“UN Starts Investigation to Ban Cyber Torture”
Magnus Olsson, Geneva 8 March 2020
UN Human Rights Council (HRC) Special Rapporteur on torture revealed during the 43rd HRC that Cyber technology is not only used for internet and 5G. It is also used to target individuals remotely – through intimidation, harassment and public shaming.
“Psychological torture is being exploited by states to circumvent the more widely understood ban on physically inflicting pain and may open the way to a future of “cybertorture”, the UN torture rapporteur has said.”
On the 28th of February in Geneva, Professor Nils Melzer, UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and other Cruel Inhuman Degrading Treatment and Punishment, has officially confirmed that cyber torture exists and investigation is now underway on how to tackle it legally.
Electromagnetic radiation, radar, and surveillance technology are used to transfer sounds and thoughts into people’s brain. UN started their investigation after receiving thousands of testimonies from so-called “targeted individuals” (TIs).
Professor Nils Melzer is an expert in international law and since 2016 he holds the Human Rights Chair at the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights. His team has found evidence that Cyber technology is used to inflict severe mental and physical sufferings.
“Judges think that physical torture is more serious than cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment,” he told the Guardian on 21 February. “Torture is simply the deliberate instrumentalization of pain and suffering.” These psychological torture methods are often used “to circumvent the ban on torture because they don’t leave any visible marks”.
Cyber psychological systems like cognitive radio are used to interrupt human perceptions and memory. They can also be used to spy on people violating personal integrity which could lead to corruption and slavery in society. Cyber torture is also called no-touch torture or brain-machine interface.
One way to handle this situation is to regulate new technologies and use AI control mechanisms by independent and impartial investigators. The evidence gathered could then be used to convict criminals easier and quicker in the future.
Professor Meltzer and his team is now underway to create an international legal framework covering cyber technologies that can cause torture which previously was hard to prove. In the future it may be necessary to establish Radio Frequency Spectrum police in order to protect humanity from cyber terrorism. Nils Meltzer also revealed to me personally that the HRC will release several reports on this subject soon in the future.
Owen Bowcott, ‘UN warns of rise of ‘cybertorture’ to bypass physical ban’ (The Guardian, March 2020) https://www.theguardian.com/law/2020/feb/21/un-rapporteur-warns-of-rise-of-cybertorture-to-bypass-physical-ban
By mindcontroleurope • Posted in Implant for Synthetic Telepathy, Magnus Olssons story, Man vs Machine, military, Mind Control, Nano Brain Implant, News, Scientists Warn • Tagged artifical-intelligence, Cyber psychological systems, Human Rights Council, mind control, nils meltzer, slavery, surveillance technology, Targeted Individuals, UN Special Rapporteur on Torture
Report | Ramola D | March 14, 2020
Magnus Olsson, Director, EUCACH, at the United Nations in Geneva, 28 Feb 2020
Groundbreaking news from Magnus Olsson, Director of EUCACH, the European Coalition Against Covert Harassment who
met and spoke with United Nations Human Rights Council Special Rapporteur for Torture, Professor Nils Melzer, in
Geneva recently, on the occasion of the 43rd Regular Session of the Human Rights Council, on Feb 28, 2020, where
Professor Melzer spoke of Psychological Torture and No-Touch Torture, and informed Mr. Olsson the UN Human Rights
Council would be further investigating and reporting soon on matters of cybertechnology use to inflict torture,
which thousands of “Targeted Individuals” have been insistently reporting as bio-hacking and neuro-hacking crimes,
In his UN Report released on 14 February, 2020 (Click on A/HRC/43/49 at this List of Reports) prior to his
presentation at the HRC in Geneva, Professor Melzer has for the first time drawn special attention to
cybertechnologies and the unsettling phenomenon of governments worldwide investing today in “methods of torture
which can achieve purposes of coercion, intimidation, punishment, humiliation or discrimination without causing
readily identifiable physical harm or traces.”
Professor Nils Melzer, UN HRC Special Rapporteur for Torture, 28 February, 2020
Professor Melzer has stated in this report that the current resurfacing of unethical Cold War/MK ULTRA-derived
interrogational technologies under cover of euphemistic labels such as special interrogation for purposes of
“counter-terrorism” and “deterrence”-based detainment” has coincided with “new and emerging technologies (which)
give rise to unprecedented tools and environments of non-physical interaction which must be duly considered in the
contemporary interpretation of the prohibition of torture.”
This precedent-setting report–which will be further reported at this site and can be read in full here–focuses on
aspects of Psychological Torture but makes specific reference to mind-control experimentation and to the need for
an expanding treatment of the prohibition of torture and international legal obligations in light of such new
technologies as “artificial intelligence, robotics, nano- and neurotechnology, or pharmaceutical and biomedical
sciences including so-called “human enhancement.”
Years, indeed decades, of public ignoring of victim testimonials regarding remote access and torture of their
bodies and brains with radiation/acoustic neuroweaponry appear to finally be receiving significant international
attention, as this report from Nils Melzer reveals.
Many thanks to Magnus Olsson and EUCACH for bringing notice of these high-tech crimes in person in Geneva to
Professor Nils Melzer, in his capacity as UN HRC Special Rapporteur for Torture.
Oct 28 2019
THE SENTIENT WORLD SIMULATION: UPLOADING YOUR MIND TO A DIGITAL WORLD
It was with the development of the first supercomputers, system for controlling the mind, brain and behavior was established. This was a part of the new science of cybernetics, which became public 1948 when the American professor Norbert Wiener published his book with the same title. The researchers’ project of mind control is most often classified as behavior or cognitive manipulation. Already from the beginning, more than half a century ago, it was possible to intercept thoughts, memories, and sensory functions such as sight or hearing. Cybernetics was also the first science that could not only measure and analyze what it came in contact with, but also change these processes. From the early beginning it was a debate about the issue.
The scientific magazine Science had 14-pages in their 1956 November issue under the heading “Some Issues Concerning the Control of Human Behavior”, and Professor Carl R Rogers said: “We can choose to use our growing knowledge to enslave people in ways never dreamed of before, controlling them by means so carefully selected that they will perhaps never be aware of their loss of personhood”. He added the possibility for political use: “Of all the dictatorships espoused by utopists, this is the most profound, and incipient dictators might well find in this utopia a guidebook of political practice…”but mentioned the probable misuse in democratic countries. This scared many. In the USA books were published, articles written and speeches held by leading people about the danger. The threat of exploitation of humans by a remote control technology became apparent. The American professor of psychiatry Joost Meerloo, released his book “The Rape of the Mind” (1956) in which he said:“The tragic facts of political experiences in our age make it all too clear that applied psychological technique can brainwash entire nations and reduce their citizens to a kind of mindless robotism which becomes for them a normal way of living.”
The EU´s Ethical Board with the Swedish Professor Hermerén as chairman protested and wrote in their 2005-declaration to the EU-Commission: “Implants used for changing the identity, memory, self perception and perception of others should be forbidden”. But the Swedish military research (FOI) declares in their report of activities that their aim is to direct the cognitive functions of people for a life time: “FOI develops systems with emphasis on the interaction between people and technology. The goal is that the systems be designed that human cognitive potential, i.e. the ability to perceive, understand, and sorting information can be utilized for´maximum system effect.” An implanted nightmare of this new kind will become permanent if not made public by mass media. This development can only continue as long as it takes place without public knowledge. Journalists, social activists and sensible politicians, among others, will not want to live their lives with an electronic leash attached to their brain, like a kind of cattle, any more than the rest of the population do. It has to be the responsibility of all of us to make this public if we want to live as human beings, in freedom and with human rights in the 21st century here on Earth.
By mindcontroleurope • Posted in Computerbrain, Implant for Synthetic Telepathy, Man vs Machine, military, Mind Control, Nano Brain Implant, Nano ICT Brain Implants, Scientists Warn • Tagged biotechnology and neuroscience, brain weapon, cognitive potential, control technology, cyber weapon, Cyber-Physical Systems, DIGITAL WORLD, mind war, Swedish military research, WORLD SIMULATION
Sep 13 2019
European Human Brain Project, and Pentagon ADVISOR REVEALS CONSCIOUS A.I. SUPERCOMPUTERS USED FOR MIND CONTROL
DARPA, European Human Brain Project, and Pentagon advisor Dr. James Giordano describes neuronanorobotic Brain to computer interface mind control weapons for remote monitoring and manipulation of brains neural circuitry. This allows an individuals consciousness to be cloned.
This allows an individuals consciousness to be cloned onto a their very own digital avatar in a Sentient World Simulation on a supercomputer. A direct link between a targeted individual and their digital avatar exists so that everything done in the real world occurs in the computer simulation. By manipulating the digital avatar in the computer simulation a persons thoughts, beliefs, perceptions, and behavior are manipulated in the real world. This is remote mind control. 21st Century MK ULTRA. This is not a conspiracy theory. This is not a joke. This is the real life matrix! For more of my videos on this topic click the links below: Enter the matrix: They Control Your Mind Through Your Virtual Avatar In The Sentient World Simulation.
“DARPA ADVISOR REVEALS CONSCIOUS A.I. SUPERCOMPUTERS USED FOR MIND CONTROL OF TARGETED INDIVIDUALS
“A SIMULATED REALITY
DARPA, European Human Brain Project, and Pentagon advisor Dr. James Giordano describes neuronanorobotic Brain to computer interface mind control weapons for remote monitoring and manipulation of brains neural circuitry. This allows an individuals consciousness to be cloned onto a their very own digital avatar in a Sentient World Simulation on a supercomputer. A direct link between a targeted individual and their digital avatar exists so that everything done in the real world occurs in the computer simulation. By manipulating the digital avatar in the computer simulation a persons thoughts, beliefs, perceptions, and behavior are manipulated in the real world. This is remote mind control. 21st Century MK ULTRA. This is not a conspiracy theory. This is not a joke. This is the real life matrix!”
“Violations of Basic Human Rights or International Law…
Curtis Bell, Senior Scientist Emeritus at Oregon Health and Science University, has recently circulated a document which he is promoting as a “Pledge by Neuroscientists to Refuse to Participate in the Application of Neuroscience to Violations of Basic Human Rights or International Law.” The full pledge is reproduced below, and can be accessed here. While individuals may wish to sign the pledge, what we view as most important is to develop a conversation regarding the merits of what Curtis has suggested. Specifically, while many responsible neuroscientists may agree with the overall sentiment, they may not agree with all aspects of the pledge as written. Whether you agree or not, this issue merits feedback from members of the neuroscience community in general and the neuroethics community in particular.”