NO, BUT HERE WE GO!
On the way to lack of freedom,
free opinion and thinking
are hacked and reprogrammed!
Crisis-proof into the future,
thanks to regular updates
that provide the solution to download
for each Problem that they create.
Right now we are seeing the clearest signs yet that the U.S and China/Russia are headed for a hot war and it could come sooner than we think. Neo cons in Washington have laid the ground work for a war with China by the year 2025 but that time table might be accelerated. This week the United States labeled China a direct threat to the U.S. and said China is trying to dominate the world. China fired back and launched war ships and aircraft surrounding Taiwan. We are at a tipping point.
READ IT FOR YOURSELF:
- https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/3644527/dod-releases-first-defense-industrial-strategy/
- https://press.armywarcollege.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3233&context=parameters
UN for Peace?
UN is the most unfair Organisation ever!!!
WE’VE LOST 🛟 THE PLOT OF HUMANITY
- When Function follows Money by Design.
- When technologies do more harm than they benefit.
- When few very greedy people preach the total digital on Mission Warp Speed, the nature of man, itself is available.
- The Moral and Ethical Fundament is brocken.
- Hacking Neurons and Genes at the highway to Hell.
- At the moment they stepwise cut off all the Rules and Laws for the security and human rights
- Weaponizing the Profession of Science and install the most irresponsible people to power and education.
- Greedy unscrupulous people have decided after Internet we hacking Humans and Nature.
- The God game Is out of control and we are in great danger.
WHO DECLARE WAR ON HEALTH
The Powergrab of the World Health Organisation (WHO) Philipp Kruse The Powergrab of the W… https://apps.who.int/gb/wgihr/pdf_fil…
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/po...
https://apps.who.int/gb/wgpr/pdf_file...
CLICK HERE for WORLDWIDE.ExitTheWHO.com
This is so vile considering who will be the only ones who will win while 99% of people, all animals and nature are sacrificed in the process. And also more horrific in the front of the tactics and techniques that are in the run for the next level war games…
Rand Corporation – Plaques, Cyborgs and Supersoldiers
The Human Body Is Now
An Official Warfare Domain
I am reposting this research article by the RAND Corporation. The entire document should be read, because it is eye opening. The human body is now considered a warfare domain that can be attacked via engineered pathogens, hacking the intra body network, hacking the brain computer interface, altering the genome and more. Future scenarios sound just too close to reality now. Please read below that a Russian commander was killed via app use and Geo location services. Genomics can be used to identify “minority groups for persecution.” Warfare strategies are to hack the human intra body network and the brain computer interface. We have been warning about the dangers of this technology. The targeting program is literally what this report is discussing, via more sophisticated technologies. If you have not seen our symposium on targeted individuals and you do not understand how much of this technology is already deployed against the citizens, please watch this now, as your life may depend on it. Targeted Individuals symposium
Please read and share.
Please read and share.
Advances in biotechnology within the past half decade have renewed questions about the use of biotechnologies in a warfighting context. Prior to advances of the past few years and with respect to nation-states, biological weapons were usually deemed too liable to inflict harm on one’s own forces to be of much strategic value; past military applications of genomics are viewed largely as misguided eugenicist pseudoscience; and, until recently, such technologies as brain-computer interfaces (BCI) were too unwieldy for the battlefield. As of this writing in 2023, technological improvements— including messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) vaccines, the use of CRISPR (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats) gene sequences as genetic engineering tools, and advances in BCI—and their accessibility to both friendly forces and adversaries—could shift these strategic calculations. This report explores how recently achieved or likely future technologies change strategic choices for the human body as a warfighting domain. The analyses and recommendations in this report should be of interest to policymakers in the biotechnology, defense, and intelligence communities, as well as to a general audience.
RAND National Security Research Division
This research was sponsored by the Office of the Secretary of Defense and conducted within the Acquisition and Technology Policy Program of the RAND National Security Research Division (NSRD), which operates the National Defense Research Institute (NDRI), a federally funded research and development center sponsored by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, the Unified Combatant Commands, the Navy, the Marine Corps, the defense agencies, and the defense intelligence enterprise.
Vignette 1 is science fiction, but it is not far-fetched. Although it remains unresolved whether genetic manipulations, such as gain-of-function research or an unintentional lab leak,1 played a role in the origins of SARS-CoV-2, advances in biotechnology make it straightforward for any suitably trained and equipped laboratory to produce coronaviruses—or other pathogens—that will escape immunity from prior infections or vaccines.
The COVID-19 pandemic enabled the first test of mRNA vaccine technology, which facilitates much faster vaccine design and production than afforded by prior techniques. The mRNA technology allowed the vaccine for COVID-19 to be developed within a single year, whereas the previous record was four years for the development of the mumps vaccine (Ball, 2020).The facts that (1) pathogens can be engineered to escape immunity and (2) mRNA vaccines can be rapidly developed introduce the potential for strategic use of bioweapons that previously would have been much less tractable. From a purely technical standpoint, at this time, many countries could engineer pathogens to infect others while rendering their own populations immune through mRNA vaccines. The use of a coronavirus bioweapon in the scenario described in Vignette 1 could make rational strategic sense for such U.S. adversaries as the Chinese government because such a weapon might be able to paralyze U.S. naval responses without incurring the military cost from a U.S. response to an opening salvo of kinetic strikes against the U.S. military. This is possible because the origins of an engineered pathogen would be highly uncertain, scientists would likely presume natural zoonosis (crossing from animals to humans) as the simplest explanation, and it would take years of research to ascertain the origin empirically. This ambiguity could serve a nation-state well in a scenario like Vignette 1, especially considered in contrast to the lack of ambiguity once a country begins kinetic strikes against the U.S.
The China-Taiwan scenario described in Vignette 1 postulates that an engineered bioweapon could be used in close coordination with actions in other domains (e.g., sea and air) to achieve a strategic goal (e.g., conquest of Taiwan). Warfighting domains are conceived as spatial or virtual places in which conflict can take place. Land, sea, and air are the traditionally recognized warfighting domains (space having been added in the past decade). Whether other zones of warfare, such as cyber, constitute domains is contested by researchers and strategists.
The China-Taiwan scenario described in Vignette 1 postulates that an engineered bioweapon could be used in close coordination with actions in other domains (e.g., sea and air) to achieve a strategic goal (e.g., conquest of Taiwan). Warfighting domains are conceived as spatial or virtual places in which conflict can take place. Land, sea, and air are the traditionally recognized warfighting domains (space having been added in the past decade). Whether other zones of warfare, such as cyber, constitute domains is contested by researchers and strategists.
The China-Taiwan scenario described in Vignette 1 postulates that an engineered bioweapon could be used in close coordination with actions in other domains (e.g., sea and air) to achieve a strategic goal (e.g., conquest of Taiwan). Warfighting domains are conceived as spatial or virtual places in which conflict can take place. Land, sea, and air are the traditionally recognized warfighting domains (space having been added in the past decade). Whether other zones of warfare, such as cyber, constitute domains is contested by researchers and strategists (
But can the human body itself be a warfighting domain? Can the body be an offensive or defensive weapon or a very specialized kind of target? As one approach to understanding the ways in which the human body might or might not be a distinct domain of warfighting, our team identified domain features mentioned in the research literature on warfighting domains and then assigned proposed domains for each of the features.
Table 1.1 therefore helps qualify aspects of disagreement about whether the human body can be a warfighting domain. If the domain concept does not require domain-specific movement, then the human body can be a warfighting domain in that it exhibits at least half of the remaining domain characteristics. The domain characteristics exhibited by the human body include specific modes of attack (e.g., pathogens, hacking IoB devices) that do not apply to other domains specifically.
Another intersection of traditional domains with the human body as a domain; specifically, that traditional warfare on land, at sea, or in the air is focused on the destruction of human bodies. This begs the question of whether the human body is a domain of war distinct from the taking of human life during land, sea, or air domain operations. Medieval use of infections during sieges may be considered rightly as simply a form of bioweapon deployed strategically within the land domain. Thus, it is perhaps contingent on the ongoing development of biotechnology and the greater ability to leverage bio capabilities independent of conflict in traditional domains that will cause the human body to emerge increasingly as a distinct domain of warfighting.
China has made exploiting advancements in biotechnology and genetic engineering a high priority—especially for enhancing warfare and national defense—because its military leaders consider biotechnology the next revolution in military affairs. A significant amount of this research is conducted in military hospitals, especially the People’s Liberation Army General Hospital. China’s Academy of Military Medical Sciences, the National University for Defense Technology, and the Central Military Committee’s Science and Technology Commission have made significant investments in “biology-enabled warfare” (Kania, 2019), which includes BCIs, brain networking, advanced biometric systems, human performance enhancements, and genetic engineering.
Chinese military leaders have also indicated that they consider biotechnology as among the new “strategic commanding heights” and are considering it a new military domain (Kania, 2019). Chinese military texts discuss offensive and defensive approaches to the biological domain, including dominance and deterrence through “ethnic-specific genetic weapons” .Regardless of what U.S. academics and strategists conclude on this definitional matter, that Chinese military leaders consider the human body to be a warfighting domain underscores the importance of our research.
We identified three aspects of biotechnology—engineered pathogens, IoB technologies, and genomics—that collectively comprise what we refer to as human domain biotech and whose further development could substantially influence warfighting. These areas overlap significantly with the field of synthetic biology. Given the broad scope of synthetic biology, we limited our insights to the three aspects of biotechnology discussed here.
For example, the potential consequences of adversary progress in the bioeconomy holistically—including (1) synthetic biology technologies related to agriculture and alternative energy sources and (2) genome-adjacent technologies, such as the microbiome or RNA modification—may affect national security and grand strategy considerations but are out of the scope of analysis for this report.
Engineered Pathogens
We consulted several existing databases compiled by academics, including one that was the most comprehensive (Peters, 2018), to assess the number of BSL-3 laboratories. We focused on BSL-3 because most BSL-4 pathogens, such as the Ebola and Marburg viruses, are so lethal that they are unlikely to cause major disruption to the U.S. military or U.S. society more generally. This assessment is based on experience, which has shown that the U.S. public health system’s epidemiological protocols—which focus primarily on diagnosis, isolation, treatment, and contact tracing—have been highly effective in preventing community spread of Ebola
Internet of Bodies
The IoB includes such devices as fitness trackers, wearables, and other smart consumer devices, as well as such internet-connected medical devices as pacemakers, exoskeletons, and prosthetic limbs.
Advanced IoB devices, such as smart contact lenses, are also under development characterizes the IoB as a progression of the Internet of Things and defines the IoB in three generations: body external, body internal, and body melded. Such technologies have the potential to transform warfighting. IoB and related technologies present a variety of potential opportunities to warfighters. For example, the U.S. Army is running studies to determine whether wearables can help with soldier well- being and fitness. Australian researchers have shown that military robot quadrupeds can be steered by brain signals collected and translated by a graphene sensor worn behind the ear of a nearby soldier (Tucker, 2023). In May 2023, the U.S. Space Force (USSF) announced plans for a large study in which guardians can choose between using wearable devices and participation in the traditional annual physical fitness tests to assess physical fitness (Hadley, 2023).4 This plan can help USSF track fitness continuously and focus on year-round health rather than driving its personnel to engage in dangerous habits, such as eating disorders, in the months leading up to annual body weight checks and fitness tests (Schmid, 2022).
Combining IoB data with advanced machine learning (ML) and AI algorithms can potentially enable tremendous advancements in health care, particularly precision medicine. AI has opened the door for more-efficient and automated analysis of complex data from across diverse sources. These algorithms speed up the data pipelines that are often necessary to support the complex interaction of human-machine interface. The collection and analysis of data collected on human physiology, activity, and genetics require efficient algorithms to manifest practical results (Hinkel, 2022). AI/ML algorithms can be trained on the vast amount of data collected by the network of IoB devices and predict acute or chronic changes in health status. For example, DoD is investing in wearable technologies using AI algorithms that could predict infection up to 48 hours before symptoms appear (Vergun, 2023).
Although IoB technologies offer significant potential and have already realized benefits, some have also been shown to incur risks to the warfighter and to national security. One type of IoB risk derives from information security issues with IoB-collected data. In early 2018, it was discovered that the publication of a heatmap of users’ running routes by the fitness app Strava revealed sensitive location and layout information of U.S. military bases around the world. A security vulnerability in the Strava app reportedly allowed unknown users to identify and track the movements of Israeli service members inside military bases, even if users limited who could view their Strava profiles. In 2023, it was reported that the Strava app might have been used to track a Russian submarine commander who was killed while jogging. In response to the first Strava incident, in August 2018, DoD banned personnel from using apps with geolocators while in overseas operational areas. However, these devices are in wide use outside military operational contexts. We present a scenario in Vignette 3 in which an insider threat uses an IoB device to capture sensitive government data.
One IoB technology—BCIs—may have a particular impact on warfighting. BCIs collect electrical signals from the brain and translate them into external outputs, such as commands. BCIs can be body external (e.g., a noninvasive electroencephalogram [EEG] wearable cap) or body internal (e.g., implanted into the brain). Some BCI technologies have shown promise for people who have lost the function of certain limbs or neuromuscular capabilities by reading brain signals. A fighter pilot who has lost function of their limbs could thus potentially use this technology to connect to and operate an aircraft. Future BCIs might even have the ability to write to the brain. A military commander could use this technology to communicate with their forces about a change in commander intent or a pivot in battlefield tactics. But if this technology were hacked, a malicious adversary could potentially inject fear, confusion, or anger into the commander’s brain and cause them to make decisions that result in serious harm. In fact, several organizations based in China were found to “use biotechnology processes to support Chinese military end uses and end users, to include purported brain-control weaponry” (Department of Commerce, 2021), and, because of this, these entities were added to the Department of Commerce’s Entity List to restrict trade with those organizations.
Genomic Surveillance
Genomic surveillance is a near-term capability already in use in the private sector and deployed by other countries to identify genomic patterns. These technologies are used to analyze ancestry, track viral mutations within human cells, and survey microbial evolution within the environment (CDC, 2023). The biggest challenge to applying genomic surveillance to warfighting forces is to find robust correlations of genotypes with characteristics (phenotypes) that effectively align with military roles.
The most future-focused of our typologies is genomic enhancement—the ability to temporarily or permanently enhance an individual’s genomic traits. Genomic enhancement has been the stuff of science fiction and comic books for many decades. The desire to create supersoldiers has deep historical roots in early experimentations, starting as far back as the late 19th century. Much of eugenics—the attempt to use reproduction to increase the proportion of individuals with desirable traits—derives from a fundamental misunderstanding of human genomics and a desire to enhance genetic traits in fighting forces.
These pseudoscience theories contributed to the justification of ethnic cleansing and the rise of genocide later in the 20th century
Understanding the landscape of genomics research is critical to understanding global competition in this area. We examined recent (within the past ten years) genomic publications, using data from the Web of Science, to track the progress of genomic-focused research, and found that the United States and China are leading the way and are neck-and-neck in overall publications.
To understand these trends better, we segmented the publication dataset into five categories of genomics research. These categories represent five key technology areas that enable the warfighting genomic typologies of surveillance and enhancement that we described previously:
1. Genomic editing: Also called gene editing, this is an area of research seeking to modify genes of living organisms to improve our understanding of gene function and develop ways to treat genetic or acquired diseases (Committee on Human Gene Editing, 2017).
2. Epigenomics: This is a field of study, also sometimes called epigenetics, that is focused on changes in DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) structure that do not involve alterations to the underlying gene sequence (National Human Genome Research Institute, 2023b).
3. Transcriptomics: The DNA sequence of genes carries the instructions, or code, for building proteins. As the first step, a gene is transcribed into a related molecule, mRNA. The transcriptome is a collection of all the mRNA molecules (gene readouts) present in a cell, at any given time (National Human Genome Research Institute, 2020).
4. Proteomics: The mRNA molecules serve as intermediate templates that are then translated into proteins; proteomics characterizes the total and individual pattern of proteins in a tissue or organ (National Human Genome Research Institute, 2018).
5. Sequencing: To sequence a person’s DNA, researchers follow three major steps: (1) purify and copy the DNA, (2) read the sequence, and (3) compare it with other sequences (National Human Genome Research Institute, 2023a).
The clear pattern across all keyword groups in this analysis is that the United States has dominated in all areas of genomic research publications, but an emergent China shows an upward trend in publications that threatens to overtake those of the United States (Figure 2.4).
There is more to read in this article, please see the posted original.
THE DEFENSE MEDICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY DATABASE https://web.archive.org/web/20220126194123if_/https://roar-assets-auto.rbl.ms/documents/13635/DMED%20fact%20sheet_final.pdf
Why Did Rice University Develop
April 14th 2016
Self-Assembling Graphene Oxide
Using Nano-Technology?
Watch the Original Video Posted by Rice University:
Carbon nanotubes in a dish assemble themselves into a nanowire in seconds under the influence of a custom-built Tesla coil created by scientists at Rice University.
But the scientists don’t limit their aspirations for the phenomenon they call Teslaphoresis to simple nanowires.
The team led by Rice research scientist Paul Cherukuri sees its invention as setting a path toward the assembly of matter from the bottom up on nano and macro scales.
There are even hints of a tractor beam effect in watching an assembled nanowire being pulled toward the coil. https://news.rice.edu/news/2016/nanotubes-assemble-rice-introduces-teslaphoresis
Technology is another times hacked by a nazi mindset to destroy and massmurder…
Here you can watch the whole interview https://charlierose.com/videos/23789
The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide
https://archive.org/details/nazidoctorsmedic0000lift/page/n583/mode/1up
If a lexicon were compiled of the greatest inhumanities man has visited on his fellows, the Holocaust would surely be the preeminent subject. The Nazi „final solution,“ promulgated in January 1942 at the Wansee Conference, was dedicated to the permanent eradication of Judaism. It was not a conceptual reshuffling of religious identity by conversion but rather a physical destruction. This genocidal purging was deemed a necessary program to rid the world, and more specifically the Aryan people, of the genetic reservoir of polluting Jewish genes.
The book opens with the
oath of Hippocrates–
the pledge of the doctor
to do no harm.
The question arises, to use the language of psychology: Was the role of the doctor in the Nazi death camps ego-syntonic (harmonious with one’s self-image) or ego-dystonic (disharmonious with one’s self-im age)?
The Nazis, of course, were not the only ones to involve doctors in evil. One need only recall the role of Soviet psychiatrists in diagnosing dissenters as mentally ill, or doctors in Chile serving as torturers, but Nazi doctors, as Lifton points out, differed significantly, not so much in their human experimentation but in their central role in genocidal projects-projects based on biological visions that justified genocide as a means of national and racial healing.
At the heart of the Nazi enterprise was the elimination of the boundary between healing and killing. The medicalization of killing-~-killing in the name of healing–was the essence of
the death camps: killing was a therapeutic imperative.
How this monstrous endeavor could be conceived and accomplished is the subject of Robert Jay Lifton’s The Nazi Doctors. Dr Lifton, a renowned psychiatrist and author, spent a decade interviewing Nazi doctors and concentration camp survivors to piece together the horrifying process by which German physicians aided (for the most part willingly) in the destruction of 6 million innocent men, women, and children.
https://archive.org/details/nazidoctorsmedic0000lift/page/n583/mode/1up
The Nuremberg Code (1947)
BMJ 1996; 313 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.313.7070.1448(Published 07 December 1996)
The judgment by the war crimes tribunal at Nuremberg laid down 10 standards to which physicians must conform when carrying out experiments on human subjects.
PERMISSIBLE MEDICAL EXPERIMENTS
The great weight of the evidence before us to effect that certain types of medical experiments on human beings, when kept within reasonably well-defined bounds, conform to the ethics of the medical profession generally. The protagonists of the practice of human experimentation justify their views on the basis that such experiments yield results for the good of society that are unprocurable by other methods or means of study. All agree, however, that certain basic principles must be observed in order to satisfy moral, ethical and legal concepts:
- The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment. The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs, or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.[13]
- The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
- The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.
- The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
- No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
- The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
- Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.
- The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
- During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.
- During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.
We must have the right to ask Question!
Why “We need to develop genetic engineering technologies and techniques (mRNA software)to be able to write circuitry for cells and predictably program biology the same way in which we write a software and program computers.” Execute Order
Follow the Scien
Why Did the CEO of Nokia (Pekka Lundmark) Say, ““By 2030 Smartphones Will Be Built Into Bodies” at the 2022 World Economic Forum Event? https://rumble.com/v16plao-transhumanism-by-2030-smartphones-will-be-built-into-bodies.-pekka-lundmark.html
By hijacking the DNA of a human cell, they showed it’s possible to program it like a simple computer. https://www.wired.com/2017/03/biologists-made-logic-gates-dna/
His 1. Sen, S. How your body can play an integral role in wearable security | TedX Indianapolis. https://www.ted.com/talks/shreyas_sen_how_your_body_will_play_an_integral_role_in_the_future_of_wearable_security (2019). [accessed March 5, 2020].
2. Das D, Maity S, Chatterjee B, Sen S. Enabling covert body area network using electro-quasistatic human body communication. Sci. Rep. 2019;9:4160-2906. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-38303-x. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
3. Maity S, Chatterjee B, Chang G, Sen S. Bodywire: A 6.3-pj/b 30-mb/s-30-db sir-tolerant broadband interference-robust human body communication transceiver using time domain interference rejection. IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits. 2019;54:2892–2906. doi: 10.1109/JSSC.2019.2932852. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
4. Balanis CA. Antenna Theory: Analysis and Design. 4. Hoboken: Wiley; 2016. [Google Scholar]
5. Tomovski B, Gräbner F, Hungsberg A, Kallmeyer C, Linsel M. Effects of electromagnetic field over a human body, sar simulation with and without nanotextile in the frequency range 0.9-1.8ghz. J. Electr. Eng. 2011;62:349–354. doi: 10.2478/v10187-011-0055-6. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
6. Kibret B, Teshome A, Lai D. Analysis of the whole-body averaged specific absorption rate (sar) for far-field exposure of an isolated human body using cylindrical antenna theory. Prog. Electromag. Res. M. 2014;38:103–112. doi: 10.2528/PIERM14072201. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
7. Kibret B, Teshome A, Lai D. Cylindrical antenna theory for the analysis of whole-body averaged specific absorption rate. IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. 2015;63:5224–5229. doi: 10.1109/TAP.2015.2478484. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]8. Kibret B, Teshome A, Lai D. Human body as antenna and its effect on human body communications. Prog. Electromag. Res. 2014;148:193–207. doi: 10.2528/PIER14061207. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
9. Hwang J, Kang T, Kwon J, Park S. Effect of electromagnetic interference on human body communication. IEEE Trans. Electromagn. Compat. 2017;59:48–57. doi: 10.1109/TEMC.2016.2598582. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
10. Kibret B, Teshome A, Lai D. Characterizing the human body as a monopole antenna. IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. 2015;63:4384–4392. doi: 10.1109/TAP.2015.2456955. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
11. Li J, Nie Z, Liu Y, Wang L, Hao Y. Evaluation of propagation characteristics using the human body as an antenna. Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) 2017;17:2878. doi: 10.3390/s17122878. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
12. Makehuman: Open source tool for making 3D characters, version 1.2.0 beta 2. http://www.makehumancommunity.org/. Accessed 13 Sep 2020.
13. Maity S, Mojabe K, Sen S. Characterization of human body forward path loss and variability effects in voltage-mode HBC. IEEE Microwave Wirel. Components Lett. 2018;28:266–268. doi: 10.1109/LMWC.2018.2800529. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
14. Nath M, Maity S, Sen S. Towards understanding the return path capacitance in capacitive human body communication. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. II Express Briefs. 2019 doi: 10.1109/TCSII.2019.2953682. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
15. Maity S, et al. Bio-physical modeling, characterization, and optimization of electro-quasistatic human body communication. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 2019;66:1791–1802. doi: 10.1109/TBME.2018.2879462. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
16. Gabriel S, Lau RW, Gabriel C. The dielectric properties of biological tissues: II. measurements in the frequency range 10 Hz to 20 GHz. Phys. Med. Biol. 1996;41:2251–2269. doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/41/11/002. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
17. Electronic code of federal regulations e-cfr title 47 part 15, subpart c, 15.209. https://ecfr.io/Title-47/se47.1.15_1209. Accessed 5 Mar 2020.
18. Proakis J, Salehi M. Digital Communications. 5. New York: McGraw-Hill Education; 2007. [Google Scholar]
19. Maity, S., Das, D. & Sen, S. Wearable health monitoring using capacitive voltage-mode Human Body Communication. In 2017 39th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), 1–4, 10.1109/EMBC.2017.8036748 (2017). [PubMed]
20. Maity S, et al. Bodywire: A 6.3-pj/b 30-mb/s- 30-db sir-tolerant broadband interference-robust human body communication transceiver using time domain interference rejection. IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits. 2019;54:2892–2906. doi: 10.1109/JSSC.2019.2932852. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
21. NEVA Electromagnetics LLC | Static VHP-Female model v2.2 – VHP-Female College. https://www.nevaelectromagnetics.com/vhp-female-2-2. Accessed 5 Mar 2020.
22. Maity, S., Nath, M., Bhattacharya, G., Chatterjee, B. & Sen, S. On the safety of human body communication. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. (2020). [PubMed]
23. ICNIRP. Icnirp guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric and magnetic fields (1hz – 100 khz). Health Phys. (2010). [PubMed]
When health becomes a function of war https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2020-11-10 This is not HEALTH , its WAR!
And the Emergency Domain
is also high jacked…
A landmark book which argues neoliberal free market policies have arisen as a deliberate strategy of ‘shock therapy’, exploiting national crises to enact questionable policies while citizens are too distracted to resist effectively.
Though written 15 years ago, ‘The Shock Doctrine’ still has a lot to tell us about events today. It charts how a radical lobby created the neoliberal economic model which dominates the world; how that model was introduced from the 1970s; and how it was supercharged after the Millennium through natural and deliberately manufactured ‘disasters’.
The key to understanding this process is the rise of ‘disaster capitalism’. As Klein states:
“It was in 1982 that Milton Friedman wrote the highly influential passage that best summarizes the shock doctrine:
‘Only a crisis – actual or perceived – produces real change. When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around. That, I believe, is our basic function: to develop alternatives to existing policies, to keep them alive and available until the politically impossible becomes politically inevitable’…
Friedman’s model of influence was to legitimise ideas, to make them bearable, and worth trying when the opportunity comes.”
Short Vision
Long Version
A Federal Emergency Response Apparatus: A Need for Change?
In the next decade, the United States, as the only world superpower, will face a strategic environment characterized by significant uncertainty and ambiguity. Inherent in this environment will be new, asymmetric threats to our national security, both at home and abroad. Transnational terrorist and criminal organizations, using the latest technology, will gain increased access and ability to employ weapons of mass destruction (WMD) within our borders. The Federal Response Plan is an over-complicated attempt at coordinating numerous federal departments and agencies for effective response to domestic crisis situations. Early warning and preemption would certainly be the best response to WMD attack, but bureaucratic rivalry within the U.S. Intelligence Community hinders the focus necessary to consistently achieve that goal. This paper examines and recommends changes to the federal domestic crisis response apparatus, in a search for greater efficiency and unity of effort in preparing the nation for WMD attack.
by Defense Technical Information Center
https://archive.org/details/DTIC_ADA363878/page/6/mode/1up
Lets see things clear!
We are now at the next level of war!
Let’s stop this immediately!
When health becomes a function of war https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2020-11-10 This is not HEALTH , its WAR!
Defense Department Anthrax Shipments
JULY 28, 2015
Officials from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Government Accountability Office (GAO), and Departments of Defense and Health and Human Services testified about live anthrax specimens that were accidentally transferred to several laboratories in the U.S. and abroad. Lawmakers called for accountability and increased oversight of the Federal Select Agent Program (FSAP), which oversees the possession, use and transfer of biological select agents and toxins.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?327361-1/defense-department-anthrax-shipments
The 8th International Conference on Current and Future Trends of Information and Communication Technologies in Healthcare (ICTH 2018)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877050918318520
Security model for Big Healthcare Data Lifecycle
Time to treat the climate and nature crisis as one indivisible global health emergency https://www.bmj.com/content/383/bmj.p2355
Why Ultra-small nanoprobes as in the Covid Shots are called a human-machine interface? https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/
Nano-Sensor Modelling for Intra-Body Nano-Networks – Wireless Personal Communications
If you don’t believe me please proof it for your self for example here looking what there say :
Please help
S.O.S. 🛟 Without freedom of Julian Assange there is no Justice & Peace!
Frankly it’s pathetic:
Microsoft published :
An environment without trustworthy information is one in which democracy cannot flourish.
Building a healthy information ecosystem
Microsoft is dedicated to supporting a healthy information ecosystem where trusted news and information thrive.
Why Does the WO2020060606 CRYPTOCURRENCY SYSTEM FROM MICROSOFT USING BODY ACTIVITY DATA Exist? Why Does This Patent Not Work Without Putting Nano-Technology Inside the Human Body? – READ – https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2020060606
But in reality big tech, media and governments has censored and banned millions of trusted people, journalists and scientists!
Why Did the Now Convicted Harvard Professor Charles Lieber (Who Was Paid $50,000 Per Month Illegally by the Chinese Communist Party) Created Nano-technology That Allows Human Cells to Send and Receive Signals?
READ – https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2011/01/virus-sized-transistors
READ – https://stateofthenation.co/?p=60567
READ – https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/harvard-university-professor-and-two-chinese-nationals-charged-three-separate-china-related\
Why Did Harvard ‘s (Now Arrested) Charles Lieber & Other Researchers Create a Material That Merges Nanoscale Electronics with Biological Tissues?
READ – http://cmliris.harvard.edu/assets/TechReview_TissueScaffold_27Aug12.pdf
Harvard’s (now convicted) Charles M. Lieber Create a U.S. Patent for Using 5G Radiation to Vibrate Corona Virus Particles from Present Nanotube Containers?
READ – https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2015199784A2/en
Why Did Harvard’s Charles Lieber Create Patents for Syringe-Injectable Mesh Electronics Integrate Seamlessly with Minimal Chronic Immune Response in the Brain?
READ – https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28533392/
Bye bye Dignity
Julimination
Shut me down so I be free
Because the future
your create
A nightmare
of surveillance state.
So if we look up
what we can see?
A sky, full of satellites
and frequency.
Corporations will kill us
the data is here.
They work hard for the money
And a world full of fear.
So if we now not in action
And fight for our rights
Times up for us human
Because everything’s strike.
In the darkest corner and secrecy
They formed the world of tyranny
No more truth in the media
no good practice in science.
Only robots in clothes
Thinking straight by the lines.
That’s not a Solution!
That’s not a Progress!
That’s is the most dangerous step in our Systems!
Respect Me&You & PlanetBlue 🕊
JULIMINATION 
Hinterlasse einen Kommentar