Mind Control Articles from the New York Times 

The Brain Project

An article series by Robert Naeslund

Mind Control Articles from the New York Times

By Robert Naeslund, 2013

When The New York Times exposed the CIA-project of behavior modification in July 1977, the General Director of the secret institution, Stanfield Turner, had to testify at the Senate hearings. On August 3, 1977, he gave an account of a CIA established network, including 80 medical universities, hospitals, and prisons together with 185 high-ranking U.S. scientists, researchers and doctors. It was mentioned that the program had begun under the Director of the CIA, Allen Dulles, in 1953. This was something Professor John C. Lilly described in his memoirs, “The Scientist”. He said that the Director in 1953 proposed that he join the CIA and participate in experiments. But he refused and the reason ha gave for this was also explained in his book: “Dr. Antoine Remond, using our technique in Paris, has demonstrated that stimulation of the brain can be applied to the human without the help of a neurosurgeon; he is doing it in his clinic. This means that anybody with the proper apparatus can carry this out on a person covertly, with no external signs that electrodes have been used on that person. I feel that if this technique gets into the hands of a secret agency, they could have a total control over a human being and be able to change his beliefs extremely quickly.” Today inject able biochips are being utilized in hospitals around the world and the issue has, with increased levels of usage become even more shrouded by secrecy and a conspiracy of silence.

During the summer of 1977 The New York Times published 30 articles about the CIA and mind control. But ten years before they’d already published a first editorial under the heading “Push-Button People” and demanding a public debate of the threat. As stated in their first editorial on mind control, 10th of April 1967, in relation to the possible political applications they mentioned: “It is quite conceivable that in some countries investigations may be under way into the possibility of using these techniques to control human beings…the mere existence of such a possibility is disturbing, and certainly merits wider public discussion and greater attention than it has received up to now.” Britain, Sweden and U.S. were among these nations.

Three years later another editorial was published. On September 19th, 1970, The New York Times editorial “Brain Wave” about the danger posed by mind control made the following point: “If George Orwell were writing a sequel to ‘1984’ today, he would probably reject as archaic the propaganda techniques for controlling people’s minds…” They suggested that: “Today, he might envisage a society in which a newborn baby’s first experience would be neurosurgery, an operation in which the child’s brain was fitted with miniaturized radio devices connected to every major center controlling reason and emotion.” They knew what was going on but had no success in bringing about a public debate on the issue. 25 years later the U.S. Senator John Glenn tried to regulate the abuse and said in a speech in the Senate: “I hope to be able to assure the people in my home state of Ohio, and those around the country, that their government is no longer conducting experiments unknown to the individual.” The situation in Europe is the same and the EU’s Ethical Board published their declaration against mind control. In 2005 they wrote “How far should we be subject to the control of such devices or by other people using these devices?” and ended with the words: “The Member States have a responsibility to create conditions for a
constructive, well-informed debate in this area.”
This is the most important subject in today’s world and mass media have a responsibility to open up that debate – so we must all show support for such action. Neither they nor
the population in general would like to live with state chips in their brains.

See lecture:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/ei3zla5hS9o

http://www.icaact.org/articles-robert-naeslund-mind-control-articles-new-york-times.html

Network (Pelicula)

https://ok.ru/video/1613548489417

Robo a mano armada por la farmacéutica Novartis con el medicamento mas caro del mundo. — Josep Pamies blog

La farmacéutica Novartis intenta ocultar el robo que significa cobrar 320.000 Euros a la sanidad Pública por el tratamiento de una sola persona de Leucemia . Y para ello ha acudido a los tribunales para impedir que el Ministerio publique los criterios infames con los que permite este robo a las arcas públicas. https://m.eldiario.es/sociedad/precio_de_medicamentos-terapia_genica-CAR-T_0_957504401.html El […]

Robo a mano armada por la farmacéutica Novartis con el medicamento mas caro del mundo. — Josep Pamies blog

Transhumanización, ¿estamos cerca?

Transhumanización, ¿estamos cerca?

www.superdeporte.es

Este movimiento pretende mejorar las capacidades humanas a nivel físico, psíquico e intelectual.

La transhumanización no está exenta de polémica.

La transhumanización no está exenta de polémica. Shutterstock

La transhumanización se define como un movimiento intelectual que pretende mejorar las capacidades de la especie humana en todos los sentidos: físico, psíquico e intelectual. El camino para hacerlo es la aplicación de la eugenesia y de los nuevos avances tecnológicos. De este modo, se pretende eliminar el sufrimiento, la enfermedad y el envejecimiento de la condición humana, así como otros elementos indeseables, pretendiéndose incluso llegar a eliminar la propia muerte.

El objetivo de la transhumanización


Se basa en incrementar las capacidades del ser humano llegando a un estado ulterior en el que solo exista una especie superior a él. Las técnicas que se utilizan son fundamentalmente la ingeniería prenatal, la ingeniería genética, la biotecnología aplicada al cerebro humano y la nanotecnología.

En especial, es la eugenesia la que va de la mano de la transhumanización al estar unida a la idea de la mejora completa del hombre en todos sus sentidos, incluyendo sus capacidades cognitivas y sensoriales. El transhumanismo no solo se toma estos principios como una mera posibilidad, sino como una obligatoriedad moral, ya que sus aspectos culturales implican que finalmente se consiga una especie superior.

Sus orígenes y principales exponentes


El transhumanismo encuentra sus orígenes en un contraste entre el pensamiento clásico, en cuanto al deseo intrínseco en el ser humano de conseguir mayores y novedosas capacidades para el hombre, y el pensamiento moderno referido a la aplicación de las nuevas tecnologías, de acuerdo con Nick Bostrom, presidente de la Asociación Transhumanista Mundial.

Los pilares transhumanistas fundamentales son, desde sus orígenes, la confianza en el hombre como concepto en sí mismo, así como en la ciencia, como herramienta de potenciación de sus posibilidades y de sus funciones. Lo que en Estados Unidos comenzó a concebirse como «mentalidad futurista» mediante el desarrollo de la inteligencia artificial, ha acabado finalmente desarrollándose en un movimiento moderno transhumanista.

Además, esta concepción del hombre se basa en el empirismo más puro, eliminando toda posibilidad de la existencia de una realidad metafísica. Así, la especie humana se reduce a su propio funcionamiento, a un neurobiologismo funcionalista de perfectas conexiones neuronales, siempre mirado desde un punto de vista liberal y utilitarista. Muchos de sus más férreos defensores defienden que esta es la etapa final del homo sapiens, que recibirá el nombre de homo technologicus.

¿Estamos a un pie de la transhumanización?

La transhumanización tiene una de sus primeras expresiones en los fármacos que reduzcan el impacto negativo de las experiencias humanas y que controlen el bienestar emocional. El primer paso es el uso de píldoras de la personalidad que eliminen rasgos considerados como defectos sociales, como puede ser la timidez, y que incrementen la capacidad de relación y entendimiento de la especie.

También, se pretenden utilizar métodos biológicos que frenen el envejecimiento celular, transmitiendo la matriz sináptica del hombre a un soporte digital. La idea es perfeccionar al hombre con una combinación de su parte orgánica y de la inteligencia artificial. Igualmente, otra de sus expresiones más ambiciosas sería la crioconservación de pacientes enfermos o fallecidos para una futura reanimación.

Problemas bioéticos

El movimiento transhumanista no está exento de problemas éticos, a los cuales todavía no han dado muchas respuestas la mayoría de sus autores. En primer lugar, se encuentra el problema de la reducción del ser humano a sus conexiones neuronales, ya que la reducción materialista todavía no ha sido demostrada de forma satisfactoria.

Otros muchos grupos contrarios al transhumanismo expresan que el hecho de que el ser humano cada vez tenga unas capacidades psíquicas y físicas más desarrolladas no significa que vaya a ser más feliz. La respuesta a esta cuestión es realmente complicada. A medida que el ser humano ha ido avanzando a lo largo de la historia, muchos han sido los planteamientos sobre quién determina la perfección y el concepto de felicidad, que cada vez está más desvinculado del materialismo.

En cuanto a su carácter práctico, hay otras implicaciones que surgen contrarias al plan transhumanista. La más importante es la eliminación eugenésica de fetos con anomalías. La selección embrionaria es la consecuencia más latente de la nanotecnología neurológica y de la crioconservación, siendo una cuestión que siempre mantendrá a la sociedad dividida.

En definitiva, el transhumanismo puede observarse en la actualidad en el incremento del número de fármacos con el objeto de medicalizar situaciones que caracterizan a la existencia humana. No obstante, aunque su fin puede considerarse bueno, ya que su principio básico es la mejora de la vida del hombre a través de la ciencia, la medicina y, englobando todo ello, el proceso, este último objetivo no puede pretender ser alcanzado de cualquier forma.

Mientras la sociedad avanza hacia el alargamiento de la vida humana y hacia el tendente crecimiento de la anestesia emocional, el sentido de la dignidad humana y de la concepción trascendental del hombre va en decadencia, siendo rasgos que lo distinguen y lo hacen destacar. Si estamos cerca de la transhumanización, ¿está la humanidad cerca de su propio exterminio o aferrándose a la mano de un futuro utópico?

Olivia Hernández 02.12.2019 | 15:38

Un viaje en alfombra mágica

Vacacionar transportándose sobre maquinas es como un viaje en una alfombra mágica donde la fantasía de la alfombra mágico flotando en el aire es solo una ilusión de libertad de la existencia monótona del día a día, proporcionada por miles de millones de hombres, niños y mujeres que han sido secuestrados desde el vientre y convertidos en los engranes de las ruedas de “El Sistema” que gira y gira por toda la Tierra para proporcionar la ilusión de las vacaciones.

Y la fantasía va aun más profundo porque los miles de millones de niños secuestrados para ser lavados del cerebro para que sean los engranajes, en donde nunca se les han dado todos los detalles de los que serán sus vidas adultas, pero nos gusta ignorar este hecho. Es mágico que hagamos esto.

El viaje en la alfombra mágica es tan emocionante que hacemos como que no vemos el daño que hacemos por culpa de ese viaje e incluso lo justificamos como daño “aceptable” como opuesto a daño “no aceptable” y nadie puede hablar por todas las formas de vida naturales de la realidad/Tierra, inanimadas o no, diminutas o enormes, y representarlas, o a todos los niños sobre la Tierra para confirmar que todo el daño que se les está haciendo es aceptable, es natural, y que todas las formas de vida han dado su permiso para que sus vidas sean modificadas de su propósito natural y convertirlos en algo muerto que es esencial para que la máquina de “El Sistema” opere.

La razón por la que todo está muerto es porque ninguno de nosotros está sintiendo/percibiendo la conciencia de la vida que estamos matando para crear las cosas muertas de “El Sistema” porque no estamos manteniendo la imagen completa de esa conciencia y justificamos el daño a través de nuestras fantasías de lo que está bien y de lo que no, y todo el tiempo pensando que somos consientes!

Estamos trazando una línea para delinear entre el daño “aceptable” y el “inaceptable”, haciendo del daño “aceptable” algo normal y justificable.

Fantasear que el tener una alfombra mágica no está haciendo daño es ignorar el resultado de haber sido secuestrados desde muy niños y haber sido convertidos en engranes sin alma de la máquina de “El Sistema” para que puedan proporcionarte tu viaje en tu alfombra mágica. Todos están directa o indirectamente involucrados ya sea desde muy lejos o desde muy cerca para que tu tengas tu viaje en tu alfombra mágica.

Ir en un viaje en tu alfombra mágica es como decir que el intenso daño hacia la completa aniquilación es aceptable.

Mucha de la gente que se esta despertando de “El sistema” nos pregunta cómo se puede salir de “El Sistema” y siempre les decimos que a menos que puedan captar la imagen completa del daño y verlo por lo que realmente es, nunca podrán escapar porque son todos los consumidores de realidad/naturaleza, hombres y mujeres atrapados en el daño “aceptable”, que son todos los que directa o indirectamente causan todos los desastres “naturales”. Semana tras semana nos enfocamos en otro desastre ambiental, político o económico, todos juntándose en una piedra rodante dirigiéndose  hacia la destrucción a escala mundial, final de los tiempos de nuestra creación (soñar).

La única manera de salir de “El Sistema” es verlo por lo que realmente es y alejarse de todo gradualmente y tan rápido como sea posible en esta vida hasta que dejemos de estar atrapados en los viajes en alfombras mágicas de daño “aceptable” que incluye utilizar dinero como “intercambio del fruto de nuestro trabajo”, ir al banco, seguir “teniendo” propiedades bajo la protección de la ley de “El Sistema”.

¿Cuántos animales han sido asesinados para que podamos tener nuestro viaje en nuestra alfombra mágica?

¿Cuánto de la Tierra ha sido destruida por la auto obsesión de nuestra adicción a la magia*?

¿Cuántos más hombres, mujeres y niños tienen que sufrir para que obtengamos algún alivio a nuestras vidas vacías y sin alma?

Es porque no queremos dejar nuestros viajes en alfombra mágica que “El Sistema”, y con él, el daño, nunca se van.

¿Cuántas personas van a seguir queriendo sus viajes en su alfombra mágica, si conocen y experimentan las vidas de todos los que son los engranajes en la maquina del viaje en su alfombra mágica? ¿Y todos los que han pasado por la trituradora de la ley y despojados de todo por lo que han trabajado duramente? ¿Cuantos más van a seguir comiendo carne, si experimentaran el sufrimiento de los animales que están comiendo?

Nos gusta mantener nuestro daño “aceptable” fuera de la vista y fuera del cerebro y el viaje en la alfombra mágica tiene que seguir (siendo desensibilizado de la realidad) porque ya hemos comprado nuestro boleto y estamos esperando en la fila. Hay tantos diferentes sistemas de viajes de donde elegir. Hacer de la vista gorda hace que la magia continúe.

Tener una conciencia es sostener la imagen completa para que así no quieras apoyar los viajes en alfombra mágica.

Arthur Cristian

  • Magia son los placebos, placeres, distracciones, tecnología, etc. que nos ofrece “El Sistema” para mantenernos atrapados.

ES TIEMPO DE DESPERTAR (13) DR. NICOLÁS OLEA “No podemos aceptar que orinar plástico sea normal” — Lo que podemos hacer

Nicolás Olea, catedrático de Medicina de la Universidad de Granada “En disruptores endocrinos la única dosis segura es la que no existe” “No podemos aceptar que orinar plástico sea normal” Nicolás Olea (Granada, 1954) encajaría bien en uno de los papeles típicos […]

ES TIEMPO DE DESPERTAR (13) DR. NICOLÁS OLEA “No podemos aceptar que orinar plástico sea normal” — Lo que podemos hacer

On Psychopathy And Power

thefreedomarticles.com

On Psychopathy And Power

psychopathy

Those who lack empathy can do whatever it takes to make the most money. Money = political power. So, it’s natural we find ourselves ruled by psychopaths. Our society is set up to accommodate and reward psychopathy.

Due to a very painful and disturbing revelation in my personal life I have had the unfortunate occasion to spend the last several days thinking a lot about psychopaths and what makes them tick. I don’t want to get into the hairy details at this time, but I would like to share some of the more general thoughts that have been coming up here on the matter.

It is interesting that psychopathy should have reached a dark tentacle into my life in the way that it did, given that the three years I’ve been at this gig have been spent writing more and more about the way our world is run by calculating manipulators who are devoid of empathy. I often say that we have found ourselves ruled by psychopaths because we have a system wherein (A) those who are willing to do anything to anyone are rewarded with immense wealth, and (B) immense wealth translates directly to immense political power. Add in the fact that studies have shown that wealth itself kills off empathy and compassion, and you’ve got yourself a perfect recipe for a plutocratic dystopia dominated by antisocial personality disorder.

All Natural - Essential Oil Sets

Psychopaths and Sociopaths Look at the World as a Puzzle to be Manipulated

I’m not really interested in getting into the specific clinical diagnoses of psychopathy and sociopathy for the purposes of this discussion. What I’m talking about here is a specific slice of humanity that is neurologically wired in such a way that they experience the world more as a series of puzzles which can be manipulated around to get them them whatever they want regardless of who it hurts, rather than experiencing a world full of fellow sentient beings with whom you can have deep, meaningful connections and interactions. Not all people who are diagnosed as psychopaths are high-functioning enough to manipulate people at high levels, and not everyone who manipulates people in this way would necessarily be diagnosed as a psychopath or even a sociopath. Feel free to mentally substitute whatever term you prefer.

Our Current Society’s Structures and Systems Reward Psychopathy

Whatever you want to call it, people who have this condition (and are able to avoid prison) tend to do quite well for themselves by our society’s standards. Because they don’t see other people as anything other than tools and resources, they don’t let empathy and compassion stand in their way when viciousness and exploitation will help them achieve their goals. Because they don’t value connections with other people, they don’t see narratives and descriptions as paths toward deeper understanding, but as tools which can be twisted and distorted in order to secure themselves more wealth, status, sex, or whatever else they want. They quickly rise to the top in corporate and financial settings, in media institutions, in government agencies, and in politics. In modern society this ability is a natural advantage that the rest of us simply cannot compete with.“Given that (A) those who lack empathy are able to do whatever it takes to make the most money, (B) studies have shown that immense wealth kills empathy, and (C) money translates directly to political power, it is only natural that we now find ourselves ruled by sociopaths.”

But it’s not just our current iteration of society which elevates psychopaths to the top. A casual glance through recorded history all around the world reveals an essentially unbroken track record of genocide, slavery, torture, exploitation and degradation as far as the eye can see, with the driving characters time and again being depraved dominators, conquerors and mass murderers. Research some of the horrors that were inflicted upon the Aboriginal people of Australia and the indigenous populations of the Americas and you’ll see that the whole thing was driven by a total lack of empathy for those human beings. Throughout history our main problems have been caused by the way we keep designing systems which elevate psychopaths to positions of leadership, who then go on to make psychopathic decisions.

Given the fact that people who are indifferent to truth or human suffering have always been so adept at ascending to power positions, it’s hard to even imagine a society where we don’t find ourselves ruled by psychopaths. George RR Martin set out to tell a story about a cast of characters all vying for power in an epic game of thrones, and that story wound up being populated almost entirely by psychopaths and sociopaths. It makes for a compelling tale because it’s very believable based on what we all know deep down about human behavior patterns, but it’s also a relentless assault on the audience’s empathy center.

So what can be done, then? How can we ordinary, feeling, caring human beings protect ourselves from this segment of the population which has been driving us into disaster after disaster since the dawn of civilization before they get us all killed?

Psychopathic leaders have never had any trouble figuring out how to get rid of segments of the population who they deem problematic: they round them up and exterminate them. This would obviously be out of the question for many reasons, not the least because in order to implement it we’d need to become psychopaths ourselves. We’d be “curing” the sickness by becoming the sickness.

Passing a bunch of laws against manipulation and deception wouldn’t work either. Manipulators actually love rules and laws, because they can figure out how to manipulate them and use them to their advantage. Julian Assange is currently awaiting extradition hearings in Belmarsh Prison because a bunch of psychopathic manipulators decided to pretend that it was very, very important to respect a series of laws and rules ranging from bail protocol to whistleblower source protection to government bureaucracy to embassy cat hygiene, and they were able to engineer a result that just so happens to look exactly the same as imprisoning a journalist for exposing US war crimes. All the worst atrocities in human history have been perfectly legal.

Here’s what a psychopath’s brain looks like http://read.bi/1RRbgw8

psychopathy brain scan PET

I’ve seen some people advocating mandatory brain scans for anyone seeking a leadership position. It is true that a psychopath’s brain shows up differently from the rest of us on a PET scan, and it is possible to envision a future where the collective is so aware of the pernicious dance between psychopathy and power that such a policy might be set and enforced. The problem of course is that manipulators manipulate, and there are many ways to manipulate one’s way around such a system; they’ve been inserting themselves into unofficial leadership positions for ages, for example, which they’d never need to be tested for. Plutocrats, advisors and propagandists are all in unofficial leadership positions.

Stopping the Dominion of Psychopaths Will Require Massive Changes to Society

Maybe you’ve got your own ideas about this, but I personally can’t think of a single solution to the fundamental problem of psychopaths inserting themselves into positions of power which doesn’t involve drastic, unprecedented changes in our civilization and our culture. Even if you completely tore down capitalism, ended plutocracy and replaced the entire system with a government-planned economy, you would still have positions of power and the absolute certainty of psychopaths manipulating their way into those positions sooner or later.

I’m talking about changes as drastic as the end of anyone having any power over anybody at all. A society where the idea of having power over anybody became so culturally taboo that even an unequal power dynamic between spouses would be seen as outrageous and ugly, to say nothing of governments or police forces. Such a society is very far from what we’ve got now, but it would surely be a very inhospitable environment for psychopathy. There would be no positions of leverage for one to manipulate their way into in order to force others to give them what they want, and if you started trying to create one everybody would immediately point at you and yell “Hey! What are you doing? Stop that, that’s weird! If you want something from us you need to form consensual collaborative relationships with us, just like we’re all doing.”

It’s also possible to imagine a culture in which manipulation is seen as an unacceptable taboo which immediately draws public backlash in the same way. In such a culture children would learn from the youngest age what honest and sincere interaction looks like, with examples of deceit and manipulation clearly illustrated for them in all forms as something gravely disordered. Advertising would cease to exist in such a society, as would propaganda in all its forms. And psychopaths would be like fish out of water, because manipulation only works when it isn’t recognized as such.

One can also imagine a culture which values empathy, compassion and helping others instead of valuing wealth, accomplishment and conquest. In such a culture we’d see the ability to connect with people and work for the good of the whole elevated, rather than seeing the ability to do whatever it takes to claw your way to the top of the heap elevated. In such a society psychopathy would actually be an immense disadvantage, rather than an immense advantage.

A Healthy Society Would Ostracize Those with Psychopathy

And that, in my opinion, would be the marker of a healthy society: one in which psychopathy and sociopathy become grave mental handicaps that the afflicted need to actively seek help for. A society that is so empathic and collaborative that having a diagnosis of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder isn’t such a big deal because your neighbors work with you and help you with what you need rather than pushing you to conform and achieve, while having psychopathy or sociopathy is a debilitating disorder which will turn you into a pariah sleeping on park benches if you don’t get help. Right now we have the opposite: people with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and other serious mental illnesses are treated like worthless hindrances to a society which values achievement over empathy, while psychopaths and sociopaths almost never seek help unless it’s court-ordered.

A healthy society would flip this. It would reward the things psychopaths are unable to do, and it would reject the things that psychopaths excel at. We can actually look at what psychopaths are and are not good at, and from there kind of reverse-engineer an idea of what a wholesome society would look like.

Is such a society possible? I don’t know. I recently put together some evidence which seems to suggest that our species may be on the verge of a drastic shift in consciousness, which would be the only facilitating agent Ican think of that would make such massive cultural changes feasible. We seem to be headed for either huge changes or extinction relatively soon, so if there’s a future humanity on the other side of what’s coming, it likely exists because it made extraordinary changes in both its behavior and in its relationship with the phenomenon of psychopathy. We’ll either make the jump or we won’t.

Caitlin Johnstone