Chapter 2 Rough Draft

 

Voting and Narrative of Democracy. America as Dictatorship with Trump and Anti-Trump Branding

 

I gave up on politics. I have a general sense and know my feelings or beliefs on variety of things, but I basically know my little corner of knowledge and life's experience and my brain's reaction to politics. I don’t go down paths of inquiry about various things like fentanyl or covid. I have thoughts on it, but I don’t do what i feel is an intelligence test research thing for something that is partially what i believe is a psychological operation. I find both camps to be annoying, but I think that is by design in order to undermine two party democracy in America while there is no hope for 3rd or 4th party and such.

 

Even though both camps are annoying, I dont think I can ignore the fact that there are seemingly divides in politics among the masses. The call to say the left-right paradigm is false may apply to Democrat vs Republican, but not to the reality that there is a group of people that largely fall into the following left right paradigm. What neither really adheres to is ethical behavior. 

 

Essentially there are definitely people on right that are ok with the market economy controlling or being the final arbiter in social affairs and damned be the environment or status of ecological systems. The right generally wants to conserve system and are ok with rich people controlling society and rewarding competing hard workers and talented people while letting impoverished and "lazy Untalented losers" fight for scraps or live in poverty without any sort of change to the greater system. This, often, is linked to a belief in divine nature of fascism or capitalism, but sometimes is based on social darwinism and a belief in a natural order. There is also like a secondary cultural identity of loving domineering violent males and warmaking and hating gay sex or any non- biblical condoned people. Historically this was previously the space for imperial racism and an identity around that, which is still a legacy that lives on to some degree. 

 

This is seriously what drives alot of people.

 

There are also people who identify as left that want other factors to regulate market economy like common good, environmental health and sustainability, human rights. They generally want to make changes to system, see it as fallible and are not ok with rich people controlling society. Many on the left don't want the masses to compete for resources but unite and are not ok with poverty. Generally, the left wants to eliminate poverty and wants the earth to survive. The left generally wants some changes to system, some want to dismantle it replace it with left wing systems. There are people who identify as left that don't agree with war as the default state of humans and don't see capitalism or fascism as natural order or believe in it as natural order. The left generally more favorably supports feminism and female elevation to roles of political, economic and social power. There are people who identify as left that want to rectify injustices of imperialism and racism and support diversity. 

 

The trick is recognizing that there is in fact this divide and in supporting democracy as a compromise between them, then finding compromises between them as each makes its case.

I will say that voter intimidation is a crime committed via gangstalking and I have been harassed to vote for Democrats, particularly Hillary Clinton. I'll state now that as a Target I don't advise anyone what to do with regards to voting. There are a few people in elected office that do acknowledge this system at least in part. One body that did so was the Richmond City Council in California, and their Mayor Tom Butt, made up of mostly progressives. Also, Democrat Dennis Kucinich who acknowledged mind control space weaponry in a bill he sponsored decades ago did so, but has back-tracked since and said nothing else about it. And as far as I know, the only other person in elected congressional office to acknowledge the program, at least in part, is former Republican representative Jim Guest who openly acknowledged the program while representing Missouri. Additionally, a target named Scott in California who has written to numerous government officials received a letter from a City Council person in Los Angeles. The council member stated that they believed that Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti was considering starting a Task Force into the topics Scott had discussed in his letter, which included Directed Energy Weapons and Remote Neural Monitoring. (14) I imagine that it'd be hard to ignore Los Angeles City Council like Richmond has been, though sworn testimony from the former Los Angeles FBI head, Ted Gunderson, is ignored. During a press conference he gave as President, Bill Clinton said that human experimentation was wrong and that the government had a moral responsibility to tell the truth about it or about anything that is wrong. I didn't know, however, if I could expect that belief system to rule another Clinton Whitehouse. I didn't have a hopeful attitude or know if one was detrimental or not. I don't know if cynicism is detrimental or not. I know that it is impossible not to be cynical.


I don't know who is best to vote for Targeted Individuals or for what you individually believe. I did not vote in 2012 after becoming aware of this program. I voted straight Democrat in 2018, but don't like that when a Democrat abuses human rights or commits war crimes they are considered a Moderate and when a Republican does it they are considered a Fascist and I believe that this leads to a widely supported and condoned fascism that kills people and abuses human rights. I'll divulge that in the next vote for the 2020 presidential election, I voted Democrat. In the previous election, the 2016 election, I voted for the Green Party, but they also don't divulge any information regarding this tyrannical system. In the 2016 election, I was weary of war or casting a vote for war and someone said that Arab blood was very cheap to Hillary Clinton. I'd add that it was very cheap in that election overall from all the candidates in 2016.  I think that is true and that it eroded Democratic party support. However, on the war and peace front, Trump's behavior with North Korea in which he threatened Fire and Fury was alarming and I think bizarre. In the 2016 primary I voted for Bernie Sanders, but Sanders is mute on psychotronic weaponry or Directed Energy Weapons, and I don't know what a vote for Sanders would mean with regards to the Monarch Program. I suspect his heart attack during the 2020 primary was possibly induced. A week before his heart attack he released a plan to eliminate billionaires and a billionaire made the statement that maybe Bernie Sanders "shouldn't exist." (15) However, he seems to be in favor of 'homeland security' and 'national security.' The European Parliament called for a ban on 'human manipulation' weapons. I know that Europe is considered on the left. I also know that Kucinich called for a ban of psychotronic, and mind control weaponry and he is on the left. Serious laws are already being violated also. 

 

Jesse Ventura considered running for president. I've also read he endorsed Bernie Sanders for the 2016 Democratic party nomination. Jesse Ventura is the only politician besides Dennis Kucinich to talk about neurophone voice transmission technology. He demonstrated its existence on his television program. I personally think that Ventura knows more than he lets on about satellite neurophone technology, remote neural monitoring or mind reading and gangstalking, but at least he admits it exists. I would ‘ve been tempted to support a Ventura presidency, at least there would be acknowledgement of the neurophone, but I don't know what else would happen. 

 

There was alot of anxiety over President Trump for good reasons and I think the Presidency is just weird no matter who is President. We vote for people we don't know to have such immense power over us and others. At Donald Trump’s inauguration, he stated that "freedoms must be reclaimed by each generation" as if a priestly class dolls them out. For years there have been impeachment petitions being circulated for President Trump and there are issues I think he should be impeached for just like Obama and Bush, but the impeachment petitions for a long while were based on ultra nationalist anti information sharing, which is a Human Right. Most of the early campaigning for Trump's impeachment, was about sharing information in Trump Tower obtained from Russian sources. Nancy Pelosi confirmed that the motive for Impeachment was based on Russian collusion, which for months was itself based on declarations that “crimes” were committed due to information sharing. She stated it was central to the Ukraine Phone call article of impeachment, stating “all roads lead to Putin.” (16) If Americans were caught overseas or abroad sharing information to influence elections and then were gone after with full force of foreign country's government, they'd be considered political prisoners. I was uncomfortable setting a precedent for impeaching somebody for sharing information obtained by a foreign 'agent.' If someone from Vanuatu, for example, had damaging information about Trump and his corruption relating to global warming policies, I'd be for that information being shared. So, I don't see how I can be for it in that case and impeach someone because it came from Russia in another. 

 

This seemingly perpetual contradiction and hypocrisy presents itself to us as political subjects of the Two-Party system regularly. What I believe is that the persons in leadership positions are trying to undermine the two-party system with a hypocrisy churning machine. The pattern of behavior and news stories or events is unmistakable. So, then you'd think they'd offer a third party? No, there's no third party to be offered. In fact, they make it such high stakes with dueling oppressions that people become tribal during election season, which in and of itself undermines the two-party system further.  I view this hypocrisy churning machine on both sides to be a psychological operation to undermine democracy in America. If we are undermining the two-party system but not starting a 3rd, then what we’re really doing is undermining any semblance of democracy in America and what’s likely to replace it is fascist technocracy. This is the operation before us. Fascist Technocracy is taking over our society.

 

For the 2024 election I've seen Robert F Kennedy Jr. make mention of this fascist technocracy and discussed an AI controlled Surveillance Tyranny being developed on CNN, but he did not go into detail and alas, you know, there is a depth to talk about this type of thing that doesn't get breeched in presidential politics. I have noticed when you come across online accounts, figures or personal interactions in society, where people often discuss voting for RFK Jr. as having no affect on fascism, that these same people will usually make no mention of an Artificial Intelligence run surveillance dictatorship being developed, but in fact Kennedy Jr. has at least mentioned it. I find that interesting. As of this writing I'm going to vote Kennedy Jr in 2024, but don't agree with everything he stands for. I've come to view presidential politics as a compromise while maintaining some semblance of values. But I typically don't have much hope in the thing. I try to be supportive of my candidate without being tribalistic.

 

America is a dictatorship and Donald Trump is in a secret society convoluting the dictatorship. He took the country down reality show psyops. I began this book discussing the intelligence tactic of using an antagonist in order to run an operation to gain trust in individuals. The same thing can be done to create trust in institutions or organizations as well. Trump functioned as an antagonist, in this case to prop up the media and intelligence agencies and institutions. In February of 2018, Republican Devin Nunes hinted at the “surveillance abuses” Targeted Individuals go through with a memo titled Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Abuses at the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Nunes memo release told a small secret, that the govt and presidents target people with 'surveillance' due to political beliefs or speech. We're supposed to see Donald Trump as a huge scam artist running Ponzi schemes etc. but then take everything he does and says at face value and all the people who positioned him along the way of his rise to fame and household standing, like NBC Universal we are also supposed to remove from any part of the scam and take everything they say at face value. How does that make sense? Trump is subverting media criticism in society by being a heel or buffoon authoritarian that attacks the media. They can position themselves off Trump as a people's champion when they are not. 

 

Donald Trump is staged like 9/11 was staged. Follow this: Trump is worth 4 billion dollars, Pelosi is worth 130 million. They are fighting an impeachment battle over exposing corruption and both support war in middle east, 1 in Syria and 1 in Iran, but 500,000 Americans must bake and freeze to death on the streets meanwhile. I stated earlier that once a person is targeted, they are subject to a bizarre and crazy psychological warfare designed to make them appear crazy so as to discredit them once they talk openly about it. Part of the bizarre psychological warfare used on me so that I discuss it and discredit myself is using Donald Trump to mimic me. On the news the day I decided to compile this book, for instance, was the headline that President Donald Trump tweeted that his impending impeachment was comparable to a lynching. There was much outrage regarding Trump's tweet, much the same as always. This is a formula for producing propaganda. I will discuss later how Donald Trump is a gangstalker who gaslights and mimics broken thoughts that I have in often distorted fashion. He is supposed to be my alter ego, one of many that act out on the entertainment and political stage to run media feedback and mind control operations directed at me and others. Trump's lynching remarks are intended to mimic a statement that I made a few years ago, in which I stated that the human rights abuses that Targeted Individuals go through with the community or workplace mobbing, Directed Energy Weapons torture, mutilation and sexual assaults etc. are comparable to lynching and have roots in lynching. I said, specifically, that they are a historical cousin to lynching. I stand by that statement. One would just have to look at the pictures of Targeted Individual and human rights victim, Midge Mathis' torture, as one example to understand that, though much of the torture can take place without leaving discernable marks. (17)

 

Robert Naeslund Lecture:  

 

21st Century Lynching uses high tech methods to destroy a person's mind and body coupled with 24-7 Mass Mobbing -For those unaware, it is an often times invisible crime happening in plain sight that people ignore.  Cybernetics is an entire transdisciplinary field of study devoted to the science of electronic control systems and communication systems in animals and machines. Ultimately, it is devoted to communication between animals and machines. It has been in existence for at least 3 quarters of a century and its development coincides with Pentagon programs to control populations post World War II. Organizations and programs engaging in the usage of mental slavery, mind control, brain invasive technologies and behavior modification programs on individuals established themselves in at least the late 40s and included the influx of NAZI scientists into the United States. One known program often pointed to is Project Paperclip, however the knowledge about this program should not be equated with the extent to which mind control programs and brain invasive technologies are in usage. Dr. Robert Duncan has testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee about the usage of mind control programs enacted on targeted individuals and about the torture of citizens occurring on a mass scale. He states that these programs exist in the U.S with a scale of secrecy greater than the Manhattan Project, while the technology is commonly known in Eastern Bloc countries as bio-communication technology. There are some who are taken slaves by this system and others who are singled out for lynchings where they are tortured until they violently act out against police and are killed, made to commit suicide or are murdered with directed energy weapons often after physical and psychological torture.

 

In 2011, Robert Naeslund gave a lecture outlining the chronology of public acknowledgements in Newspapers and by scientists or politicians of what the New York Times at one point described as a future of “Push Button People.” The Lecture was titled “The Brain Project," which is what Naeslund referred to as the implanting of people to link their brains to a super computer. I leave here his transcription. As someone with strong interest in this topic, I find this lecture to not be very prominent in disseminated information about Monarch Program. I don't know what to make of that except to think that it is being repressed with overload of information. I hope I’m not doing that here with this book, but rather supporting it’s claims and organized presentation.

 

"From the 1940s electrodes were implanted in the brains of unwitting Hospital patients during surgery. In the 1960s mini-transmitters that easily could be implanted were developed and today "brain-chips" are also injected at hospitals internationally." -Robert Naeslund 

 

RN "Robert Naeslund): This subject has received too little attention and that often has been related to conspiracy theories and even science fiction, but that in reality has been a state project for the past 60 years, developed behind the so called "walls of power": the secrecy of military research. My name is Robert Naeslund and I am going to give an explanation of the subject that the American Senator John Glenn had his main activity during his last 3 years as a politician and that he, in his last speech in the Senate 1997, described as one of the most important questions of our times. The technology that uses remote control to directly connect to the human brain emerged as super computers were developed in the 1940s. From the beginning this technology has used implants in the human brain, then electrode two-way communication systems where the emitted frequencies could be programmed with data for influence while returning signal sent biological information that the super computer could compile and analyze. 

RN: The very first articles about this technology were published in the NY Times in December 1948 when the American Professor Norbert Weiner published the book "Cybernetics" coining at the same time the "cyber" concept. It can be interesting to know where this word is coming from. The technology came to be known as bio-medical telemetry. That is the medical name for it. Telemetry means measuring at a distance. Other terms were bio-cybernetics, brain-computer-technology, or man-system-interaction, which is the Swedish State's name for this technology. The first experiments- and this is something that will challenge our understanding about medical ethics, in particular, but also doctors' functions- but there is very strong documentation about this: The first experiments with this technology in Sweden that we can document took place at Karolinska Hospital in Stockholm 1946. Electrodes were implanted in people's brains- on the same premises as today- without people's knowledge, and these people were thereafter used in medical experimentation with the new technology. Already in the 1950s'- half a century ago this extensive research program was organized behind the defense research that was at that time called F.O.A and that functioned as a "knowledge bank", innovator, made evaluations, trained doctors and professors to develop the project. Military research has by now changed its name to F.O.I and state in its annual report of 2011 that their goal is to control man's cognitive functions during the individual's whole lifetime. Cognition is about thought and reason.

Narration Quote: All facts which are presented about Sweden are as well valid for the U.S or any European nations. This techno-political violent project goes on globally and Senator John Glenn, Congressman Dennis Kucinich, The New York Times and many professors have all protested against the "rape" or menticide of the brain.

 

RN: It's with supercomputers that they were able to develop the "Big Brain Project" that this lecture will be about. Two years later 1953, April 3, The New York Times had an article with the Title "Scientists use electrodes in brain" and from it we can understand already at that time in 1953, one could transfer both memory thoughts and sensory functions by remote control. I'll quote a few lines from it: "Patients brains are wired for sound with hairlike electrodes in a new technique reported at the Mayo Clinic today...The scientists said that through the depth recording and electrical stimulation methods, new fields had been opened into basic function of the human brain, like memory, thought, action, sight and smell." And this article was published  April 3rd 1953, but still today this is nothing that anybody talks about. Well at least not in the mass media or in the popular magazines. Professor John Lilly mentioned in his memoirs, the book with the title "The Scientist" published 1978 that in 1953- again this is mind blowing because it happened such a long time ago- 58 years ago he was called to a meeting with the director of the U.S Mental health institute that asked him to have  his research with dolphins and chimps- with electrodes in their brains- to be directed behind the C.I.A's secrecy. But he refused. And the answer that he gave the General Director was also published in his memoirs telling us very much about how this technology was developed and how far the development had gone already by 1953. "Doctor Remond that uses our technology in Paris shows that this method of stimulation of the brain can be applied to the humans (with implants), without the help of a neurosurgeon. He does it at his clinic. This means anyone with the right tools can do this to a person, in secret, without any signs that electrodes have been used on the person. If this technology comes into the hands of a secret agency, they can have a total control over a person and change his beliefs extremely quickly. Thats how far this technology was developed already in 1953. The C.I.A had begun its collaboration with surgeons abroad, in this case Paris, who implanted their electrodes imperceptibly, secretly in patient's brains (hospitals, brothels, orphanages, and prisons).

Narration Quote:  The magazine Science had in 1956, 30 Nov., their first extensive article regarding the brain subject under the heading "Some issues concerning the control of human behavior." Professor Carl. R. Rogers called the people under these conditions slaves of those who directed their behavior. "I believe the prediction and control of behavior may be misused...It also means the great majority are only the slaves. We can choose to use our knowledge to enslave humans in ways we never dreamed of, in such a way that they never become aware of the loss of their personalities"

RN: And this was something that was published in the magazine "Science." He also added: "in such a case we can only look back on the concept of human freedom and the right to choose, as being a historical curiosity that once existed, as a cultural accident, as a set of values in a pre-technological civilization." Yes these are indeed scary words. They state something that in fact is much more detestable than what old traditional dictatorships represent. And that the project was developed because of government decisions...well, its a horror story. That is something that Swedish Defense researcher and scientist P.M Persson talked about in an article in the F.O.A. Magazine 1965, with the title "Bio-Telemetry." He wrote: "The word telemetry comes from the Greek tele meaning far, and metri meaning measure. In Swedish telemetry would be called "measuring at a distance." Telemetry can be described as the science of the transmission of data that is normally not available. The oldest and most widely used radio system is the AM/FM system. It was standardized as early as around 1950 in the U.S.A. "The substantial portion of biotelemetry comprises data transmission. This is mainly done by using implanted transmitters. The technology has evolved very far in Swedish medical research." What in fact was developed far back in the medical research was the abuse of patients, in whose brains or heads, transmitters had been implanted. And this was something that at the time was done largely during surgeries, when patients were anesthetized. Dr. Jose Delgado, mentioned earlier in the New York Times, published in 1967 a research report, "Mans intervention in intracerebral functions." He wrote that electrodes were implanted in patients in all major hospitals around the world. I'll quote a few words from the research report: "Implanted electrodes in humans are now used in all large hospitals. The presence of electrodes in the brain is not harmful or even unpleasant and patients live a completely "normal" life in their homes. From the experimental point of view, behavioral research requires individual freedom. In consequence of this trend, we have begun to affect the brains psychological reactions and scientific studies have concluded that we can experiment with intracerebral functions responsible for developing and maintaining specific behaviors and mental functions." Well this was nothing that the patients themselves-as they were called-had the slightest idea about; that they had been implanted and that they were used in research. In experiments of their brain functions for a lifetime connected to their systems. With this technology, one of the most prioritized research areas emerged that had to do with changing people's perceptions, ideas and in general, behavior. To understand politicians' attitudes regarding this matter, I am going to report a Swedish government report from 1972. The Prime Minister Olaf Palme appointed Alva Myrdal as chairman of State Commission "Choosing the Future." The predicted future wasn't what anyone would accept. From the following words that I'm going to quote, one can better understand politician's tactical games in which human rights and all international conventions that Sweden has signed to protect citizens, were completely mashed. Alva Myrdal wrote: "Research in the field of brain function and behavior is primarily aimed at identifying the nature and extent of  those changes that can be achieved with different methods. Discussion about the various methods to influence people, are leading to the question of the individual's ability to protect oneself from undesirable influences and the invasion of privacy. Undoubtedly, the protection of the individual against the abuse of these and similar methods in today's society are inadequate." In fact, the government did not want to give us-the people- protection against the technological intrusion into our brains. 

 

RN: This was 40 years ago. They gave their sympathies to power instead of taking the people's side and felt solidarity with some small but powerful groups such as the military, the professors and the researchers. In particular, these three groups. All of them wanted to develop it against humanity....and the whole population. About the same time the American Professor of Astronomy, Carl Sagan, published his book "The Dragons of Eden." In that book he discussed this technology,  and he wrote that people who accept electrodes in their brains have lost any chance of freedom. I quote from it "When it comes to technological nightmares, it is important to recognize the possibility that people can understand it and prevent government abuse. The people that allow the government to implant electrodes in their brains, have lost the battle of freedom." A way of understanding it- at least the beginning of the lost freedom- is to realize that not a single article has come out in mass media that has been able to create a debate about this technology and its emerging role as a political factor. 

 

 RN: But there has been one newspaper, a single newspaper in the world, that has been better than any other. It has challenged the greatest power on earth in this matter, and it is The New York Times. Already from the start in the 1950s, they bought up the research reports that referred to the possibility to, for the first time in human history-being able to neutralize- not only mental diseases but even physical ones. They have written many articles about this development in the 1950s. In the 1960s; they began saying that the technology was being misused. And they also published many leading figures' warnings about the social danger of a society under brain (mind) control. During the 1970s the danger had become even greater and more and more articles were written about the C.I.A's  brain control systems. During a single summer in 1977 the New York Times published thirty articles about the C.I.A's brain control systems. The most important thing that was brought into the light was that this project had already had begun in the 1940s, and that they had built with this technology, a state within a state. In 1967 the New York Times had its first editorial under the title "Push Button People" and they discussed ongoing experiments that warned about the development of this technology and it was stated that it has come up to a more general debate and to everyone's attention. They also mentioned that probably there were countries in the world that already planned to subjugate their populations using this technique. I'll quote a few words from the New York Times editorial. "It is the possibility of similar control over human beings that causes concern. Several years ago a scientist told a scientific meeting that experiments with patients seems to support the distasteful conclusion that motion, emotion and behavior can be directed by electrical forces and that humans can be controlled like robots by push buttons. It is indeed a distasteful conclusion but it is quite conceivable that in some countries investigations may be under way into the possibility of using these techniques to control human beings. But the mere existence of such a possibility is disturbing, and certainly merits wider public discussion and a greater attention than it has received up to now." Certainly this was the way it was. Both in the U.S. and Sweden were countries that had far reaching plans to subjugate citizens beyond their knowledge in brain control systems.

 

RN: By this time, surgeons had under two decades committed their abuses on patients and this technology has during the whole time been developed behind the Swedish defense Research Institute F.O. A. The Experiments have during the whole development been very brutal. A conference was held in 1986, March 13th, about this issue, at The Swedish Department of Justice. Swedish Justice Minister, Sten Wickborn, had invited some professors, researchers and a few politicians. At the meeting it was mentioned that this musn't reach the mass media. One professor, Bengt Pernow said that researchers from all over the world are coming to Sweden, to experiment on humans, as they don't have the right to do that in their own countries. Because we here in Sweden have less protection for our human rights than other nations and this was mentioned in clear words at that conference. We tend to believe that we in Sweden live in the best of all democracies. Thats jhow it usually sounds in the mass media anyway, but if you only scratch a little bit on the surface you discover something very different. To return to the New York Times, they publish their second editorial September 19th, 1970, under the title "brainwave." It indicated that Orwell's vision of the future had already expired. Something new was around the corner, something new and much worse. Every newborn baby, it's first experience in this world would be to be implanted with a neurotransmitter and for their entire lifetime have emotion and cognition controlled by state computers.

 

Narration Quote; NEW YORK TIMES editorial excerpt Aug 5 1977, "Control C.I .A not behavior; " So we must add repugnant medical experimentation to the list of horror stories emerging from the C.I.A. It was no secret that the agency once hunted desperately for means to control human behavior. One objective was to program individuals so that they might do the agency's bidding even to the point of ignoring such fundamental laws of nature as self-preservation. We are not sufficiently schooled in ethics to know how this differs from murder. There is no substitute for also holding their senior officials ethically and legally responsible as individuals for all activities. Even at this late date, the country should be told who sanctioned such projects, and how.

 

 

RN: These are good words coming from The New York Times. Now, 35 years later, we have every reason to make the same demands in Sweden. What happened during 60 years of brain experimentation? Which doctors, professors, what institutions have been involved in the most anti democratic project that ever existed? By what kinds of methods has it been possible to keep off the media and peoples attention? What defenses have been set up? What is the role of medical corporations? They are involved. What does the government say? F.O.I's supercomputers must be turned off! We are all about to become the state's lab rats and chip manipulated behavior skulls, and that is verified by F.O.I itself.  

 

RN:  To give you an idea about the Pentagon's use of brain control technology I will quote something which, just as everything else no one has heard of even though it should have been on the front pages of the mass media. A few people with insight and courage dared to reveal the most secret, the military's use of brain technology for mass murder. Two British Scientists, Professor Malcolm Varner and Dr. Michael Stone, published in 1970 the book "The Data Bank Society," a strong protest against the government's power over people's minds. At that time the U.S had its war in Vietnam, and they had advanced methods for implanting people by mixing up microchips in both medicine and alcohal; one could within a few years scan a large part of South Vietnam upper and middle class. The super computers (via Radio Tower and Scanners) could thereafter analyze and evaluate people generally deduce their opinions and see what they were up to. They rationalized (via the data) that there weree 33,000 "very important people" that were vietcong sympathizers which they planned to execute, and it could be done by the same ingested technology through which their sympathies were assessed through the cennection to their brainwaves- their biological "feelings" could be altered to a state that was lethal rendering them sick or diseased. By intromitting heart attacks, strokes, cancer or whatever they liked. The following brief quotation from Professor Malcolm Varner says alot about that: "Hopelessly thwarted in its attempts to improve information input, the U.S Command in Saigon has developed its most skilled resources to rendering its information processing ultra-sophisticated. It has invented what is in effect, a computerized "extermination machine"... The high command in Saigon is now extending the idea of computer selections to individuals as well as selected areas. This year, 1970, the program aims to "eliminate" 33,000 inividual Vietnamese civilians who- it has been determined by the computer- are Vietcong Sympathizers. This quote says alot about being able to- through the computer brain interaction- manipulate someone's biological functions even to the point where they die for one reason or another that can't be differentiated from natural causes. The same resources are also in the F.O.I's computer systems and it is also used to to keep the brain systems away from the mass media and people's knowledge. A Swedish general Director, Stina Whalstrom, wrote in 1989 in the data inspections annual book that as long as this continues, Sweden cannot be called a Democracy. She wrote about people exploited without their knowledge or against their will. Of course these are harsh words that we are not living in a democracy, but a project like this cannot exist in a democracy. However one of the best protests and revelations from this society's own authroities was actually stated a few years ago. March 16 2005, The European Commission's Ethical Council with the Swedish Professor Goran Hermeren as chairman published the document "Ethical Aspects of I.C.T implants in the human body" to the E.U Commission as a reccomendation on how one should regard this technology's future development. It is without doubt challenging the system and it is the best of all other explanations and the biggest disclosure made about this technology. Their 30 page document explains that implants are injected into people for research and social control purposes. I.C.T stands for Information Control Technology and includes everything from electrodes to biochip implants. The quotes from their document say everything regarding how this technology is nowadays used not only in Sweden, but in all Europe, within the European Union. They are talking about injecting people, unwittingly with chips. Well, this has in fact been going on for 60 years now, but good they mention it. I quote from their document: "Brain Computer -interface or direct brain control: the technologies involved above are communication technologies: they take information from the brain and externalize it. There are internalizing technologies whose purpose is to take information from outside and provide individual access to it."  They did not talk about any particular individuals but about all of us...it was declared that it to a transformation of human being. 

Here is the quote: "Our present society is confronted with the changes that have to do with the anthropological essence of what man's inner nature is." They did not mention some specific people or population groups, but in fact all of us. This is a planned population project for the manipulation of our inner most nature. Our right to think for ourselves. They explain that it was a threat to democratic society and of course it is so. Not even a Hitler with his old methods could be a more terrifying threat in today's societies when you compare them with the technology's intrusion into our brains. They wrote "E.G.E makes the evaluation that non-medical applications of implants are a potential threat to human dignity and the democratic society... the use of the remote control to take over people's will must be absolutely prohibited." It is of course not less critical to go into someone's brain and change a human beings thoughts and will- than it was under Hitler and Stalin's times- forcing people behind barbded wire in order to neutralize their thoughts and will power. It says alot about our political governance of course. In addition, you should be aware that many of those who sit in Paliament also have their brains incorporated into the defense department's super computer control systems. Of course they become a type of puppet for the will of others.

 

Narration Quote: Frequency Errata Table of Implanted Americans by Professor Stuart Mackay, "Telemetry is Coming of Age" 1983. Biomedical frequency allocation in the United States for research and patient monitoring: Frequency mils; 38-41/88-108/174-216 Bandwidth Life: 200/200/200, Field Strength 10 at 15m/ 50 at 15m/150 at 30m. Out of band transmitter requirements (maximum); 10 uvm at 3m/40 uvm at 3m/15 uvm at 30m

 

RN:  Next quote is about health and our social life that has largely degenerated since the brain technology had its impact from a couple of decades ago. A neuro Professor, Anders Lasner at Stockholm Brain Institute states that approximately 30% of people in the E.U. suffer from brain diseases or behavioral disorders. It increases and it is directly related to this technology. We all have of course been confronted with the tragedy that people seem to become stranger and stranger. The E.U. ethical group provided us with an explanation of the reasons: "It should be stressed that there are no reliable scientific investigations concerning the longterm health aspect of implants in the human body. The unrestricted freedom of some may endanger the health and safety for others. As in other areas, the freedom to use implants in one's own body i.e the principle of freedom itself might collide with the potential negative social effects."

 

Narrator Quote: The European Commissions Ethical Board wrote: "Brain computer interface (B.C.I) or direct brain control are communication technologies; they take information from the brain and externalize it...Contemporary society is confronted with changes that have to do with the anthropological essence of individuals...to what extent might this technology be misused by the militairy?...the member states and their ethics councils have a responsibility to create conditions for education and constructive, well informed debates in this area. 

 

RN: Under the section "Human Dignity Integrity and Autonomy" The E.G.E group brought up a number of questions not because they wondered about the answers, but probably because they were best presented as questions; "How far can such implants be a threat to human autonomy, particularly when they are implanted in our brains?" "How far can such implants have irreversible impact in the human body and or the human psyche?" "How will they influence human memory?" "Does a human being cease to be such a being in cases where parts of his or her body- particularly the brain- are substituted and/or supplemented with I.CT. implants?" "How far can I.C.T implants give an individual, or a group, specific capabilities that could become a threat to society?" "How far should we be subject to the control of such devices or by other people using these devices?"

From this quote when the E.U. Commission's Ethical Board talks about these implants in our own brains and bodies, we can understand the extensive use of this project. It has, in fact, throughout the history of mankind never existed anything more totalitarian. There has never been anything more anti-democratic. A dictator ship can never be greater than when citizens' brains are linked to computer control.. The state has become a cannibal, a rapist who is eating its citizens. Transforming us into biological manipulated components. But the E.U commission did not support their reccommnedation on the need to stop the ongoing trend of mind control. They instead accepted the constitution of this project and of course, that day when this techno-political development will create debates in the mass media, it will have serious consequences. They ended the document by urging that this development must become general knowledge. Quote: The member states and their national ethics councils have a responsibility to create conditions for education and constructive, well informed debates in this area" Of course it is good if everyone joins this challenge. But these councils have now had more than 6 years to show their inability. No debate has arisen. Not even a single word has been said yet. But this is of coure everyone's responsibility All of us must participate to ensure this issue reaches the mass media. This is one of humanities crossroads. One can almost say that nothing has ever happened in the history of mankind. That this is the very first time something is occuring. In other words before this we have always been our own biological creations. Sure, we have been indoctrinated to believe or not in certain things, but we have nevertheless always had our own biology, mentality, our own resources intact. This is an issue, almost completely unknown, but without doubt humanity's most important. ANd that is exactly what Senator John Glenn said in his speech in 1997 when he left the Senate. 

Narrator Quote: The Swedish Defense 7 Research Institution wrote in its annual report 2011; F.O.I developed systems with emphasis on the interaction between people and technology. The goal is that sysetmes are designed at the human cognitive potential i.e. the ability to perceive, understand, and sorting information can be utilized for maximum system effect...

 

RN: Everyone must of course join this cause! The media has of course a responisbility to address this issue. Of course all human rights organizations Greenpeace, Attack, Amnesty and of course all political parties that see people's well being as above state power must participate in order to bring this subject up for a debate, and by that making change possible. I will end these dark visions with some positive thoughts about this technology. The man that termed the pharase "information society," The Japanese Professor Yoneji Masuda published his book "The Information Society" in 1980. In that book he brought up the dark and the light applications of this technology an he wrote: "If information systems were to be completely dominated by a despotic state organization, the information society would be the ultimate controlled society, in which the abuses would far exceed the abuses of human rights under dicatorships, but if the people took over the systems we could live free, healthy active, creative lives of up to an average of 90 or more. This technology has as many  positive as negative applications. Thank You.

Sweden Human Brain Project Conference Transcript | PDF | Brain | Human (scribd.com)

 

With this revelation or allegation by Robert Naselund that we are in a supercomputer brain control dictatorship, that which I have personally experienced, it calls into question the Narrative sold that Democracy exists still and is under threat from Donald Trump. There have been numerous narratives pushed through the Trump Reality show/type presidency. One is that Trump is some cross between a Russian or Vladimir Putin puppet and the second coming of Adolf Hitler and that the Intelligence agencies are all that is good standing in the way of Trump. The irony, which is not so funny, is that the FBI and the CIA basically run a KGB type operation, but act like there is something to defend America from anymore. They just adopted all Nazi and KGB tactics and are running a dictatorship utilizing techniques from other countries all over the world and their systems. Another of those narratives pushed has been the notion that the country has been shocked into a Trumpian Nationalism that runs opposite to the internationalism of old. This theme is pushed by operatives on the left and the right, in alternate media as well as in mainstream media. I find the debate in the United States over Trumpian Nationalism to be odd or somewhat phony and duplicitous. Currently, the United States and the "coalition of the willing" and other international countries disregard the sovereignty and national boundaries of other countries through the Global War On Terror. At the time of this writing, we are at war in like 7 countries and that’s just what’s overtly acknowledged by the Pentagon. Often times, the anti-nationalists as they fashion themselves, invoke Germany during the 1930s as a parallel to the Trumpian Nationalism, but then they proceed to promote International Blitzkrieg and warfare attacking other nationalist countries like Iraq and Afghanistan and others as the anti-dote to Trumpian Nationalism. It’s what you would describe as Orwellian “War is Peace.”

 

 Many of the people lining up to become heads of the executive branch support the Global War on Terror and so heralded moral wars all over the world that are more in line with Germany's behavior during the 1930s. Also, a country like France for instance, opposed the Iraq war but they support plan A, which is a never ending war, violating various nations' boundaries and thus international law thus undermining international system based on the rule of law. This is now all being rebranded and all being done in the name of anti-nationalism and pro internationalism. So I ask was Trump the real president or is there an underground leadership of this country? Look at Harry Reid and Mitch Mcconnel. Are these real leaders of millions of people? They are bizarre characters to be political leaders. If that is true, what kind of leadership would conceal itself? Why was a reality show star head of state? Is he an actor?