Dr. Reiner Fuellmich on the COVID Vaccine Scam – LETHAL DOSE FINDINGS: “Trying to figure out how to kill as many people as possible, without alerting too many people.”

“There’s no benign explanation for what they have done. This is not innocent. This is intentional.”

Dr. Reiner Fuellmich and a team of lawyers/doctors/scientists have come together during the last year and a half to form a Corona Investigative Committee set on exposing the COVID plandemic and holding those who are perpetrating these crimes responsible for their actions.

In the interview below, Reiner Fuellmich shares some incredibly important information and data that they’ve been discussing in these meetings, mentioning some of the groups responsible, and the steps that they are taking to address these issues.

It is extremely relevant and essential to consider the exact magnitude that is being discussed in this interview. Dr. Reiner Fuellmich describes scientific findings and factual details and connects that with profound implications that helps to explain the state of the world.

While it may be hard to believe, especially perhaps for those with a strong, scientific background, as some doctors and researchers have been admitting, the conclusions that they’ve come to have inevitably revealed the truth of the matter – as difficult as it is to face. However, with several proofs and evidence explaining certain agendas, there can be no doubt what it all boils down to.

I sincerely thank Dr. Reiner Fuellmich and everyone else on these teams for being brave enough to address these issues head on, and exposing the egregious corruption we’re surrounded in.

The video has been transcribed in full. Some embellishment has been added for emphasis.

Maria Zeee: “Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, thank you so much for joining us this evening.

Dr. Reiner Fuellmich is the leading lawyer and member of the German Corona Investigative Committee, and specializes globally on the prosecution of fraudulent corporations. You might have heard of him from the famous “Nuremberg 2.0″. Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, thank you – Reiner Fuellmich, thank you so much for joining us this evening, or this afternoon for you.”

Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: “Yeah, thank you very much for having me. It’s a pleasure.”

Maria Zeee: “Uh, look, for the sake of the audience, I always do this, could you please just give us a brief career history and what led you to… spearheading Nuremberg 2.0?”

Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: “Well, I don’t – I prefer not to call it Nuremberg 2.0. But I know that a lot of people have tried to pin that on me, so that… um, a lot of hopes – very high hopes are riding on what we’re doing here.

But, first of all, I’m not the only one. I’m just one of many. Um, the Corona Investigative Committee is, was founded by my friend Viviane Fischer, she’s an attorney here in Berlin, and myself, on July 10th of 2020.

Before that, I was completely in line with the mainstream. Um, I did have some suspicions because of the – because of my law practice; I had been going after the larger, German global corporations such as one of the most criminal organizations in the world, Deutsche Bank, VW, and the world’s largest shipping company, Kuehne and Nagel [Kuehne+Nagel]. I did have my suspicions, so did all of my colleagues, because it looked like the cards were stacked against us in these cases, in the courts of law.

In the meantime, of course, we’ve learnt a lot and the cards are not just stacked against us. It’s a fact, that the other side – um, Catherine Austin Fitts calls them Mr. Global, but that the people who are behind this agenda – and we have come to the conclusion that this is an agenda that’s being rolled out – that these people have been infiltrating our societies for decades.

It is hard to imagine, but this is what we’ve come – this is the conclusion that we’ve come to. Not just through the World Economic Forum, not just through their Young Global Leaders, or Global Young Leaders program, which produced graduates like Angela Merkel and Bill Gates, and of course Jacinda Ardern, and Macron in France, and uh, what’s his name… Justin Trudeau in Canada.

But, to make a very long story very short, my wife and I were still in the U.S. at our ranch in Northern California, when we received the news – this is in March of 2021, uh, 2020 rather, when we got all these phone calls from our friends and relatives telling us about a lockdown. Which I thought this is – this is ridiculous. This is crazy. And the stories that we heard reminded me a lot of what had happened during the swine flu, even though I had forgotten most of it.

And because I couldn’t understand what was going on, I got in touch with my friend Wolfgang Wodarg. Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, he is the man who, more or less – hang on one second – who more or less single-handedly stopped the swine flu some ten years/eleven years ago. He was capable of doing that because he’s a very – he’s a doctor, lung-specialist with lots of experience, and he was in a position of power. He was a member of the German Parliament, and he was a member of the Council of Europe. And that’s why he was – why he managed to expose that hoax back then as a mild flu.

However, even then, the very same protagonists, including Professor Dr. Drosten, he’s the guy who invented – who invented the PCR test which he claims can tell us something about infections, which is a complete lie. That guy, and his British counterpart, Neil Ferguson. Both of them are blatant liars. They had – they had come very far. They had, in fact, helped the pharmaceutical industry introduce their “vaccines” even then. It didn’t work that well in Germany, but in the Scandinavian countries, they vaccinated lots of people, and by – through this vaccination now, there’s 1,300 children, young adults now, who are permanently disabled because they suffer from narcolepsy. So that’s how it all started.

My wife said, “We’ve got to go back, we’ve got to do something, you know how to fight these bastards”; she used other words, of course, um, so, “You gotta do it. You gotta find some allies and go ahead.” And I said, I don’t think I’m gonna find any allies because the Germans, in particular, the German judiciary, is a bunch of cowards. They’re in it for the money, they’re in it for their careers, I don’t think I can count on anyone.

But Wolfgang put me in touch with Viviane Fischer, she’s not in it for the money, she’s in it for the cause, and we set up the Corona Investigative Committee on July 10th. Wanted answers to those questions which we believe our government, which is not our government anymore, and the mainstream media, which are owned, of course, by the same people who are owning this corona plandemic, that they wouldn’t give us any answers to.

How dangerous is the virus, how reliable is the PCR test, and how much damage do the anti-corona measures do? In the meantime, we know that it’s devastating and that’s why we talk about crimes against humanity. The latest evidence is so compelling that the – I just spoke with Dr. Mike Yeadon, former Vice-President of Pfizer – “

Maria Zeee: “I was about to ask you about this. Because what I’ve heard, is that this is – this is not about money, this original plan was to roll it out back – all the way in 2050, but they’ve accelerated it.

And this recent finding from Mike Yeadon and others, is that this is worse than what happened in World War 2, and we’ve found evidence, undeniable evidence, that this is a kill-shot, it being used to murder or maim people. Could you please go into – into those findings for us.”

Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: “Yes. This is the – this is the most recent findings that Dr. Mike Yeadon came up with. But he does emphasize he’s not the only one. And this is a group of 5 or 6 scientists, it’s just that he’s the one I think that, who connected the dots.

And I don’t know if you know, have you seen his video, the one that… it’s a bitchute video and I think he calls it compelling evidence for pre-meditated mass murder. This video shows in great detail, and we’re going to do this again, tomorrow, on our next Corona Committee session. It shows in great detail how – and he’s focusing on 3 vaccine makers. Or, they claim it’s vaccines; we know it’s not a vaccine. It’s not even experimental gene-therapy, it’s experimental gene-manipulation. This is what we’re talking about. And so he took a closer look at BioNTech/Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson and Johnson.

And the evidence that he showed us, is really so compelling that we think we’re going to make this a center piece of our International Criminal Trial. Which will start in… a couple of weeks and it’s going to be, probably going to be a grand jury investigation asking the jury, which is the people, to, for indictments against 4 of their figureheads: Bill Gates, Drosten, Fauci, and Tedros, of the W.H.O.

But the findings that he showed us, is that – but – all 3, all 3 of these vaccine makers, quote/unquote “vaccine makers”, are deliberately – they’re looking for lethal doses. They’re trying out the dosage – I forget the precise technical term he used, but we’re going to come up with it tomorrow in our committee. It is very obvious that if you follow the lot numbers, I think the British called it ‘charges’? Batches, rather, but the Americans call it lots. So, if you follow these lot numbers, there’s some that don’t seem to cause any problems whatsoever. At least not now.

As we have learned from one of our scientist professor, she’s a biologist and immunologist [undetermined] University, even those shots that seem to be harmless, if it is mRNA, they shut off your immune system. That doesn’t necessarily mean you’re going to die immediately; no you’re not. But sooner or later you’re going to run into a virus or some kind of illness and your body won’t be able to fight it, because your immune system has been shut off.

But some of these lots are so dangerous that if you look at them, and follow them through the United States, through the – in that case, 36 states of the United States, they were extremely harmful, caused thousands and thousands of deaths, all across the country. And from the way that he explained it to us, it seems very very obvious that they did this, taking turns. First Moderna, then BioNTech/Pfizer, then Johnson&Johnson. And you could also see that they were sort of taking breaks in between. And there’s a couple of lots that were completely harmless again, and all of a sudden it starts again, with these very lethal batch- lots, rather.”

Maria Zeee: “What do its breaks signify? What do they mean, the fact that they took breaks?”

Reiner Fuellmich: “We think – we’re trying to establish a baseline. Something like that. But we’re going to look into this in greater detail. By the time that we start our criminal investigation, our grand jury investigation, we will have the complete story.

But even now, it is – it is so compelling. It is undeniable and irrefutable that they’re – that this is what they’re trying to do. Trying to figure out how to kill as many people as possible, without alerting too many people. Cause if they had started, if they had used these lethal doses right from the start, it would’ve killed everyone and everybody would have been, “Ooh, I don’t think I’m gonna get this shot.” So that’s why they’re trying to figure out a way through which they can cause a lot of harm but in such a way that people will not be alarmed.

It is… it is devilish. It’s just… we looked at each other, and we just couldn’t believe it. How can people be so evil? So evil.

Maria Zeee: “I will find the video that you’re talking about from Mike Yeadon. [Reiner Fuellmich: “I’ll send it to you.”] I’ll upload it onto my website for the viewers so that I can see that afterwards.

So, let me get this straight. There have been, just to recap, there have been batches released purposely by these big pharma giants… placebo, knowing that they’re – that they’re saline shots, then knowing that they’re releasing kill shots, taking a break, releasing some more saline, releasing some more kill shots, on purpose, knowing full well what they are doing?”

Reiner Fuellmich: “That is the conclusion that we have arrived at. It is inescapable. There’s no benign explanation for what they have done. This is not innocent. This is intentional.

Maria Zeee: “You made a comment recently that this is not about money, Dr. Fuellmich. Can you talk to us about what that means?”

Reiner Fuellmich: “Yes. The people who are behind this, maybe 300, maybe 3000, we don’t know. It’s not very many people, but the people who are behind this and who are – they have so much money, they don’t need any more. They can buy tens or thousands of yachts if they wanted to because they’ve stolen so much from us. They don’t care about money.

But, they’re using money. They’re using money to buy politicians, mainstream media people, doctors, lawyers, those are the two tools that they use in order to get people under control to do their bidding. Money, bribing them, and the other tool is extortion. And this extortion thing is very very difficult to figure out. We do believe that ritual child abuse has – plays a big role in this. But money is very – “

Maria Zeee: “Why do you believe that? Why do you believe that? Is there evidence to suggest that – “

Reiner Fuellmich: “Well, we had whistleblowers approaching us and telling us about these things. And 18 years ago, I know a little bit about that scene because 18 years ago, I represented some of the victims of this ritual child abuse. A friend of mine who’s a well known member of the German journalistic scene, and myself; I did the legal work and he published it in – even on our national public radio and television. Until they stopped him, because they didn’t want him to do it anymore and, my ex-wife, she also, she couldn’t handle it anymore.

So I know a few things about this. I just couldn’t believe how big it possibly is. It may be much bigger than we think. But we don’t have enough evidence for that yet, so I’m not going to make this public, yet.”

Maria Zeee: “Sure. So we’re saying that all of these global leaders are taking part in this. If this is part of it, this ritual child abuse, how does it tie in with this depopulation plan?”

Reiner Fuellmich: “Well, we think, after having spoken with a number of psychology and psychiatry professors, we think this is a huge psychological operation. It has been planned for at least 3 decades, maybe longer. And, they’re using all kinds of panic mongering tools. We have, for example, here in Germany, the so-called “panic paper” was leaked. It was written by the German Secretary of the Interior, and in detail, in great detail, it explains how to get the population to panic.

For example, “We want to make children feel responsible for the tortured death of their parents and grandparents if they don’t wash their hands, if they don’t wear masks”, etc. That’s what it says. Explicit. This is insanity. That’s why we believe the people who are behind this are psychopaths and sociopaths. They’re using many many puppets because they’re bribing them, or there’s extortion, we don’t know.

But it’s not about money. They’re using money, but they don’t want money. Ultimately, money plays a big role in this. Because we believe that it’s the financial industry, or, better put, the financial mafia: Blackrock, Vanguard – which they’re using as vehicles to invest their money in and then these funds – invest their money in Deutsche Bank, VW, and all the other international global corporations. Thus, owning through I think 147 corporations, owning pretty much everything on this planet.

Um, so, this is what’s been going on for at least 30 years or so. It was about to blow up, this financial mafia scheme was about to blow up in 2008 and 9, which is when we had the first financial scandal; it started out as a housing scandal in the United States. I, coincidentally, had been going after these people, after Deutsche Bank in particular, for the same crimes which had been committed in Germany since 1992.

But I guess it’s the – because of the fact that the German courts of law, for some reason, now we know why, because they were stacked by their own people, didn’t want to follow up on this, they felt motivated, Deutsche Bank and others felt motivated to play this game on a much grander scale in the United States. That’s where the whole, we now call it ‘predatory lending schemes’, started.

This should’ve blown up in 2008 and 9. Um, lots of people stepped forward, including our chancellor, and our then secretary of finance, and “we’re gonna get these people, they’re gonna have to pay a price” – No. No one paid a price. The only thing that happened is that they started to print money. Truckloads of money.

In September of 2019, this whole thing was about to explode again. But, they – and they wanted to explode. But they wanted to explode, or implode, rather, on their terms. They want to… because there’s no other way. There’s no other way to solve this problem.

Because, if this explodes, in an uncontrolled way, then the people will understand that it’s the – we now call them the DAVOS clique, the people who regularly meet once a year on this platform of the World Economic Forum, all of them crooks and gangsters, mafia-like structures – then we would have found out that it’s these people and they’re mingling with its self-appointed corporate elites and the self-appointed political elites. The political elites are their own. They’ve bought them. They’ve trained them, through their Young Global Leaders program, for example. Private public partnership means a hostile takeover of our politicians, by them. We think it’s our politicians – no, it’s theirs.

So this whole thing would’ve exploded, and we all would’ve found out about it and they wanted to keep us from learning this, and that’s why they needed a distraction. And that’s why, in December of 2019, they came up with a corona pandemic, even though there were no cases. They needed to create – that’s what drove them into an early start, and that’s why they’re making so many mistakes. Apart from the fact that most of them are stupid as hell. But they’re making many many mistakes and that is helping us. Because they were driven into an early start.

They didn’t have any cases. Even in Wuhan, China. Which is where they, they claim the whole thing started. We don’t know if it’s true. They didn’t have any cases. So what they needed is cases. Why did they need cases? Because they needed to declare the international – what is it called – the Public Health Emergency of International Concern. Was short, PHEIC [pronounced “fake”]. PHEIC. Fake. So obvious. It’s in our faces.

But in order to declare this – and why did they need this? Not for the mask mandates. Not for social distancing. But they needed it for the introduction of untested new drugs. For the vaccines. Cause that is the only basis on which they can use untested new drugs. On the basis of an international health emergency. And that’s what this Public Health Emergency of International Concern is.

Therefore, didn’t have any cases, so they called Drosten. This – he’s neither a professor nor is he a doctor of medicine, he’s a fake. So they called him and told him, just as they had done 10 years earlier, or 20 years earlier during the bird flu, come up with a PCR test that will tell us about infections. And he claims he did that.

The two basic lies on which everything rides here is – come from him. One is, there are asymptomatic infections; of course there aren’t any. And even if there were they don’t play a role in this. The most recent study is that, which was conducted in Wuhan, with 10 million people involved, this is at the end of 2020 and it shows there are no asymptomatic infections. And this is a question of just of logic. You know? If you want to go – if you go see a doctor and tell him, “I have a problem.” The doctor – the first thing the doctor’s gonna ask you is, “What symptoms do you have?” What are you going to say? “I don’t have any!” Except Drosten and Fauci… yeah right. Go see an exorcist or something like that.

So there are no asymptomatic infections but he needed that. Or the W.H.O. which promoted his ideas and recommended them to the entire world, they needed this in order to make everyone afraid of everyone. Because even if you look perfectly healthy, you pose a potential danger, according to their logic. And then he came and said, “But I do have a solution for this. Because I have invented a new PCR test and I can tell you precisely who is infectious and who isn’t.”

That is the second lie. I’m saying ‘lie’ because we can prove that he lied when he said asymptomatic infections, cause he was referring, in a preprint, he was referring to a woman who traveled into Germany – Frankfurt, Germany from China, and he pointed at her as an example of someone having absolutely no symptoms but being very infectious, because she infected some people down in Southern Germany, in Bavaria. But another scientist read this preprint and pointed out to Drosten, “You’re wrong! This woman did have symptoms.” Because she was eating anti-flu medication and you don’t do that because it tastes so great. And ultimately it turned out she had been infected by her own parents and of course she had symptoms. She was sweating, etc., etc.

Second lie, he says, “I have invented the PCR test which will tell you who really is infectious”, and of course that’s a blatant lie because PCR tests as the real inventor, Kary Mullis, has said over and over and over again, is not for diagnostic purposes. It is for scientific purposes, but not for diagnostic purposes. Because it cannot tell the difference between dead and live matter. So when you test positive, it is very likely that it tests positive because the test finds the fragments of your body’s immune system’s fight against the common cold or the flu. It cannot tell the difference. Also, for someone to be infected with the virus, you need a whole virus to enter your cells and start replicating there. These tests – the Roche machines, all they see is fragments of virus; they never see whole viruses.

So for these two reasons, and there’s others, for these two reasons, it is absolutely totally, completely impossible for a PCR test to tell you anything about infections. On top of this, he, Drosten, and following his lead – the World Health Organization, who used, or which used his PCR test as a blueprint, they sent the test so that it was guaranteed to create false positives.

Last night, Mike Yeadon said, “Reiner, I think all of these cases were false positives. Not just 97%.” Why is he saying that? Well you take the, what you get from the nose and the throat, the swab, you can’t see anything because it’s invisible to the human eye. So you put them into the machines, all of them owned by Roche, they’re making truckloads of money right now, and in this machine you magnify the stuff that’s in there. It’s called cycles of amplification. 2, 4, 6 – 2, 4, 8, 16 – whatever. At 24 cycles of amplification, I think you’re in the billions of magnifying this stuff. At 24 cycles of amplification, even the Frankfurt Health Institute says we disregard anything that’s beyond that because it makes absolutely no sense.

Mike Yeadon says, remember, he’s the former Vice President of Pfizer, and he was their Chief Science Officer for 16 years, he says at 35 cycles of amplifications, you end up with at least 97 positives. The Drosten test and all the others were set at 45. So that’s how they created the cases, in order to be able to declare the Public Health Emergency of International Concern, in order to walk us through, make us obedient to walk us through mask mandates, social distancing, lockdowns, until finally we would agree to anything to have this end. Anything meaning, the deadly shots.”

Maria Zeee: “And speaking of the deadly shots, we – so we now know, that these, according to Karen Kingston, also an ex-Pfizer employee who’s been analyzing the patents, that these undoubtedly, all COVID-19 vaccines approved by the World Health Organization, have tracking abilities in them. They will not approve them, if they are not able to track citizens.

So on that note, knowing that these are kill shots, knowing that they’re able to track people, what are they trying to really do here, Dr. Fuellmich? Are they trying to reach this DAVOS clique, you know, this goal of reduced population that are easier to control… is this the final goal?”

Reiner Fuellmich: “I think it’s two-fold. They want, and they euphemistically call it population control, but it’s really about population reduction. Some people say that they want to reduce us to 500 million; I don’t know if that’s true. But population reduction is one of their major goals. That is definitely true.

Even Robert Malone, who said that if somebody had told him this a year ago, he would’ve said, “Yeah right.” And, myself! I mean, had you told me this a year and a half ago, I would’ve said, “Go take your pills. Go see a doctor. And things will get better.” No! In the meantime we’re running out of conspiracy theories. So this is one of their major goals.

The other one is, and that’s why all this tracking stuff comes into play, the other is to control the rest of us. To make us really into slaves. That will not think, that will not fight back, but that simply do as they’re ordered. So that’s why they’re trying to control us, why they’re trying to manipulate our DNA, through these mRNA shots.

There’s lots of experiments within this gigantic experiment going on. We don’t know what’s in the shot. Only they do. Our governments, as I said, are not our governments anymore. They’re completely controlled by the other side. This is especially true here in Europe where they’re about to install the first mini-world government – the real world government, as the pope who’s also in on this declared in his, what was it, ‘fratelli tutti’ thing in 2020. He said we must all submit to a new world government under the U.N. Yeah right.

But they’re gonna start with Europe, the program that they – the agenda that they’re following here is called HERA, Health Emergency Response Agency, and this is going to be the net result after it turns out that our national governments are incapable of dealing with this grave threat of the coronavirus.

I don’t think they’re going to get that far, because too many people have woken up in the meantime. And even here in Europe, where much of this is playing out, even here in Europe people are taking to the streets, again; hundreds of thousands of people, everywhere. In Italy, in particular in the former East European countries, and even in Germany again. So they’re not going to get much further than this.”

Maria Zeee: “We’ve seen many people taking it to the streets, Dr. Fuellmich, but it seems like the plan just keeps accelerating and accelerating. Do we think that it’s actually making a difference to these people that so many are protesting?”

Reiner Fuellmich: “I think it is. It’s a question of time until it will be absolutely impossible for them to sweep any of this under the rug. They have been able to do this because they have complete control of the mainstream media. But it is more and more obvious that even though nobody knows anyone who died of COVID or who suffered serious damage of COVID, all of a sudden EVERYONE knows someone who’s suffered serious problems, even death, after vaccination.

And this is another thing, latest figures are telling us, and this was confirmed by the CEO of an American life insurance company, that since the beginning of the measures, in particular, since the beginning of the shots of the vaccinations, we have had for the past year or so, we have excess mortality of 40%. This is unheard of. Totally unheard of. This cannot be swept under the rug much longer.”

Maria Zeee: “I agree. And some mainstream have had to start reporting – they don’t have a choice. Because too many people are talking about the people that they know that are now disabled or dead from the kill shot.

You mentioned the 4 people: Gates, Tedros, and a couple of others; this trial that’s going on. Can you give us more detail about that?”

Reiner Fuellmich: “I think i t’s gonna – we have put a lot of time and energy into this because we believe that it’s so important… because there’s so many people out there who’re talking about Nuremberg 2.0. What they really want is, they want us as lawyers, and as scientists, who are going to be our experts, they want us to show them the facts, and they want us to give them a legal platform, on which they can safely resist. 

We’ve come to this conclusion after we discussed this in great detail, in particular with people, very smart people, like Catherine Austin Fitts, who knows a lot about this, the aforementioned financial mafia structures. Which are doing their best to distract our attention from what they’ve been doing. We need not – of course we want – this is a formalized proceeding, patterned after the American grand jury investigation which shows all of the evidence we have, with real experts, with real witnesses, with real attorneys. We’re gonna have a real judge.

All of the evidence to the jury, which is going to be our viewers, and then ask them to return, to give us indictments against Drosten, who is their major puppet, as far as the PCR test is concerned. Fauci, Tedros, and of course Bill Gates. I don’t know how important these people are, they’re probably just figureheads. Maybe Bill Gates thinks that he’s one of them who pulls the strings. I don’t think he is, but we’ll see.

But much more important than these indictments, is to give the people full information. Verifiable information from real experts. People who really know what they’re talking about. Robert Malone, for example. He was on the other side, for a very long time. He knows everything that’s been going on there. So does Peter McCullough. So does Catherine Austin Fitts. I mean, she was a member of the American government, for awhile, and she’s also a very experienced investment banker.

So all of these people, including many of the politicians who have joined our ranks, will testify in great detail to what has really happened. To how this is a long planned agenda which is being rolled out in order to distract our attention from what is really going on. And what’s really going on is population reduction, and population control. And what is really going on is the deliberate destruction of our economies for the benefit of American platforms, such as Amazon, for example.

Whistleblowers have been telling us that at the same time the Chinese are taking over our and the American car industry. We don’t know how true that is, but there’s some evidence that shows us that it could be true. But whatever we’re seeing, it is two things: deliberate destruction of our economies, deliberate destruction of our health.

Maria Zeee: “And what can we, first of all, so this is happening in an international court, correct? [Reiner Fuellmich: “Yes.”] What we’ve seen in local courts is truly corruption of judges that throw out cases. [Reiner Fuellmich: “Yes.”] What are the chances of that happening in the international court? If all of this big players are in on it?”

Reiner Fuellmich: “Excellent question. And I just spoke with a couple of my colleagues here in Germany. I just spoke with them a couple of minutes before – before we started your show. We think that if we’re lucky, we’re going to run into individual judges who are still willing to uphold the law.

However, here in Germany, that is next to impossible. Why is that? Because Germans traditionally have been very obedient for at least 150 years. Bismarck started all this. This is, it’s especially bad in the judiciary because back in the day, 150 years ago, you could only join the judiciary if you were completely in line with the government. So this is not an invention by Hitler. He made it worse, yeah. But it’s never gotten better.

And right now we can see the results of this decades long education. That has to change. I believe that if we want to make an inroad, if we want to make progress, on our international judicial levels, we’re going to have to start on an international level. We’re going to have to show the people that we, the people, are in charge. We do not need their system.

We, for example, even the American colleagues and our South African colleague, have been telling us, we’re starting our own judiciary. We’re already working on this. Because the system is so corrupt, we can’t depend on them anymore. This is not just true for the judiciary. It’s also true for the economic system, for the education system, we’re gonna have to start our own system. We’re gonna have to disconnect from these global corporations and global NGOs, revert – and focus on our regional economies on our regional governments, because this is really what it is. It’s back to the roots. That’s democracy.

That’s why I joined this new party, grassroots party here in Germany. Because they truly believe that we – the only people who really know what’s good for them is the people in the region. In our own communities. We cannot allow these people to control us through a world government. No way! We’ve seen how, where this got us. This is where it got us. And it can’t get any worse. That’s why we have to fight up, fight back; set up our own systems, including our own system of law, so that we can have all these regional governments, we can connect. Each of us can connect all of these separate systems can connect. But we should never again allow any global entity to rule over us.

Like this is what the W.H.O. is doing right now. No one, not even the lawyers, understand about the – what is it called? International Health Regulations? This is an invention of the W.H.O. This is not democracy. Democracy is when we vote for someone who’s going to represent us in parliament. No one, no one has elected these people at the World Health Organization.

I mean, keep in mind, Tedros, the guy who runs the show, their major puppet, I think they filed a criminal complaint against him in New York last year, for genocide. And I’ve seen pictures of him wearing a gun and dead people behind him. So, this is who we’re dealing with. It’s the mafia. [Maria Zeee: “He’s a known terrorist.”] Yes. He’s a known terrorist.”

Maria Zeee: “Yes. He’s giving the world health advice all of a sudden wanting to save humanity through the World Health Organization solutions. It’s unbelievable. What are the possible – what are the possible consequences for these murderers? What could come of this? Dr. Fuellmich. People are angry. People want justice.”

Reiner Fuellmich: “Yes. I think we have to be very careful not to let this spin out of control into violence. Because that’s what they want. If we start to get… acting violently, I think they’re gonna try and bring in their own troops. If they have any. I don’t know about that. There’s lots of rumors – we haven’t been able to verify anything.

But we should continue with peaceful protests. We should also continue with the efforts to refocus on our regions, instead of this globalism. We will… there’s another factor to this. There’s 3 levels on which we, on which we have to fight.

One is, education. Bring out the truth. Expose them all. The other is, legal efforts. We have to continue with our legal efforts; in particular with the international legal efforts. But there’s also the spiritual side.

If, again, if you had told me about this a year ago, I would’ve said, “Yeah right. Take your pills.” But, this – and even Robert Malone agrees with that. I mean, he is a stone-cold scientist. We all agree that there’s something else. And that’s spirituality. Some call it religion; I’m not a religious person, because I don’t believe in organized religion. It’s all about power, in my view. But there is a spiritual side to this. And I think we’re going to get help from this spiritual side.

This is what connects us, by the way. This is why so many of us, despite the fact that they claim, “Oh, I’ve lost many friends.” Nah. Not really. These people were never our friends. But we’ve made so many new friends. People who we immediately felt connected with. Without having to even talk for an hour or so. But, there’s an immediate connection. So this spirituality is going to help us.

There is a spiritual force out there, and I’ve come to this conclusion after talking to someone from Australia. Aboriginal by the name of David Cole. Very smart man. And I reminded him, “David, I spoke to one of your people. A very famous, very old aboriginal by the name of Max.” He said, “Yeah, that’s Uncle Max! He guided us through the ceremony a couple of weeks ago, but unfortunately he passed away.”

Now this man, when I spoke to him, he made a great impression on me. Just like the indigenous people from Canada and the United States who I spoke with. They said, “We are, we’re on your side. We’re protecting you.” Because I for awhile thought, when I go running with my dogs, I mean, I’m a perfect target for them. And they said, “Well you are. But we’re gonna protect you. No matter what happens.” And I believe this is true. That’s why, when people tell me, “Don’t you feel that? Aren’t you scared?” Nah. I’m not scared. There’s no other way. We have to fight. All of us. We have to stand up and fight.”

Maria Zeee: “Many many people, Dr. Fuellmich, in this time, have asked for deeper answers, as to what’s wrong with the world. And what, you know, many people have run to God, in this time, to – for shelter, for comfort, for protection. For all of these things.

I, much like you, am a person that just does not feel fear. We have a task, we are on the right side of history, and we have to do this at whatever cost. But, again, what are the potential consequences for those that are guilty? If they are found guilty, what are the potential consequences for these people?

Reiner Fuellmich:They’re going to pay a very very very high price. Um, I think, ultimately, we the people will turn this thing around. It’s not the courts of law. The courts of law will then come in and clean up. In the aftermath.

There will be a – I’m absolutely convinced, there will be a, a real… a final reckoning. Which has been overdue for hundreds of years, probably. There will be a final reckoning. That’s why I think they’re going to pay a really steep price. And those who survive this, well, we’re going to deal with them in the courts of law.

Ultimately, if I look at the legal picture, which is evolving right now, but it’s clear enough. It’s like a huge puzzle of a thousand pieces but I think there’s only 10 or 15 pieces missing. So you can see exactly what’s going on. Despite the fact that a couple of pieces are still missing. So this is, Mike Yeadon is right. This – the facts that we can see, are compelling evidence – irrefutable evidence, for pre-meditated murder. And for that you have to pay a price. There is no immunity. Even under our legal systems. There is no immunity for anyone for pre-meditated murder. How can there be?

So all of the doctors, who are taking part in this, all of the pharmaceutical companies who are – which are taking part in this, everyone who’s involved in this, all of the people – all of the so-called VIPs, the politicians, who are trying to talk people into getting the shots, they’re all going to have to pay a very high price.

And this price, is… it’s, I mean you could throw out a figure, like, everyone who – EVERYONE, suffered damages because of what’s been going on for the past 2 years. EVERYONE. So if you start with a price tag in damages of a million dollars, that would probably be not too high. But we’re not talking about just a million dollars. In pain and suffering, for example. If that’s all you have. But there’s gonna be destroyed businesses, there’s gonna be your health destroyed. But if you start at 1 million dollars, and I think that’s a very low figure, you can multiply this, because we’re talking about intentional infliction of harm. Intentional infliction of harm leads us directly to, what the Americans call ‘punitive damages’.

Ultimately, the only way to pay for this, is by taking apart all of these global corporations, taking back what they stole from us, and using their money for a brand new society. One that’s humane, one that is built on cooperation, one that makes sense, in the human sense.”

Maria Zeee: “Will they go to prison?”

Reiner Fuellmich: “Yes. Those who survive the great reckoning, they’re definitely going to go to prison. Yes.”

Maria Zeee: “What do you mean by those who survive?”

Reiner Fuellmich:I think there’s gonna be a Great Reckoning and people, many of those who are… who are responsible, were stupid enough to take the shots themselves. I don’t think they’re gonna survive that. And I don’t have a clear image of how this spiritual reckoning is going to work. But I think they’re going to have to pay a really really really high price.

And that’s why I’m saying, the legal systems will – our new legal system, will deal with them. Those of them who are still there. But we’re only going to have to do the cleanup work, I think.”

Maria Zeee: “And have you got the support of lawyers all over the world, in every country committed to the cause? [Reiner Fuellmich: “Yes.”] I know that Tony Nikolic in Australia has been a great help. He’s a dear friend of mine and he’s helped me too. So…”

Reiner Fuellmich: “Yeah. He’s a good – a great character. He’s a great activist. He’s tough. I love him. He’s cool.”

Maria Zeee: “And so you’ve got, you got people all over the world supporting you and on board with this. These public trials.”

Reiner Fuellmich: “Yes. We’re a big team. It’s a team of people. There’s no ego involved in this. None of us has to prove anything to any of us. We’re doing it because we believe in what we’re doing. And we know that this is, ultimately, this is really a fight of good against evil. And we know we’re the good guys. We know it.”

Maria Zeee: “And this new system, this new society, who’s responsible for dictating how that goes?”

Reiner Fuellmich: “No one. It’s just us. We’re all going to set up our own systems of – in our own regions. We’re first going to start in our region. Because – and we’re all different. That’s why I keep telling the people here in Europe, get rid of this f*cking EU. The EU is only – it’s an instrument to steal money from the people, from the member states of the EU. That’s why it was a very smart move of the British to leave the EU. And now the former Eastern European countries are about to leave the EU as well.

We’re going to have to start from scratch. Build up our own systems, supplies systems, as far as energy, as far as food is concerned, in our regions. And then connect with each other. Exchange ideas. But never again shall we allow anyone to rule from above; from very far away.”

Maria Zeee: “And will we have an exposure of all of these organizations, all of these companies, everyone involved? Will that all be uncovered?”

Reiner Fuellmich: “Yes. I think absolutely. No one’s going to get away.”

Maria Zeee: “How can the public track this, and track what’s going on?”

Reiner Fuellmich: “I think it’s already happening. The news cannot be suppressed any more. As I said, all of these so-called side effects, which are not side effects, really, of the vaccinations, cannot be swept under the rug anymore. 40% excess mortality; I mean, what more can you say?

But if you want to – if you want to keep, or if you want to get detailed information, we, the Corona Committee, I don’t want to heap all this praise on ourselves, but the Corona Committee has interviewed over 150 experts from all walks of science.

Luc Montagnier, he’s a professor who won a Nobel Prize, from France. Catherine Austin Fitts, I already mentioned her. Dr. Mike Yeadon. Robert Malone. Peter McCullough. All of these people, we have interviewed them in great detail.

Robert Malone was very hesitant, at first. This is a few months ago. But in these few months, he has completely come around and understood that what he thought was conspiracy theories, involving the W – the World Economic Forum, for example, is absolutely true. And he says it’s in our face! You can read it. They’re publishing this! They’re so stupid. They’re really stupid.

But, we must not underestimate them, we must take them seriously, because they have paid a lot of people a lot of money to do their bidding and many of them are in strategically important positions. So we have to deal with these people. And we will. And we will.”

Maria Zeee: “And this plan, for the “great reset”, potentially, the cyber COVID shutting down all the networks… Do we know any more about that?”

Reiner Fuellmich: “Anything is possible. I don’t think it’s going to happen. There’s so many rumors out there. There’s so much panic mongering. Much of this is part of the illusion that they’re creating. Much of this is part of the psychological operation, which depends to a large degree on keeping us disoriented, keeping us in a panic-mode.

Keeping us in a position – there’s a… what is it called? The Biderman Chart of Coercion? Incredible. You should look this up. This is from the 1950’s or so. It is a deliberate psychological operation which Professor Mattias Desmet explained to us, it’s as though they are, and he says it’s not ‘as though’, it is, they’re hypnotizing 30% of the population. This is how it works with 30% of the population. You cannot reach them anymore. Because if you’re hypnotized, you can’t see anything, you can’t feel anything.

And he compared this with an old Chinese technique. They, in China, they still perform surgery – not all of them, but in some cases by hypnotizing people. So if you have open heart surgery, and you’re being hypnotized, of course you can’t listen to anything. You will not hear anything we’re telling them. So that’s what he said.

But! The good news is, 40% of the population can still be reached. 40% are sort of sitting on the fence, don’t know which way to get off, and they can still be approached by us. And more and more of them are waking up. Including those who have gotten the shots. Because they feel that they’ve been fooled. All of a sudden, they’re telling – they’re getting, they’re being told, “No! You’re unvaccinated because you haven’t gotten your third shot, or your fourth shot.” And this is just going too far.

Maria Zeee: “Or your fifth! In the Netherlands. Your fifth, now. My goodness. And, are the number of people that are vaccinated, what they’re telling us true? Because we just had a report out of the UK, stating that there’s only 25 million that have – 25 million that have not even received 1 dose.”

Reiner Fuellmich: “Yeah. I think, I think the numbers are completely false. They’re lying to us. They’re lying whenever they’re opening up their mouths. Here in Germany, we believe that 40% of the population have not been vaccinated yet. They claim that 80%, or more, have been vaccinated. But we don’t believe that.

The same is true in the United States. Except in the United States it’s even worse, as far as they’re concerned. Because we believe that maybe 50%, maybe 55% have been vaccinated. But no more.

And now people from the health care industry are beginning to walk off their jobs. They’re gonna, they’re gonna shut down the entire healthcare business, and we’re gonna do the same in Austria and in Germany. Because we have founded unions, and one of the most important sections of these unions is the healthcare section. Because we know that many members of the healthcare business, including nurses, for example, in particular nurses, will not get the shots. So they need protection. And that’s why we founded these unions.”

Maria Zeee: “Right. And these unions, you plan to extend them globally? Everywhere? [Reiner Fuellmich: “Yes. Yes.”] Set up for those people?”

Reiner Fuellmich: “Yes. We’re already discussing this amongst ourselves with the international group of lawyers. Yeah.”

Maria Zeee: “That’s wonderful news. That’s wonderful news. So, so there is hope. [Reiner Fuellmich: “Yes.”] Many people are feeling like it is a lost cause, and the World Health Organization gave us this, this deadline of the 1st of July, 2022, to fully vaccinate 70% of the world. And what is fully va- what is “fully vaccinated” mean to them, by the 1st of July as they keep moving the goalpost?

But we are saying that there is hope. So… what, Dr. Fuellmich, you go to Telegram, and the website that the people can find you on as well, the – my apologies, the Corona Investigative Committee?”

Reiner Fuellmich: “Yeah. You can find it – I think much of this is in English. Or I think there’s a button “ENGLISH”. If you push that then everything comes up in English. Um, I don’t know a lot about these IT things, but if you want to look it up, the German – the website is corona-ausscuss.de [correction: corona-ausschuss.de]. Ausschuss is a German word for committee. And of course I have my telegram channel, which my friend and our manager Corvin Rabenstein, handles.

And I mean, I get hundreds and hundreds of emails every day. But my colleagues filter them so that ultimately I get about a hundred per day. But then there’s another 150 or so text messages through Threema, Telegram, Signal, Wire – all of these messenger services. Plus I have to write my briefs. Last night I wrote a couple of briefs, plus I have to do interviews, beyond Zoom calls and phone conferences, etc., etc. But, I know it’s worth it. And I know we’re making progress.

Maria Zeee: “That’s good to hear. What I’ll do, is after this interview, I will include those links for the audience so that they can track what’s going on, on your Telegram. Will there be an announcement on your Telegram about this 2 week international – [Reiner Fuellmich: “Yes.”] Yes? There will be?”

Reiner Fuellmich: “Yes. There will be – we’re going to try and get as much attention for this trial, because there’s so many really good people working on this. As much attention as possible. Because we do know that, as Catherine Austin Fitts says, it’s not just about getting the indictments, it’s about giving the people factual and a legal platform on which to stand up, rise up, and fight these bastards.

We’re probably going to have a couple of constitutional law professors who will give us their view on whether we can really do this. Because the German constitution, unlike all of the others, has a section: 20 subsection 4, which explicitly gives the people a right to resist if there is evidence that someone is trying to over – is trying to get rid of the constitution or democracy altogether.

And, there’s not just some evidence, there’s clear and convincing evidence that that’s what’s happening right now. Because they’re trying to introduce a fascist system, and that’s why they have to get rid of democracy.”

Maria Zeee: “And how do the people get involved while… with what’s happening?”

Reiner Fuellmich: “I think the most important thing is to just get the information and spread it. Give the information to as many people as possible. Because that is what empowerment is all about. You have to know what’s going on. You have to know the true facts.”

Maria Zeee: “Well I certainly think that telling people that are on the fence that there are international crimes against humanity being, you know, being lodged – cases being lodged for this, surely, that this would prick up their ears. I mean, I personally been talking to people who are saying there’s no way I’m going back for more. This is ludicrous.

So there are people that are waking up and yes, you’re right. 30% of the population, they cannot wake up; they may even believe, after it’s all out in the open, that this was all for our health. But the power is still in the people.

Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, thank you so much.

For the audience, please do subscribe to this channel; I will include all the links at the bottom in the end. Thank you for watching and share this information everywhere. Everyone must know that the lies are being exposed. They can no longer hide this plan. This global mass depopulation, kill-shot, has to stop.

Goodnight everyone. And goodnight, Dr. Reiner Fuellmich.”

Reiner Fuellmich: “Thank you, and good luck. Do not give up. Fight.”

Maria Zeee: “Thank you. We will not stop. Goodnight everyone.”

REFERENCED LINKS:

Dr. Mike Yeadon: Evidence for Premeditated Mass Murder
Foundation Corona Committee: https://corona-ausschuss.de/en/
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich’s Telegram: https://t.me/ReinerFuellmichEnglish

NOTE FROM EXPANDING AWARENESS RELATIONS: What is occurring around us is no less than a huge global overreach of abuse and power through means of extortion, malfeasance and deception. And as more information is being revealed, it is getting clearer that all of these different groups – multiple governments/politicians, agencies (WHO, UN, WEF, NIH, FDA, NHS, CDC, DARPA, etc.), pharma companies (Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson&Johnson, etc.), and other institutions (Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Johns Hopkins University, MIT, Wuhan Lab, etc.), including many mainstream media channels, have been colluding together to bring this totalitarian agenda on to humanity.

It’s not just about enacting legal ramification on the deadly vaccines and the manufacturers. There is a much bigger plot involved in this sinister scheme, and it involves companies and organizations throughout the whole world which have been infiltrated and perpetuating this global dictatorship behind the scenes for many decades.

But now it’s up to us, the rest of the people, to end this madness and refuse to participate in this hostile takeover – DO NOT COMPLY / DO NOT CONSENT to this tyranny.

God bless you all, and many, many thanks to Reiner Fuellmich, Mike Yeadon, Catherine Austin Fitts, and everyone else who is remaining strong and defending humanity from this oppressive assault on our rights and freedom.

*Featured image/screenshot credited to: Maria Zeee@rumble / Reiner Fuellmich

Fact checking is extremely important. I want to reiterate not to take everything at face value; no matter what you read, where you read it from, or who you hear it from. And to be clear, do not rely on “fact checking” websites to give you accurate information either. These are just as likely, (if not even more likely…), to feed false information and false debunking accounts to manipulate the reader. Please take everything into consideration before adhering to a certain narrative – and always keep your mind open to other possibilities.

Fair use disclaimer: Some of the links from this article are provided from different sources/sites to give the reader extra information and cite the sources, but does not necessarily mean that I endorse the contents of the site itself. Additionally, I have tried to provide links to the contents that I used from other sites as an educational and/or entertainment means only; if you feel that any information deserves further citation or request to be clarified, please let me know through the contact page.

Dr. James Giordano – From DARPA Mind Weapon Tools, to Nanotechnology | Hacking Our Mind is the Ultimate Agenda

“The Brain is the Battlefield of the Future” [Full Transcript]

Many may have seen Dr. James Giordano’s “The Brain is the Battlefield of the Future” 2018 presentation already, but as of yet, I have not seen a transcript of this particular lecture. It is incredibly pertinent, and is perhaps the key reason why there is a nationwide effort to vaccinate absolutely every person on the planet.

There will be, of course, those who would consider any talk of “brain/mind control/nanotechnology” as a ridiculous conspiracy theory that has no basis in reality.

Yet Dr. James Giordano has based his entire career on this endeavor, and is a very real agenda of some of the most prominent government and research organizations worldwide.

While Dr. Giordano’s lecture encompasses a wide range of extremely important and mind-boggling (no pun intended) information, I have highlighted a few aspects from his presentation that espouses incredibly topical information in order for the public to realize what the main goals are of these institutions.

As someone with 40 years of experience in neuroscience and prestigious credentials/history of working with DARPA/Pentagon, brain science/interfacing technologies, “neuroethics”, etc., Dr. Giordano lays out their agenda in this one hour presentation; no efforts to sugar-coat, hide or discreetly allude their motives.

For those who don’t believe that brain manipulation/mind control is a real endeavor, this single presentation lays that speculation/disbelief to rest. It is not a “conspiracy theory”. It is a cold, hard fact.

The full transcript of his presentation is transcribed below. Some embellishment has been added for emphasis.

Index for certain topics:

Weaponized neuro-cognitive science / Weapons of Mass Destruction and Disruption (and Influence)

Agenda to affect free will

“- if in fact I understand how it is that your brain does what your brain does, I may be able to access your brain and affect your brain, indirectly and directly.”

Assess, Access, Affect the Brain

Brain science for warfare intelligence already in operational play

Interventional technologies, including: Directed Energy Devices, Novel Pharmaceuticals, Nanoneurotechnologicals

How to influence the attitudes, beliefs, thoughts, emotions, activities, and vulnerabilities of individuals

Genetics, biomarkers and information database for tracking/surveillance

Psychological operations (psyops) to influence behavior and emotions of individuals, groups, and populations

Dr. Giordano mentions Havana (Havana Syndrome) as a possible Directed Energy Weapon Neural attack

DARPA program to implant brain machine networks

DARPA’s program, Neural Narratives, to influence individuals/groups through psyops and propaganda

Manipulating bio-data as a potential weapon

Efforts to use drugs and nano/neurotechnology to “enhance” military warfighters/personnel

Dual-use: “Medical purposes that are then depurposed in medicine and used for other agenda”

Initiatives against potential dissidents/opposition

Gene-editing a virus to make it more deadly and/or to cause worldwide panic to disrupt a nation(s)/population

Controllable nanomaterials that can be aerosolized to infiltrate the biological system up to the neural membrane

Drugs, bugs(viruses) and toxins can be developed “under the radar” if classified as Weapons of Mass Disruption

Ethical posturing…

“- advancements in medicine very often arise as a consequence of the possible utility of various forms of science and tech to be weaponized and the damage that they incur”

Brave New World

MKUltra (mind control) to alter the cognition, emotions and behavior of individuals (using psychedelic drugs)

Using transcranial devices (magnetic/electric stimulation) / and engaging brain substrates, nodes, networks through the use of pharmaceuticals

Introduction Speaker: “Good afternoon and thank you for coming. Today’s MWI speaker event with Dr. James Giordano.

Dr. Giordano is a professor in the Department of Neurology and Biochemistry, Chief in Neuroethics Studies Program of the Pelligrino Center for Clinical Bioethics, and Co-director of the O’Neill-Pellegrino Program in Brain Science and Global Health Law and Policy at Georgetown University Medical Center.

As well, Dr. Giordano currently serves an appointed member of the United States Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Advisory Council on Human Research Protections.

He is a researcher and task leader of the European Union Human Brain Project and has served as an appointed member of the Neuroethics Legal and Social Issues Advisory Panel of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and Senior Advisory Fellow of the Strategic Multi-layer Assessment Branch of the joint staff of the Pentagon. It’s quite a bit.

In his spare time, he has authored over 260 publications in neuroscience and neuroethics, seven books and 13 government white papers on neurotechnology ethics and biosecurity. And is an editor-in-chief of the International Journal of Philosophy Ethics and Humanities in Medicine.

Dr. Giordano, thank you for joining us today.”

James Giordano @1:26: “No, no. Don’t applaud now. Wait until the end. Because the performance pressure is much too severe if you do that. And my thought is you’re probably not going to applaud at the end, but what I’m gonna hear is the slamming shut of your sphincters with fear. That’s good. That’s been successful.

It’s a pleasure to be here. It’s a real honor to be here. Is cadet Yoshi in the audience? Hello. No PDA’s but I do want you to come up and say hello. Your mother says hello. I’m just – everybody has a mother and I know hers.

So, what we’re here to talk about today is the fact that the brain is and will be the 21st century battle scape in many ways. End of story. We could stop it there and I can let you go back to your respective units and think about that for a while.

[@2:04]: But I’m here to tell you absolutely as much as there’s a big old Tyrolean nose on this face that you will encounter some form of neuro-cognitive science that has been weaponized not only in your military career, but in your personal and professional lives. Irrespective of whether those two things coincide or not.

So the idea of the brain as the battlescape is very important, and more importantly is this other acronym that’s up there which is WMD Squared. Please get used to this because this is going to be part of the idea of a regular warfare and ongoing military innovation in your careers.

Weapons of Mass Destruction and Disruption. Disruption and influence will be the key to creating pier capabilities and asymmetrical engagements. Let me say it again, it will be the key to creating pier capability in asymmetrical relations and engagements.

If we talk about what brain science is, let me just give you a little bit of brief background on this field that is now called neuroscience. As a titular field, as a named field, neuroscience has only been in existence for 40 years. I know that because I’ve been a neuroscientist for about 38 of those 40 years.

When I first applied to get into a program in neuroscience, there were only 4 neuroscience programs in the continental United States. Four.

Right now, at this particular point, there are well over 200 dedicated university and collegiate programs. Several programs at the junior college levels, several programs at the high school level and many many dozens of independent think tanks and philanthropic organizations solely devoted to brain sciences. That’s just here in the United States.

Furthermore, what becomes critically important for you to understand is that brain science is not just a United States enterprise or effort, nor is it singularly an effort of the United State’s allies worldwide.

Increasingly it is becoming an international/multinational global and independently exercised event and endeavor. Which increases the capability of the brain sciences developed, not only new theories but have more sophisticated tools.

I like this slide a lot, because what it presents, few ladies and gentlemen, is a century – a century long history of brain science even before it was called neuroscience.

Image credited to Dr. James Giordano/MWI

James Giordano @4:06: “Look. Let’s face it, for as long as human beings were looking in some reflective pool and recognized that that thing looking back at them was themselves, there was some interest in what makes me, me.

What makes me think, what makes me feel, what makes me behave the way I do and you behave and think the way you do. What is my sense of self? Do I have free will, and what is the nature of that and how can we affect that? In a variety of ways that go from the non-kinetic all the way to the kinetic?

If we take centenary jumps into the era of the Enlightenment, we can see the great thinkers that came before and during the Enlightenment, inclusive but not limited to people like Rene Descartes, pondered the idea of what that means. “Cogito, ergo sum”: I think, therefore I am.

The inverse of the statement that in many cases was implicit but now becomes ever more explicit, is, what makes me think? And if I can understand what makes me think, and makes you think, and makes you feel, then that understanding may in fact flavor, if not directly influence the way you and I interact.

But more than that, if in fact I understand how it is that your brain does what your brain does, I may be able to access your brain and affect your brain, indirectly and directly.

And what this allows us to do is to create tremendous potential and possibility and probability, potential, possibility, and probability of what the brain sciences can do and will do.”

Image credited to Dr. James Giordano/MWI
SLIDE TEXT:

Neuro Science and Technology
(NeuroS/T)…
Puts the brain at our fingertips

Potential…

    • To harness and engage neuroS/T in convergent, multi-disciplinary approaches to study, define, predict and influence human ecologies
    • Affect human activities on individual, group and populational levels
    • To affect human relations on local, regional and global scales
    • Influence postures and conduct of national security and defense agenda(s)

James Giordano @5:29: “Remember these three letters: A, A, and A. Keep them as your viable mantra for the duration of this course today and throughout your professional careers and each and all the opportunities that you have to interface and try to understand the power that the brain and cognitive sciences can yield.

A: the ability to assess the brain and its functions.

A: the ability to access the brain on a variety of levels, from the subcellular all the way to the social.

And

A: the ability to affect that brains and the individuals in which those brains are embodied and the ecologies in which those individuals enact, engage, encounter – from the level of the individual, to the group, to the community, to the populational.

Look at the power that understanding tools and techniques the brain sciences afford. It’s there before you on the screen.

Obviously, if in fact this gives me some insight to the way people interact, inclusive of the way they may interact in bellicose, aggressive, violent and volatile ways, and it also confers upon me certain powers to be able to influence that, alter that, change that, mitigate thatthen clearly I’m able to use the brain sciences as we have tried repeatedly in the past to influence the postures and capabilities; not only of our own individuals, who are engaged in warfare intelligence and national security operations, but those who seek to threaten us. In other words, we can utilize these things in national security, intelligence and defense.

Please look at the timeline. A mere 10 years ago, 2008, the National Academy of Sciences National Research Council convened a group to create a report dedicated to if and why and how brain sciences might be viable, valid and of value in national security, intelligence and defense operations. And in 2008, they did a 5-year retrospective and came to the conclusion that although these things may be valid, their relative viability value at that particular time rendered them not ready for primetime play.

Our group, working with others internationally inclusive of the Nuffield Council in the UK, proceeded forward from 2008 and did a slightly deeper dive; looking at international capabilities, limitations, and de-limitations in the brain sciences and came to a very very different set of conclusions.

Not only were the brain sciences increasingly being considered, interested and used for possibilities of national security, intelligence and defense, but they would continue to be so as more and more countries internationally developed the capabilities and the specialized agendas to be able to look into the brain and affect the brain.

So much so, that by 2014, the exact same committee reconvened and recognized at that time that the brain science is indeed were ready and in operational primetime for warfare intelligence and national security agenda. In other words, it is valid, valuable, and already in operational play.

The brain is the current and future battle space. Or at least one that can be leveraged in those ways to be able to create tremendous effect with fairly little investment of engagement.

In other words, what it allows us to do, is assess the brain, access the brain, and affect the brain. I’ll unapologetically repeat myself throughout this lecture to drive home this point with regard to these capabilities, because each and all have gravitas importance and operational leverage ability.

That said, what are these techniques and technologies that have rendered this capability, and if you will, geopolitical, military, and social power? Well, I have them here before you.”

Image credited to Dr. James Giordano/MWI
SLIDE TEXT:

NeuroS/T in NSID
Access-Assess-Affect

    • Assessment Technologies
           – Neuroimaging
           – Neurophysiological recording
           – Neurogenomics and genetics
           – Neuroproteomics
           – Neuro-cyber informatics
    • Interventional Technologies
           – Cyber-linked neurocog manipulation
           – Directed energy devices
           – Novel pharmaceuticals
           – Transcranial neuromodulation
           – Implantable BMIs
           – Neuromicrobiologicals
           – Organic Neurotoxins
           – Nanoneurotechnologicals

James Giordano @9:07: “Generalization, we can parse them down into two discrete domains.

First, the assessment neurotechnologies that do exactly as the name would imply. They are, based upon various tools that we can use to assess those structures and functions of the brain that may be involved in those process of cognition and motion behaviors.

Humans are tool users. Rarely, however, do we turn over a rock, look around the corner, appear under the bed, just to know what’s under there. We use, at very very least, the knowledge we have gained from turning the rock over and looking under the bed, around the corner, and very often those things that we find under the rock, under the bed, around the corner, become tools for us to use in a variety of other engagements. Brain science, like any other science and technology, is no different.

Earlier in the day at lunch, major and I had a conversation about the viability of different types of research. Science for science’s sake. Science just to know, because that’s where your interests lie.

Oh look, I’ve been in academic for well over 4 decades, and I can tell you that that kind of research is wonderful. But when that research is generated for a purpose and when it’s funded and when that purpose deals with those things that are near and dear to the health, survivability, flourishing and protection of kith and kin, then that research is operational research that has an end goal of use.

This is what this is about. It’s not just a question of trying to figure out what makes the brain tick and the way it’s built. It’s can we get in there to affect the ticking and tocking, and by affecting the way that brain is built and the way it functions, influence in ways that are kinetic and non-kinetic.

[@10:40]: The attitudes, beliefs, thoughts, emotions, activities, and relative vulnerabilities and predispositions of those individuals for whom both we are responsible, in terms of our own forces, perhaps to make them better, more insulated against injury, operationally protected and enhanced and those who may threaten us.

To do that, we need to intervene. So the other dimension of these neurotechnologies are interventional neurotechnologies.

Now, I’m not going to bring you down the rabbit hole into what each and all of these things do, because you don’t want to be a neuroscientist and I’m certainly not going to make you a neuroscientist in an hour. But I think it becomes important to dial into a little bit more clarity and with further granularity what we’re really talking about when we talk about these relative assessments and interventional technologies.

In the former case, probably the one that gives the most rise to both provocation and contention are various forms of neuro-imaging, the ability to image the living brain – to be able to see what brain areas are differentially active as we engage in different thoughts, feelings, emotions, and tasks. And to then correlate the interaction of those nodes and networks with discrete patterns that occur not only in individuals, but in groups of individuals.

In other words, if I can see how this gentleman brain worked, whether he’s awake or falling asleep, [addressing an audience member] thought I catch ya, the idea there is that I can then understand – [addressing audience member again] I’m only kidding, I can only – I can understand better… [addressing audience] relax – can only understand better not only what makes him happy, agitated, engaged, or tired, but I can then in some way alter my discourse to be able to make him feel happier, more engaged, and less tired.

In so doing, I can take the information I have about the way a brain works, and I can put it to good use, practical use. Think about this. If I know what makes you tick as an individual, and I’m then able to generate patterns of how you as an individual relate to, are similar to, or different from other individuals, I may be able to then generate information that allows me to interact with you on ways that are more meaningful to our level of interaction. In other words, the more I know about what makes you tick, the more my interactions can be geared with you to make you tick the way I want you to. The way I want you to.

Obviously it takes some energy to put people into a big magnet and scan their brain. There’s a whole bunch of things that are limitations of brain imaging. We recognize that. That’s part of the mission. We seek to delimit those particular constraints and through the use of co-register different forms of neuroimaging; make it better.

Some of these forms of neuroimaging are fieldable. Operationalizable in field missions. Some of them are not. We’re seeking to make these things more operationalizable; not only for military medicine to assess individuals who may have incurred brain injury and/or the effects of brain injury, inclusive of things like PTSD and other forms of neuropsychiatric disorders, but also to understand better how it is that our individuals are able to think through certain situations, how their brains work, and be able to classify those individuals and perhaps specify the way we train them, then we sustain that training, then we maximize their performance.

We can use other methods as well.

[@13:39]: Genetics. Biomarkers. And information. And that information is critical. One of the things you must learn, is as military personnel, your demographic, biological, social and psychological information exists in your jacket and is in fact retrievable in real time. That information becomes ever more important as we try to understand the you-ness of you.

And the nature to classify that information, hold that information secure, doesn’t only exist on the medical side with regard to your HIPAA records, but increasingly is becoming a concern for national security – when these large-scale big databases of brain structure and function physiology, biopsychosocial demographics, become ever more available and ever more relevant to what’s making you tick, what’s making you tock, what’s making you strong, and what’s making you vulnerable.

And the fact that other nations inclusive of China, and Russia, are engaging in large-scale neuro big data initiatives to be able to create large-scale databases that can join not only imaging and physiological, but as well as other forms of phenotypic and genetic data, of the entirety of populations, renders great power because there’s great capability in that information to know where key points of strength and vulnerability may lie and also to intercede to inject information in to in some way be able to affect what appears to be your medical record/your personal record. The evidence that is you.

[@14:56]: And we can take that step to go one step further: the more I know about you and the more I know about the way your brain works, as individuals, groups, communities, even populations, the more I can utilize non-kinetic means, such as informational means of narratives, iconographies, semiotics, to influence your emotions and your behaviors.

We can do this subliminally through computer images, we can do this more liminally through the types of engagements, interactions that we engage the psychological operations and informational operations. We can train better our Human Terrain Teams to be able to interact with individuals and variety of cultures, groups, settings, and ecologies – to improve their performance, so as to be less distancing and more ameliorating.

We can go further than that as well. We can also utilize these interventional technologies in those ways that may be able to directly affect the brain. Probably the one that you’ve heard about most recently, most contemporously [sic] in the literature, is the possibility to use some form of directed energy to affect physiology, peripherally and also to affect the physiology and health of the brain.

Case in point, here, U.S. Embassy personnel here in Havana, and possibly in China. And of course, there’s not a lot that I can tell you about that, although I am one of the researchers on that particular project, but this seems to be wholly indicative and supportive of the fact that this was at least some form of directed energy; whether it was wholly intentional or not still remains to be definitively decided.

However, the pattern of insult and injury to those individuals, and the pattern of injury of who was affected, strongly suggests that this was an intentional and directed engagement, and that this represents a beta test. The possible probe of the directed energy neural weapon. And there are a number of countries that had developed initiatives and agenda towards developing just these types of things; the United States included.

But you’ll also have a whole host of other things that can go bump and bang in your brain. The more we understand the specifity of the brain, on a very granular level, the more we’re able to derive and develop specific types of drugs that not only can enhance and optimize the performance of our people, but can also be used to mitigate, militate and in some cases, manifest profound morbid changes, in their [own] people. In other words, against the ‘hostile other’. [what is considered a ‘hostile other’ according to the government…?]

Drugs can be exceedingly specific, and as I’ll show you in a moment, can be very very much used to individualize weaponology in terms of what we call precision pathology, or precision effect.

[@17:15]: We can go further. Clearly one of the things we can also do is transcranial neuromodulation. The idea of going through the skull to modulate the node network activity of the brain, to optimize the performance of key individuals in certain tasks and performances that are relative to the missional space, and we can also do that against hostile or perhaps belligerent others.

We can go further to implant certain brain machine interfaces; these are many of the DARPA programs that you may hear of now. Probably the one that is most, most notorious, in a very good sense, is something called the N3 program, which is the non-invasive neurosurgical/neuromodulation program being run by their program manager Dr. Al Emondi. The idea here is to put minimal-sized electrodes in a network within a brain through only minimal intervention to be able to read and write into the brain function in real-time. Remotely. The United States is not alone in such efforts.

And then of course you also have the things a little bit more traditional. If we talk about things that can be operable in the biochemical space, we ordinarily talk about drugs, bugs, toxins, and ever more we’re considering devices.

At the last Biological Toxins and Weapons Convention, the RevCon, it was then raised by the Australia group that we need to be a little bit more salient in our attention to those possible neurotechnological devices that may be able to be weaponized. Our group has also argued that the current considerations and extant categories of the Biological Toxins and Weapons Conventions are not detailed enough, to be able to appreciate or keep pace with the advances in this form of science that can be weaponized that poses a risk and threat on the battle space.

So how then, can we use these elements as weapons? Means of contending against others? Formal definition of a weapon, right under the Oxford Old English Dictionary: ‘means of contending against others’. And we can do that in a number of ways. We can militate their behaviors and their thoughts in some ways as to make them more amenable to what we do. The idea of positive weaponology. Or we can in fact mitigate, and in some cases, completely nullify their capability, will, or engagement to fight.

Image credited to Dr. James Giordano/MWI

James Giordano @19:20: If we combine those two definitions into one, what you find is those agents that will either change individual’s thoughts, vulnerabilities, volatility to violence and aggression, or incur morbidity, dysfunction, and/or mortality, in such a way as to then mitigate the engagement altogether.

You still with me?

That said, we can break down any form of weaponology into two discrete categories: soft weapons, and hard weapons.

In the former categorization, soft weapons include, but are not limited to, such things like economic leveraging to create economics, market values, market presence, presence of international bargaining tables to develop international power and leverage, as a soft weapon.

Clearly the more we’re able to make an impact in a field, in a dimension, by virtue of research, medicine, technology, infiltration to a variety of areas of the public space, the more we’re able to yield economic strong-arming, economic leveraging.

I think an important consideration that I’ll reiterate later in this particular lecture, is that there are countries outside the United States and/or the West, that are increasing their capabilities by intent in the brain sciences so as to be able to gain this type of economic leveraging and international global markets; in medicine, science technology, and the military. Most notably among them is China. We’ll talk more about that momentarily.

We can also utilize weapons in a more of a soft approach, as I mentioned earlier. The more I know about what makes you tick, the more I might be able to do things like weaponize the approach that I then take towards you in my interactions and engagements with you.

[@20:50]: Here we can utilize the brain sciences for psychological operations. Most notably, one of the DARPA programs run by the case managing – by the program manager Bill Casebeer. Dr. Bill Casebeer, who subsequently went on to be a program manager at Lockheed Martin and run their brain machine interfacing programs. Bill Casebeer’s program was called Narrative Networks, and one component of the Narrative Network’s project was something called Neural Narratives.

If we understand how it is that brains and individuals, groups and populations respond to certain forms of imaging, memes, iconographies, engagements, the more we may be able to tailor those things through our psychological operations, propaganda, MISO [Military Information Support Operations], to be able to engage these individuals more positive ways or in ways that are influential, to be able to direct their behaviors, their predispositions, and perhaps their engagements with us on a variety of levels from the individual, all the way up to the political.

But then, of course, we move into the more harder forms of weapons; things such as, bullets and bombs. And here, once again, let me reiterate, we’re talking about on the neuro side, are drugs, bugs, toxins and devices.

But of course if we spill over the idea of soft weaponology, into a hard weaponization, we also see the use of bio data as a viable weapon. Manipulating bio data, so that I can then put into your particular medical records, subtle information that may change the disposition of whether you’re sick or not, change how you’re treated. Influence the postures that go to you in terms of insurance, care, viability for military service. By altering that information, by changing those data, by purloining those data, I essentially changed the “you” of you. And I can do that in very subtle and insidious ways.

Furthermore, I can do that on a variety of different levels that can affect key individuals, so that in fact your medical record changes, so thereby render you incapable, or at least, invalid to be able to serve in a way of serving. Or I can do that on a much larger scale. Groups, populations. And if I change those data, I change the way you’re being regarded and treated.

And I can do that in one of two ways. I can do it in such a way that you’re gonna be regarded in a negative sense, or I can do it in such a way that I’m going to treat you incorrectly. If I say, for example, do you have a particular allergy, or you have particular sensitivities, or you have a particular disorder, you will be treated for that. And that could then harm your health and your stability. In both, a short wars approach, as well as a long wars approach.

But if we take a look at this in a little more detail, you can see that once again it falls back to the idea of what can we do to ours and what can be done to others?

[23:20]: Clearly, one dimension, one domain, of operational viability and value, is to enhance the capabilities of the combat and intelligence operator, across a range of scale abilities, in both general purpose and more select forces. And this is the idea of neuro-enablement. Neuro-enablement.

You will hear this referred to in a variety of different ways. Performance optimization. Enhancement. Enablement. Maximization. These terms means something.

A number of years ago our group was tasked with the Air Force to develop a lexicon, a nomenclature, that would be able to define these in more precise ways. I will not bore you with that now. But the idea of enablement gives forth a particular meaning that’s relevant. You’re enabling individuals to do some aspects of a performance of a task, that is germane and justified to their operational mission, and, that is in fact, done with regard to protection of their charges.

So in other words, we’re saying, ‘we’re going to make you good to go and we’ve decided that this is good’.

The reason this can become problematic, of course, is that, what definition of ‘good’ are we using? When we define, whoever the proverbial “we” may be, to be good, might be quite different than what “they”, whoever the proverbial “they” is. And as a consequence, we have to keep a much broader window of opportunity and possibility open to be aware for the potential benefits, burns and risks that this type of engagement may pose.

What types of things can we do to make our people better, if you will? Well certainly we can use a variety of advanced psychopharmacologics and neuropharmacologics. In other words, drugs.

And, I refer you to a wonderful book written by a colleague of mine, Professor Jonathan Moreno, called Mind Wars. First edition came out in 2006, second edition came out in 2012, and Professor Moreno does a very good job in defining/explaining the history and historicity of the way the brain and cognitive sciences had been used in national security intelligence and defense operations. Both by the United States, and more globally.

And what we see is that this is certainly not a new event. We can look back into antiquity and see that there have been attempts to try to maximize the performance, capability, sustainability, and protection of those individuals who are operational war fighters. Literally from ancient Roman Greece all the way to the 20th and now 21st century.

It’s the tools and techniques, based upon the understanding and depth that we have, that increases the granularity and specificity of effect, and increases the sophistication and gravitas of outcome.

The more we know about the brain, the more we can develop ever more selective agents to affect the structures and functions of the brain and cognition, emotion and actions, and the more we can do so in a way that’s more like sharpshooting, rather than buckshotting.

But irrespectively, drugs can be somewhat dirty. What I mean by that is they can have a host of adverse effects, some of them side effects, some of them direct effects, and very often we’ll find, is unless we’re able to deliver the drugs directly to a particular site in the brain or elsewhere in the nervous system, they can have heterogeneity of effects throughout the body, and that can lead us to some undesirable outcomes.

But we don’t need to be limited to drugs. No no no. We can also use a variety of computational brain machine interfaces that are both closed and open loop, and these include things like transcranial magnetic and electrical stimulation, stimulating the vagus nerve transdermally; or if you wanted to get somewhat more invasive but certainly more specific, brain machine interfaces by virtue of deep brain and superficial brain implants.

And I shall tell you, that one of the leading projects in developing state of the art brain implants, is a DARPA funded project aimed at the medical side for the treatment of neurological and neuropsychiatric spectrum disorders, and this program is called SUBNETS. Systems based neurotechnologies for emerging therapies.

[27:02]: But what you also need to appreciate is that that DARPA program, like any program that is oriented towards engaging brain function to then alter those functions in certain ways, directional ways, can be harnessed for what’s called dual-use. Medical purposes that are then depurposed in medicine and used for other agenda; inclusive of warfighter enablement and enhancement.

Furthermore, we understand that there are a number of nations outside the United States, some of whom are allied, others that are at least competitive, if not combative, that are engaged in these types of programs looking at the capability for transcranial and deep intracranial modulation of brain function, to improve the functional performance of military and intelligence operators across a range of viable missional tasks.

We are not alone in these pursuits. And I think that’s something that needs to be appreciated.

But it’s not just a question of what we can do to our own. Because very often, in raising these questions, we tend to, what I call ‘err’ on the side of moral probity, and we recognize that there are particular limitations, limits, boundaries, thresholds, that cannot and perhaps should not be crossed, in terms of what we can do.

And if we intend to cross them, we only cross them with consent and that consent is highly contingent upon the necessity of a continuity of research and clinical care. Understanding what happens to the individual once they’ve been enabled and enhanced, and what may happen when they’re no longer enabled and enhanced. In other words, more colloquially, when Superman goes back to being Clark Kent, what happens to Clark, becomes the burden obligation of our responsibility.

However, those ethics are not homogeneous on the world stage. And the idea of pushing the envelope of what can be done to the combat warfighter and intelligence operator, and perhaps more broadly, to those individuals who may oppose particular regimes, and/or maybe military fighters against your own regime, is very often bounded by, and in some cases, deconstricted, by philosophies, cultures and ethics of those individuals who may be competitive, if not combative to us. So in other words, this can also be weaponized against others.

And this is where we get into the idea of novel neural weapons. Once again, this is not necessarily new, but the momentum of this dimension of the field has accelerated as a consequence of increased understanding of the brain, increased capability to develop tools and techniques to access and affect the brain.

So what are we seeing here? Well, take a look.”

Image credited to Dr. James Giordano/MWI
SLIDE TEXT:

Combat Operations

Novel Neuroweapons (Drugs & Bugs…)

In-close pharmaceuticals and organic neurotoxins

      • Ultra-low dose/high specify agents for use in targeting diplomatic/local culture “hearts and minds” scenarios*

High morbidity neuro-microbiologic agents

      • Neuro-microbials with high neuro-psychiatric symptom clusters for public panic/public health dis-integrative effects
      • Gene-edited microbiologcals [sic] with novel morbidity/mortality profiles

Nano-neuroparticulate agents

– High CNS aggregation lead/carbon-silicate nanofibers (network disrupters)*
– Neurovascular hemorrhagic agents (for in-close and population use as “stroke epidemic” induction agents*

James Giordano @29:20: “We see in-close neuropharmaceuticals and organic toxins. What’s new about this is the in-close nature of this. Increasingly we’re not seeing these things as weapons of mass destruction against growth aspects of the population. Although, certainly many neuroweapons, such as sarin gas and VX and other forms of neurotoxic agents can be leveraged against large groups of people, but that’s messy.

More specifically, perhaps, might be targeting individuals on a level that allows either direct attribution, or covert engagement with non-attribution. Let me give an example of what I mean.

So this gentleman is the leader of some group. A political group, a social group, a combative group, and under the available white flag, he and I announced to have some kind of caucus. A meeting. And during that meeting what I do is I lace the rim of his drink, or his pen, or his seat, or something in his medium environment, with very very low dose drug or toxins that are going to affect his stability.

They may affect the way his brain works, and as a consequence of that, they can affect the functions of his brain. His thought patterns, his relative emotionality, and the behaviors that go along with that.

One of two things might happen. He might be completely incapacitated as a consequence of this, or he may change his level of capacity and engagement, so that he went into the meeting thinking, “I hate this guy. This guy’s my enemy.” He walks out of the meeting going, “I love this guy. This guy’s great.” Now what could happen?

If, in fact, this is a gentleman who has charismatic, financial, elected, or dictatorial power, it may be that his followers will then follow him blindly. He came into the meeting as a leader of those followers, who were bellicose, were volatile, were violent and aggressive; he comes out of the meeting, he tells them to change their behaviors, and they do.

Or, I could sever the trust. By now he leaves this meeting, he’s espousing a very different philosophical stance and orientation, and his followers no longer adhere to his precepts, his tenets, or his lead. And I fractured the relative arrangement of trust, engagement, capability, that he fostered; leaving that population disrupted and vulnerable to intervention. To a coup d’etat. To a junta. To some type of insertive reassumption of leadership. You see how this can work.

Furthermore, I can use this very tactically. Some of these agents allow me to assemble the agent on site and not have to stockpile it. Which allows me to take the components of this agent into and out of a country, relatively covertly, target a specific individual, change or eliminate that individual with very little attribution and trace, and be able to leave prior to any attribution. Think, Novichok.

Or, I could assemble very small quantities of this that would then allow a specific intervention, characteristically in a place that would not allow such an intervention; think of the use of a derivative of VX, in an airport.

But I could do more than that. I could also incur much broader type of ripple effects. And one of the ways I could also do that, is with what’s called high morbidity neuromicrobiologic agents. It’s a real fancy way of saying neuro-bugs. But high morbidity neuro-bugs. I may not want to kill a lot of people. In fact, arguably, I may assume what is sometimes referred to as the Sailor Malan mantra.

For those of you who may be fans, or students of military history, you may remember that Sailor Malan, Wing Commander Sailor Malan, was a South African who flew at the Royal Air Force during the Second World War. And he became well-known during the Battle of Britain, for shooting up German airplanes, but letting them limp home. Particularly bomber aircraft. And they would ask Sailor Malan, “Wing Commander, why didn’t you shoot that plane down?” And his adage was simple.

Better to have that plane returned home, with wounded crew who are spitting up their lungs, one dead crewman that they had to attend to, and therefore divert their missional capability while in flight, than shoot them down. Because the psychological effect will be rippling and devastating. This is sometimes referred to as the Malan effect.

[@33:30]: What can I do? I can use a particular bug that I may be able to now modify through the use of gene-editing technique that is ubiquitously available and fairly easy to use, to take a bug that was previously relatively benign and non-pathogenic, and make that bug virulent. Pathogenic. Dangerous.

And then what could I do? I could introduce that bug in key sites. Des Moines. Seattle. Tampa. Newark. Houston. I get a few people sick. I do it on an airplane. Do it at an airport. Do it at a sporting event. Do it on Black Friday.

And then what I would do is I would take credit for that, but I want to make sure that at least part of the symptomatic constellation was not only neurological, was profoundly psychological. Agitation. Debilitation. Sweating. Stomach problems. Sleeplessness. Cardiac problems. Things that are very what we call top-down neurological in their effect. Brain to body and body to brain, in the bottom-up cascade.

Then what I would do is I would get on the internet, and I would put out over the internet, “I did it. Oh yes. On that dangerous G group that you should all be afraid of. And in fact, this is far more ubiquitous than I let on. These are only the first cases. I’ve let these buggies go all over the country, and your early warning signs are agitation, anxiety, worry, sleeplessness, stomach problems, heart problems…”

What have I done? I’ve rippled the sheets of the worried well. At first blush I get every hypochondriac running to their physician, but in second and third blush, I get those individuals who begin to become worried that they may have been exposed to this. That the children may have been exposed to this. That their loved ones, their kin, their kids may have been exposed to this.

Of course, the physicians, the CDC, the Public Health Service comes back on and says, oh no, that’s not what’s going on. But I get back on the internet and I say, “Oh don’t you listen to that. That’s fake. That’s false. Your government knows what’s going on; they can’t do anything about it and they can’t treat you. They’re going to end up quarantining you.”

How many people would I need to affect? We modeled it. Somewhere between 12 and 240. What would be the effect? Hang on folks. Within 41 to 45 days, we would crash the United States Public Health System. Crash it. In so doing, I render the United States infrastructure vulnerable. Either there or elsewhere.

See the ripple effect? See the disruptive effect? I can disrupt an individual from the level of their cell, to their system, and disrupt individuals on a variety of levels, from individuals all the way up to the social fabric. And that social fabric may go even further. It may be geopolitical.

I need you to think, just for a moment, if you could, why would it be of any value at all, to affect, disrupt and disable individuals who are a U.S. Embassy personnel, in Havana? When did it happen? What was happening? What would be the benefit in fracturing a growing economic, political, and social trust in that part of the world? Who would benefit? What would be the long-term effects, for example, of at least indicating that U.S. Embassy personnel and foreign service personnel are vulnerable to these types of threats?

Could you impact – pair the threat with some type of condition stimulus, so now what you’re able to do is to evoke a response in the worried well? I only offer possible suggestions for your speculation and your… consideration, if you will.

[@37:13]: We can even go further. One of the newest developments, is that nanoparticulate matter, can be stabilized for distribution. If you’re not aware of what nanoparticulate matter is, it’s that matter which exists on a scale of 1 times 10 to the minus ninth. Very very small. Smaller than a cell.

And we can manufacture materials that have discreet properties that can be controlled by virtue of bioengineering in their physical chemistry. To auto-aggregate, to be able to aggregate in particular areas based upon their biological and your chemical sensitivity.

But now we go one step further. Most recently, just a few weeks ago, it was announced you could then aerosolize nanomaterials.

And go one step further. I can create small robotic units. Controllable robotic units at the nano-scale, and that these, too, can be aerosolized, to create a nano-swarm of biopenetrable materials that you cannot see, that can penetrate all but the most robust, biochemical filters, that are able to integrate themselves through a variety of membranes, mucus membranes, and wherever – a mouth, nose, ears, eyes… Can be then uptaken into the vascular system to create clumping, can affect the vascular system of the brain, or can directly diffuse into the brain space, and these can be weaponized. And they can be done in such a level, that their presence is almost impossible to detect, and as such, the attribution becomes exceedingly difficult to demonstrate.

How much of this material would I need? Take a look. This is the front of my pen. This amount of nanomaterial, if be able to maintain and sustain with regard to its deliverability and aerosolization, could, in fact, affect all of you. Or, based upon where I come from, New York City, all you’se.

Look at this. Look at this. I’m carrying that material. Would you see it? Would I have to lug a giant weapon into the room? No I wouldn’t. And what if, in fact, I utilized some form of an unmanned aerial device, or unmanned ground devices delivery vehicle? Something like a drone? Or a bug? Could I do something with that?

But let’s keep going. Could I also utilize a whole host of devices to be able to affect individuals close in, for example, during interrogations, during social engagements, during Human Terrain Team engagements… Or more remotely? In a room? In a theater? In an airplane? In a bus? In a store, in a mall? The answer is increasingly, yes.

So this then represents for us both a challenge and an opportunity. The challenge is that increasingly what we find is that neuroscience and technology is relatively easy to obtain.

Many of the things that I’ve just spoken to you about are viable and obtainable directly to the consumer, or directly to the scientist. We also know that many of the products that are available direct-to-consumer can be easily modified to create things that have a much higher weaponization potential.

But more than that, we also recognize that there are dedicated efforts on the part of nations, states, and even groups of non-state actors and increasingly virtual nations that are using virtual currencies to fund research efforts in these areas.

I’d like to think that I’m a smart guy talking to a bunch of very intelligent individuals, but let’s face it. We’re not the only smart people in the world. And if we’re thinking this way, there are plenty of other people who are thinking this way too. Some of them are our allies, some of them may be our competitors, and some of them are combatants and hostiles. And this is, in fact, the reality.

Furthermore, we recognize that the goal, particularly among the actions of the United States and her allies, is to fight for right and honor, but to keep our own honor clean. To take the moral high ground, if you will. And indeed, that has been the case in the majority of the United States engagements throughout our history.

However, one of the things that may creep up here is that there’s something of an abrogation, a prohibition, a proscription, against engaging this type of research in its possible translation in the civilian sector.

You heard earlier in the very nice introduction that Captain Bender afforded me, that I’ve had the opportunity to work with the European Union Human Brain Project, specifically as a task-leader for dual-use brain science. And one of the considerations that grew out of that, was that absolutely none of those projects in the Human Brain Project, again a multinational effort, can and should be uptaken into warfare intelligence and national security agenda. That’s viable enough.

The idea there is that these things should be used for only peaceful means. However, this also creates a challenge. And the challenge is simple. If, in fact, I choose not to train in particular ways, I choose not to train three days a week, if in fact those individuals who may choose to then conflict with me, will then train in the ways that I do not and train on the days of the week that I will not, they may opportunize a select advantage.

What do we do about that? Again, I think it becomes at least a problematic issue for discourse because we recognize it in many cases the civilian sector, not only is not amenable to engaging in this type of research, certainly, many are, but in some cases should not engage in this type of research for those very proscriptions that I alluded to momentarily.

However, the question then becomes, how do we appreciate the international challenge, risk and threat that the advancements of the brain sciences and cognitive sciences offer for global weaponization with the brain as the next battle scape?

Clearly it defines some type of a solution space and there have been those that have posited, myself included, that there should be more directed, more details, and more dedicated government efforts in this particular domain, so able to advance the brain sciences and ways with sustainable funding to understand what the potential risks and threats are, and to develop a stance of preparedness.

This becomes increasingly important. We take a look at those countries that have notable and identified programs of high level of investment of GDP and/or other levels of economic investment to advance the brain sciences in those ways that are either directly usable or have some, what I would call, explicit dual use capability.

An important consideration that I want you all to bear, is that current estimates based upon trend analysis, is that by 2025, greater than 50% of research development, test, evaluation, and possible use of brain sciences in general, will occur outside the West. Outside the West.

Furthermore, we understand that there has been a directed effort in China to be able to engage the current and 5 year plans, to be able to advance brain science in those ways, to be able to have a higher level of gravitas with regard to the research, its capability in its translation, in medicine, and other agenda; inclusive possible dual use in direct use within warfare intelligence and national security.

This creates opportunities for research tourism, medical tourism, and market capture. And again, that market capture can be leveraged as economic warfare in terms of being able to destabilize the global market and the global economics, that is relevant upon this form of bioscience and technology.

But we also recognize that these things are being used for military applications. Certainly there are directed opportunities and directed agendas for doing that within China. We also recognize that there have been activities and directed initiatives in the former Soviet Union that have now been translated and perpetuated into the current Russian infrastructure of biomedical science or military purposes.

And a number of other countries have directed efforts in this space, inclusive of Iran, North Korea, India, Bolivia, certainly among the U.S. and its allies. You recognize that. The United States, the U.K., Canada, Israel, and there are governmental efforts within Europe. We recognize also their efforts in Japan.

But there’s another looming threat. The threat is the non-state actor. The threat is the virtual nation, to establish serenity within a serenity, so as to be able to say that we are immune or inured to your rules and regulations. Essentially, possibly destructive diaspora. And increasingly what we’re seeing is the use of Bitcoin currencies and the like, allow the finances of these types of things to be sustained in ways that were heretofore economically unimaginable, if not incapable.

So as a consequence, what we’re recognizing is that the threat parameters, the risk parameters, as well as the challenge and opportunity parameters, are growing.

We’re equally concerned about the do-it-yourself community. Not because this community of biohackers represents an inherently malicious or nefarious group, but because of their relative vulnerability to infiltration. And we recognize that to such an extent that at present, the Federal Bureau of Investigation in this country has dedicated ongoing efforts to try to maintain continued communication, interaction and engagement with this community, so as to be able to better surveil their relative vulnerability to purloinment, infiltration, manipulation, and misuse.

[@46:09]: Clearly, if we’re looking at these things as possible destructive weapons, the more characteristic or classic criteria of drugs, bugs, and toxins meet at least some of the extant categorizations of the biological toxins, weapons and chemical conventions.

However, as disruptive agents, as those agents that may be assembled, developed anew, that do not meet these criteria, you can then get skirting of these extant treaties, in these X and signatory documents, and as a consequence, can develop these means, these methods, tools and technologies, essentially, below the radar.

Moreover, as disruptive elements, they need not be mass-produced or stockpiled, but rather, their ingenuity is that they’re able to to assembled in situ, in relatively low quantities, and used with specific effects against individuals and small groups, to be able to incur disruptive effects; not only within that organism, or that group of organisms, but beyond the organismic level to the system’s level, to the social level, to the geopolitical level. There’s great power that can be leveraged there.

Clearly, what we can do, is provocative. Therefore what we should do remains at issue. Ladies and gentlemen, I do not have answers for you, but I will post several questions and possibilities.

One of the things we have to understand is that this represents, if you will, a bioscientific speedway. Consider the true speeday. Lots of entries. I’ve already shown you the entries. Very fast pace. The speed of translation from concept to construct in the brain science is about 60 calendar months, and increasingly that’s being compressed.

So the developments in the brain sciences that reach a tech readiness level can be achieved within 48 calendar months. It’s very fast. Certainly we know not only are there many entries, it’s very fast, but the prizes are tremendous. Economic prizes, prizes of notoriety in the biomedical front, prizes of power, capability and weaponization on the wins front; weaponization, intelligence, national security front.

We also recognized that there were risks and possible harms. Not only to those who are on the track, but to those who surround it.

So the idea is if in fact we’re going to move into this space, how can we move into the space with some prudence, how do we move into the space pragmatically, and how do we move into the space in such a way that is prepared?

Our group was tasked with developing these protocols and paradigms and referred to them as the Operational Neurotechnology Risk Assessment of Mitigation Paradigm. The ON-RAMP to the neural biotechnological speedway, if you will.

I won’t bore you by reading this slide, but I do want you to pay particular attention to the lower box.

Lower box portion of the slide:
Image credited to Dr. James Giordano/MWI

“Speaking of a future at most only decades away, an experimenter in intelligence control asserted, ‘I foresee a time when we shall have the means and therefore, inevitably, the temptation to manipulate the behavior and intellectual funtioning of all the people through environmental and biochemical manipulation of the brain.’ “

Zbigniew Brezinski, Between Two Ages, America’s Role in the Technotronic Era 1970

James Giordano @48:47: “That’s, Zig Brezinski. In 1970, he was prescient at forethought, foresight, and said in 1970, in the coming decades we will see an increasing viability and value in being able to affect the neurocognitive space. There was something of the sort of crystal ball in that statement. We are there. And increasingly will be ever deeper in there, based upon not only our own initiatives, but those initiatives of groups around the country.

This is a space that we need to at least be prepared for. A simple precautionary principle will no longer obtain. Why?

Number one, it shouldn’t. Number two, it’s anachronistic.

Just because we recognize that in some cases the risks may be high and there may be certain benefits, a simple precautionary principle says if the risks or threats outweigh the benefits, don’t go. However, we need to also be equally preparative and take a more advanced precautionary principle that says, you must examine the potential, the probability, and the possibilities of what those risks and threats are, relative to the benefits of a stance of preparedness, and preparedness very often includes engaging the research to understand how these things work and how they can be used.

How do we do it? Well, these are some of the contingencies that I offer, simply as proposition for you. I ask you to consider them.

[@50:05]: Number one, what is the technical rightness of any and all form of neuroscience and technology in these types of agenda? What are key situational variables that may be germane to its use or non-use? Is there a valuation or some revision of the various ethical concepts that may be able to guide these uses in practice, and might we need to develop in some cases, new frameworks, new foundations of ethics that are more applicable, given the fact that the science and technology may be running at a speed to which our ethics and policies may not yet be at pace?

I’m not going to bore you with these contingencies, but what I want you to do is pretty much go down to the very very last one. The idea here is, can we utilize neuroscience and technology? And if the answer is yes we can, should we?

And if the answer there is, we already are, and there are some domains and dimensions by which use should be advocated – for example, non-lethality, least harm, doing less harm than other forms of interventions and engagements that are currently in use, being able to mitigate individual’s capacity or willingness to engage in volatility. In other words, improving the capacibility – the capacity for individuals to gain capability to get along… well perhaps there’s some value there.

If these things is going to be used in a more hard weaponized approach, are they being used in those ways that are less harmful than other extant weapons? And/or, what are the postures that we should adopt if in fact another nation utilizes this form of weaponology? What represents what I would consider to be comparative or appropriate proportionality?

And ultimately, if in fact we’re going to move into this space, and I think we are moving into this space realistically, not only now but ever more in the future, we have the obligation responsibility to assess whether or not the contingencies for consent to treat our own people are in place.

In other words, if there are things we’re going to do to optimize the performance and capabilities of our own personnel, and there are things that are being done on the world stage inclusive, perhaps, by us and our allies, that could mitigate effect or manifest change in other personnel, are we prepared to accept those responsibilities? The responsibilities for ongoing research, responsibilities for ongoing clinical care? Not only of ours, but internationally?

Because of the role that the United States and our allies plays, and because of the need to take an upstanding moral front with regard to the fact that as we develop weapons and as weapons are developed, by us, our allies, and by others, the preparedness stance says we must also be equally assumed, equally in position to be able to not only counter those weapons, but mitigate and treat the effects that those weapons incur.

[@52:42]: And in fact, historically, very often what we’ve seen is that that has been the interesting march of science technology and medicine, where advancements in medicine very often arise as a consequence of the possible utility of various forms of science and tech to be weaponized and the damage that they incur.

But the question still comes up, ladies and gentlemen, what ethics shall we use to guide research, test development, and perhaps utilization of neuroscience and neurotechnology in these agenda and initiatives?

Clearly here in the United States, as with any open society, our military has relative transparency to the polis for our intents, our goals and our operations. Absolutely certain things are held confidential and classified. You don’t show the other team your playbook on Friday and expect to win the game on Sunday. Yes of course. And information we may understand about what they’re doing, by virtue of our deep and our intermediate surveillance, may also be need – kept close to the chefs, if you will.

But the transparency of military intent operations goals and interventions here in the United States, has been paramount to the nature and fabric of our infrastructure, our politics, and our government. And the same is true for our allies.

So at least part of this needs to be at least relevant to, afforded by, and guided through civilian ethics. Why? Because in many cases, it is the civilian institutions that to date have been involved at least some of the research and development that can be uptaken into dual or direct use agendas. And as such, these things are subject to, and I think validly subject to, civilian ethics of science and technology, or biomedical ethics.

But if we move increasingly away from that, if we say that indeed the proscriptions and prohibitions, such as those that are being proposed and leveraged by the European Union Human Brain Project, and throughout the world by things like dual use research of concern treaties, such as that which was developed at [S SolarMar], are taken to heart and civilian agencies, institutions and organizations are essentially sort of debanded, disbanded, debarred, from their engagements in these types of activities.

Who then will uptake the torch? Increasingly there’s been some interest, consideration, a real discussion as to reinvestment in government agencies and government-sponsored agencies that are specifically and explicitly dedicated to these pursuits. So to avoid any confusion what the intent is, and to also avoid any confusion as to who’s doing what. We don’t want to get another scenario, such as we do with Robert Oppenheimer looking at the first test of the atomic bomb and going, ‘what have I done? I am deaf.’ Dr. Oppenheimer, what did you think you were doing?

We don’t want to have those confusions. We want to make sure that in fact those who engage the brain sciences for biomedical purposes of wellness, lifestyle, enhancing the human condition, are not necessarily confused with those who may then uptake these things into wins agenda.

But if that’s the case, and these things are moving more into governmental institutions, organizations and initiatives, are civilian ethics even viable any longer? And if we engage military ethics, what military ethical principles will be engaged? The use, development, research, surveillance, of these particular things for just war?

And if in fact these things are not used in a strictly warfare fashion where war is declared, by the use of these agents, yet they still tend to be bellicose or disruptive, can we then say that we can justify their use? In other words, not just a just war, but they’re just use within this frame of conduct, whatever “this” may be? And/or can we revive another older and less known tradition, which is called ‘jus contra bellum’? Which is justification for the use to prevent warfare.

Here, the use of the neurocognitive sciences and intelligence, Human Terrain Teams, psychological operations, such as Narrative Networks, may be viable to de-escalate the volatility and vulnerability towards violence and combativeness.

But again we need to consider to what level we will engage us and whether or not the current ethics that we have in place are viable and valuable to do this, and how these things can then be rendered on the international scale. Because if in fact this is going to demand the multinational global discourse, that it will, then clearly the global relevance of any ethical approach needs to be considered. And ethics, very often, is said to have a big mouth but no teeth, but policies and international law has choppers, that can in fact be retributive and can bite.

What do these developments then incur for ongoing iterations of biological toxins and weapons convention, as well as other treaties, policies, and international laws that may help to guide, direct, if not regulate and govern the use of these particular implements?

[@57:15]: So the situation we’re faced with, ladies and gentlemen, is as follows: as we begin to untangle the Giordian knot of the brain, to the development of neuroscience and technologies, we’ve come to the precarious position of opening the proverbial can of worms of if, how, in what ways, to what extent, and when, these techniques and technologies will be used in weaponized intelligence and national security agenda?

I submit to you, ladies and gentlemen, that can has already been opened. It’ll be our job, and increasingly your job, to be able to navigate this new terrain, this brave new world, and what it incurs.

This is Atlas. [shows slide depicting Atlas and the phrase: “With increasing knowledge comes great power… …With great power comes great responsibility”]

The idea of Atlas was that Atlas balanced the integrity and well-being of the world upon his shoulders. I disagree. Atlas of the 21st century, as you see here, balances the world upon her head.

What we know about the brain, we’re able to do with the brain, of all those organisms that are embodied and have one that exists in their various environments, cultures and ecologies. Because the brain sciences in its technologies confer tremendous capability of knowledge intervention.

With tremendous capability comes tremendous power. And with tremendous power comes great responsibility. Look. That phrase is good enough for Spider-man, it certainly was good enough for [undetermined] Nietzsche, certainly good enough for me, and I hand that off to you.

Because ladies and gentlemen, as I started this, neuroscience puts the brain at our fingertips. Whether that’s to help, to heal, or to harm, is simply the effect of the human condition and how we put this to play.

You will, in your professional careers and your personal lives, see the brain sciences evermore infiltrated and integrated, not only into the battlespace, but to the bedside, to the boardroom and beyond. They will be a part of your realistic lives in the way we engage each other’s, regard each other, treat each other, interact… and perhaps, enter into combat.

Understanding the brain sciences and their power will become one of your obligate responsibilities; not only as military offers – officers, but as civilians of the 21st century global space.

I’d like to end a lecture like this usually by giving you a personal story. My dad, former Navy man, was an engineer. And one of the things that dad liked to do was build stuff, like to tinker. I still like to tinker. I like to work with tools.

My dad was a really bright guy. One of the things he did when I was a kid, he’d come home every month and bring me a new tool. Teach me how to use it. So they’re fairly shorter, I was a young kid, I became pretty adroit. Or at least, I thought I was adroit with using tools. And with all of the impulsiveness and zeal, of youth getting a new tool with only partial knowledge, I remember one day dad came home and he said to me, “Jim, here’s a brand new tool.” I took it from him and said, “Thanks dad!” then I went to go running off. My dad put his hand on my shoulder. He said, “Jim, slow down. Measure twice. Cut once. Sometimes you can’t go back.”

Ladies and gentlemen, these are the brain sciences. They can and they will increasingly be used in national security, intelligence and defense agenda, globally. We need to measure twice, and cut once. And make sure that the cut we make is one that is for good, one that is for right, and is one that does not cut our own throats, or the throats of others. In those ways they’re irreparable. I leave you with my father’s wisdom.

These are some of our white papers that we’ve submitted to the strategic multi-layer assessment group of the Joint Staff of the Pentagon. I can make these slides available to you. These are now all open domain and available to your perusal.

If you’re interested in some of our ongoing work by my research group, I provide you with some of our own work, and this is the part of the lecture – I’m gonna look right at the camera – there’s the unabashed self-promotional plug. If you’re really interested in this, I’ve only had the wonder and opportunity to engage with you for about the past hour or so, if you’re interested in going further down the rabbit hole and reading about this in greater detail, granularity, and specificity, I recommend this to you. [“NEUROTECHNOLOGY IN NATIONAL SECURITY AND DEFENSE”]

Not because I’m gonna go out and buy the new Maserati when you all buy the book, but because I’m very proud of it. And I’m proud of it not because I wrote it, because I only really contributed a couple of chapters. I’m proud of it because bringing this together was a multi-year effort that grew out of a set of at first somewhat sensitive, but unclassified and some classified conferences that we had that was then subsequently declassified.

And then also brought together international leaders in the field of military science, bioengineering, neuroscience, philosophy, ethics and law, to provide their perspective, their lens, their vision and voice, as to what’s going on in this domain at this point. With some speculation, vision and proposition as to what may need to go on in the future so as able to opportunize the capabilities of the brain sciences and meet and be prepared for the challenged that it offers in this space.

At this point I’d like to thank you all for your attention, I hope I haven’t bored you. If you wish to get in touch with me, feel free. Just put in your subject line “USMA” so I don’t think you’re trying to sell me viagra, not that I wouldn’t buy it. But this way I know where it’s coming from. If you want to ask questions you have some time to do that now, if you don’t get to your questions, feel free to email me; I will email you back. It may not be that day or even that week, because I may be busy or traveling, but I will in fact email you back because that’s my obligate responsibility to you. Thank you ladies and gentlemen for your time. I appreciate it.”

Speaker @1:02:36: “If you guys have any questions, we have about 5-10 minutes.”

James Giordano: “Yes sir?”

James Giordano: “Oh yeah, well, it’s the different number of different books. The new book there is the idea that is psychedelic drugs had some bad research and of course some of that bad research was not only procedurally bad, it was based upon the font of knowledge we had at the time.

Having engaged in psychedelic research, that’s – not, pert- well, maybe some, well having engaged in psychedelic research, one of my first projects actually was looking at methylenedioxymethamphetamine, “ecstasy”, under United States Navy grant for the possibility of weaponizing ecstasy as a volatile agent. As viable agent particularly against submariners.

So the understanding that the psychedelics could in fact be used in a variety of different ways inclusive of weaponization, is not new. We look back to the older projects, such as MKUltra, “mind control ultra”, which utilized Lysergic acid diethylamide [LSD] and psilocybin to be able to alter the cognitions, emotions and behaviors of individuals to see if that could be leveraged. Not only against our own people, but against others, some of the whole brainwashing, mind washing, mind changing effect.

However, one of the things we’ve come to recognize is that the mechanisms of these psychedelic agents is far more specific than we thought. And in fact, can be incurred at far lower doses than were heretofore attempted at either experimentally or in social practice.

So there’s a regenerated interest, revivified interest, in reexamining the mechanisms and effect of these psychedelic compounds, inclusive lysergic acid diethylamide, psilocybin, dimethyltryptamine, as well as some that are sort of like borderline on what might be considered a psychedelic, such as the affiliative drugs like MDMA, at micro doses. Or sort of intermediate micro doses. Not only to treat individuals who’ve had particular neuropsychiatric spectrum disorders, and there’s a growing body of research that would suggest that even one-time administration of a therapeutic dose of LSD or psilocybin, and/or MDMA, may have very profound therapeutic effects against certain forms of PTSD, intractable depression, and beyond the military framework, even certain forms of psychosis.

We also recognize that these things may be useful in treating forms of TBI, treating other forms of psychiatric and neuropsychiatric disorders, and may also be viable as performance enhancers, particularly if given in a very specific regiment at a very controlled asymmetry.

So to think like so many other things, the more we’re learning about the brain, suggests to us not only what we know, but what we didn’t know. Some of the errors in our previous ways of experimentation empiricism, and that allows us to revisit these things under a newer and I think more granular perspective, that I think may benefit – demonstrate certain benefits, as well as giving rise to concern about certain burdens and risks.

So I think that it certainly warrants continued research, and I think that we need to be cautious in how we interpret that research in its translational effect, but I think there’s great benefit to be gained there. Did I answer your question?

Other questions. Yes sir.”

Audience member @1:05:28: “So I had a similar question. So in regards to the neuro enable- enablement of the warfighter intel operator, do you think one day the military will change its stance towards legalizing the use of pharmaceuticals and nootropics, such as modafinil or, or adderall, to – “

James Giordano: “Yes. Yes. In fact, I can tell you some ongoing research that’s being done now by the Air Force Research Laboratory. It’s looking not only at the comparative use of what’s called nootropic agents, as you said modafinil and some of the newer ones. They’ve been around for awhile but they’re sort of new with regard to the light of their potential utility.

Some of those drugs, like as piracetam, pramiracetam, oxiracetam… these have been around for a long time, but now we’re understanding their mechanisms a little bit better and we’re recognizing how we may be able to use them in concert with other agents, inclusive something like caffeine, and/or how we can also utilize these agents at lower doses that are much more safer dose, that can also then be co-potentiated to the use of various devices.

Here, we’re talking about the transcranial devices, such as transcranial magnetic stimulation, and transporting electrical stimulation, and if you’re interested in some of this work, I refer you to a colleague of mine who’s at Air Force; he’s a Wright-Patt. And his name is Andy McKinley. Just look up some of Dr. McKinley’s work in this area, it’s stellar. It’s – it’s leading edge. And the Air Force Office of Scientific Research is funding a number of different projects that are looking at exactly this – this mechanism.

Can we engage certain brain substrates, nodes and networks, through the use of new pharmaceuticals or older pharmaceuticals that are re-dosed, or pharmaceutically delivered in different ways, to most maximize key aspects of the processes of those neural functions that are operative in key tasks for the intelligence operator or warfighter? And, in so doing, can we then take a slightly different stance on our postures towards the viability and value of these drugs under controlled circumstances for the warfighter intelligence operator, and I think that’s the general idea. Okay.

Did I answer your question? Cool. Other questions. Going once. Going twice. Thank you all.”

*Featured image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

Tal Zaks, Former Chief Scientist at Moderna, Speaks of Nanomedicine, Personalized Vaccines and Genetic Engineering in 2017

Scientist quote/unquote: “hacking the software of life.”

Tal Zaks, former Chief Medical Officer at Moderna (currently partnering with Orbimed) – gives us another look at their terminology of “hacking the software of life”, i.e. – changing/modifying our genes.

Piggybacking off of Klaus Schwab’s statements that gene-editing changes YOU, not to mention Craig Venter’s (of the Human Genome Project) admission that:

“It’s pretty stunning when you just replace the DNA software in the cell, and the cell instantly starts reading that new software, starts making a whole different set of proteins. And within a short while, all the characteristics of the first species disappear. And a new species emerges from this software that controls that cell going forward.”

Craig Venter of the NIH and Human Genome: Creating Synthetic Life | ” – trying to design what we want biology to do”

– it is clear that, by definition, “rewriting the genetic code” changes what it means to be human – or changes whatever species is being modified. Craig Venter himself says that a “new species emerges from this software”.

So while these doctors and scientists try to sugarcoat these ill-conceived endeavors (even if they were born of good intentions initially… “the road to hell is paved with good intentions”), the attempts at genetically changing our DNA have grave consequences; not only on the physical-molecular level, but on the conscious-soul level as well.

Here, Tal Zaks, in a Tedx Talk from November 2017, specifically mentions vaccines (a total of 17 times in a 10 minute presentation) to administer this genetic-changing software. In addition, he also alludes to collecting DNA in order to make “personalized vaccines”. An endeavor that DARPA is also invested in:

DNA Script Partners with Moderna to Develop On-Demand Vaccines and Therapeutics for DARPA

SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, Calif., and PARIS | April 27, 2021

[ https://www.dnascript.com/press-releases/dna-script-partners-with-moderna-to-develop-on-demand-vaccines-and-therapeutics-for-darpa/ ]

“Rewriting the Genetic Code” – Tal Zaks (2017)

Source: odysee | @RedPillman | Rewriting the Genetic Code

Full transcript below. Some embellishment has been added for emphasis.

Tal Zaks: “So I started my professional life about thirty years ago as a nurse and the pediatric intensive care unit.

And I remember this one infant, let’s call him Jonathan, who came in really really ill. Seemed to have a rare genetic defect, but in those days, gene diagnosis was still in its infancy so we couldn’t really figure out what’s wrong with him.

And in the years since, as I’ve trained as a physician scientist, we’ve been living in this phenomenal digital and scientific revolution. And I’m here today to tell you that we’re actually hacking the software of life. And that it’s changing the way we think about prevention and treatment of disease.

So here’s all the biology you need to know in 30 seconds. Our body is made out of organs, our organs are made out of cells, and in every cell there’s this thing called “messenger RNA” or mRNA for short, that transmits the critical information from the DNA, our genes, to the protein, which is really the stuff we’re all made of.

This is the critical information that determines what a cell will actually do. And so we think of it like an operating system. And it’s not just in every cell of our body. It’s actually in every cell of every organism of life. It’s the same thing.

And so, if you could actually change that, which we call the software of life, you could introduce a line of code, or change a line of code, it turns out that has profound implications for everything from the flu, to cancer. And I’m going to demonstrate that with three short examples.

Let’s start with the flu. So many of us get a vaccine. What is a vaccine? It is an injection in our arm where we get bits and pieces of the virus; the protein, and that teaches our immune system to recognize the virus and so when we get infected we’re not sick.

Now imagine if instead of giving the protein, we would give the instructions on how to make the protein. How the body can make its own vaccine. That’s an mRNA vaccine.

And here’s what it looks like from the cell.”

Image Source: Tal Zaks / Tedx Talks

“So the traditional approach has protein floating around your cells. An mRNA vaccine approach has the cells themselves in your own body making the vaccine.

What’s more alarming: a stranger prowling the neighborhood, or somebody who’s just broke into your ground-floor, and tripped the alarm?

That’s what happens with an mRNA vaccine. You’re tripped the alarm wire and now the cell is dialing 9-1-1. It’s calling the police at the same time as it’s making the protein and saying, ‘that’s the bad guy’.

That’s how an mRNA works. And for the last several years we’ve shown this actually works in a whole multitude of animal models. Earlier this year we published the first actual study in people. And it actually works in people.

We took a group of volunteers and injected them with a messenger RNA vaccine against a variant of flu/influenza. And all of these volunteers got the immune response we were hoping to see. The side-effect profile was pretty benign, what you would see with any normal type vaccine.

So we’ve proven the principle, this actually can work. It works in people and now we’re going to be developing a whole slew of vaccines against diseases for which we don’t have one. So that’s infectious disease.

Now for the second example, let’s talk for a minute about cancer. Horrible disease. Cancer has affected the lives of many of us and will affect the lives of many more of us as we age.

The problem with cancer at the cellular level is that the DNA is screwed up. You’ve got these mutation on this screwed up DNA, leads up to screwed up information that makes screwed up protein. And so the cell loses control.

Now, how do you figure out what is actually screwed up? Well, you got to figure out the whole sequence, right?

It took us decades and billions of dollars to sequence the human genome, and we’ve done that. We achieved that in 2003. And now we’re less than 15 years later, and it takes us a week. And we can do it for every patient. So now we can go and figure out what exactly is screwed up in a patient, and we can use that information to make a vaccine.

We take that information, say a patient with lung cancer, and we take it – we take the biopsy, we figure out the sequence, we figure out their immune system, we – and that all becomes information. It goes up in the cloud into a bioinformatic algorithm and then automatically makes a vaccine that we administer into their normal tissue; into the muscle to try and wake up their immune system.

Now the challenge, of course, is that every person’s cancer is different. Mutation happened by random chance. And so to do this you have to make it personalized.

So this is me, but if every patient is different, what we’re going to have to do is make a personalized cancer vaccine for every patient. And that’s exactly what we’ve started to do. Every patient gets a vaccine that’s based on the sequence and their own tumor.

So when we started to do this a couple years ago, my CEO stopped by one evening and said, “Tal, I get the idea but is this going to work?” And I said, “Look, Stefan. I don’t know, but we’ve got all the pieces to try and answer the question so we should try.”

And today I can tell you that I still don’t know if it’s going to work. But I know we’re able to actually run the experiment. Earlier this week the first patient was treated with a personalized cancer vaccine we made just for her.

So in the months and years to come we will know the answer of whether we can actually wake the immune system against somebody’s cancer with a personalized cancer vaccine so stay tuned.

I’m gonna finish with a third example of something called “methylmalonic acidemia” or MMA for short. Now the name doesn’t matter. Okay? This is just a disease that is caused by an enzyme that’s critical for metabolism. And children are born and they lack this one crucial gene. And so their body is not able really to fight infection properly or anytime they have any sort of stress, their body goes into crisis. They have one gene that’s gone awry and it causes a really significant disease.

If you look at what happens over time, for these children, about 1/3 of them don’t make it to the age of 10. You see here the survival curve whether the gene is completely lost or whether there’s just an aberration in it, the survival is impaired.

And, what do we do? Well there’s not much you can do because the missing protein is actually missing inside their cells. So what do we do? Well, here’s what we do. We take out their liver and we transplant the liver from a donor that is healthy and normal into these kids.

Think about it. They’re missing one critical piece of information and what we do is transplant an entire organ. Well, it fixes the problem, but what if there’s a better way? What if we could fix the missing information?

So based on innovations, nanomedicine, a new class of invention that Bob Langer across the river at MIT in Cambridge has been inventing, we’re now able to package this information and messenger RNA with a goal of giving it as an infusion, and then having it go to the liver to replace that missing information.

Is this going to work? Well we know the biology works. So together with the National Institutes of Health, we’ve studied this in a mouse model and this mouse has been engineered to have the exact same problem that the kids have. They’re lacking the one – the same gene. And you can see in the red line what happens to these mice when they’re born. Pretty much immediately they die. They cannot cope with stress. But if you inject messenger RNA that codes for the one missing protein that replaces that information, these mice, all of them survive, as you can see in the green line. And if you look at them they not only survive, they’re actually growing, they’re gaining weight, they look like they’re healthy littermates.

We’re hoping to start the clinical trial in the near future and the idea is the same thing here. If you think about what it is we’re trying to do, we’ve taken information and our understanding of that information and how that information is transmitted in a cell, and we’ve taken our understanding of medicine and how to make drugs and we’re fusing the two. We think of it as information therapy.

I started by telling you about Jonathan and 30 years ago, and I was a nurse in the intensive care unit, I worked two night shifts, and Jonathan came in when he was about 12 months old and very quickly became dependent on a ventilator. And for the next 15 months or so, every time I came into the unit he was my patient to care for. You know, bathe, feed, treat, play with – he couldn’t talk, he was on a ventilator, but he was very much alive and you could tell – you could play with him, his eyes would – would follow me. After a while he would recognize me. Until one day I came into the unit for my shift and he was no longer there. He had died because of an infection in between shifts.

Imagine a world where we cannot just diagnose, but we can actually use the information to create vaccines to wake up the immune system to something like cancer and to fix the missing information for children with diseases like Jonathan, so that they can leave the ICU and live a healthy life.

Thank you.”

What is “nanomedicine”?

“Nanomedicine is defined as the medical application of nanotechnology. Nanomedicine can include a wide range of applications, including biosensors, tissue engineering, diagnostic devices, and many others. In the Center for Nanomedicine at Johns Hopkins, we focus on harnessing nanotechnology to more effectively diagnose, treat, and prevent various diseases.”

[ https://cnm-hopkins.org/what-is-nanomedicine/ ]

Interestingly, but not surprisingly, Johns Hopkins was the organization that the WEF (World Economic Forum / Klaus Schwab – famous for the “Great Reset” agenda) chose to moderate the EVENT 201 Plandemic Pandemic exercise, with the help of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation…

And while, of course, Mr. Zaks ends his speech high-lighting the beneficial aspects of a “gene-editing vaccine” and reminds the audience that it is to “cure cancer” or any other number of diseases, we must be alert to alternative motives and the implications of what could arise from such technological tampering of the human genome, not to mention a collection of the population’s DNA in a database – to control and alter at their discretion.

Now aside from those chilling prospects, is it worth it to forever alter a human being, and what it means to be human, by injecting them with genetic changing software? What possibilities might arise from such an endeavor? Are we SURE that they have our best interest in mind? (that is a rhetorical question, by the way… because of course they don’t) If they can change us as a species, then it follows suit that it can change our emotions, our thoughts, even our very purpose.

There are some things in life which should not be meddled with. “Life” itself, is definitely one of them.

Fact checking is extremely important. I want to reiterate not to take everything at face value; no matter what you read, where you read it from, or who you hear it from. And to be clear, do not rely on “fact checking” websites to give you accurate information either. These are just as likely, (if not even more likely…), to feed false information and false debunking accounts to manipulate the reader. Please take everything into consideration before adhering to a certain narrative – and always keep your mind open to other possibilities.

Fair use disclaimer: Some of the links from this article are provided from different sources/sites to give the reader extra information and cite the sources, but does not necessarily mean that I endorse the contents of the site itself. Additionally, I have tried to provide links to the contents that I used from other sites as an educational and/or entertainment means only; if you feel that any information deserves further citation or request to be clarified, please let me know through the contact page.

Featured image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay