Ethics For COINTELPRO Criminals #6



The more serious problem is that the organized stalkers not only steal others’ privacy, but also lie as if no one would do such things. Their old trick is to make up a childish story that the targeted person is a terrorist, etc, and self-justify their own crimes – stalking, torturing, and stealing others’ privacy (Rich, 2009).

  If the perpetrators really believe what they are doing is legally, morally, and ethically right, they would not have to hide it. However, when their stalking / harassment activities are pointed at, the perpetrators lie that the victims’ claim is a schizophrenic delusion. Henece, it can be said that the perpetrators' true motivation is not “community policing.” Rather, they enjoy watching victims being afflicted, and satisfy their own catharsis. For this aspect, Rich (2009) analyzes that the organized staliking / harassment crimes are a type of hate crime. As a matter of fact, racists or not, it is obvious that the perpetrators are extremely selfish, who claim their own rights while they do not respect even the basic human rights of others – that is, privacy. In other words, they do not regard others as equal person. Not to mention, these activities, so called COINTELPRO, ruined American democracy as the book “War AT Home” reports (Glick, 1989).

   After all, no matter how many hours the COINTELPRO perpetrators spend peeping into others’ privacy, they cannot figure out their own nation’s problem – How could people be moral when the police are stealing and lying everyday?  Consequently, this country now has the highest crime rate among developed countries despite that there are more “community police” than in East-Germany during the Stasi era (Goldestein, 2002). Besides, horrible incidents like school shooting occur more often than any other countries. Thus, is it not time to look at what we do rather than peep what others do? "Honesty is the best policy" is not an old cliche. Only this way will the country regain respect from the world people.



Glick, Brian. War at Home: Covert Action against U.S. Activists and What We Can Do About It. Boston, MA: South End Press, 1989. Print.

Goldstein, R. (2002).  US Planning to Recruit One in 24 Americans as Citizen Spies. Sunday Morning Herald |, Monday, 15 July, 2002.

Mark M. Rich, The Hidden Evil,, 2009

Ethics For COINTELPRO Criminals #5


   Another obstacle to ethical use of the mind reading technology is some people’s limitless greed for money – that is, the dark side of capitalism. Those who are rich and in power have kept secret the existence of mind reading machines so they can monopolize the benefits gained from the new invention. Thus, if we are to make use of the latest technologies of neuroscience for public interests, first we have to tacle the problem of greed of people who make money from neuroscience technologies.

On the other hand, recently, some scientists and companies openly started business using the mind reading technologies. For example, in 2008 in London, a neuroscientist Gemma Calvert, founded a corporation of so called “neuromarketing” which sells private information taken directly from the people’s brain through a thought-identifying machine. According to Calvert, their clients are mainly from big corporations who want to know consumers’ mind.  

   Concerning Calvert’s buziness, some critics raise ethical questions on buying/selling the ultimate privacy of humans – information in the brain. It is understandable that some people may frown upon making money with private information. Nonetheless, this may not be unprecedented business because in porn industry for decades, females have voluntarily sold their own privacy. Hence, as long as the sellers agree with trading their own privacy, the issue seems to be just a matter of commercialism.       

   However, the more unethical problem is that currently the mind reading machines are monopolizedly used for “stealing” people’s privacy by the countries which own the mind control system (Kilde, 2008). According to Dr. Kilde, MD, it appears that those “stolen” information are collected as data to further develop mind control technologies. At the same time, those who want to keep the mind reading machines secret organize stalking / harassment groups, and use the technologies to torture people who try to make the facts public. By doing so, the perpetrators can make the victims look like a paranoia-schizophrenia, and neutralize the victims' claims. These secret crimes are what is called “Gang Stalking,” which is nowadays world widely reported by thousands of victims, particularlly in the U.S., Europe, and Japan. Not to mention, these unethical activities urged by ugly greed are conducted under the name of “National Security.”  

 Therefore, I humbly suggest that those scientists and engineers who engage in developing mind control technologies had better acquire self-control skills first. What they need to do is to reduce their greed for money, power, and fame rather than attempt to control other people for their self-interest.



Kilde, R. (2008). MICROWAVE MIND CONTROL: Modern torture and Control Mechanisms eliminating human rights and privacy.


Neuromarketing 2008 - Prof Gemma Calvert [Retreived on Jan. 19, 2013]


Ethics For COINTELPRO Criminals #4

Mind Reading Technologies  

Chapter 2 of Social Exclusion and the Way Out begins with discussion about the relations between mind and body, and then moves on to discussion of the relations between mind and brain based on the latest scientific discoveries (Bonner, 2006). The author refers to a significant contribution to the study of memory by brain science. As a matter of fact, the recent technologies can search a person’s memory by monitoring brain activities. For example, when an experimenter shows an object to a subject, a machine can detect if the object is what his or her brain has seen before. This function is called brain-print, and is planned to be used for the criminal justice field.
    Furthermore, chapter 2 of Social Exclusion and the Way Out dipicts brief history of the rapid advances in neuroscience during the last two decades (Bonner, 2006, p. 21). The author seems to be trying to analyze from neuroscientific perspectives why social exclusion occurs (p.27).  I admire the author’s sinserity to try to use mind-reading technologies for alleviating socially weak people’s sufferings. Nevertheless, not all scientists work with such an altruistic intention – some of the scientists have monopolized the mind-reading technologies for their self-interests. 
[Advertisement] VPS

   Lo and behold, the technology to catch human brainwaves and analyze the thoughts was already developed as early as in 1970’s. The following is the patent document of, so to speak, “mind-reading / mind-control” which was oficially  called “Apparatus and method for remotely monitoring and altering brain waves.”

Inventor: Robert G. Malech
Patent number: 3951134
Filing date: Aug 5, 1974
Issue date: Apr 20, 1976

Abstract: Apparatus for and method of sensing brain waves at a position remote from a subject whereby electromagnetic signals of different frequencies are simultaneously transmitted to the brain of the subject in which the signals interfere with one another to yield a waveform which is modulated by the subject's brain waves. The interference waveform which is representative of the brain wave activity is re-transmitted by the brain to a receiver where it is demodulated and amplified. The demodulated waveform is then displayed for visual viewing and routed to a computer for further processing and analysis…

The major reason why most of us are ignorant to such an innovative technology alredy existing is because the government has kept these technologies secret in order to use them as secret weapons. As is often the case with unclassified weapons, the researchers secretly tested those machines on subjects without having informed consent. Many victims tried to make them public to accuse illegal operations. Concerning the atrocities of secret human experiments of mind-reading machines, we can access abundant information from the victims all over the world on the Internet. However, their claims have been rejected systematically by law enforcement, and they were automatically diagnosed as dillusion of schizophrenia by psychiatrists (Kilde, 1999).
    Suffering from unbearable distress, reportedly some of the victims have committed suicide. One of the non-profitable organizations for electric harassment victims, Technology Hanzai Higai Network, has witnessed more than seven victims who died from suicide over the last four years in Tokyo. According to the representative, Terukatsu Ishibashi (2012), every year over 8,000 people with mental disorders die from suicide in Japan, and many of them are allegedly victims of organized stalking / electric harassment. I heard some people say that this number is not so big compared to the entire population of the country. However, if several thousands of casualities every year was "small," the number of victims in Sep. 11th should be considered as even "smaller."

  Nevertheless, in March, 2011, the Obama administration finally held a public hearing to listen the information from the victims directly. The participants who testimonied the atrocities include a famous psychiatrist, an ex-military person, a mayor candidate, and so on. The name of this committie is “The U.S. Presidential Commission for Bioethical Issues” (2011), and the report on this public hearing is available at the U.S. government’s official website.



Bonner, A. (2006). Social exclusion and the way out: An individual and community response to human social dysfunction. Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons.


Ishibashi, T. (2012).テクノロジー犯罪と嫌がらせ犯罪を撲滅するための要望書  (Retreived on Jan. 18, 2013)

Kilde, R. (1999). Microchip Implants, Mind Control, and Cybernetics, SPEKULA 3rd Quarter, 1999.

The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. (2011). The U.S. Presidential Commission for Bioethical Issues.

Ethics For COINTELPRO Criminals #3

How Can Pyschologists Be Ethical?

   In the journal #1, absurdity of immoral experiments was discussed. In addition, the journal #2 pointed at useless ethical codes unless properly observed. Accordingly, we should be cautious when experiments that include any inhumanity are attempted. In fact, research on cruelty could be used for the opposite purposes such as an intentional torturing. For example, Seligman conducted the famous animal experiment in the U.S. Military School called SERE. There he found “Learned Helplessness.” In this research he succeeded in identifying some causes of depression. However, his findings were used in order to develop new techniques of torturing people by the U.S. Military (Ehrenreich, 2009). The discovery of the ways of sufferings was abused to intentionally cause sufferings to people. Concerning the issue, Myer (2005) reported in her journal the details of the U.S. Military’s inhumane experiments for developing the torturing techniques.

The SERE (the U.S. Military school) affiliate…said that “some of the folks” associated with the program seemed to enjoy using manipulative techniques. “They’d play these very aggressive roles, week after week”…Although there is no scientific basis for believing that coercive interrogation methods work better than less aggressive ones, the affiliate said that some of the sere psychologists he knew believed that to get someone to talk “you have to hurt that person” (Myer, 2005).

Moreover, retired Army Colonel, Patrick Lang, who had joined the SERE school, also testified as follows:

“Once, I was on the other side of the exercise, acting as captor and interrogator... You can manipulate people. And most people like power. I’ve seen some of these doctors and psychologists and psychiatrists who really think they know how to do this…it’s very easy to go too far” (Myer, 2005).

Accordingly, in addition to the Seligman’s method of afflicting animals into depression, various torturing techniques were exercised by the U.S. Military under the name of national security. One of their methods is called “noise stress.” This technique was actually used upon Guantánamo detainees around 2003. The detainees had “been subjected to blaring audiotapes of loud music, cats meowing, and human infants wailing.” Another cruel torturing technique was used, such as wrapping up the Quran with an Israeli flag and stomping on it in front of the Muslim detainees. Consequently, a mass suicide was attempted at Guantánamo, in August, 2003, in which “two dozen or so detainees tried to hang or strangle themselves” (Myer, 2005).

 It may not be surprising that the development of psychological manipulation techniques is utilized to satisfy men’s primitive desires. Twymann (2008) collected experts and survivers testimonies about sex-slaves for those rich and in power including the U.S. presidents, and he published the book “Mind Controlled Sex Slaves And The CIA.” The book reports that trauma-based psychological studies were abused to mind control the subjects into sex-slaves, many of whom were children.
[Advertisement] VPS  (The testymony of a former-sex-slave for Henry Kissinger and the U.S.Vice-President)

     The fundamental problem that underlies all these shameless misdeeds is that the perpetrators covered their work under the name of “National Security.” Thus, check and balance is required in scientific experiments as well. There should be a more powerful checking system which can examine if researchers are properly observing their ethical codes. Besides, the system should be completely independent from any political and even academic authorities —and ideally, an international organization should become an observer. 
     Moreover, it has to be mandated for experimenters to participate in their own experiments at least once as a human subject in order to prove the safty of the experiment. Otherwise, the ethical codes for the Psychologists would be a mere name.This is not the case of coersion because this rule does not force “the other people” to get involved. Besides, if an experimenter feels that his/her experiment is too risky, he/she should call off such a dangerous plan in the first place.
    Furthermore, the experimenters should first ask their family members to be the subjects. Otherwise, how could we trust such an insecure experiment that the experimenter cannot allow the family to participate? In this manner, no one would dare to design an experiment which can make their wife, sisters, or daughters sex-slaves.





American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and Code of conduct. Washington, D.C: APA.

Ehrenreich, B. (2009). Bright-sided: How the relentless promotion of positive thinking has undermined America. New York: Metropolitan Books.

Mayer, Jane. "The Experiment -- The Military Trains People to Withstand Interrogation. Are Those Methods Being Misused At Guantanamo?" New Yorker, July 11, 2005, 60.

Twyman, T. (2008). Mind controlled sex slaves and the CIA: A collection of essays and interviews about Project Monarch. New Brunswick, NJ: Global Communications/Conspiracy Journal.

Ethics For COINTELPRO Criminals #2

Hypocritic Scientists

    Another reason why unethical experiments should no longer be allowed is simple. Human beings have already experienced enough examples of inhumanity – Look at what happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, in Auschwitz, in Katyn Forest in Poland, in Son-My in Vietnam, in Mainland China during the Cultural Revolution, and in Cambodia under the Pol Pot regime. Why would we need to prove human beings’ cruelty by conducting another cruel experiment like Milgram’s?

    For the remorse and also for prevention of further unethical conducts, the American Psychological Association's (APA) legislated the researchers’ ethic codes titled: The American Psychological Association's Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Although these codes have been regularly revised, what they regard as primary ethical principles are the same – autonomy of participants (no coercion), no maleficence (non-harmful), beneficence, and justice.  These values appear in its 2002 edition as the rule of informed consent in section 3.10, avoidance of false or deceptive statements in 5.01, protection of animal rights—minimize the pain of animal subjects— in 8.09 (d), using animals for painful experiments only when there is no alternative procedure available in 8.09 (e), and avoidance of plagiarism in 8.11 – 14.

     Nevertheless, merely legislating ethical codes does not guarantee that every researcher will follow them. On the contrary, legislation of rules may drive evil researchers into underground experiments. In fact, as early as in 1947 similar ethical codes were adopted by the U.S. government to prohibit human experiments without a voluntary consent of the subjects. This ethical rule is known as the Nuremberg Code. However, CIA worried that the U.S. might be left behind in the race of developing mind control techniques between the U.S., the Soviet Union, and the mainland China. Hence, the CIA agents secretly carried out field experiments in Japan in 1950, which was under military occupation of the U.S. and its allies. There, the agents tested the effect of amphetamine drug, using it on uninformed subjects. This human experiment violated the Nuremberg Code. However, the fact has long been kept secret until recent days under the name of national security.

Source: Mind Control ~ America's Secret War (History Channel)



American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and Code of conduct. Washington, D.C: APA.



The Writer of 『拝啓 ギャングストーカー犯罪者の皆様』(Dear COINTELPRO Criminals) and <集団ストーカーの死> The Death of Gangstalker; also Co-Editor of 「新しいタイプの人権侵害・暴力」 Unprecedented Human Rights Violation

Latest journals
Latest comments
Latest trackbacks
Monthly archive
Search form
Display RSS link.
Friend request form

Want to be friends with this user.