Concerning the issue, “individual’s privacy and human rights violations,’ I interviewed Cheryl Welsh, Director of Mind Justice. According to the official website, Mind Justice is a human rights organization which works for “the rights and protections of mental integrity and freedom from new technologies and weapons which target the mind and nervous system”(Mind Justice, 2013). The representative, Welsh, herself has been targeted with nonconsensual mind control experiments by the government since 1987. She was interviewed by CNN in 1997 on the program, “American Edge,” featuring a former CIA director. Since then she shared the story with various social media. Recently, she was also interviewed by KOVR 13 News for a 2001 rally on nonconsensual experimentation at the California state capital. She also writes, for example in 2009, her opinion-editorial on the issue of mind control weapons, called neuroweapons today, was published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists online edition.
Regarding the issue, “Individual’s privacy and the state,” including organized stalking/harassment/mind control crimes, Carole Smith, advocates four messages as follows:
We are concerned here with reinforcing in the strongest possible terms:
i) The need for such abuses to human rights and the threats to democracy to be called to consciousness, and without further delay.
ii) To analyze the reasons why people might defend themselves from becoming conscious of the existence of such threats.
iii) To address the urgent need for intelligence, imagination, and information – not to mention compassion – in dealing with the victims of persecution from this technology, and
iv) To alert a sleeping society, to the imminent threats to their freedom from the threat from fascist and covert operations who have in all probability gained control of potentially lethal weaponry of the type we are describing.
For my class project, first I would like to discuss (ii) why people might defend themselves from becoming conscious of the existence of such threats.
Observing people in America today, many people’s thoughts are apparently directed to self-justify human rights violations under the name of national security, such as violation of privacy. This phenomenon can be a type of “mass mind control.” (I am sorry for good Americans, but currently I live in America, thus, I should observe Americans at first hand.)
I analyze that possible reasons of their mind being controlled are because of inferiority complex, catharsis, selfishness, fear, hatred and/or dishonesty. In other words, this crime takes advantage of people’s evil minds which are deeply rooted in every human being. In fact, “privacy-theft” by the state is conducted for very this purpose: to find people’s weak points in mind. Thus, to analyze possible reasons for people to be mind controlled is crucial to help with understand the imminent threats, that is, violation of privacy and subsequent activities that people are put in, such as organized stalking and/or covert harassment.
Accordingly, for the first, I would like to ask your opinion regarding the question (ii) which Carole Smith raised: why people tend to stay indifferent to such imminent threats rather than facing the reality, or become a by-stander even though they are aware of the atrocities of this issue.
I agree that people defend themselves from becoming conscious of the existence of such threats and I think this is a general response to many issues, not just privacy. With awareness come responsibilities and also uncomfortable feelings that are raised by issues. Unawareness is a way to avoid both responsibility and uncomfortable feelings. I have read Jay Lifton’s books on his study of why people torture and why others do nothing to stop torture and I would agree with his findings. Humans are capable of both good and evil to a varying degree. Professor Philip Zimbardo and his famous prison experiment is a good example of how seemingly average people are capable of evil acts. The greater awareness of these facts means that change is possible. So education, grass roots advocacy, activism, research and writing to publicize the underlying problems of an issue; all are proven and effective tools for change. I think the public scandal and legal actions taken to expose the sexual abuse of boys by Catholic priests is a great example of change that takes place with exposure to the facts of the problem and just how difficult it can be to confront power. There are no easy answers. Some issues are successfully fought and some are not and the lesson is to learn from the mistakes.
Your comment on America today reminds me of a book by Jacob Bronowski; he wrote as you commented that he was very disappointed about the lax values of American society and on the turn that America was taking in the 1960s, the hard questions were not being asked or confronted by most Americans, the less disciplined path was being pursued by American society. Bronowski did not agree with this lax view but he felt that progress forward for mankind was always a choice and not a straight path forward. Bronowski was confident that humankind progress would continue. My humble opinion is not so confident. My personal experience in activism on the neuroweapons issue was that I was so enraged at what was happening to me that it was hard to function. I was eventually able to channel my rage into going to college and law school and now publishing articles and getting out the facts about neuroweapons. Progress has been very slow and painful. So to conclude, you can’t force people to accept an issue but you can present it to them and give them a choice, as Bronowski advocates.