Sometimes you drive me nuts with the circles you spin people in. Youwill read a post and then only print a small irrelevant part and answerthat when the portion you left out answers the question you are asking.You, by doing this send the topic in an irrelevant direction andproclaim a conclusion based on this misdirection while announcing toeveryone how I didn't answer your question to your satisfaction. Youthen explain to everyone how my post is misleading.
In this caseyou make the assumption that probing a persons mind means total mindreading, you know it doesn't mean that. What exactly would be total mindreading anyway when we don't even know our own minds our selves attimes. I reallythink most people can decide and understand without your commentary as to who has proven a fact and who is off base.
You goto the most basic evidence of V2K or voice to skull going back about 40years and say we should stay with that. That's fine, hard documentedevidence. Then you discount hard basic evidence of cell phone stalkingwith a conviction as in the case of the Sheri Peak case and refuse toeven put it up on your web site knowing it may be the only actualconviction. You are censoring information.
Someone describeddebating with you is like trying to nail down mercury. ;-) For a whileyou were at least leaving my whole post and then answering what youwanted to. Please don't answer this by putting up some small segment andchanging the whole meaning of what I'm saying. So here itis..............in greater detail as I see it.
When I have dreammanipulation and questioning through V2K and other techniques likemaking digital movies in my head I respond. This level of dreammanipulation is my testimony only it has at times broken down intocartoons when it can't keep up and has been as simple as asking mequestions and participating in my dreams through V2K. Sometimes with nobody or image to go with the voice. The latter even you have to admitcan be done with V2K. I know they can read my subvocal responses becausethey acknowledge my responses. You can at least admit that along withV2K being done at a distance such is also the case with millimeter wavesurveillance and both are through wall. Perhaps differing distance arerequired for whether or not active or passive millimeter wavesurveillance is being used. So if they for instance wanted to know if Icommitted a crime or have hidden money or something of the sort all theyhave to do is ask and read my heart rate, breathing breathing rateand whether or not I begin to sweat. that is simple enough and is alsodone with a lie detector under questioning. That is the most basic and Ihave said so for a long time.
Woody Norris ownerof American Technologies Corporation that developed the LRAD, "HailingDevise", mentioned to Jesse Ventura that he built a prototype of this onJesse's show, "Conspiracy theories". That may be as far as you want togo and that is fine but I didn't need Woody to confirm this ability tome. Putting these weapons, communications or surveillance tools togetheras a weapons system only makes sense.
To take this a stepfurther would be to acknowledge people have been chipped and that thesechips can broadcast for a distance to a cell phone tower like the triple stacked cell phone chips in David Larson's case, complete withchips removed, patents matching, theAlfred E Mann's endowment funding the study, the scientists working thestudy, with cell phone technology and the same scientists and theirfamily members purchasing access to microwave towers in the area tosurround David Larson's location. With a chip in a nervebundle it seems easy to see how subvocal thought reading and cell phonetype broadcasting to the microwave towers could then gothrough a computer to be discerned as speech. Even throughwe don't always speak in our sleep, the History channel's show, "That'sIncredible", reproduced this with an external electrode on the subjectsvoice box on his neck while he made a phone call and had a conversationwith someone without speaking. I see this also as verifiable proof withthe given demonstrated technologies and believe the same to be said for achip broadcasting thought recognition of EEG in the brain.
Wealso know that thetime signals arrive at different cell phone towers can also triangulatethe location of the broadcast. This is another fact with lawenforcement now trying to receive this information on all cell phonetransmissions on all people and all towers. I won't even get intomilitary satellites monitoring cell phone transmissions which we knowthey can do and where they don't need to ask for permission.
The most controversial subject of probing a targets mind which seems tome to be the fact is that they are commenting on the things I look atand I believe the images I and they they create. I, when seeing and Iand them, when dreaming. I would have to guess that either through EEGor through another type of implant possibly in the optic nerve might dothe trick as does the subvocal effect with the help of acomputer to translate the nerve impulses of the spoken thought in ourminds. I'm sure you don't wantany part of this last one but it seems likely to me. You can ignorethese demonstrated facts before this paragraph like theSheri Peak case but then you are now attempting to influence others decision making by withholding facts from those wishing tounderstand and make up their own minds.
If only I could figureout how to nail down mercury? ;-)
Peter Rosenholm
Comments