This post is about information in the public domain, recently highlighted in the UK and US media, about miniature lenses that can sit on an eyeball and communicate with other devices used for military purposes. Based on reports of targeted individuals, similar technology may already be in use to enable perpetrators to see through our eyes.
In my post on ‘Perpetraitor Profiles’ I mentioned that several Targeted Individuals recorded that perpetraitors were looking through one or both of their eyes, and that a technology called Remote Neural Monitoring could be used to do that. But it wasn’t clear how that worked in practice.
Since then I have done some more research and, based on the information and evidence quoted below, I have come up with a theory about how perpetrators could look through the eyes of Targeted Individuals. So here is my argument for what technology is being used, and how it works.
SCIENTISTS COULD SEE THROUGH CATS EYES IN 1999
In 1999 scientists proved that they could look through the eyes of a cat. BBC News Online Science Editor Dr David Whitehouse reported: ‘ A team of US scientists have wired a computer to a cat’s brain and created videos of what the animal was seeing… To their amazement they say they saw natural scenes with recognisable objects such as people’s faces. They had literally seen the world through cat’s eyes.’
US MILITARY PLANS TO USE INSECTS AS MINIATURE SURVEILLANCE DRONES
In March 2008 Fox News reported that ‘U.S. military engineers are trying to design flying robots disguised as insects that could one day spy on enemies and conduct dangerous missions without risking lives… In essence, the research seeks to miniaturize the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle drones used in Iraq and Afghanistan for surveillance and reconnaissance.’ www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,456384,00.
In November 2008 Fox News also reported that ‘The next generation of drones, called Micro Aerial Vehicles, or MAVs, could be as tiny as bumblebees and capable of flying undetected into buildings, where they could photograph, record, and even attack insurgents and terrorists.’www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,456384,00.html#ixzz22s2VQHy3
In July 2009 the journalist Chares Q. Choi reported that: ‘Scientists can already control the flight of real moths using implanted devices. The military and spy world no doubt would love tiny, live camera-wielding versions of Predator drones that could fly undetected into places where no human could ever go to snoop on the enemy.’www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-527328/Insects-fly-wall-spies-tiny-cameras-radio-controls-microphones.html#ixzz22s0vDPMK
US BATTLEFIELD TECHNOLOGY ENABLES SOLDIERS TO SEE THROUGH THE EYES OF THEIR TEAM MATES
On 3 February 2012 the UK newspaper the Daily Mail reported:
‘DARPA – the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, thought of as the American military’s ‘mad scientist’ wing – has been funding research on ‘soldier mounted displays’ for some time, but previous versions have been bulky.
The lenses, made with nano-scale engineering processes,work as a hi-tech focusing device, which allows Innovega’s glasses to be considerably less bulky than previous devices. The lenses themselves require no power, and thus can sit safely on the eyeball.’* *My emphasis
DARPA Says, ‘Innovega’s iOptiks are contact lenses that enhance normal vision by allowing a wearer to view virtual and augmented reality images without the need for bulky apparatus. ‘
‘Instead of oversized virtual reality helmets, digital images are projected onto tiny full-color displays that are very near the eye.’
These novel contact lenses allow users to focus simultaneously on objects that are close up and far away. www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2095987/Virtual-reality-contact-lenses-beam-images-directly-eyes-sale-2014
On 14 April 2012, the Daily Mail ran an article under the headlines:
‘U.S. TROOPS TO HAVE ‘SUPER VISION’ AS PENTAGON ORDERS ELECTRIC CONTACT LENSES THAT LET THEM ‘SEE’ THROUGH DRONES FLYING OVERHEAD
- Lenses can let troops see through ‘eyes’ of drones flying above.
- Can ‘layer’ target information over view of world.
- Contact lenses don’t impede fighter’s vision.
- Equivalent to a 240-inch 3D television from 10 feet’.
The Daily Mail reporter, Rob Waugh, stated that:
‘The Pentagon has placed an order with Innovega for lenses which focus 3D battlefield information from drones and satellites directly into people’s eyeballs*. The tiny ‘screens’ sit directly on users’ eyeballs and work with a pair of lightweight glasses with a built-in translucent screen. *My emphasis
On Sunday 29 July 2012, the Daily Mail also reported that:
‘The system is designed to improve the awareness of a military team as a whole, allowing soldiers to see through the eyes of their team mates in real-time’.* *My emphasis
HOW DOES NEW TECHNOLOGY AFFECT TARGETED INDIVIDUALS?
According to John St Clair Akwei, a former surveillance specialist, Remote Neural Monitoring plays a key role in the targeting of individuals:
‘Without any contact with the subject, Remote Neural Monitoring can map out electrical activity from the visual cortex of a subject’s brain and show images from the subject’s brain on a video monitor. NSA operatives see what the surveillance subject’s eyes are seeing. Visual memory can also be seen. RNM can send images direct to the visual cortex, bypassing the eyes and optic nerves.’
From an article in Nexus Magazine April/May 96 from MindControlForums Website. http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/scalar_tech/esp_scalartech12.htm
John St Clair Akwei does not say how Remote Neural Monitoring is achieved. Dr John Hall, medical anesthesiologist, author of ‘A New Breed: Satellite Terrorism in America’ and a targeted individual, states that satellite technology was used at an early stage to connect electronically with computers. Drawing on his experience in the medical profession he notes that Electroencephalograms – EEGs – are routinely used in hospitals to monitor brain wave frequency activity, and that when connected with satellite technology, a similar type of equipment will enable a perpetraitor to hear what you hear and see what you are seeing in real-time.
For Remote Neural Monitoring to work, satellite technology must have some way to connect with the targeted individual. Perpetraitors can see Targeted Individuals all the time using lasers and satellite technology. But they can also look through the eyes of a Targeted Individual. So far I have not been able to find anything that describes how this is achieved, but I think that nano-scale cameras must play a part in enabling perpetraitors to see through the eyes of targeted individuals.
The reason I think this is that:
- The Daily Mail reported how US military battlefield methods are being upgraded with drones or satellites connected to cameras that can ‘safely sit on the eyeball’ of soldiers, allowing them to ‘see through the eyes of their team mates’.
- If the US military weapons described in the Daily Mail articles could connect with drones and satellites without using nano-scale eye cameras they would have done so, as it can hardly be convenient for soldiers to be fitted with a type of contact lense attached to a camera, however small. If the US Military didn’t need nano-scale cameras I doubt if the US army would be doing what they are doing.
- The US military weapons system has some similarities with the Remote Neural Monitoring, and it is quite possible that RMN would need nano-scale cameras in the same way.
- TIs report that perpetraitors only look through one of their eyes. This is consistent with having a camera installed in one eye.
My theory is that perpetraitors can see through both our eyes, using satellite technology to track into our brains and connect with a nano-scale camera attached to or implanted on the outside of the eye.
MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE
My impression was that perpetraitors could look through one of my eyes, although I now think they can see through both eyes, even if our eyes are closed. Something else I noticed was that in the dark I could see the nano-scale camera implant equipment shining white inside both my eyes, although it appears that only one eye has a camera.
And in daylight I saw something in one of my eyes that looked like a black comma. At first I thought it was a floater. Then I saw a clothing advert on a bill board, and noticed that the model had a comma drawn above her cheekbone. It looked like the one in my eye. I searched the words ‘comma symbol’ on the Internet and found that there is a computer game called Naruto which has a huge following, and that the comma symbol is known as a Sharingan.
I also found out that you can buy contact lenses that give you a whole range of Sharingans. Could it be that some perpetraitor technician is into Naruto games and is making nano-scale eye camera implants that have a Sharingan on them?
Picture opposite: Sharingans. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sharingan.jpg
IF LOOKS COULD KILL
After reading the articles referred to above in the Daily Mail, and adding to them the information I had from my own experience, I began to realise that a TI with a camera embedded in one eye could be part of a weapons system, providing additional close up vision that could be transmitted to a drone/satellite and also to a third party, possibly but not necessarily a human with weapons capability.
But the set up could work just as well if the Targeted Individual was the third party with weapons capability, if the camera in the TI’s eye could be used as a weapon to be fired at someone or somthing. Could some Targeted Individuals be used as human handgrenades? And could the system work just as well if the Targeted Individual had a separate camera in each eye? Or could the second camera be embedded centrally somewhere else in the TIs head?
I put a patch over my eye – the one with the Sharingan in it. I could see as well with the other eye as if I had two eyes. But for the first time, I noticed a blurred patch in the middle of the other eye. Could that blurred patch be an invisible camera sight? I had already seen the placement socket shining in the dark as if reflecting ultraviolet light. Did it make any difference whether my eyes were open or closed?
At this stage, I hope I am wrong in my conclusions. Last week, I was sitting next to a friend who was driving, when something the colour of a stone seemed to come from slightly above eye level opposite us and hit the windscreen, leaving a mark in the glass. The mark in the glass was where my eyes were focused when the windscreen got hit.
Are nearby people and living things at risk when individuals are targeted electronically?
When perpetraitors target me with microwaves, birds and squirrels do not visit the food table outside. When perpetraitors stop targeting me with microwaves, birds crowd the table, as if making up for lost time.
This made me wonder how wide a space is covered when perpetraitors target individuals. Could it affect people nearby, for example sleeping in the next room. Could it affect neighbours sleeping in a semi-detached house. And what effect could it have on partners of targeted individuals.
MITIGATING THE EFFECTS OF LASER/MICROWAVE HITS
Anti-histamine cream and tablets appear to be helpful, based on my experience. Maintaining an alkaline ph balance may also assist – for example, drinking lemon juice or cider vinegar. Perpetraitors get agitated by this, so it may nullify the results of some laser or microwave research testing. Microwaves leach calcium out of bones, with results similar to osteoporosis. Taking a sufficiently strong dose of calcium citrate with vitamin D3 on a regular basis can counter the effects of this. 1000 mg of calcium with D3 a day would be the lowest suggested level. Seeking the advice of a pharmacist is advisable.
After using aluminium protective eye shades at night for a while I could see that I had a ‘sunglass mark’. My face was more red – except where the eye shades covered my face. One side of my face was less red than the other, probably because I sleep on that side. I am not sure if this was caused by directed laser or microwave energy. Sleeping in sunglasses or eye shades covered with aluminium foil may be beneficial. Attaching a cloth container such as a sunglass case to eye shades, and filling it with aluminium is another option.
NOTE: This post may not read as I would wish, owing to multiple interventions made on my Blogspot post by perpetraitors while I was trying to draft it. In recent weeks I have been subject to an onslaught of interventions and attacks by perpetrators while drafting, and I sometimes find that publishing the post as work in progress is best. Criminal encroachment in the internet operations of another country is a breach of international law.