“In the modern times of the internet and digital devices permeating our daily habits and routines, the issue of privacy is becoming more and more of a hot button issue. One needs to just look at how Facebook is increasingly encroaching upon the vast amounts of personal information that is recorded willingly and correlated with friends and family to understand that there is a huge amount of our personal lives available for review, whether it be for commercial marketing reasons or for legal justifications. Many scandals have come out regarding AT&T working with our government to intercept our phone calls, our text messages and other private communications. Such breaches of privacy have even come with legislation giving these companies retroactive immunity from prosecution for snooping around in our personal lives, regardless of their motivations.
But what if such ways of obtaining personal information were considerably outdated?
The NSA may think so.
Remote Neural Monitoring is a way to measure the EMF (electro magnetic frequency) waves of an individual and are able to translate them into the words heard/spoken and the images seen by an individual. Labeled under the Signal Intelligence department, remote neural monitoring is a technology that has been around and used for quite some time and has been kept secret from the public along with all other developments of electronic weaponry, research and development of paid for by the taxpayers.
While it may seem a bit of a stretch to consider that it is possible for technology to read our minds and that this technology would be kept from the public, there has been a lawsuit against the NSA claiming remote monitoring and manipulation. John St. Claire Akwei filed a lawsuit detailing his comprehension of the secretive NSA technology and its’ covert operations against unwitting citizens.
How does the technology work?
Remote neural monitoring focuses on the audio and visual portions of the brain by sending signals which are then transmitted back to the origin and analyzed by a computer. While the decoding and encoding of brain signals for surreptitious communication with someone’s brain is certainly a complex feat, there is much that can be done from a remote vantage using this technology. The technology can measure sounds that an individual hears, can transmit its’ own words and images into the brain and can manipulate emotions and behavior. A prison study in Vacaville, conducted by IBM was able to cause complete lethargy in prisoners to the point where sleep was imposed for 18-20 hours per day. Indeed, the spectrum of human emotion and reaction is up for remote manipulation. Paranoia can be instilled as easily as anger. The ability to force emotional reactions on people is a very important consideration as it is a dangerous tool which opens the possibility for people to force criminal behavior without culpability. Forcing a suicide in a depressed individual, as some people have considered the possibility, constitutes remote murder and would be untraceable.
The type of research for this is certainly invasive and due to the manipulations possible the secrecy for it is indeed paramount as they would send every human rights organization into a frenzy. Cloaked under reasons of national security (but developed by the corporate and university worlds), the information and technology has been ridiculed in official mainstream media to dissuade any actual consideration. Thusly, the technology is now free to be used in secret and without any oversight or transparency.
But the concerns aren’t just based on privacy rights. Many scientists and human rights advocacy groups are claiming that the unknown risks imposed on a person when targeted could be hazardous to ones health.
In essence, the reality of remote neural monitoring is the result of decades of research into behavioral modification of human beings, with the goal to be able to remotely influence the actions and mental perception of any given individual. The reality of such a goal really brings a lot of very human ideas to the forefront. Such as, what is consciousness and what constitutes the individual. Is it okay for people to understand the very nature of the human animal and how it reacts without sharing such knowledge? Is it okay to manipulate someone into believing a false reality? Is it okay to create a false reality to further these aims, such as Fox news recently winning a case against a whistleblower asserting its’ rights to mislead the public intentionally as a protection of free speech?
The list goes on and while there is a subsection of the population fighting to expose this technology and the implications it has for humanities future, there are still a lot of people who aren’t even aware that remote neural monitoring is even possible. Others that have heard of it have no idea how to incorporate the knowledge as the effects, if one were targeted, are on such a subtle level as to make conscious awareness a very difficult endeavor especially when society has already been conditioned to consider that these types of concerns are born of mental illness.
The persuasion of opinion has long been a goal of authority. To remain in the position of authority, one must have the agreement of the populace. Can it be considered agreement if the populace is subconsciously manipulated into agreement? Or does it matter if the populace does not comprehend or recognize that their agreement was pre-determined and manufactured beforehand?
Such basic questions are exactly what we consider human rights and to keep such weapons in secret for the consideration of only an elite few is certainly an epic travesty and breach of humanity. No longer must we be concerned about the lies we are being fed from mainstream media and even our leaders.
Now we must consider whether or not our opinion and agreement were perhaps manufactured by them.”