Nice research, Buddy, RedFox!
When I read over the original post in this thread, I noted that it could be broken down into
two articles. The first article contained the comments by Ken Adachi of Educate Yourself.org, and the second was the article he posted by A. True Ott.
The first, I found 'smelled' rather a bit in the same way as the infamous and false, "hundreds of thousands of box cars fitted with manacles" story. --Which, tellingly, was referenced at the end of his post before he went on to quote the second article in full.
--With this particular 'smell', I find that the common pattern seems to be one of the claimant describing the global conspiracy as being more nuts and bolts, more concrete and easily measurable than it really is.
While the article he posted smelled a lot less, I did find myself a little galled by the claim that when Eisenhower was warning the world of the MIC, he was talking specifically of the essayist's personal subject of alarm, SSSS, --and not the much more broad and complex pattern of corrupt thinking which the MIC represents. This strikes me as being a tad arrogant and over-simple. --Though in fairness, it may also be accurate.
There is certainly a legitimate concern here; the human nervous system is indeed highly susceptible to EM manipulations.
[quote author=Buddy]Early in the article, his case seems not to differentiate between digital, HD and analog carrier waves. It's all lumped together under the idea of mind control, but is it? I'm still not sure if a mind can be effectively programmed with digital signals as with analog after reading this.
[/quote]
Some time ago, I looked into the subject of EM manipulation and learned this interesting fact. --
That a digital signal, even if it is carried by a frequency wave-form which is much higher than has been observed to have specific affect on the human nervous system, (between 0 and 30 Hz), can STILL have those same effects. --This is done through
pulse modulation.
Robert O. Becker describes it better than me (bolded emphasis mine). . .
--I should first mention that Becker, author of
"Cross Currents" is a wonderfully lucid writer and a well-respected doctor, and I recommend his book to everybody who wants to understand how the human nervous system can be affected by the electromagnetic spectrum. I often mention Becker in the same breath as Dolan. There appear to be used copies available on Amazon for as little as $3.00 http://www.amazon.com/Cross-Currents-Robert-O-Becker/dp/0874776090 )
Dr. W. Ross Adey of California's Loma Linda Medical Center has reported that the release of calcium ions from nerve cells following exposure to 16 Hz may also be produced by exposure of nerve cells to a microwave field modulated as 16 Hz. The microwave alone (unmodulated) has no such effect. The two types of modulation that are biologically important are pulsed and amplitude.
Modulation is the secret of transmitting information by means of electromagnetic fields. AM radio, for example, is amplitude modulated: the radio receiver "demodulates" the signal, removing the "carrier" radio-frequency wave and saving the slowly rising and falling modulation, which is what we then hear as music or voice. Transmission of the carrier wave alone would produce no sound, or a steady tone, depending upon the type of AM radio used. It appears that the body also demodulates the signal when exposed to modulated radio-frequency or microwave fields; the biological effect is that of the low-frequency modulation.
In this view, all biological effects are produced by ELF (extremely low frequency) frequencies. This makes good sense, because the body systems that pick up the electromagnetic field are "tuned" to the natural frequencies between zero and 30 Hz.
-Robert O. Becker, "Cross Currents" page 212.
I found this rough image which shows how frequency modulation works. . .
http://transcriptions.english.ucsb.edu/archive/courses/liu/english236/materials/pulse-amplitude-modulation.gif
--The smooth wave seen in the image has a slow up and down, and this is the one which can affect the nervous system. The square wave-form in the image (the one which carries a digital signal) pulses up and down much more quickly, at a frequency not immediately registered by the nervous system, (according to Becker), but the height of each square-topped wave makes up a portion of an artificial curve, simulating the slower, smooth wave form. The brain, apparently, does not differentiate between the two.
So, microwaves and other high frequencies can be used to stimulate the brain using modulation techniques.
Now the new Digital TV systems are working within the same frequency range (from around 50 to 800 Mhz) as the old regular television broadcasts, --with a little shuffling around in the spectrum to place police and emergency bands into new slots. The only big difference is that the type of receiver in the home needs to work differently to de-code the signal.
I found the following in an FAQ provided by an antenna retailer. (Emphasis mine.)
Q: How do analog TV broadcasts and DTV compare to each other?
A: There are some similarities. Both use VHF and UHF broadcast frequencies. While analog and digital television broadcasts have a modulated carrier wave, the way that signal is modulated is entirely different. Analog TV uses an amplitude-modulated (AM) signal for pictures and frequency modulation (FM) for audio, while DTV signals use digital "packets", to transmit pictures and audio.
http://www.antennasdirect.com/faqs.html)
From what I could further gather from other posts on the web regarding this topic, the new DTV system may be increasing somewhat the amount of raw EM already being broadcast into the environment, and that the manner of coding information into the signal will be different, but that beyond this, little will change with respect to the actual signal.
Of course, it is certainly not beyond the range of possibility that the new DTV signals could be directed to modulate down to affect a human target. But this is already the case, and it should be noted that the military reserves a vast portion of the EM broadcast spectrum above the portion allocated to Television and Radio broadcasts. This portion can certainly be modulated down to affect humans.
However, I did spot one significant change: while the new DTV signal uses the same frequency range as the old TV system, some television stations are nonetheless being forced to build new broadcast towers. Apparently, the new digital signal needs to be more precise than the old analog signal if it will be able to reach all its customers properly. This has always been the case with digital communications. If the incoming signal is too fuzzy, then the whole signal vanishes, unlike analog which allows one to squint at the TV set and still be able to make out a picture and pick up sound.
So I
can see an increased danger in that there is new equipment being erected with what sounds like increased strength and finer control over what signals are sent where. That sounds like it could indeed be useful for mind-controlling operations.
[quote author=C's 970222]
A: We told you that "HAARP" was being designated for capturing
and modulating electromagnetic fields for the purpose of total control
of brainwave patterns in order to establish a system of complete
"order on the surface of the planet" in either 3rd or 4th density.
Q: (L) Is HAARP in operation at the present time?
A: Yes, in its early stages.
Q: (T)
Is the spreading of all these communication towers out across
the country the equivalent of a HAARP program on a continental
scale?
A: Back up system.
Q: (L) So, they don't need the towers to operate the HAARP system,
but they are there as the backup?
A: Towers serve dual and lateral purposes.
[/quote]
Now. . . One of the suggestions put forth in first of the two articles appears to be that the DTV receivers and Plasma screen televisions are themselves vectors of attack using SSSS.
I don't quite see how this can be. --A DTV receiver box should not, I think, also be a broadcasting unit; I may be wrong here, (and I invite anybody to correct me if I am mistaken), but I would expect that such a unit simply decodes the existing signal and sends it via wire to the television set. And unless the receiver box is contributing to the broadcast EM signal in a person's house, then it should logically not be able to serve as a vector of attack in the sense described, (SSSS). --Though, it may affect people in ways I am not aware of; that is always a possibility, but it seems from my current understanding of the technology to be unlikely. --Any tech-savvy hobbyist who pops open the receiver box and discovered that it contained a UHF or VHF transmitter would immediately wonder why and this would raise questions.
Second. . . The new plasma screen televisions. Unless they are broadcasting a signal between 0 - 30 Hz, either raw or modulated, then similarly, I don't see how they could be a vector of direct attack through that means either. However, it is possible that from their audio speakers a sub-audio SSSS signal may be broadcast, though again, this seems unlikely to me. It's the sort of thing people could discover rather quickly, and thus it would appear to be a very short-sighted attempt at mind-control.
The technology as it currently works to control minds through TV and other strobing devices has been suggested by the C's. . .
[quote author=C's 951118]
Q: (L) Okay. You mentioned the strobe lights. Are these strobe lights
that are used to control minds, are these something that we would or
might come in contact with on a daily basis?
A: Do you not already know? We didn't say: some strobe lights, we
said: strobe lights, i.e. all inclusive!
Q: (T) Strobe lights come in many forms and types. TV is a strobe
light. Computer screens are a strobe light. light bulbs strobe.
Fluorescents strobe. Streetlights strobe.
A: Police cars, ambulances, fire trucks... How long has this been
true? Have you noticed any changes lately??!!??
Q: (F) Twenty years ago there were no strobe lights on any of those
vehicles mentioned. They had the old flasher type lights. Now, more
and more and more there are strobe lights appearing in all kinds of
places. (L) And now, they even have them on school buses! (T) And
the regular city buses have them too, now. (L) Okay, is the strobing
of a strobe light, set at a certain frequency in order to do certain things?
A: Hypnotic opener.
Q: (L) Can we say that this is something we are being acclimated to,
so that other things that happen to us in terms of our interactions... it
just keeps one in a continual state of hypnosis?
A: Assumptions restrict the flow!
Q: (L) What is the purpose of the hypnotic opener being used in this
way?
A: You don't notice the craft.
Q: (L) Ohhhhhhhh! So we may be being continuously flown over by
alien craft...
A: Assumption!
Q: (L) Sorry! (T) Okay, we don't notice the craft because we see the
strobes. They are hypnotic openers and are inducing a hypnotic
effect...
A: Assumption!
Q: (T) Okay, continue, then.
A: Well, ask a question, then!
Q: (L) Okay, they are telling us not to assume, but to ask. (T) Okay,
what craft are we NOT seeing?
A: Opener. Is precursor to suggestion, which is auditory in nature.
Q: (T) What suggestion?
A: Put on your thinking caps. Networking is not making assumptions.
Bold unilateral statement of "fact" is.
Q: (T) Oh. Phrase your statements in the form of a question! I'd like
"Hypnotic Openers" for $200, Alex! Cosmic Jeopardy! (L) Okay, you
said the "suggestion is auditory in nature." If this is the case, where is the
suggestion coming from auditory?
A: Where do you normally receive auditory suggestions from?
Q: (L) Radio, television... (T) Telephone... (L) Is that what we are
talking about?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) If you encounter a strobe while driving, or you are sitting in
front of your television, then the suggestions can be put into you
better because of this hypnotically opened state? Is that it?
A: Yes.
[/quote]
So when I think through how television affects us, this is what I come up with: The regular, old-style CRT television strobes at 60 Hz, and acts as a hypnotic opener so that audio signals can sit themselves deeply within the mind. Television is a brilliant/insidious strategy for mind-control; the audio is linked right up with the strobe. An advert or news cast need only tell you what to believe, and being hypnotically opened ensures that what you are told sticks inside you on a subconscious level.
Now I have been plagued by one question. CRTs definitely strobe, and at 60 Hz, (on and off 60 times per second), it is quite slow. When you wave your hands in front of a CRT, your fingers look all dance-floor funky. In front of a flat screen monitor, however, this is not the case. Flat screen computer monitors use what are known "Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamps" to illuminate the screen. According to what I was able to glean from the web, (and this was surprisingly difficult), these lamps, depending on the design, flicker at rates of between 30 kHz to 80 kHz --Which even at the slowest rate, is tens of thousands of times faster than the old CRT television screen. Together with diffusion frosting in the tube, the light in an LCD flat screen seems perfectly steady. (The following two websites were where I was able to derive the frequency of CCFLs. You'll note if you read through them that it was hardly straight-forward. If somebody can find a better source, it would be a useful addition here.)
http://www.maxim-ic.com/appnotes.cfm/appnote_number/3513
http://napkinlinks.com/node/160
I haven't been able to determine what the effect of this high frequency strobing is on the optical nerve, if any. The same holds true for the new so-called 'green' CFL light bulbs being pushed down our throats lately.
--One thought did occur to me, however. --When you have an electronic system turning a switch on and off that quickly, it creates a radio signal. This means that when you have a CFL bulb in your light socket, or a CCFL running in your computer screen, unless the electronics are shielded, (which I know in the case of some light bulbs is not the case), then they will be emitting high frequency radio emissions. (The old incandescent bulbs can't be accused of this.) I haven't figured out what this might mean for our poor grey matter, but it is something to consider.
Also. . , I don't know how plasma screens work. I don't know anything about the light which comes from them, if it flickers or not. I've just about run out of research-juice tonight, so maybe somebody else can pick that one up and find an answer. =)
So. . .
In closing this rather long post, I will re-cap the things I was trying to say. . .
1. The first half of the original post seemed rather alarmist and mis-directed.
2. The second half of the original post, while addressing a legitimate concern, doesn't appear to have much to do with the deployment of DTV.
3. The new DTV system is causing broadcasters to erect new towers, extending the range and fine-tuning of the existing control system.
4. I don't see how DTV receivers can directly enlarge the problem of mind-control via EM radiation or SSSS unless they are also transmitters.
5. Unless the new plasma screens are broadcasting a subliminal message through their speakers, then a newly introduced form of audio SSSS also seems unlikely.
--Of course, I may be wrong on all points, and I am open to input.
And here are a few of my open questions. . .
1. How does the light from a flat screen monitor or plasma screen affect the viewer? (It seems weird and unlikely that CRT's which are so effective in the area of mind control should be replaced by a less effective technology. This suggests to me that I am missing something important.)
2. How are people affected by the EM 'noise' given off by CFL and CCFL lamps?
That's it for now.
This is certainly a fascinating subject! Thank you, Michael for bringing it up.
