Police and Mind Control

Dan Costachescu

Police, as a criminal organization, uses a wide range of techniques to 'disrupt' individuals they want to harm. The methods used, which include electromagnetic radiation, harmful chemicals, viruses, bacteria, etc., have the purpose of inducing medical conditions that incapacitate or kill police targets. Those methods could collectively be classified as body control techniques. As a separate line of (criminal) business, Police also has mind control as a high priority goal. Killing and incapacitating people have limitations from a control point of view. Police is a parasitic entity, and too much 'disruption' can affect people to the point they cannot produce enough to sustain the parasite. (Imagine the productivity of a society where most members have arthritis, diabetes, cancer, cardiovascular disease, etc..) So Police identified the objective to read what people think and be able to influence their actions at mind level. Reading people's thoughts is not that difficult from a technical point of view. We think in words and sentences for the most part. Thinking and speaking use the same language subsystem of the brain, the difference being that thinking does not engage the vocal cords. The variations of the brain's EMF (electromagnetic field) generated during speaking are similar to those produced when we think. Mind reading works much the same as speech recognition, with a major difference. Spoken words are supposed to be understood by listeners, regardless of voice pitch, speed of talking, accent, and other individual characteristics. This constraint acts like a de facto standard for the core speech audio data. You are supposed to understand (more or less) what Peggy is saying even if you haven't met her before. Thoughts do not have to comply with a similar standard, so individual variations of EMF patterns during thinking are much wider. Here is the first challenge of mind reading, the need for individual databases of EMF data for words in a particular language. Say Robert tells his wife "I feel like eating some strawberries." Police records the EMF data samples associated with the words "I", "feel", "like", "eating", "some", "strawberries" in Robert's database. From that point on, thoughts like "I like strawberries" can be read by reverse translation from the database. I'll call this database an EMF dictionary. If Robert is a public speaker, Police can build a sufficient EMF dictionary for him in a couple of months. If Robert is a silent type, it may take a year or two until enough words and corresponding EMF data samples are collected and stored. The second challenge of mind reading is that thoughts do not have the same level of coherence as spoken sentences. For example Monica will tell her spouse

"I won't visit our neighbour Sally this evening because she is so rude.". The same idea as a personal thought will have some parts omitted: "I won't visit [our neighbour] Sally [this evening] [because she is so rude].". The part "[our neighbour]" is not needed, as Monica knows exactly which Sally she refers to. Specifying the time "[this evening]" is not necessary in the context of planning the evening activities. Finally "[because she is so rude]" is an opinion that Monica formed long ago, and she does not need to repeat it to herself all the time. In order to fully understand what a person thinks, the EMF dictionary is not enough. It is also necessary to have databases of social contacts, opinions, beliefs, and events. Is it difficult to collect EMF data samples? Technology provides today sensors of exceptional sensitivity. It probably helps if the targeted individual has metal components in his teeth, such as crowns, bridges, root canal and cavity fillings. Those components will work as antennas and facilitate EMF data collection from a distance. They are not needed if the surveillance equipment is close enough (same room for example). I am assuming that Police is currently recording the basic thoughts (text format, based on EMF dictionaries) of a large number of people living in urban settings. In other words, massive mind reading and storage is already happening. Enhanced mind reading, based on databases of opinions, beliefs, events, is more difficult and probably done for only a small subset of the population, which includes politicians, government bureaucrats, high ranking military personnel, etc. How is the mind data used? Collected thoughts, text format, are stored in large databases. When Police targets a particular individual, they look at the mind data stored for that individual. Knowing what their target thinks gives them a significant advantage in choosing the 'disruption' techniques to be used for incapacitating the target. Police also uses mind data and search engines, similar to Google, for identifying targets. For example, typing "police", "cancer", "suspicious", and "John Doe" will give them a list of people who might think John's cancer is suspicious and Police could be involved.