Open Letter to the World Press
Water constitutes a significant portion of the human body, ranging from 55% to 70%. A large proportion of this water contains particles known as ions, which are atoms or molecules that have either gained or lost an electron, resulting in a positive or negative charge. Liquids in the human body, rich in these ions, can be likened to electrolytes—substances that conduct electrical currents and can function similarly to antennas. The activity of the human nervous system is predominantly characterized by electrical currents arising from the flow of these charged particles through nerve fibers. Information within the brain is communicated through the number and frequency of nerve impulses, with the intensity of feelings or perceptions typically correlating to the intensity of the electrical current. Thus, the human nervous system operates in a manner akin to a digital system and can be compared to a computer and connected to it.
By Mojmir Babacek | Global Research
In response to stimuli that attract the brain’s attention, the frequencies of nerve impulses in different areas of the brain are synchronized. By delivering to the brain the appropriate number of electrical, magnetic or electromagnetic impulses of a certain frequency, it is possible to artificially induce the activity of neurons corresponding to a certain natural brain activity.
As early as the 1950s, Spanish scientist José Delgado, conducted in the USA experiments involving electrical stimulation of the brain. When he stimulated the motion center in a cat’s brain, the animal lifted its paw, even during a jump, resulting in a poorly executed landing. When a volunteer was asked to straighten a hand that was electrically stimulated to bend, he remarked, “I think your electricity is stronger than my will.” Delgado’s work demonstrated that electrical stimulation could significantly affect functions like breathing, heart rate, and even visceral secretions. When the pleasure center was stimulated women offered marriage to therapists.
In 1962, American scientist Allen H. Frey successfully created sounds within the brains of human subjects using pulsed microwaves—a finding that has been replicated multiple times and recognized by the World Health Organization. In 2012, Allen H. Frey wrote that research into the effects of microwave radiation on human organisms had been falsified in the US in previous years in order to conceal the development of microwave bioweapons (it should come as no surprise that this article has disappeared from The Scientist website). In other words the further research in this area was classified.
In 2011, another scientist of Spanish origin, Rafael Yuste, proposed the development of technologies aimed at “recording every spike from every neuron.” He co-authored a white paper outlining this ambitious endeavor, modeled after the Human Genome Project. In 2013, then-President Barack Obama accepted this proposal and announced the U.S. BRAIN Initiative, which continues to fund neuroscience research with billions of dollars across over 500 laboratories and is scheduled to continue until the end of this year. The initiative has been echoed by similar announcements from the European Union, and it is more than likely that comparable efforts have commenced, albeit unpublically, in Russia and China. This research has culminated in the creation of highly accurate maps of brain activity, enabling the artificial reproduction of any natural neuronal action within the brain by neurotechnologies. The fact that scientists from all over the world were not involved in this research together suggested that the results of this research were to be used among others for weapons development.
Similar to Robert Oppenheimer and Andrei Sakharov—scientists who grappled with the moral implications of their nuclear inventions—Rafael Yuste expressed deep concerns about the potential catastrophic misuse of these discoveries. Consequently, he co-founded the Neurorights Foundation, which, among others is trying to incite the United Nations Organization to defend human rights in the face of potential abuses resulting from such detailed knowledge of the workings of the human brain by neurotechnologies,
According to Special Rapporteur on the right to privacy Ana Brian Nougrère‘s report „Foundations and principles for the regulation of neurotechnologies and the processing of neurodata from the perspective of the right to privacy,“ Rafael Yuste listed among the challenges produced by the development of neurotechnology:
„potential to alter certain fundamental human characteristics, such as autonomy, moral responsibility, free will, dignity, identity, private mental life… bodily integrity and security“, potential of „causing physical damage or mental manipulation in human beings“.
He warned as well that „’Brainjacking’ may involve the theft of information (violation of the right to mental privacy). In addition, viruses could be introduced or Internet-connected neural devices might make it possible for individuals or organizations (hackers, corporations or government agencies) to track or even manipulate an individual’s mental experience“.
In the Report of the Human Rights Council Advisory Committee of the UN published in 2024, „Impact, opportunities and challenges of neurotechnolboy with regard to the promotion and protection of all human rights“ we can read:
„Neurotechnologies challenge the foundations of the human rights system and can be used in ways that may erode democracy and the rule of law… Neurotechnologies can be used to interfere and manipulate individuals. Through neuromodulation devices, the physical and mental processes of a person’s inner sphere can be altered in ways similar to ‘brainwashing’… They may also interfere with the right to make autonomous life choices without outside interference or intimidation (decisional privacy), as well as effect informational privacy through unauthorized uses of the personal information collected… Moreover some types of neurotechnologies can affect mental health and provoke alterations in an individual’s personality, psychological balance or sense of self identity… As ‘neuromarketing’ strategies have already demonstrated, they can be successfully used to condition the forming of opinions, as well as influencing an individual’s decision-making processes. That enables, to an unprecedented extent, behavioural manipulation of individuals by private actors, such as marketing engineers or political campaigners. With the extensive commercialization of such technologies for personal uses, including during sleep, the risk that such interference occurs even without the individual’s consent or knowledge is high“.
Nowhere in the report does the UN Human Rights Council acknowledge that these effects can be produced at a distance, with one exception. On page 4 (item 11), it states:
“Invasive brain stimulators have been in use for decades and are being implanted worldwide for the treatment of neurological conditions. However, the applications of ‘chip technology’ are also extending beyond the medical field. A company has recently developed a secure interface for communication ‘with the power of thought’ and is conducting large-scale trials of this technology, which can be implanted into the brain through blood vessels. Other companies already advertise ‘cosmetically’ invisible implants that may allow users to control computers or mobile devices from any location.”
The company working on the delivery of “chips” or implants through blood vessels is most likely using graphene nanoparticles to deliver additional antennas to the brain, enhancing the effectiveness of pulsed microwaves used to communicate with it. Graphene is the least harmful nanomaterial, making it suitable for so-called non-invasive communication with the brain, and it is already being used widely in the treatment of neurological disorders. It can also be delivered to the brain through food or aerosol It can also be delivered to the brain, as it enters the blood from inhaled air and swallowed food.
The United Nations is authorized only to make recommendations to governments. In the aforementioned documents, they recommend that governments enact legislations to protect their citizens from the abuse of neurotechnologies; however, they do not recommend banning the use of pulsed microwaves or other energies to manipulate the minds of people on an individual or global scale at distance. The reason is that these technologies are classified as national security information.
On June 6, 1992, the Russian newspaper Komsomolskaya Pravda published an article titled “Купите устройство для слежки за соседями” (Buy Equipment to Spy on Your Neighbors). The article stated that the subject of remote control over human brain function was on the “List of Information Banned from Publication” in the Russian Federation in 1990.
In November 2000, the Committee on Security of the Russian State Duma published a conclusion titled “On Inclusion of Addendum to Article 6 of the Federal Law on Weapons,” arguing that “the effects of microwave radiation cause false perception of reality“ and that (to influence the masses of people) “phone lines, heating and sewer pipes, TVs, fire signalization can be used as transmitting antennas” for this radiation. This reasoning of the Russian Security Committee has not been published in the Russian media. In November 2016, the Polish weekly NIE wrote that when its journalists asked the Polish Ministry of Defence why the Polish Minister of Defence had not fulfilled his promise to set up a commission to investigate complaints from Polish citizens that they were being attacked with electromagnetic weapons, they were told that the issue was subject to the law on state secrets related to national defence (this article can no longer be found on the original magazine NIE web address (similar to the article by Allen H. Frey in magazine The Scientist, which mentions the classification of bioweapons using microwaves).
In the last paragraph of the first of the quoted UN documents, the organization recommends that governments educate their citizens publicly about the “benefits and risks associated with neurotechnologies,” which “will enable people to better understand their impact, make informed decisions about their neurodata, and demand that their rights be respected in this new technological era”. Unfortunately, these UN publications are not mentioned in the world media, indicating that governments are suppressing information about repressive technologies that starkly contrast with their stated human rights policies. In 2008, the deposed Honduran president Manuel Zelaya, while under siege at the Brazilian embassy in Honduras, complained that he was subjected to “electron bombardment with microwaves”. Asked by Amy Goodman of the globally watched Democracy Now! if he knew that the Honduran military had such technology in its arsenal, he replied: “Yes, of course.” In an exceptional situation, he was therefore willing to publicly confirm the existence of these weapons.
The efforts of the U.S. intelligence services to deny that attacks related to Havana Syndrome are produced by foreign powers only serve to raise suspicions that the US wants to use these neurotechnologies to control the entire world population, as proposed in 1994 by the Strategic Studies Institute of the US War College. Suspicions that the US wants to use neurotechnology to control the world are heightened by the fact that the new US President Donald Trump, after taking office, stopped US funding to the UN (a total of $2.7 billion), causing the UN to lay off 20% of its staff. Was he trying to get the UN to stop releasing more material that would put pressure on the governments to declassify these weapons? Previously, Joe Biden had already prevented the European Union from disclosing and banning the use of these neurotechnologies in its AI law by stopping further orders for US liquefied natural gas, effectively stalling further growth of the European economy beyond the end of the decade. Donald Trump has not yet authorized new orders for US LNG. Thus, today, the non-freedom of the press serves to shift the technology of governance worldwide towards a new form of totalitarianism.
It becomes more and more evident that governments are unwilling to accept responsibility for their citizen’s freedom and respect their fundamental human rights. This raises the question of whether the United Nations should be given more authority than simply issuing recommendations and become a democratic institution that will oversee compliance with the ban on the misuse of neurotechnologies to suppress human rights worldwide. You can help break the silence of governments about the existence of technologies that destroy freedom of thought and democracy and enable the theft of ideas from people’s brains by sharing this article on social media and by signing a petition urging the European Union to declassify technologies that enable the remote control of the human nervous system.
Mojmir Babacek was born in 1947 in Prague, Czech Republic. Graduated in 1972 at Charles University in Prague in philosophy and political economy. In 1978 signed the document defending human rights in communist Czechoslovakia „Charter 77“. Since 1981 until 1988 lived in emigration in the USA. Since 1996 he has published articles on different subjects mostly in the Czech and international alternative media.
In 2010, he published a book on the 9/11 attacks in the Czech language. Since the 1990‘s he has been striving to help to achieve the international ban of remote control of the activity of the human nervous system and human minds with the use of neurotechnology.
