ce399 | research archive

IBM Controls the Nordic Viking Genome

In 1998, Iceland created the world's first national DNA database of its citizens. Almost all of its 275,000 citizens trace their lineages to the original Nordic Vikings of a prior millennium. In a unique arrangement, Iceland's national genetic code was sold to the genetic research and pharmacogenetic industries through an entity called deCODE Genetics. Less than 8 percent of Iceland's population opted out of the voluntary program, hence deCODE possesses virtually a complete national genetic and hereditary portrait of Iceland. Scientists at deCODE are currently utilizing the information in their study of a range of debilitating condition, including respiratory and muscular disease. Safeguards have been built into the program to conceal individuals' names. But at least one Icelander has sued the government to have her father's genetic history removed. As of March 2003, the case is still winding its way through Icelandic courts. Iceland's national genomic information will be made available to a wide variety of scientific, commercial and governmental entities in an Internet-based system that employs massive data storage drives codenamed "Shark." 31

One main company manages and controls Iceland's genetic data. That company is already positioned to become the worldwide manager and disseminator of all genomic information globally. In anticipation of that day, the company currently operates genomic offices in California, New York, Zurich, Haifa, New Delhi and Tokyo. The name of the company is IBM. Its Iceland project operates under a division known as "Life Services - Nordic." 32 

War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create a Master Race. By Edwin Black. Pg. 439

Related Archive:

http://ce399.typepad.com/weblog/2009/08/humans-are-extinct-part-two.html

Brain will be Battlefield of Future, Warns US Intelligence Report

The human brain could become a battlefield in future wars, a new report predicts, including 'pharmacological land mines' and drones directed by mind control

Rapid advances in neuroscience could have a dramatic impact on national security and the way in which future wars are fought, US intelligence officials have been told.

In a report commissioned by the Defense Intelligence Agency, leading scientists were asked to examine how a greater understanding of the brain over the next 20 years is likely to drive the development of new medicines and technologies.

They found several areas in which progress could have a profound impact, including behaviour-altering drugs, scanners that can interpret a person's state of mind and devices capable of boosting senses such as hearing and vision.

On the battlefield, bullets may be replaced with "pharmacological land mines" that release drugs to incapacitate soldiers on contact, while scanners and other electronic devices could be developed to identify suspects from their brain activity and even disrupt their ability to tell lies when questioned, the report says.

"The concept of torture could also be altered by products in this market. It is possible that some day there could be a technique developed to extract information from a prisoner that does not have any lasting side effects," the report states.

The report highlights one electronic technique, called transcranial direct current stimulation, which involves using electrical pulses to interfere with the firing of neurons in the brain and has been shown to delay a person's ability to tell a lie.

Drugs could also be used to enhance the performance of military personnel. There is already anecdotal evidence of troops using the narcolepsy drug modafinil, and ritalin, which is prescribed for attention deficit disorder, to boost their performance. Future drugs, developed to boost the cognitive faculties of people with dementia, are likely to be used in a similar way, the report adds.

Greater understanding of the brain's workings is also expected to usher in new devices that link directly to the brain, either to allow operators to control machinery with their minds, such as flying unmanned reconnaissance drones, or to boost their natural senses.

...

The report warns that while the US and other western nations might now consider themselves at the forefront of neuroscience, that is likely to change as other countries ramp up their computing capabilities. Unless security services can monitor progress internationally, they risk "major, even catastrophic, intelligence failures in the years ahead", the report warns.

"In the intelligence community, there is an extremely small number of people who understand the science and without that it's going to be impossible to predict surprises. This is a black hole that needs to be filled with light," Green told the Guardian.

The technologies will one day have applications in counter-terrorism and crime-fighting. The report says brain imaging will not improve sufficiently in the next 20 years to read peoples' intentions from afar and spot criminals before they act, but it might be good enough to help identify people at a checkpoint or counter who are afraid or anxious.

"We're not going to be reading minds at a distance, but that doesn't mean we can't detect gross changes in anxiety or fear, and then subsequently talk to those individuals to see what's upsetting them," Green said.
...

Ian Sample
UK Guardian
13 August 2008

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/aug/13/military.neuroscience/print

via:

No World System

http://noworldsystem.com/category/psychotronic-weapons/

Intrusive Brain Reading Surveillance Technology: Hacking the Mind

Carole Smith describes claims that neuroscientists are developing brain scans that can read people’s intentions in the absence of serious discussions about the ethical issues this raises, despite the fact that the research has been backed by government in the UK and US.”

We need a program of psychosurgery for political control of our society. The purpose is physical control of the mind. Everyone who deviates from the given norm can be surgically mutilated. The individual may think that the most important reality is his own existence, but this is only his personal point of view. This lacks historical perspective. Man does not have the right to develop his own mind. This kind of liberal orientation has great appeal. We must electronically control the brain. Someday armies and generals will be controlled by electric stimulation of the brain. - Dr José Delgado.Director of Neuropsychiatry, Yale University Medical School Congressional Record, No. 26, Vol. 118 February 24, 1974.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Guardian piece ran as follows:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

NOTES

[1] http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/antenna/neurobotics/private/121.asp

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

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

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

http://www.ahrp.org/InformedConsent/glennConsent.php

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

http://www.economist.com/opinion/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=9080024

[5] Guardian: ‘The Brain Scan that can read people’s intentions’: 9 February 2007. www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,2009229,00.html

[6] http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.01/lying_pr.html

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

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

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

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

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

[10] Fruit flies share to a remarkable degree, the DNA of humans.

[11] Fruit Flies and You:  NASA sends fruit flies into Space:

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2004/03feb_fruitfly.htm

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

http://www.science.org.au/nova/newscientist/040ns_003.htm

[13] See author’s paper: http://www.btinternet.com/~psycho_social/Vol3/V3.html

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

[15] Liberty, and Lawyers for Liberty have staunchly maintained a thorough-going campaign against the protracted government plan to issue biometric ID cards, taking the case to the House of Lords where they have gained support. In view of the undisclosed work being carried out which will enable direct access to the brain through the technology coming to light, and using light, one cannot but suspect that the biometric ID card is but an adjunct to the tracking and data sourcing of citizens, and as such has fulfilled the function of a very effective smokescreen, having deflected the energies of the protectors of individual liberties in terms of thousands of hours of concentrated protest effort, with enormous expenditure spent on their campaign.

[16] Human subjects, once computers for research experiments program them, remain targeted, even if the original reasons for their usage have become obsolete. Some have been continuously abused for over  thirty years.

[17] Thz Lasers Small Enough for Screening Devices:

www.photonics.com/content/ news/2007/February/7/86317.aspx

http://www.whatsnextnetwork.com/technology/index.php/2007/01/23/miniaturized_terahertz_transmitter_recei 

[18] http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/vistas/vistas.htm

http://www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=7606

Carole Smith
Global Research
13 December 2007
and
Dissent Magazine
Australia, Summer 2007/2008

Microchip Implants, Mind Control and Cybernetics

Mirroring here since Constantine's sourcing for this seems to have preemptively disappeared even before he posted it.
--
In 1948 Norbert Weiner published a book, Cybernetics, defined as a neurological communication and control theory already in use in small circles at that time.  Yoneji Masuda, "Father of the Information Society," stated his concern in 1980 that our liberty is threatened Orwellian-style by cybernetic technology totally unknown to most people.  This technology links the brains of people via implanted microchips to satellites controlled by ground-based supercomputers.

The first brain implants were surgically inserted in 1974 in the state of Ohio, USA and also in Stockholm, Sweden.  Brain electrodes were inserted into the skulls of babies in 1946 without the knowledge of their parents. In the 1950s and 60s, electrical implants were inserted into the brains of animals and humans, especially in the U.S., during research into behavior modification, and brain and body functioning. Mind control (MC) methods were used in attempts to change human behavior and attitudes. Influencing brain functions became an important goal of military and intelligence services.

Thirty years ago brain implants showed up in X-rays the size of one centimeter. Subsequent implants shrunk to the size of a grain of rice. They were made of silicon, later still of gallium arsenide. Today they are small enough to be inserted into the neck or back, and also intravenously in different parts of the body during surgical operations, with or without the consent of the subject.  It is now almost impossible to detect or remove them.

It is technically possible for every newborn to be injected with a microchip, which could then function to identify the person for the rest of his or her life. Such plans are secretly being discussed in the U.S. without any public airing of the privacy issues involved.  In Sweden, Prime Minister Olof Palme gave permission in 1973 to implant prisoners, and Data Inspection's ex-Director General Jan Freese revealed that nursing-home patients were implanted in the mid-1980s. The technology is revealed in the 1972:47 Swedish state report, Statens Officiella Utradninger (SOU).

Implanted human beings can be followed anywhere. Their brain functions can be remotely monitored by supercomputers and even altered through the changing of frequencies. Guinea pigs in secret experiments have included prisoners, soldiers, mental patients, handicapped children, deaf and blind people, homosexuals, single women, the elderly, school children, and any group of people considered "marginal" by the elite experimenters.  The published experiences of prisoners in Utah State Prison, for example, are shocking to the conscience.

Today's microchips operate by means of low-frequency radio waves that target them.  With the help of satellites, the implanted person can be tracked anywhere on the globe.  Such a technique was among a number tested in the Iraq war, according to Dr. Carl Sanders, who invented the intelligence-manned interface (IMI) biotic, which is injected into people.  (Earlier during the Vietnam War, soldiers were injected with the Rambo chip, designed to increase adrenaline flow into the bloodstream.)  The 20-billion-bit/second supercomputers at the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) could now "see and hear" what soldiers experience in the battlefield with a remote monitoring system (RMS).

When a 5-micromillimeter microchip (the diameter of a strand of hair is 50 micromillimeters) is placed into optical nerve of the eye, it draws neuroimpulses from the brain that embody the experiences, smells, sights, and voice of the implanted person.  Once transferred and stored in a computer, these neuroimpulses can be projected back to the person’s brain via the microchip to be reexperienced.  Using a RMS, a land-based computer operator can send electromagnetic messages (encoded as signals) to the nervous system, affecting the target's performance.  With RMS, healthy persons can be induced to see hallucinations and to hear voices in their heads.

Every thought, reaction, hearing, and visual observation causes a certain neurological potential, spikes, and patterns in the brain and its electromagnetic fields, which can now be decoded into thoughts, pictures, and voices.  Electromagnetic stimulation can therefore change a person's brainwaves and affect muscular activity, causing painful muscular cramps experienced as torture.

The NSA's electronic surveillance system can simultaneously follow and handle millions of people.  Each of us has a unique bioelectrical resonance frequency in the brain, just as we have unique fingerprints.  With electromagnetic frequency (EMF) brain stimulation fully coded, pulsating electromagnetic signals can be sent to the brain, causing the desired voice and visual effects to be experienced by the target.  This is a form of electronic warfare.  U.S. astronauts were implanted before they were sent into space so their thoughts could be followed and all their emotions could be registered 24 hours a day.

The Washington Post reported in May 1995 that Prince William of Great Britain was implanted at the age of 12.  Thus, if he were ever kidnapped, a radio wave with a specific frequency could be targeted to his microchip.  The chip’s signal would be routed through a satellite to the computer screen of police headquarters, where the Prince’s movements could be followed.  He could actually be located anywhere on the globe.

The mass media has not reported that an implanted person's privacy vanishes for the rest of his or her life.  S/he can be manipulated in many ways.  Using different frequencies, the secret controller of this equipment can even change a person's emotional life.  S/he can be made aggressive or lethargic.  Sexuality can be artificially influenced.  Thought signals and subconscious thinking can be read, dreams affected and even induced, all without the knowledge or consent of the implanted person.

A perfect cyber-soldier can thus be created.  This secret technology has been used by military forces in certain NATO countries since the 1980s without civilian and academic populations having heard anything about it.  Thus, little information about such invasive mind-control systems is available in professional and academic journals.

The NSA's Signals Intelligence group can remotely monitor information from human brains by decoding the evoked potentials (3.50HZ, 5 milliwatt) emitted by the brain.  Prisoner experimentees in both Gothenburg, Sweden and Vienna, Austria have been found to have evident brain lesions.  Diminished blood circulation and lack of oxygen in the right temporal frontal lobes result where brain implants are usually operative.  A Finnish experimentee experienced brain atrophy and intermittent attacks of unconsciousness due to lack of oxygen.

Mind control techniques can be used for political purposes.  The goal of mind controllers today is to induce the targeted persons or groups to act against his or her own convictions and best interests.  Zombified individuals can even be programmed to murder and remember nothing of their crime afterward.  Alarming examples of this phenomenon can be found in the U.S.

This “silent war” is being conducted against unknowing civilians and soldiers by military and intelligence agencies.  Since 1980, electronic stimulation of the brain (ESB) has been secretly used to control people targeted without their knowledge or consent.  All international human rights agreements forbid nonconsensual manipulation of human beings — even in prisons, not to speak of civilian populations.

Under an initiative of U.S. Senator John Glenn, discussions commenced in January 1997 about the dangers of radiating civilian populations.  Targeting people’s brain functions with electromagnetic fields and beams (from helicopters and airplanes, satellites, from parked vans, neighboring houses, telephone poles, electrical appliances, mobile phones, TV, radio, etc.) is part of the radiation problem that should be addressed in democratically elected government bodies.

In addition to electronic MC, chemical methods have also been developed.  Mind-altering drugs and different smelling gasses affecting brain function negatively can be injected into air ducts or water pipes.  Bacteria and viruses have also been tested this way in several countries.

Today's supertechnology, connecting our brain functions via microchips (or even without them, according to the latest technology) to computers via satellites in the U.S. or Israel, poses the gravest threat to humanity.  The latest supercomputers are powerful enough to monitor the whole world’s population.  What will happen when people are tempted by false premises to allow microchips into their bodies?  One lure will be a microchip identity card.  Compulsory legislation has even been secretly proposed in the U.S. to criminalize removal of an ID implant.

Are we ready for the robotization of mankind and the total elimination of privacy, including freedom of thought?  How many of us would want to cede our entire life, including our most secret thoughts, to Big Brother?  Yet the technology exists to create a totalitarian New World Order.  Covert neurological communication systems are in place to counteract independent thinking and to control social and political activity on behalf of self-serving private and military interests.

When our brain functions are already connected to supercomputers by means of radio implants and microchips, it will be too late for protest.  This threat can be defeated only by educating the public, using available literature on biotelemetry and information exchanged at international congresses.

One reason this technology has remained a state secret is the widespread prestige of the psychiatric Diagnostic Statistical Manual IV produced by the U.S. American Psychiatric Association (APA) and printed in 18 languages.  Psychiatrists working for U.S. intelligence agencies no doubt participated in writing and revising this manual.  This psychiatric "bible" covers up the secret development of MC technologies by labeling some of their effects as symptoms of paranoid schizophrenia.

Victims of mind control experimentation are thus routinely diagnosed, knee-jerk fashion, as mentally ill by doctors who learned the DSM “symptom” list in medical school.  Physicians have not been schooled that patients may be telling the truth when they report being targeted against their will or being used as guinea pigs for electronic, chemical and bacteriological forms of psychological warfare.

Time is running out for changing the direction of military medicine, and ensuring the future of human freedom.

This article was originally published in the 36th-year edition of the Finnish-language journal SPEKULA (3rd Quarter, 1999).  SPEKULA (circulation 6500) is a publication of Northern Finland medical students and doctors of Oulu University OLK (Oulun Laaketieteellinen Kilta).  It is mailed to all medical students of Finland and all Northern Finland medical doctors.

http://www.combat-diaries.co.uk/diary14chapter_4.htm

By Rauni-Leena Luukanen-Kilde, MD
Former Chief Medical Officer of Finland
December 6, 2000

http://aconstantineblacklist.blogspot.com/2007/12/microchip-implants-mind-control-and.html

Thought Reading Capacity

 

Download thought_reading_capacity.doc

Download thought_reading_capacity.txt

Thought Reading Capacity

John J. McMurtrey, M. S., Copyright 2004,[a]    12 Sept. 05

Co-authorship is negotiable towards professional publication in an NLM indexed journal, Email- Johnmcmurt@aol.com

Donations toward future research are gratefully appreciated at http://www.slavery.org.uk/FutureResearch.htm

ABSTRACT 

Reports of specific concept recognition in humans by technical means on hearing words, viewing images or words, and prior to vocalization are examined.  These reports are consistent with an extensive literature on word category differentiation by electrophysiology and blood flow, which is reviewed.  EEG discrimination literature of emotional states, and deception is surveyed along with non-invasive brain computer interface reports.  Non-contact and remote methods of brain wave assessment are also considered.  The literature treated lends some substantiation to press accounts indicating thought reading is possible, and has had covert development.

INTRODUCTION

The Bible attributes to God the capacity to know the thoughts of men. [1]  Most scientists are unaware that thought reading by electroencephalogram (EEG) was reported as feasible in work begun over 30 years ago, [2] which more recently a number of groups confirm by EEG, Magnetoencephalograpy (MEG), and functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) technologies.  This review focuses on literature relating to technologic thought reading, though also treated are the discrimination of more general cognitive states, brainwave capture methods, and reports of thought reading development apparently covert to open literature.   

METHODS OF SPECIFIC CONCEPT RECOGNITION

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency in 1972 contracted Pinneo & Hall for work that a 1975 US technical report entitled “Feasibility Study For Design of a Biocybernetic Communication System.”   The study concludes “that it is feasible to use the human EEG coincident with overt and covert speech as inputs to a computer for such communication” (covert speech is defined as verbal thinking). 2  The 149 page report [b] states:  “enough information has been obtained . . . to specify the optimum parameters to use for an EEG operating system, and to suggest future research towards that end.”

Pinneo & Hall utilized templates for EEG word recognition constructed by averaging EEG patterns evoked by 9 words in each subject for visually presented words, and primarily utilized 4 electrodes over brain language areas for prediction.  People with high hemispheric lateralization had EEG patterns for some words that frequently classified 100% correctly, regardless of the number of repetitions with stablity over time.  Over all words, however, classification accuracy for these people was 85% for overtly, and 72% for words repeated to oneself, but solely by mental means without vocalization.  Across all subjects specific word EEG patterns were classified 35% correctly for overtly, and 27% correctly for covertly spoken words, but more people were in the 70-100% classification range than in the 10-15% range. [c]  Subjects with low hemispheric laterality, particularly stutterers had near chance EEG classification.  EEG concept recognition was actually 10-15% higher for pictures rather than words.  Phrases containing similarly articulated words or homonyms were better recognized than these words alone without context.

Suppes et. al. have the most extensive recent publications supporting and reporting specific EEG thought recognition. [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]  This work largely compares recognition improvement methods with some emphasis on a relative invariance of EEG concept representations across individuals.  The procedures generally utilized Fourrier transforms of both templates for recognizing words, and test samples with an optimal EEG frequency window, or filter selected for each subject.   EEG word templates constructed by averaging each subject’s responses (50 trials) at single electrodes resulted in less EEG word recognition, 3 than recognition templates averaged across all subjects (700 trials) [d] for bipolar electrode difference.  The latter technique produced recognition rates over seven words of 100% for visual images and auditory words. 5 [e]  However, for visually presented words, recognition templates generated by excluding from the average the subject tested was better--75% than averaging within subject or over all subjects.  The waveforms for each presentation modality were very similar, and when recognition templates averaged across subjects in the modalities of visual images or words were utilized for recognizing other modalities (visual images or words & auditory), recognition still was generally 60-75%.  Such results were despite inclusion of three subjects with English as a second language, and obvious hemispheric laterality confounds important to Pinneo & Hall, [f] such as one left handed and another ambidexterous subject.  These results indicate a relative invariance of EEG representations for different concepts between subjects and perception modality, when averaging out and filtering noise.  Matching templates to words is derived by amplitude difference between template and test word waveforms, when sampled at 814 difference points as squared and summed (Pinneo & Hall had 255 samples per word).

Also examined are brain wave patterns for sentences.  Recognizing the first sentence word by the same words individually presented, and the same words in sentences when cut and pasted was successful at a 50% recognition rate (with 8.3% as chance). 4  Even when excluding a subject from the averaged template, over 90% recognition was obtained for 48 sentences, as visually presented one word at a time. 6

Averaged unfiltered auditory responses are classified 100% correctly by the superposition of 3 sine waves chosen from the frequency domain maxima for each word.7  The same procedure when averaged across subjects and presentation modalities (visual images, visual and auditory words) classifies 100% of the words by 5 frequencies per word, while data fit decreased only 6% compared to the filtered templates.  Syllable classification is less successful, with six correct classifications out of eight examples from superposition of nine frequencies.

A Korean group reports yes/no decision discrimination of 86% by spatio-temporal cross correlation. [8]  This was achieved from 4 electrodes over bilateral frontal and occipital sites.  Differential equation measures of synchronization rate and average polarity also had high recognition rates of 78% and 81% respectively.

Other investigators publish magnetoencephalographic (MEG) recognition of viewed words above chance significantly by 27% for recognition and 44% for accuracy. [9]  Although these results were only somewhat above chance, MEG also was less successful for Suppes et al., 3 4 and a speech recognition optimized artificial intelligence system was utilized without filters or recognition templates.  The authors expressed surprise that any recognition was possible, considering that input utilized only a simple technique; root mean squares of foci. 

There is apparently a Russian report of specific EEG word recognition before 1981. [10]  The work is only known from a science reporter, and specifically unavailable, but is mentioned to aid this report’s discovery, and because of the claim that specific words contain category information, which is of possible significance for word category differentiation studies.

Patents for EEG thought recognition exist.  Electroencephalographic (EEG) instant detection by syllables of “a content of category which the testee wishes to speak” quotes Kiyuna et. al. Patent # 5785653 “System and method for predicting internal condition of live body.” [11]  A stated use:  “the present invention may be use (sic) to detect the internal condition of surveillance in criminal investigation” by EEG.  NEC Corporation licensed this patent.  Mardirossian Patent # 6011991 “Communication system and method including brain wave analysis and/or use of brain activity” includes remote EEG communication with armed forces or clandestine applications. [12]   This patent proposes transmitter capable skin implants, utilizes artificial intelligence, and is licensed by Technology Patents, LLC.

Studies of brain blood flow changes detected by functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI), confirms that viewing pictures of objects activates specifically identifiable brain patterns.  Comparing the distributed brain activity observed by fMRI for viewing faces, houses, cats, chairs, bottles, shoes, and scissors were 90-100% correct in all two category comparisons (with 50% as chance). [13]  A different group replicates the results of this report. [14]  Even though all these objects are described as categories because different exemplars and views were presented, discrimination of these objects generally requires an adjective, so that the distinctions qualify as specific concepts.  A further report examined just 20 seconds of fMRI data rather than one half of an fMRI session in the previous studies, and utilized different exemplars of an object category for training classifiers from those utilized during classification.  A support vector classifier provided the best results with 59-97% accuracy among ‘categories’ of baskets, birds, butterflies, chairs, teapots, cows, horses, tropical fish, garden gnomes, and African masks (with 10% as chance). [15]  “Brain reading” are descriptive terms titling the report.

Numerous fMRI studies show similarly activated brain regions for viewing images or words, and hearing words.  Viewing pictures of objects or the word naming them activates similar distributed brain systems for storing semantic knowledge, [16] [17] [18] and auditory presentation also shares the same [19] or a similar [20] system with that of viewing these words.  These studies give anatomical basis for the high cross modality recognition rates of concepts observed by Suppes et al. 5 7

PHYSIOLOGIC DISCRIMINATION OF WORD CATEGORIES

Broca and Wernicke originally defined anatomy pertinent to aphasia resulting from brain injury. [21]  More recently described are brain lesion patients who have very selective agnosias, which is an inability to name or recognize specific object classes. [22] [23] [24]  Many word category differentiation reports reviewed below were initiated to explain and substantiate such deficits.  This literature is consistent with specific word recognition, because word responses are averaged by category, and distinguished with only statistical inspection without template generation or specific comparison thereto as is required for thought recognition.  Brain cell assembly activation provides a theoretical framework for both specific concept recognition, and word category discrimination. [25]

Electroencephalogram and Magnetoencephalogram Word Category Discrimination

Evoked EEG responses discriminate nouns and verbs.  Nouns elicit more theta power than verbs, but verbs have greater theta coherence decrease, particularly in frontal versus posterior sites. [26]  Noun waveforms generally are more negative than verb responses at post-stimulus intervals of both 200-350 and 350-450 milliseconds (msec.) [27] [28] [29] [30]  Ambiguous noun/verbs are more negative than unambiguous nouns or verbs in the early latency interval, and when context indicates noun meaning versus verb use, are more negative over both these latency windows. 30  Anterior-posterior electrode activity also differs for ambiguous versus unambiguous nouns and verbs. 30 [31] 

Action verb waveforms differ in amplitude, 28 and central versus posterior distribution compared to visual nouns, [32] with particular 30 Hz increase over the motor cortex for action verbs, and over the visual cortex for visual nouns. [33] [34]  Face, arm, or leg action verbs differ in amplitude by time interval, and activity increases over the specific corresponding motor strip locus as well as by frontal electrode. [35] [36]  Low resolution electromagnetic tomography finds irregular verb activity more in the left superior and middle temporal gyri, while regular verbs are more active in the right medial frontal gyrus at 288-321 msec. [37]  Irregular verbs respond more in the left ventral occipito-temporal cortex than regular verbs at ~340 msec. by MEG, which localizes perpendicular sources undetectable by EEG. [38]  Regular verb activity modulates more the left inferior prefrontal region including Broca’s area at ~470 msec with MEG, but irregular verbs have more right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex activity at ~570 msec.  Priming evoked patterns occur for regular but not irregular verbs, [39] [40] while incorrect irregular noun plural [41] and verb participle [42] [43] waveforms differ from that of incorrect regular forms.

Abstract word waveforms onset more positively about 300 msec., persist longer at lateral frontal sites, and distribute more to both hemispheres compared to concrete words.28 [44] [45]  β-1 frequency coherence during memorization of concrete nouns indicates left hemisphere electrode T5 as the main brain processing node. [46]  Left hemisphere electrode T3 is similarly important for abstract nouns, which have more frontal area contribution, and massive right posterior hemisphere coupling.  Abstract versus concrete memorization distinctly changes other frequency bands, [47] [48] and theta synchronization predicts efficient encoding. [49]      

Content words yield a more negative peak at 350-400 msec. than functional grammar words, with a subsequent occipital positivity that function words lack, and more electrode and hemisphere differences from 400- 700 msec. [50] [51]  In sentences, the late component of function words resembles preparatory slow waves that apparently subserve their introductory and conjunctive grammatical function. [52]  Other studies show content versus function word differences at additional intervals and more bi-hemispheric effects,[53] with right visual field advantage for function words. [54]  MEG distinguishes functional grammar words, or content words such as multimodal nouns, visual nouns, or action verbs, each by response strength and laterality at intervals of both ~100 and greater than 150 msec. [55]

Proper name amplitudes peak more just after 100 msec. negatively, and just after 200 msec. positively than common nouns, while one’s own name accentuates these peaks relative to other proper names with further positive and negative components. [56]  Proper names, animals, verbs, and numerals show electrode site differences:  proper name temporal negativity extends to inferior electrodes bilaterally; verbs and animal names are less negative and similar, but verbs have left frontal inferior positivity; while numerals have less waveform negativity, and bilateral parietal positivity. [57]   Non-animal objects are more negative in both the 150-250 and 350-500 msec. intervals than animals, while animals are more positive in the 250-350 msec. interval. [58] [59]  Animals are more positive in approximately the same latter interval than vegetables/fruits, while vegetables/fruits are more negative in about the earlier interval (150-250 msec.), and have stronger frontal region current sources than animals. [60]  Animals in natural scenes evoke different waveforms than just natural scene or building pictures. [61]  Responses to words for living things are less negative over the right occipital-temporal region than artifactual objects, while pictorial presentations of the same items further differ and have hemisphere effects noted as unreported. [62]  EEG waveforms for specific meanings could be as discretely categorized as indicated by the reported but unspecified Russian work, which claims that “the waves for such concepts as “chair”, “desk”, and “table” are all overlapped by another wave that corresponds” to the concept of furniture. 10

Affective word meanings such as good-bad, strong-weak, or active-passive are discriminated [63] by both category and meaning polarity according to response latency, amplitude, and scalp distribution at intervals of 80-265 and 565-975 msec. [64]  Positive words have amplitude increases peaking at 230 msec. compared to negative words, and relative to neutral words increase a subsequent peak amplitude as well as a slow wave component. [65]  Emotional words also show less amplitude decrease on repetition than neutral words. [66]

Some of these word category differentiation reports are consistent with both the specific recognition reports, and/or the discrimination of non-verbal cognition.  Based on EEG/MEG responses, words are readily distinguished from non-words, [67] [68] [69] pictures, [70] and as to length. [71]  Even commas have a characteristic waveform similar to the speech phrase closure evoked pattern called closure positive shift. [72]  Color selection modulates the EEG. [73]  EEG discriminates the judgement of gender for both faces and hands. [74]

Positron Emission Tomography (PET) and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) Word Category Discrimination

Positron Emission Tomography (PET) and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) localize brain blood flow, with ability to distinguish perceptual categories.  Some studies locate recognition of places [75] [76] and faces [77] within certain brain areas, however, expertise can recruit the face recognition area, [78] and other studies show these areas only responding maximally for specific stimuli. [79]  Word category activity is both distributed and overlapping 79 [80] in a somewhat lumpy manner. [81]  Though regions of word category difference are indicated below, brain comprehension is not solely dependent on these areas.  Discrete category responsive emergence may have some resemblance to category segregation in the feature processing of artificial neural networks that self organize without programming. [82]

Meta-analysis of 14 studies locating activity for face, natural, and manufactured object recognition shows ventral temporal cortex difference.  Face recognition activates more inferior ventral temporal portions including the fusiform gyrus of which manufactured objects activate more medial aspects than face or natural objects, yet natural objects distribute more widely in this region. [83]  Eighty eight percent of face studies converged for mid fusiform gyrus activity, while natural and manufactured objects converged no more than 50% for any discrete area.   Manufactured object activity locates to the middle temporal cortex from natural objects, which locate more in the superior temporal cortex.  Face and natural object activity is more bilateral, and in the left inferior frontal cortex, while particularly tools activate the premotor area.  These studies also feature activity in the inferior occipital/posterior fusiform and the medial occipital structures of lingual gyrus, calcarine sulcus, and cuneus.

There is some agreement that verbs have greater activity in temporal, parietal, and premotor/prefrontal regions than nouns, while nouns have little [84] or no [85] greater activated areas than verbs, yet no noun/verb difference is also reported. [86]  German regular noun and verb fMRI responses compared to irregular words differ significantly in the right precentral gyrus, the left prefrontal cortex, bilateral posterior temporal lobes, and bilateral complexes including superior parietal lobules, supramarginal gyri, and angular gyri. [87]  Regular words are left hemisphere lateralized, while irregular words have somewhat greater distribution to the right hemisphere, and a greater activation over all cortical areas.    Irregular verbs activate more total cortex than regular verbs, but lack motor strip, insular, and most occipital cortex activity present for regular verbs. [88]  Though both forms activate the inferior parietal lobule, irregular verbs activate more posterior and superior portions than regular verbs

Depending on control task correction, naming actions activates the left inferior parietal lobule, which is lacking for locative prepositions, which activate the left supramarginal gyrus selectively from actions. [89]  Furthermore, naming abstract shape location compared to locating concrete items increases right supramarginal gyrus activity,89 which specifically also activates on long-term memory for spatial relations [90] and in American sign language prepositions. [91]  The supramarginal gyrus is encompassed by the temporal-parietal-occipital junction active for location judgments, and is separate from temporal activity for judging color. [92]  Action word generation activity is just anterior to the motion perception area, while color word generation activity is just anterior to the color perception area. [93]  Naming object color activates distinct brain regions from naming the object, with color knowledge retrieval activity being slightly removed from that of naming colors.  [94]  Irrespective of language and visual or auditory modality, the naming of body parts activates the left intraparietal sulcus, precentral sulcus, and medial frontal gyrus, while naming numbers activates the right post central sulcus as joined to the intraparietal sulcus. 19 

Concrete words are discriminated from abstract words in both noun or verb forms,85 with more right hemisphere activity for abstract words than concrete words. [95] [96] [97]   Abstract/concrete contrasts feature both right or left temporal areas, while the reverse concrete/abstract comparison features frontal activity. [98] [99] [100] [101] [102]  Besides distinction from abstract nouns, the concrete categories of animals contrasted to implements respond selectively in the posterior-lateral temporal, and frontal cortex areas across studies. 95 100  Limbic activity, particularly the cingulate, distinguishes emotional words from both abstract and concrete words. 96      

Naming pictures of animals, tools, and famous people are discriminated [103] by increased regional blood flow in the left inferior frontal gyrus for animals, premotor area for tools and left middle frontal gyrus for people. [104]  Faces activate the right lingual and bilateral fusiform gyri, while the left lateral anterior middle temporal gyrus response differs to famous faces, famous proper names, and common names. [105]  Particularly the left anterior temporal cortex responds to names, faces, and buildings when famous relative to non-famous stimuli. 105 [106]  Viewing photographs of faces, buildings, and chairs evokes activity distributed across several cortical areas, which are each locally different in both the visual ventral temporal 79 and occipital cortices. [107]  Photograph perception of these same categories has more hemispheric lateralization and activation than non-perceptual imagery, [108] while short term memory face imagery activity is stronger than that of long term memory. [109] 

More advanced fMRI techniques discriminate further word or object classes.  In a high resolution fMRI limited brain cross section study, the activity differs for animals, furniture, fruit, or tools in discrete sites of the left lateral frontal and 3 separate medial temporal cortex loci respectively. [110]  The application of artificial intelligence to fMRI pattern distinguishes between 12 noun categories (fish, four legged animals, trees, flowers, fruits, vegetables, family members, occupations, tools, kitchen items, dwellings, and building parts). [111]  Finally are the reports of discriminating the viewing of 7 13 14 and 10 15 different ‘categories’ so discrete as to require an adjective for distinction as previously discussed.   

Some cognitive functions are related to or partly dependent on language.  Letters activate the left insula more than objects and exclusively activate the left inferior parietal cortex. [112]  Letters also activate an area in the left ventral visual cortex more than digits in most subjects. [113] [114]  Brain activations of mathematical thinking are partly dependent on language. [115]  Subtraction activates bilaterally the anterior intraparietal sulcus and a phoneme area in the intraparietal sulcus mesial to the angular gyrus, selectively from simple motor tasks. [116]  Number comparison activates right hemisphere intraparietal and prefrontal areas, while multiplication localizes more to the left hemisphere. [117]   

ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAM DISCRIMINATION OF OTHER COGNITIVE STATES

Other literature indicates EEG differentiation of completely non-verbal cognition.  Greater left prefrontal activity predicts positive affect, while greater right prefrontal activity predicts negative disposition in psychological testing. [118]  However, the stability of hemispheric activation is important for such a trait characteristic, [119] and more transient mood states have exactly the opposite arousal symmetry. [120]   Decreased left prefrontal activity is also found in depression, [121] [122] and the anxiety situations of social phobics. [123]  Patented is more specific attitude, mood, and emotion differentiation, by plotting at least two and as many as five EEG frequencies, with reference to Air Force research. [124]   EEG patterns discriminate relative misanthropy and philanthropy in facial preferences, and favorable or negative responses to faces, [125] while waveform topography identifies sad face perception. [126]  Another EEG emotion indicator is the stimulus-preceding negativity (SPN).  Although slight SPNs can precede instruction cues, this wave is most pronounced while awaiting performance assessment and reward or aversive feedback. [127] [128] [129] [130]

A number of groups have developed procedures to detect deception based on the P300 (positive @ 300 millisec) event related potential (ERP) from EEG. [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136]  A commercial system, Brain Fingerprinting, [137] which includes additional frequency analysis, particularly a late negative ERP potential, cites 100% accuracy over five separate studies. [138] [139] [140] [141] [142]  Though most EEG deception detection concerns situation specific knowledge, a late positive potential approximate to the P300, is reported to vary as a function of real attitude rather than attitude report. [143]

BRAIN COMPUTER INTERFACES

EEG cortical potentials are detected for both actual movement, [144] and movement readiness potentials (bereitschaftspotential). [145] [146]  EEG sufficiently differentiates just the imagination of movement to operate switches, [147] move a cursor in one [148] or two dimensions, [149] control prosthesis grasp, [150] and guide wheel chairs left or right [151] in a prompted manner.   EEG detects such potentials to play Pac Man, [152] and imagining the spinning of cubes, or arm raising in appropriate direction guides robots through simulated rooms, [153] [154] [155] both achieved without response prompting.  Unprompted slow cortical potentials also can turn on computer programs. [156]  Signals from implanted brain electrodes in monkeys achieve even more complex grasping and reaching robot arm control without body arm movement. [157]  Some ability to recognize evoked responses to numbers [158] and tones [159] in real time by a commercial system called BrainScope has limited report.

REMOTE AND PROXIMATE BRAIN WAVE CAPTURE METHODS

EEG is typically recorded with contact electrodes with conductive paste, while MEG detectors are in an array slightly removed from the head.  Remote detection of brain rhythms by electrical impedance sensors is described. [160]  Though non-contact is the only remote descriptor for EEG, this same detector design is applied to monitoring electrocardiogram with wrist sensor location. [161]  Passive brain wave fields extend as far as 12 feet from man as detected by a cryogenic antenna. [162]  This device is entirely adaptable to clandestine applications, and pointed comments are made on the disappearance of physiological remote sensing literature since the 1970’s for animals and humans, while all other categories of remote sensing research greatly expanded. [163]

In 1976, the Malech Patent # 3951134  “Apparatus and method for remotely monitoring and altering brain waves” was granted. [164]  Example of operation is at 100 and 210 MHz, which are frequencies penetrating obstruction. [165]  “The individual components of the system for monitoring and controlling brain wave activity may be of conventional type commonly employed in radar”; and  “The system permits medical diagnosis of patients, inaccessible to physicians, from remote stations” are quotes indicating remote capacity.  License is to Dorne & Margolin Inc., but now protection is expired with public domain.  The Malech patent utilizes interference of 210 and 100 MHz frequencies resulting in a 110 MHz return signal, which is demodulated to give EEG waveform.

The capability of remote EEG is predicted by electromagnetic scattering theory using ultrashort pulses, [166] which is different from the unpulsed Malech patent.  Ultrashort pulses are currently defined in the range of 10-12 to 10-15 second.  Considering that EEG word elicited potentials are comparatively long (hundreds of milliseconds), indicates that remote radar brain wave capture is adequate to word recognition, with ultrashort pulses allowing some 109 or more radar reflections in a millisecond (10-3 sec.)

THOUGHT READING COVERT DEVELOPMENT EVIDENCE

The research arm of agencies with missions to covertly acquire information would certainly develop to operational capability any thought reading potential, which was reported feasible 30 years ago to the Department of Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).  Reports that such development has progressed are multiple, and two are confirmed by details of the 1975 DARPA EEG specific word recognition report, which itself is evidence of development covert to open databases. 2  An International Committee of the Red Cross Symposium synopsis states EEG computer mind reading development by Lawrence Pinneo in 1974 at Stanford. [167]  A letter by the Department of Defense Assistant General Counsel for Manpower, Health, and Public Affairs, Robert L. Gilliat affirmed brain wave reading by the Advanced Research Projects Agency in 1976, [168] the same year as Malech remote EEG patent grant.  Such a capacity would be unlikely to neglected by DARPA in the 22 years between the current confirmations and the Pinneo report. 

In fact news reports assert such development.  Articles quote Dr. John Norseen of Lockheed Martin Aeronautics that thought reading is possible and has had development.[169] [170]  He predicted by 2005 the deployment of thought reading detectors for profiling terrorists at airports. 170  A further acknowledgement of developing a device to read terrorists’ minds at airports was made in a NASA presentation to Northwest Airlines security specialists. [171]  Statements in all articles indicate remoteness of brain wave detection, though somewhat proximate.

“Thought reading or synthetic telepathy” communications technology procurement is considered in a 1993 Jane’s [g] Special Operations Forces (SOF) article:  “One day, SOF commandos may be capable of communicating through thought processes.” [172]  Descriptive terms are “mental weaponry and psychic warfare”  Although contemplated in future context, implied is availability of a technology with limited mobility, since troop deployment anticipation must assume prior development.  Victim complaints that mind reading is part of an assault upon them are very similar to such a capacity.  Other complaints by these victims, such as technologic internal voice assault are upheld by considerable documentation that internal voice transmission is feasible, even at a distance and within structures, 165 and a presumptive diagnosis of such complaints is largely consistent with microwave exposure [173]--a basis for both internal voice and EEG capture technologies.

DISCUSSION

There is considerable confirmation of an ability to recognize specific concepts by brain activity across subjects.  Identifying visual images viewed by a subject solely by measures of mental activity is replicated across five groups by two methods, with best recognition rates of 100%.  Three groups report success in visually viewed word identification by brain waves in two methods with best recognition rates of 75%.  Isolated groups report EEG word recognition by auditory perception and prior to vocalization, with best results of 100% for auditory perception and 35% for vocalization.  Although single reports examine lesser vocabularies, over all open studies of thought recognition, some 80 words have been examined.  In all, seven groups have reported some level of specific concept recognition by EEG, MEG, or fMRI.  Word category distinctions would be expected from such individual differences.  EEG, MEG, PET, or fMRI techniques discriminate some 42 word class or dimension distinctions, many of which would survive separate direct comparison just by reported results.

The finding that words can be classified by superposition of sine waves suggests an obvious interpretation, when considering word category blood flow activations of cell assemblies. 7  The frequencies resulting from neuron firing rates in the distributed, yet somewhat discrete regions, when interference phase summed and subtracted by arrival from different locations results in word representation in the brain’s language. 

Considerable capacity to specifically detect and differentiate mental states is evident from literature reports by EEG.  The fact that EEG signals are detected on a voluntary unprompted basis for turning on computer programs, 156 playing Pac Man, 152  and robot guidance 153 154 155 suggests the feasibility of a similar capacity for specific EEG concept recognition.  Although most concept recognition work is related to stimulus prompted responses, unprompted detection of numbers apparently as a class, has limited report. 158  The references to remote EEG provide plausibly exploitable mechanisms, for which covert development has some indication.  Making those more proximate electromagnetic detectors (MEG, cryogenic antenna, or electrical impedance sensor) the focus of a parabolic antenna, would be obvious to remote brain wave detection engineers to extend the range and provide directionality, and is a simple, common design innovation.

The plausibility of thought reading has not completely escaped scientific attention, as a French government panel expresses concern about the potential for thought reading and such a remote capacity. [174]  Complete rejection of reports of a remote mind reading capability is just as presumptuous, in the face of complaints, as has been the dismissal of internal voice capacity. 165  News reports of covert thought reading development have confirmation in the Pinneo study, and independent assertions of more proximate thought reading development “against terrorists” affirm each other.  Special operations officials consider procurement of a similar remote capacity to that of which many victims complain.  Though victims will regard their experience to affirm such a thought reading capability, professional prejudice regards such complaints as defining psychiatric condition.  The certain fact is that these claims have had no adequate investigation, and the available evidence questions the routinely egregious denial of civil rights to such individuals.  Mind reading development must at least be considered as plausible, even regarding very remote methods.

It is known that government elements have done work in thought reading development.  The logic that in the 30 years since the Pinneo work started, this capacity is operationally applied is too sound to dismiss victim corroboration and other evidence, without appropriate investigation.  It would have to be admitted that funding for projects by the defense and security agencies is considerably greater than for open science, and that thought reading would be a priority area.  Particularly disturbing is the existence of a remote EEG method in the public domain.  Educated democracies should not be complacent at any prospect of mind reading, given the potential for privacy loss, civil rights violation, and political control.

Acknowledgements:  Thanks are given to God for inspiration and guidance as well as Mr. John Allman, Secretary of Christians Against Mental Slavery for invaluable materials and support (website http://www.slavery.org.uk/ ).

EEG concept recognition articles are printable thru Pubmed as designated.

All patents are printable from the U. S. Patent Office website.   

Each is free

REFERENCES

[a] This article has been partly supported by substantial financial contributions from Christians Against Mental Slavery http://www.slavery.org.uk

[b] Pinneo’s report does not include all experiments reported to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency in the six annual reports over the 3 year contract.

[c] Over the experiments presented by the report, chance would be from 6.5 to 14% depending on the size of tested vocabulary.

[d] Suppes points out that this may have been due to increased averaging per se.

[e] Though apparently only single electrodes or pairs were utilized for prediction, the best recognition rates were not always from the same electrode of pair.

[f] Almost half of the Pinneo report is devoted to resolving such confounds.

[g] Jane’s is the most respected and authoritative of defense reporting services.

[1] The Bible Job 42: 2, Psalms 139: 2,  94: 11, I Chronicles 28: 9, Isaiah 66: 18.

[2] Pinneo LR and Hall DJ. “Feasibility Study for Design of a Biocybernetic Communication System” Report #ADA017405 National Technical Information Service (NTIS), 1975.  Prepared for the Advanced Research Projects Agency Order #2034, Program Code #2D20, Contractor: Stanford Research Institute Contract dates: 2/9/72-8/31/76, SRI Project LSU-1936. (US cost ~$50.)  Available at http://www.slavery.org.uk/Pinneo.doc and http://www.sysos.co.uk/Pinneo.doc

[3] Suppes P, Lu Z, and Han B.  “Brain wave recognition of words” Proc Natl Acad Sci 94: 14965-69, 1997.  Printable free online thru Pubmed or at  http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/94/26/14965

[4] Suppes P, Han B, and Lu Z. “Brain-wave recognition of sentences” Proc Natl Acad Sci 95: 15861-66, 1998.  Printable free online thru Pubmed or at  http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/95/26/15861

[5] Suppes P, Han B, Epelboim J, and Lu Z. “Invariance of brain-wave representations of simple visual images and their names” Proc Natl  Acad  Sci 96: 14658-63, 1999.  Printable free online thru Pubmed or at http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/96/25/14658

[6] Suppes P, Han B, Epelboim J, and Lu ZL. “Invariance between subjects of brain wave representations of language” Proc Natl Acad  Sci 96(22): 12953-8, 1999.  Printable free online thru PubMed or at http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/96/22/12953

[7] Suppes P and Han B. “Brain-wave representation of words by superposition of a few sine waves” Proc Natl Acad Sci 97: 8738-43, 2000.  Printable free online thru Pubmed or at http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/97/15/8738

[8] Kim M-J, Shin S-C, Song Y, and Ryu CS. “Yes/No Discrimination With Spatio-Temporal Characteristics of EEG” 23rd Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society Oct 25-28, Istanbul Turkey.  Obtained from the Storming Media Pentagon collection of technical papers at a cost of ~$10.  Abstract at http://www.stormingmedia.us/30/3012/A301214.html?searchTerms=~Kim~Shin~Song~Ryu  The paper was apparently collected from the conference with the Koreans not under Pentagon contract.  Entire conference is #ADM001351 on cd-rom.

[9] Assadullahi R and Pulvermuller F. “Neural Network Classification of Word Evoked Neuromagnetic Brain Activity” In: Wermter S, Austin J, and  Willahaw D (eds.) Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence: Emergent Neurocomputational Architechures Based on Neuroscience Heidelberg Springer, p 311-20, 2001.  More limited preliminary communication at http://www.his.sunderland.ac.uk/durhamab/ramin.doc

[10]  Selden G. “Machines That Read Minds” Sci Digest Oct 89: 60-6, 1981. Also at http://www.datafilter.com/mc/machinesThatReadMinds.html

[11] Kiyuna T, Tanigawa T, and Yamazaki T. Patent #5785653 “System and method for predicting internal condition of live body” USPTO granted 7/28/98.

[12] Mardirossian A. Patent #6011991 “Communication system and method including brain wave analysis and/or use of brain activity” USPTO granted 1/4/00.

[13] Haxby JV, Gobbini MI, Furey ML, Ishai A, Schonten JL, and Pietrini P. “Distributed and Overlapping Representations of Faces and Objects in Ventral Temporal Cortex” Science 293(5529): 2425-30, 2001.

[14] Spiridon M, and Kanwisher N. “How Distributed is Visual Category Information in Human Occipito-Temporal Cortex? An fMRI Study” Neuron 35: 1157-1165, 2002.

[15] Cox DD, and Savoy RL. “Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) “brain reading”: detecting and classifying distributed patterns of fMRI activity in human visual cortex” Neuroimage 19: 261-70, 2003.

[16] Vandenberghe R, Price C, Wise R, Josephs O, and Frackowiak RSJ. “Functional anatomy of a common semantic system for words and pictures” Nature 383: 354-6, 1996.

[17] Chao LL, Haxby JV, and Martin A. “Attribute-based neural substrates in temporal cortex for perceiving and knowing about objects” Nature Neurosci  2(10): 913-9, 1999.

[18] Moore CJ and Price CJ. “Three Distinct Ventral Occipitotemporal Regions for Reading and Object Naming” NeuroImage 10: 181-92, 1999.

[19] Le Clec’H G, Dehaene S, Cohen L, Mehler E, Dupoux E, Poline JB, Lehericy S, van de Moortele PF, and Le Bihan D. “Distinct Cortical Areas for Names of Numbers and Body Parts Independent of Language and Input modality” NeuroImage 12: 381-91, 2000.

[20] Chee MWL, O’Craven KM, Bergida R, Rosen BR, and Savoy RL. “Auditory and Visual Word Processing Studied With fMRI” Hum Brain Mapp 7: 15-28, 1999.

[21] Isselbacher KJ, Adams RD, Brunwald E, Petersdorf RG, and Wilson JD (eds.) Harrison’s Principles of Internal Medicine 9th edition, McGraw-Hill, p 141-2, 1980.

[22] Warrington EK and Shallice T. “Category specific semantic impairments” Brain 107(Pt 3): 829-54, 1984.

[23] Damasio H, Grabowski TJ, Tranel D, Hichwa RD, and Damasio AR. “A neural basis for lexical retrieval” Nature 380: 499-505, 1996.

[24] De Renzi E. “Disorders of Visual Recognition” Semin Neurol 20(4): 479-85, 2000.

[25] Pulvermuller F. “Words in the brain’s language” Behav Brain Sci 22: 253-336, 1999.

[26] Khader P and Rosler F. “EEG power and coherence analysis of visually presented nouns and verbs reveals left frontal processing differences” Neurosci Lett 354: 111-14, 2004.

[27] Preissl H, Pulvermuller F, Lutzenberger W, and Birbaumer N. “Evoked potentials distinguish between nouns and verbs” Neurosci Lett 197: 81-3, 1995.

[28] Kellenbach ML, Wijers AA, Hovius M, Mulder J, and Mulder G. “Neural Differentiation of Lexico-Syntactic Categories or Semantic Features? Event-Related Potential Evidence for Both” J Cog Neurosci 14(4): 561-77, 2002.

[29] Khader P, Scherag A, Streb J, and Rosler F. “Differences between noun and verb processing in minimal phrase context: a semantic priming study using event-related brain potentials” Cogn Brain Res 17: 293-313, 2003.

[30] Federmeier KD, Segal JB, Lombrozo T, and Kutas M. “Brain responses to nouns, verbs and class-ambiguous words in context” Brain 123(12): 2552-66, 2000.  Also at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/utils/fref.cgi?http://brain.oupjournals.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=full&pmid=11099456

[31] Brown WS, Lehmann D, and Marsh JT. “Linguistic Meaning Related Differences in Evoked Potential Topography: English, Swiss-German, and Imagined” Brain Lang 11: 340-53, 1980.

[32] Pulvermuller F, Mohr B, and Schleichert H. “Semantic or lexico-syntactic factors: what determines word-class specific activity in the human brain?” Neurosci Lett 275: 81-4, 1999.

[33] Pulvermuller F, Lutzenberger W, and Preissl H. “Nouns and Verbs in the Intact Brain: Evidence from Event-retlated Potentials and High-frequency Cortical Responses” Cerebral Cortex 9(5): 497-506, 1999.  Also at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/utils/fref.cgi?http://cercor.oupjournals.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=full&pmid=10450894

[34] Pulvermuller F, Preissl H, Lutzenberger W, and Birbaumer N. “Brain Rhythms of Language: Nouns Versus Verbs” Eur J Neurosci 8: 917-41, 1996.

[35] Pulvermuller F, Harle M, and Hummel F. “Walking or Talking? Behavioral and Neruophysiological Correlates of Action Verb Processing” Brain Lang 78: 143-68, 2001.

[36] Pulvermuller F, Harle M, and Hummel F. “Neurophysiological distinction of verb categories” Cog Neurosci 11(12): 2789-93, 2000.

[37] Lavric A, Pizzagalli D, Forstmeier S, and Rippon G. “A double dissociation of English past-tense production revealed by event-related potentials and low-resolution electromagnetic tomography (LORETA)” Clin Neurophysiol 112: 1833-1849, 2001.

[38] Dhond RP, Marinkovic K, Dale AM, Wotzel T, and Halgren E. “Spatiotemporal maps of past-tense verb inflection” Neuroimage 19: 91-100, 2003.

[39] Weyerts H, Munte TF, Smid HGOM, and Heinze H-J. “Mental representations of morphologically complex words: and event-related potential study with adult humans” Neurosci Lett 206: 125-8, 1996.

[40] Munte TF, Say T, Clahsen H, Schlitz K, and Kutas M. “Decomposition of morphologically complex words in English: evidence from event-related potentials” Cogn Brain Res 7: 241-53, 1999.

[41] Weyerts H, Penke M, Dohrn U, Clahsen H, and Munte TF. “Brain potentials indicate differences between regular and irregular German plurals” Neuroreport  8(4): 957-62, 1997.

[42] Penke M, Weyerts H, Gross M, Zander E, Munte TF, and Clahsen H. “How the brain processes complex words: an event-related potential study of German verb inflection” Cogn Brain Res 6: 37-52, 1997.

[43] Gross M, Say T, Kleingers M, Clahsen H, and Munte TF. “Human brain potentials to violations in morphologically complex Italian words” Neurosci Lett 241: 83-6, 1998.

[44] Kounios J and Holcomb PJ. “Concreteness Effects in Semantic Processing: ERP Evidence Supporting Dual-Coding Theory” J Exp Psychol 20(4): 804-23, 1994.

[45] West CW and Holcomb PJ. “Imaginal, Semantic, and Surface-Level Processing of Concrete and Abstract Words: An Electrophysiological Investigation” J Cogn Neurosci  12: 1024-37, 2000.

[46] Weiss S and Rappelsberger P. “EEG coherence within the 13-18 band as a correlate of a distinct lexical organization of concrete and abstract nouns in humans” Neurosci Lett 209: 17-20, 1996.

[47] Schack B, Weiss S, and Rappelsberger P. “Cerebral Information Transfer During Word Processing: Where and When Does It Occur and How Fast is it?” Hum Brain Mapp 19: 18-36, 2003.

[48] Weiss S and Rappelsberger P. “Left Frontal EEG Coherence Reflects Modality Independent Language Processes” Brain Topogr 11(1): 33-42, 1998.

[49] Weiss S, Muller HM, and Rappelsberger P. “Theta synchronization predicts efficient memory encoding of concrete and abstract nouns” NeuroReport 11(11): 2357-61, 2000.

[50] Neville HJ, Mills D, and Lawson DS. “Fractionating Language: Different Neural Subsystems with Different Sensitive Periods” Cerebral Cortex 2: 244-58, 1992.

[51] Munte TF, Wieringa BM, Weyerts H, Szentkuti A, Matzke M, and Johannes S. “Differences in brain potentials to open and closed class words: class and frequency effects” Neuropsychologia 39: 91-102, 2001.

[52] Van Petten C and Kutas M. “Influences of semantic and syntactic contex on open- and closed-class words” Mem Cogn 19: 95-112, 1991.

[53] Pulvermuller F, Lutzenberger W, and Birbaumer N. “Electrocortical distinction of vocabulary types” Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol 94: 357-70, 1995.

[54] Mohr B, Pulvermuller F, and Zaidel E. “Lexical Decision After Left, Right, and Bilateral Presentation of Function Words, Content Words, and Non-Words: Evidence For Interhemispheric Interaction” Neuropsychologia 32(1): 105-24, 1994.

[55] Pulvermuller F, Assedollahi R, and Ekbert T. “Neuromagnetic evidence for early semantic access in word recognition” J Neurosci 13: 201-5, 2001.

[56] Muller HM and Kutas M. “What’s in a name? Electrophysiological differences between spoken nouns, proper names and one’s own name” Neuroreport 8: 221-5, 1996.

[57] Dehaene S. “Electrophysiological evidence for category-specific word processing” Neuroreport 6: 2153-7, 1995.

[58] Antal A, Keri S, Kovacs G, Janka Z, and Benedek G. “Early and Late components of visual categorization:  an evant-related potential study” Cogn Brain Res 9: 117-19, 2000.

[59] Antal A, Keri S, Kovacs G, Liszli P, Janka Z, and Benedek G. “Event-related potentials from a visual categorization task” Brain Res Protocols 7: 131-6, 2001.

[60] Ji J, Porjesz B, and Begleiter H. “ERP components in category matching tasks” Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 108: 380-9, 1998.

[61] Thorpe S, Fize D, and Marlot C. “Speed of processing in the human visual system” Nature 381: 520-2, 1996.

[62] Kiefer M. “Perceptual and semantic sources of category-specific effects: Event-related potentials during picture and word categorization” Mem Cogn 29(1): 100-116, 2001.

[63] Skrandies W and Chiu MJ. “Dimensions of affective meaning – behavioral evoked potential correlates in Chinese subjects” Neurosci Lett 341: 45-8, 2003.

[64] Skrandies W. “Evoked potential correlates of semantic meaning—A brain mapping study” Cog Brain Res 6: 175-183, 1998.

[65] Schapkin SA, Gusev AN, and Kuhl J. “Categorization of unilaterally presented emotional words: an ERP analysis” Acta Neurobiol Exp 60: 17-28, 2000.

[66] Dietrich DE, Waller C, Johannes S, Wieringa BM, Emrich HM, and Munte TF. “Differential Effects of Emotional Content on Event-Related Potentials in Word Recognition Memory” Neuropsychobiol 43: 96-101, 2001.

[67] Krause CM, Korpilahti P, Porn B, Joskim J, and Lang HA. “Automatic auditory word perception as measured by 40 Hz EEG responses” Electroencephal Clin Neurophysiol 107: 84-7, 1998.

[68] Diesch E, Biermann S, and Luce T. “The magnetic mismatch field elicited by words and phonological non-words” Neuroreport 9(3): 455-60, 1998.

[69] Lutzenberger W, Pulvermuller F, and Birbaumer N. “Words and pseudowords elicit distinct patterns of 30-Hz EEG responses” Neurosci Lett 176: 115-18, 1994.

[70] Kiefer M. “Perceptual and semantic sources of category-specific effects: Event-related potentials during picture and word categorization” Mem Cog 29(1): 100-16, 2001.

[71] Assadollahi R and Pulvermuller F. “Neuromagnetic evidence for early access to cognitive representations” Cog Neurosci Neurophysiol 12(2): 207-13, 2001.

[72] Steinhauer K. “Electrophysiological correlates of prosody and punctuation” Brain Lang 86: 142-164, 2003.

[73] Lange JJ, Wijers AA, Mulder LJM, and Mulder G. “Color selection and location selection in ERPs: differences, similarities and ‘neural specificity’” Biol Psychology 48: 53-82, 1998.

[74] Mouchetant-Rostaing Y, Girad M-H, Benlin S, Aguera P-E, and Pernier J. “Neurophysiological correlatres of face gender processing in humans” Eur J Neurosci 12: 303-12, 2000.

[75] Aguirre GK, Zarahn E, and D’Esposito M. “An Area within the Human Ventral Cortex Sensitive to “Building” Stimuli: Evidence and Implications” Neuron 21: 373-83, 1998.

[76] Epstein R, Harris A, Stanley D, and Kanwisher N.  “The Parahippocampal Place Area: Recognition, Navigation, or Encoding?” Neuron 23: 115-25, 1999.

[77] Kanwisher N, McDermott J, and Chun MM. “The Fusiform Face Area: A Module in Human Extrastriate Cortex Specialized for Face Perception” J Neurosci  17(11): 4302-11, 1997.

[78] Gauthier I, Scudlarski P, Gore JC, and Anderson AW. “Expertise for cars and birds recruits brain areas involved in face recognition” Nature Neurosci 3(2): 191-7, 2000.

[79] Ishai A, Ungerleider LG, Martin A, Schouten JL, and Haxby JV. “Distributed representations of objects in the human ventral visual pathway” Proc Natl Acad Sci 96(16): 9379-84, 1999.  Also at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/utils/fref.cgi?http://www.pnas.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=full&pmid=10430951

[80] Martin A. “Functional Neuroimaging of Semantic Memory” In: Cabeza R and Kingstone A (eds.) Handbook of Functional Neuroimaging of Cognition MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass p 153-86, 2001.

[81] Martin A and Chao LL. “Semantic memory and the brain: structure and processes” Curr Opinion Neurobiol 11(2): 194-201, 2001.

[82] Small SL, Hart J, Nguyen T, and Gordon H. “Distributed representations of semantic knowledge in the brain” Brain 118: 441-53, 1995.

[83] Joseph JE. “Functional Neuroimaging Studies of Category Specificity in Object Recognition: A critical review and meta-analysis” Cog Affect Behav Neurosci 1(2): 119-36, 2001.

[84] Warburton E, Wise RJS, Price CJ, Weiller C, Hadar U, Ramsay S, and Frackowiak RSJ. “Noun and verb retrieval by normal subjects. Studies with PET” Brain 119(Pt 1): 159-79, 1996.

[85] Perani D, Cappa SF, Schnur T, Tettamanti M, Collina S, Rosa MM, and Faziol F. “The neural correlates of verb and noun processing: a PET study” Brain 122(12): 2237-44, 1999.  Also at http://brain.oupjournals.org/cgi/content/full/122/12/2337

[86] Tyler LK, Russell R, Fadili J, and Moss HE. “The neural representation of nouns and verbs: PET studies” Brain 124(8): 1619-34, 2001.

[87] Beretta A, Campbell C, Carr TH, Huang J, Schmitt LM, Cristianson K, and Cao Y.  “An ER-fMRI investigation of morphological inflection in German reveals that the brain makes a distinction between regular and irregular forms” Brain Lang 85: 67-92, 2003.

[88] Jaeger JJ, Lockwood AH, Kemmerer DL, Val Valin RD, Murphy BW, and  Khalak HG. “A Positron Emission Tomographic Study of Regular and Irregular Verb Morphology in English” Language 42(3): 451-97, 1996.

[89] Damasio H, Grabowski TJ, Tranel D, Ponto LLB, Hichwa RD, and Damasio AR. “Neural Correlates of Naming Actions and of Naming Spatial Relations” NeuroImage 13: 1053- 64, 2001.

[90] Moscovitch M, Kapur S, Kohler S, and Houle S. “Distnict neural correlates of visual long-term memory for spatial location and object identity: a positron emission tomography study in humans” Proc Natl Acad Sci 92: 3721-5, 1995.  Also at http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/92/9/3721.pdf

[91] Emmorey K, Damasio H, McCullough S, Grabowski T, Ponto LLB, Hichwa RD, and Bellugi U. “Neural Systems Underlying Spatial Language in American Sign Language” Neuroimage 17: 812-24, 2002.

[92] Mummery CJ, Patterson K, Hodges JR, and Price CJ. “Functional Neuroanatomy of the Semantic System: Divisible by What?” J Cogn Neurosci 10(6): 766-77, 1998.

[93] Martin A, Haxby JV, Lalonde FM, Wiggs CL, and Ungerleider LG. “Discrete Cortical Regions Associated with Knowledge of Color and Knowledge of Action” Science 270: 102-5, 1995.

[94] Chao LL and Martin A. “Cortical Regions Associated with Perceiving, Naming, and Knowing about Colors” J Cogn Neurosci 11(1): 25-35, 1999.

[95] Kounios J, Koenig P, Glosser G, DeVita C, Dennis K, Moore P, and Grossman M. “Category-specific medial temporal lobe activation and the consolidation of semantic memory: evidence from fMRI” Cogn Brain Res 17: 484-94, 2003.

[96] Beauregard M, Chertkow H, Bub D, Murtha S, Dixon R, and Evans A. “The Neural Substrate for Concrete, Abstract, and Emotional Word Lexica: A Positron Emission Tomographic Study” J Cogn Neurosci 9(4): 441-61, 1997.

[97] Fiebach CJ and Friederici AD. “Processing concrete words: fMRI evidence against a specific right-hemisphere involvement” Neuropsychologia 42: 62-70, 2003.

[98] Kiehl KA, Liddle PF, Smith AM, Mendrek A, Forster BB, and Hare RD. “Neural Pathways Involved in the Processing of Concrete and Abstract Words” Hum Brain Mapp 7: 225-33, 1999.

[99] Mellet E, Tzourio N, Denis M, and Mazoyer B. “Cortical Anatomy of mental imagery of concrete nouns based on their dictionary definition”  NeuroReport 9: 803-8, 1998.

[100] Grossman M, Koenig P, DeVita C, Glosser G, Alsop D, Detre J, and Gee J. “The Neural Basis for Category Specific Knowledge: An fMRI Study” NeuroImage 15: 936-48, 2002.

[101] Jessen F, Heun R, Erb M, Granath D-O, Klose U, Papassotiropoulos A, and Grodd W. “The Concreteness Effect: Evidence for Dual Coding and Context Availability” Brain Lang 74: 103-112, 2000.

[102] Grossman M, Koenig P, DeVita C, Glosser G, Alsop D, Debre J, and Gee J. “Neural Representation of Verb Meaning: An fMRI Study” Hum Brain Mapp 15: 124-34, 2002.

[103] Damasio H, Grabowski TJ, Tranel D, Hichwa RD, and Damasio AR. “A neural basis for lexical retrieval” Nature 380: 499-505, 1996.

[104] Grabowski TJ, Damasio H, and Damasio AR. “Premotor and Prefrontal Correlates of Category-Related Lexical Retrieval” NeuroImage 7: 232-43, 1998.

[105] Gorno-Tempini ML, Price CJ, Josephs R, Vandenberghe R, Cappa SF, Kapur N, and Frackowiak RSJ. “The neural systems sustaining face and proper name processing” Brain 121: 2103-18, 1998.  Also at http://brain.oupjournals.org/cgi/reprint/121/11/2103.pdf

[106] Gorno-Tempini ML and Price CJ. “Identification of famous faces and buildings: A functional neuroimaging study of semantically unique items” Brain 124: 2087-97, 2001.  Also at http://brain.oupjournals.org/cgi/content/full/124/10/2087

[107] Ishai A, Ungerleider LG, Martin A, and Haxby JV. “The Representation of Objects in the Human Occipital and Temporal Cortex” J Cogn Neurosci 12(Supp 3): 35-52, 2000.

[108] Ishai A, Ungerleider LG, and Haxby JV. “Distributed Neural Systems for the Generation of Visual Images” Neuron 28: 979-90, 2000.

[109] Ishai A, Haxby JV, and Ungerleider LG. “Visual Imagery of Famous Faces: Effects of Memory and Attention Revealed by fMRI” NeuroImage 17: 1729-41, 2002.

[110] Spitzer M, Kwong KK, Kennedy W, Rosen BR, and Belliveau JW. “Category-specific brain activation in fMRI during picture naming” NeuroReport  6: 2109-12, 1995.

[111] Mitchell TM, Hutchinson R, Just MA, Niculescu RS, Percira F, and Wang X. “Classifying Instantaneous Cognitive States from fMRI Data” Am Med Informatics Assoc, November, 2003.  Also at http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~tom/amia2003-final.pdf

[112] Joseph JE, Gathers AD, and Piper GA. “Shared and dissociated cortical regions for object and letter processing” Cogn Brain Res 17: 56-67, 2003.

[113] Polk TA and Farah MJ. “The neural development and orgainization of letter recognition: Evidence from functional neuroimaging, computational modeling, and behavioral studies” Proc Natl Acad Sci 95(3): 847-52, 1998.  Also at http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/95/3/847

[114] Polk TA, Stallcup M, Aguirre GK, Alsop DC, D’Esposito M, Detre JA, and Farah MJ. “Neural Specialization for Letter Recognition” J Cogn Neurosci  14(2): 145-59, 2002.

[115] Dehaene S, Spelke E, Pinel P, Stanescu R, and Tsivkin S. “Sources of Mathematical Thinking: Behavioral and Brain-Imaging Evidence” Science 284(5416): 970-4, 1999.

[116] Simon O, Mangin JF, Cohen L, Le Bihan D, and Dehaene S. “Topographical Layout of Hand, Eye, Calculation, and Language-Related Areas in the Human Parietal Lobe” Neuron 33: 475-87, 2002.

[117] Cochin F, Cohen L, van de Moortele PF, and Dehaene S. “Differential Contributions of the Left and Right Inferior Parietal Lobules to Number Processing” J Cogn Neurosci 11: 617-30, 1999.

[118] Davidson RJ. “Affective Style and Affective Disorders: Perspectives form Affective Neuroscience” Cogn Emot 13(3): 307-30, 1998.

[119] Davidson RJ. “Anterior electrophysiological asymmetries, emotion, and depression: Conceptural and methodological conundrums” Psychophysiol 35: 607-14, 1998.

[120] Papousek B and Schulter G. “Covariations of EEG asymmetries and emotional states indicate that activity at frontopolar locations is particularly affected by state factors” Psychophysiol 39: 350-60, 2002.

[121] Tomarkin AJ and Keener AD. “Frontal Brain Asymmetry and Depression: A Self-regulatory Perspective” Cogn Emotion 12(3): 387-420, 1998.

[122] Heller W and Nitschke JB. “The Puzzle of Regional Brain Activity in Depression and Anxiety: The Importance of Subtypes and Comorbidity:” Cogn Emotion 12(3): 421-47, 1998.

[123] Davidson RJ, Marshall JR, and Tomarkin AJ. “While a Phobic Waits: Regional Brain Electrical and Autonomic Activity in Social Phobics during Anticipation of Public Speaking” Biol Psychiatry 47: 85-95, 2000.

[124] Patton RE. Patent #6292688 “Method and apparatus for analyzing neurological response to emotion-inducing stimuli” USPTO granted 9/18/01.

[125] Pizzagalli D, Koenig T, Regard M, and Lehmann D. “Faces and emotions: brain electric field sources during covert emotional processing” Neuropsychologia 36(4): 323-32, 1998.

[126] Eger E, Jedynak A, Iwaki T, and Skrandies W. “Rapid extraction of emotional expression: evidence form evoked potential fields during brief presentation of face stimuli” Neuropsychologia 41: 808-17, 2001.

[127] Bocker KBE, Baas JMP, Kenemans JL, and Verbaten MN.  “Stimulus-preceding negativity induced by fear: a manifestation of affective anticipation” Int J Psychophysiol 43: 77-90, 2001.

[128] Kotani Y, Hiraku S, Suda K, and Aihara Y. “Effect of positive and negative emotion on stimulus-preceding negativity prior to feedback stimuli” Psychophysiol 38: 873-78, 2001.

[129] Kotani Y, Kishida S, Hiraku S, Suda K, Ishii M, and Aihara Y. “Effects of information and reward on stimulus-preceding negativity prior to feedback stimuli” Psychophysiol 40(5): 818-28, 2003.

[130] Baas JMP, Kenemans JL, Bocker JL, and Verbaten MN. “Threat-induced cortical processing and startle potentiation” Neuroreport 13(1): 133-7, 2002.

[131] Farwell LA and Donchin E. “The Truth Will Out: Interrogative Polygraphy (“Lie Detection”) With Event-Related Brain Potentials” Psychophysiology 28(5): 531-47, 1991.

[132] Johnson MM and Rosenfeld JP. “Oddball-evoked P300-based method of deception detection in the laboratory II. Utilization of non-selective activation of relevant knowledge” Int J Psychophysiol 12: 289-306, 1992.

[133] Rosenfeld JP, Ellwanger J, and Sweet J. “Detecting simulated amnesia with event-related brain potentials” Int J Psychophysiol 19: 1-11, 1995.

[134] Allen JJB and Iacono WG. “A Comparison of methods for the analysis of event-related potentials in deception detection” Psychophysiology 34: 234-40, 1997.

[135] Lorenz J, Kunze K, and Bromm B. “Differentiation of conversive sensory loss and malingering by P300 in a modified oddball task” Neuroreport 9: 187-91, 1998.

[136] Tardif HP, Barry RJ, and Johnstone SJ. “ Event-related potentials reveal processing differences in honest vs. malingered memory performance” Int J Psychophysiol 46: 147-58, 2002.

[137] Brain Fingerprinting Laboratories, Inc., 108 West Palm Drive, Fairfield, IA 52556 at http://www.brainwavescience.com/

[138] Farwell LA and Smith SS. “Using Brain MERMER Testing to Detect Knowledge Despite Efforts to Conceal” J Forensic Sci 46(1): 135-46, 2001.

[139] Farwell LA. “Two new twists on the truth detector: brain-wave detection of occupational information” Psychophysiology 29(4A): S3, 1992.

[140] Farwell LA. Patent #5363858 “Method and apparatus for multifaceted electroencephalographic response analysis” USPTO granted 11/15/94.

[141] Farwell LA and Conte FL. Patent #5406956 “Method and apparatus for truth detection” USPTO granted 4/18/95.

[142] Farwell LA and Conte FL. Patent #5467777 “Method for electroencephalographic information detection” USPTO granted 11/21/95.

[143] Crites SL, Cacioppo JT, Gardner WL, and Berntson GG. “Bioelectrical Echoes From Evaluative Categoriization: II. A Late Positive Brain Potential That Varies as a Function of Attitude Registration Rather Than Attitude Report” J Person Soc Psychol  68(6): 997-1013, 1995.

[144] Chen R and Hallett M.  “The Time Course of Changes in Motor Cortex Excitability Associated with Voluntary Movement” Can J Neurol Sci 26(3): 163-9, 1999.

[145] Deeke L. “Bereitschaftspotential as an indicator of movement preparation in supplementary motor area and motor cortex” Ciba Found Symp 182: 132-231, 1987.

[146] Cui RQ, Lang HW, and Deeke L. “Neuroimage of Voluntary Movement: Topography of the Bereitschaftspotential, a 64-Channel DC Current Source Density Study” NeuroImage 9: 124-34, 1999.

[147] Birch GE. “Initial On-Line Evaluations of the LF-ASD Brain-Computer Interface With Able Bodied and Spinal-Cord Subjects Using Imagined Voluntary Motor Potentials” IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 10(4): 219-24, 2002.

[148] Penney WD, Roberts SJ, Curran EA, and Stokes MJ. “EEG-Based Communication: A Pattern Recognition Approach” IEEE Trans Rehab Eng (2): 214-15, 2000.

[149] Kostov A and Polak M. “Paralell Man-Machine Training in Development of EEG-Based Cursor Control” IEEE Trans Rehab Eng 8(2): 203-5, 2000.

[150] Guger C, Harkam W, Hertnacs C, and Pfurtscheller G. “Prosthetic Control by an EEG-based Brain-Computer Interface (BCI)” In: Bühler C and Knops H (eds.) Assistive Technology on the Threshold of the new Millennium  2003.  Also at http://www.gtec.at/research/Publications/aaate.pdf

[151] Tanaka K, Matsunaga K, and Wang HO. “Electroencephalogram-based Control of an Electric Wheelchair” IEEE Transactions on Robotics 21(4): 762-66, 2005.

[152] Krepki R, Blankertz B, Curio G, and Muller K-R. “The Berlin Brain-Computer Interface (BBCI) towards a new communication channel for online control of multimedia applications and computer games” 9th International Congress on Distributed Multimedia Systems, 2003.  At http://ida.first.fhg.de/publications/KreBlaCurMue03.pdf

[153] Millan JR. “Adaptive Brain Interfaces” Communications of the ACM 46(3): 74-80, 2003.  Abstract at http://www.idiap.ch/publications/millan-2003-comm-acm.bib.abs.html

[154] Millan JR and Mourifio J. “Asynchronous BCI and Local Neural Classifiers: An Overview of the Adaptive Brain Interface Project” IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering (Brain-Computer Interface Technology) 11(2): 159-61, 2003.  Article also at ftp://ftp.idiap.ch/pub/reports/2003/millan_2003_nsre.pdf

[155] Millan JR, Renkens F, Mourifio J, and Gerstner W. “Non-Invasive Brain-Actuated Control of a Mobile Robot” Proceedings of the 18th Joint International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Aug 9-15, in press, 2003.  Article also at ftp://ftp.idiap.ch/pub/reports/2003/millan_2003_ijcai.pdf

[156] Kaiser J, Perelmouter J, Iversen IH, Neumann N, Ghanayim N, Hinterberger T, Kubler A, Kotchonbey B, and Birbaumer N. “Self-initiation of EEG-based communication in paralysed patients” Clin Neurophysiol 112: 551-4, 2001.

[157] Carmens JM, Lebedev MA, Crist RE, O’Doherty JE, Santucci DM, Dimitrov DF, Patil PG, Henriques CS, and Nicolelis MAL. “Learning to Control a Brain-Machine Interface for Reaching and Grasping by Primates” Public Library of Science, Biology Oct 1(1) 2003. At http://www.plosbiology.org/archive/1545-7885/1/2/pdf/10.1371_journal.pbio.0000042-L.pdf

[158] Roscher G, Pogrzeba G, Emde D, and Neubauer. “Application of a Multi-Processor System for Recognition of EEG-Activities in Amplitude, Time and Space in Real Time” In: D’Hollander EH, Joubert GR, Peters FJ, Trottenberg U (Eds.) Parallel Computing: Fundamentals, Applications and New Directions Elsevier Science B. V., p 89-96, 1998.  Also at http://www.icsroscher.de/Parco.htm

[159] Roscher G, Herrmann WM, Henning K, Wendt D, Fechner S, Godenschweger F, Weib C, Abel E, Rijhwani A, Martinez J, Karawas A, and Dahan N. “A System to Recognize, Estimate and Describe Single Events in the Spontaneous Electroencephalogram: Example for Single Sweep N1 and P2 Detection”  Clinical Applications of Advanced EEG Data Processing Rome, May 8-9 p 47, 1995.  At http://www.icsroscher.de/Rom.html

[160] Harland CJ, Clark TD, and Prance RJ. “Remote detection of human electroencephalograms using ultrahigh input impedance electric potential sensors” Appl Physics Lett  81(17): 3284-6, 2002.  Abstract at http://content.aip.org/APPLAB/v81/i17/3284_1.html

[161] Harland CJ, Clark TD, and Prance RJ. “High resolution ambulatory electrocardiographic monitoring using wrist mounted electric potential sensors” Meas Sci and Technol 14: 923-8, 2003.  Abstract at http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0957-0233/14/7/305

[162] Taff BE and Stoller KP. Patent #49400558 “Cryogenic remote sensing physiograph” USPTO granted 7/10/90.

[163] Stoller KP and Taff BE. “Remote Physiological Sensing: Historical Perspective, Theories and Preliminary Developments” Med Instrum 20(5): 260-5, 1986.

[164] Malech RG. Patent #3951134 “Apparatus and method for remotely monitoring and altering brain waves” USPTO granted 4/20/76.

[165] McMurtrey JJ. “Inner Voice, Target Tracking, and Behavioral Influence Technologies” in press 2004.  Accessed 8/11/04 at http://www.slavery.org.uk/InnerVoiceTargTrackBehavInflu.doc

[166] Department of the Army, USAF Scientific Advisory Board. “New World Vistas: air and space for the 21st century” 14 vol. (Ancillary Volume) p 89-90, 1996.  Also at http://www.azstarnet.com/~freetht/biologic.htm

[167]  Guyatt DG. “Some Aspects of Anti-Personnel Electromagnetic Weapons” International Committee of the Red Cross Symposium: The Medical Profession and the Effects of Weapons, ICRC publication ref. 06681996 (The paper is available from the Health Division of the ICRC.)  Also at  http://www.mahlers.com/wompaoapew.htm

[168] Brodeur P.  The Zapping of America  Norton, New York, p 299 & 105, 1977.

[169] Berry S. “Decoding Minds, Foiling Adversaries” Signal Magazine 56(2): 56-7 Oct 2001. Also at http://cartome.org/brainmap.htm

[170] Pasternak D. “Reading your mind-and injecting smart thoughts” U S News and World Report p 67-8, Jan 3, 2000. Also at http://www.raven1.net/norsee2.htm

[171] Murray FJ. “NASA plans to read terrorists’ minds at airports” Washington Times, Aug 17, p A1, 2002.

[172] Lopez R. “Special operations survives Pentagon budget constraints” Jane’s International Defense Review 26(3): 247-51, 1993.

[173] McMurtrey JJ. “Microwave Bioeffect Congruence with Schizophrenia”  In press, 2004.  Available at  http://www.slavery.org.uk/MicrowaveCongruenceSchiz.doc and  http://www.grn.es/electropolucio/microwav.rtf

[174] Butler D. “Advances in neuroscience ‘may threaten human rights’” Nature 22 January 391: 316, 1998.  Also at http://raven1.net/nature1.htm

MK-ULTRA SubProject 130: Personality Theory (ACIM, Unity Church, MK-OPRAH)

26 May 2007

National Security Archive
Gelman Library
2130 H St NW Ste 701
Washington DC, District of Columbia 20037
1-202-994-7000 (T)
1-202-994-7005 (F)

Dear

I wish to thank you again for your excellent assistance and detailed answers to my queries the other day on the telephone. Thanks again, you were very kind, tolerant, and thoughtful.

As per our conversation of Friday, May 25, 2007, please mail all available government documents (redacted or otherwise – I believe you said there were thirty-five pages in total) regarding MK-ULTRA  SubProject 130: Personality Theory, to the above listed mailing address.

You quoted me a price of $7.92 for attaining these documents. Please find attached a money order in that amount for the aforementioned documents.

The information that follows is primarily for my own personal records, but also might be of interest to you, The National Security Archive or other persons and organizations. What follows is by no means new or original research and has been documented by a wide variety of other researchers and authors in the past.  (The exception being the ACIM milleu’s connection to SRI-Scientology).

The following information essentially serves as a rough bullet point outline and should not by any means be construed as a cohesive narrative of events, past or present, regarding Dr. William Thetford or the A Course In Miracles book.

Beware, the “critique” I engage in here (especially in the latter half) is not “structuralist”. There are also the usual concerns regarding “conspiracy theories”. I have extensively studied, deconstructed and analyzed this term over the years. Please refer to the following compendium of information regarding this subject.

Most of the following biographical information regarding Dr. William Thetford and A Course in Miracles is primarily available from online Wikipedia documents. As of this revision 3/2010, Wikipedia has deleted the criticism and controversy section from their ACIM page.

http://ce399.typepad.com/weblog/2009/12/wikipedia-removes-a-course-in-miracles-controversy-and-criticism-section-.html

Dr. William Thetford, along with David Saunders, headed CIA MK-ULTRA SubProject 130: Personality Theory, while at Columbia University between 1971-1978.

Dr. Thetford’s Professional Vita (also available on the A Course in Miracles web site) makes reference to his involvement in a Personality Theory Research Project while Professor of Medical Psychology at Columbia University, though the information does not specifically cite this as a CIA MK- ULTRA SubProject. (The information might have recently been altered to reflect involvement in MK-ULTRA.)

Dr. William Thetford also directly assisted Dr. Helen Schucman as a so-called ‘scribe’ in the initial transcription (or ‘channeling’) of the A Course in Miracles book originally published in 1975 by an organization called The Foundation for the Investigation of Para Sensory Phenomena.

Dr. Thetford was working for the CIA conducting Personality Theory experiments under MK-ULTRA at the same time the A Course in Miracles book was published in 1975.

A Course in Miracles is commonly known as “the Bible of the New Age.”

The Foundation for the Investigation of Para Sensory Phenomena may have been funded by members involved with or employed by the Stanford Research Institute (SRI), Menlo Park, California, as Remote Viewers at the time. One of the individuals with connections to SRI was Judith Skutch, the president and founder of The Foundation for the Investigation of Para Sensory Phenomena, which, once again, originally published A Course in Miracles in 1975.

Other researchers in this area have speculated that Judith Skutch’s Foundation for the Investigation of Para Sensory Phenomena may have even been an outright front organization for the CIA. The publishing of A Course in Miracles may have been a CIA operation from the beginning.

It has also been claimed Skutch funded many of the early experiments by Israeli telepath Uri Geller. Geller worked for SRI during this same time period.

A Course in Miracles legal documents have revealed that Skutch met with David Hurt (an engineer associated with SRI), Russell Targ, Thetford and Schucman at a luncheon in 1974. Russell Targ was co-founder of the Stanford Research Institute´s CIA funded Remote Viewing program at SRI during this same time period. Targ´s collegue at SRI was chief researcher Dr. Harold Puthoff.  Puthoff was a high ranking ‘Operating Thetan’ for the Church of Scientology and was also working under the auspices of the CIA’s MK-ULTRA program along with Targ when this meeting took place. As previously stated, William Thetford, the so-called co-’scribe‘ of ACIM, was also under the payroll of the CIA during the same period, conducting research under MK-ULTRA SubProject 130: Personality Theory at Columbia University.

In 1998 Russell Targ wrote a book entitled Miracles of Space. Targ and Scientology claim Targ was never a member of L. Ron Hubbard´s so-called ´church.´

According to the Washington Post of August 7, 1977, high-level ‘Operating Thetans‘ (Harold Puthoff, Pat Price, Ingo Swann) from the Church of Scientology were in charge of all Remote Viewing and other related CIA mind control operations at Stanford Research Institute under the auspices of CIA MK-ULTRA during this time period, which began sometime in 1973. (See the Washington Post article of August 7, 1977, Psychic Spying? by John L. Wilhelm regarding the connection between the Stanford Research Institute, CIA mind control operations via MK-ULTRA and the Church of Scientology.)

MK-ULTRA was ‘investigated’ by the US Congress’ Church Committee and the group appointed by President Ford known as the Rockefeller Commission in 1975. MK-ULTRA is now obviously a matter of public record.  As you stated, all of the scanned CIA MK-ULTRA documents are available to the public from the CIA itself on CD-ROM format.

Fast forwarding to the present: Unity Church, a ‘Christian New Age’ tax exempt organization, with locations in numerous communities across the United States, hosts many A Course In Miracles seminars on a weekly basis, and includes the information contained in the book as part of their regular ‘church services.’

I spoke with a woman named ‘Mxxxx’ at the Unity Church in Eugene, Oregon, via telephone on Friday, May 25, 2007, and she stated Unity Church holds seminars in A Course In Miracles twice a week. I requested documentation from her to this effect via regular mail. She claimed that she would comply with this request. And, I might add, she seemed quite ‘happy’ and ‘joyful’ to mail any and all material made available from the church.

Unity Church also sponsors or hosts UFO seminars with titles like: ´UFOs: Earth’s Cosmic Watergate´ and ´Flying Saucers ARE Real.’ These seminars espouse a ‘spirituality’ similar to those found in UFO cults such as the former Heaven’s Gate in San Diego, California and the Church of Scientology. Usually, the ‘information’ disseminated at these UFO seminars claims that a giant, invisible UFO mother ship – containing the spirits of deceased humans, famous leaders from history and supernatural beings such as angels or even Jesus Christ himself – is hovering just above the earth’s atmosphere.

The Scientology UFO ‘religious’ belief system is very similar, though much more detailed, complicated and multifaceted. Part of Scientology’s ‘creation mythos’ advocates passive acceptance of what basically constitutes ‘galactic genocide’ as part of its cult programming. Indeed, from the limited contact I have had with people who have been programmed by these and other similar types of off shoot UFO cult groups such as those found at Unity Church, advocacy of euthanasia or suicide are causally incorporated into their belief systems; even in their interpersonal relationships with others and are completely devoid of any critical analysis as to the larger implications of upholding such philosophies. Briefly, in this respect, similarities to Aldous Huxley’s novel, Brave New World (1932) have come to mind.

Scientology is considered to be a destructive, totalitarian cult by the German government and other European countries and is highly regulated there.

Unity Church and A Course In Miracles are ultimately all about forgiveness and prayer; yet this forgiveness exists in a spiritual construct devoid of basic human social justice.

This construct basically constitutes the same old, repacked and regurgitated snake oil peddled by ‘confidence men’ since the days of PT Barnum. The mantra goes something like this: ‘God will take care of everything and God will forgive everything;’ and therefore, accountability, responsibility, and oversight are not necessary. Thus, the organized crooks, mass murderers, torturers, destroyers of culture, various two bit thugs and other assorted sub humans are  allowed to continue perpetuating their endless cycle of banal criminality at the expense of the innocent and the powerless. As a result,  human justice and even human memory itself has now, for all intents and purposes, been  eviscerated. This is the literal apotheosis of what the authors Gore Vidal and Studs Terkel have each separately called: ‘The United States of Amnesia‘ and ‘The United States of Alzheimer’s.‘

For example, in 2004, the A Course in Miracles website had an very interesting article regarding the Abu Graib Prisoner Abuse Scandal, in which it stated the following:

Let us, then, take a closer look at the Iraq prison scandal from the perspective A Course in Miracles gives us. We will be looking at the monstrous acts of other people, but the point is not to pass judgment on these people, but to use their example to illuminate ego dynamics common to all of us. I’m reminded of what Jesus once said to Helen [Dr. Helen Schucman] before giving an account of the ego lapses she and Bill [Dr. William Thetford] had fallen into on a particular day: “There is nothing of special interest about the events described below, except their typical nature” (Absence from Felicity, by Ken Wapnick, p. 260). The “monster” revealed by the Iraq prison scandal is all too typical, but if we are willing to look at it calmly, we will put ourselves in a position to let it go through forgiveness.

(What the Iraq Prison Abuse Scandal Reveals: Looking Calmly at the Monster and Letting It Go by Greg Mackie. Circle of Atonement, P.O. Box 4238, W. Sedona, AZ 86340. http://www.circlofa.org. info@circleofa.org, 1-928-282-0790.)

This is an excellent example of what many other commentators, researchers, and authors have coined New Age Fascism (also see: From UFO’s to Yoga) and this particular type of mind control programming perfectly compliments the fascism promoted by the Christian and Religious Right or Right Wing Christian Evangelical movements in the United States. I fail to see the fundamental difference between the views espoused by Mr. Mackie above and the opinions communicated by Rush Limbaugh on his talk show. They are both essentially being apologists for the Bush Administration’s use of torture in conducting the so-called ‘War on Terror.‘

‘Students’ in A Course in Miracles programs (which evidently includes devotion to Oprah Winfrey – who has avidly and enthusiastically promoted the book on her television show) might also be involved in an experimental trauma healing treatment program called See Morg Matrix, which includes hypnosis and the evisceration (or ‘clearing’) of memories. Other research in this area has referred to these techniques as ‘pseudo-therapies’.

Involvement in the Unity Church mind control and UFO cult usually comes about through association with some form of unlicensed ‘therapist,’ healer or guru type figure. Possibly even ‘ordained ministers’ in Unity Church serve dual functions as ‘counselors’ or ‘therapists.’ In other words, possible involvement with Unity religion manifests itself as a result of someone seeking some form of psychotherapy, usually to heal childhood or adult trauma and abuse.

An unfortunate possible result and side effect of an individual being involved in this network of healing programs and therapies (and there are many more which I have not mentioned in this brief overview) can be the apparent disability of higher brain functions, including a basic inability to think clearly and engage in basic relationship psychodynamics. The book utilizes hypnotic, mantra-like repetition of concepts which are, more often than not, logically incoherent and are meant to brainwash and control the thoughts of the ‘student.’ I personally know of one person who has been reading A Course In Miracles almost exclusively, (in other words, without reading anything else – like a New York Times best seller, for example) for over twenty years. Indeed, these and other similar types of side effects are relayed in the criticism section from the A Course In Miracles web page documented by Wikipedia:

Some Doctrinal Christian apologists have considered it heretical or counterfeit. Author and Yogi, Joel Kramer, states that the Course could be considered a classic authoritarian example of programming thought to change beliefs. Anton van Harskamp, a German scholar of religion, says that the Course contains, “…endless variation on some universally meant insights in life…” that, “…brings readers of the book, [or] in any case this reader, [to] a mood in which bewilderment and boredom take turns”. Long time teacher of the Course, Hugh Prather, notes that ACIM students often become, “far more separate and egocentric,” with many ultimately, “[losing] the ability to carry on a simple conversation”. He admits that he and his wife Gayle, “…had ended up less flexible, less forgiving, and less generous than we were when we first started our path!

I believe that at the turn of the previous to the last century, similar procedures were carried out through damage to, or the surgical severing of, the nerve fibers connecting the pre frontal cortex to the thalamus of the brain. These were known as lobotomies to the functionaries at ‘Houses of Bedlam’ or asylums for the ‘insane.’ The end result of the procedures described in the above previous paragraphs is, in my opinion, basically the same as a lobotomy.

As mentioned previously, this letter is meant to be a brief overview of the connections between Unity Church, A Course In Miracles, CIA MK-ULTRA Artichoke Subproject 130 and the Stanford Research Institute.

There are many other high level individuals of dubious sanity who espouse equally unsound philosophies surrounding the ACIM millieu. Some of  these individuals include: Lee Carroll (Kryon), who apparently channels nonsense with the blessing and  sanction of the United Nations and Barbara Marx Hubbard, who openly advocates genocide. Further information about these and other caustic so-called New Age leaders is currently beyond the scope of this letter.

Though the MK-ULTRA program has been official declassified and considered terminated, the effects of the damage wrought by this program of psychological warfare (PSYOP) or ‘Mind War’ are still being felt in the year 2007.

Indeed, as I have stated in letters to Senator xx and Peter Dale Scott, among many others, I suspect a new and more high-tech COINTELPRO / MK-ULTRA hybrid domestic surveillance and harassment program may be currently operational today in the United States and is currently being used against US citizens.

One only need look at the stellar work of Nick Begich, MD, Mr. Kucinich in the House of Representatives (see HR 2977) and especially John J. McMurtrey, M.S., and his 2003 paper, Inner Voice, Target Tracking, and Behavioral Influence Technologies (see previous link), to really understand the extent of the potentially bottomless pit of a Pandora’s Box that has been opened by those Aldous Huxley called the ‘power elite.’

As a side note, John J. McMurtrey’s aforementioned paper contains eleven excellent and eye-opening pages of footnotes, with a great many US Patent Office numbers issued for related inventions, dating back to the early 1960’s. The complete document should still be available via Wikipedia, keyword search: Microwave Auditory Effect or Microwave Hearing.

All of the patents referenced in that document are readily available and easily accessible via the US Patent Office website complete with abstracts, claims and detailed descriptions.

Of special interest is Apparatus and Method for Remotely Monitoring and Altering Brain Waves, (United States Patent 3951134), which was issued in 1974, coincidentally, approximately the same year A Course In Miracles was published (1975). To the best of my knowledge, the United States Patent Office does not give patent numbers to inventions that do not work.

Similarly, Nick Begich, MD has done extensive research into the area of what the US military calls the Microwave Auditory Effect, a so-called non-lethal weapon capable of producing intra-cranial sound inside the head of a human target :

This area of research is one of the most important because it points to the ultimate weapon of political control: the ability to place information directly into the human brain, bypassing all normal filtering mechanisms.

In 1995, the US Department of Defense put forward the contract, “Communicating via the Microwave Auditory Effect; Awarding Agency: Department of Defense; SBIR Contract Number: F41624-95-C-9007″. The description of this technology, which would be used for direct communications with military personnel, is written as follows:

“Title: Communicating via the Microwave Auditory Effect. “Description: An innovative and revolutionary technology is described that offers a means of low-probability-of-intercept Radio Frequency (RF) communications. The feasibility of the concept has been established using both a low intensity laboratory system and a high power RF transmitter. Numerous military applications exist in areas of search and rescue, security and special operations.”

(Mind Control: The Ultimate Brave New World, Extracted from Nexus Magazine, Volume 13, Number 2, February – March 2006)

In the August 28, 2005 edition of the Washington Post, an article entitled Xtreme Defense by Sharon Weinberger, stated that similar ’non-lethal’ weapons, as previously described above, are currently being utilized by private contractors and the US military in Iraq:

His latest is to use ultrasonic waves in the dazzler not just to blind enemies, but also to convey messages in their heads, similar to Gibbs’ Medusa project. Hearing voices from God is a ‘big thing’ in Arab culture according to Bitar. “We flash-blind them. And, while their eyes are shut, you could send a recorded message or deep guttural voice that echoes in the inside of their head…“

There is absolutely no doubt that these and other similar types of technologies and programs have been privatized and are being used extensively in theatre today in the Middle East to combat the so-called ‘War on Terror.’ These technologies may also be exasperating the ‘civil wars’ currently raging in Iraq and the Occupied Territories in Palestine.

Ultimately, the point that really needs to be emphasized, above any other is that which has been categorized as an ‘exotic or non-lethal weapon’ is a form of information weapon (the book A Course In Miracles serves a similar purpose – as an information weapon or a weapon of propaganda). Thus, the warfare engaged in is an information type of warfare (or PSYOP) which, by default, constitutes propaganda. Propaganda or PSYOP, by its very definition under US code is lying, speaking an untruth or distorting the truth; as such, propagandizing the citizens of the US or using PSYOP against the citizens of the US is a criminal act under the current laws of the United States of America.  [This law might have been overturned by Patriot Act Two]

Most Sincerely,

Revised 7/2010