Is that feasible to manipulate human brain at distance? (원거리에서 인간의 뇌(腦)를 조종하는 것은 실현가능한가?)

[청량산]

아래 글은 포항공대 생물학연구센터 사이트인 BRIC에 올린 글입니다.

http://www.ibric.org/myboard/read.php?Board=isori&id=14533&sflag=4

----------------------------------

 Is that feasible to manipulate human brain at distance? (원거리에서 인간의 뇌(腦)를 조종하는 것은 실현가능한가?)

어제, 현재 뇌과학의 발전과 관련한 글 한편을 올리고 의견을 물었습니다만, 오늘은 충격적인 질문을 할까합니다.

" 원거리에서 인간의 뇌(腦)를 조종(조작)하는 것은 실현가능한가?"라는 질문이 그것입니다. 

쉽게 이야기하자면 <뇌(腦)를 해킹>하는 것이 가능한가라는 것입니다.

그런데 여러분들은 모르겠지만, 이 놀라운 "뇌(腦)해킹"이란 말을 지금으로부터 11년 전인 2005년 정기국회 원내대표 연설을 통해 당시 야당이었던 한나라당 대표인 강재섭의원이 미래의 기술을 제시하면서 언급한 바 있습니다.

第256回國會
(定期會)
國會本會議會議錄 第
5 號
國 會 事 務 處
2005年10月14日(金) 午前 10時
議事日程
1. 국정에 관한 교섭단체대표연설(계속)
附議된案件
1. 국정에 관한 교섭단체대표연설(계속) ·································································································· 1
강재섭 의원

.....

과거에서 미래로 국정의 키를 돌려야 합니다.

산업혁명 시절에는 100년 속도로 인류생활을 변화시켰습니다. 그러나 지금 인터넷 혁명은 빠른 속도로 우리를 바꾸고 있습니다. 심지어 미래에는 사랑의 느낌, 필링도 이메일로 보낼 수 있다고 얘기하고 있습니다. 또 다른 사람 몸을 복제하고 인간의 두뇌를 해킹하는 일이 벌어질지도 모릅니다. 공상과학영화, 007영화, 이런 것이 우리 현실로 다가오고 있습니다.

산업의 패러다임도 더욱 빠르게 변화할 것입니다. 이미 미국 EU 호주 이런 나라에서는 국가 차원에서 미래를 대비하는 프로젝트를 시작했습니다. 다른 나라는 미래를 향해서 질주하고 있는데 우리는 과거로 과거로만 후퇴하고 있습니다.

이제 저출산,고령화 문제뿐만 아니라 경제,사회,과학,환경,에너지,가족 문제 등 미래의 모든 분야를 정확히 예측하고 비전을 제시해야 할 때입니다.

그래서 저는 ‘국가미래전략청’의 설치를 강력히 제안합니다. 희망으로 맞이해야 될 미래를 우리가 두려움으로 기다릴 수는 없습니다. 제 말이 맞습니까?

분열보다는 통합으로 나아가야 합니다.....

회의록 2페이지

http://likms.assembly.go.kr/kms_data/record/data2/256/pdf/256za0005b.PDF#page=1

실제 연설(회의록 참조)과 달리 언론에 배포된 연설문에는 <또 다른 사람 몸을 복제하고, 인간의 두뇌를 해킹하는 일이 벌어질지도 모릅니다>라는 대목이 빠져 있었습니다. 
http://m.polinews.co.kr/news/article.html?no=18150 

이에 대해 강재섭의원의 보좌관은 <자신이 작성한 것이며 예민한 문제라 뺀 것인데 강재섭의원이 발언한 것>이라는 답변을 했다고 합니다.

한 나라의 국회원내대표가 생방송중인 정기국회 대표연설에서 자신의 보좌관이 <예민한 문제>라 뺀 것에 대해 발언을 했다는 것은 그가 어떤 식으로든 그와 관련 된 정보를 가지고 있으며, 알고 있다는 반증이 아닐까요? <뇌를 해킹한다>는 말이 생방송 중인 정기국회연설에서 아무런 정보없이 할 수 있는 말인가 이 말이죠. 연설문에서 빼지 않은 대목인 <사랑의 느낌, 필링도 이메일로 보낼 수 있다>는 것도 감정의 복제와 뇌-컴퓨터 인터페이스를 이야기하는 것이어서, 현재의 "공표된" 뇌과학 기술로는 실현이 요원한 것처럼 보이는데 말이죠. 강재섭대표는 그날 연설에서 <국가 미래전략청>의 설치를 주장한 바있음은 위 회의록을 보면 알 수 있습니다.  

보좌관이 언급한 "예민한 문제"라는 것은 어떤 의미에서 예민한 문제라는 것이었을까요?  

아래 관련 영문 논문도 보시고 의견을 제시해주시면 감사하겠습니다.

IS THAT FEASIBLE TO MANIPULATE HUMAN BRAIN AT DISTANCE?

                                                                Babacek, Mojmir

In October 2000, the congresman Denis J. Kucinich introduced in the American Congress a bill, obliging the American president to get engaged in the negotiations aimed at the ban of space based weapons. In this bill the definition of a weapon system includes: „any other unacknowledged or as yet undeveloped means inflicting death or injury on, or damaging or destroying, a person (or the biological life, bodily health, mental health, or physical and economic well-being of a person)… through the use of land-based, sea-based, or space-based systems using radiation, electromagnetic, psychotronic, sonic, laser, or other energies directed at individual persons or targeted populations for the purpose of information war, mood management, or mind control of such persons or populations“(15). As in all legislative acts quoted in this article the bill counts with sound, light or electromagnetic stimulation of human brain. Psychotronic weapons remain, at least for a layman uninformed of secret military research, in the sphere of science fiction, since so far none of the published scientific experiments was presented in the way which would allow for its replication.

That it is feasible to manipulate human behavior with the use of subliminal, either sound or visual, messages is now generally known. This is why in most of the countries the use of such technologies, without consent of the user, is baned. Devices using light for the stimulation of the brain show another way how the light flashing in certain frequencies could be used for the manipulation of human psychic life. As for the sound, a report on the device transmitting a beam of sound waves, which can hear only persons at whom the beam of sound waves is targeted, has appeared in the world newspapers. The beam is formed by a combination of sound and ultrasound waves which causes that a person targeted by this beam hears the sound inside of his head. Such a perception could easily convince the human being that it is mentally ill. The facts presented in this article suggest that with the development of technology and knowledge of the functioning of human brain new ways of manipulation of human mind keep emerging. one of them seems to be the electromagnetic energy.

Though in the open scientific literature only some 30 experiments were published, supporting this assumption (1),(2), already in 1974, in the USSR, after succesfull testing with military unit in Novosibirsk, the installation Radioson (Radiosleep) was registered with the Government Committee on the Matters of Inventions and Discoveries of the USSR, described as a method of induction of sleep by means of radio waves (3), (4), (5). In the scientific literature technical feasibility of making a human being asleep by radio waves is confirmed in the book by English scientist carrying out research on the biological effects of electromagnetism (6). In the report by World Health Association on nonionizing radiation from 1991 we read "Many of biological effects observed in animals exposed to ELF fields appear to be associated, either directly or indirectly, with the nervous system…" (2). Among the published experiments there are experiments where pulsed microwaves caused the synchronization of isolated neurons with the frequency of pulsing of microwaves - for example a neuron firing at a frequency 0.8 Hz was forced in this way to fire the impulses at a frequency of 1 Hz. As well pulsed microwaves changed the concentration of neurotransmitters in brain (neurotransmitters are a part of the mechanism which causes the firing of neurons in the brain) and reinforced or attenuated the effects of drugs delivered into the brain (1). The experiment where the main brain frequencies registered by EEG were synchronized with the frequency of microwave pulsing (1,2) might explain the function of the Russian installation Radioson. Microwaves pulsed in the sleep frequency would cause the synchronization of the brain activity with the sleep frequency and in this way produce the sleep. Pulsing of microwaves in frequency predominating in the brain at awaked state could by the same procedure deny the sleep to a human being. A report derived from the testing program of the Microwave Research Department at the Walter Read Army Institute of research states "Microwave pulses appear to couple to the central nervous system and produce stimulation similar to electric stimulation unrelated to heat". In a many times replicated experiment microwaves pulsed in an exact frequency caused the efflux of calcium ions from the nerve cells (1,2). Calcium plays a key role in the firing of neurons and Ross Adey, member of the first scientific team which published this experiment, publically expressed his conviction that this effect of electromagnetic radiation would interfere with concentration on complex tasks (7). Robert Becker, who had share in the discovery of the effect of pulsed fields at the healing of broken bones, published the excerpts from the report from Walter Reed Army Institute testing program. In the first part "prompt debilitation effects" should have been tested (8). Were not those effects based on the experiment by Ross Adey and others with calcium efflux? British scientist John Evans, working in the same field, wrote that both Ross Adey and Robert Becker lost their positions and research grants and called them "free-thinking exiles" (6). In 1975, in the USA, a military experiment was published where pulsed microwaves produced, in the brain of a human subject, an audio perception of numbers from 1 to 10 (9). Again the possibility to convince human being that it is menatlly ill is obvious. 

The testing program of American Walter Read Army Institute of Research, where the experiment took place, counts with "prompt auditory stimulation by means of auditory effects" and finally aims at "behavior controled by stimulation" (8). Let us imagine that the words delivered into the brain were transcribed into ultrasound frequencies. Would not then the subject perceive those words as his own thoughts? And could not then his behavior be controled in this way? The American Air Force 1982 "Final Report on Biotechnology Research Requirements For Aeronautical Systems Through the Year 2000" states: "While initial attention should be toward degradation of human performance through thermal loading and electromagnetic field effects, subsequent work should address the possibilities of directing and interrogating mental functioning, using externally applied fields…" (10).

Several scientists warned that latest advances in neurophysiology could be used for the manipulation of human brain. In June 1995, Michael Persinger, who worked on the American Navy's project of Non-lethal electromagnetic weapons, published, in a scientific magazine, an article where he states: „the technical capability to influence directly the major portion of the approximately six billion brains of the human species without mediation through classical sensory modalities by generating neural information within a physical medium within which all members of the species are immersed… is now marginally feasible“ (11). In 1998, the French National Bioethics Committee warned that „neuroscience is being increasingly recognized as posing potential threat to human rights“ (12). In May 1999 the neuroscientists conference, sponsored by the UN, took place in Tokyo. In the declaration we read: "Today we have intellectual, physical and financial resources to master the power of the brain itself, and to develop devices to touch the mind and even control or erase consciousness…We wish to profess our hope that such pursuit of knowledge serves peace and welfare" (13).

The events at the international political scene, in the last few years, confirm‎ that the concept of remote control of human brain is a matter of negotiations. In January 1999 the European Parliament passed a resolution where it „calls for an international convention introducing a global ban on all developments and deployments of weapons which might enable any form of manipulation of human beings.“ (14) 

Already in 1997 nine states of the Union of Independent States addressed OUN, OBSE and the states of the Interparliamentary Union with the proposal to place at the agenda of the General Assembly of the Organization of United Nations the preparation and conclusion of an international convention „On Prevention of Informational Wars and Limitation of Circulation of Informational Weapons“ (16), (3).

The initiative was originaly proposed, in the Russian State Duma, by Vladimir Lopatin (3). V. Lopatin worked, from 1990 to 1995, in sequence, in the Committees on Security of the Russian Federation, Russian State Duma and Interparliamentary Assembly of the Commonwealth of Independent States, specializing in informational security (3). The concept of informational weapon or informational war is rather unknown to the world general public. In 1999, V. Lopatin, together with Russian scientist Vladimir Tsygankov, published a book „Psychotronic Weapon and the Security of Russia“ (3). There we find the explanation of this terminology: "In the report on the research of the American Physical Society for the year 1993 the conclusion is presented that psychophysical weapon systems…can be used… for the construction of a strategic arm of a new type (informational weapon in informational war)…" Among many references to this subject we find Materials of the Parliament Hearings "Threats and Challenges in the Sphere of Informational Security", Moscow, July 1996, "Informational Weapon as a Threat to the National Security of the Russian Federation" (analytical report of the Intelligence Service of the Russian Federation), Moscow, 1996 and a material "To Whom Will Belong the Conscienscious Weapon in the 21st century", Moscow, 1997. (17). In 2000 V. Lopatin introduced, after two other authors, the third in order bill on the subject of "Informational and Psychological Security of the Russian Federation“. The Russian newspaper Segodnya wrote about this draft: „…means of informational-psychological influence are capable not only to harm the health of a person, but, as well, cause – and quotation of Lopatin‘s draft follows – „the blocking of freedom of will of human being on subliminal level, the loss of ability of political, cultural and other selfidentifiction of human being, the manipulation of societal consciousness“ and even „destruction of united informational and spiritual space of Russia“ (16). 

In the book "Psychotronic Weapon and the Security of Russia" the authors propose among the basic principles of the Russian concept of the defense against the remote control of human psyche the acknowledgement of its factual existence as well as the acknowledgement of „realistic feasibility of informational, psychotronic war (which as a matter of fact is actually taking place without declaration of war)“ (18). They quote as well the record from the session of the Russian Federation Federal Council where V. Lopatin stated that psychotronic weapon can "cause the blocking of the freedom of will of a human being on a subliminal level" or "instillation into the consciousness or subconsciousness of a human being of information which will cause faulty perception of the reality" (19). For that matter they propose the preparation of national legislative as well as the norms of international law "aimed at the defense of human psyche against subliminal, destructive, informational effects" (20). As well they propose the declassificcation of all works on this technology and warn that, as a consequence of the classification, the arms race is speeding up making the psychotronic war probable. Among the possible sources of remote influence on human psyche they list the „generators of physical fields“ of "known as well as unknown nature" (21).

In 1999 the STOA (Scientific and Technological Options Assessment), part of the Directorate General for Research of the European Parliament published the report on Crowd Control Technologies, ordered by them with the OMEGA foundation in British Manchester (22). one of four major subjects of the study are the „2nd generation“ or "non lethal" technologies: "This report eval‎uates the second generation of 'non-lethal' weapons which are emerging from national military and nuclear weapons laboratories in the United States as part of the Clinton Administration's 'non-lethal' warfare doctrine now adopted in turn by NATO. These devices include weapons using… directed energy beam,…radio frequency, laser and accoustic mechanisms to incapacitate human targets" (23) The report states that „the most controversial ‚non-lethal‘ crowd control … technology proposed by the U.S., are so called Radio Frequency or Directed Energy Weapons that can allegedly manipulate human behavior… the greatest concern is with systems which can directly interact with the human nervous system“ (24). The report also states that „perhaps the most powerful developments remain shrouded in secrecy“ (25). The unavailability of offical documents confirm‎ing the existence of this technology may be the reason why the OMEGA report is referencing, with respect to mind control technology, the internet publication of the author of this article (26). In an identical approach the internet publication of the directrice of the American human rights and anti mind control organization (CAHRA), Cheryl Welsh, is referenced by joint initiative of Quaker United Nations Office, United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, and Programme for Strategic and International Security Studies, with respect to non-lethal weapons (27).

On September 25th, 2000 the Committee on Security of the Russian State Duma discussed the addendum to the article 6 of the Federal law on Weapons. In the resolution we read: „The achievements of contemporary science… allow for creation of measured methods of secret, remote influencing on the psyches and physiology of a person or a group of people“ (28). The committee recommended that the addendum be approved.

The addendum to the article 6 of the Russian Federation law „On Weapons“was approved on July 26, 2001. It states: „ within the territory of the Russian Federation is prohibited the circulation of weapons and other objects… the effects of the operation of which are based on the use of electromagnetic, light, thermal, infra-sonic or ultra-sonic radiations…“ (29). In this way the Russian government made a first step to stand up to its dedication to the ban of mind control technology.

In the Doctrine of Informational Security of the Russian Federation, signed by president Putin in September 2000, among the dangers threatening the informational security of Russian Federation, is listed „the threat to the constitutional rights and freedoms of people and citizens in the sphere of spiritual life… individual, group and societal consciousness“ and "illegal use of special means affecting individual, group and societal consciousness" (30). Among the major directions of the international cooperation toward the guaranteeing of the informational security is listed „the ban of production, dissemination and use of 'informational weapon‘ “ (31). This should be interpreted as the continuing Russian dedication to the international ban of the means of remote influencing of the activity of human brain.

In the above mentioned report, published by the STOA, the originally proposed version of the resolution of the European Parliament is quoted, calling for „an international convention for a global ban on all research and development… which seeks to apply knowledge of the chemical, electrical, sound vibration or other functioning of the human brain to the development of weapons which might enable the manipulation of human beings, including a ban of any actual or possible deployment of such systems.“(32) Here the term "actual" might easily mean that such weapons are already deployed. 

Among the countries with the most advanced military technologies those are the USA which did not present any international initiative demanding the ban of technologies enabling the remote control of human mind. (The original version of the bill by Denis J. Kucinich was changed.) All the same, according to the study published by STOA, the USA are the major promoter of the use of those arms. Non lethal technology was included into NATO military doctrine due to their effort: "At the initiative of the USA, within the framework of NATO, a special group was formed, for the perspective use of devices of non-lethal effects" states the record from the session of the Committe on Security of the Russian State Duma (28). The report published by STOA states: "In October 1999 NATO announced a new policy on non-lethal weapons and their place in allied arsenals" (33). "In 1996 non-lethal tools identified by the U.S. Army included… directed energy systems" and "radio frequency weapons" (34) - those weapons, as was suggested in the STOA report as well, are being associated with the effects on human nervous system. According to the Russian government informational agency FAPSI, in the last 15 years, the U.S. expenses on the development and acquisition of the means of informational war grew four times and at present time they occupy the first place among all military programs (17), (3). Though there are other concepts of informational war than mind control, the unwillingnes of the USA to engage in the negotiations aimed at the ban of the manipulation of human brains might indicate their intent to use those means in internal as well as international affairs. one clear consequence of the continuation of the apparent politics of secrecy surrounding technologies enabling remote control of human brains might be that the governments, who would own such technologies, could use them without having to take into consideration the opinion of the general public. The concept of the democratic world thus would be, though secretly, disrupted in this way, and in the future the world populations could live in only fake democracy where their own or foreign governments might, by means of secret technologies, shape their opinions. 

Mojmir Babacek

The author is the founder of the International Movement for the Ban of the Manipulation of Human Nervous System by Technical Meanshttp://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Campus/2289/webpage.htm 

Dear Sirs,
I am proposing you this article for publication. If you choose to publish the article, please send the payment for the article at the address:

Ceska Sporitelna
Vaclavske namesti 16
110 00 Praha 1
Czech Republic
EUROPE
SWIFT code: GIBACZPX
Account number: 001118-0140728263/0800 
The name of the account: Mojmir Babacek

Please let me know if you are interested in the publication of the article.

Mojmir Babacek 


REFERENCES

1) Handbook of Biological Effects of Electromadnetic Fields, 1996, CRC Press Inc., 0-8493-0641-8/96, - pg. 117, 119, 474- 485, 542-551, 565 at the top and third and last paragraph
2) World Health Organization report on non-ionizing radiation from 1991, pg. 143 and 207-208 
3) V. Lopatin, V Cygankov: „Psichotronnoje oružie i bezopasnost Rossii“, SINTEG, Russian Federation, Moscow, ISBN 5-89638-006-2-A5-2000-30, list of the publications of the publishing house you will find at the address http://www.sinteg.ru/cataloghead.htm
4) G. Gurtovoj, I. Vinokurov: „Psychotronnaja vojna, ot mytov k realijam“, Russsian Federation, Moscow, „Mysteries“, 1993, ISBN 5-86422-098-1
5) With greatest likelihood as well the Russian daily TRUD, which has organized the search for the documents, Moscow, between August 1991 and end of 1992
6) John Evans: Mind, Body and Electromagnetism, the Burlington Press, Cambridge, 1992, ISBN 1874498008, str.139
7) Robert Becker: "Body Electric: Electromagnetism and the Foundation of Life", William Morrow and comp., New York, 1985, pg. 287 
8) Robert Becker: "Cross Currents, teh Startling Effects of Electromagnetic Radiation on your Health", 1991, Bloomsburry Publishing, London, Great Brittain, ISBN 0-7475-0761-9, pg. 304, Robert Becker refers to Bioelectromagnetics Society Newsletter, January and February 1989
9) Don R. Justesen, 1975, Microwaves and Behavior, American Psychologist, March 1975, pg. 391 - 401
10) Dr. Nick Begich and Jeane Maning: "Angels Don't Play This HAARP, Advances in Tesla Technology", Earthpulse Press, 1995, ISBN 0-9648812--0-9, pg. 169
11) M. A. Persinger: „On the Possibility of Directly Lacessing Every Human Brain by Electromagnetic Induction of Fundamental Algorythms“, Perception and Motor Skills, June1995,, sv. 80, str. 791-799
12) Nature, vol.391, 22.1.1998,str.316, „Advances in Neurosciences May Threaten Human Rights“
13) Internet reference at the site of the United Nations University and Institute of Advanced Studies in Tokyo does not work any more, to verify the information it is necessary to find the document from the 1999 UN sponsored conference of neuroscientists in Tokyo, you may inquire at the address unuias@ias.unu.edu
14) http://www.europarl.eu.int/home/default_en.htm?redirected=1 click at Plenary sessions, scroll down to Reports by A4 number –click, choose 1999 and fill in 005 to A4 or search for Resolution on the environment, security and foreign policy from January 28, 1999
15) http://thomas.loc.gov./ and search for Space Preservation Act then click at H.R.2977
16) Russian daily Segodnya, 11. February, 2000, Andrei Soldatov: „Vsadniki psychotronitscheskovo apokalypsa" (Riders of Psychotronic Apokalypse)
17) See ref. 3), pg. 107
18) See ref. 3) pg. 97
19) See ref. 3), pg. 107
20) See ref. 3), pg. 108
21) See ref. 3) pg. 13
22) http://www.europarl.eu.int/stoa/publi/pdf/99-14-01-a_en.pdf 
23) see ref. 22 pg. XIX or 25
24) see ref. 22 pg. LIII or 69
25) see ref. 22 pg. XLVII or 63, aswell pg. VII-VIII or 7-8, pg. XIX or 25, pg. XLV or 61 
26) see ref. 22) pg. LIII or 69, note 354
27) http://www.unog.ch/unidir/Media%20Guide%20 CAHRA and Cheryl Welsh are listed at the page 24
28) Document sent by Moscow Committee of Ecology of Dwellings. Telephone: Russian Federation, Zelenograd, 531-6411, Emilia Tschirkova, directrice 
29) Search http://www.rambler.ru , there "poisk" (search) and search for "gosudarstvennaja duma" (State Duma) (it is necessary to type in Russian alphabet), at the page which appears choose "informacionnyj kanal gosudarstvennoj dumy" (Informational Channel of the Russian State Duma), there "federalnyje zakony podpisanyje prezidentom RF" (Federal laws signed by president of the Russian Federation), choose year 2001 and search 26 ijulja, č. N 103-F3 (July 26, 2001, number N 103-F3) , "O vnesenii dopolnenija v statju 6 federalnogo zakona ob oružii" (addendum to the article 6 of the Federal law on weapons)
30) Search http://www.rambler.ru and then (type in Russian alphabet) "gosudarstvennaja duma", next "informacionnyj kanal gosudarstvennoj dumy" (informational channel of the State Duma), next search by use of "poisk" (search) Doktrina informacionnoj bezopasnosti Rossii" "Doctrine of the Informational Security of the Russian Federation) there see pg. 3 "Vidy informacionnych ugroz bezopasnosti Rossijskkoj federacii" (Types of Threats to the Informational Security of the Russian Federation)
31) See ref. 30, pg. 19, "Měždunarodnoje sotrudničestvo Rossijskoj Federacii v oblasti obespečenija informacionnoj bezopasnoti" (International Cooperation of the Russian Federation in Assuring the Informational Security")
32) See ref.22, pg. XVII or 33
33) See ref.22, pg. XLV or 61
34) See ref.22 pg. XLVI or 62

[neoelf0813]

좋은 글 감사합니다^^ 이러한 기사나 외국 사례들이 법정에서 객관적 증거자료로 쓰일 수는 없을까요?

[청량산]

예~ 감사합니다.
Babacek의 글은 논문입니다.

이런 중요 영문자료라면 법정에서 설득력있는 참고자료로 쓰일 수는 있더라도,
객관적 증거자료로 쓰일 수 있을지에 대해서는 잘 모르겠습니다.

객관적 증거자료란 가해자들의 가해수단이나 탐지된 주파수가 객관적 증거자료가 되지 않을까 싶습니다.