Jim Stone — via The Rebel.org May 19, 2013
Mind control via electronic manipulation
Because mind control is a classified topic, it is impossible to nail the subject dead on. However, this article was revealing enough to have created a very strong response from the powers that be. I will soon post an updated video which better explains how Windows 7 and the new LCD display chipsets may be configured for mind control.
This article is getting repeatedly hacked. That should say how important it is. If you see any stupid looking “mistakes” check back later because that is the form the hacks are taking. Joe Vialls died while in the process of producing a report like this, and I would bet this is somewhere close to where he was going to take this topic.
This article received a MAJOR update on Thursday, June 14, 2011.
The brain is a computer, and like a computer it has a clock frequency that all thoughts, your existence, is centered around. This is a little basic because your brain in reality has multiple simultaneous clock frequencies which interact with each other and serve different purposes for biological function, whereas a microprocessor normally has only one central clock that everything in it synchronizes with. For example, your visual cortex may process at a different frequency than the section of your brain which regulates your heart beat. Feelings and thoughts will run at another frequency.
Because your brain is an ultra parallel computer, it can accomplish a lot while using frequencies that are far lower than would be practical in a microprocessor, and these frequencies are in the ELF (extended low frequency) range.
The fact that your brain operates on frequencies leaves it open to manipulation via electronic means. Since different moods are reflected by different frequencies, it is possible to electronically force people to be relaxed when they should be angry, laugh when they should be appalled, and give loyalty when they should rebel. There are a number of ways that this can be accomplished, and this report will touch on a few of them.
The switch to digital television was un precedented, rapid, and illegal. It was a direct violation of long established standards regulation, which, by the book, required backwards compatibility with legacy devices. It was illegal because it FORCED stations to change format, whether they wanted to or not. Television was not the same as computers, where standards can change in a day and be perfectly legal, because television utilized the electromagnetic spectrum – VHF and UHF, and there were long standing laws in place which clearly stated that there would be no forced changes permitted with regard to how the well established radio frequency bands were used. IF a station, under its own free will CHOSE to start broadcasting digital only, that was up to them, and would have been permitted. The illegal aspect of the switch was the fact that it was forced on everyone, wanted or not.
And “they” had a reason.
For background, I suggest you read a brilliant article by Joe Vialls that is preserved on this site. In it, he shows a device Hollywood used to manipulate people’s response to what was being broadcast over analog television. But the NTSC signal, which all standard definition televisions operated on, really was an ultra stable and hard to manipulate signal standard. This made analog manipulation of people’s psychological responses to what was on the screen difficult to achieve in a perfectly uniform fashion. Televisions were designed to reject spurious modulations in the signal, so depending upon each television receiver’s differences, you got a different level of effectiveness.
This would not do well enough to subdue the population during the final crush of America. They HAD TO get the switch to digital, where things could be manipulated with perfect and predictable digital accuracy. And I have caught them at it, and will tell you how to as well.
The method -
Vialls believed that they would manipulate public response by getting the correct color flicker at random places on the screen, and he died before they forced the switch to digital television. As it turned out in reality, that is not entirely how they are doing it. Instead, if you look closely at any mid tone area on the screen (an area that is not totally white or totally black, and this will move around the screen depending upon the scene) you will notice a snow effect, which on average makes a perfect picture, but the picture itself is really in fact a subtly modulated “snow storm” where the “snow” always takes upon itself the color of whatever the image is supposed to be in that spot. Gray areas are by far the best place to look for this. The snow will be moving and modulating and circling at the frequency that triggers whatever feeling they want you to have for whatever is on the screen. Keep in mind that there should be NO SUCH THING AS SNOW IN A DIGITAL PICTURE, yet it is there.
It is not in all broadcasts. I suggest you observe the screen during any program where they are bragging about being Jewish, are pushing a gay agenda, or are airing a political topic – especially campaign ads and politically weighted news. Anything of a political nature.
How to observe the screen -
The effect is not obvious. You have to get tricky to see it. So go beneath the TV, up very close to it, at an angle where the picture does not show right. You have to be able to see the sub tones only. And THEN you will see the snow. Computers will do the color shift as well. Take your (LCD) computer screen, for practice before trying it on a big clumsy LCD television, and tilt the screen back until you see a shift in the way the colors are displayed. Many of you have already noticed this. It is at that angle you have to look at the TV, from below and not the side. This will not work on a plasma TV. But on an LCD tv, you will see what I am talking about. Windows 7 will also create and modulate a similar “snow” on computer screens, even in a still picture or desktop image. This is something new, I have always had the latest and greatest computers, and this weird effect only showed up with Windows 7. It is creepy.
And I have now learned exactly what that effect is from. It is something I never expected.
Back in 2004, technology was more advanced than it is now. Therefore, my Toshiba laptop I had back then had a better screen, with full 24 bit color resolution, which featured 8 bit color for each of the color channels. This enabled it to display 16.7 million colors, and as a result there was no need for an early 1990′s technology called dithering to be used to prevent the screen from pixelation due to lack of ability to display a separate color for each pixel. Dithering is a random scattering or movement of pixels to simulate the presence of a greater ability to display color.
But when Windows 7 came out, all of a sudden we forgot how to make a good display, and instead of advancing on to 12 bits per color channel (which would have made 36 bit color instead of the 24 bit color we had in the late 90′s,) we had to step backwards to six bits per color channel because we just could not produce a video chip for an LCD screen that was capable of doing it anymore. Damn those public schools. But wait, China is advancing, so that cannot be it. That ends the sarcasm.
Folks, they sabotaged the screens. Now we are eating trash. Lots of people have noticed and there is a very good reason for them to have sabotaged the screens. Keep in mind that this sabotage coincided precisely with the release of Windows 7 and the forced switch to digital television, which was totally illegal in the way it was carried out. This sabotage gave them a “reason” to put a modulation effect called dithering into every computer display, an effect which can no doubt be used for mind control.
I am going to show you a little math. I will keep it simple and not do any binary (even though that is simple if you just sit down and rationalize it out). But since everyone reading this understands base 10, I will do the math in base 10, and you will just have to trust my knowledge of binary.
8 bits of binary will represent 255 different values, plus zero, for a total of 256, including zero. Six bits of binary can represent 63 different numeric values, plus zero, for a total of 64. So by dropping the displays from 8 color bits per channel to 6 color bits per channel, they took a display that was capable of 256X256X256 colors, for a total of 16.7 million colors, and made it into a display that was capable of 64x64x64 colors, for a total of 262,000 colors. For the most part, the most basic of all displays nowadays has a resolution of 1366X768. 1366 X 768 = 1,049,000 pixels. So the most basic of all monitors on the market now, with six bit color depth, can only display 1/4th of the needed colors for it’s resolution. This means you HAVE TO modulate the pixels with dithering, especially on a nice screen which displays at 1920X1080, which equals 2,073,000 pixels or you will get a blotchy or grainy off colored look to any color picture displayed on the screen.
Why would they willfully choose to have all displays take a quantum leap backwards (in this case approximately 12 years) when there was no feasible economic reason to do it? LCD technology is old now, there is no reason to be stuck in the last century with it, unless, of course, you wanted to make an EXCUSE and provide a VENUE through which a mind control effect could be added to any online content or offline program. Digital television provided them with a way to bypass the NTSC limitations and lunge forward with full on mind control embedded in a picture, and having a computer be a refuge from this simply would not do. Now we have irritating noisy screens, and there is no rational reasonable explanation for it other than clandestine intent. And it is interesting that the new Mac Books do not do it, only PC computers do. Why?. Ask Microsoft.
Two years ago we had 8 bit color depth per channel. Now we have 6 bit color depth per channel. And there are three channels. Three channels with six bits of color depth each = 666, and that’s just perfect for the luciferian cabal in power, at the Bilderberg conference where what the little people are going to have gets decided on. Want to know what REALLY CAME OUT OF BILDERBERG? It’s six bit per channel color depth, when public choice, the true free market, would have driven it upward to 12 instead of downwards. And why? It’s because it gave them a plausible explanation for the modulations on the screen that many would notice, and some GEEK would just stand up and say, OH, don’t worry, it’s just DITHERING. And with that big word as an explanation, everyone would just shut up. Shut up and forget about the 80′s and 90′s, where it would have actually been needed. And if anyone wants to argue this I suggest first grabbing a Windows XP laptop and try to find this effect. Try to find it on a 10 year old laptop. That ought to make you wish for the good old days.
Nowadays, your “urgent windows update” could be nothing but a new dithering algorithm that is based upon your psychiatric “needs” as defined by an elite few, a decision based upon what you read, surf, write . . . . . . . .
I am going to post an updated version of the previous video, which explains this, but I have to finish it first.
Other things to look for – They can also simply flicker the entire screen in a subtle way (this would be with a TV only because with a computer it would be too obvious). To observe this, turn off all the lights and leave the room the television is in, and while able to see into the room the television is playing in, but not able to see the TV itself, turn to the side and observe the light coming from the TV with your peripheral vision, which is sensitive to flickering. If they are modulating the entire screen, you should be able to see it this way, and it will be a very rapid and even flicker, like a fast strobe. I would expect this to not be as commonly used, but used sparingly when it is needed most to form public opinion, like after a terror attack. Obviously strobing the entire screen is more effective than the snow approach, but it is also a lot riskier. Fortunately for them, during emotional times like after 911, people are very unlikely to notice because they are too caught up in the event.
There is something fishy with the cell towers