Some individuals believe that televisions it a totally horrible, irredeemable technology and that we would all be better off without it. Television produces such a diverse collection of dangerous effects—mental, physiological, ecological, economic, political; effects that are dangerous to the person and also to society and the planet—that it seems to many only logical to propose that it should never have been introduced, or once introduced, be permitted to continue. It is not as though Americans have no precedent for action against things that are proven dangerous. We have seen various levels of legal control put on tobacco, saccharin, some food dyes, certain uses of polychlorinated biphenyls, aerosols, fluoroscopes and X-Rays to name a few. These have all been thought too dangerous to allow and yet their only negative effect is personal, they seem to cause cancer. It is at least possible, judging by the potential effects of the narrow spectra of television light, that television also causes cancer. However, is it only on the basis of cancer that we are able to think of banning something? Consider a few of television’s side effects: Television seems to be addictive. Because of the way the visual signal is processed in the mind, it inhibits cognitive processes. Television qualifies more as an instrument of brainwashing, sleep induction and/or hypnosis than anything that stimulates conscious learning processes. Television is a form of sense deprivation, causing disorientation and confusion. It leaves viewers less able to tell the real from the not-real, the internal from the external, the personally experienced from the externally implanted. It disorients a sense of time, place, history and nature. #RandolphHarris 1 of 20

Television suppressed and replaces creative human imagery, encourages mass passivity, and trains people to accept authority. It is an instrument of transmutation, turning people into their TV images. By stimulating action while simultaneously suppressing it, television contributes to hyperactivity. Television limits and confines human knowledge. It changes the way humans receive information from the World. In place of natural multidimensional information reception, it offers a very narrow-gauged sense experience, diminishing the amount and kind of information people receive. Television keeps awareness contained within its own rigid channels, a tiny fraction of the natural information field. Because of television we believe we know more, but we know less. By unifying everyone within its framework and by centralizing experience within itself, television virtually replaces environment. It accelerates the destruction of nature. It moves us father inside an already pervasive artificial reality. It furthers the loss of personal knowledge and the gathering of all information in the hands of a techno-scientific-industrial elite. Television technology is inherently antidemocratic. Because of its cost, the limited kind of information it can disseminate, they way it transforms the people who use it, and the fact that a few speak while millions absorb, television is suitable for use only by the most powerful corporate interest in the country. They inevitably use it to redesign human minds into a channeled, artificial, commercial form, that nicely fits the artificial environment. Television freewayizes, suburbanizes and commonditizes human beings, who are then easier to control. Meanwhile, those who control television consolidate their power. Television assists the creation of societal conditions which produce autocracy; it also creates the appropriate mental patterns for it and simultaneously dulls all awareness that this is happening. #RandolphHarris 2 of 20

Taking into account all these effects and the dozens of others described, is it really necessary to show that television causes cancer in order to get rid of it? Is it not possible to outlaw a technology based on its political or economic or psychological effects? For if even a small portion of these arguments are valid, then in the long run they are surely more important than the fact that a percentage of people get sick. Why does banning such a technology seem bizarre? It lies with the absolutely erroneous assumption that technologies are “neutral,” benign instruments that may be used well or badly depending upon who controls them. Americans have not grasped the fact that many technologies determined their own use, their own effects, and even the kind of people who control them. We have not yet learned to think of technology as having ideology built into its very form. Also, once any technology of a certain scale is introduced, it effectively becomes the environment of our awareness. While we may imagine life without X-rays or aerosols, we cannot imagine life without concrete, cars, gasoline, coal, or electricity. These are so ubiquitous that they literally spread themselves around our awareness. We are contained within them; the fish is the last creature which is capable of understanding water. So it is the most pervasive of the technologies that become invisible to us. Television is an extreme example of this pervasiveness and confinement. It becomes not only the external environment for an entire population, it also projects itself inside us. Television has so enveloped and entered us, it is hard for most of us to remember that it was scarcely more than a generation ago that there was no such thing as television, or that four million years of human evolution somehow tool place without it. #RandolphHarris 3 of 20

Furthermore, another reason we do not believe it possible to control technological evolution is that, in fact, for most of us it is not possible to do so. The great majority of us have no say at all in choosing or controlling technologies. These choices, as I have described, are now solely within the hands of this same technical-scientific-industrial-corporate elite whose power is enhanced by the technology they create. From our point of view the machines and processes they invent and disseminate just seem to appear on the scene from nowhere. Yet all life adjusts accordingly, including human systems of organization and understanding. We do not get to vote on these things as they are introduced. All we get to do is pay for them, use them and then live within their effects. On the very rare occasions when we do perceive a technology’s negative effects, we find it takes a herculean organizing effort to do anything about it. Nuclear power is a dangerous technology, not only for our own generation but for the unthinkable but its existence. However, if Californians wished to eliminate nuclear power, then we would have to find a way around this desire of their, our need for that energy is too great. Similar stories could be told about genetic engineering, satellite communication systems, microwave technology, neutron bombs, laser technology, centralized computer banks, and a thousand other processes, including many about which we may not even have heard. Our technology may have made changes as momentous as the Gutenberg invention of movable type. Some have been bad technologies, good technologies, and others have both characteristics of good and bad. Computers are used to make investment decisions, which helps one, among other things, to create “what-if” scenarios, although with how much accuracy, we are not told. #RandolphHarris 4 of 20

Computer are also now used to help the police locate the addresses of callers in distress; now police officers have so much information instantly available about any caller that they know how seriously to regard the caller’s appeal for help. One may well wonder if Charles Babbage had any of this in mind when he announced in 1822 (only six years after the appearance of Laennec’s stethoscope) that he had invented a machine capable of performing simple arithmetical calculations. Perhaps he did, for he never finished his invention and started work on a more ambitious machine, capable of doing more complex tasks. He abandoned that as well, and in 1833 put aside his calculator project completely in favor of a programmable machine that became the forerunner of the modern computer. His first such machine, which he characteristically never finished, was to be controlled by punch cards adapted from devices French weavers used to control thread sequences in their looms. Babbage kept improving his programmable machine over the next thirty-seven years, each design being more complex than the last. At some point, he realized that the mechanization of numerical operations gave him the means to manipulate non-numerical symbols. It is not farfetched to say that Babbage’s insight was comparable to the discovery by the Greeks in the third century B.C. of the principle of alphabetization—that is, the realization that the symbols of the alphabet could be separated from their phonetic function and used as a system for the classification, storage, and retrieval of information. In any case, armed with his insight, Babbage was able to speculate about the possibility of designing “intelligent” information machinery, though the mechanical technology of his time was inadequate to allow the fulfillment of his ideas. #RandolphHarris 5 of 20

The computer as we know it today had to await a variety of further discoveries and inventions, including the telegraph, the telephone, and the application of Boolean algebra to relay-based circuitry, resulting in Claude Shannon’s creation of digital logic circuitry. Today, when the word “computer” is used without a modifier before it, it normally refers to some version of the machine invented by John von Neumann in 1940s. Before that, the word “computer” referred to a person (similarly to the early use of the word “typewriter”) who performed some kind of mechanical calculation. A calculation shifted from people to machines, so did the word, especially because of the power of von Neumann’s machines. Getting to nanotechnology will require the work of experts in differing fields: chemists, who are learning how to make molecular machines; computer scientists, who are building the needed design tools; and perhaps the scanning tunneling microscope (STM) and atomic force microscope (AFM) experts, who can provide tools for molecular positioning. To make progress, however, these experts must do more than just work, they must work together. Because nanotechnology is inherently interdisciplinary, countries that draw hard lines between their academic disciplines, as the United States of America does, will find that their researchers have difficulty communicating and cooperating. In chemistry today, a half-dozen researcher assisted by a few tens of students and technicians is considered a large team. In aerospace engineering, enormous tasks like reaching the Moon or building a new airliner are broken down into tasks that are within the reach of small teams. All these small teams work together, forming a large team that may consist of thousands of engineers assisted by many thousands of technicians. If chemistry is to move in the direction of molecular-systems engineering, chemists will need to take at least a few steps in this direction. #RandolphHarris 6 of 20

In engineering, everyone knows that designing a rocket will require skills from many disciplines. Some engineers know structures, others know pumps, combustion, electronics, software, aerodynamics, control theory, and so on and so forth down a long list of disciplines. Engineering managers know how to bring different disciplines together to build systems. In academic science, interdisciplinary work is productive and praised, but is relatively rare. Scientists do not need to cooperate to have their results fit together: they are all describing different parts of the same thing—nature—so in the long run, their results tend to come together in a single picture. Engineering, however, is different. Because it is more creative (it actually creates complex things), it demands more attention to teamwork. If the finished parts are going to work together, they must be developed by groups that share a common picture or what each part much accomplish. Engineers in different disciplines are forced to communicate; the challenge of management and team-building is to make that communication happen. This will apply to engineering molecular systems as much as it does to engineering computers, cars, aircrafts, or factories. Jay Ponder suggest that it is a question of perspective. “It’s all a matter of what’s perceived to be important by the different groups that have to come together to make this work: the chemists doing their bit and the computational people doing their bit. People have to come together and see the big picture. There are people who try to bridge the gaps, but they are rare compared to the people who just work in their own specialty.” Progress toward nanotechnology will continue, and as it does, researchers trained as chemists, physicists, and the like will learn to talk to one another to solve new problems. They will either learn to think like engineers and work in teams, or they will be eclipsed by colleagues who do. #RandolphHarris 7 of 20

Are these problems preventing advances? With all these problems, the advance toward nanotechnology steadily continues. Industry must gain ever-better control of matter to stay competitive in the World marketplace. The STM, protein engineering, and much of the chemistry are driven by commercial imperatives. Focused efforts would yield faster advances, yet even without clear focus, advances in this direction have an air of inevitability. As Bill DeGrado observes, “We really do have the tools. Experience has shown that when you have the analytic and synthetic tools to do things, in the end science goes ahead and does them—because they are doable.” Jay Ponder agrees: “Over the next few years, you are going to see slow evolutionary advances coming from people tinkering with molecular structures and figuring out their principles. People are going to work on a particular problem because they see some application for it or because they got grant funding for it. And in the process of doing something like improving a laundry detergent’s ability to clean protein stains, Procter and Gamble is going to help work out the principles for how to increase molecular stability, and to design spaces inside the molecules.” With the help of biotechnology, more and more foods will also be enhanced with disease-fighting properties—including illnesses widely prevalent in poor countries. Hepatitis B kills more than half a million people a year, a third of them in Asia. Four hundred million people around the World are carriers. In the United States of America, hepatitis inoculations consist of three shots that together cost about two hundred dollars—a sum far beyond the reach of millions of less affluent people. Researchers at Cornell University are trying to drive the cost down to about ten cents a dose by implanting hepatitis vaccines in bananas. Before long, we may also see tomatoes and potatoes fortified with vaccines to prevent hepatitis B. #RandolphHarris 8 of 20

Or take a strain of “golden rice” fortified with vitamin A to prevent the blindness now common among children in poor regions. In India, scientists are also working on vaccine-laden foods to fight cholera and rabies. Tomatoes that may protect against diarrhea (one of the worst baby killers), corn enhances to combat cystic fibrosis and vitamin-loaded fruits and vegetables—are all being studied. Moreover, it should surprise no one if, as we learn more about the genetic and proteomic makeup of individuals, other high-value-added foods are designed not merely for medical purposes but for cosmetic reasons or to enhance personal performance. As biotech companies continue to turn out new strains of seeds, “pharmers,” will be able to customize output for smaller and smaller high-value markets, and eventually even for individuals. In fields where everyone is still, so to speak, at the starting gate, there is no inherent reason why less affluent countries cannot “catch up” with leading nations and not only feed their own populations better but profitably export high-value-added agricultural products. All these, however, are just the state of possibilities. No longer ready to accept IBM’s dominance, competitors have searched for a weapon with which to strike down Goliath. And they found one. That mighty slingshot is a counter-standard called OSI (Open System Interconnection), which is intended to permit all kinds of computers to talk freely to one another. Heavily promoted by the European computer makers, OSI has forced IBM to retreat from its restrictive policies. The conflict heated up when a dozen European computer manufacturers, appalled by IBM domination, reached agreement in 1983 that would jointly undertake the incredibly complex work needed to design the specifications for an open system. Sensing the implications, European governments leaped to support them. #RandolphHarris 9 of 20

On the other side, Uncle Sam, watching this gang-up of forces against IBM, cried foul. Charging the Europeans with discrimination in their decisions, Donald Abelson of the Office of U.S. Trade Representative, stated that “Americans suspect…that we are the subject of a conspiracy.” Since then the anti-IBM campaign has expanded. Support for it has come from Esprit, the Common Market’s program for the support of science and technology. At the end of 1986 the Council of Ministers of the European Community ruled that a subset of OSI options would be the standard for computer sales to governments in the community. IBM responded to this attack with an offering confusingly called System Applications Architecture, or SAA, which included a version of SNA, and by offering customers a choice of either SNA or OSI products. Then faced with this formidable opposition, IBM once more followed the principle “If you can’t lick ‘em, join ‘em.” Joining these various groupings, IBM pledged on scout’s honor that it will henceforth support the open standard. It was, as in the case of operating systems, a last-minute religious conversion called into question by IBM’s critics and competitors. Like General Motors and many other giants of the industrial age, IBM expanded to fill every available inch of its ecological niche, adapted itself all too comfortably to it, and now finds itself in an increasingly hostile, fast-changing environment in which sheer size, once an advantage, is now often a disadvantage. To some it appears that the battle over telecommunications standards is the beginning of the post-IBM era. On the surface, IBM’s main rivals, American and foreign, have won. It might also appear that Europe has won. The war, however, is not yet over. The battle over standard is never won. #RandolphHarris 10 of 20

There is a hidden paradox in these power struggles. As business produces more diversified products, there is, in addition to a mounting pressure for more standards, a countereffort to make products more and more versatile by accommodating multiple standards. (This is why some portable TV sets provide a button that allows the user to switch back and forth among the European PAL and SECAM standards and the American NTSC standards.) Another technique used to make products more versatile is to break them down into smaller and more numerous modular components. This reduces the importance of the external standard. However, at the same time, it increases the number of “micro-standards” embedded inside the product and needed to make the components work together. However, no sooner is one standard established—OSI, for example—than new technologies drive it into obsolescence or irrelevancy. And as soon as we have arrived at standards for networks, or for software, the battleground shifts to a still higher and more complex plane. Thus, where two or more standards compete, new equipment appears that permits a user to convert from one system to another. However, the appearance of adaptors gives rise to a need for standards for adaptors. Today, therefore, we are even seeing attempts to create what might be termed “standards for standards”—a group called the Information Technology Requirements Council was established not long ago for precisely this purpose in the field of communications. The fight to control standards in other words, shifts from higher to lower levels and back up again. However, it does not go away. For the battle is part of the larger, continuing war for the control, routing, and regulation of information. It is a key front in the struggle for power based on knowledge, and it is raging not just in the technical thickets of television, computers, and communication, but in the nearest bierstube and, indeed in the kitchen itself. #RandolphHarris 11 of 20

The thinkers of the Enlightenment, as I have said, reproached all earlier philosophers for their powerlessness to help men and themselves. The Republic’s formula, that power and wisdom must coincide if evils are ever to cease in the cities, is the perfect expression of what the Enlighteners meant. The necessary unity of power and wisdom is only a coincidence for the ancients, id est, dependent on chance completely out of the philosopher’s control. Knowledge is not in itself power, and though it is not in itself vulnerable to power, those who seek it and possess it most certainly are. Therefore the great virtue for the philosophers in their political deeds was moderation. They were utterly dependent on the prejudices of the powerful and had to treat them most delicately. They subjected themselves to a fierce discipline of detachment from public opinion. Although they inevitably had to try to influence political life in their favor, they never seriously thought of themselves as founders or lawgivers. The mixture of unwise power and powerless wisdom, in the ancients’ view, would always end up with power strengthened and wisdom compromised. He who flits with power, Socrates said, will be compelled to lie with it. In joining the Church of Satan, people not only managed to inject a little mystery into their otherwise banal lives, they achieved a satisfying sense of mastery over their own fates by the practice of ritual magic. By becoming masters of arcane powers, they became unique. As Edward Moody, an anthropologist who observed the church, noted, many Satanists were seeking “success denied them—money, fame, recognition, power—and with all avenues apparently blocked, with no apparent means by which legitimate effort will bring reward, they turn to Satanism and witchcraft.” #RandolphHarris 12 of 20

Some people have had mystical experiences which gave them a sense of equality all round, although they are hierarchal in feeling and in the established order. With the great event of the aeon, which will bring with it the possibility of redemption to the whole of the Western World, has not yet been made manifest. We, who contain the knowledge of this event among Ourselves until the time is right, and who were in fact the instruments of its gestation, give the present indication. The Aeon of Horus is the nature of the child. To perceive this, we must conceive of the nature of a child without the veil of sentimentality—beyond good and evil, perfectly gentle, perfectly ruthless, containing all possibilities within the limits of heredity, and highly susceptible to training and environment. However, the nature of Horus is also the nature of force—blind, terrible, unlimited force. That is why the West stands in imminent danger of annihilation. That is why the West also stand in the possibility of the most rapid and tremendous evolution that the World has ever known. The balance must be love and understanding, or else all else fails. The uncompromisable difference that separates the philosophers from all others concerns death and dying. No way of life other than the philosophic can digest the truth about death. Whatever the illusion that supports ways of life and regimes other than the philosophic one, the philosopher is its enemy. There can never be a meeting of minds on this question, as both ancients and moderns agreed. It seemed only natural to the ancients to find their allies among the vulgarly courageous, id est, those willing to face death with endurance and even intrepidity, although they required unfounded beliefs about the noble, which made them forget about the good. They share the common ground with the philosophers on which something higher than mere life rests. #RandolphHarris 13 of 20

However, they have no good reason for their sacrifice. Achilles’ laments and complaints about why he must die for the Greeks and for his friend are very different from Socrates’ arguments and the reasoning that underlies them for accepting death—because he is old, because it is inevitable, and because it costs him almost nothing and might be useful to philosophy. Anger characterizes Achilles; calculation, Socrates. Whatever sympathy there might be between the two kinds of men is founded, to speak anachronistically, on Achilles’ misunderstanding Socrates. The extraordinary device contrived by the new philosophy that produces harmony between philosophy and politics was to exchange one misunderstanding for another. All men fear death and passionately wish to avoid it. Even the heroes who despised it do so against a background of fear, which is primary. Only religious fanatics who believe certainly in a better life after death march gaily to death. If, instead of depending on the rare natures who have a noble attitude toward death, which goes against nature’s grain, philosophy could without destroying itself play the demagogue’s role—id est, appeal to the passion that all men have and that is most powerful—it could share in and make use of the power. Rather than fighting what appears to be human in nature, by cooperating with its philosophy could control it. In short, if philosophy should be revealed to man not as his moral preceptor but as his collaborator in his fondest dreams, the philosopher could supplant priests, politician and poet in the affection of the multitude. This is what Machiavelli meant when he blamed the old writers for building imaginary principalities and republics that neglect how men actually live in favor of how they ought to live. #RandolphHarris 14 of 20

Machiavelli counsels writers to accommodate themselves to the dominant passions instead of exhorting men to practice virtues that they rarely perfect, whose goodness for the individuals who practice them is questionable, and the preachings of which are boring to everyone concerned. In a word, turn philosophy into a benefactors, and it will be thought to be good and will enjoy the power accruing to benefactors. From the strong influences of magical secret societies on the development of National Socialism in Germany, to the close links in American between groups like the bizarre I AM cult and William Dudley’s Pelley’s fascistic Silver Shirts in the 1930s, the historical affinity between occultism and the radical right has been well documented. Both believe and adhere to the conspiracy theory of history—that is, that events are shaped by the workings of small, elite, but concealed groups—and both believe in the ability of one man, whether it be a Magus or a Hitler, to alter global events through the sheer force of his will. Thus, a 1971 Newsweek article expressed concern about LaVey’s political intensions: “If there is anything fundamentally diabolic about LaVey, it stems more from the echoes of Nazism in his theories than from the horror-comic trappings of his cult.” Radical-right groups besides Madole’s had sought to ally themselves with the Church of Satan, including the American Nazi Party and Robert Shelton’s United Klans of American, but LaVey had always rejected the overtures, just as he rejected Madole’s. The Klan, allegedly the last bastion of Native American Christianity holding back “Commie-atheist hordes of Satan,” would seek to align itself with the dark forces it professes to abhor is not as strange as it might first appear. According to sociologist Charles Glock and Rodney Stark, religious cults and radical political movements spring from the same source—deprivation. #RandolphHarris 15 of 20

Radical rightists saw an ally in LaVey presumably because of his Machiavellian, power-oriented philosophy and because of public statements he had made advocating establishment of a “benign police state,” not to mention the strong Germanic flavor of some of his rituals. However, although LaVey was willing to use the sympathies of these groups when possible to his benefit, he kept them at arm’s length and privately expressed contempt for their anti-Sematic, racists ideas. In 1974, Lavey wrote: “The N.P.R. is enamored with the Church of Satan. Their racist ideals are also worn on their sleeves, and, I believe, are as removable as their armbands. The C/S must be O.K., like the Hell’s Angels. The colors are similar. The Angeles, the Nazis, and the C/S. All together. Even the Klan. Night Riders all. Now the enemy is the weakling. All my life I’ve been the weakling, but with my swastika, I’m strong. My Satanic amulet gives me power. I’m not the misfit anymore, with pimples and a heart murmur and flat feet. What does it matter anymore that I can’t play baseball or don’t spell too good? So what if I can’t get a girl? I got my armband. You see, we are dealing with intelligence levels on which imagery and ideals are easily interchangeable. Philosophy can be used to conquer fortune, so Machiavelli announced. It was, of course, fortune—chance—that made it impossible for philosophers to rule, according to Plato. Fortune governs the relations between power and wisdom, which means that men cannot be counted on to consent to the rule of the wise, and the wise are not strong enough to force them to do so. The conquest of fortune meant for Machiavelli that thought and thinkers could compel and guarantee the consent of men. If this is possible, then the ancient philosophers’ moderation looks like timidity. Daring in the political arena becomes the new disposition of the philosophers. #RandolphHarris 16 of 20

Danton’s “de l’audace, encore de l’audace, toujours de l’audace,” is but a pale, merely political, duplicate of Machiavelli’s original call to battle. Bacon’s assertion that science will make man “master and possessor of nature,” and the commonplace that science is the conquest of nature are offsprings of Machiavelli’s revolution and constitute the political face adopted by modern philosophy. We are engulfed in war. Not simply a war fought with guns and bombs, “somewhere out there.” The skirmishes take place in the region of one’s own mind. The less one is aware of the invisible war, the more receptive one is to its ongoing process of demoralization, for the insensate human is vulnerable, malleable, weak, and ripe for control. Invisible warfare allows its victims to wallow in their sense of choice and freedom while actually feeling weak and ineffectual. Avenues for infection are everywhere. “Bombs” are falling on our doorsteps every day. Supermarket tabloids, radio, tv—all these are catechism of demoralization. Weather Control—unusually protracted weather conditions with little or no change (especially long periods of sunshine) provide ample opportunity for the incubation of viral and bacterial agents. An added advantage is that sunny, warm weather encourages people to get together in groups, going to games, the beach, the park. These masses of humanity create a mental wavelength which depletes creative energy and deadens the environment, contributing to the main objective of overall demoralization. Viral and Bacterial Agents—it is foolish to believe that research in bacteriological warfare ended with the invention of the nuclear bomb. Many diseases are now being traced back to invincible, ever-modifying viruses. The causes of everything from COVID to Monkey Pox to the much-discussed “Yuppie Disease” (Chronic Fatigue Syndrome) seems to be isolated to breakdown the body’s immune system triggered by a viral infection. #RandolphHarris 17 of 20

If “bombardments” were being manipulated so as not to arouse suspicion, attacks could be made on areas of the body already susceptible, causing “flare-ups” of already diagnosed diseases. “Spot” or arthritic-type pains could be induced in unlikely parts of the body. Irregularities in mucous membranes could cause cold-like symptoms that never quite develop into full-fledged colds, chronic yeast infections, symptoms of internal parasites (bloating and swelling), fluid retention, or a feeling of “pressure” in the head. Of course, few would feel bad enough to be incapacitated, just ill enough to wonder what was that matter. Ultrasonic targeting or saturation (White Noise)—I have done extensive experimentation with various frequencies, on both ends of the spectrum, and discovered what can be done, especially using the technology of microchips and synthesizers. Ultrasonic sound jams volitional thought, immobilizes the individual, induces mental confusion and increases suggestibility. White noise can be carried by radio and tv-audio signals, and enhanced by frenetic musical (MTV, et cetera) or frenetic spoken delivery. We become used to the “chipmunk” sound always going in the background, establishing a norm of hyper-pacing and overstimulation of the sense. Without an electronic device chattering away, things seem unnaturally quiet, so, under the  guise of seeking information and being entertained, we become addicted to the “presence” of tv, radio, or stereo as guiding and stabilizing influences. On the opposite end of the sound spectrum, subsonics can be used to drive people together during conducive periods (holidays, weekends, or special events.) Besides the depletion resulting from large numbers of people clustering together, black sound creates anxiety, hyperactivity behavior, agitation, and increased stress. Subsonic sound can also be employed to create Earthquakes. #RandolphHarris 18 of 20

Microwave radiation–not leaking from microwave ovens, but received through undetectable (or overlooked) receivers, from satellite or Earth-bound transmitters. No giant receiving dishes are necessary. Natural or man-made configurations can be utilized or constructed that are conducive to reception (areas between hills, valleys between skyscrapers, sports arenas, et cetera). Symptoms: respiratory ailments, circulatory problems, mucous membrane and kidney dysfunction, excessive thirst, cognitive disabilities, memory loss, forgetfulness. Food and beverage dispersal—outlets where large numbers of people are exposed to the mass-produced provisions are suspect. Chemical in widely consumed foodstuffs or drinks are an obvious arena for unseen chemical additives. (And those who actually fry or dispense the foods never need know exactly what is being dispersed.) Fast food and restaurant chains receive pre-mixed, pre-packaged supplies, as do supermarkets and other retail outlets. To “fuel-up” at these outlets is to perhaps induce and sustain lassitude, and foster mental incapacity and insensitivity. Those not yet conditioned by exposure to these chemicals can experience MSG-type symptoms (excessive thirst, hot flashes, wired yet tired feelings, metallic taste, et cetera). Psychological smokescreens—screening and misdirection are employed to divert attention from the agents of the invisible listed above. Some of the more obvious misdirections are: threat of nuclear attack, political “causes,” scandal and campaign hysteria, concern over “real” or conventional warfare, contrived revolts and shooting wars in far-away areas of the World, fear of contamination of water supplied by parties unknown (ensuring increased sales of chemical-laden beverages), poisoning or experiments by the CIA or other convenient groups, fear of the Appointed Enemy, id est, Christian-defined “Satanic” influences, UFOs, neo-Nazis (until they are absorbed to make room for a new, common enemy). These are all widely discussed and heatedly protested topics, and therefore effective as diversions. #RandolphHarris 19 of 20

The extended weekend—there have been occasional three-day weekends before, but never like this. Long weekends are necessary to allow spending and recreational time while maintaining the illusion of productivity. Three and four day weekends allow plenty of opportunity for “relaxation” (id est, intensive television viewing and other indoctrinational devices) and keep everyone happy. At this rate, we may yet see six day weekends. Urban warfare—Beyond the smokescreens, there are other psychological elements involved in the present war. By allowing heavy drug use to increase, and an underground network of sales and distribution to exist, people can be kept malleable and satisfied, while the drugs induce mental delays and declines. Drug skirmishes, rampant in urban sectors, thin the population. Another effective warfare agent is the individual annihilator—a person so frustrated with the injustices of the “justice system” or by the petty tyranny of contemporary life that one grabs an armful of guns and starts shooting into the nearest crowd. The serial killer—a contemporary phenomenon—cannot be overlooked. These incidents are often labeled “Satanic” or “cult” crimes, and will increase as a method of population reduction, which is why they are being allowed. Instead of the TV news media harping on these mass shootings, they should actually plead people to stop. Then the issue of focusing on gun control, right after, may make people feel like they are being controlled and make them act in a counterproductive manner. These are major weapons in use today. Inasmuch as neurological responses affect the entire physical organism, it must be emphasized that physical malaise or disease may originate in demoralization created and sustained by any warfare agent. Becoming aware of these agents can minimize unnecessary demoralization in those who wish to preserve their instinct for survival. #RandolphHarris 20 of 20

CRESLEIGH HAVENWOOD

Lincoln, CA | from the high $600s

Now Selling!

No appointment needed! Cresleigh Havenwood features four distinct floor plans ranging from 2,293 – 3,377 square feet and offering up to five bedrooms. 

Each plan has been thoughtfully designed and includes great features such as single story homes, guest suites, optional offices, garage workshops, and more!

Get the most out of your new home with Cresleigh’s All Ready smart home featuring all the connectivity needed to keep your house running. Best of all, each Cresleigh home comes with owned solar included! 

Located off of Virginiatown Road and McCourtney Road, residents of the 83 homesites of Cresleigh Havenwood will benefit from a brand new neighborhood in the charming City of Lincoln. Palo Verde Park, is  just down the street and there’s plenty of recreation to take part in all around town. 

#CresleighHomes

#Havenwood