Where virtual reality is going
by Jon Rappoport
Activist Post
Jan 14, 2015
“In the early 1960s, I was sitting in a crowded New York theater watching one of the first dubbed Japanese monster imports. I was hoping the police would stop the huge lizard, who was clomping around, wrecking the city, toppling buildings, squashing humans I gradually became aware that the audience was cheering for the monster. A cultural shift had happened. I hadn’t known about it until then.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)
I want to sketch the path along which virtual reality is going.
Right now, companies are selling improved tech that allows a helmet-wearer to see landscape and people in a wider perspective, and hear layers of sounds to the left and right, and above and below him. He can also walk inside the virtual set up.
He can’t touch everything he sees yet, but that’s coming. And perhaps one day, he’ll be able to sit down at a lavish meal and smell and taste the food.
Sight, sound, touch, smell, taste. A five-sense envelope.
He’ll leap off a cliff, fly through the clouds, and attack a monster coming his way, and he’ll win. He’ll do this over and over, and begin to control his own attendant fear. (You can see the obvious military use.)
But…the money men behind virtual reality will want more. They’ll want to program the user’s reactions AHEAD OF TIME; his feelings, sensations, nervous-system responses, endocrine outputs, brain signals.
The full package.
“Press Button A on your remote and receive the complete experience as we give it to you.”
Eventually, there won’t be a button A. Buyers will want what they’re given.
That’s the threshold, the crossover:
Why try to imagine and create your own reactions? Why try to minimize your Pavlovian responses? The VR techs already have the answers for you.
And their answers are very much like a medical protocol.
Entrainment on multiple levels. This is where virtual reality is heading.
In the process, the basic principle of elite reality-building will be expanded: cut off the individual’s imagination; bury it; exclude it; make it unnecessary.
Why?
Because that imagination, and its ability to invent new unpredictable realities, is ultimately what stands between a locked-down planet and a planet that has a chance of freedom.
No matter what happens to this society, civilization, and culture, imagination has to stay alive.
There is, at any given moment, a whole level of solution and innovation that is in a state of hidden potential, that is uncreated and unknown…no one knows what these solutions are, because individuals haven’t invented them yet, haven’t dreamed them up, haven’t acted on them.
If, by burying imagination, you eliminate this level, what’s left is total control over the population.
RADIO — “Don’t believe the mainstream media”: Brandon Martinez interview on Vancouver Coop Radio
Brandon Martinez
Dec 15, 2014
Geopolitical analyst Brandon Martinez was interviewed by Bulland Awaaz of Vancouver Co-op Radio today. He talked about his analysis of geopolitics and history, principally his discoveries regarding Zionist political intrigue in the 20th and 21st centuries which he outlines in his books Hidden History and Grand Deceptions.
Artificial Telepathy 101
Artificial telepathy
The experience of “Artificial Telepathy” is really not that extraordinary. It’s as simple as receiving a cell-phone call in one’s head.
Indeed, most of the technology involved is exactly identical to that of cell-phone technology. Satellites link the sender and the receiver. A computer “multiplexer” routes the voice signal of the sender through microwave towers to a very specifically defined location or cell. The “receiver” is located and tracked with pinpoint accuracy, to within a few feet of actual location. But the receiver is not a cell phone. It’s a human brain.
Out of nowhere, a voice suddenly blooms in the mind of the target. The human skull has no “firewall” and therefore cannot shut the voice out. The receiver can hear the sender’s verbal thoughts. The sender, in turn, can hear all of the target’s thoughts, exactly as if the target’s verbal thoughts had been spoken or broadcast. For this reason, the experience could be called “hearing voices” but is more properly described as “artificial telepathy”.
Now, if artificial telepathy were entirely voluntary, like a conversation between friends sitting across the room from one other, it might be kind of cool. One could talk back and forth with one’s friend, exchanging verbal thoughts exactly as if speaking on the phone, but without ever using one’s voice or mouth. It’s a completely silent, subvocal form of speech. Between lovers, this would be beautiful.
The problem is that artificial telepathy provides the perfect weapon for mental torture and information theft. It provides an extremely powerful means for exploiting, harassing, controlling, and raping the mind of any person on earth. It opens the window to quasi-demonic possession of another person’s soul.
When used as a “nonlethal” weapons system it becomes an ideal means for neutralizing or discrediting a political opponent. Peace protestors, inconvenient journalists and the leaders of vocal opposition groups can be stunned into silence with this weapon.
Artificial telepathy also offers an ideal means for complete invasion of privacy. If all thoughts can be read, then Passwords, PIN numbers, and personal secrets simply cannot be protected. One cannot be alone in the bathroom or shower. Embarrassing private moments cannot be hidden: they are subject to all manner of hurtful comments and remarks. Evidence can be collected for blackmail with tremendous ease: all the wrongs or moral lapses of one’s past are up for review.
Like a perverted phone caller, a hostile person with this technology in hand can call at any time of day, all day long. Sleep can be disrupted. Prayers can be desecrated, religious beliefs mocked. Business meetings can be interrupted, thoughts derailed. Love can be polluted, perverted, twisted, abused. Dreams can be invaded, fond memories trashed.
The attacker cannot be seen or identified, the attack cannot be stopped, and the psychological damage is enormous. But there is no physical damage, not one single mark is left on the body and there is absolutely no proof that any crime or any violation ever took place! Everything that “happens” to the victim happens inside the victim’s head. What physical evidence is there to give the police? Without physical evidence, how can one photograph the “crime scene” or fingerprint the stalker? There are no footprints leading to or from the scene. Indeed, there is no physical scene at all, and no evidence that an attack ever took place.
Most people who experience this abusive form of “artificial telepathy” feel as if their mind has been raped. They find themselves hunted, stalked, harassed and abused by a person or persons who refuse to give their names, who defile one’s mind with the most foul and perverse language imaginable, and who refuse to hang up or go away. The caller or callers delight in the perverse and sadistic torture of their targets. Furthermore, they delight in violating the privacy of their targets, reading the target’s mind and commenting on everything the target thinks, in an effort to demonstrate as brutally as possible that the target has no privacy at all.
The callers act, in short, exactly like rapists or perverted stalkers. Imagine what a man might do if he found a “magic cell phone” that allowed him to dial into the heads and the private thoughts of anyone on earth. The temptation to choose a target at random and start spying on or abusing that person would be enormous, almost irresistable. It could become a sick and twisted hobby, a guilty pleasure very quickly. Put into the hands of a secret police unit, the potential for abusing such technology is even more chilling.
[…CONTINUE READING THIS ARTICLE]
[CLOSELY RELATED LINKS:
VIDEO — Silk Road/Ross Ulbricht Trial — Ben Swann Interviews Derrick Broze
Damon Shaw
Jan 15, 2015
Derrick Broze talks to Ben Swann about the Silk Road/Ross Ulbricht trial on RT America.
Obama Declares War On ‘Extremism’ – Are You An ‘Extremist’ According To His Definition?
by Michael Snyder
Activist Post
Jan 11, 2015
Do you know what an “extremist” is? In the wake of the horrible terror attacks on the offices of Charlie Hebdo in France, Barack Obama is speaking very boldly about the need to win the war against “extremists”, and he has announced plans to host a major global summit on “extremism” next month. And on the surface that sounds great. But precisely how are we supposed to determine whether someone is an “extremist” or not? What criteria should we use?
As you will see below, your definition of an “extremist” may be far, far different from the definition that Barack Obama is using. When you do a Google search, you will find that an “extremist” is defined as “a person who holds extreme or fanatical political or religious views, especially one who resorts to or advocates extreme action.” According to Wikipedia, “extremism” is “an ideology (particularly in politics or religion), considered to be far outside the mainstream attitudes of a society or to violate common moral standards. Extremism can take many forms, including political, religious and economic.”
Please notice that neither of those definitions uses the word violence. In this day and age, you can be considered an “extremist” simply based on what you believe, and as you will see later in this article there are now tens of millions of Americans that are considered to be “extremists” and “potential terrorists” according to official U.S. government documents.
When you use the word “extremist”, you may have in your mind a picture of ISIS fighters or the terrorists from the Charlie Hebdo massacre.
But for elitists such as Barack Obama, the word “extremist” has a much broader meaning. In recent years, it has become a code word for those who do not have an “enlightened” view of the world. If your views on politics, religion or social issues are extremely different from the liberal, progressive views of “the mainstream” (as defined by the mainstream media and by “mainstream” politicians such as Barack Obama), then they consider you to be an extremist.
VIDEO — Scams in the Bitcoin Space: Interview with MK Lords
Liberty.me
Jan 3, 2015
Jeffrey Tucker interviews MK Lords based on her experience in the Bitcoin space regarding how to spot shady deals and sketchy operators.
RADIO — Webster Tarpley – Charlie Hebdo shooting
Webster Tarpley Radio
Jan 11, 2015
Webster Tarpley – World Crisis Radio – January 10, 2015
French President Francois Hollande declared on January 5, 2015 that US-ordered sanctions against Russia had to end. On January 7, Paris was rocked by the worst terror attack in many decades, carried out by ostentatiously Islamist operatives against the political satire weekly Charlie Hebdo. Are these events somehow related? And is the real issue more geopolitics than free speech?
[hat tip: The Financial Armageddon]
PN 