“Mind control” is a topic commonly perceived as “conspiracy theory” or “X-Files” fare. That is, it is seen as possibly not “real,” and certainly not something about which one should be “overly” concerned.
This attitude at least partially arises from the widespread belief or assumption that the human brain is so complicated-(“the most complex entity in the universe” is a common formulation)-that it has not, and perhaps cannot, be comprehended in any depth.
One writer, for example, describes the brain as of “perhaps infinite” complexity, while another, David Brooks of the New York Times, writes that it is “probably impossible” that “a map of brain activity” could reveal mental states such as emotions and desires.
Similarly, Andrew Sullivan, blogger and former editor of The New Republic, opines that neuroscience is still in its “infancy,” and that we have only begun “scratching the surface” of the human brain, and links to a New Yorker piece in support of that position.
And the cover story for the October 2004 issue of Discovery Magazine entitled “The Myth Of Mind Control” advises the reader that while mind control is a “familiar science-fiction” staple, there is little reason for real concern, because actually deciphering the “neural code” would be akin to figuring out other “great scientific mysteries” such as the “origin of the universe and of life on Earth,” and is therefore hardly likely.
According to the article, as the brain is “the most significant mystery in science” and quite possibly “the hardest to solve,” mind control remains at worst a distant concern.
The underlying idea seems to be that sophisticated mind control is unlikely without understanding the brain; and we do not understand the brain.
Understanding the “Neural Code”
Of course, one might question the notion that a full understanding of the “neural code” is a prerequisite for mind control since it is not always necessary to know how something works for it to be effective. Nonetheless, the assumption that the brain is so complex that little progress has been made in “solving” it is itself incorrect.
As neuroscientist Michael Persinger has said, the “great mythology” of the brain is that it is “beyond our understanding; no it’s not.” In fact, according to inventor and “futurist” Ray Kurzweil, “very detailed mathematical models of several dozen regions of the human brain and how they work….” had already been developed over a decade ago.
Kurzweil also said at that time that science is “further along in understanding the principles of operation of the human brain than most people realize….” While the brain may be complicated, “it’s not that complicated (emphasis added).”
Similarly, an Air Force report from 1995, in a section entitled “Biological Process Control,” predicts that before 2050 “… [w]e will have achieved a clear understanding of how the human brain works, how it really controls the various functions of the body, and how it can be manipulated…:”
One can envision the development of electromagnetic energy sources … that can couple with the human body in a fashion that will allow one to prevent voluntary muscular movements, control emotions (and thus actions), produce sleep, transmit suggestions, interfere with … memory, produce an experience set, and delete an experience set.
As disturbing as such “predictions” may be, is it possible that technologies to prevent (or perhaps even impel) muscular movement, control emotions, transmit suggestions, delete memories, create false memories, and so on, have already been developed?
Certainly, even a cursory review of the “open literature” reveals that various sophisticated mind control technologies already exist. Indeed, it is rather shocking to realize how advanced mind control technology was, even several decades ago.
For example, there is the 1974 invention of Robert G. Malech for which a patent was granted in 1976 and assigned to defense contractor Dorne & Margolin, Inc. – for a method of “remotely monitoring and altering brain waves.” Moreover, experiments conducted over thirty years ago at the Stanford Research Institute (SRI) showed that basic mind reading from EEG readouts was possible, revealing the existence of “a non-symbolic language” of “brain-wave patterns” which could be deciphered and translated.
Indeed, “…[b]y the late 1960s … ‘remote control’ of the human brain-accomplished without the implantation of electrodes-was well on its way to being realized.” A means of stimulating a brain “by creating an electrical field completely outside the head” was developed, and it was discovered that electric pulses could stimulate the brain using far less energy than previously “thought … effectual in the old implanting technique.” Not surprisingly, with such developments arose legitimate fears of a future world where “human robots” would perform the bidding of the “military.”
And one source quotes a 1970s Pentagon agency report as saying that it will likely be possible in “several years” to induce sounds and words directly into the brain (bypassing the ears), as well as to use “combinations of frequencies and other signal characteristics to produce other neurological effects….,”
The report notes that the Soviets had observed “various changes in body chemistry” and “functioning” of the brain from the exposure of the brain to various frequencies. Also mentioned are studies at MIT showing that “magnetic brain waves can be picked up … and amplified as if the brain were a radio transmitter,” no implants or electrodes required.
Finally, an article from 1981 describes how “microwave generators” placed in appropriate locations and transmitting at low energy would create “interference patterns” out of the interaction with brainwaves (brain electricity). These interference patterns “could then be built up by computer into a three-dimensional moving picture of mental processes”-in other words, a remote “thought scanner” (and tracking device) could be developed.
In light of these past developments, it is perhaps rather surprising to read modern articles describing supposedly recent innovations in “mind reading” and mind control technology – in which it is sometimes claimed, for example, that scanners, electrodes and proximity to the subject is required to read and “control” minds.
Such claims reflect an apparent failure of the science of “mind control” to progress as one might have expected considering the presumed interest, as well as the spectacular rate of advancement of science and technology in general in recent decades.
Of course, it would not be all that surprising if mind control technology has advanced considerably, but that research has been carried out in secret for reasons of “national security.”
CIA affiliated scientists have certainly conducted much research which they have been prohibited from sharing with their peers, and inventions that implicate “national security” are routinely suppressed under Pentagon secrecy orders. Also, it might seem desirable to hide research programs which sometimes “require” relaxation of ethical standards, such as that of informed consent.
That said, even ignoring the likely existence of a “secret science” of mind control, recent public advancements are quite troubling in their own right.
1. In 2004, 25,000 rat neurons on a glass dish learned to fly an F-22 jet fighter simulator. After scientists placed the neurons on the dish, the neurons quickly began “to reconnect themselves, forming a living neural network-a brain.”
The lead scientist added that “one day,” though of course a “long way off,” disembodied brains might actually be used to fly drones, though the current experiment was merely to enhance knowledge of how the brain works, and possibly provide “clues to brain dysfunction.”
2. In August 2013, researchers revealed that “miniature” human brains had been grown in the laboratory. As is typical, any negative implications or reasons for worry were minimized, while possible “therapeutic” uses were highlighted.
Thus, the breakthrough was hailed as a great opportunity to understand “developmental defects.” Though the writer does mention “the spectre of what the future might hold,” the reader is reassured that the research is “primitive territory”-though one researcher did comment on the “undesirability” of growing larger laboratory brains.
3. On July 1, 2013, a magazine reported a claim by neuroscientist Sergio Canavero that it was now feasible to transplant the head of one human to the body of another and reattach the spinal cord.
4. Scientists have reconstructed random images viewed by subjects, from fMRI brain scans, in research that “hints” that “one day” scientists might be able to “access dreams, memories and imagery….”
5. The brains of two rats have been linked, such that one, located in North Carolina, responded “telepathically” to the thoughts of the other, located in Brazil.
The second rat’s brain processed signals from the first rat’s brain, delivered over the internet, as if they were its own. The scientist speculated about the “future possibility” of a “biological computer, in which numerous brains are connected….”
6. A brain-to-brain interface has been created, allowing humans to move a rat’s tail just by thinking about it. Readers are told that while it is not yet possible to “communicate brain to brain with our fellow humans … we may be on our way to … controlling” other species.
But, since it is “still very early days” the writer “hope(s)” that any ethical concerns can be “iron(ed) out.” Of note, the study used focused ultrasound to deliver impulses to the rat’s brain.
7. Continuing the ultrasound “theme”: Focused pulses of low intensity low frequency ultrasound, transmitted noninvasively through the skull to the human brain, have been shown capable of producing, not only pain, but also sound, as well as evoking “sensory stimuli.”
Accordingly, a lab with a “close working relationship” with DARPA, the Department of Defense, and U.S. Intelligence communities, has been looking into using pulsed ultrasound to encode “sensory data onto the cortex”; in other words, producing hallucinations through the remote and direct stimulation of brain circuits. Possibilities are the ability to “remotely control brain activity” and the “creation of artificial memories.” Even Sony has gotten in on the act, patenting a device for using ultrasound to produce hallucinations-again described as “transmitting sensory data directly into the human brain.”
Most troublingly, one source recently alleged that the NSA is using this ultrasound technology to target individuals through their smartphones.
8. A low cost means of tracking people, even through walls, has been developed. While in the past individuals could be tracked anywhere by the “military” using radar technology, this technology might enable entities with fewer resources to track people as well.
9. Scientists have remote controlled a worm by implanting magnetic nanoparticles into it, and then exposing the animal to a “radiofrequency magnetic field” which stimulated its neurons. The scientists suggest that their research could lead to “innovative cancer treatments” and “improved diabetes therapies,” as well as “new therapies for some neurological disorders which result from insufficient neuro-stimulation.”
10. Americans can now be spied on in their homes through their internet-connected appliances, according to (former) CIA Director David Petraeus. Petraeus made his statements at about the same time a huge microchip company, ARM, unveiled new processors which will connect home appliances such as refrigerators, washers and driers to the internet.
While the aforementioned public developments are quite concerning, the reality is they may not actually represent the true state of the art in “mind control” technology. It would not be that surprising, after all, for a domain with national security implications to at some point in its development branch off onto separate “tracks,” one public and the other “hidden.”
If such a bifurcation were to occur, advancements made in secret would not necessarily be incorporated into the public sphere. Eventually perhaps, innovations and breakthroughs would result in the development of an essentially new, covert science.
An example of a domain in which this bifurcation process seems to have occurred is aviation. In the public sphere, the most advanced aircraft might well be the F-22 fighter jet, or perhaps the F-35. However, if insider testimony is credited, these aircraft seem almost primitive in comparison with flying machines developed in secret.
Perhaps the most compelling statements in this regard come from Ben Rich, former Director of Lockheed-Martin’s Advanced Development Projects, or “Skunk Works,” a Lockheed division notable for its super high-tech, top secret projects, among them the U2 spy plane and the SR-71 Blackbird.
As Joseph P. Farrell reports in his book Saucers, Swastikas, and Psyops, Rich made a number of peculiar and provocative comments at the end of his career, and following his retirement on December 31, 1990 (prior to his death five years later), comments strongly hinting at “the development of … an off-the-books physics and technology….”
For example, on September 7, 1988, in a presentation to the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics in Atlanta, Georgia, Rich lamented that he was prohibited from discussing Skunkwork’s current projects, but he did say that they “call for technologies once only dreamed of by science fiction writers.”
In ensuing years, Rich elaborated slightly. For instance, while speaking to the UCLA School of Engineering Alumni Association in 1993, Rich said that “an error in the equations” had been discovered and corrected, making it possible “to travel to the stars.” He added, however, that “these technologies are so locked up in black programs, that it would take an act of God to ever get them out to benefit humanity.”
Farrell goes on to relay a statement from an unnamed Lockheed retired engineer who was quoted in a magazine article in 1988 as saying that “we have things flying in the Nevada desert that would make George Lucas drool.” In the same article an Air Force officer involved in the development of the SR-71 said “[w]e are testing vehicles that defy description.
To compare them conceptually to the SR-71 would be like comparing Leonardo da Vinci’s parachute design to the space shuttle.” And a retired Colonel chimed in: “We have things that are so far beyond the comprehension of the average aviation authority as to be really alien to our way of thinking.”
Consider then for a moment the possibility that within the classified world, in 1993, a technology, to quote Ben Rich, “to take ET back home” had already been developed. The implications are enormous, not to mention rather frightening. One wonders where the technology must be in 2014, more than twenty years later.
And if the aforementioned statements are true, and this seems plausible (why would these individuals lie, or even exaggerate, especially to Engineering Associations and Aeronautics institutes), what might this imply about the current state of the art in domains other than aviation, such as neuroscience, which has itself been the subject of intense “weaponization” efforts.
Indeed, what does such a vast discrepancy between what people believe and what is actually true suggest about the nature of our perceived reality in general?
Electromagnetic Mind Control
Because mind control technology is in large part classified, statements and official documents from “higher authority” as to the state of the art are lacking.
However, despite this limitation, one can still perhaps arrive at a reasonable understanding or approximation of covert capabilities by examining the most sophisticated public research, such as that of Michael Persinger, cognitive neuroscience researcher and professor at Laurentian University in Ontario.
Significant aspects of Persinger’s work relate directly to the feasibility of “electromagnetic” mind control directed at targeted individuals or populations, and are thus a continuation of research that went dark in the 1970s, research suggesting that remote electromagnetic energy fields could be used to “influence” the brain.
According to Persinger, the brain can be influenced with very weak magnetic fields, “… the electromagnetic fields associated with consciousness, which are very, very weak.”
These electromagnetic fields can even “mimic” the effects associated with taking various drugs.
This is possible because the brain works by electromagnetic patterns-brainwaves- not just chemistry, and for every drug there is “an appropriate temporal pattern” of electromagnetic radiation “equivalent to the molecular structure” of the drug.
Thus, by introducing the electromagnetic equivalent of a drug into the brain, the individual should experience “the drug,” as if it had actually been ingested – In other words, “…you don’t have to have a chemical.
This is especially significant when one considers that many compounds, both legal and “illicit,” alter consciousness, modifying, sometimes significantly, one’s experience of the world.
Imagine, for example, “electromagnetic LSD,” or “electromagnetic valium” delivered via satellite to a targeted individual or population.
Electromagnetic patterns may also be capable of creating artificial “sensory” experiences.
This is because sense experience is not a perception of a thing “in itself,” but an interpretation by the brain of electrical patterns produced by a given stimulus.
For example, the perception of a rose is the brain experiencing a particular electromagnetic resonance pattern produced by the interaction of the rose with the senses, not an experience of the rose “itself.”
By introducing the electromagnetic resonance pattern normally produced by a given stimulus directly into the brain, the need for the actual stimulus (for example, a real rose), “…can be circumvented….”
The idea, in other words, is that vivid hallucinations can be created via the introduction of precisely patterned electromagnetic radiation into the brain.
Such possibilities do not appear to be merely “theoretical.” In a 2000 article in US News & World Report, John Norseen, neural weapons designer for Lockheed Martin, is quoted as saying that electromagnetic pulses could be used to create what he termed “synthetic reality.”
Norseen elaborated in a series of emails with artist Duncan Laurie, posted at Laurie’s web-site (Norseen died in 2007).
In one such discussion Norseen referenced a technology for creating hallucinations.
The topic arose when Laurie mentioned a news story reporting a Mexican police officer’s encounter with a “flying witch.”
According to the officer’s account, the witch fell from a tree and floated above the ground before flying at the officer and “trying to grab him with her hands right through the car’s windshield.”
While the officer perceived the witch as an actual being, Norseen suggested that the witch was not a living entity, but was instead a technologically induced hallucination that “ripped into (the officer’s) perceptual apparatus from inside his thought structures….”
In other words, Norseen’s suspicion was that the officer did not have a real sensory experience, but instead experienced a virtual reality sequence, a vividly realistic, complex “sensory” experience produced entirely in his brain.
Accordingly, for Norseen the “real story” was “whether this type of … hallucination is now available in the psyop inventory…eh eh.”
Norseen explains that the witch could have been the product of an “orbiting satellite that mistakenly beamed … (the) Mexican village with a powerful entraining downlink….”
The “witch” is an example of what Norseen calls a “semiotic.”
For current purposes, suffice it to say that “neural information” encoded in “carrier waves,” and then decoded by an individual’s brain, is a semiotic.
Norseen was particularly interested in semiotics, like the “witch,” that could “reflexively control” an individual.
Norseen discusses an experiment with rats in which a rat would press a button and an electromagnetic field would stimulate a part of the rat’s brain, inducing (apparent) feelings of ecstasy in the rat. The rat would continue to press the button, discharging the “pleasure semiotic” (Laurie’s term) until it died.
Per Laurie, “Norseen’s point was that if you could trigger that part of the brain remotely, via a transmission of some kind, the receiver would be all but powerless” to stop his brain from responding in a determined, stimulus-response manner to the semiotic.
Norseen suggested to Laurie that one way to transmit a semiotic would be to encrypt commands, which could be “…buried within unrelated visual and auditory information, to be broadcast to the general public.”
In other words, a semiotic message encoded within, for example, a television or internet broadcast, could be transmitted directly to the unconscious mind of a person, in essence programming the person for some future action – “Norseen strongly suggested these techniques were connected to the Columbine murders….”
Moreover, as Norseen suggests in his discussion of a satellite downlink producing the witch hallucination, semiotics do not even need to be encoded within a sensory medium, such as a television program or internet broadcast, but can instead be transmitted directly into the brain via electromagnetic radiation or ultrasound.
As Norseen put it, the human brain has an “extremely keen sensitivity to both internal and external signals, from sight, sound, smell, touch, memory, ultrasound, EMF (electromagnetic frequency), etc.” (emphasis added), which can make “…the human brain … in essence, a sex, violence, religious pump”:
“My database of Semiotics, Signs and Symbols, when presented by various media to the human brain cause tremendously strong circuits to fire in the Nucleus Accumbens (Sex), Amygdala (Violence), and Anterior Cingulate/right temporal axis (Religion) …
“So even if a person wouldn’t do something based on his personality, the key is to reset or disengage the person’s personality (free will), and then repeatedly train either consciously or non-cognitively the person’s brain to fire relentlessly … to the point where you insert a new personality that acts upon the impulses emanating from the sex/ violence/ religious circuits (emphasis added).
“You end up with a sex offender, a serial killer, a religious zealot wherein suicide is an option…or any combination (of) the three.” … [S]omewhere, somehow, the result of culture at large, or highly refined and focused cultural inputs, is turning out just such PERSONALITIES…The question is, is this just the natural results of five billion people on earth interacting with modern information and EM (electromagnetic) signals or maybe, just maybe… somewhere, some people are using technical means for PSYOP?”
“Semiotics” can be transmitted from an external source directly into a human brain, “training” the brain through constant repetition, into new beliefs, new motivations, even, perhaps, a new personality. Further, this conditioning process can occur below the level of conscious awareness, presumably further enhancing its value as a tool for plausibly deniable covert action.
Norseen describes a technology that can literally control one’s thoughts. As he explains in the US News & World Report article, one could possibly even “…begin to manipulate what someone is thinking … before they know it.”
Robert Duncan, a scientist who worked on projects for the Department of Defense and the CIA, likens this “thought filtering and suppression” capacity to the automated spell check in Microsoft Word, which corrects spelling errors as one types.
According to Duncan, “…even new thoughts can be suppressed”; moreover, memories can be faded or erased.
The most invasive form of mind control may require analysis of the unique characteristics of an individual’s electromagnetic output, what Norseen called “brain prints”: “Think of your hand touching a mirror,” explains Norseen. “It leaves a fingerprint.” … “Just like you can find one person in a million through fingerprints,” he says, “you can find one thought in a million.”
A person’s “brain prints” leak into the environment in unique “energy dispersion pattern(s),” which if “monitored by mixed electromagnetic sensors…,” could potentially be used to identify and track the person.
Moreover, brain prints could even be transmitted “…back into the brain…” (“intact or rearranged-to the individual or someone else….”) with the brain acting upon the information “as if it were a real signal from the environment.”
[An aside: Much of what Norseen told Duncan Laurie may have actually already been “old hat.” Norseen had security clearances and had signed “70+” year non-disclosure agreements. He explained that while he could not discuss more recent developments, “at least” he could “edify” regarding the years 1995-2002.]
Copying one person’s brainwaves onto the brain of another person is a technology sometimes referred to as “EEG cloning.”
Researcher Tim Rifat explains that emotions and states such as anger and aggressiveness, apathy, lust, psychopathy, suicidal depression, mania, paranoia and psychosis have distinctive frequencies which can be entrained into the brain “remotely by use of extremely low frequency broadcast carried by pulse modulated microwave beams (ELF pulse modulated microwave remote mind control technology).”
As physicist Richard Alan Miller put it:
“By using … computer-enhanced EEGs, scientists can identify and isolate the brain’s …”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 stored “emotion signature clusters” can then be entrained into human beings to trigger the emotion.
More than mere emotions, even another “personality” can be “cloned” onto an individual. This “cerebral cortex cloning” has been likened to “having an enemy within one’s own mind.”
Of note, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, alleged Boston bomber (most likely a patsy), was subject to what he called “majestic mind control,” and told his mother that it felt as though another person was inside him, telling him things to do.
John Norseen suggested that the brain, which has been described as a “biological computer,” could be connected wirelessly (without a brain-computer interface) to a technological computer, explaining that a person could possibly be “ping[ed]” with a “light sequence or with an [extremely low frequency] … radiation sequence” causing “…something to be fired off in the brain….” Of course, one computer “pings” another to test connectivity between the two “devices.”
Moreover, if multiple brains were connected to the same “system,” the same brain signals could be routed to (“cloned” onto) multiple brains. “Broadcast messages” could even be sent, inducing similar thoughts, feelings, behaviors, and even beliefs in all people on the network.
One could thus imagine hive mind cells or even a large hive in which “participants” would share neural information (brainwaves). In such a scenario, complex group behaviors could perhaps be coordinated from an external “control center,” a situation reminiscent of some accounts of individuals claiming to have been “gang stalked.”
“Mind hacking” is Robert Duncan’s term for the process by which a brain is remotely mapped, and through which some degree of operational control over the brain becomes possible. A mind hack establishes the full capability of wireless interaction between a brain and a computer.
To “hack” a brain, the brain prints or overall “brain signature” of the person must be deciphered, a mechanical, deterministic process requiring only “time” and the target’s “coordinates” to be effectual. In other words, given “time and coordinates” anyone’s brain can be hacked:
“Precise timing of pulses is how the trick is done … The timing of the pulses must exactly coincide with the end of a neuron’s depolarization,” which is “specific to each individual and their microcircuits … This bit stream acts like an encrypted message that only a single unique human brain with the exact physical patterns can interpret …
” In order to create any significant amplification, thousands of neurons if not more need to be exactly pulsed without a single one off alignment before the electromagnetic signal can gain enough influence in the brain for entrainment. In other circuits or brains it merely adds noise that is filtered out …
“Radar pulses using the bit stream key (are) sent to the target brain, and if it hits just right along with the others, a few microseconds later an evoked potential should be detected. This indicates that the brain key is being accepted … These bit stream keys are categorized and sub-categorized.
“Each one represents a “brain-resonance” or a state that was achieved. They are templates that can be replayed into the target mind. As the brain mapping [process proceeds] other bit streams fall into place into the whole cognitive model faster and faster [as when one gets] closer to completing a jigsaw puzzle.”
A signal “tailored” to a person’s unique brain signature will not affect other brains exposed to the signal. Thus, people standing even in close proximity to a targeted person would not notice anything unusual, other than perhaps the target’s behavior.
According to Duncan, that someone could be remotely besieged by “invisible waves,” while others, even in close proximity, remain unaffected and unaware of the intrusion, tends to “baffle the common citizen who has yet to experience the electromagnetic virtual reality.”
However, the concept becomes more intuitive when one considers that the targeted individual’s nervous system has been “tuned into like a cellular phone.” And, of course, only a “phone” whose number has been dialed is going to “ring.”
Mind hacking enables feats of grotesque invasiveness, making it possible to actually “listen through the subject’s ears, and see through the subject’s eyes.”
An unanswered question is how much time is required to hack into a brain – Minutes? Days? Weeks? In any case, however long the process does take, one might suppose that mind hacking has become more efficient with time.
Scanning For Brains – MASINT
According to John Norseen, the brains of individuals in a given population can be surveyed and unusual brain signatures (“brain prints”) identified from afar. This would appear to be an aspect of MASINT-measurement and signature intelligence-the “newest, most encompassing, and technically complex” of the intelligence gathering methods.
Norseen writes that “multiple sensors can detect and measure what you think…” and that “hyper spectral analysis across the electromagnetic spectrum, within which brain function occurs” can be used “to correlate and pinpoint with more accurate detail the specific … regions of the brain engaged in mental processing of the target activity.”
Further, these mind reading capabilities are “much more robust” than traditional diagnostic technologies such as EEG or FMRI, and “involve … more remote sensor analysis using interferometer techniques…,” such that “information about underlying neural activity can be collected … (and) displays … (can be) generated of ongoing and anticipated future mental behavioral patterns, normal, pathologic, or trained”:
“Neural circuits that reflect normal, pathological or trained brain patterns can be discerned. Therefore, … a complex system of internetted, hyperspectral brain analysis sensors, exchanging database information packages of representative mathematical equations and biophysical state spaces, would be able to survey a particular area and determine the brain activities of the constituent elements of the surveillance area. A person with normal brain patterns would have characteristic brain prints that would be different than another person suffering from some pathological or trained pattern of behavior.”
It might also be added that non-conforming brains, for example, brains with non-deferential attitudes towards authority or unsanctioned beliefs, could also presumably be identified and singled out for additional “investigation” or “targeting.”
We are faced with a world in which dystopian science fiction is fast becoming reality. Indeed, for some, the dystopia may have already arrived.
World-wide, thousands of “targeted individuals” claim to have had experiences consistent with what Robert Duncan calls “mind hacking.”
Moreover, as these are only self-identified targets, the actual number of targeted individuals could be significantly greater.
Meanwhile “whistleblower” Edward Snowden goes about “revealing” NSA surveillance abuses, abuses largely disclosed by others in prior years, but without the consternation and media fanfare.
While Snowden’s “revelations” are certainly not trivial, it is apparent that the American and world populations now exist in a bubble of “unreality,” entirely unaware of the “science fiction” technologies arrayed against them.
Consider then the possibility that the true extent of “surveillance operations” remains very much “undisclosed.”
Author: Steven DiBasio