Excellent work as always, Prof. Hughes. I may be misperceiving it, but it seems there is a much stronger emphasis in this video on a skepticism towards the Agenda assets actually having technology that is capable of doing some of the things they claim. This aspect is obviously a completely open question: can they do some version of these things or not? And if they can't, are their claims being advanced as a form of information warfare?
This is quite possibly by design, and the fact that they have to some extent mastered hiding secrets in plain sight (plus the fact that much of it is classified/compartmentalized and the DARPA 20-40 year tech progression advancement from what is openly known about estimate that is usually given).
I most definitely do not have an ability to know which is more the case: is it pretty advanced in reality or are they putting ideas out there that are much further along than anything they are capable of doing?
But I'll just add two pieces of information for consideration to the discussion. They don't change our ability to KNOW what's happening now, but I do think logical lines of trajectory are very relevant to the discussion (I guess in some ways they're the only thing we have, but they are nevertheless meaningful but not conclusive).
This 8 page article from Scientific American in 2005, "The Forgotten Era of Brain Chips," about Jose Delgado's work from the 1960s. As one can see, it was actually quite advanced even at the time, and involved a great many different kinds of animals, including other primates, whose brains are from what I understand not radically dissimilar to the brains of humans (hence why they are used for these horrific experiments, then as well as now) (https://pdfhost.io/v/xrqZeX26M3_Dr__Jose_Delgado-The_Forgotten_Era_of_BRAIN_CHIPS_--).
Finally, I wanted to ask if anyone has a link to the James Corbett piece referenced early in the video that sounded like it was laying out a case for these claims of advanced mind control technology being more likely to be part of an information warfare effort. I did some searches but seemed to be coming across mostly pieces of his in which he was taking it as a given that they ARE likely real, but it sounds like this other piece may be taking a different approach.
As always, thanks very much for your excellent work!
Thank you, that is a fair and balanced assessment.
Especially given some of the wild claims being made by certain individuals, my goal was to encourage people to think critically about what is and is not possible with these technologies. As I mentioned in my presentation, there are plenty of unknowns, and it is a difficult field to map. But it is important that we try to do so in a way that is evidence-based.
I was not aware of the "remote-controlled dogs" - great spot!
For reasons of time, I necessarily had to be brief re: Delgado, but yes, he got up to plenty to other things.
Thank you for the reply and the Corbett link! This question as to the possibility of information operations being deployed amongst the "Awake" or the (allegedly) informed speculators crowd is a good one that I always try to keep in mind, but will be doing more so going forward. There's definitely a Hall of Mirrors dimension to things at times, and I think it's quite likely that's by design.
Here's another piece of evidence that things may be farther along. This video says it's from 2014. Ido Bachelet talks Surgical Nanorobotics, "each of these objects that you see here is a robot with chassis and moving parts that can be programmed to do amazing things. These robots are built from DNA. We use a technique called DNA origami; we take a piece of DNA and fold it into the 3D structure that comprises the machine. These robots were born 4 years ago in work I did with Sean Douglas at Harvard medical school. Each robot has a task that it knows how to do. It picks up cargo at point a and takes it to point B. In fact it doesn't drop the cargo converts the cargo from a concealed state to an exposed state. So basically it switches the cargo from off to on, and it can go back and forth and do this repeatedly. In the past two years we've learned to design robots that are invisible to the immune system, the mammalian immune system."
2015 Pfizer to Collaborate with Prof. Ido Bachelet. The international pharmaceutical company Pfizer will cooperate with the laboratory of Bar Ilan University Prof. Ido Bachelet in the production of his “DNA robots."
Prof. Bachelet has developed a unique method by which he is able to produce DNA molecules that can be “programmed” to research certain locations in the body and to carry out minor procedures.
Brilliant and impeccable as always Dr. Hughes! Thank you for your courage and what you do to assist us to peer inside the nefarious world and plans of what Buckminster Fuller termed The Great Pirates in his little book Spaceship Earth. I remain convinced that, given the historical roots of the term "human" in the Greek and Roman empires, its unnoticed meaning is "those who are compelled and forced to live under domination." The invading colonizers of our part of the planet called our Native ancestors, among other things, "barbarous," meaning "not yet fully human."
We can turn to the spanish empire as a prototype: the so-called "barbarous" people would not be classified as "human" until they had been made to undergo a process: 1) be deprived of their free existence by being forced live subject to the Spanish claim of a right of domination (Vitoria used the Latin term "dicio," translated in English as "sway"), 2) be ritually baptized and given a christian name, 3) be forced, under torment, misery, and suffering, to build their spanish catholic mission structures. Only once they had been made to live under spanish catholic domination would they be regarded as thereby "becoming" civilized and human.
For those peoples termed "barbarous" to remain free and still regarded as civilized and fully human was an impossibility within that system of thought. It seems to me that these insights ought to change the usual and accustomed way that the term "human" is understood, and what you are bringing to light are many of the various manifestations of the system of domination used against the "humans" (homo sapiens) made to live under and subject to tyranny and oppression (i.e., domination).
By the way, the third preamble paragraph of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says that "human rights" need to be "protected by the rule of law" so that "man" will "not be compelled to rebel against tyranny and oppression" (i.e., domination). Protecting human rights by the rule of law will not end tyranny and oppression but it will redirect attention away from the claim of a right of domination being made by the perpetrators, and toward a false "solution" that was never designed or intended to end what the drafters of the UDHR fully admit is tyranny and oppression throughout the planet.
Third paragraph of the UDHR reads: "Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law."
I like listening to Katherine Austin Fitts when she talks about the tens of trillions laundered out of taxpayer pockets through questionable programs. I think that Musk, for example, is nothing more than a turtle on a fencepost, not all that bright, a fast talker, and a close associate of a known scammer named Trump, both experts at siphoning cash out of our pockets under falsely entitled programs
How can civilian awareness fight against a military powerhouse shielded by classified information? Does more defense spending translate into DARPA research not for military use but for control of its own citizenry? What does the average Joe do now?
I list all kinds of things that people can do at the end of my report, Omniwar: Exposing and Ending the Invisible War Against Humanity.
One thing that is very important is to get to the truth of what is happening, and to spread awareness of the truth, so that the public can reject technocratic agendas en masse. The global technocratic coup can only be pulled off with the public's acquiescence. It is vital that we withdraw our consent, and encourage others to do the same.
In relation to the potential advent of technology that can read someone’s thoughts, something that I’m concerned about is that the ability for technocrats to leverage digital brain interfaces, particularly in targeted situations (examples to follow), may not require a technology that actually works… as long as it is treated as if it is working.
A quick analogy that encapsulates the above dynamic fairly well would be what played out with Covid testing. The accuracy of the tests used were abysmal, yet the narratives that were propped up around them gave authorities power to take actions against (or place restrictions on) people whose tests came back “positive”. There were countless examples of Covid tests failing and healthy people essentially being punished due to what a *faulty technology deemed to be accurate.*
Another analogy that encapsulates a complementary aspect to the previous example, is the widespread gaslighting that’s occurred against people who were injured by the Covid vaccine. Let’s use the extremely blatant example of Covid vaccine recipients who had an acute onset of severe symptoms minutes after receiving their shot… only to be repeatedly reminded that “correlation doesn’t prove causation”; a willful lie on the part of every sane healthcare practitioner that had the gall to utter such nonsense. Yet the prescriptive treatment of these injured people still went according to the premise that the vaccine had nothing to do with the injury.
The aforementioned situations are examples of faulty technology and willfully faulty logic (respectively) prevailing over what would otherwise, if we lived in a world even remotely close to conscionable, be handled in a manner diametrically opposed to the enforced ‘standard of care’ that we witnessed.
Therefore,- - even if the technology of digital brain interfaces don’t achieve reliable and/or accurate results- - a narrative/construct that treats the technology as if it was highly accurate/reliable will offer many (albeit not all) of the same powers that a truly functional digital brain interface would offer. If the elites can maintain control over the way a “thought reading” technology’s results are interpreted, then even if the technology is an abysmal failure, they can still have the ‘print out’ state that the subject has committed a ‘thought crime’, is lying, and/or is exhibiting any characteristic that would support how the elite’s want the given individual to be dealt with.
All that tech advancement and I see zero stories of how it has helped anyone, brain chips by Elon? My nephew was wheelchair bound for over 20 years as a quadriplegic
and they wouldn't even upgrade his wheelchair that was falling apart. When he purposefully overdosed and then went to the hospital they discharged him a few days later and prescribed him tons of the very drug he overdosed on as a parting gift.
Excellent work as always, Prof. Hughes. I may be misperceiving it, but it seems there is a much stronger emphasis in this video on a skepticism towards the Agenda assets actually having technology that is capable of doing some of the things they claim. This aspect is obviously a completely open question: can they do some version of these things or not? And if they can't, are their claims being advanced as a form of information warfare?
This is quite possibly by design, and the fact that they have to some extent mastered hiding secrets in plain sight (plus the fact that much of it is classified/compartmentalized and the DARPA 20-40 year tech progression advancement from what is openly known about estimate that is usually given).
I most definitely do not have an ability to know which is more the case: is it pretty advanced in reality or are they putting ideas out there that are much further along than anything they are capable of doing?
But I'll just add two pieces of information for consideration to the discussion. They don't change our ability to KNOW what's happening now, but I do think logical lines of trajectory are very relevant to the discussion (I guess in some ways they're the only thing we have, but they are nevertheless meaningful but not conclusive).
Apparently the CIA had created at least six "remote controlled" dogs as of 1965 (https://www.newsweek.com/cia-mkultra-documents-files-remote-control-dogs-1250519).
This 8 page article from Scientific American in 2005, "The Forgotten Era of Brain Chips," about Jose Delgado's work from the 1960s. As one can see, it was actually quite advanced even at the time, and involved a great many different kinds of animals, including other primates, whose brains are from what I understand not radically dissimilar to the brains of humans (hence why they are used for these horrific experiments, then as well as now) (https://pdfhost.io/v/xrqZeX26M3_Dr__Jose_Delgado-The_Forgotten_Era_of_BRAIN_CHIPS_--).
Finally, I wanted to ask if anyone has a link to the James Corbett piece referenced early in the video that sounded like it was laying out a case for these claims of advanced mind control technology being more likely to be part of an information warfare effort. I did some searches but seemed to be coming across mostly pieces of his in which he was taking it as a given that they ARE likely real, but it sounds like this other piece may be taking a different approach.
As always, thanks very much for your excellent work!
Thank you, that is a fair and balanced assessment.
Especially given some of the wild claims being made by certain individuals, my goal was to encourage people to think critically about what is and is not possible with these technologies. As I mentioned in my presentation, there are plenty of unknowns, and it is a difficult field to map. But it is important that we try to do so in a way that is evidence-based.
I was not aware of the "remote-controlled dogs" - great spot!
For reasons of time, I necessarily had to be brief re: Delgado, but yes, he got up to plenty to other things.
The Corbett link is here: https://corbettreport.substack.com/p/the-battle-for-your-brain-is-already
Thank you for the reply and the Corbett link! This question as to the possibility of information operations being deployed amongst the "Awake" or the (allegedly) informed speculators crowd is a good one that I always try to keep in mind, but will be doing more so going forward. There's definitely a Hall of Mirrors dimension to things at times, and I think it's quite likely that's by design.
Here's another piece of evidence that things may be farther along. This video says it's from 2014. Ido Bachelet talks Surgical Nanorobotics, "each of these objects that you see here is a robot with chassis and moving parts that can be programmed to do amazing things. These robots are built from DNA. We use a technique called DNA origami; we take a piece of DNA and fold it into the 3D structure that comprises the machine. These robots were born 4 years ago in work I did with Sean Douglas at Harvard medical school. Each robot has a task that it knows how to do. It picks up cargo at point a and takes it to point B. In fact it doesn't drop the cargo converts the cargo from a concealed state to an exposed state. So basically it switches the cargo from off to on, and it can go back and forth and do this repeatedly. In the past two years we've learned to design robots that are invisible to the immune system, the mammalian immune system."
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aA-H0L3eEo0
2015 Pfizer to Collaborate with Prof. Ido Bachelet. The international pharmaceutical company Pfizer will cooperate with the laboratory of Bar Ilan University Prof. Ido Bachelet in the production of his “DNA robots."
Prof. Bachelet has developed a unique method by which he is able to produce DNA molecules that can be “programmed” to research certain locations in the body and to carry out minor procedures.
https://futurism.com/pfizer-to-collaborate-with-prof-ido-bachelet
Yes, Bachelet is an interesting character.
I wonder what he's up to now.
Brilliant and impeccable as always Dr. Hughes! Thank you for your courage and what you do to assist us to peer inside the nefarious world and plans of what Buckminster Fuller termed The Great Pirates in his little book Spaceship Earth. I remain convinced that, given the historical roots of the term "human" in the Greek and Roman empires, its unnoticed meaning is "those who are compelled and forced to live under domination." The invading colonizers of our part of the planet called our Native ancestors, among other things, "barbarous," meaning "not yet fully human."
We can turn to the spanish empire as a prototype: the so-called "barbarous" people would not be classified as "human" until they had been made to undergo a process: 1) be deprived of their free existence by being forced live subject to the Spanish claim of a right of domination (Vitoria used the Latin term "dicio," translated in English as "sway"), 2) be ritually baptized and given a christian name, 3) be forced, under torment, misery, and suffering, to build their spanish catholic mission structures. Only once they had been made to live under spanish catholic domination would they be regarded as thereby "becoming" civilized and human.
For those peoples termed "barbarous" to remain free and still regarded as civilized and fully human was an impossibility within that system of thought. It seems to me that these insights ought to change the usual and accustomed way that the term "human" is understood, and what you are bringing to light are many of the various manifestations of the system of domination used against the "humans" (homo sapiens) made to live under and subject to tyranny and oppression (i.e., domination).
By the way, the third preamble paragraph of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says that "human rights" need to be "protected by the rule of law" so that "man" will "not be compelled to rebel against tyranny and oppression" (i.e., domination). Protecting human rights by the rule of law will not end tyranny and oppression but it will redirect attention away from the claim of a right of domination being made by the perpetrators, and toward a false "solution" that was never designed or intended to end what the drafters of the UDHR fully admit is tyranny and oppression throughout the planet.
Third paragraph of the UDHR reads: "Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law."
With deep admiration for your amazing work ~ S.N.
Thanks, Steven. That is a very interesting perspective on what it means to be "human"!
I like listening to Katherine Austin Fitts when she talks about the tens of trillions laundered out of taxpayer pockets through questionable programs. I think that Musk, for example, is nothing more than a turtle on a fencepost, not all that bright, a fast talker, and a close associate of a known scammer named Trump, both experts at siphoning cash out of our pockets under falsely entitled programs
One has to wonder where all that money has been going...
"Lookoutfa Charlie" - https://www.youtube.com/@LookoutfaCharlie - is a good channel for those trying to distinguish between facts & fiction in
Audio Forensics
Rogue Audio Forensics
ELF Weapons
RF Weapons
RF Targeting
Bio Weapons / Morgellons / Shewanella / GMO Fungus / Graph-eeeeeeeene
Image Projection Weapons / BlueBeam style weapons
Targets of ELF and RF Weapons
I think he's an ex-musician with a background in sound technology.
Great presentation, David, as usual.
How can civilian awareness fight against a military powerhouse shielded by classified information? Does more defense spending translate into DARPA research not for military use but for control of its own citizenry? What does the average Joe do now?
I list all kinds of things that people can do at the end of my report, Omniwar: Exposing and Ending the Invisible War Against Humanity.
One thing that is very important is to get to the truth of what is happening, and to spread awareness of the truth, so that the public can reject technocratic agendas en masse. The global technocratic coup can only be pulled off with the public's acquiescence. It is vital that we withdraw our consent, and encourage others to do the same.
In relation to the potential advent of technology that can read someone’s thoughts, something that I’m concerned about is that the ability for technocrats to leverage digital brain interfaces, particularly in targeted situations (examples to follow), may not require a technology that actually works… as long as it is treated as if it is working.
A quick analogy that encapsulates the above dynamic fairly well would be what played out with Covid testing. The accuracy of the tests used were abysmal, yet the narratives that were propped up around them gave authorities power to take actions against (or place restrictions on) people whose tests came back “positive”. There were countless examples of Covid tests failing and healthy people essentially being punished due to what a *faulty technology deemed to be accurate.*
Another analogy that encapsulates a complementary aspect to the previous example, is the widespread gaslighting that’s occurred against people who were injured by the Covid vaccine. Let’s use the extremely blatant example of Covid vaccine recipients who had an acute onset of severe symptoms minutes after receiving their shot… only to be repeatedly reminded that “correlation doesn’t prove causation”; a willful lie on the part of every sane healthcare practitioner that had the gall to utter such nonsense. Yet the prescriptive treatment of these injured people still went according to the premise that the vaccine had nothing to do with the injury.
The aforementioned situations are examples of faulty technology and willfully faulty logic (respectively) prevailing over what would otherwise, if we lived in a world even remotely close to conscionable, be handled in a manner diametrically opposed to the enforced ‘standard of care’ that we witnessed.
Therefore,- - even if the technology of digital brain interfaces don’t achieve reliable and/or accurate results- - a narrative/construct that treats the technology as if it was highly accurate/reliable will offer many (albeit not all) of the same powers that a truly functional digital brain interface would offer. If the elites can maintain control over the way a “thought reading” technology’s results are interpreted, then even if the technology is an abysmal failure, they can still have the ‘print out’ state that the subject has committed a ‘thought crime’, is lying, and/or is exhibiting any characteristic that would support how the elite’s want the given individual to be dealt with.
Excellent points.
It would certainly fit with their "Big Lie" modus operandi to fake it all if they have to.
All that tech advancement and I see zero stories of how it has helped anyone, brain chips by Elon? My nephew was wheelchair bound for over 20 years as a quadriplegic
and they wouldn't even upgrade his wheelchair that was falling apart. When he purposefully overdosed and then went to the hospital they discharged him a few days later and prescribed him tons of the very drug he overdosed on as a parting gift.
I am sorry to hear that, Gayle. It touches for me for very personal reasons that I won't go into here.