Last of two parts
The previous article is at thevoice.us/mapping-brain-thoughts-on-technological-horizon
Dr. Joseph Mercola wrote in the Children’s Defense Fun on brain mapping: “At the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) 2016 meeting, panelists suggest that different ways of scanning the brain and brain mapping could be incorporated into the legal system and used by lawyers as part of trials: ‘Another panelist, Brian Knutson, professor of psychology and neuroscience at Stanford, describes thoughts and feelings that you may not be able to verbalize, or may not want to verbalize, that still leave a signature in your brain. “And we might be able to decode that,’ he said.
“One goal, it appears, may be to decode a person’s brain even without their consent. Rana Foroohar, Time magazine’s assistant managing editor in charge of economics and business, a panelist, said:
‘“If we could get to the point, where either you can have an unwilling suspect or an unwilling individual having their brain decoded in some sense … legal systems don’t bake in any presumption that we can do that and so there’s no legal protections that can be afforded to you.
‘“So if you look nationally, internationally, at whether or not there are any human rights … if there are constitutional protections for something like freedom of thought or mental privacy or cognitive liberty, nothing like that exists yet.’
“Scientists have already decoded various aspects of language, such as phonetics, syntax, and semantics. From there, it’s just a matter of time before internal speech — your very thoughts and mind — can be decoded.
‘“Once you have those models,’ panelist Jack Gallant said, ‘you can actually decode language. Now, of course, the obvious application of that is decoding internal speech. And once you decode internal speech, then you essentially have the sort of worst possible brain decoding device, or best possible, depending on your view. Certainly, the most controversial brain decoding device.’ Then the panelists laugh.
“Are portable brain decoding devices a few years away?
“Gallant said he believes it’s just a matter of time before there will be portable brain decoding technology that decodes language as fast as you can text on your cell phone, ‘Everyone will wear them, because people have shown that they’re quite willing to give up privacy for convenience.’ A prototype could be here in the next decade.
“While they bring up the scary ethical and privacy questions this raises, there’s no question of whether or not they should move forward. This is already occurring.
“Technology is about to openly bring us an era where government authorities can read people’s minds without their permission and use it against them including in court, pre-crime, thought police/thought crime and labeling people including children as potential criminals based on their brainwaves and all of this was discussed casually at Davos,’ Truthstream Media noted.
“In fact, Kent Kiehl, of the University of New Mexico and the MIND Research Network, has used brain scans to uncover what he believes is a specific brain signature for psychopathy. He’s noted, ‘A great deal of research suggests that the core, precipitating features of psychopathy are developmental in nature, with relatively persistent traits becoming apparent before the age of 10.’
“If it turns out you can decipher who may become a psychopath via brain decoding, and identify them by the age of 10 — then what?
“Scientists are trying to use brain decoding to figure out how likely it is that someone may commit a crime again, in order to influence criminal sentencing.
“The WEF panel even put out a public poll to find out who people would trust with access to their thoughts and memories — government, police, your doctor, your employer, your spouse or none of them? Three percent said they would give over access to the government, compared to 25% to their spouse.
“Part of what makes brain decoding, and the use of mindreading, so terrifying is that memories can be manipulated. Elizabeth Loftus, a professor of psychology at UC Irvine, has done extensive research showing that memory is not only not reliable, but easily manipulated.
‘“We can easily distort memories for the details of an event that you did experience,’ she told The Guardian in 2003. ‘And we can go so far as to plant entirely false memories — we call them rich false memories because they are so detailed and so big.’ What her decades of research have shown is that memory doesn’t always work like a recording device that simply plays back scenarios as they occurred.
‘“Memory works a little bit more like a Wikipedia page,’ she told NPR. ‘You can go in there and change it, but so can other people.’ False memories, then, can be implanted in people’s minds, and that’s not all.
“Another area of research is pain detection — understanding the circuitries that cause pain. If that can be manipulated, it’s possible that instilling pain could be used as a coercive measure in the legal system, the WEF panelists noted. ‘That’s amazing,’ one of them responded.
“U.S. government has history of mind control experiments.
“If this sounds too conspiratorial, too outlandish to be real life, consider the CIA’s top-secret MK-Ultra project, which engaged in mind control experiments, human torture and other medical studies, including how much LSD it would take to ‘shatter the mind and blast away consciousness.’
“In decades past, the technocrats — the global, mostly unelected, elite that steer the management of nations worldwide — called for a ‘new world order.’ Currently, terms like ‘the Great Reset,’ ‘the Fourth Industrial Revolution’ and ‘Build Back Better’ are being thrown around, as fear and social control, triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic, grow.
“All of these terms refer to the same long-term globalist agenda to dismantle democracy and national borders in favor of a global governance by unelected leaders, and the reliance on technological surveillance, i.e., brain decoding, digital ‘health passports’ and more, rather than the rule of law to maintain public order.
“The warning signs are all around us, if we’re willing to see them for what they actually are. The only question now is whether enough people are willing to resist it to make a difference,” Mercola wrote.