by Carole Smith

"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, 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 program

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.

NEURObotics Exhibition

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
organizers 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. 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 analyze
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
can be used quite freely, and with relative ease, in our
wireless age, 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 neuro-engineer 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 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
endeavor, 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 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 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? 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
defenseless citizens, and unaccountable to them.
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 un-
technical 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 unraveling 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, and
worms engineered so that their nerves and muscles can
be controlled with pinpricks of light, the information and
techniques that have been ruthlessly forged using
opportunistic onslaughts on defenseless 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 ionizing 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, Dr Nick Begich’s
book, Controlling the human mind, 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 organization, Liberty.

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.

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 ionize, 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.

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’.
The surveillance technology of today is the surveillance of
the human mind and, through access to the brain and
nervous system, the control of behavior 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’.

by Madison Ruppert
August 17, 2012
from EndTheLie Website
Spanish version
 A brain-computer interface (BCI)
being demonstrated in 2009

As hard as it is to believe, what many might

think is the last bastion of total privacy, namely,
the human mind, is quickly becoming just as
vulnerable as the rest of our lives with the
invention of mind-reading helmets and other
ways to “hack” the mind.

Now security researchers from the University

of California, Berkeley, the University of Oxford
and the University of Geneva, have created a
custom program to interface with brain-
computer interface(BCI) devices and steal
personal information from unsuspecting
victims.

The researchers targeted consumer-grade BCI

devices due to the fact that they are quickly
gaining popularity in a wide variety of
applications including hands-free computer
interfacing, video games and biometric
feedback programs.

Furthermore, there are now application

marketplaces - similar to the ones popularized
by Apple and the Android platform - which rely
on an API to collect data from the BCI device.

Unfortunately with all new technology comes

new risks and until now,
“The security risks involved in using
consumer-grade BCI devices have
never been studied and the impact of
malicious software with access to the
device is unexplored,” according to a
press release.
The individuals involved with this project -
which resulted in a research paper entitled “On
the Feasibility of Side-Channel Attacks with
Brain-Computer Interfaces,” include,
 Ivan Martinovic and Tomas Ros
of the Universities of Oxford and
Geneva, respectively
 along with Doug Davies, Mario
Frank, Daniele Perito, and Dawn
Song, all of the University of
California, Berkeley
The findings of these innovative researchers
are nothing short of disturbing.

They found,
“that this upcoming technology could
be turned against users to reveal their
private and secret information.”
Indeed, they used relatively cheap BCI devices
based on electroencephalography (EEG) in
order to demonstrate the feasibility of
surprisingly simple and effective attacks.

The information that can be gained by the

attacks is incredibly sensitive, including,
“bank cards, PIN numbers, area of
living, the knowledge of the known
persons.”
Most troubling is the fact that this represents,
“the first attempt to study the security
implications of consumer-grade BCI
devices,” which makes the success of
the attacks that much more
disconcerting.
The researchers tested out their proprietary
program on 28 different participants who, while
they were obviously aware that they were
cooperating in a study, were not aware that
they were being “brain-hacked,” as it were.
Unfortunately, or fortunately depending on your
perspective, the researchers found,
“that the entropy of the private
information is decreased on the
average by approximately 15% - 40%
compared to random guessing
attacks.”
Or as Sebastian Anthony put it in writing
for ExtremeTech,
“in general the experiments had a 10
to 40% chance of success of
obtaining useful information.”
The researchers leveraged a distinctive EEG
signal pattern known as the P300 response.

This brainwave pattern typically occurs when

the subject recognizes something such as a
friend’s face or a tool necessary to complete a
given task. Using the knowledge of the P300
response, the researchers created a program
which utilizes a technique which those who are
familiar with typical hacking might call a “brute
force” method.

However, this method is only loosely

comparable to the traditional brute force
methods since we’re talking about using a
brute force attack on the human mind. The
researchers did this by flashing pictures of
maps, banks, PINs, etc. while monitoring the
subject for any P300 responses.

After they had collected enough data from the

subject, they were able to easily compare the
captured information in order to see when a
P300 response was triggered by a certain
image.

Thus, this allowed the researchers to discover

with surprising accuracy which bank the
subject uses, where they live, and other
information which could potentially be highly
sensitive.

The key to capturing this information seems to

be making the subject remain unaware of the
fact that they are being attacked either through
specially formulated “games” designed to steal
personal information from the mind of the
target or through a false sense of security
engendered by social engineering techniques.

Personally, I find it quite troubling that people

could have their personal information
stolen simply by playing what they think is a
normal game controlled by a BCI device when
in reality it is a carefully engineered piece of
software designed to pull private data from the
target’s mind.

As Anthony correctly points out,

 “Moving forward, this brain hack can
only improve in efficacy as BCIs
become cheaper, more accurate, and
thus more extensively used.”
However, Anthony incorrectly states,
“Really, your only defense is to not
think about the topic,” when in reality
the P300 response can occur without
consciously “thinking” about the topic.
The response can occur when a picture of a
familiar face or location shows up, even if the
individual isn’t thinking about the familiar
person or the location.

While someone could theoretically be on the

defensive in an attempt to minimize their
responses, the entire methodology of the
hacker depends on avoiding detection to begin
with.

Therefore, if the target is already consciously

on the defensive, the hacker has failed in their
task of remaining in the shadows and carrying
out the attack without the knowledge of the
target.

That being said, if programs are created in a

clever enough manner, I seriously doubt that
most people would be able to tell that they’re
being actively attacked in order to obtain their
most private and sensitive information.

by Chloe Diggins and Clint Arizmendi

December 11, 2012
from Wired Website

It’s been fashionable in military circles to talk

about cyberspace as a “fifth domain” for
warfare, along with land, space, air and sea.
But there’s a sixth and arguably more
important war-fighting domain emerging: the
human brain.

This new battle-space is not just about

influencing hearts and minds with people
seeking information.

It’s about involuntarily penetrating, shaping,

and coercing the mind in the ultimate
realization of Clausewitz’s definition of war:
compelling an adversary to submit to one’s will.
And the most powerful tool in this war is brain-
computer interface (BCI) technologies, which
connect the human brain to devices.

Current BCI work ranges from researchers

compiling and interfacing neural data such as
in the Human Conectome Project to work by
scientists hardening the human brain
against rubber hose cryptanalysis to
technologists connecting the brain to robotic
systems.

While these groups are streamlining the BCI

for either security or humanitarian purposes,
the reality is that misapplication of such
research and technology
has significant implications for the future of
warfare.
Where BCIs can provide opportunities for
injured or disabled soldiers to remain on active
duty post-injury, enable paralyzed individuals
to use their brain to type, or allow amputees to
feel using bionic limbs, they can also be
exploited if hacked.

BCIs can be used to manipulate… or kill.

Recently, security expert Barnaby

Jack demonstrated the vulnerability of
biotechnological systems by highlighting how
easily pacemakers and implantable
cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) could be
hacked, raising fears about the susceptibility of
even life-saving biotechnological implants.

This vulnerability could easily be extended to

biotechnologies that connect directly to the
brain, such as vagus nerve
stimulation or deep-brain stimulation.

Outside the body, recent experiments have

proven that the brain can control and
maneuver quadcopter drones and metal
exoskeletons. How long before we harness the
power of mind-controlled weaponized drones -
or use BCIs to enhance the power, efficiency,
and sheer lethality of our soldiers?
This new battle-space is not just about
influencing hearts and minds. It’s about
involuntarily penetrating and coercing the mind.

Given that military research arms such as the

United States’ DARPA are investing
in understanding complex neural
processes and enhanced threat
detection through BCI scan
for P300 responses, it seems the marriage
between neuroscience and military systems
will fundamentally alter the future of conflict.

And it is here that military researchers need to

harden the systems that enable military
application of BCIs. We need to prevent BCIs
from being disrupted or manipulated, and
safeguard against the ability of the enemy to
hack an individual’s brain.

The possibilities for damage, destruction, and

chaos are very real.

This could include manipulating a soldier’s BCI

during conflict so that s/he were forced to pull
the gun trigger on friendlies, install malicious
code in his own secure computer system, call
in inaccurate coordinates for an air strike, or
divulge state secrets to the enemy seemingly
voluntarily.
 Whether an insider has fallen victim to BCI
hacking and exploits a system from within, or
an external threat is compelled to initiate a
physical attack on hard and soft targets, the
results would present major complications: in
attribution, effectiveness of kinetic operations,
and stability of geopolitical relations.

Like every other domain of warfare, the mind

as the sixth domain is neither isolated nor
removed from other domains; coordinated
attacks across all domains will continue to be
the norm.

It’s just that military and defense thinkers now

need to account for the subtleties of the human
mind… and our increasing reliance upon the
brain-computer interface.

Regardless of how it will look, though, the threat is real

and not as far away as we would like - especially now that
researchers just discovered a zero-day vulnerability in the
brain.

by Susanne Posel
December 14, 2012
 from OccupyCorporatism Website

The Human Connectome Project (HCP) is

dedicated to “understanding the complete
details of neural connectivity.”

They endeavor to “construct a map of the

complete structural and functional neural
connections in vivo within and across
individuals.” By compiling data on genetics,
behavior, matter fiber pathways, and functional
correlations, the HCP have refined and
optimized,
 “the spatial and functional resolution
of our connectome neuro-imaging” as
well as acquiring “high resolution
neuro-imaging data” to enhance
understanding of the
“neuroanatomical connectedness of
the human brain.”
Advancing biometrics with neurological
augmentations would result in successful
connectivity of the human brain to robotic
systems in a literal sense.

AutoNOMOS Labs have developed an iPad

app that allows users to order their car to drive.
After a few modifications, the technology can
control the car through the brain of the driver.

A software program
called BrainDriver interprets and records
information just as an EEG which can be
understood and translated into intentions which
are then played out by the vehicle.

At the Human Enhancement and the Future of

Work conference, and further expanded upon
in their published report, explains how science
and ethics are coming into conflict as
technology promises to replace the faulty
human body with an eternal, mechanical
replacement.
These transhumanists define human
enhancement as everything that,
“encompasses a range of approaches
that may be used to improve aspects
of human function (e.g. memory,
hearing, mobility).

This may either be for the purpose of

restoring an impaired function to
previous or average levels, or to raise
function to a level considered to be
‘beyond the norm’ for humans.”
By using brain-computer interface (BCI) to
facilitate communication between the mind and
external machines, technology began in the
1970s at the University of California with
funding from the National Science Foundation
and contractual agreements with DARPA have
resulted in research into neuroprosthetic
applications that reconnect the natural sensors
in the human brain to electronic effector
channels and make prosthetics more
functional.

An EEG headset can process brain activity as

sensors read the electro-magnetic signatures
of the human brain.

DARPA has a $2 billion yearly budget for

research into creating a super solider as well
as developing a synthetic police force. Working
with the human genome, DARPA hopes to
manipulate certain gene expressions.

In experimentation, DARPA and the military

industrial pharmaceutical complex are using
natural abilities that are enhanced through
genetic engineering.

Some of the medical feats DARPA would like

to enhance are the ability of military soldiers to
regrow limbs destroyed in battle.
By eliminating empathy, the Department of
Defense (DoD) hopes to “enhance” a soldier’s
ability to,
“kill without care or remorse, shows
no fear, can fight battle after battle
without fatigue and generally behave
more like a machine than a man.”
Scientists are researching the construction of
soldiers that feel no pain, terror and do not
suffer from fatigue as tests on the wiring of the
human brain are furthered by Jonathan
Moreno, professor of bioethics at
Pennsylvania State University.

Moreno is working with the DoD in

understanding neuroscience. The Pentagon
allocated $400 million to this research. Further
study could be passed onto the general public
in order to maximize profits as well as enhance
the drug’s effectiveness.

According to Joel Garreau, professor at

Arizona University, DARPA is learning how to
genetically modify human fat into pure energy
by rewiring the metabolic switch which would
create soldiers that require less food.

By using gene therapy and combining

enhancements to alter the color of the human
eye is a blending of mutations that have no
basis in the natural world. In addition to
genetically modifying the human genome,
global Elite are obsessed with the merging
man and machine, transhumanism and
immortality.

Basing advancements on scientific research,

the 2045 Program will create,
“a new vision of human development
that meets global challenges
humanity faces today, realization of
the possibility of a radical extension of
human life by means of cybernetic
technology, as well as the formation
of a new culture associated with these
technologies.”

In February of 2012 the first Global Future 2045

Congress
was held in Moscow.

There, over 50 world leading scientists from

multiple disciplines met to develop a strategy
for the future development of humankind.
 One of the main goals of the Congress was to
construct a global network of scientists to further
research on the development of cybernetic
technology, with the ultimate goal of transferring
a human's individual consciousness to an artificial
carrier.
2012-2013. The global economic and social crises
are exacerbated.
The debates on the global paradigm of future
development intensifies.
New transhumanist movements and parties
emerge.
Russia 2045 transforms into World 2045.
Simultaneously, the 2045.com international social
network for open innovation is expanding. Here
anyone interested may propose a project,
take part in working on it, or fund it, or both.
In the network, there are scientists, scholars,
researchers, financiers and managers.

 2013-2014. New centers working on

cybernetic technologies for the development
of radical life extension rise. The 'race for
immortality' starts.

 2015-2020. The Avatar is created - A robotic

human copy controlled by thought via
'brain-computer' interface. It becomes as
popular as a car.

 2020. In Russia and in the world appear - in

testing mode - several breakthrough
 projects: Android robots replace people in
manufacturing tasks; android robot servants
for every home; thought-controlled Avatars
to provide telepresence in any place of the
world and abolish the need business trips;
flying cars; thought driven mobile
communications built into the body or
sprayed onto the skin.

 2020-2025. An autonomous system

providing life support for the brain and
allowing it interaction with the environment
is created. The brain is transplanted into an
Avatar B. With Avatar B man receives new,
expanded life.

 2025. The new generation of Avatars

provides complete transmission of sensations
from all five sensory robot organs to the
operator.

 2030-2035. ReBrain - The colossal project of

brain reverse engineering is implemented.
World science comes very close to
understanding the principles of
consciousness.

 2035. The first successful attempt to transfer

one's personality to an alternative carrier.
The epoch of cybernetic immortality begins.
  2040-2050. Bodies made of nanorobots
that can take any shape arise alongside
hologram bodies.

 2045-2050. Drastic changes in social

structure, and in scientific and technological
development.
For the man of the future, war and violence are
unacceptable.
The main priority of his development is 'spiritual'
self-improvement.

The globalists at the 2045 Program assert that

humanity “is in need of a new evolutionary
strategy” consisting of a balance between the
complexity of technological advances and the
acceleration of informational processes to
expand the “limited, primitive human” into a
“highly self-organized” and technologically
“higher intelligence”.

The Project for the New American

Century (PNAC) published a document
entitled Rebuilding America's Defenses in 2000
which frameworks a strategy for American
hegemony in the near future, identifying
“problem areas” of the world and advising
regime change of unfavorable governments so
that in the end the nations of the world will be
unified under the banner of American
democracy.

The revelation of former US President George

Bush’s “axis of evil” defined American policy
under the guidelines of the PNAC with the
identification of Iran, Iraq and North Korea
which is literally mentioned in the PNAC as
governments that require a regime change.

In the PNAC, the globalists have described the

use of scientific enhancement and clinical trials
turning the US armed forces into unwitting test
subjects for the advancement of a super
solider.

While Roger Pitman, professor of psychiatry

at Harvard University is experimenting
with propranolol which is a beta blocker that is
believed to erase “terrifying memories”,
soldiers are subjected to more research while
serving to alleviate the psychological effects of
war.

Moreno explains:
“The problem is: what else are they
blocking when they do this? Do we
want a generation of veterans who
return without guilt?”