reply to post by wirehead
I'm almost hesitant to fan your flame but this comes up often enough for me to address.
I previously said James Tilly Matthews is a testament for some people as to why this cannot be government mind control
). Like I said before he was jailed during the Reign of Terror on suspicion of being
a spy. So presumably he was a target of espionage and would have been subject to the tools of the trade at the time, including but not limited to
stalking, drugging and magic.
This is an old game predating the CIA and acknowledged in the "The Official CIA Manual of Trickery and Deception". In 1953 the recently formed CIA
hired renowned magician John Mulholland to write a manual on how to apply the art of magic to espionage. This was funded as part of the CIA's Project
MKULTRA which as we all should know included research of brainwashing through the use of drugs, psychic driving (viz. simulated voices) and influence
of behavior by remote means. Former Deputy Director of the CIA John McLaughlin writes "[The essence of Mulholland's contribution] was, in effect, to
help the nation's early intelligence officers think like magicians. Given the close kinship between these two ancient
arts, that was a
significant contribution indeed and one that continues--in stealthy ways...--to this very day."
My point is there may be more to the story of James Tilly Matthews than what is recorded in the history books. And for the preponderance of
fantastical "influencing machines" that could never have existed in their time, there is a wealth of material that indicates remote influencing
technology of an impeccable order is within reach today. So if you take pleasure in herding potential victims of government mind control to the
nearest loony bin why not realign that effort in proving the contrary?
Can you name just half of the classified underground military installations in the US? What about a third of the classified satellite systems? The
government secretly built a nuclear bomb in 1945 but a project of what I would argue to be of even greater stakes, that is to remote sense and decode
the brain, is considered crazy talk in this modern age? Even Leon Panetta, as director of the CIA, admitted "Our biggest problem is always how do we
get into the head of somebody". And this has been an interest to the CIA since at least 1960 as evidenced in
. Did you know that? So who besides the CIA would have this as one of their
biggest problems? Maybe the Department of Defense? I'm sure they wouldn't mind getting into the head of somebody like Kim Jong-il or Ali
And where would government mind control victims be without the little irrefutable evidence they do have? Fodder to those who would rather see them
locked away than seeking the justice they deserve? I must stress this point, the technology to implant voices electromagnetically without the use of
implants is proven to exist. Voice to skull was
officially defined by the US Army
as a "nonlethal weapon which includes (1) a neuro-electromagnetic device which uses microwave
transmission of sound into the skull of persons or animals by way of pulse-modulated microwave radiation". The declassified report "Bioeffects of
Selected Nonlethal Weapons" (1998) brought to surface in 2006 by a FOIA clearly says
Application of the microwave hearing technology could
facilitate a private message transmission. It may be useful to provide a disruptive condition to a person not aware of the technology. Not only might
it be disruptive to the sense of hearing, it could be psychologically devastating if one suddenly heard 'voices within one's head.
reported successful demonstration of V2K using electromagnetic radiation was in the early 1970s by Joseph Sharp and Mark Grove at the Walter Reed Army
Institute of Research. Dr. James C. Lin a world authority on microwave hearing does not mention this fact in his
but readily acknowledges the clicks and chirps and does write in his 1978 text
"Microwave Auditory Effects and Applications"
By radiating themselves with the "speech modulated" microwave energy, Sharp and Grove reported
they were able to hear, identify, and distinguish the words tested.
And not to flame you
too badly but you have fabricated some of my symptoms. Nowhere in the thread have I ever mentioned "cuts or abrasions on
my skin". And no my primary complaint is not pains and sensations in parts of my body; tactile sensations are one effect but not the only one I
experience. And then to say "pains and sensations in parts of the body, so bad that you want to remove that part of your body"? You do indeed have
a wild imagination.
edit on 2-7-2011 by tmk81 because: (no reason given)