Peacepink

Worldwide Campaign to stop the Abuse and Torture of Mind Control/DEWs

Satellite Surveillance including:

GPS Tracking

See through Wall

Reading your mind with implants

Reading your mind without an implants

 

Intrusive Brain Reading Surveillance Technology: Hacking the Mind

by Carole Smith

“Carole Smith describes claims that neuroscientists are developing brain scans that can read people’s intentions in the absence of serious discussions about the ethical issues this raises, despite the fact that the research has been backed by government in the UK and US.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“We need a program of psychosurgery for political control of our society. The purpose is physical control of the mind. Everyone who deviates from the given norm can be surgically mutilated.

The individual may think that the most important reality is his own existence, but this is only his personal point of view. This lacks historical perspective. Man does not have the right to develop his own mind. This kind of liberal orientation has great appeal. We must electronically control the brain. Someday armies and generals will be controlled by electric stimulation of the brain.

Dr José Delgado.Director of Neuropsychiatry, Yale University Medical School Congressional Record, No. 26, Vol. 118 February 24, 1974.

 

The Guardian newspaper, that defender of truth in the United Kingdom, published an article by the Science Correspondent, Ian Sample, on 9 February 2007 entitled:

‘The Brain Scan that can read people’s intentions’, with the sub-heading: ‘Call for ethical debate over possible use of new technology in interrogation”.

“Using the scanner, we could look around the brain for this information and read out something that from the outside there's no way you could possibly tell is in there. It's like shining a torch around, looking for writing on a wall”, the scientists were reported as saying.

 

At the same time, London’s Science Museum was holding an exhibition entitled ‘Neurobotics: The Future of Thinking’. This venue had been chosen for the launch in October 2006 of the news that human thoughts could be read using a scanner. Dr Geraint Rees’ smiling face could be seen in a photograph at the Neurobotics website[1], under the heading “The Mind Reader”. Dr Rees is one of the scientists who have apparently cracked the problem which has preoccupied philosophers and scientists since before Plato: they had made entry into the conscious mind. Such a reversal of human historical evolution, announced in such a pedestrian fashion, makes one wonder what factors have been in play, and what omissions made, in getting together this show, at once banal and extraordinary. The announcement arrives as if out of a vacuum. The neuroscientist - modern-style hunter-gatherer of information and darling of the “Need to Know” policies of modern government - does little to explain how he achieved this goal of entering the conscious mind, nor does he put his work into any historical context. Instead, we are asked in the Science Museum’s programme notes:

How would you feel if someone could read your innermost thoughts? Geraint Rees of UCL says he can. By using brain-imaging technology he's beginning to decode thought and explore the difference between the conscious and unconscious mind. But how far will it go? And shouldn’t your thoughts remain your personal business?

If Dr Rees has decoded the mind sufficiently for such an announcement to be made in an exhibition devoted to it, presumably somewhere is the mind which has been, and is continuing to be, decoded. He is not merely continuing his experiments using functional magnetic resolution scanning (fMRI) in the way neuroscientists have been observing their subjects under scanning devices for years, asking them to explain what they feel or think while the scientists watch to see which area lights up, and what the cerebral flow in the brain indicates for various brain areas. Dr Rees is decoding the mind in terms of conscious and unconscious processes. For that, one must have accessed consciousness itself. Whose consciousness? Where is the owner of that consciousness – and unconsciousness? How did he/she feel? Why not ask them to tell us how it feels, instead of asking us.

 

The Neurobotics Exhibition was clearly set up to make these exciting new discoveries an occasion for family fun, and there were lots of games for visitors to play. One gets the distinct impression that we are being softened up for the introduction of radical new technology which will, perhaps, make the mind a communal pool rather than an individual possession. Information technology seeks to connect us all to each other in as many ways as possible, but also, presumably, to those vast data banks which allow government control not only to access all information about our lives, but now also to our thoughts, even to our unconscious processing. Does anyone care?

One of the most popular exhibits was the ‘Mindball’ game, which required two players to go literally head-to-head in a battle for brainpower, and used ‘brainpower’ alone. Strapped up with headbands which pick up brain waves, the game uses neurofeedback, but the person who is calm and relaxed wins the game. One received the impression that this calmness was the spirit that the organisers wished to reinforce, to deflect any undue public panic that might arise from the news that private thoughts could now be read with a scanner.[2] The ingress into the mind as a private place was primarily an event to be enjoyed with the family on an afternoon out:

Imagine being able to control a computer with only the power of your mind. Or read people’s thoughts and know if they’re lying. And what if a magnetic shock to the brain could make you more creative…but should we be able to engineer our minds?

Think your thoughts are private? Ever told a lie and been caught red-handed? Using brain-scanning technology, scientists are beginning to probe our minds and tell if we’re lying. Other scientists are decoding our desires and exploring the difference between our conscious and unconscious mind. But can you really trust the technology?

Other searching questions are raised in the program notes, and more games:

Find out if you’ve got what it takes to be a modern-day spy in this new interactive family exhibition. After being recruited as a trainee spy, explore the skills and abilities required by real agents and use some of the latest technologies that help spies gather and analyse information. Later go on and discover what it’s like to be spied upon. Uncover a secret store of prototype gadgets that give you a glimpse into the future of spy technologies and finally use everything you’ve learnt to escape before qualifying as a fully-fledged agent!

There were also demonstrations of grateful paraplegics and quadriplegics showing how the gods of science have so unselfishly liberated them from their prisons: this was the serious Nobel Prize side of the show. But there was no-one representing Her Majesty’s government to demonstrate how these very same devices[3] can be used quite freely, and with relative ease, in our wireless age[4], to conduct experiments on free-ranging civilians tracked anywhere in the world, and using an infinitely extendable form of electrode which doesn’t require visible contact with the scalp at all. Electrodes, like electricity, can also take an invisible form – an electrode is a terminal of an electric source through which electrical energy or current may flow in or out. The brain itself is an electrical circuit. Every brain has its own unique resonating frequency. The brain is an infinitely more sensitive receiver and transmitter than the computer, and even in the wireless age, the comprehension of how wireless networks operate appears not to extend to the workings of the brain. The monotonous demonstration of scalps with electrodes attached to them, in order to demonstrate the contained conduction of electrical charges, is a scientific fatuity, in so far as it is intended to demonstrate comprehensively the capability of conveying charges to the brain, or for that matter, to any nerve in the body, as a form of invisible torture.

 

As Neurobotics claims: ‘Your brain is amazing’, but the power and control over brains and nervous systems achieved by targeting brain frequencies with radiowaves must have been secretly amazing government scientists for many years. The problem that now arises, at the point of readiness when so much has been achieved, is how to put the technology into action in such a way, as it will be acceptable in the public domain. This requires getting it through wider government and legal bodies, and for that, it must be seen to spring from the unbiased scientific investigations into the workings of the brain, in the best tradition of the leading universities. It is given over to Dr Rees and his colleague, Professor Haynes, endowed with the disclosure for weightier Guardian readers, to carry the torch for the government. Those involved may also have noted the need to show the neuroscientist in a more responsible light, following US neuroengineer for government sponsored Lockheed Martin, John Norseen’s, ingenuous comment, in 2000, about his belief about the consequences of his work in fMRI:

‘If this research pans out’, said Norseen, ‘you can begin to manipulate what someone is thinking even before they know it.’ And added: “The ethics don’t concern me, but they should concern someone else.”

While the neuroscientists report their discovery (without even so much as the specific frequency of the light employed by this scanner/torch), issuing ethical warnings while incongruously continuing with their mind-blowing work, the government which sponsors them, remains absolutely mute. The present probing of people’s intentions, minds, background thoughts, hopes and emotions[5] is being expanded into the more complex and subtle aspects of thinking and feeling. We have, however, next to no technical information about their methods. The description of ‘shining a torch around the brain’ is as absurd a report as one could read of a scientific endeavour, especially one that carries such enormous implications for the future of mankind. What is this announcement, with its technical obfuscation, preparing us for?

 

Writing in Wired[6] contributing editor Steve Silberman points out that the lie-detection capability of fMRI is ‘poised to transform the security system, the judicial system, and our fundamental notions of privacy’. He quotes Cephos founder, Steven Laken, whose company plans to market the new technology for lie detection. Laken cites detainees held without charge at Guantanamo Bay as a potential example. ‘If these detainees have information we haven’t been able to extract that could prevent another 9/11, I think most Americans would agree that we should be doing whatever it takes to extract it’. Silberman also quotes Paul Root Wolpe, a senior fellow at the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania, who describes the accelerated advances in fMRI as ‘ a textbook example of how something can be pushed forward by the convergence of basic science, the government directing research through funding, and special interests who desire a particular technology’. Are we to believe that with the implied capability to scan jurors’ brains, the judiciary, the accused and the defendant alike, influencing[7] one at the expense of the other, that the legal implications alone of mind-accessing scanners on university campuses, would not rouse the Minister for Justice from his bench to say a few words about these potential mind weapons?

So what of the ethical debate called for by the busy scientists and the Guardian’s science reporter?[8] Can this technology- more powerful in subverting thought itself than anything in prior history – really be confined to deciding whether the ubiquitously invoked terrorist has had the serious intention of blowing up the train, or whether it was perhaps a foolish prank to make a bomb out of chapatti flour? We can assume that the government would certainly not give the go-ahead to the Science Museum Exhibition, linked to Imperial College, a major government-sponsored institution in laser-physics, if it was detrimental to surveillance programs. It is salutary to bear in mind that government intelligence research is at least ten years ahead of any public disclosure. It is implicit from history that whatever affords the undetectable entry by the gatekeepers of society into the brain and mind, will not only be sanctioned, but funded and employed by the State, more specifically by trained operatives in the security forces, given powers over defenceless citizens, and unaccountable to them.[9]

The actual technology which is now said to be honing the technique ‘to distinguish between passing thoughts and genuine intentions’ is described by Professor John-Dylan Haynes in the Guardian in the most disarmingly untechnical language which must surely not have been intended to enlighten.

The Guardian piece ran as follows:

A team of world-leading neuroscientists has developed a powerful technique that allows them to look deep inside a person’s brain and read their intentions before they act.

The research breaks controversial new ground in scientists’ ability to probe people’s minds and eavesdrop on their thoughts, and raises serious ethical issues over how brain-reading technology may be used in the future.

‘Using the scanner, we could look around the brain for this information and read out something that from the outside there's no way you could possibly tell is in there. It's like shining a torch around, looking for writing on a wall,’ said John-Dylan Haynes at the Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences in Germany, who led the study with colleagues at University College London and Oxford University.

 

We know therefore that they are using light, but fMRI has been used for many years to attempt the unravelling of neuronal activity, and while there have been many efforts to record conscious and unconscious processes, with particular emphasis on the visual cortex, there has been no progress into consciousness itself. We can be sure that we are not being told the real story.

Just as rats and chimpanzees have been used to demonstrate findings from remote experiments on humans, electrode implants used on cockroaches to remotely control them, lasers used to steer fruit-flies[10] [11], and worms engineered so that their nerves and muscles can be controlled with pinpricks of light[12], the information and techniques that have been ruthlessly forged using opportunistic onslaughts on defenceless humans as guinea pigs - used for myriad purposes from creating 3D haptic gloves in computer games to creating artificial intelligence to send visual processing into outer space - require appropriate replication for peer group approval and to meet ethical demands for scientific and public probity.

The use of light to peer into the brain is almost certainly that of terahertz, which occurs in the wavelengths which lie between 30mm and 1mm of the electromagnetic spectrum. Terahertz has the ability to penetrate deep into organic materials, without (it is said) the damage associated with ionising radiation such as x-rays. It can distinguish between materials with varying water content – for example fat versus lean meat. These properties lend themselves to applications in process and quality control as well as biomedical imaging. Terahertz can penetrate bricks, and also human skulls. Other applications can be learnt from the major developer of terahertz in the UK, Teraview, which is in Cambridge, and partially owned by Toshiba.

 

Efforts to alert human rights’ groups about the loss of the mind as a place to call your own, have met with little discernible reaction, in spite of reports about over decades of the dangers of remote manipulation using technology to access the mind[13], Dr Nick Begich’s book, Controlling the human mind[14], being an important recent contribution. A different approach did in fact, elicit a response. When informed of the use of terahertz at Heathrow and Luton airports in the UK to scan passengers, the news that passengers would be revealed naked by a machine which looked directly through their clothes produced a small, but highly indignant, article in the spring 2007 edition of the leading human rights organisation, Liberty.[15] If the reading of the mind met with no protest, seeing through one’s clothes certainly did. It seems humans’ assumption of the mind as a private place has been so secured by evolution that it will take a sustained battle to convince the public that, through events of which we are not yet fully informed, such former innocence has been lost.

Trained light, targeted atomic spectroscopy, the use of powerful magnets to absorb moisture from human tissues, the transfer of radiative energy – these have replaced the microwave harassment which was used to transmit auditory messages directly into the hearing.[16] With the discovery of light to disentangle thousands of neurons and encode signals from the complex circuitry of the brain, present programs will not even present the symptoms which simulated schizoid states. Medically, even if terahertz does not ionise, we do not yet know how the sustained application of intense light will affect the delicate workings of the brain and how cells might be damaged, dehydrated, stretched, obliterated.

 

This year, 2007, has also brought the news that terahertz lasers small enough to incorporate into portable devices had been developed.[17]

Sandia National Laboratories in the US in collaboration with MIT have produced a transmitter-receiver (transceiver) that enables a number of applications. In addition to scanning for explosives, we may also assume their integration into hand-held communication systems. ‘These semiconductor devices have output powers which previously could only be obtained by molecular gas lasers occupying cubic meters and weighing more than 100kg, or free electron lasers weighing tons and occupying buildings.’ As far back as 1996 the US Air Force Scientific Advisory Board predicted that the development of electromagnetic energy sources would ‘open the door for the development of some novel capabilities that can be used in armed conflict, in terrorist/hostage situations, and in training’ and ‘new weapons that offer the opportunity of control of an adversary … can be developed around this concept’.[18]

 

The surveillance technology of today is the surveillance of the human mind and, through access to the brain and nervous system, the control of behaviour and the body’s functions. The messaging of auditory hallucinations has given way to silent techniques of influencing and implanting thoughts. The development of the terahertz technologies has illuminated the workings of the brain, facilitated the capture of emitted photons which are derived from the visual cortex which processes picture formation in the brain, and enabled the microelectronic receiver which has, in turn, been developed by growing unique semi-conductor crystals. In this way, the technology is now in place for the detection and reading of spectral ‘signatures’ of gases. All humans emit gases. Humans, like explosives, emit their own spectral signature in the form of a gas. With the reading of the brain’s electrical frequency, and of the spectral gas signature, the systems have been established for the control of populations – and with the necessary technology integrated into a cell-phone.

‘We are very optimistic about working in the terahertz electromagnetic spectrum,’ says the principal investigator of the Terahertz Microelectronics Transceiver at Sandia: ‘This is an unexplored area, and a lot of science can come out of it. We are just beginning to scratch the surface of what THz can do to improve national security’.

 

Carole Smith was born and educated in Australia, where she gained a Bachelor of Arts degree at Sydney University. She trained as a psychoanalyst in London where she has had a private practice. In recent years she has been a researcher into the invasive methods of accessing minds using technological means, and has published papers on the subject. She has written the first draft of a book entitled: “The Controlled Society”.

 

NOTES

[1] <a href="http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/antenna/neurobotics/private/121.asp" target="_blank">"">http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/antenna/neurobotics/private/1...;

At the time of writing it is still accessible. The exhibition ran from October 2006 to April 2007.

[2] Where are the scanners? Who controls them? Are they guarded by police to avoid them being stolen by terrorists? How many are they in number? Are they going into mass production? Do we have any say about their deployment? It is perhaps not unduly paranoid to want to have some answers to these questions.

[3] There is insufficient space here to deal with microchips, the covert implantation of radio transmitting devices which were referred to in Senator Glenn’s extraordinary speech to Congress on the occasion of his attempt to introduce the Human Research Subject Protection Act in 1997:

<a href="http://www.ahrp.org/InformedConsent/glennConsent.php" target="_blank">"">http://www.ahrp.org/InformedConsent/glennConsent.php</a>;

[4] Ref: The Coming Wireless revolution: When Everything Connects: The Economist: 26 April 2007.

<a href="http://www.economist.com/opinion/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=9080024" target="_blank">"">http://www.economist.com/opinion/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id...;

[5] Guardian: ‘The Brain Scan that can read people’s intentions’: 9 February 2007. <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,2009229,00.html" target="_blank">"">www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,2009229,00.html</a>;

[6] <a href="http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.01/lying_pr.html" target="_blank">"">http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.01/lying_pr.html</a>;

[7] I say, ‘influencing’, advisedly since the technology that enables thoughts to be accessed, certainly also allows for the dulling of mental processes, the interference of memory, the excitation of mental or bodily processes, the infliction of pain on any organ or nerve, the increase of blood pressure, breathing or the slowing down of these, as well as the activation of rage, sadness, hysteria, or inappropriate behaviour. Ref:John Norseen’s work: Images of Mind: The Semiotic Alphabet. The implantation of silent messages, experienced as thoughts arising in the mind, is now possible.

[8] Despite three letters to the Guardian science correspondent, and Editor, I had no reply from them, having asked them to consider my points, as psychoanalyst and researcher, for the ethical debate which was called for. Nor was there any response from my approach to the Cambridge ethicists and scientists who were said to be forming a committee. I have seen no correspondence nor reference to the whole matter since February, 2007. There was some marked regression in the New Scientist about worms being used for experiments for remote control

See: Douglas Fox, ‘Remote Control Brains: a neuroscience revolution’, New Scientist, 18 July 2007.

[9] The covert action group in the newly formed CIA recommended to President Eisenhower in 1954 that the US must pursue “a fundamentally repugnant philosophy”, and that they must learn to “subvert, sabotage and destroy” its enemies by “more clever and more ruthless methods” than those of its opponents:

Ref: James Doolittle et al: “The Central Intelligence Agency: History and Documents (Univ.Alabama Press, 1984.

[10] Fruit flies share to a remarkable degree, the DNA of humans.
[11] Fruit Flies and You: NASA sends fruit flies into Space:

<a href="http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2004/03feb_fruitfly.htm" target="_blank">"">http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2004/03feb_fruitfly.htm<...;

[12] Ref: New Scientist, 18 July 2007: ‘Remote Control Brains: a neuroscience revolution’:

<a href="http://www.science.org.au/nova/newscientist/040ns_003.htm" target="_blank">"">http://www.science.org.au/nova/newscientist/040ns_003.htm<...;

[13] See author’s paper: <a href="http://www.btinternet.com/~psycho_social/Vol3/V3.html" target="_blank">"">http://www.btinternet.com/~psycho_social/Vol3/V3.html</a>;

[14] Nick Begich, Controlling the human mind: the technologies of political control or tools for peak performance, Earthpulse Press Publications.

[15] Liberty, and Lawyers for Liberty have staunchly maintained a thorough-going campaign against the protracted government plan to issue biometric ID cards, taking the case to the House of Lords where they have gained support. In view of the undisclosed work being carried out which will enable direct access to the brain through the technology coming to light, and using light, one cannot but suspect that the biometric ID card is but an adjunct to the tracking and data sourcing of citizens, and as such has fulfilled the function of a very effective smokescreen, having deflected the energies of the protectors of individual liberties in terms of thousands of hours of concentrated protest effort, with enormous expenditure spent on their campaign.
[16] Human subjects, once computers for research experiments program them, remain targeted, even if the original reasons for their usage have become obsolete. Some have been continuously abused for over thirty years.
[17] Thz Lasers Small Enough for Screening Devices:

<a href="http://www.photonics.com/content/" target="_blank">"">www.photonics.com/content/</a>; news/2007/February/7/86317.aspx

<a href="http://www.whatsnextnetwork.com/technology/index.php/2007/01/23/min..." target="_blank">"">http://www.whatsnextnetwork.com/technology/index.php/2007/01/...;

[18] <a href="http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/vistas/vistas.htm" target="_blank">"">http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/vistas/vistas.htm</a>;


Global Research Articles by Carole Smith

 

Please go to LAST PAGE OF "Replies to this Discussion" to read NEWEST Information

Views: 6045

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Inside the Surveillance State: How Peaceful Activists Get Swept Up onto "Terrorist" Watch Lists


There appears to be no end to the appetite for data to be stored and mined, and all sorts of agencies want a share of the action.

September 15, 2011 |
http://www.alternet.org/rights/152432?page=entire
Ten Years Later: Surveillance in the "Homeland" is a collaborative project with Truthout and ACLU Massachusetts.

How little - yet how much - has changed in the last 40 years. The COINTELPRO papers sound distinctly 21st century as they detail the monitoring of perceived threats to "national security" by the FBI, CIA, National Security Agency (NSA), Secret Service, and the military, as well as the intelligence bureaucracy's war on First Amendment protest activity.

The Church Committee investigation concluded in 1976 that the "unexpressed major premise of the programs was that a law enforcement agency has the duty to do whatever is necessary to combat perceived threats to the existing social and political order."

In addition to massive surveillance, assassinations and dirty tricks "by any means necessary" included the creation of NSA "watch lists" of Americans ranging "from members of radical political groups, to celebrities, to ordinary citizens involved in protests against their government," with names submitted by the FBI, Secret Service, military, CIA, and Defense Intelligence Agency. The secret lists, which included people whose activities "may result in civil disturbances or otherwise subvert the national security of the US," were used by the NSA to extract information of "intelligence value" from its stream of intercepted communications.

We learned that there was, apparently, no easy way to get off the FBI's "security index." Even after the criteria for fitting the profile of a "subversive" were revised in  the mid-1950's, the names of people who no longer fit the definition remained on IBM punchcards, and were retained in field offices as "potential threats." A card would only be destroyed "if the subject agreed to become an FBI source or informant" or in another way indicated a "complete defection from subversive groups."

By 1960, the FBI had compiled 432,000 files on "subversive" individuals and groups, and they were getting hard to handle. The following decade brought the promise of a technological fix. Under the guidance of the attorney general at the time, Ramsey Clark, the FBI explored the potential for "computerizing the master index." The goal of Clark's Interdivision Information Unit was to harness "automatic data processing" to put information about people collected from external and internal sources in a "quickly retrievable form."

Forty years later, the same "by any means necessary" mindset is harnessed to a national surveillance industrial complex that pumps out some 50,000 intelligence reports every day into the FBI's Terrorist Screening Database (which contains over a million names, including aliases). This error-ridden "master list" is not to be confused with the National Counterterrorism Center's Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment (TIDE)system, which held 640,000 identities in March 2011. There arereported to be about a dozen terrorism watch lists or databases, and a single tip from a credible source is all it takes to get into one or more of them, while there is no reliable way to get out.

Given the legion of local, state and federal agents seeking out harbingers of "terrorist activity," the fact that espousing "radical" beliefs is grist for a Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) and the virtually unchecked ability of FBI operatives to spy on groups without suspicion of wrongdoing, it is not surprising that the same kind of groups that were infiltrated and spied on by the FBI, NSA, CIA, and Department of Defense (DoD) under COINTELPRO are featuring in Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) investigations and fusion center data banks. The secrecy shrouding "national security" matters and the blurred jurisdictions that turn FOIA requests into pieces in a "pass the buck" shell game have made it impossible to get a clear picture of the extent of spying on protected First Amendment activity. But leaks and oversight reports indicate that a 21st century Church Committee would find a mention of any group that challenges the status quo somewhere in the vast domestic surveillance labyrinth.

In his 2010 report, "A Review of the FBI's Investigation of Certain Domestic Advocacy Gr..." Glenn Fine, the (now retired - and not replaced) inspector general of the Justice Department, concludes that the FBI had "little or no basis" for investigating many advocacy groups and individuals, and that it made false and misleading statements to the public and Congress to justify its surveillance of an antiwar rally organized by a peace and social justice organization, the Thomas Merton Center of Pennsylvania. Not only did it routinely classify actions involving nonviolent civil disobedience as "Acts of Terrorism matters," it also, "relied upon potential crimes that may not commonly be considered 'terrorism' (such as trespassing or vandalism)" to get people placed on watch lists and their travels and interactions tracked.

Around the country, databases have swelled with information about antiwar and other protests that are classified as "potential terrorist activity." Intelligence oversight reports indicate that the Pentagon, which defined protest in training materials as "low-level terrorism activity," monitored and shared intelligence on groups ranging from Alaskans for Peace and Justice to Planned Parenthood, and used Army signals intelligence in Louisiana to intercept civilian cell phone conversations. It was revealed late in 2005 that the DoD had a secret database called Theart and Local Observation Notice (TALON) maintained by its Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA) unit. Among its 13,000 reports were dozens detailing antiwar activity, along with photos of protesters. Meetings were sometimes infiltrated and information widely shared among partner agencies. Events classified as "threats" included the gathering of activists at a Quaker meeting house in Lakewood, Florida, to plan a protest of military recruiting at the local high school, a Boston protest outside a military recruiting center and a peace march through the streets of Akron, Ohio, tailed by local police who had been tipped off by the Pentagon.

Although CIFA was disbanded after the extent of its spying was revealed, the TALON database has been preserved and is expected to be part of a new repository of information housed at the Pentagon's Defense Counterintelligence and Human Intelligence Center. A notice in the Federal Register for June 15, 2010, states that the new repository will have a broad domestic and homeland security mandate and will amass personal data, citizenship documentation, biometric data and "reports of investigation, collection, statements of individuals, affidavits, correspondence, and other documentation pertaining to investigative or analytical efforts by the DoD and other US agencies to identify or counter foreign intelligence and terrorist threats."

The Posse Comitatus Act's substantial limitations on the use of the military in domestic law enforcement appear to have all but vanished. Indeed, in Washington State, John Towery - a member of Force Protection Service at Fort Lewis who infiltrated and spied on peace groups in Olympia and shared information with the Army, JTTF, the FBI, local police departments and the state fusion center - is being sued by groups claiming his undercover surveillance violated the Act. Adocument leaked by WikiLeaks outlines how a "fusion cell" in a military police garrison integrated with local, county, regional, state and federal law enforcement can avoid the usual constraints on military intelligence by operating "under the auspice and oversight of the police discipline and standards." In the words of former Olympia City Council member T.J. Johnson, who was one of the people spied on by Towery, "The militarization of domestic law enforcement is one of the more disturbing trends in recent years."

Leaks from fusion centers reveal that peace groups share a place on surveillance databases with environmental groups, animal rights groups, student groups, anti-death penalty organizations, Muslim organizations, conspiracy theorists, Ron Paul supporters, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Nation of Islam and "Black Extremists." The Virginia Fusion Center cited various historically black colleges and universities as potential "radicalization nodes" for terrorists. The Maryland State Police, which works with the FBI as part of a JTTF and shares information with the state's fusion center, infiltrated protest activity, kept error-ridden "terrorist" files on activists and was notified by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) about what groups should be monitored. Bette Hoover, a retired nurse who is a grandmother and Quaker antiwar activist, was surprised when documents came to light listing her as a member of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and direct action group The Ruckus Society - organizations she never belonged to - and placing her at demonstrations she had never attended. She now understands why she receives special scrutiny at airports.

Given the enormous dimensions of the secretive echo chamber in which flawed information is disseminated, it is difficult to see how the record can ever be set straight. Once a person is in a database, there seems to be no more inclination to delete all traces of that individual (assuming this is even possible) than to remove an IBM punch card from J. Edgar Hoover's security index. The FBI today wants to keep all Suspicious Activity Reports in its eGuardian database, on the grounds that even if there is no connection to terrorism or crime today, one may become clear tomorrow as it continues to add information to a person's profile and mine information about their associations.

In the age of the Total Information Awareness program, there appears to be no end to the appetite for data to be stored and mined, and all sorts of agencies want a share of the action. There was little attempt to rein in the NSA after whistleblowersRussell Tice and Thomas Tamm revealed an "overcollection" of data of staggering proportions through the Agency's access to the phone calls, text messages, faxes and emails affecting the communications of "all Americans" - including Bill Clinton. Data captured through the NSA's warrantless surveillance program has reportedly been systematically archived for data mining purposes.

The US Joint Special Operations Command is meanwhile establishing a mega fusion center at a secret address near the Pentagon which will serve as "the offense end of counterterrorism, tracking and targeting terrorist threats that have surfaced in recent years" and advising domestic law enforcement "in dealing with suspected terrorists inside the US." It will feature a cloud-computing network combining "all elements of US national security, from the eavesdropping capabilities of the National Security Agency to Homeland Security's border-monitoring databases."

Not to be outdone, the FBI has erected a giant Investigative Data Warehouse (IDW) containing 1.5 billion records and counting - much of it classified - including information collected through nearly 300,000 National Security Letters, criminal records, financial records, intelligence reports, gang information, terrorist information, open source data and more. According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, whoseFreedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation has brought the data trove to light - the "future of the IDW is data mining" as the FBI uses "link analysis" and "pattern analysis" in the hunt for "pre-crime."

The neverending hunger for data may be one reason why the FBI, in late 2010, raided the homes and seized computers, cell phones and files belonging to peace and justice activists in Illinois, Minnesota and Michigan. Twenty-three of them have been issued with grand jury subpoenas, some for allegedly giving "material support" to a foreign terrorist organization by meeting with groups in Colombia and Palestine.

"We're conflating proper dissent and terrorism," warned former FBI agent and whistleblower Coleen Rowley:

A secretive, unaccountable, post 9/11 homeland security apparatus has increasingly turned inward on American citizens. The evidence includes everything from controversial airport body scanners to the FBI's raids last September on antiwar activists' homes ... Agents are now given a green light, for instance, to check off "statistical achievements" by sending well-paid manipulative informants into mosques and peace groups. Forgotten are worries about targeting and entrapping people not predisposed to violence.... The massive and largely irrelevant data collection now occurring only adds hay to the haystack, making it even harder to see patterns and anticipate events. "Top Secret America" needs to ask itself who is more guilty of furnishing "material aid to terrorism: - its own operatives, or the activists and protesters it so wrongheadedly targets.

 


Nancy Murray is the author of Rights Matter: the Story of the Bill of Rights. Nancy holds a B.A. from Harvard University and a B.Phil. and Ph.D. in Modern History from Oxford University.

 

Kade Crockford is the ACLU of Massachusetts privacy rights coordinator.

 

Public Said to Be Misled on Use of the Patriot Act

By CHARLIE SAVAGE 

Published: September 21, 2011

o  

 

WASHINGTON — Two United States senators on Wednesday accused the Justice Department of making misleading statements about the legal justification of secret domestic surveillance activities that the government is apparently carrying out under the Patriot Act.

 

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

The Caucus

The latest on the 2012 election, President Obama, Congress and other news from Washington and around the nation. Join the discussion.

Joshua Roberts/Bloomberg News

Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, above, and Senator Mark Udall of Colorado, have questioned the Justice Department about surveillance activities.

The lawmakers — Ron Wyden of Oregon and Mark Udall of Colorado, both of whom are Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee — sent a letter to Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. calling for him to “correct the public record” and to ensure that future department statements about the authority the government believes is conveyed by the surveillance law would not be misleading.

“We believe that the best way to avoid a negative public reaction and an erosion of confidence in U.S. intelligence agencies is to initiate an informed public debate about these authorities today,” the two wrote. “However, if the executive branch is unwilling to do that, then it is particularly important for government officials to avoid compounding that problem by making misleading statements.”

The Justice Department denied being misleading about the Patriot Act, saying it has acknowledged that a secret, sensitive intelligence program is based on the law and that its statements about the matter have been accurate.

Mr. Wyden and Mr. Udall have for months been raising concerns that the government has secretly interpreted a part of the Patriot Act in a way that they portray as twisted, allowing the Federal Bureau of Investigation to conduct some kind of unspecified domestic surveillance that they say does not dovetail with a plain reading of the statute.

The dispute has focused on Section 215 of the Patriot Act. It allows a secret national security court to issue an order allowing the F.B.I. to obtain “any tangible things” in connection with a national security investigation. It is sometimes referred to as the “business records” section because public discussion around it has centered on using it to obtain customer information like hotel or credit card records.

But in addition to that kind of collection, the senators contend that the government has also interpreted the provision, based on rulings by the secret national security court, as allowing some other kind of activity that allows the government to obtain private information about people who have no link to a terrorism or espionage case.

Justice Department officials have sought to play down such concerns, saying that both the court and the intelligence committees know about the program. But the two lawmakers contended in their letter that officials have been misleading in their descriptions of the issue to the public.

First, the senators noted that Justice Department officials, under both the Bush and Obama administrations, had described Section 215 orders as allowing the F.B.I. to obtain the same types of records for national security investigations that they could get using a grand jury subpoena for an ordinary criminal investigation. But the two senators said that analogy does not fit with the secret interpretation.

The senators also criticized a recent statement by a department spokesman that “Section 215 is not a secret law, nor has it been implemented under secret legal opinions by the Justice Department.” This was “extremely misleading,” they said, because there are secret legal opinions controlling how Patriot Act is being interpreted — it’s just that they were issued by the national security court.

“In our judgment, when the legal interpretations of public statutes that are kept secret from the American public, the government is effectively relying on secret law,” they wrote.

That part of the dispute appeared to turn on semantics. The department said that while the national security court’s opinions interpreting the Patriot Act are classified, the law itself is public.

Supreme Court to hear GPS surveillance case

It sounds a bit like Big Brother: Police can place a GPS device on your car to follow all of your movements, for any length of time.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday is scheduled to hear arguments about whether investigators need to get a warrant before doing so.

Legal experts say the case, which stems from a D.C. nightclub owner's conviction on drug charges, is one of the most important Fourth Amendment cases in decades, and will determine how police conduct investigations and privacy in the high-tech age.

Smile for the cameras
GPS devices aren't the only high-tech surveillance tools making waves. The District said earlier this year that it was planning to beef up its public surveillance system, adding thousands of security cameras to its citywide network; law enforcement officials are increasingly using such systems and a variety of other technological devices to monitor people.
That's why the Supreme Court's eventual decision in the GPS case could have far-reaching implications for privacy rights, said John Whitehead, a constitutional lawyer and president of the Charlottesville-based Rutherford Institute. In an amicus brief arguing that a warrant should be required for most GPS surveillance, the institute points to microelectromechanical sensors, Radio Frequency Identification chips, tracking chips in cell phones, facial-recognition software and iris scanners as other tools where security and privacy rights can be at odds.
"Waiting until this sort of surveillance technology is in use everywhere before setting limits on its use by police is imprudent," the brief says.

"No one believes that GPS surveillance by law enforcement is inappropriate," said John Verdi, senior counsel at the Electronic Privacy Information Center. "The question is: What is the standard that law enforcement will be held to? Is law enforcement simply permitted to track anyone, at any time, for no reason?"

The nightclub owner, Antoine Jones, was arrested on Oct. 24, 2005 on cocaine-distribution charges after police used a GPS device to track his vehicle for a month. He was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. D.C. police initially obtained a warrant for the GPS, but it expired. Now the government now argues it never needed one.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit disagreed last year, holding that the extended GPS use violated Jones' "reasonable expectation" of privacy.

The court wrote that "prolonged GPS monitoring reveals an intimate picture of the subject's life that he expects no one to have -- short of perhaps his spouse."

Federal prosecutors contend that no warrant was necessary because Jones was freely traveling on public roads.

In a brief, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli Jr. told the Supreme Court that "any individual who moves on public roadways knows that his movements can be readily observed."

Verrilli also noted that "no evidence exists of widespread, suspicionless GPS monitoring, and practical considerations make that possibility remote."

Two other federal appeals courts have held that police don't need a warrant to install and monitor a GPS on a suspect's vehicle.

D.C. Police Union Chairman Kris Baumann said GPS monitoring lets officers track suspects' patterns and requiring a warrant harms investigations by causing delays.

"Following people in cars is something we've done for years," he said. "It simply allows us to use technology to do that."

The last time the Supreme Court took up a case involving Fourth Amendment searches, technology and travel was 1983, when the court held in United States v. Knotts that police could, without a warrant, use a beeper device to monitor suspects and people did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy while traveling on public streets.

But the Knotts opinion declines to address the type of 24-hour surveillance at issue in the Jones case, saying there will be "time enough" to rule on those issues.

Such 24-hour monitoring without a warrant is "a grave and novel threat to the personal privacy and security of individuals," Stephen Leckar, Jones' attorney, said in his brief.

ebabay@washingtonexaminer.com



Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/local/crime-punishment/2011/11/suprem...

Document Trove Exposes Surveillance Methods

By JENNIFER VALENTINO-DEVRIES, JULIA ANGWIN and STEVE STECKLOW

NOVEMBER 19, 2011 Censorship Inc.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203611404577044192607407780.html

 

Documents obtained by The Wall Street Journal open a rare window into a new global market for the off-the-shelf surveillance technology that has arisen in the decade since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

The techniques described in the trove of 200-plus marketing documents, spanning 36 companies, include hacking tools that enable governments to break into people's computers and cellphones, and "massive intercept" gear that can gather all Internet communications in a country. The papers were obtained from attendees of a secretive surveillance conference held near Washington, D.C., last month.

Stewart Baker, the former assistant secretary for Homeland Security, talks with WSJ's Julia Angwin about the need for balancing privacy rights with security concerns and explains why privacy may one day be a luxury available to the privileged and the rich.

Intelligence agencies in the U.S. and abroad have long conducted their own surveillance. But in recent years, a retail market for surveillance tools has sprung up from "nearly zero" in 2001 to about $5 billion a year, said Jerry Lucas, president of TeleStrategies Inc., the show's operator.

Critics say the market represents a new sort of arms trade supplying Western governments and repressive nations alike. "The Arab Spring countries all had more sophisticated surveillance capabilities than I would have guessed," said Andrew McLaughlin, who recently left his post as deputy chief technology officer in the White House, referring to the Middle Eastern and African nations racked by violent crackdowns on dissent.

 

The Journal this year uncovered an Internet surveillance center installed by a French firm in Libya and reported that software made by Britain's Gamma International UK Ltd., had been used in Egypt to intercept dissidents' Skype conversations. In October, a U.S. company that makes Internet-filtering gear acknowledged to the Journal that its devices were being used in Syria.

Companies making and selling this gear say it is intended to catch criminals and is available only to governments and law enforcement. They say they obey export laws and aren't responsible for how the tools are used.

Trade-show organizer Mr. Lucas added that his event isn't political. "We don't really get into asking, 'Is this in the public interest?'" he said.

TeleStrategies holds ISS World conferences world-wide. The one near Washington, D.C., caters mainly to U.S., Canadian, Caribbean and Latin American authorities. The annual conference in Dubai has long served as a chance for Middle Eastern nations to meet companies hawking surveillance gear.

The global market for off-the-shelf surveillance technology has taken off in the decade since 9/11. WSJ's Jennifer Valentino-DeVries explains some of the new methods governments and law enforcement are using to monitor people.

Many technologies at the Washington-area show related to "massive intercept" monitoring, which can capture vast amounts of data. Telesoft Technologies Ltd. of the U.K. touted its device in its documents as offering "targeted or mass capture of 10s of thousands of simultaneous conver...." Telesoft declined to comment.

California-based Net Optics Inc., whose tools make monitoring gear more efficient, presented at the show and offers a case study on its website that describes helping a "major mobile operator in China" conduct "real-time monitoring" of cellphone Internet content. The goal was to help "analyze criminal activity" as well as "detect and filter undesirable content," the case study says.

Net Optics' CEO, Bob Shaw, said his company follows "to the letter of the law" U.S. export regulations. "We make sure we're not shipping to any countries that are forbidden or on the embargo list," he said in an interview.

Among the most controversial technologies on display at the conference were essentially computer-hacking tools to enable government agents to break into people's computers and cellphones, log their keystrokes and access their data. Although hacking techniques are generally illegal in the U.S., law enforcement can use them with an appropriate warrant, said Orin Kerr, a professor at George Washington University Law School and former computer-crime attorney at the Justice Department.

The documents show that at least three companies—Vupen Security SA of France, HackingTeam SRL of Italy and Gamma's FinFisher—marketed their skill at the kinds of techniques often used in "malware," the software used by criminals trying to steal people's financial or personal details. The goal is to overcome the fact that most surveillance techniques are "useless against encryption and can't reach information that never leaves the device," Marco Valleri, offensive-security manager at HackingTeam, said in an interview. "We can defeat that."

Representatives of HackingTeam said they tailor their products to the laws of the country where they are being sold. The firm's products include an auditing system that aims to prevent misuse by officials. "An officer cannot use our product to spy on his wife, for example," Mr. Valleri said.

Mr. Valleri said HackingTeam asks government customers to sign a license in which they agree not to provide the technology to unauthorized countries.

Vupen, which gave a presentation at the conference on "exploiting computer and mobile vulnerabilities for electronic surveillance," said its tools take advantage of security holes in computers or cellphones that manufacturers aren't yet aware of. Vupen's marketing documents describe its researchers as "dedicated" to finding "unpatched vulnerabilities" in software created by Microsoft Corp., Apple Inc. and others. On its website, the company offered attendees a "free Vupen exploit sample" that relied on an already-patched security hole.

Vupen says it restricts its sales to Australia, New Zealand, members and partners of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. The company says it won't sell to countries subject to international embargoes, and that its research must be used for national-security purposes only and in accordance with ethical practices and applicable laws.

The documents for FinFisher, a Gamma product, say it works by "sending fake software updates for popular software." In one example, FinFisher says intelligence agents deployed its products "within the main Internet service provider of their country" and infected people's computers by "covertly injecting" FinFisher code on websites that people then visited.

The company also claims to have allowed an intelligence agency to trick users into downloading its software onto BlackBerry mobile phones "to monitor all communications, including [texts], email and BlackBe...." Its marketing documents say its programs enable spying using devices and software from Apple, Microsoft, and Google Inc., among others. FinFisher documents at the conference were offered in English, Arabic and other languages.

A Google spokesman declined to comment on FinFisher specifically, adding that Google doesn't "tolerate abuse of our services."

An Apple spokeswoman said the company works "to find and fix any issues that could compromise [users'] systems." Apple on Monday introduced a security update to iTunes that could stop an attack similar to the type FinFisher claims to use, namely offering bogus software updates that install spyware.

Microsoft and Research In Motion Ltd., which makes BlackBerry devices, declined to comment.

The documents discovered in Egypt earlier this year indicated that Gamma's Egyptian reseller was offering FinFisher systems there for about $560,000. Gamma's lawyer told the Journal in April that it never sold the products to Egypt's government.

Gamma didn't respond to requests for comment for this article. Like most companies interviewed, Gamma declined to disclose its buyers, citing confidentiality agreements.

Privacy advocates say manufacturers should be more transparent about their activities. Eric King of the U.K. nonprofit Privacy International said "the complex network of supply chains and subsidiaries involved in this trade allows one after the other to continually pass the buck and abdicate responsibility." Mr. King routinely attends surveillance-industry events to gather information on the trade.

At the Washington and Dubai trade conferences this year, which are generally closed to the public, Journal reporters were prevented by organizers from attending sessions or entering the exhibition halls. February's Dubai conference took place at a time of widespread unrest elsewhere in the region. Nearly 900 people showed up, down slightly because of the regional turmoil, according to an organizer.

Presentations in Dubai included how to intercept wireless Internet traffic, monitor social networks and track cellphone users. "All of the companies involved in lawful intercept are trying to sell to the Middle East," said Simone Benvenuti, of RCS SpA, an Italian company that sells monitoring centers and other "interception solutions," mostly to governments. He declined to identify any clients in the region.

In interviews in Dubai, executives at several companies said they were aware their products could be abused by authoritarian regimes but they can't control their use after a sale. "This is the dilemma," said Klaus Mochalski, co-founder of ipoque, a German company specializing in deep-packet inspection, a powerful technology that analyzes Internet traffic. "It's like a knife. You can always cut vegetables but you can also kill your neighbor." He referred to it as "a constant moral, ethical dilemma we have."

—Paul Sonne contributed to this article.

Write to Jennifer Valentino DeVries at jennifer.valentino-devries@wsj.com, Julia Angwin at julia.angwin@wsj.com and Steve Stecklow at steve.stecklow@wsj.com

http://www.infowars.com/oregon-senator-reveals-secret-government-surveillance-grid/

Oregon Senator Reveals Secret Government Surveillance Grid

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
May 26, 2011

In an interview with Wired, Sen. Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, adds yet more confirmation to what many of us have known for years – the government has built a secret surveillance structure far more portentous and dangerous than anything devised by the PATRIOT Act now up for renewal.

Wyden points to the so-called “business-records provision” of the PATRIOT Act which empowers the FBI to force businesses, medical offices, banks and other organizations to turn over any “tangible things” it deems relevant to a so-called security investigation.

“It is fair to say that the business-records provision is a part of the Patriot Act that I am extremely interested in reforming,” Wyden told Wired. “I know a fair amount about how it’s interpreted, and I am going to keep pushing, as I have, to get more information about how the Patriot Act is being interpreted declassified. I think the public has a right to public debate about it.”

“Surveillance under the business-records provisions has recently spiked,” writes Spencer Ackerman. “The Justice Department’s official disclosure on its use of the Patriot Act, delivered to Congress in April, reported that the government asked the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for approval to collect business records 96 times in 2010 — up from just 21 requests the year before. The court didn’t reject a single request. But it ‘modified’ those requests 43 times, indicating to some Patriot-watchers that a broadening of the provision is underway.”

During the Bush years, it was revealed that the NSA had engaged in a massive dragnet of electronic communications without court order in direct violation of the Fourth Amendment. In 2006, Bush waved offcriticism of NSA snooping and said the program was “necessary to win this war and to protect the American people” against terrorism.

In 2006, the NSA argued that it is above the law and the Constitution and said a courtroom challenge to its surveillance program would expose sensitive state secrets and demanded it be thrown out.

In a filing with the Detroit court, Justice Department lawyers pointed to history in defending the NSA surveillance program, noting President Woodrow Wilson’s authorization for government agencies to intercept telephone, telegraph and cable communications during World War I and President Franklin D., Roosevelt approving the interception of “all telecommunications traffic” after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Gail Gibson wrote for the Baltimore Sun.

The NSA was created by secret presidential directive in 1952. It soon grew into a vast intelligence-gathering machine – and super-state structure – which intruded into the private lives and communications of all Americans.

The NSA program Operation Shamrock intercepted millions of telegrams to and from the United States. The NSA placed the names of law-abiding American citizens on watch lists and then disseminated their private communications to other government agencies such as the FBI and CIA, explains the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law.

As revealed by the Church Committee in the mid-1970s, the FBI and CIA repeatedly violated the rights of Americans engaged in constitutionally protected political activity.

During the NSA controversy in 2006, William M. Arkin, writing for the Washington Post, noted that government organizations have developed hundreds of software programs and analytic tools to “harvest” intelligence, and they’ve created dozens of gigantic databases containing the names of countless Americans.

“These cutting edge tools — some highly classified because of their functions and capabilities — continually process hundreds of billions of what are called ‘structured’ data records, including telephone call records and e-mail headers contained in information ‘feeds’ that have been established to flow into the intelligence agencies,” Arkin wrote. “The multi-billion dollar program, which began before 9/11 but has been accelerated since then.”

Wyden and his colleague Sen. Mark Udall have offered an amendment on Tuesday to the PATRIOT Act reauthorization.

The amendment takes the Obama administration to task for “secretly reinterpret[ing] public laws and statutes.” It would oblige the Attorney General to “publicly disclose the United States Government’s official interpretation of the USA Patriot Act.”

The bill mentions “intelligence-collection authorities” embedded in the PATRIOT Act that the Obama administration briefed the Senate about in February.

Stock up with Fresh Food that lasts with eFoodsDirect (Ad)

Sen. Ron Wyden neglected to provide more detail on the government’s massive surveillance program because it is highly classified. His measured comments, however, are a haunting reminder that the government has erected a huge and largely secret high-tech surveillance and control grid.

The testimony of Ray Kurzweil on the Societal Implications of Nanotechnology(this is how the new technology mind control Works) My visons has led me to this. Mr. Kurzweil testimony was April-9-2003 at the Committee on Science and US House of Representatives Hearing in the USA! Their technology has moved very fast in the last decade.(www.kurzweilai.net/testimony-of-ray-kurzweil-on-the-societal-implic...) I have the old technology implants,chips and the new Nano also,it is very difficult for me to write, because they are hammering me 24/7 and they have much control over everything.I am very sad to here about Richard Cain and Chirldren! i will try to connect with Mr. Jesse Beltran to get evidence of my chips and implants but they make sure that i have no money through Sabotage and i am very concerned for my family also.Two of my visons was about the Chirldren months ago,i  explained this to Derrick Robinson on the telephone but i had to wait until i did my homework on this first.My knowledge is great and i have many documents and i would like to explain all this, because i can't write very well.I have wrote in the past that they are harming the little Chirldren and God is angry about this.I could use some help to get the truth out to the people,i have been supressed to long, no one wants to here the truth in the USA everyone is afraid, just like my doctor told me Jan.24-2012 when i explained to her about my implants and ask for her help, she told me that it was (Over Her Head) and she did not want my documents. If i could stop them from looking out my eyes and knowing my every thought and hearing their death threats 24/7 i could show the World all about the (New World Oder).You can't manufacture Humans-part human and part nanobots-this is a Abomonation to God!!.Even though they can cure all diseases with this, in the wrong hands this can cause major destruction all over the world also.Much Science has fallen into the wrong hands and these people have gone on the Dark Side. Any major distruction in the future with this could be blamed on Terrorism, but this technology is great for National Security.After swiming this past summer i was standing and looking out my back deck and had my back turned away from family members,i heard them say (look at them they are looking at his arms) they could see out my family members eyes also,they can do this in large groups of people.This is just one example of many! We are moving into the (Brave New World) and the only way to try to change this is (We The People) God created all his people to be Equal, most people in the world today are not aware of the danger this new technology can do in the future and many are not even aware that it exist.The tectnology will never change but the powerfull people that use this against innocent people needs to change. Contact lovelace27959@att.net I could use the help. Thanks and God Bless!   

The Neuro Revolution - Full HD    Neural Warfare

By Zack Lynch  Executive Director of Neurotechnology Industry Organization - Which tracks neuroscience projects in the government and private sectors.  His report at link below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBK8SkOjMTw&context=C3b03f64ADOE...  

 

Dr. Amy Kruse - DARPA  Neorscience - "among the items currently on her plate research of computer analysis of brain waves detected from Satellites without the subjects knowledge."

http://torturedinamerica.org/

This video explains the mad scientists, corporations, universities and government entities behind the horrific research experiments we were chosen to be put in. As explained in Directive 5240.1R, Procedure 13, consent must be obtained by the participant. It also states what can be done to us and what outcomes can occur. Procedure 15 states that if they go beyond what is asked of them, they are in violation of the law and should be prosecuted. Start your lawsuit. This video also gives evidence.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBK8SkOjMTw&context=C3b03f64ADOEgsToPDskI5L0bLz_99onEsMoRdGqNw
Dr. Amy Kruse - DARPA  Neorscience - "among the items currently on her plate research of computer analysis of brain waves detected from Satellites without the subjects knowledge." 

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2012/mar2012/surv-m26.shtml

Obama administration expands illegal surveillance of Americans

By Tom Carter
26 March 2012

Last Thursday, Attorney General Eric Holder enacted guidelines that further expand the US government's asserted powers to collect and store private information, without a warrant, concerning individuals who are not suspected of any crime.

The guidelines constitute a further step by the Obama administration to expand and entrench unconstitutional spying operations on the American people by all levels of government that were spearheaded by the Bush administration.

In the period since September 11, 2001, the US government has secretly compiled vast databases containing private information on the American public. These databases include telephone conversations, the contents of personal emails, visited web sites, Google searches, text messages, credit card transactions, mobile phone GPS location data, travel itineraries, Facebook activity, medical records, traffic tickets, surveillance camera footage and online purchases. The vast quantities of information that are being collected and stored by the US government far exceed what was gathered by the most infamous police states of the last century.

Holder's guidelines permit intelligence officials to secretly use these databases to profile and track Americans who have no connection to terrorism-alleged or otherwise-for up to five years. The previous guidelines, issued in 2008 by Bush administration Attorney General Michael Mukasey, were understood to limit the retention of such information to 180 days.

According to an article Friday in the New York Times, the new guidelines are expected to result in increased collection and "data mining" of information on ordinary Americans by the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC).

The Electronic Privacy Information Center issued a brief statement denouncing the guidelines: "The change represents a dramatic expansion of government surveillance and appears to violate the Privacy Act of 1974, which limits data exchanges across federal agencies and establishes legal rights for US citizens."

The guidelines, which are couched in military, legal and intelligence jargon, were drafted in secret and not made available for public comment before they were enacted. In addition to Holder, National Counterterrorism Center Director Matthew G. Olsen and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper, Jr. signed the guidelines.

The new guidelines must be understood as part of a vast escalation of domestic surveillance being undertaken by the Obama administration. According to a report last week in Wired magazine, the Obama administration is constructing a secret facility of unprecedented size in Bluffdale, Utah to store and process all of the information it is presently gathering about Americans. The new data center is conceived as a central hub that will link to National Security Agency (NSA) electronic eavesdropping facilities that are already operating around the country. "The heavily fortified $2 billion center should be up and running in September 2013," the report stated.

"Flowing through its servers and routers and stored in near-bottomless databases will be all forms of communication, including the complete contents of private emails, cell phone calls, and Google searches, as well as all sorts of personal data trails―parking receipts, travel itineraries, bookstore purchases, and other digital 'pocket litter,'" the article reported.

The Wired report, titled "The NSA Is Building the Country's Biggest Spy Center (Watch What You Say)," confirms that among the major sources for the surveillance databases are "secret electronic monitoring rooms in major US telecom facilities." The FISA Amendments Act of 2008 retroactively legalized the collusion, illegal when it was initiated under the Bush administration, between private telecommunications companies and government intelligence agencies in the warrantless government compilation of private information.

The magazine reported one unnamed former intelligence official as saying, "Everybody's a target; everybody with communication is a target."

The secret compilation of these databases by the Bush and Obama administrations is entirely unconstitutional. The Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution provides: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated." It requires the police to obtain a warrant before conducting a search or seizure.

"They violated the Constitution setting it up," William Binney, a senior NSA mathematician-turned-whistleblower, told Wired, referring to the warrantless surveillance initiated by the Bush administration and now being expanded by the Obama administration. "But they didn't care. They were going to do it anyway, and they were going to crucify anyone who stood in the way."

The pretext for this massive escalation of domestic spying is the so-called "war on terror." However, the US ruling class is primarily targeting not terrorism in the Middle East, but mounting opposition to its policies within the United States. This is the real reason for its attacks on the democratic rights of the population. They are the preparation for large-scale repression of political and social opposition.

A report last week by AP journalist Frank Franklin II confirmed that "counterterrorism" units in the New York Police Department's Intelligence Division have been carrying out extensive undercover monitoring of the meetings of liberal and protest groups. Detailed reports on meetings, including the identities of those present and future planned activities, have been generated and transmitted regularly to an "intelligence collection coordinator."

According to one such briefing, an NYPD undercover agent traveled as far as New Orleans in April 2008 to spy on the activities of left-wing groups. The briefing the agent sent back included the names and backgrounds of speakers at meetings, the names of the organizations involved, the political issues discussed, and all of the sites of future rallies.

Another NYPD undercover agent attended a white-water rafting Muslim religious retreat to spy on those in attendance. The informant, identified as OP#237, reported the details: "The group prayed at least four times a day, and much of the conversation was spent discussing Islam and was religious in nature."

The designation "OP#237" suggests that hundreds of such undercover informants and spies are attending political meetings and gatherings from the NYPD alone.

Also revealed last week were Department of Homeland Security (DHS) internal manuals for agents in the department's Media Monitoring Capability program. The manuals were ordered released pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act request. These manuals make clear that the agency has been closely monitoring political discussions and activity on social media sites such as Facebook. The manual identifies as "items of interest" warranting investigation any activity on social media sites concerning "policy directives, debates and implementations related to DHS."

The escalation of domestic surveillance by the Obama administration is one aspect of the disintegration of American democracy. On December 31 of last year, Obama signed the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, which gives intelligence agencies and the military the power to abduct any person, anywhere in the world, including US citizens, and imprison him or her indefinitely in a facility such as the one located at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The NDAA was followed by Holder's speech earlier this month asserting the power of the president to unilaterally assassinate US citizens without any kind of judicial process whatsoever. The pseudo-legal arguments advanced by the Obama administration in support of these measures exceed the most authoritarian presumptions of the Bush administration.

These unprecedented attacks on democratic rights, in which the entire political establishment and both Democrats and Republicans are participating, must be understood as preemptive preparations by the political establishment to meet the coming social upheavals with police state measures.

Can A Satellite Read Your Thoughts? - The Scientific Papers

 

Well, we have a very interesting article today.  We're going to take a look at the scientific papers, some strange signals hiding behind mains hum and a video of a CNN reporter having images inserted into his brain.

Its interesting that the media was all over this technology in the mid-80's pushing for its development, but surprisingly quiet when the reports of abuse and torture started to roll in.

So much for corporate responsibility.

The Scientific Papers

One of the interesting things about discussing radio-based brain computer interfaces with people, is the complete lack of public knowledge that exists.  The first reaction is always either a smirk or reference to a tin foil hat.  I often wonder why this is given the amount of scientific material that exists.  I suppose that it has very little application outside of the military and what civilian application it could be applied to could not justify the development, infrastructure and on-going maintenance costs.

To help remedy this situation, I have collected five of the best papers of the subject.  The first three I have posted links to the previous article.  These cover establishing synchronization between the neurons and the ELF E-field and then controlling the firing pattern.  Basically, that all there is to it.  Scale it up, control the firing patterns of a wide range of neuron clusters and you can exercise control or induce hallucinations in a person.

It doesn't matter if you are 2000Km away.

Chaos control and synchronization of two neurons exposed to ELF external electric field

Jiang Wang Ting Zhang, Yanqiu Che

School of Electrical and Automation Engineering, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China

Accepted 23 March 2006. Available online 26 May 2006.

Abstract

Chaos control and synchronization of two unidirectional coupled neurons exposed to ELF electrical field via nonlinear control technique is investigated. Based on results of space–time characteristics of trans-membrane voltage, the variation of cell trans-membrane voltage exposed to extremely low frequency (ELF) electric field is analyzed. The dynamical behaviors of the modified Hodgkin–Huxley (HH) model are identified under the periodic ELF electric field using both analytical and numerical analysis. Then, using the results of the analysis, a nonlinear feedback linearization control scheme and a modified adaptive control strategy are designed to synchronize the two unidirectional coupled neurons and stabilize the chaotic trajectory of the slave system to desired periodic orbit of the master system. The simulation results demonstrated the efficiency of the proposed algorithms.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960077906003134

Unidirectional synchronization of Hodgkin–Huxley neurons exposed to ELF electric field

Jiang Wang Yan-Qiu Che, Si-Si Zhou, Bin Deng

School of Electrical Engineering and Automation, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, PR China

Accepted 29 May 2007. Available online 26 July 2007.

Abstract

In this paper, a hybrid control strategy, H∞ variable universe adaptive fuzzy control, is derived and applied to synchronize two Hodgkin–Huxley (HH) neurons exposed to external electric field. Firstly, the modified model of HH neuron exposed to extremely low frequency (ELF) external electric field is established and its periodic and chaotic dynamics in response to sinusoidal electric field stimulation are described. And then the statement of the problem for unidirectional synchronization of two HH neurons is given. Finally H∞ variable universe adaptive fuzzy control is designed to synchronize the HH systems and the simulation results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed control method.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096007790700392X

Fire patterns of modified HH neuron under external sinusoidal ELF stimulus

Chunxiao Han, Jiang Wang Bin Deng

School of Electrical and Automation Engineering, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China

Accepted 5 August 2008. Available online 17 September 2008.

Abstract

Neuron as the main information carrier in neural systems is able to generate diverse fire trains in response to different stimuli. In this paper, the stimulus frequency is taken as the bifurcation parameter, and ISI is considered to be one of the state variables. Via numerical simulation, we mainly concentrate on the kinds of fire patterns that the modified HH neuron model displays such as period-n, bursting, and modulation fire patterns, etc. under the effect of external sinusoidal ELF electric field, and the relation between the ISI sequences and the external stimulus just like synchronization and transition in the manner of pitchfork bifurcation. In addition, an explanation is put forwards from the electrophysiology point of view to try to interpret why neurons generate so many different kinds of ISI sequences.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960077908003688

This next paper I included to make a point.  If you study it carefully you will see that it closely resembles the paper directly above.  This is a good example of reinventing the wheel.  In this case, this paper predates the previous paper by 9 years.  This raises the question of just how long before this paper was the initial government funded research done?  Was it a product of need and capability?  Keep this in mind when you watch the video later, as this is a practical demonstration of this next paper produced in 2010.

Modeling the effect of an external electric field on the velocity of spike propagation in a nerve fiber

John M. Myers Gordon McKay Laboratory, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138

Received 21 April 1999; published in the issue dated November 1999

The effect of an externally generated electric field on the propagation   of action potentials is modeled, assuming the Hodgkin-Huxley equation   for the voltage-dependent conductance of the membrane of a nerve fiber.  With  some simplifying assumptions, this conductance together with  Maxwell’s equations leads to the Hodgkin-Huxley differential equations  for  propagation, modified by a term proportional to the gradient of the   externally generated electric field component along the nerve fiber.  Computer  solution of these equations shows the influence of an electric  field  gradient on propagation velocity. When the electric field  oscillates, voltage spikes  starting later along a given axon advance or  lag relative to earlier  spikes, so the time between spikes at the  receiving end differs from the time  between spike originations. The  amount that a low-frequency electric  field modulates pulse timing at  the end of a fiber relative to that at the  beginning is estimated under  several conditions.

http://pre.aps.org/abstract/PRE/v60/i5/p5918_1

Now this paper gets very close to the mechanism that has been described in this series of articles.  Note that this is the first paper to show that quite apart from transmitter design, the properties of the tissue are important to the reception of that signal.  Not only this but the magnitude and frequency are important to prevent signal rejection.

Med Biol Eng Comput. 2011 Jan;49(1):107-19. Epub 2010 Nov 10. Transmembrane potential generated by a magnetically induced transverse electric field in a cylindrical axonal model. Ye H, Cotic M, Fehlings MG, Carlen PL. Source

Toronto Western Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada. hye@uhnresearch.ca

During the electrical stimulation of a uniform, long, and straight nerve  axon, the electric field oriented parallel to the axon has been widely accepted as the major field component that activates the axon. Recent  experimental evidence has shown that the electric field oriented  transverse to the axon is also sufficient to activate the axon, by inducing a  transmembrane potential within the axon. The transverse field can be  generated by a time-varying magnetic field via electromagnetic induction. The aim of  this study was to investigate the factors that influence the  transmembrane potential induced by a transverse field during magnetic stimulation.  Using an unmyelinated axon model, we have provided an analytic  expression for the transmembrane potential under spatially uniform, time-varying magnetic  stimulation. Polarization of the axon was dependent on the properties of  the magnetic field (i.e., orientation to the axon, magnitude, and  frequency). Polarization of the axon was also dependent on its own  geometrical (i.e., radius of the axon and thickness of the membrane) and electrical  properties (i.e., conductivities and dielectric permittivities).  Therefore, this article provides evidence that aside from optimal coil design, tissue  properties may also play an important role in determining the efficacy  of axonal activation under magnetic stimulation. The mathematical basis of this  conclusion was discussed. The analytic solution can potentially be used  to modify the activation function in current cable equations describing  magnetic stimulation.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21063912

What none of these scientists has yet grasped is the secret to speeding up their research.  The secret lies in recording the signals produced by the brain, storing the patterns and associating those patterns to activity.  Its just a matter of replaying the signals, with the same physical characteristics, to induce remote control over the neuron clusters.

The upshot is that we are about 12-24 months away from someone reproducing the basics of the NSA's neural interface.

Hidden Signals

Tests in Europe (Germany) between 2000-2003 revealed the existence of a transmitter broadcasting in the ELF frequency range.  The transmissions were hidden by the hum of electrical power grid and the fact that they appeared to be using the Earth itself as an antenna.  You can read more about the signals, the equipment used and circuit diagrams here:

http://www.vlf.it/kurt/elf.html

As you will find out in the video to come at the end of this article, the strength of a signal required to create an image in the brain is a thousand times weaker than the Earth's magnetic field.  So standard oscilloscopes, with millivolt divisions, would barely register voltage of the E-field without some major amplification.  The setup used to detect these hidden signals had an amplification factor of about 240,000.  Given how weak this signal was, the fact that it was hidden behind electrical noise and that it could only be detected in the ground indicates someone went to extremes to hide this transmitter.

To this day, no major government has acknowledged this transmitter, its function or who operates it.  Without a more detailed analysis of the signal, it would be nearly impossible to tell if it relates to remote neural communication.

The one thing to take from this is that classified transmitters of this type have been proven to exist.

CNN Meets Mr Computer's Retarded Cousin

This video is perfect, it shows very weak magnetic fields about 1/1000 the strength of the Earth's magnetic field, pulsed at ELF frequencies inducing controlled hallucinations in a target.  The video is from a CNN segment on Soviet mind control technology in 1985.  The reporter gets a scientist and an engineer to use of the shelf components to put images into his mind.  What's really interesting is that the engineer claims that it would take about 3 week to modify it to effect an entire town.

Obviously, it is a cut down version of the real thing.  The first difference we notice is that this system does not match particular frequencies to either a particular target or neural network.  This may indicate that the field strength used far exceeds what is required to achieve the effect.  The second point to note is that this is using the magnetic field, rather than the E-field.

It also demonstrates something we refereed to earlier.  This is a practical demonstration of a paper that was not written until 2010, even though this segment was shown 25 years earlier.  Not only this, but the technology used is based on an old Soviet design, meaning that it could be 10-15 years older again.  This means the research into this began at least in the 1960's with implementation in the 1970's.  If the Soviet's considered this old technology in the mid-80's, it would seem to indicate that a far more complex version was in current service.  Despite claims of the US being behind in the technology, it is more likely given the access to better processors and hardware in general, that the NSA had, in fact, a fully functional system at this time.

If you are just interested in the device that can put images into the brain, skip ahead to time index 06:31.

Can A Satellite Read Your Thoughts? - The Scientific Papers

Well, we have a very interesting article today.  We're going to take a look at the scientific papers, some strange signals hiding behind mains hum and a video of a CNN reporter having images inserted into his brain.

Its interesting that the media was all over this technology in the mid-80's pushing for its development, but surprisingly quiet when the reports of abuse and torture started to roll in.

So much for corporate responsibility.

 

The Scientific Papers

One of the interesting things about discussing radio-based brain computer interfaces with people, is the complete lack of public knowledge that exists.  The first reaction is always either a smirk or reference to a tin foil hat.  I often wonder why this is given the amount of scientific material that exists.  I suppose that it has very little application outside of the military and what civilian application it could be applied to could not justify the development, infrastructure and on-going maintenance costs.

To help remedy this situation, I have collected five of the best papers of the subject.  The first three I have posted links to the previous article.  These cover establishing synchronization between the neurons and the ELF E-field and then controlling the firing pattern.  Basically, that all there is to it.  Scale it up, control the firing patterns of a wide range of neuron clusters and you can exercise control or induce hallucinations in a person.

It doesn't matter if you are 2000Km away.

Chaos control and synchronization of two neurons exposed to ELF external electric field

Jiang Wang Ting Zhang, Yanqiu Che

School of Electrical and Automation Engineering, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China

Accepted 23 March 2006. Available online 26 May 2006.

Abstract

Chaos control and synchronization of two unidirectional coupled neurons exposed to ELF electrical field via nonlinear control technique is investigated. Based on results of space–time characteristics of trans-membrane voltage, the variation of cell trans-membrane voltage exposed to extremely low frequency (ELF) electric field is analyzed. The dynamical behaviors of the modified Hodgkin–Huxley (HH) model are identified under the periodic ELF electric field using both analytical and numerical analysis. Then, using the results of the analysis, a nonlinear feedback linearization control scheme and a modified adaptive control strategy are designed to synchronize the two unidirectional coupled neurons and stabilize the chaotic trajectory of the slave system to desired periodic orbit of the master system. The simulation results demonstrated the efficiency of the proposed algorithms.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960077906003134

Unidirectional synchronization of Hodgkin–Huxley neurons exposed to ELF electric field

Jiang Wang Yan-Qiu Che, Si-Si Zhou, Bin Deng

School of Electrical Engineering and Automation, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, PR China

Accepted 29 May 2007. Available online 26 July 2007.

Abstract

In this paper, a hybrid control strategy, H∞ variable universe adaptive fuzzy control, is derived and applied to synchronize two Hodgkin–Huxley (HH) neurons exposed to external electric field. Firstly, the modified model of HH neuron exposed to extremely low frequency (ELF) external electric field is established and its periodic and chaotic dynamics in response to sinusoidal electric field stimulation are described. And then the statement of the problem for unidirectional synchronization of two HH neurons is given. Finally H∞ variable universe adaptive fuzzy control is designed to synchronize the HH systems and the simulation results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed control method.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096007790700392X

Fire patterns of modified HH neuron under external sinusoidal ELF stimulus

Chunxiao Han, Jiang Wang Bin Deng

School of Electrical and Automation Engineering, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China

Accepted 5 August 2008. Available online 17 September 2008.

Abstract

Neuron as the main information carrier in neural systems is able to generate diverse fire trains in response to different stimuli. In this paper, the stimulus frequency is taken as the bifurcation parameter, and ISI is considered to be one of the state variables. Via numerical simulation, we mainly concentrate on the kinds of fire patterns that the modified HH neuron model displays such as period-n, bursting, and modulation fire patterns, etc. under the effect of external sinusoidal ELF electric field, and the relation between the ISI sequences and the external stimulus just like synchronization and transition in the manner of pitchfork bifurcation. In addition, an explanation is put forwards from the electrophysiology point of view to try to interpret why neurons generate so many different kinds of ISI sequences.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960077908003688

This next paper I included to make a point.  If you study it carefully you will see that it closely resembles the paper directly above.  This is a good example of reinventing the wheel.  In this case, this paper predates the previous paper by 9 years.  This raises the question of just how long before this paper was the initial government funded research done?  Was it a product of need and capability?  Keep this in mind when you watch the video later, as this is a practical demonstration of this next paper produced in 2010.

Modeling the effect of an external electric field on the velocity of spike propagation in a nerve fiber

John M. Myers Gordon McKay Laboratory, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138

Received 21 April 1999; published in the issue dated November 1999

The effect of an externally generated electric field on the propagation   of action potentials is modeled, assuming the Hodgkin-Huxley equation   for the voltage-dependent conductance of the membrane of a nerve fiber.  With  some simplifying assumptions, this conductance together with  Maxwell’s equations leads to the Hodgkin-Huxley differential equations  for  propagation, modified by a term proportional to the gradient of the   externally generated electric field component along the nerve fiber.  Computer  solution of these equations shows the influence of an electric  field  gradient on propagation velocity. When the electric field  oscillates, voltage spikes  starting later along a given axon advance or  lag relative to earlier  spikes, so the time between spikes at the  receiving end differs from the time  between spike originations. The  amount that a low-frequency electric  field modulates pulse timing at  the end of a fiber relative to that at the  beginning is estimated under  several conditions.

http://pre.aps.org/abstract/PRE/v60/i5/p5918_1

Now this paper gets very close to the mechanism that has been described in this series of articles.  Note that this is the first paper to show that quite apart from transmitter design, the properties of the tissue are important to the reception of that signal.  Not only this but the magnitude and frequency are important to prevent signal rejection.

Med Biol Eng Comput. 2011 Jan;49(1):107-19. Epub 2010 Nov 10. Transmembrane potential generated by a magnetically induced transverse electric field in a cylindrical axonal model. Ye H, Cotic M, Fehlings MG, Carlen PL. Source

Toronto Western Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada. hye@uhnresearch.ca

During the electrical stimulation of a uniform, long, and straight nerve  axon, the electric field oriented parallel to the axon has been widely accepted as the major field component that activates the axon. Recent  experimental evidence has shown that the electric field oriented  transverse to the axon is also sufficient to activate the axon, by inducing a  transmembrane potential within the axon. The transverse field can be  generated by a time-varying magnetic field via electromagnetic induction. The aim of  this study was to investigate the factors that influence the  transmembrane potential induced by a transverse field during magnetic stimulation.  Using an unmyelinated axon model, we have provided an analytic  expression for the transmembrane potential under spatially uniform, time-varying magnetic  stimulation. Polarization of the axon was dependent on the properties of  the magnetic field (i.e., orientation to the axon, magnitude, and  frequency). Polarization of the axon was also dependent on its own  geometrical (i.e., radius of the axon and thickness of the membrane) and electrical  properties (i.e., conductivities and dielectric permittivities).  Therefore, this article provides evidence that aside from optimal coil design, tissue  properties may also play an important role in determining the efficacy  of axonal activation under magnetic stimulation. The mathematical basis of this  conclusion was discussed. The analytic solution can potentially be used  to modify the activation function in current cable equations describing  magnetic stimulation.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21063912

What none of these scientists has yet grasped is the secret to speeding up their research.  The secret lies in recording the signals produced by the brain, storing the patterns and associating those patterns to activity.  Its just a matter of replaying the signals, with the same physical characteristics, to induce remote control over the neuron clusters.

The upshot is that we are about 12-24 months away from someone reproducing the basics of the NSA's neural interface.

Hidden Signals

Tests in Europe (Germany) between 2000-2003 revealed the existence of a transmitter broadcasting in the ELF frequency range.  The transmissions were hidden by the hum of electrical power grid and the fact that they appeared to be using the Earth itself as an antenna.  You can read more about the signals, the equipment used and circuit diagrams here:

http://www.vlf.it/kurt/elf.html

As you will find out in the video to come at the end of this article, the strength of a signal required to create an image in the brain is a thousand times weaker than the Earth's magnetic field.  So standard oscilloscopes, with millivolt divisions, would barely register voltage of the E-field without some major amplification.  The setup used to detect these hidden signals had an amplification factor of about 240,000.  Given how weak this signal was, the fact that it was hidden behind electrical noise and that it could only be detected in the ground indicates someone went to extremes to hide this transmitter.

To this day, no major government has acknowledged this transmitter, its function or who operates it.  Without a more detailed analysis of the signal, it would be nearly impossible to tell if it relates to remote neural communication.

The one thing to take from this is that classified transmitters of this type have been proven to exist.

CNN Meets Mr Computer's Retarded Cousin

This video is perfect, it shows very weak magnetic fields about 1/1000 the strength of the Earth's magnetic field, pulsed at ELF frequencies inducing controlled hallucinations in a target.  The video is from a CNN segment on Soviet mind control technology in 1985.  The reporter gets a scientist and an engineer to use of the shelf components to put images into his mind.  What's really interesting is that the engineer claims that it would take about 3 week to modify it to effect an entire town.

Obviously, it is a cut down version of the real thing.  The first difference we notice is that this system does not match particular frequencies to either a particular target or neural network.  This may indicate that the field strength used far exceeds what is required to achieve the effect.  The second point to note is that this is using the magnetic field, rather than the E-field.

It also demonstrates something we refereed to earlier.  This is a practical demonstration of a paper that was not written until 2010, even though this segment was shown 25 years earlier.  Not only this, but the technology used is based on an old Soviet design, meaning that it could be 10-15 years older again.  This means the research into this began at least in the 1960's with implementation in the 1970's.  If the Soviet's considered this old technology in the mid-80's, it would seem to indicate that a far more complex version was in current service.  Despite claims of the US being behind in the technology, it is more likely given the access to better processors and hardware in general, that the NSA had, in fact, a fully functional system at this time.

If you are just interested in the device that can put images into the brain, skip ahead to time index 06:31.

Can A Satellite Read Your Thoughts? - A View From MIT

Output from an MEG, the NSA system does not image the brain like this.

Throughout this series, one question has been repeatedly asked, does the brain emit radio waves? The answer should be an obvious yes based upon the information from this series, but I found a second opinion from engineers at MIT that should settle the issue once and for all.

A question was posed, "Can brain waves interfere with radio waves?"

Can brain waves interfere with radio waves?

Radio waves and brain waves are both forms of electromagnetic radiation—waves of energy that travel at the speed of light. The difference between brain waves, radio waves, and other electromagnetic waves (such as visible light, X-rays and Gamma rays) lies in their frequency—that is, how often the waves peak and trough in a second.

Radio waves, which include radio and other wireless transmission signals, as well as other natural signals in the same frequency, peak and trough at between 50 and 1000 megahertz—that’s between 50 million and one billion oscillations per second.

The human brain also emits waves, like when a person focuses her attention or remembers something. This activity fires thousands of neurons simultaneously at the same frequency generating a wave—but at a rate closer to 10 to 100 cycles per second.

http://engineering.mit.edu/live/news/1785-can-brain-waves-interfere...

So, now you know, the brain does emit radio waves and that they exist in the ELF band (under 300Hz). Some corrections must be made to the reply from MIT. When they refer to radio waves, they have selected a region of the radio spectrum that corresponds to transmissions made by FM radio stations. In fact, the region actually extends between 0-300Ghz, or to even 1Thz if you include sub-millimeter frequencies. The point they were trying to make is that it will not interfere with your car radio, which is true.

The explanation continues:

Interference happens when two waves of the same or very similar frequencies bump into each other. This might happen when the signals from two radio stations, both broadcasting at 89.7 megahertz from different cities, bump into one another. “The shape of the waves changes linearly, they add to and subtract from one another,” says Dimitrios Pantazis, director of the Magnetoencephalography (MEG) Laboratory at MIT’s McGovern Institute. As a result, songs become static.

Whilst true, it also depends on your detection equipment. In MEG the detectors are small and cannot accurately determine the frequency difference between photons. That is, the detectors classify a range of photons as being a particular frequency. When cancellation does occur, the remaining photons are too weak to activate the detector. The NSA gets round this by using larger antennas and highly expensive photon classifiers.

But, says Pantazis, since their frequencies are so wildly different, brain waves don’t interfere with radio waves. Even if that was the case, brain waves are so weak, they are hardly measurable at all. For comparison, says Pantazis, “the magnetic field of the earth is just strong enough to move the needle of a compass. Signals from the brain are a billionth of that strength.”

Very true, but he fails to mention the size of the wavelength. At 100Hz the wavelength is 2998Km. Let's put that in perspective:

The shortest distance from the [US] East to West Coast (as the crow flies) would be 2,092 miles (3,347 km) from San Diego, CA to Jacksonville, FL.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_distance_in_miles_from_the_Ea...

This means that what the MEG detects on the head of patient in a hospital, is the exact same as what can be detected at the other side of the US continent.

The difference is that an MEG has about 306 detectors spaced around the head, to create a 3D image. A detector on the other side of the country would not get this spacial quality and it would receive every other brain wave in the country at the same time. That is, it does not produce images of the brain, it just records signals that can be use to identify everything that you do or experience.

The engineer from MIT explains that here:

Hard to measure, but not impossible. MIT recently installed a new MEG scanner to study the function of the human brain. To capture brain signals, the MEG scanner is in a room shielded with mu metal, a special alloy that blocks external magnetic fields. “Like a rock in the middle of a river, this metal forces all electromagnetic signals to flow around the room and doesn’t let any inside,” says Pantazis.

The MEG scanner consists of a helmet that contains 306 sensors spaced uniformly across its surface. These “superconducting quantum interference detectors” (SQUID) are cooled to near absolute zero, which makes them superconductive and, according to Pantazis, “able to measure even the slightest magnetic signals from the brain.”

We can conclude from this that the detector behind Remote Neural Monitoring, is very similar to an MEG machine. Unlike the MEG machine, this detector does not reject every other brain by shielding itself. On the contrary, it detects every signal, from every brain, in the entire nation, or 3000Km radius.

That's enough to listen to everyone in Moscow from the UK. No doubt it works the other way too.

The trick here is a highly advanced DSP (Digital Signal Processing) program. This separates the frequencies, classifies them and passes them to a supercomputer for decoding.

If you thought the warrantless wire tapping program was bad, then the fact that the NSA trawls through your private thoughts, conversations and generally uses you as a free bugging device in your own home should piss you right off.

The MEG lab, open since March 2011, is used by researchers across MIT. Projects are as diverse as studying visual attention, language processing, or even olfactory responses to pleasant and unpleasant smells. “It is a very exciting field of research, you never know how the brain will respond to different stimuli”, says Pantazis. Meanwhile, the song on the radio remains the same. — Elizabeth Dougherty

The NSA does a lot more, with the greatest density of supercomputers in the world.

Have a nice day!

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Latest Activity

CLS posted a status
"Look at Indian temples Egyptian temples you will see green blue people. It wasnt paint. Chemistry! Mind control chemistry. No lies."
1 hour ago
CLS posted a status
"Change chemistry through mind control. Ancient East Indians changed their skin color with this. Aliens. Garbage manufactured. Green Aliens n"
1 hour ago
CLS posted a status
"Give someone cancer, many diseases through mind control changing the brain and chemistry. Garbage"
1 hour ago
CLS posted a status
"Remote control heart attacks. Cause diseases through your brain frequencies. Garbage. No words. A idiot pressing buttons with no brain"
1 hour ago
CLS posted a status
"Give access to a computer system to brain damaged people. Nice USA. Seriously. Idiot gets mad about how pathetic is own life is and assaults"
1 hour ago
Jason Marcus cunningham commented on Jason Marcus cunningham's blog post jason m. cunningham
"In Texas Austin I welcome peacepink, I hope they will not share common goals with rico stasi. we really need a strong legal support team or many groups of these in texas, if the blue-states will not do anything legally about this encroachment then…"
15 hours ago

Badge

Loading…

© 2019   Created by Soleilmavis.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service