one soldier could talk 450 enemy soldiers into surrendering. The possibilities are there, and, as the next article[5] documents, that is exactly what happened. Iraqi troops gave up en masse.
We quote:
“They were surrendering in droves, almost too fast for us to keep up with...”
“...two Iraqi majors, both brigade commanders, who gave up their entire units...”
“...one of them gave up to an RPV [remotely piloted vehicle]. Here’s this guy with his hands up, turning in a circle to give himself up to a model airplane with a camera in it.”
Irrational? Not if there was also a voice being beamed into his head from that little flying toy, saying, "Give up, give up!"
Otherwise, how do we account for the editor’s note at the beginning of the article:
“The following is based on pool dispatches that were subject to military censorship.”
Without that note, we could smugly think that the Iraqi soldiers were cowards or crazy, but why censor that idea?
The mind-altering mechanism is based on a subliminal carrier technology: the Silent Sound Spread Spectrum (SSSS), sometimes called “S-quad” or “Squad”.
It was developed by Dr Oliver Lowery of Norcross, Georgia, and is described in US Patent #5,159,703, “Silent Subliminal Presentation System”, dated October 27, 1992.
The abstract for the patent reads:
“A silent communications system in which non-aural carriers, in the very low or very high audio-frequency range or in the adjacent ultrasonic frequency spectrum are amplitude- or frequency-modulated with the desired intelligence and propagated acoustically or vibrationally, for inducement into the brain, typically through the use of loudspeakers, earphones, or piezoelectric transducers.
The modulated carriers may be transmitted directly in real time or may be conveniently recorded and stored on mechanical, magnetic, or optical media for delayed or repeated transmission to the listener.”
According to literature by Silent Sounds, Inc., it is now possible, using supercomputers, to analyze human emotional EEG patterns and replicate them, then store these “emotion signature clusters” on another computer and, at will, “silently induce and change the emotional state in a human being”.
Silent Sounds, Inc. states that it is interested only in positive emotions, but the military is not so limited. That this is a US Department of Defense project is obvious.
Edward Tilton, President of Silent Sounds, Inc., says this about S-quad in a letter dated December 13, 1996:
“All schematics, however, have been classified by the US Government and we are not allowed to reveal the exact details... ... we make tapes and CDs for the German Government, even the former Soviet Union countries! All with the permission of the US State Department, of course... The system was used throughout Operation Desert Storm (Iraq) quite successfully.”
The graphic illustration, “Induced Alpha to Theta Biofeedback Cluster Movement”, which accompanies the literature, is labeled #AB 116-394-95 UNCLASSIFIED” and is an output from “the world’s most versatile and most sensitive electroencephalograph (EEG) machine”.
It has a gain capability of 200,000, as compared to other EEG machines in use which have gain capability of approximately 50,000. It is software-driven by the “fastest of computers” using a noise-nulling technology similar to that used by nuclear submarines for detecting small objects underwater at extreme range.[6]
The purpose of all this high technology is to plot and display a moving cluster of periodic brainwave signals. The illustration shows an EEG display from a single individual, taken of left and right hemispheres simultaneously.
The readout from the two sides of the brain appear to be quite different, but in fact are the same (discounting normal left-right brain variations).
CLONING THE EMOTIONS
By using these computer-enhanced EEGs, scientists can identify and isolate the brain’s low-amplitude “emotion signature clusters”, synthesize them and store them on another computer.
In other words, by studying the subtle characteristic brainwave patterns that occur when a subject experiences a particular emotion, scientists have been able to identify the concomitant brainwave pattern and can now duplicate it.
“These clusters are then placed on the Silent Sound[TM] carrier frequencies and will silently trigger the occurrence of the same basic emotion in another human being!”
SYSTEM DELIVERY AND APPLICATIONS
There is a lot more involved here than a simple subliminal sound system.
There are numerous patented technologies which can be piggybacked individually or collectively onto a carrier frequency to elicit all kinds of effects.
There appear to be two methods of delivery with the system. One is direct microwave induction into the brain of the subject, limited to short-range operations. The other, as described above, utilizes ordinary radio and television carrier frequencies.
Far from necessarily being used as a weapon against a person, the system does have limitless positive applications. However, the fact that the sounds are subliminal makes them virtually undetectable and possibly dangerous to the general public.
In more conventional use, the Silent Sounds Subliminal System might utilize voice commands, e.g., as an adjunct to security systems. Beneath the musical broadcast that you hear in stores and shopping malls may be a hidden message which exhorts against shoplifting. And while voice commands alone are powerful, when the subliminal presentation system carries cloned emotional signatures, the result is overwhelming.
Free-market uses for this technology are the common self-help tapes; positive affirmation, relaxation and meditation tapes; as well as methods to increase learning capabilities.
In a medical context, these systems can be used to great advantage to treat psychiatric and psychosomatic problems. As a system for remediating the profoundly deaf, it is unequalled.
(Promises, promises. This is the most common positive use touted for this technology over the past 30 years. But the deaf are still deaf, and the military now has a weapon to use on unsuspecting people with perfectly normal hearing.)
OFFICIAL DENIALS
In fact, the US Government has denied or refused to comment on mind-altering weapons for years.
Only last year, US News & World Report ran an article titled “Wonder Weapons” basically a review of the new so-called ‘non-lethal’ or ‘less-than -lethal’ weapons.’ Not one word about S-quad, although the technology had been used six years earlier!
Excerpts from the article read:
“Says Charles Bernard, a former Navy weapons-research director: ‘I have yet to see one of these ray-gun things that actually works…”
"And DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) has come to us every few years to see if there are ways to incapacitate the central nervous system remotely,’ Dr F. Terry Hambrecht, head of the Neural Prostheses Program at NIH, told US News, ‘but nothing has ever come of if,’ he said. ‘That is too science-fiction and far-fetched.”’
It may sound “science fiction and far-fetched” but it is not.
However, that is just what the powers-that-be want you to believe, so as to leave them alone in their relentless pursuit of... what?
The idea behind non-lethal weapons is to incapacitate the enemy without actually killing them, or, in the case of riot control or hostage situations, to disable the participants without permanent injury, preferably without their knowing it. The electromagnetic mind-altering technologies would all fall into this class of weapons, but since they are all officially non-existent, who is to decide when and where they will be used?
And why should selected companies in the entertainment industry reportedly be allowed access to this technology when the very fact of its existence is denied to the general public?
As recently as last month [February], this stonewall approach of total denial or silence on the subject still held fast, even toward committees of the US Congress!
"The Joint Economics Committee, chaired by Jim Saxton (R-NJ), convened on February 25, 1998 for the 'Hearing on Radio Frequency Weapons and Proliferation: Potential Impact on the Economy'”.
Invited testimony included statements by several authorities from the military:
Dr Alan Kehs, of the US Army Laboratories, discussed the overall RF threat.
Mr James O’Bryon, Deputy Director of Operational Testing and Director of live fire testing for the Office of Secretary of Defense at the Pentagon, discussed the role of Live Fire Testing and how it plays a role in testing military equipment with RF weapons.
Mr David Schriner, Principal Engineer of Directed Energy Studies with Electronic Warfare Associates and recently retired as an engineer with a naval weapons testing facility, talked about the difficulty in building an RF weapon and about the terrorist threat.
Dr Ira Merritt, Chief of Concepts Identification and Applications Analysis Division, Advanced Technology Directorate, Missile Defense and Space Technology Center, Huntsville, Alabama, discussed the proliferation of RF weapons primarily from the former Soviet Union.
Although these statements gave information of technical interest, they are perhaps more important for the information they did not give: information on the existence of radiofrequency weapons that directly affect the human brain and nervous system.
KGB PSYCHOTRONICS
This technology did not spring up overnight. It has a long history of development and denials of development-by the US Government and probably half of the other governments of the world as well.
We know that the former Soviet Union was actively engaged in this type of research. In a previous article we reported that during the 1970s the Soviet KGB developed a Psychotronic Influence System (PIS) that was used to turn soldiers into programmable ‘human weapons’. The system employed a combination of high-frequency radiowaves and hypnosis.
The PIS project was begun in response to a similar training scheme launched in the US by President Carter, according to Yuri Malin, former security adviser to USSR President Gorbachev.[8]
In my Electromagnetic Weapons Timeline[9] I covered a period of 60 years of interest and development in EM weapons—information gathered from the many articles and news clippings sent in by readers of Resonance. In my article on synthetic telepathy[10]
I traced the development of the ‘voice in your head’ technology dating back to 1961, all my references coming from the open scientific literature.
POWER OF THE MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX
Jan Wiesemann has written an apt description of the situation which now exists in the United States, about the ‘forces that be’ and how the situation came about:
“During the Cold War the United States not only engaged in a relatively open nuclear arms race with the Soviet Union, but also engaged in a secret race developing unconventional weapons.
As the intelligence agencies (which prior to the Second World War had merely played a supporting role within the government) continued to increase their power, so did the funds spent on developing techniques designed to outsmart each other.
“And as the US intelligence community began to grow, a secret culture sprang about which enabled the intelligence players to implement the various developed techniques to cleverly circumvent the democratic processes and institutions...
“Like many other democracies, the US Government is made up of two basic parts the elected constituency, i.e., the various governors, judges, congressmen and the President; and the unelected bureaucracies, as represented by the numerous federal agencies.
“In a well-balanced and correctly functioning democracy, the elected part of the government is in charge of its unelected bureaucratic part, giving the people a real voice in the agenda set by their government.
“While a significant part of the US Government no doubt follows this democratic principle, a considerable portion of the US Government operates in complete secrecy and follows its own unaccountable agenda which, unacknowledged, very often is quite different from the public agenda.“[11]
Jan goes on to quote one of the United States’ most popular war heroes: Dwight D. Eisenhower, who served as Supreme Commander of Allied Forces during World War II and was later elected 34th President of the United States.
In his farewell address to the nation in 1961, President Eisenhower said:
“...we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.
“This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence-economic, political, even spiritual-is felt in every city, every state house, every office of the federal government. We recognise the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military -industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or our democratic processes.”
INTERNATIONAL CONCERNS OVER NEW WEAPONS
The United Nations was established in 1945 with the aim of “saving succeeding generations from the scourge of war”.
In 1975 the General Assembly considered a draft first proposed by the Soviet Union:
“Prohibition of the Development and Manufacture of New Types of Weapons of Mass Destruction and New Systems of Such Weapons”.
In 1979 the Soviet Union added a list of some types of potential weapons of mass destruction:
Radiological weapons (using radioactive materials) which could produce harmful effects similar to those of a nuclear explosion
Particle beam weapons, based on charged or neutral particles, to affect biological targets
Infrasonic acoustic radiation weapons
Electromagnetic weapons operating at certain radio-frequency radiations which could have injurious effects on human organs.[12]
In response, the US and other Western nations stalled.
They gave a long, convoluted reason, but the result was the same. In an article entitled “Non-Lethal Weapons May Violate Treaties” [13] (below insert), the author notes that the Certain Conventional Weapons Convention[14] covers many of the non-conventional weapons—“those that utilize infrasound or electromagnetic energy (including lasers, microwave or radiofrequency radiation, or visible light pulsed at brainwave frequency) for their effects”.
|
by Barbara Hatch Rosenberg
Development of many of the proposed weapons described on these pages has been undertaken by NATO, the United States, and probably other nations as well. Most of the weapons could be considered "pre-lethal" rather than non-lethal.
They would actually provide a continuum of effects ranging from mild to lethal, with varying degrees of controllability. Serious questions arise about the legality of these expensive and highly classified development programs.
Four international treaties are particularly relevant.
The Biological Weapons Convention
The development of biological agents for "non-lethal" uses such as degradation of aircraft fuel, lubricants, or electrical insulation would appear to violate the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), which prohibits the development, production, or possession of biological agents that have no justification for prophylactic, protective, or other peaceful purposes.
Although "protective purposes" is not defined in the treaty, by analogy with the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) it can be presumed to mean protection against dangerous biological agents. U.S. law implementing the treaty provides criminal penalties for the development or possession of "any biological agent" for use as a weapon; "biological agent" is defined to include any microorganism capable of causing "deterioration of food, water, equipment, supplies, or material of any kind; or deleterious alteration of the environment."
There is no exemption for use in law enforcement.
The Chemical Weapons Convention and the Geneva Protocol
The development of "non-lethal" chemical weapons, such as sedatives delivered in aerosols absorbed through the skin or supercaustics that corrode roads and tires (and inevitably also clothing, shoes, skin, and flesh), threatens to violate the Chemical Weapons Convention.
The convention is expected to come into force next year. It prohibits the development, production, or retention for prohibited purposes of toxic chemicals, defined as "any chemical which through its chemical action on life processes can cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals." The definition would include substances such as caustics and other harmful chemicals not usually classified as poisons.
The convention permits the production of toxic chemicals if they are used for peaceful purposes, as in agriculture; protective purposes (against toxic chemicals); "military purposes not connected with the use of chemical weapons and not dependent on the use of the toxic properties of chemicals as a method of warfare"; and "law enforcement including domestic riot control purposes." The third of these permissible purposes might be construed to include chemicals such as supercaustics, on the grounds that "life processes" are not the intended target, provided that use of the chemicals as weapons would entail little contact with living things. For some weapons, this would be difficult to establish.
The Geneva Protocol of 1925 prohibits "the use in war of asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and of all analogous liquid materials or devices." The "or other" appears to broaden the prohibition beyond asphyxiating or toxic substances. Thus, the use in warfare of harmful chemicals such as supercaustics and sticky foams (which, in addition to forming a kind of "roach motel" for people, could act as asphyxiating agents) may be illegal, and the use of metal embrittlement agents, superlubricants, chemicals that interfere with fuel combustion, and so forth could also be questioned.
Under the CWC, the fourth permissible purpose for developing chemical weapons agents-law enforcement, including domestic riot control-is the major reason currently offered for developing non-lethal weapons. This permissible purpose, however, contains an ambiguity in urgent need of clarification. "Law enforcement" is not defined in the treaty. Does it include anything more than riot control? If so, what? And what law?
In contrast, the convention defines "riot control agents" narrowly and prohibits their use in warfare. Regarding law enforcement, it excludes the use of "Schedule 1" chemicals (one of several categories of chemical weapon agents) but says no more. This implies that for any law enforcement purposes other than domestic riot control, any nonSchedule 1 chemical may be developed, produced, acquired, stockpiled, or transferred as a weapon. Furthermore, although riot control agents must be declared, the treaty says nothing about declaring other agents that might be developed or held for law enforcement.
In the report containing the final text of the CWC, several of the national delegations to the negotiating body pointed out the problems raised by the undefined term "law enforcement' as a permissible purpose.1
One delegation stated that "this might give rise to far-fetched interpretations of what the negotiators intended." Indeed, the three delegations that commented on this issue interpreted this permissible purpose in widely different ways: as limited to domestic actions, as applicable outside national boundaries, or as including only domestic and U.N. peacekeeping activities. Unless the CWC Preparatory Commission takes steps to define more closely and limit this wild card, it could subvert much of the intent of the convention and render its elaborate verification mechanism futile.
For domestic riot control, the development of chemical agents is clearly permissible under the CWC, although their use in warfare is prohibited. Riot control agents are defined in the CWC as chemicals "which can produce rapidly in humans sensory irritation or disabling physical effects which disappear within a short time following termination of exposure." This might be true of certain sedatives, depending on the dose; it is certainly not true of corrosive chemicals or immobilizing glues. No agent that causes a deleterious effect not automatically reversible can be considered acceptable and humane for use in domestic riot control; it would be unethical to subject innocent bystanders, children, or hostages to severe psychological stress, possible permanent injury, or death.
The development of chemical weapons in the guise of domestic riot control agents must not be allowed as a means of circumventing the CWC. The treaty states that every chemical held for domestic riot control purposes must be declared; the CWC Preparatory Commission needs to specify that these chemicals must fit the convention's humanitarian definition of a riot control agent.
The Certain Conventional Weapons Convention (also known as the Inhumane Weapons Convention)2
Many of the non-lethal weapons under consideration utilize infrasound or electromagnetic energy (including lasers, microwave or radio-frequency radiation, or visible light pulsed at brain-wave frequency) for their effects.
These weapons are said to cause temporary or permanent blinding, interference with mental processes, modification of behavior and emotional response, seizures, severe pain, dizziness, nausea and diarrhea, or disruption of internal organ functions in various other ways. In addition, the use of high-power microwaves to melt down electronic systems would incidentally cook every person in the vicinity.
Typically, the biological effects of these weapons depend on a number of variables that, theoretically, could be tuned to control the severity of the effects. However, the precision of control is questionable. The use of such weapons for law enforcement might constitute severe bodily punishment without due process.
In warfare, the use of these weapons in a non-lethal mode would be analogous to the use of riot control agents in the Vietnam War, a practice now outlawed by the CWC. Regardless of the level of injury inflicted, the use of many non-lethal weapons is likely to violate international humanitarian law on the basis of superfluous suffering and/or indiscriminate effects.3
In addition, under the Certain Conventional Weapons Convention, international discussions are now under way that may lead to the development of specific new protocols covering electromagnetic weapons; a report is expected sometime next year.
The current surge of interest in electromagnetic and similar technologies makes the adoption of a protocol explicitly outlawing the use of these dehumanizing weapons an urgent matter.
1. Conference on Disarmament, Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on Chemical Weapons to the Conference on Disarmament, Aug. 26, 1992, Nos. 22, 25, 34 (CD/1170).
2. The full name of this treaty is "Convention on Prohibition or Restriction of the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects."
3. Louise Doswald-Beck, ed., Blinding Weapons: Reports of the Meetings of Experts Convened by the International Committee of the Red Cross on Battlefield Laser Weapons, 19891991 (Geneva: Internal Committee of the Red Cross, 1993)
|
Harlan Girard, Managing Director of the International Committee Against Offensive Microwave Weapons, told me he believes the strategy behind the government’s recent push for less-than-lethal weapons is a subterfuge.
The ones that are now getting all the publicity are put up for scrutiny to get the public’s approval. The electromagnetic mind-altering technologies are not mentioned, but would be brought in later under the umbrella of less-than- lethal weapons. These weapons were recently transferred from the Department of Defense over to the Department of Justice.
Why?
Because there are several international treaties that specifically limit or exclude weapons of this nature from being used in international warfare.
In other words, weapons that are barred from use against our country’s worst enemies (notwithstanding the fact that the US did use this weapon against Iraqi troops!) can now be used against our own citizens by the local police departments against such groups as peaceful protestors of US nuclear policies.
TOWARDS GLOBAL MIND CONTROL
The secrecy involved in the development of the electromagnetic mind-altering technology reflects the tremendous power that is inherent in it. To put it bluntly, whoever controls this technology can control the minds of men-all men.
There is evidence that the US Government has plans to extend the range of this technology to envelop all peoples, all countries. This can be accomplished, is being accomplished, by utilizing the nearly completedHAARP project [15,16] for overseas areas and the GWEN network now in place in the US.
The US Government denies all this.
Dr Michael Persinger is a Professor of Psychology and Neuroscience at Laurentian University, Ontario, Canada. You have met him before in the pages of Resonance where we reported on his findings that strong electromagnetic fields can affect a person’s brain.
“Temporal lobe stimulation,” he said, “can evoke the feeling of a presence, disorientation, and perceptual irregularities. It can activate images stored in the subject’s memory, including nightmares and monsters that are normally suppressed.” [17]
The abstract reads:
“Contemporary neuroscience suggests the existence of fundamental algorithms by which all sensory transduction is translated into an intrinsic, brain-specific code. Direct stimulation of these codes within the human temporal or limbic cortices by applied electromagnetic patterns may require energy levels which are within the range of both geomagnetic activity and contemporary communication networks.
A process which is coupled to the narrow band of brain temperature could allow all normal human brains to be affected by a sub-harmonic whose frequency range at about 10 Hz would only vary by 0.1 Hz.”
He concludes the article with this:
“Within the last two decades a potential has emerged which was improbable, but which is now marginally feasible. This potential is the technical capability to influence directly the major portion of the approximately six billion brains of the human species, without mediation through classical sensory modalities, by generating neural information within a physical medium within which all members of the species are immersed.
“The historical emergence of such possibilities, which have ranged from gunpowder to atomic fission, have resulted in major changes in the social evolution that occurred inordinately quickly after the implementation. Reduction of the risk of the inappropriate application of these technologies requires the continued and open discussion of their realistic feasibility and implications within the scientific and public domain.”
It doesn’t get any plainer than that. And we do not have open discussion because the US Government has totally denied the existence of this technology.
Acknowledgements
I would like to give special thanks to:
Jan Wiesemann for sending the Silent Sounds[TM] statement and patents which were the keystone of this article
Mike Coyle, whose computer search turned up many more related patents
Harlan Girard, who has provided numerous official government documents
to the many who have provided newsclippings and articles, moral and financial support to Resonance, without which we’d have ceased publication long ago.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment