(LifeSiteNews) — Some probably heard that anti-Trump protesters, led by radical feminists, had planned public annoyances for the 4th of July. Their events were labeled as “Free America” protests, apparently implying that America is not free because there is not “gender and pay equality, LGBTQ+ and civil rights, affordable health care, environmental awareness, and reproductive freedom.”
Such people were responsible for the other public annoyances known as the “No Kings” protests. While the numbers could be wrong, there were reportedly 5 million protesters for the No Kings protests. There was not much, if any, reporting about how many protesters there were on the 4th of July.
A question that is almost never considered is the following: what kind of harm would those people who participate in such protests and non-participators who support such false freedoms cause if they worked for the local secret police, FBI, intelligence community, or even the U.S. military? Imagine if such people had secret, invisible, and silent technologies which could be used to torture those who oppose them; would they torture others and enjoy the experience?
Similarly, approximately 75 million people in America voted for Kamala Harris; such voters typically support the same false freedoms as the radical feminists mentioned above. Presumably some of those voters work for law enforcement, the FBI, intelligence community, etc. What would they do if they had access to secret weapons?
For example, there are Directed Energy Weapons which are silent, invisible, and can be operated from remote locations. Those weapons can cause brain damage and can be used for torture. What would the above protesters do to a person who says homosexuality, transgenderism, contraception, and abortion are grave evils and not freedoms? Would they torture such a person if they had the weapon and the security and “law enforcement privilege” from being a secret police, intelligence community, or other government employee?
(This is not saying that Trump voters would not do the same thing. For example, if a Trump voter is a secret police employee and his supervisor said, “Torture that person with these secret weapons or else you will lose your job, be unemployable, and likely homeless,” it is not guaranteed that he will refuse to do so. The reality is that there are likely very few people in the world who would make significant sacrifices to do good and refuse to do evil to the point of substantial financial loss.)
A second question is: what can Americans do to make America free from the harm that the above people could cause if they work in the police, FBI, intelligence community, and military?
An example of a current event is helpful here both to show how intelligence community employees apparently set out to oppose others by breaking the law and how advanced technology could be used to cause other types of harm. The U.S. military bombed Iran’s underground nuclear facilities. Soon after the bombings, it was apparently illegally leaked by some employee(s) in the U.S. government’s Defense Intelligence Agency that the centrifuges in the facilities were largely “intact” and “the impact to all three sites — Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan — was largely restricted to aboveground structures, which were severely damaged…”
First, the example shows how government employees in the intelligence community apparently wanted to oppose President Trump by illegally leaking the information that his action was not as successful as he claimed, potentially even harming Trump’s reputation (if Trump was correct and the leaked information was false or falsified).
Next, the example might imply the use of potentially advanced technologies. How could anyone make the somewhat detailed determinations that the underground facilities were not severely damaged? Iran’s Fordow facility is supposedly around 300 feet underground. How can the Defense Intelligence Agency or any U.S. government entity see 300 feet underground?
The media sources do not explain how the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency can see 300 feet underground, even to the point of determining that centrifuges are largely “intact.” That appears to have been kept secret, while other information was not.
There is a type of radar known as “Ground Penetrating Radar” which has been suggested as potential use by the military to see or “map” underground bunkers. It is described in a U.S. government weapons’ reference document as follows:
Antilethal, Sensor-Ground Penetrating Radar. Sensor that can detect nongeologic objects and human engineered structures beneath the ground by analyzing the return of electromagnetic waves traveling through geologic structures. Detection of buried mines and discovery/mapping of underground bunkers represent practical, nonlethal applications (Page 5; emphasis added)
Radar that sees underground is pretty advanced technology. And that document was published in 1997; technology is more advanced now than it was then.
Thus, government documents imply that Ground Penetrating Radar was a possible technology used to determine if Iran’s centrifuges 300 feet underground were destroyed.
But the above reference document was from 1997. In 2023, non-U.S.-government Chinese scientists suggested a type of Ground Penetrating Radar using electromagnetic fields and other technologies that might work from space:
Full-spectrum electromagnetic field refers to the whole range of electromagnetic radiation, including ultraviolet, visible light, infrared, microwave, and other low-frequency electromagnetic waves. Penetrating remote sensing techniques involve static magnetic and gravity as classical potential fields. A unified numerical framework for describing the interaction mechanisms between the electromagnetic field and multi-physics media is the key and aim of penetrating remote sensing, which allows us to harness and manipulate these waves in order to achieve deep-Earth space sensing capabilities.
It is necessary to emphasize that U.S. government scientists are usually more advanced than competitors due to almost unlimited money. And if U.S. government scientists discovered a Ground Penetrating Radar-like technology which can see through anything (including earth) from space, then they would likely keep it secret. Thus, the Chinese scientists’ conceptual proposal might have already been achieved by U.S. government scientists.
Similarly, it is known that there is already radar technology used by U.S. government employees that sees into homes, but it is not described as working from space.
Now, refer back to the 5 million protesters or the 75 million Kamala Harris voters. If they worked for the local secret police, FBI, or intelligence community, and they had technologies which could see into your home at all times, would they use it?
Of course, here is where some or many people might say, “If you aren’t doing anything wrong, who cares if government employees watch every move you make throughout your whole life?” Or, “The FBI won’t use radar to surveil you unless they have a warrant!”
Most of the responses to those false suggestions are common sense. Warrants might be easily obtainable, especially with “activist judges.”
The false suggestion that “if you aren’t doing anything wrong, who cares if government employees watch every move you make” is incorrect for apparently less obvious reasons. Government employees can weaponize surveillance by surveilling a target and then using cooperators or secret police employees to use either non-verbal communication or other hints and suggestions that make the targeted person know they are being watched with advanced surveillance radar which sees into their home.
Most human beings do not like having their every move surveilled. When a person knows or suspects they are being secretly watched by a stranger their brain and behavior are traumatized or otherwise significantly effected – even if there is nothing for the person to hide. A person who is being surveilled usually feels like a person who is detained by law enforcement; thus, surveillance is crippling in a way. (The previous reference is not fully endorsed.)
Constant surveillance, then, would be torture, similar to being imprisoned. Thus, surveillance can be weaponized against and cause harm to a target, even if the target has nothing to hide.
What can be done to Make America Free?
It seems, then, that there is policing, investigative, intelligence gathering, and other law enforcement technologies, weapons, and methods that should be completely prohibited – with no exceptions, in part because government misuse of such technologies against the innocent would be far worse an evil than the potential good use of such technologies.
Such prohibitions should include severe penalties for the development, production, stockpiling, transfer, acquisition, retention, or possession of as well as assisting foreign states or organizations in such activities, or attempting, threatening, or conspiring to do the previous with such prohibited technologies (wording which is similar to biological weapons’ laws, but without exceptions).
Some technologies which should be completely prohibited include surveillance technologies as well as non-consented and/or remote mind-reading, mind-controlling and mind-effecting technologies, and technologies which can remotely and secretly harm another like directed energy weapons or similar technologies. Additional technologies should be prohibited but are not described here.
Both states and the federal government should enact laws prohibiting those technologies. Only a complete prohibition of such technologies would be sufficient to at least partially protect the American public from such crippling effects.
What would the harm of such laws be? There are many people that say that it is delusional to suggest that mind-reading and mind-controlling technologies are possible. If mind-controlling technologies and mind-reading technologies are impossible, then a law which provides severe punishments, especially for police, intelligence community, FBI, etc., for the above-mentioned actions should not be problematic.
Science suggests, at minimum, that remote mind-reading and mind-controlling technologies are possible. Remote surveillance technologies are also possible. Laws are often enacted against mere possibilities – much like biological weapons’ laws making it illegal to, say, combine the HIV virus with the common cold and make HIV spread easier.
Local police, the FBI, intelligence community, and all other government employees should fully support such laws. In fact, while it is uncommon to do so, they should also fully support retroactive specifications of laws which describe that, for instance, mind-controlling technology and Havana-syndrome causing technology are types of violent weapons and are subject to the same or worse penalties as other violent weapons.
There should also be ways to encourage whistleblowing by those who know of such technologies. And maybe there is a need for states and the federal government to form something similar to the Department of Government Efficiency which keeps track of, publishes information on, punishes, and otherwise protects the common citizen from local police and secret police, the FBI, intelligence community, and so on.
Finally, Congress and the president need to enact laws which provide compensation to (non-government-employed) American citizens who have been harmed by Directed Energy Weapons or similar technologies. Directed Energy Weapons’ attacks have been reported in the U.S. and there is reason to believe that some suspected attacks were caused by U.S. federal or local government employees (as opposed to foreign actors). The law could be similar to what is provided in the “Helping American Victims Afflicted by Neurological Attacks Act of 2021” or “the HAVANA Act of 2021.”
Whistleblowers who provide information on targeted people should also be compensated, because targeted people in many cases likely don’t know that, say, their brain aneurysm rupture was caused by a Directed Energy Weapon attack.
Science suggests that advanced technologies are already in use which could secretly and severely harm Americans. There are evil people in America who would seemingly use such technologies to harm those who oppose them. To make America free, such technologies need to be completely prohibited.
