• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

the new normal?, toward a "Psychocivilized" Society?, our "Brave New World"? ...

// __ "affect recognition" ...

https://theintercept.com/2018/12/06...nst-facial-scanning-with-a-dangerous-history/

But researchers at New York University’s AI Now Institute have issued a strong warning against not only ubiquitous facial recognition, but its more sinister cousin: so-called affect recognition, technology that claims it can find hidden meaning in the shape of your nose, the contours of your mouth, and the way you smile.

https://ainowinstitute.org/AI_Now_2018_Report.pdf

But AI Now, which was established last year to grapple with the social implications of artificial intelligence, expresses in the document particular dread over affect recognition, “a subclass of facial recognition that claims to detect things such as personality, inner feelings, mental health, and ‘worker engagement’ based on images or video of faces.” The thought of your boss watching you through a camera that uses machine learning to constantly assess your mental state is bad enough, while the prospect of police using “affect recognition” to deduce your future criminality based on “micro-expressions” is exponentially worse.

“affect recognition,” the report explains, is little more than the computerization of physiognomy, a thoroughly disgraced and debunked strain of pseudoscience from another era that claimed a person’s character could be discerned from their bodies — and their faces, in particular.

https://theintercept.com/2016/11/18...o-will-be-criminals-based-on-facial-features/

“From Faception claiming they can ‘detect’ if someone is a terrorist from their face to HireVue mass-recording job applicants to predict if they will be a good employee based on their facial ‘micro-expressions,’ the ability to use machine vision and massive data analysis to find correlations is leading to some very suspect claims,” said Crawford.

What’s worse than bad science passing judgment on anyone within camera range is that the algorithms making these decisions are kept private by the firms that develop them, safe from rigorous scrutiny behind a veil of trade secrecy.
 
From: Dr. Michael Ellis Hoffer (leading a team of doctors investigating the "health attacks" in Cuba)

His site confirms that he is indeed welcoming new patients, including international patients. To book an appointment:

https://doctors.umiamihealth.org/provider/Michael+Ellis+Hoffer/524979

A week ago, the team published a groundbreaking report, which has huge implications for Tis worldwide. Here's a link to the pdf of the report:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/lio2.231

Why is this report so important to us? Because the team of doctors was not content with examining the diplomats in Cuba. Quite unexpectedly, they are adamant and insistent that this is much, much bigger, than the few dozen embassy personnel in Havana. The team emphasizes in no less than in three different sections of their report that "new cases have been reported all over the globe affecting individuals from many countries".

And that's not all: all three sections include a call to doctors and caregivers to learn about the symptom patterns as this is "crucial" to making a proper diagnosis of this widespread condition.

Here are the direct quotes I am talking about:

"Because this injury pattern has now been reported elsewhere, it is important for individuals who care for patients to be aware of the presenting symptoms and signs" (p.7):

"Knowledge of the unbiased presenting symptom patterns reported here is crucial since new cases have been reported all over the globe affecting individuals from many countries" (p.7-8)

"This report is intended to facilitate an objective diagnosis of this disorder as new actual or potential cases continue to be reported" (p.8)
Why was the publication of this report delayed for so long? "Hoffer said a copy of the study published Wednesday had been given to the State Department and that it took nine months for it to get clearance."

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-

world/world/americas/cuba/article222943585.html

Did State find the revelations too sensitive?

Be sure to read the other Hoffer Report, written by a a team of three doctors including Dr. James Giordano and Dr. Carey Balaban. (Thank you David Hambling!) This earlier report delves much more deeply into the question of weapons used:
"Directed energy weapons intended to disrupt or damage their victims’ brains were the most likely source of a series of mysterious attacks singling out U.S. personnel assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Cuba in 2017, three doctors involved in the investigation have told National Defense in exclusive interviews."

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine....veal-details-of-neuroweapon-attacks-in-havana

One of the theories studied by the trio is that human guinea pigs are somehow involved: "One theory is that the victims were being used as a test — basically human guinea pigs — and the perpetrators are hoping the U.S. publishes test results that can help them fine-tune or better understand how to use these weapons. Balaban said that kind of data will not be made public." Hmmm… As we all know, Dr. John Hall - himself a TI - published in 2014 an important book called Guinea Pigs: Technologies of Control.
I close with this quote by Dr. Giordano: "Such weapons could be used clandestinely against a political leader, for example, to ultimately destabilize a society, Giordano said. “I think what you are beginning to see is a greater likelihood for targeting the brain in these ways — both in regard to its structure and its functions, which includes cognitions, emotions and behaviors — in ways that are going to be disruptive on a variety of scales from systems in the individual to systems in the social and political” realm, he said." Interestingly, deposed President Manuel Zelaya of Honduras complained in 2016 of being targeted by microwaves:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/oct/25/honduras-manuel-zelaya-embassy-siege
 
Al McCoy is someone to pay attention to, and interestingly his lecture in the video makes no mention of the gangstalking delusions and the other symptoms evidenced by the primary source of those discussions on this forum.
 
I was referring to the author of the wall o'text website linked:

Webmaster: Dr. Eric T. Karlstrom, Emeritus Professor of Geography, CSUS
 
Hans said:
Oh my that was torture to read - I did find this pearl in all the muck thou:



Wow someone invented a direct energy weapon that is portable enough to be used by the police? REALLY....do share? Tell us about these microwave, laser, particle beam and sonic weapons the police are using on us.
Click to expand...
they have the ADS a abbreviation of active denial system but it is more military,but the portable where they can use it like a dang flash light is too ambiguous as the police can just use the taser
 
> . . . police can just use the taser

tasers have become toys in the policing, social control arsenal.

I myself and other people have been harassing theIntercept to come clear on a number of aspects about which they are too unclear, "philosophical". They were reporting on FBI "operative manuals" (amazing how similar the terminology they use is to the one used by the stasi (similar mindset?, were they eagerly holding a candle to them?, have they become their wholesale copycats?, ..., all of the above?)) which they "found", but would not make public their content (and, hey!, it would be Julian Assange, wikileaks the ones they would be complaining about, right?). For example, in this article, they talk about how USG can "... peer through the walls of private homes; and more ..." :

// __ Secret Docs Reveal: President Trump Has Inherited an FBI With Vast Hidden Powers
Glenn Greenwald, Betsy Reed

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/31...-with-vast-hidden-powers/?comments=1#comments
~
Many TIs have been constantly complaining about crawling sensations and bodily jolts of their organs which they can easily check are not nervous, endogenous, by fencing and un- that area with a metal sheet. If you know your ABC about Physics you will understand that that must work both ways ...

Many TIs report they can't sleep while their spouses right next to them doesn't notice anything. Some even report their babies are being harassed with such weapons. They are not only able to keep some sort of coreographed map/text of all your actions, but also harass, target you if it comes to that. Yesterday, I could barely sleep because of all the peskily annoying noises around me.
 
in case you had any doubts about the U.S. being a police state. At this point things have started to become kind of amusing in a dark sense:

// __ A Texas Elementary School Speech Pathologist Refused to Sign a Pro-Israel Oath, Now Mandatory in Many States — so She Lost Her Job

https://theintercept.com/2018/12/17/israel-texas-anti-bds-law/
~
Is the Israeli government actually sabotaging their own bs? They have been pretty effective at managing it so far, haven't they?

Of course, when "we" do such things it is "different" because "we" do it out of wholehearted true-blue-"American" "patriotism" to make sure that "freedom prevails in the Universe". Oh, yeah and when the soviets, Nazis, "the Chinese", . . . have done such things they also thought of their own ***** as being "different", too . . ., but our ***** sure is "different different" . . . What the heck did that teacher think freedom was all about?
 
> What you neglect to note is that there is a civil case filed on her behalf.

I don't know what makes you think that I am "neglecting" anything. At least you could have seen/said I was looking at that issue from a different point of view.

To me there is plenty of news right there already and I was definitely pointing out way more than that particular case. Why should a "Pro-Israel Oath" (or any kind of highly politicized "pro" whatever, totally unrelated to one's line of work), "mandatory" in any state to begin with?

Aren't you the one "from the field"? If you are, at least you should know how easily gullible people are, I mean the whole "from the field" profession is based just on that.

Ask yourself just a few (of possibly many) simple questions. Since when was that preposterous "Oath" thing instituted? In how many states? How many people have signed such a thing many of them not even knowing the meaning of it (provided it has any) or even where Israel is on a map with both hands on their rear ends?
 
and BTW they do those "letter of understanding" things even at the UN as well, even with foreign representatives. You would find a page on your desk telling you (again, depending on your point of view, in not so clear or in -very clear- terms) "if you are one of us, just fax this page to ... and you will be good. We wish you a prosperous career in your future"
 
rlopez2 said:
and BTW they do those "letter of understanding" things even at the UN as well, even with foreign representatives. You would find a page on your desk telling you (again, depending on your point of view, in not so clear or in -very clear- terms) "if you are one of us, just fax this page to ... and you will be good. We wish you a prosperous career in your future"
Click to expand...

1. The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in “advanced” countries, but they have destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued development of technology will worsen the situation. It will certainly subject human beings to greater indignities and inflict greater damage on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased physical suffering even in “advanced” countries.

2. The industrial-technological system may survive or it may break down. If it survives, it MAY eventually achieve a low level of physical and psychological suffering, but only after passing through a long and very painful period of adjustment and only at the cost of permanently reducing human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. Furthermore, if the system survives, the consequences will be inevitable: There is no way of reforming or modifying the system so as to prevent it from depriving people of dignity and autonomy.

3. If the system breaks down the consequences will still be very painful. But the bigger the system grows the more disastrous the results of its breakdown will be, so if it is to break down it had best break down sooner rather than later.

4. We therefore advocate a revolution against the industrial system. This revolution may or may not make use of violence; it may be sudden or it may be a relatively gradual process spanning a few decades. We can’t predict any of that. But we do outline in a very general way the measures that those who hate the industrial system should take in order to prepare the way for a revolution against that form of society. This is not to be a POLITICAL revolution. Its object will be to overthrow not governments but the economic and technological basis of the present society.

5. In this article we give attention to only some of the negative developments that have grown out of the industrial-technological system. Other such developments we mention only briefly or ignore altogether. This does not mean that we regard these other developments as unimportant. For practical reasons we have to confine our discussion to areas that have received insufficient public attention or in which we have something new to say. For example, since there are well-developed environmental and wilderness movements, we have written very little about environmental degradation or the destruction of wild nature, even though we consider these to be highly important.

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF MODERN LEFTISM

6. Almost everyone will agree that we live in a deeply troubled society. One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern society in general.

7. But what is leftism? During the first half of the 20th century leftism could have been practically identified with socialism. Today the movement is fragmented and it is not clear who can properly be called a leftist. When we speak of leftists in this article we have in mind mainly socialists, collectivists, “politically correct” types, feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists and the like. But not everyone who is associated with one of these movements is a leftist. What we are trying to get at in discussing leftism is not so much movement or an ideology as a psychological type, or rather a collection of related types. Thus, what we mean by “leftism” will emerge more clearly in the course of our discussion of leftist psychology. (Also, see paragraphs 227-230.)

8. Even so, our conception of leftism will remain a good deal less clear than we would wish, but there doesn’t seem to be any remedy for this. All we are trying to do here is indicate in a rough and approximate way the two psychological tendencies that we believe are the main driving force of modern leftism. We by no means claim to be telling the WHOLE truth about leftist psychology. Also, our discussion is meant to apply to modern leftism only. We leave open the question of the extent to which our discussion could be applied to the leftists of the 19th and early 20th centuries.

9. The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we call “feelings of inferiority” and “oversocialization.” Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while oversocialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential.

FEELINGS OF INFERIORITY

10. By “feelings of inferiority” we mean not only inferiority feelings in the strict sense but a whole spectrum of related traits; low self-esteem, feelings of powerlessness, depressive tendencies, defeatism, guilt, self- hatred, etc. We argue that modern leftists tend to have some such feelings (possibly more or less repressed) and that these feelings are decisive in determining the direction of modern leftism.

11. When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said about him (or about groups with whom he identifies) we conclude that he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem. This tendency is pronounced among minority rights activists, whether or not they belong to the minority groups whose rights they defend. They are hypersensitive about the words used to designate minorities and about anything that is said concerning minorities. The terms “negro,” “oriental,” “handicapped” or “chick” for an African, an Asian, a disabled person or a woman originally had no derogatory connotation. “Broad” and “chick” were merely the feminine equivalents of “guy,” “dude” or “fellow.” The negative connotations have been attached to these terms by the activists themselves. Some animal rights activists have gone so far as to reject the word “pet” and insist on its replacement by “animal companion.” Leftish anthropologists go to great lengths to avoid saying anything about primitive peoples that could conceivably be interpreted as negative. They want to replace the world “primitive” by “nonliterate.” They seem almost paranoid about anything that might suggest that any primitive culture is inferior to our own. (We do not mean to imply that primitive cultures ARE inferior to ours. We merely point out the hypersensitivity of leftish anthropologists.)

12. Those who are most sensitive about “politically incorrect” terminology are not the average black ghetto- dweller, Asian immigrant, abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists, many of whom do not even belong to any “oppressed” group but come from privileged strata of society. Political correctness has its stronghold among university professors, who have secure employment with comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual white males from middle- to upper-middle-class families.

13. Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of groups that have an image of being weak (women), defeated (American Indians), repellent (homosexuals) or otherwise inferior. The leftists themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify with their problems. (We do not mean to suggest that women, Indians, etc. ARE inferior; we are only making a point about leftist psychology.)

14. Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as strong and as capable as men. Clearly they are nagged by a fear that women may NOT be as strong and as capable as men.

15. Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives. They SAY they hate the West because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at best he GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points out (and often greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these faults are not the leftist’s real motive for hating America and the West. He hates America and the West because they are strong and successful.

16. Words like “self-confidence,” “self-reliance,” “initiative,” “enterprise,” “optimism,” etc., play little role in the liberal and leftist vocabulary. The leftist is anti-individualistic, pro-collectivist. He wants society to solve everyone’s problems for them, satisfy everyone’s needs for them, take care of them. He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense of confidence in his ability to solve his own problems and satisfy his own needs. The leftist is antagonistic to the concept of competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser.

17. Art forms that appeal to modern leftish intellectuals tend to focus on sordidness, defeat and despair, or else they take an orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope of accomplishing anything through rational calculation and all that was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the moment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom