Pinneo and beyond
See note (1)
‘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.’
So wrote Ian Simple, referring to certain very recent research into the technological inference of human thought, in this recent case using brain imaging, conducted by the Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, University College London and Oxford University. (2)This most welcome call in The Guardian for ‘ethical debate’ about technological thought inference, is over long overdue. That the inference of human thought from biological data was entirely feasible, in the case of this much earlier research from EEG and EMG data, was demonstrated conclusively by Dr Lawrence Pinneo and others during a U.S. Department of Defense-funded research project that was conducted at the Stanford Research Institute, from 1972 until 1975.(3)
The final report on Pinneo’s project is entitled ‘Feasibility Study for Design of a Biocybernetic Communication System’. This under-publicised but unclassified 149 page-long report has been obtainable in print for many years now, from the U.S. Department of Commerce’s National Technical Information Service, by quoting the document reference number ‘ADA017405’ when ordering.
Pinneo’s final report to the Department of Defense was first published, in Word format, on the internet in 2004, on the Christians Against Mental Slavery (CAMS) group’s website <www.slavery.org.uk>. There are now several other copies of Pinneo’s report available on the internet (searchable by full title), in more compact formats. The CAMS website also publishes a literature review paper by American biologist John McMurtrey that cites not only Pinneo’s research, but also various later, civilian research projects that have developed different methods of technological human thought inference. Significantly, there is also a short discussion paper covering the scientific literature that strongly suggests that nowadays EEG data may already be collectable remotely, by telemetry.
Remote, technological thought inference capability is needed, if the effects upon specifically targeted individuals when deploying weapons for the manipulation of human beings is to be monitored by those inflicting the effects. Eight years ago, European Parliament Resolution A4-0005/99 Paragraph 27 called for all weapons capable of the manipulation of human beings to be banned world-wide, although the present British government is expressly opposed, in writing, to any such ban, or even to this new class of weapons being debated publicly.
One example of this new class of human manipulation weapons, so-called V2K weapons, is defined in the Military Thesaurus published on the website of The Center for Army Lessons Learned, Fort Leavenworth.
The targeting of specific individuals using V2K weapons, for the purposes of ‘psychological direction’, is specifically elaborated by the USAF Scientific Advisory Board report entitled ‘New World Vistas: air and space power for the 21st century’, published in 1996. Sadly, for reasons of ‘national security’, attempts to obtain Freedom of Information Act disclosure, both in the UK and the USA, about this class of technology has not been successful enough to date for any official response to make a helpful contribution towards the proposed ‘ethical debate’, about the thought inference technology that would be needed in order to monitor how effective any ‘psychological direction’ of targeted individuals might be, using V2K or other human manipulation weapons.
On Sunday 14 January 2007, The Washington Post colour supplement magazine’s feature article was about the people internationally who nowadays claim to be the victims of non-consensual human-subject experimentation that deploys precisely the human manipulation weapons that the European Parliament wanted banned eight years ago. These people have been putting vigourously one side of the proposed ethical debate, on the internet and such like, for decades. It is therefore pleasing that the mainstream media are at last beginning to take notice of this knotty ethical problem, in this 200th anniversary year of the final Act of our own British Parliament, leading to the abolition of the type of ‘slavery’ against which William Wilberforce and others campaigned.
The position of the CAMS group is that we want it to be regarded as a crime against humanity world-wide for anyone to monitor or to influence human thought technologically without continuing, informed consent.
Robin Ramsay adds:
Early research by USAF
The Washington Post article(4) referred to by John Allman above was a feature, not about the technology involved, but about the people who claim to be its victims. The author concluded as I have that, since the technology exists to do what the mind control victims claims is happening to them, we should not rush to judge them as mad, especially when they do not present many ‘mad’ symptoms. The Washington Post feature was centred round Harlan Girard, first referred to in these pages in 1989, who introduced me to this topic and who has supplied me with much of the material referred to in these columns.(5)While I was putting this issue of Lobster together, Harlan sent me a photocopy of what he thinks may turn out to be a ‘smoking gun’ in the hunt for the origins of these tests on involuntary subjects. It is the 1982 ‘Final Report on Biotechnology Research Requirements for Aeronautical Systems Through the Year 2000’, prepared for The Air Force Office of Scientific Research. One of the sections is about Radiofrequency (RF) radiation. Its objectives included:
‘1. Define the ability of RFR to interrupt, degrade or direct human central nervous functioning.
2. Define the ability of RFR to interrupt or degrade physiological functions such as cardiac output and respiration.’
And in the paragraphs below these we find the following:
‘……..the increasing understanding of the brain as an electrically mediated organ suggests the serious probability that impressed electromagnetic fields can be disruptive of purposeful behaviours and may be capable of directing and/or interrogating such behaviour…..subsequent work should address the possibil-ities of directing and interrogating mental functioning using externally applied fields’. (underlining in the original)
‘Interrogation and direction of mental functioning’ is pretty much what many of the putative ‘mind control’ victims are claiming; and this paper was written 25 years ago. Harlan commented on it:
‘I regard the experiment marked “RFR Forced Disruptive Phenomena” to be the one we are all locked up in. It’s about stressing people up beyond human endurance with non-ionizing radiation. They started working over a number of us in October, 1984, which is a good guess as to when the proposed experiment actually began, and it was scheduled to run for 25 years, which also corresponds to the situation on the ground.’
Mobile phones and the body
I keep coming back to this because no matter how much the industry and the government proclaim that this technology is safe, some of us remember the science being discussed before it was being used in a billion mobile phones;(6) and other new evidence keeps popping-up.
‘The study, done by a collection of researchers from many universities and led by Anna Lahkola of the Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority in Finland, found firm corollary evidence that using a cell phone causes the risk of getting a brain tumor called a glioma to rise by 40 to 270 percent on the side of the head preferred for using the phone.’
In April stories began to appear about doubts expressed by scientists about the safety of wi-fi networks and one of the British teaching unions called for their introduction in schools to be halted pending further research.(8)
In ‘US Bioelectromagnetic Weapons Research’ David Hambling discusses Russian and American research which shows that RF radiation does have effects on the human body other than heat – the claim which the mobile phone industry and official government science do not admit but which was taken for granted in the early 1980s.(9)
Pandora’s Box
The David Hambling piece is quoted in a long review essay by Cheryl Welch, ‘Mind Wars: Brain Research and National Defense’ on the Global Research website, 17 December 2006.(10) Welch reminds the reader that research in this field goes back to the 1970s and quotes a couple of comments from the British TV documentary Opening Pandora’s Box which discussed this in 1986. I haven’t seen this documentary for over ten years and I was forcibly struck by this comment quoted from it:
‘The safety standards for electromagnetic radiation, EMR, were set higher in the 1950s to allow the military to have unlimited use of EMR technology. At the time, American science reports suggesting EMR health effects of brain tumors, heart conditions, leukemia, cataracts and more, were ignored. The military was a major source of funding and reports were not followed up. The government safety levels for EMR were challenged in courts all around the world.’
In other words, that tumour you may get from using mobile phones a lot is a direct result of the military’s corruption of civil society.(11)
And who made the groundbreaking Opening Pandora’s Box in 1986? It was Adam Curtis, more recently author/director of the much acclaimed The Power of Nightmares (about the so-called ‘war on terror’), The Century of the Self (about the uses of psychological research in marketing), The Mayfair Set (about a section of the British right in London in the 1970s considered as a microcosm of and forerunner to the Thatcher era) and, most recently, The Trap. I didn’t think much of The Trap’s thesis and thought its version of the concept of freedom contrived and philosophically unintelligible, but the rest of them were seriously good. If Opening Pandora’s Box gets shown again, watching it, as Tony Frewin would say, will be mandatory for all ranks.
Notes
- Secretary, Christians Against Mental Slavery, 15 Regent Court, Albert Street, Fleet, Hampshire, GU51 3YA tel: (+44) 7930 519793 <www.slavery.org.uk>
- ‘The brain scan that can read people’s intentions’, The Guardian, 9 February 2007 <www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,,2009217,00.html>
- Pinneo’s research was mentioned in New Scientist, on 3 June 2006. See <www.newscientist.com/article/mg19025540.900.html>
- <www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/10/AR2007011001399.html>
- It also features a decent photograph of Girard and also one of John McMurtry, referred to by Allman. So if you want to see what those crazy mind control victims look like…..
- The ‘Bibliography on the psychoactivity of electromagnetic fields’ by Robert C. Beck and Eldon A. Byrd, <www.vxm.com/bib.doc.html> which I cited in the last Lobster (p. 25 fn 9) is mostly research from the pre-mobile phone period. Let me add that I am not claiming to understand all this science, merely acknowledging its existence.
- <www.newstarget.com/021634.html#conventional>
- Jonathan Owen, ‘Scientists demand inquiry over Wi-Fi’, The Independent on Sunday 29 April 2007
- <www.defensetech.org/archives/003006.html>
- <www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=MOR20061217&articleId=4181a>
- A similar thing is happening with depleted uranium. Because it is useful to the military – and now because there would be a shoal of law-suits from people damaged by it – its effects are being denied by the British and American military establishments.See, for example, Michael Clarke, ‘Doing the Wrong Thing in Afghanistan: Depleted Uranium: The Definitive Moral Paradox’ at <http://mparent7777.livejournal.com/> and Leuren Moret, ‘Depleted Uranium is WMD’ at <http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0809-33.htm>. There must be special section of Hell reserved for the lawyers who work for the MOD and US Army.