May 14, 2016 By Joseph P. Farrell

No one likes talking about mind control, or mind reading, or thought manipulation technologies. After all, beyond the fact that they seem magical,  almost unbelievable, no one likes to admit that human minds could be subject to manipulation and external influence; it violates a sense of our individuality and sovereignty that is deeply embedded in our culture. And the implications of such technology challenge our understandings of the relationship of the brain, the mind, and even jurisprudence. Is someone under "mind control" responsible or not for their actions? And if so, to what degree? There is for example a clear case that the alleged assassin of Senator Robert F. Kennedy, Sirhan Sirhan, exhibits patterns of behavior and suggestibility that suggest that he was a victim of such techniques and technologies.

Yet, the evidence for their existence cannot be denied. There are any number of patents concerning them over the decades - some of which I have talked about in some of my books such as Genes, Giants, Monsters, and Men - which indicate an ongoing interest in them by scientists, and by our increasingly paranoid deep state. And now, they have taken yet another turn, according this important article shared by Ms. K.F.:

Scientists can now Identify individuals based on Brain Waves

Note the crux of the new technology:

But now, researchers from Binghamton University have found a more efficient way to identify people—using brain waves.

Because people react to various stimuli—such as foods, or words, or celebrities—differently, it means people’s brain waves will also exhibit varying patterns when these things are presented to them. No two people will show the same brain pattern when presented an image of, say, a dog.

This led researchers to look into how this can be applied to security and identification. They tested the brain activity of 50 individuals who wore electroencephalogram devices as they were shown 500 images (which included images of pizza, Anne Hathaway, a boat, and words).

The result? Significant discrepancies in brain activity that was enough to define a ‘brainprint’ with 100 percent accuracy.

Now let your mind invoke the craft of imagination, and to speculate and extrapolate possible implications. In doing so I am quite confident that you, the reader, willl see many of the same potentials that I see. Note, for example, that individuals respond to images of various things differently, and this response, recorded on an electroencephalogram, can identify that individual with 100% accuracy. From there it is a short step to the conclusion that a statistical sampling of many different individuals, viewing the same sets of images, might exhibit similarities of wave structure, even though individual responses are slightly different.  The reason for the differences? Perhaps the image - we'll call it the "statement" - is embedded in each individual's responses in a different context, and hence, the response of the brain's neuron structure is slightly different. Over time, it is conceivable, if this hypothesis should prove true, that a stastistical database could be compiled to allow one to read someone's thoughts: "She's looking at an apple; he's thinking of his dog," and so on. Indeed, I've blogged about precisely this possibility in conjunction with Japanese neurological research on this website.

Go a step further: if such should eventually be achieved, then it would become possible to reverse the process by stimulating various parts of the brain via electromagnetic signals and thus to inject thoughts into an individual's brain. Again, this technology has already been written about and various patents have already been taken out for such devices.

Go a step further, and here, we are now entering our very high octane speculation: suppose that one individual's brain waves could be modulated, like carrier waves, with the "brain print" of another individual. In effect, what this would produce was one person who would have not only his or her own thoughts (and, presumably, memories), but someone else's thoughts and memories. It might, with enough research and money, even be possible to produce a more or less permanent "coupling" via such techniques between individuals. And this, in its turn, would be an invaluable technology, for miltary communications and operations, for "population control", for "insider trading"... the possibilities are almost limitless.

So what's the bottom line here? Just this: if we can think of it, rest assured, the black projects-deep state world has thought of it too, and has been hard at work on it for a very long time. We're familiar with the "psychic driving" and "de-patterning" torture techniques of CIA MK-ULTRA "psychologists" like Dr. Ewen Cameron. But these, I suspect, are the tip of an iceberg, a kind of Frankenstein glimpse we were allowed to see. I suspect the real technogies were much more subtle, and that such studies have been underway for a very very long time...

... and that should give one pause.

See you on the flip side...