Chapter 44-Friends in Trouble Fight Against Netease's Slander Report on High-tech Brain Control!
The fellow prisoners angrily retaliated against Netease for slandering the high-tech brain control violation report! Operation Friend in Trouble
The Ugly Truth Poster
The truth is ugly and ruthless
The most unbearable thing for us is
The world's leader is ugly
Dontdropus
My words:
Dear netizens, September 16, 2009. A report appeared on the news page of China's famous portal website, Netease.
"Save the 'victim of brain control'"
" Http://
news.163.com/special/00012Q9L/naokong091016.html
The article was full of abnormal subjective assumptions, sarcasm, slander, and discrimination. The writing was vague and chaotic. It's similar to how other websites slander our website. It was impossible for a high-level website like Netease to have such a retarded parallel article. We were surprised and confused. What was going on?
I think--our governments know what we've been through, and they can't rule out the possibility that we're sacrifices for their so-called national interests and scientific value. The higher-ups have come up with a series of plans to deal with our online exposure. This news report not only brought this little-known technological conspiracy to the surface, but also tried to hide it. There's no smoke without fire. This mentally retarded parallel article can only hoodwink the simple and mentally retarded citizens. I believe that people of insight. They will definitely believe us.
After I saw this article, I was very angry. I didn't hesitate to stay up until 5 am to write a blog to fight back-"Be on guard against fishing vessel conspiracy, Netease appears to slander 'brain control' news!"》http://guopeixi167.blog.163.com/blog/static/** **/edit/
After that, the QQ group of friends retaliated angrily. I think it's necessary to summarize and publish it. I hope all the netizens will read it carefully. Think about it. Netease's retarded parallel report, and the other party's sincere cry from the bottom of their hearts, which was more real? --
1. The following is our anti-impersonation (QQ: **) The counterattack article sent by the fellow prisoners from the QQ group mail:
The Ignorant Fearlessness of the Reporters and Their Loss of Conscience
--Anti-impersonation of comments on Netease's article "Save the 'victims of brain control'"
How technology affects and changes human life is perhaps the most challenging topic of our time. When people were faced with various social impacts and uncertain prospects caused by unprecedented technologies, technological experiments, and technological applications, helping people understand new high-tech and establishing a reasonable position and attitude in value ethics was a public life topic that was necessary to deal with the challenge. For most people, it was probably not an obvious question in terms of knowledge what kind of high-tech era we were living in. There was a lack of understanding of the new technologies that had been emerging in recent years, and the public was almost never as familiar with all aspects of new technology as the experts in the field of science and technology. In particular, when the use of a new technology had quietly become a threat to the normal life of the public, the role of the media as a fishing vessel supervisor and the spread of public knowledge was very important. If the journalists of online media admitted that such a social intervention was their duty and mission, then we might be able to find a reasonable yardstick to judge the article published by Netease,"Save the 'victims of brain control'."
However, when you see such an article that treats a serious technological ethics event with ignorance, frivolity, and arrogance, or even a serious crime, we can only evaluate it with the ignorance of Netease's journalists and their lack of conscience.
This article was the main article of the 123rd issue of Netease's " Post-commentary: Knowing is Fearless ", and it occupied a full-page commentary news report. At the beginning, it used the sinologist Kong Feili's description of the " soul calling " story that caused panic among all kinds of people in the Qing Dynasty to refer to the social reaction caused by the use of high-tech brain-controlled weapons. It also accused the victims of brain-control of " spreading social fear." After describing the danger of " many people believe that they are caught in a huge and terrifying conspiracy ", it said,"" However, whether intentionally or unintentionally, they have almost never appeared in the eyes of mainstream society. It seemed that the author expected himself to represent the values of mainstream society and its silence, stability, and rationality towards the issue of brain control to highlight a kind of political wisdom.
The article used a socially-curious tone and style to outline the "mysterious" life world of the victim of brain control." This code, which is very similar to the underground party in the Kuomintang-controlled area or the underground resistance organization of the Nazi-controlled area, is not from a dystopian movie like 'V'. It is a code that many of us believe in in real life.”Naturally, in describing the " legendary " story of the victims of mind control, it would not forget to show the public " their version of the story ":
According to them, they had been " brain-controlled ", which meant that someone else was using a control device to remotely control their thoughts. The controller could " know what you are thinking and doing at all times "," instill thoughts into your brain "," control your thoughts and actions ", and " completely control your physiological and health conditions ". In short, life and death were all under the control of others.
The victims of brain control initially thought that they were being controlled by a remote (or even satellite) machine. Later, in order to make this statement less ridiculous, they gradually believed that they were implanted with a virus or chip before being controlled remotely.
It was unknown whether it was to prevent the public from fully understanding the theoretical and fact-based evidence that the victims of mind control put forward to verify these "claims", or to reduce the difficulty of the author's own refutation of these claims, the article avoided a large number of domestic and foreign academic and legal literature, as well as the views of many mainstream media news reports on the victims of mind control.
" The victims of brain control are also looking for evidence for their conjectures in real life. Among them, some reports from the Cultural Revolution or earlier that were almost fabricated have become their main evidence. A series of papers on brain science around the 12th issue of Radio 1963 have also been dug out as conclusive evidence. The victims of brain control in the United States referred to themselves as SIN, short for " target." They talked about " V2K," short for " voice straight into the skull." Like the victims of brain control in China, their evidence was some seemingly reliable news stories. Most of these stories came from military news, as well as some reports that were claimed to be " deciphered." Their Chinese patients could find a hundred such newspapers at any train station in China.
The evidence that the victims of brain control relied on to support their claims was described as either " some almost groundless reports from the Cultural Revolution or earlier times ", or just " brilliant papers on brain science " from the 1960s, or seemingly " true and reliable news stories " that were actually not credible, especially " military news, as well as some reports that were claimed to be " decrypted ", which seemed to be conclusive." You can find a hundred copies of this newspaper in any train station in China." Needless to say, there is no or no mention of the evidence presented by the victims of brain control on the existence of brain control technology and brain control weapons published in scientific magazines, books, and mainstream media, as well as the mainstream and authority of these knowledge carriers in social life that are enough to form the main source of public scientific and technological knowledge. Even if we only rely on the brain control basis of the author's own selective statement, it is not something that the author can ignore. If the author of the article had only treated the complaints and suffering of the victims of mind control casually, then now, the author was pretending to be an intellectual authority to despise the scientific journals and media that published proof of the existence of mind control technology. However, how could one judge that a paper was just a " brilliant paper about brain science " without any evidence? If you look down on China's long-standing Radio magazine, do you also look down on the prestigious American Science magazine, Nature magazine, and European Global Research magazine? Are the military news and military science and technology reports on the CCTV military channel, Science and Technology Daily, reference news, Xinhuanet, People's Daily, and the website of the Ministry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China using nonsense to "spread social fear"? Was the news report about the " decrypted " technical information that could be found in " a hundred copies of this newspaper in any railway station in China " fake or not credible?
Dr. Deng Zibin from the Law Research Institute of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences published a review article on the complaint of brain control in Southern Weekend on May 1, 2001, which made the author of the article very angry and helpless. The author accused Deng Zibin of " obviously hearing some rumors of 'brain control', and couldn't help but publish a series of' irresponsible conjectures 'for this. This was " the rumor finally appeared in the mainstream newspapers." Since the beginning of the article claimed that the victims of brain control "almost never appeared in the eyes of mainstream society", then the fact that scholars from the country's top social science institutions published complaints about brain control problems in mainstream media and legal reviews made the article seem illogical. We don't know if the author intends to regret that an intellectual like Deng Zibin did not fully express social indifference and highlight the arrogance of power and status in the "mainstream society". Perhaps, Deng Zibin's following words were something that made the author of this article feel ashamed to criticize verbally. For the victims of brain control, the intellectual of this society still seemed to have a conscience. Deng Zibin wrote:
" When some experts have this technology, the laboratory will be more effective than the court. It will be more irresistible to reveal the truth. In the end, the court, the right to silence, and the presumptions of innocence will all become worthless. When that time comes, the experts will be our judges."
"Those who control the technology can control us and dominate us. They know what we want to do in advance and what we do afterwards. As the technology continues to improve, we will do whatever we are told to do. "What's even more frightening is that this technology is interfering in all aspects of life. (Deng Zibin, Southern Weekend, May 1, 2001)
According to the structure of the article, the author seemed to feel that he had already "let go" too much. Now, it began to " collect " its scattered rationality and began to launch intellectual doubts and attacks. However, if we compare his posture with his intellectual reasons, it is really strange and absurd. With the title " Current technology is unable to 'decipher' thoughts," the author clearly judged: "People often have unrealistic fantasies about the development of technology.‘Mind-Controlled Victimist thought that his thoughts had been deciphered and instilled, but he did not know that humans currently did not have the ability to decipher thoughts.”His reason was:
People could analyze and observe the eeg because the nature of biological activities was chemical reaction. When these activities were carried out, they were controlled by neurons. Nerves were electric currents of positive and negative poles. Therefore, when the brain was active, the brain would have a certain weak electricity. However, this weak current had nothing to do with thinking. Human thinking was wonderful and could not be simply understood as electromagnetic activity. However, the current research on the human brain was still at the level of brainwaves. It was impossible to decipher the mysteries of the mind itself, let alone decipher it.
The current " brain reading " technology of human beings was to make judgments by distinguishing the activity of brain regions, and the electrode-detecting brain waves had to be in contact with the human brain. As for the mind instilling that the " victims of brain control " were worried about, in 2001, Swiss scientists successfully created hallucinations by inserting chips into the brain to interfere with the brain. However, the content of the hallucination was not to directly instill thoughts, but to stimulate the activity of a certain part of the brain.
Humans could decipher "judgments" by analyzing the active areas of the brain's nerves (and this kind of deciphering usually required observation of the eyes). This was a technology similar to a lie detector, except that the target of judgment was inside the skull. A German research team had announced that they could "crack" an apple. This was a "reading" that was close to thinking, not "judging." Many media outlets in China reported this news, but what was not reported was that this discovery was questioned by the scientific community and had not been regarded as a confirmed result.
It turned out that his reason was that he only knew that human beings could " analyze and observe the eeg " technically, but he did not know about the brain control technology that could interpret the thoughts of the human brain beyond the level of analyzing the eeg. He didn't know that this technology didn't exist. This was the typical fearless attitude and logic of the ignorant. There are many things in this world that you don't know. How much do you plan to deny? Logically speaking, if you were trying to prove the existence of a technology, you could prove it through the existence and reports of the technology in academia, experiments, and applications. Of course, there could be doubts and discussions about whether the evidence was sufficient. However, our author is now pretending to be a knowledge authority in this field to judge and prove that brain control technology does not exist. Then, the question involves whether you have a comprehensive grasp of the highly confidential brain technology research and the knowledge, production, and use of brain control weapons and other brain control products. It involves the denial of any documents and facts that have various levels of proof of the existence of this technology. It was an astonishingly large amount of work that required the knowledge, credibility, and reputation of various experts, media, and government organizations to be at war. These included the world's most famous universities and research institutions, the most authoritative magazines, and the government of a certain state in the United States and the parliament The Russian Federation that had enacted prohibitions. Due to space limitations, there might be a few examples below:
"The result of our failure to understand the technology that originated in the era of the arms race between the Soviet Union and the West has led to the use of satellite technology not only in surveillance and communication systems, but also to target humans. Manipulation of brain frequencies through the use of directed laser beams, neural particle beams, electromagnetic radiation, sound waves, radio frequency radiation (RPR), solitary particle waves, torsional forces, and other types of energy that make up the scope of cosmic physics research. Because of the secretive nature of these operations, the methods we know of, the methods of exploiting the ionosphere (our natural protective layer), are inevitably outdated by the time we begin to grasp the meaning of their use.”(Quoted from "New Mental Illness Diagrams Urged in View of the Reality of Mental Assault Techniques", October 18, 2007, Global Research.)
The draft law proposed to add an addition to the sixth article of the Federal Law on Onweapon to prohibit the circulation of these weapons or equipment among the citizens and the military of The Russian Federation: Its attack was based on electromagnetic radiation, ultrasound, and infrasonic waves.
The achievements of modern science and technology made the development of information and psychological and physiological technology possible. Based on these technologies, there were secret methods and means to remotely affect the psychology and biology of individuals or a certain group.
There are many reliable ways to change a person's ability to think, to manipulate their behavior, to interfere with rational responses, or to artificially create symptoms of dependence.
The auditory-visual effect is achieved through the auditory or visual pathway: Weak stimulations that were below the threshold could not be perceived by the conscious, but they could be guided into the deep subconscious, and their thoughts and actions would be directed in a predetermined direction without the person being aware of their existence. (The Security Committee of the State Duma of the Federal Parliament of the Russian Federation "On the draft federal law on the addition of the sixth article of the federal law Onweapon" resolution)
……
The author of the Netease article didn't seem to understand what he was talking about. He didn't even understand that he was just a journalist and not an expert in this field. In the face of an unfamiliar field of high-tech and technological ethics, one should not take it for granted to make arbitrary judgments and have to rely on the assistance of experts to state anything. This should be the role of journalists. Its negative reason was fundamentally not a reason. For example, the author believes that " when the brain is active, there will be a certain amount of weak electricity in the cerebral hemisphere. However, this weak current has nothing to do with thinking. His reason was," The human mind is wonderful. It can't be simply understood as electromagnetic activity. However, the current research on the human brain was still at the level of brainwaves. It was impossible to decipher the mysteries of the mind itself, let alone decipher it.”How could this be a reasonable reason to disprove it? No one said that the human brain was just electromagnetic activity, but brainwaves were an external form of brain activity. The data structure of brainwaves could reflect human thoughts. Why did you conclude that the weak electric current in the cerebral hemisphere had nothing to do with thinking? When people thought, they would produce corresponding brainwaves in the brain, and they could interpret their thoughts by analyzing the brainwaves. This was already the knowledge that brain science experts had revealed to the public. Professor Hong Bo, who was in charge of the human-computer interface technology project at Tsinghua University, told the reporter,"
When a person was thinking, there would be specific electrical activity in the cerebral hemisphere. The electrical activity recorded on the scalp was usually called brainwaves. Brain waves were an external form of brain activity. Generally speaking, certain human thoughts could reflect certain rhythms and spatial distribution characteristics in brainwaves. With the help of high-performance bioelectrical signal acquisition systems and specially designed computer algorithms, these characteristics could be extracted in real time and automatically classified, thereby determining the current state of mind of the person in real time. The mental state determined by the computer could be translated into pre-set control commands and sent out through the wireless network, thus achieving direct control of computers, household appliances, robots and other external devices by the human brain. (Quoted from Xinhuanet, website of the Ministry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China: [Tsinghua University successfully developed a brain-computer interface system that can be used to play football with thoughts]
It was unknown if the author of the Netease article had not seen or heard the propaganda of Professor Hong Bo of Tsinghua University about brain control knowledge, or if he thought that he was so " authoritative " that he was not worthy of discussing with Professor Hong Bo, who had already developed brain control products for civilian use.
Netease wrote in the caption below a picture of human-machine interface technology for the article:
Using brainwaves to develop some high-tech products was used by the victims of brain control as evidence of the existence of "brain control" and that they were being persecuted.
This was probably due to the author's ignorance of mind control knowledge and the distortion of the reason for the victim's complaint. The victims of brain control never said that the human-computer interface technology products for civilian use and safety were evidence of their suffering from brain control. Instead, they said that the human-computer interface technology products for civilian use and the scientists 'explanation of the basic principles of the products could prove the basic mechanism and existence of brain control technology. Although the human-computer interface technology used the method of installing an electric cap outside the human brain and connecting it to an external computer to obtain and interpret the brainwave thinking information, it proved the possibility and reality of reading the human brain's thoughts by obtaining brainwave data. Technically, the method of obtaining brainwave data could be either an external mechanical physical technology that the subject could decide whether to control the brain or not, or an electromagnetic wave technology that was forcibly transmitted into the human body from the outside or a nano-chip implant technology to obtain or instill information in the brain. The former was a civilian, safer, and harmless brain-controlled technology product, while the latter was a brain-controlled weapon with military offensive properties. In scientific literature, it was generally referred to as a " non-lethal weapon." It should be pointed out that the development of civilian brain control technology products was actually more difficult than brain control weapons. Because of the safety requirements of civilian products, the technical methods to obtain and interpret brainwave data needed to consider more constraints. To avoid the harm to the human body caused by external electromagnetic radiation or the irreversibility of chip implant, it was necessary to adopt external mechanical physical methods that the subject could control, which increased the difficulty of obtaining brainwave data. This was just like how even if one could see the condition of a person's internal organs, the method of direct surgery that had side effects on the human body was probably earlier than the CT method, but the latter was more difficult and later developed. This was the reason why, despite the existence of military offensive brain-controlled weapons for many years, the current reported technological progress of civilian brain-controlled products was still very limited. Of course, we can still see the magical technology that can be used to play football with your mind when you wear an electric cap, and you can directly open and close the door and TV when you want to. China's brain control technology had already reached the application development stage. The human mind control technology, which was based on the acquisition, interpretation, transmission, and control of information in the brain, did exist in China. This proved the feasibility of this technology in China.
What was even more interesting was that while the Netease skeptics denied the existence of brain control technology, they expressed their love and enthusiasm for the future of brain control technology. He wrote:
Different from what the victims of mind control imagined, if mind control technology was really invented, it would be a blessing to mankind instead of a death knell. It was not an exaggeration to say that the inventor of brain control would definitely win the Nobel Prize. Because through the so-called " brain control," people would gain the ability to " instill knowledge " directly into their brains. Learning would no longer be laborious, and language learning would be as easy as lifting a finger. The media and communication forms will change dramatically. We don't even need the Internet anymore. We just need to set up a brain control server like a mobile phone base station. Unfortunately, the human brain was not a radio or a wireless network card. Brain control technology could be said to have surpassed the current technology.
Yes, he was right! The application of brain control technology was indeed tempting. Whether it was to " instill knowledge " into the brain, or to turn the robots with human thinking ability in science fiction movies into reality and widely use them in most places that used to use robots, these would be revolutionary technological achievements, which would fundamentally change the basic way humans learn, live, and work. This is why many scientists claim that the 21st century will be the century of brain science. However, we couldn't see any trace of technological ethics in this gentleman's mouth. If your news report was not about how a technology could benefit mankind, but about using a highly concealed high-tech brain-controlled weapon to carry out military attacks on ordinary citizens who had no technological resistance, then what would your praise for the future of brain-controlled technology mean? Is it that we must sacrifice the basic human rights of the general public for such a bright future, and thus technological slavery is a political reality that the victims of brain control must accept until they die tragically? Or is this gentleman so ignorant and lacking in conscience that he can't see that technology is a double-edged sword being used by those vicious and shameless people in our society to crazily harm people? When you saw that technological means could " instill knowledge " into the brain, did you think that when such weapons were used to forcefully control the human mind and psychology, thereby subverting human dignity and life, and creating an evil society, did you think that you would always be an exception?
We might be able to tolerate a journalist's ignorance in a high-tech field that he is not familiar with, but we cannot tolerate an ignorant journalist using ignorance and arrogance to establish a shameless slander and accusation against the victims. After he thought that he had denied the existence of brain control technology, he began to create the view that the complaints and performance of the victims of brain control were a kind of schizophrenia in the following " report." He wrote:
Although the idea of 'mind control victims' was ridiculous, their pain was real. Their mental condition was similar to that of a persecutor or schizophrenia. They always thought that there were individual people or groups who wanted to harm them, so they felt miserable every day. They often seized on some extremely fragile facts as evidence to deliberately murder him. This emotion gradually spread to his life, forcing him to do absurd actions and even have the impulse to endanger society. Many of them had attempted suicide.
More importantly, they had a deeper concealment than ordinary schizophrenia. They would not disclose their true thoughts, making them neglected patients and unable to receive timely treatment and help.
Although this kind of attack was not particularly rare for many victims of brain control, it was indeed very shameless. Moreover, it was one of the ways that brain control weapons destroyed people. The victim's consciousness and subconscious mind are deeply occupied and controlled. When the victim is aware of this situation, the victim's mental and psychological crisis is manifested as having no privacy in the brain and staying in instinctive privacy--forced to disclose the privacy of the mind--instinctively driving oneself not to think, reducing the chances of being discovered and spread of the brain thoughts--even the thoughts that are not thought and not spread are also thought and spread--thus causing psychological cycle conflicts. It was like comparing two mirrors. However, the victims of Mind Control were not mentally ill. The accusation of mental illness against the victims of mind control was in itself a form of social and political repression produced by mind control weapons. In a society where it was a crime to publish other people's personal phone numbers and medical records without authorization, the victims of brain control were forced to live in an unfair environment where even the privacy of their thoughts was forcibly removed. Most of them gradually lost the opportunities, careers, love, and family in a competitive society. And the basic form of social repression was to accuse them of mental illness. It could be said that the Netease article itself constituted part of the social environment of oppression. Even if it did not consciously slander and persecute the victims of brain control, it objectively constituted an accomplice to this kind of perdition. In fact, the series of serious injuries caused by the abuse of mind control weapons and their social consequences should at least make the persecutors face charges of crimes against humanity in law and morality. This kind of unbearable guilt and the hidden use of brain-controlled weapons often led them to deny what they had done and even deny the existence of brain-controlled weapons to escape punishment. Only he knew whether Netease's denial of the brain control problem was of this nature.
The attacker was even dissatisfied with the victim's attempt to buy protective equipment to block the electromagnetic wave attack. Because he needed to describe the matter as someone using a non-existent brain control problem to cheat for profit. At the very least, writing the article like this made it seem as if the speaker was clear-headed, discerning, and a social hero who had turned the tide. He wrote:
Just like how discussion forums about hepatectomy were always occupied by small advertisements about " folk prescriptions to turn negative," merchants selling so-called " jammers " and " jammers " were also very active in online communities where " brain control victims " were active. One businessman showed his " jammer " with a photo. It was a motorcycle helmet-shaped thing covered with tin foil. He announced that the helmet blocked signals from satellites.
In addition, there were also fake advertisements selling " imported brainwave control devices " on the Internet. It could be imagined that these were the same kind of people who sold " jammers ". They made " brain control " seem even more real. The " tin hat " was the most commonly used shielding device, hence its name. This invention was the motorcycle helmet we mentioned above. On wikipedia, it had become a popular joke and synonymous with paranoia. In 2005, a group of students at the massagers institute of technology used tin foil and radio signals to conduct formal research. They found that the tin hat could actually amplify rather than block radio frequency signals.
We don't know whether or not the police's " brain wave control device " that appeared in the online store is a fake advertisement, nor do we know whether or not the electromagnetic wave " shielding device " is a commercial fraud that uses fake brain control problems to profit. Since the author claims so confidently, then what we have to ask is whether he personally investigated the performance of these products, or whether he obtained reliable evidence from relevant investigations. We don't see the evidence we need for the next commercial fraud case. Although this kind of accusation did not affect the judgment of the victim of mind control, if we consider the professional ethics of journalists, people seemed to have a reason to verify the myth of commercial fraud. Creating news by writing an article that he had not investigated was probably a kind of commercial fraud!
From slandering the victims of mind control as mentally ill patients and accusing them of harming society, to further accusing and mocking the victims of mind control for trying to buy protective equipment to block electromagnetic wave attacks, this was a social offensive launched by exploiting vulnerability and society's ignorance of high technology. This showed that the problem with the Netease article was not just an ignorant and fearless offender, but a sinister attempt to deceive the public with absurd news reports. It was a pity that the people of this era still lacked the effect he expected from a self-righteous, ignorant, and arrogant news report. When you try to replace the truth with deception, professionalism with ignorance, and conscience with evil, the voices that fight back against you will be louder-2009, October, 18-19
2. The following were the replies from the other fellow prisoners:
(1). The sound of the waves (**)QQMail_REVER_SplIT wrote on (Satellite Deciphering Brainwave Group) October 19, 2009 (Monday) at 10:43 PM:
If you look down on China's long-standing Radio magazine, do you also look down on the prestigious American Science magazine, Nature magazine, and European Global Research magazine? Are the military news and military science and technology reports on the CCTV military channel, Science and Technology Daily, reference news, Xinhuanet, People's Daily, and the website of the Ministry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China using nonsense to "spread social fear"? Was the news report about the " decrypted " technical information that could be found in " a hundred copies of this newspaper in any railway station in China " fake or not credible? Well written? What was terror? It was the abuse of brain control technology to persecute citizens to create terror!!
(2)Never (**)QQMail_REVER_SplIT wrote at 6:12 PM, October 21, 2009 (Satellite Deciphering Brainwave Group):
The reporters and editors who planned this topic did not directly contact or investigate any of the victims of brain control. This is extremely irresponsible and lacking professional ethics! How much darkness and conspiracy was hidden from the world? I don't believe that the three reporters and editors can't understand! He hoped that Netease would have the courage, conscience, responsibility, and morality to make a real issue of " Saving the 'victims of brain control'"?
(3) PVP Jinhua Leilong in Mindcontrol victim group 2 **@ group mail. qq.com. October 18th, 2009 (Sunday) at 8:26 PM said:
The following Netease news article," Save the 'victims of brain control',"?
?
" Save the victims of brain control "
?
?" However, the current research on the human brain is still at the level of brainwaves. It is impossible to decipher the mysteries of the mind itself, much less decipher it. There was some truth to this statement, but it was not flawless. Brain control technology was a high-end, top-secret technology. Very few people knew about it. If they were not core figures, even academicians of the Academy of Sciences might not know about it. Some people ask why the government doesn't use this technology to earn votes. I provide a reason: Just like how nuclear weapons were restricted, brain technology was also restricted and could not be used as one wished. In addition, God was not omnipotent. This technology could not completely control people.
(4) 123 on Tuesday, October 20, 2009 at 5:11 PM said:
Although the original report seriously distorted the facts, it was better than the paper media because it provided us with the space to fight back. As long as our replies were reasonable, it was possible for more people to pay attention to it, understand it, and fight against the perverted and anti-social behavior of the criminals. From there, it was possible to expose their unspeakable evil intentions. Therefore, I would like to thank the original author for introducing the real painful experience of the victims of brain control to the public and the mainstream media. This way, more ordinary people will have the opportunity to come into contact with the word 'brain control', understand what' brain control 'is, and possibly give us support and help. And the post of 'anti-impersonation' represented the appeal of all our fellow victims. Friends, follow the thread and repost it!
(5) Decrypted brainwaves on Saturday, October 17, 2009 at 1:14 AM:
The world's higher-ups are well aware of this, but they control the fishing boats. They slander us. They want to bury millions of involuntary test subjects in the world just like that!
(6) Anti-Impostor on October 17th, 2009 (Saturday) at 4:06 PM said:
Netease publishing such an article was very irresponsible and lacked professional ethics. If you didn't know anything about a high-tech field that you weren't familiar with, then you wouldn't have the scientific and fact-based evidence to judge whether or not brain control existed. If you were a journalist, then we didn't see any technical judgments based on interviews with authoritative scientists in the field, nor did we see the author himself give a reasonable scientific explanation. The author had replaced scientific rationality with presumptuous judgment and ignorance, and replaced the conscience and professional ethics of journalists with an irresponsible curiosity towards the victims of brain control. I deeply regret such a report!
(7) On Saturday, October 17, 2009, at 8:14 PM, Never Said:
This was indeed an irresponsible news report because it was far from the truth! But let's think about the strange and evil people who harm others. Even reporters can make mistakes sometimes! I still value its positive effects because it is the first time (in my memory) that the mainstream media has paid attention to the victims of mind control! There is only one truth. We have to reflect on ourselves. We haven't done enough!
(8) The Sound of Waves on October 17th, 2009 (Saturday) at 8:18 PM said:
The more the reporters reported, the more they would analyze and comment on the right and wrong. The more they could identify the brain control. This was probably the meaning of this article. From the author's understanding, he was a technology illiterate. He had no professional ethics and looked down on human life! There is a limit to one's conscience. If we, the victims, are asked to debate collectively, it means that most people in reality know about the existence of brain control, and it also has a huge social impact! Then, submit this article along with the reply to the Ministry of National Security and the Ministry of Public Security to let them understand that the people once hated the harm of this technology!
I'm so miserable! I'm so weak!
My country! Don't leave us behind!
Dontdropus
This book is provided by FunNovel Novel Book | Fan Fiction Novel [Beautiful Free Novel Book]