We are concerned here with reinforcing in the strongest possible terms:

i) The need for such abuses to human rights and the threats to democracy to be called to consciousness, and without further delay.

ii) To analyse the reasons why people might defend themselves from becoming conscious of the existence of such threats.

iii) To address the urgent need for intelligence, imagination, and information - not to mention compassion - in dealing with the victims of persecution from this technology, and

iv) To alert a sleeping society, to the imminent threats to their freedom from the threat from fascist and covert operations who have in all probability gained control of potentially lethal weaponry of the type we are describing.

It is necessary to emphasise that at present there is not even the means for victims to gain medical attention for the effects of radiation from this targeting. Denied the respect of credulity of being used as human guinea pigs, driven to suicide by the breakdown of their lives, they are treated as insane – at best regarded as ‘sad cases’. Since the presence of a permanent ‘other’ in one’s mind and body is by definition an act of the most intolerable cruelty, people who are forced to bear it but who refuse to be broken by it, have no other option than to turn themselves into activists, their lives consumed by the battle against such atrocities, their energies directed to alerting and informing the public of things they don’t want to hear or understand about evil forces at work in their society.
It is necessary, at this point, to briefly outline a few – one might say the precious few – attempts by public servants to verify the existence and dangers inherent in this field:

  • In January 1998, an annual public meeting of the French      National Bioethics Committee was held in Paris. Its chairman, Jean-Pierre      Changeux, a neuroscientist at the Institut Pasteur in Paris, told the      meeting that “advances in cerebral imaging make the scope for invasion of      privacy immense. Although the equipment needed is still highly      specialized, it will become commonplace and capable of being used at a      distance. That will open the way for abuses such as invasion of personal      liberty, control of behaviour and brainwashing. These are far from being      science-fiction concerns…and constitute “a serious risk to society.”      (“Nature.” Vol 391, 1998.
  • In January 1999, the European Parliament passed a      resolution where it calls “ for an international convention introducing a      global ban on all development and deployment of weapons which might enable      any form of manipulation of human beings. It is our conviction that this      ban can not be implemented without the global pressure of the informed      general public on the governments. Our major objective is to get across to      the general public the real threat which these weapons represent for      human rights and democracy and to apply pressure on the governments and      parliaments around the world to enact legislature which would prohibit the      use of these devices to both government and private organisations as well      as individuals.” (Plenary sessions/Europarliament, 1999)
  • In October 2001, Congressman Dennis J. Kucinich      introduced a bill to the House of Representatives which, it was hoped      would be extremely important in the fight to expose and stop      psycho-electronic mind control experimentation on involuntary,      non-consensual citizens. The Bill was referred to the Committee on      Science, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services and      International Relations. In the original bill a ban was sought on ‘exotic      weapons’ including electronic, psychotronic or information weapons,      chemtrails, particle beams, plasmas, electromagnetic radiation, extremely      low frequency (ELF) or ultra low frequency (ULF) energy radiation, or mind      control technologies. Despite the inclusion of a prohibition of the basing      of weapons in space, and the use of weapons to destroy objects or damage      objects in space, there is no mention in the revised bill of any of the      aforementioned mind-invasive weaponry, nor of the use of satellite or      radar or other energy based technology for deploying or developing      technology designed for deployment against the minds of human beings.      (Space Preservation Act, 2002)

http://www.uwe.ac.uk/hlss/research/cpss/Journal_Psycho-Social_Studies/v2-2/SmithC.shtml

 

E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of Peacepink3 to add comments!

Join Peacepink3