Donate CMSC 304


This publication was written over 2 years ago by owner of https://Anonymous.Cool/ — it may be connected to that which I explained on the front page

Published to Anonymous.Cool on 5 OCT 2021 at 16:49

George Orwell Was Right: It's Time to Build A “New Wall”

We live in the information age where data are ubiquitous. Data come in many different forms such as the zeros and ones that comprise this document, the messages transmitted and received online and even the satellite radio signals sent to navigation systems from the global positioning system's satellites.

To fully understand the big picture, it is important to know more about global connectivity and technological adoption. According to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in 2017, 984,289,950 had fixed line telephone service (13.04% of inhabitants); there were 7,806,142,681 mobile telephone subscriptions (103.4% of inhabitants); 3,174,000,000 people access the internet (41.59% of inhabitants); and 1,002,793,951 had broadband internet connectivity with a data rate greater than 256 kilobytes per second (13.29% of inhabitants) (CIA, 2019). According to IoT Analytics, GmbH, “The number of connected devices that are in use worldwide now exceeds 7 billion, with the number of IoT devices at billion (that number does not include smartphones, tablets, laptops or fixed line phones), (IoT Analytics GmbH, 2018)”.

As of late October 2019, we can interpolate that the total number of active device connections worldwide is 20.87 billion devices (9.61 billion Non-IoT and 11.26 billion IoT devices. This implies that there are more IoT active device connections worldwide than people (7.7 billion is the current approximation of Earth's population).

What's fascinating is that wireless telephones' antennae are so sensitive to electromagnetic frequencies that they are able to pick up humans' bioelectric field. The NSA is able to record bioelectric signals globally and this form of data holds more information than you can imagine. A human's bioelectric field emits electromagnetic frequencies which can be recorded across the range of frequencies which it encompasses (3 Hz —50 Hz).

According to documents leaked accidently after a FOIA request for information related to ANTIFA, this classified information was shared. (Popular Mechanics, Apr 19, 2018)

Brain Area

Bioelectric Resonance Frequency

Information Induced Through Modulation

Motor Control Cortex

10 Hz

Motor impulse coordination

Auditory Cortex

15 Hz

Sound which bypasses the ears

Visual Cortex

25 Hz

Images in the brain bypassing the eyes

Somatosensory Cortex

9 Hz

Phantom touch sense

Thought Center

20 Hz

Imposed Subconscious Thoughts

As evidence of the reverse of the emission of the aforementioned bioelectric electromagnetic frequencies, is known as electromagnetic induction. This means sound can perceived by the targeted individual via electromagnetic waves induced at the target's precise and finely-tuned thought center frequency. I present a noncoincidental occurrence that happened twice in class. During two previous classes, I had raised my hand in response to a question that Professor Aaron Cubbage had asked the class. Initially he had asked which software can be used to capture packets of data from a wireless router. I responded with the correct answer, Wireshark. Professor Cubbage asked me to present Wireshark to the class and I responded with a phrase that I rarely use. I said (a verbatim transcript can be obtained by the National Security Agency), “Would you like me to get it fired up? I think it would be best to wait until I'm prepared”. The second utterance came the day I presented Wireshark to the class. After having presented Wireshark, I ordered the book “Permanent Record” by Edward Snowden on October 18, 2019. I had not read any part his book beforehand. After you see what I discovered on page 123 of the hardback version of Snowden's book is what I said in class. What's more is that while randomly driving by the National Security Agency (NSA) a voice inside of my head told me to say 123 aloud and I did! After seeing “fired up” on page 123 of Snowden's book, my mind was blown and fully convinced of the veracity of the fact that the military can induce thoughts and control living organisms' central nervous systems via electromagnetic frequencies.

Furthermore, I miraculously ended up seeing the numbers 6 (“F” is the sixth letter of the alphabet) and 21 (“U” is the 21st letter of the alphabet) on my parking receipt after having photographed my University of Maryland, Baltimore County parking receipt.

It ought to be noted that The Department of Defense 'tweeted' on the publishing platform Twitter about the excessiveness of conducting thought surveillance on suspected pedophiles (due to the existence of libelous errors within The United States' National Security Databases). The Department of Defense's allusion to “thought surveillance” further confirmed the existence of these top-secret mass collection of bioelectric EMF signal transmissions.

“A successful lawsuit from a former NSA employee details how he was targeted by his fellow employees and the methods used. Following is an excerpt from a brief filed in US District Court, District of Columbia by John St. Clair Akwei against the National Security Agency. 111 NSA Signals Intelligence uses EMF Brain Stimulation for Remote Neural Monitoring (RNM) and Electronic Brain Link (EBL). EMF Brain Stimulation has been in development since the MKULTRA program of the early 1950s, which included neurological research into radiation (non-ionizing EMF) and bioelectric research and development.

The resulting secret technology is categorized at the National Archives as 'Radiation Intelligence,' defined 'information from unintentionally emanated electromagnetic waves in the environment, not including radioactivity or nuclear detonation.' Signals Intelligence implemented and kept this technology secret in the same manner as other electronic warfare programs of the US government. The NSA monitors available information about this technology and withholds scientific research from the public. There are also international intelligence agreements to keep this technology secret. The NSA has proprietary electronic equipment that analyzes electrical activity in humans from a distance.

NSA computer-generated brain mapping can continuously monitor all of the electrical activity in the brain continuously; the NSA records and decodes individuals brain maps (of hundreds of thousands of persons) for national security purposes. EMF Brain Stimulation is also secretly used by the military for brain-to-computer link (in military fighter aircraft, for example). For electric surveillance purposes, electrical activity in the speech center of the brain can be translated into the subject's verbal thoughts. FNM can send encoded signals to the brain's auditory cortex, thus allowing audio communications direct to the brain (bypassing the ears) NSA operatives can use this covertly to debilitate subjects by simulating auditory hallucinations characteristic of paraoid schizophrenia. Without any contact with the subject, Remote Neural Monitoring can map out electrical activity from the visual cortex of a subject's brain and show images from the subject's brain on a video monitor. NSA operatives see what the surveillance subject's eyes are seeing.

Visual memory can also be seen. RNM can send images direct to the visual cortex, bypassing the eyes and optic nerves. NSA operatives can use this surreptitiously to put images into a surveillance subject's brain while they are in REM sleep for every thought, reaction, motor command, auditory event and visual image in the brain has a corresponding 'evoked potential' or set of 'evoked potentials.' The EMF emission from the brain can be decoded into the current thoughts, images and sounds in the subject's brain. The SNA's Signals Intelligence has the proprietary ability to monitor remotely and non-invasively information in the human brain by digitally decoding the evoked potentials in the 30-50 Hz, 5 milliwatt electromagnetic emissions from the brain.

The frequency to which the various brain areas respond varies from 3 Hz to 50 Hz. Only NSA Signals Intelligence modulates signals in the frequency band. TABLE 1: An example of EMF Brain Stimulation Brain Area Bioelectric Information Induce Resonance Through Modulation Frequency Motor Control Cortex 10 Hz Motor impulse coordination Auditory Cortex 15 Hz Sound which bypasses the ears Visual Cortex 25 Hz Images in the brain bypassing the eyes Somatosensory 9 Hz Phantom touch sense Thought Center 20 Hz Imposed subconscious thoughts. (Thomas, 2018)”

Proper oversight, management and emergency preparedness are very important considerations for executives of businesses, government agencies and organizations which manage large amounts of data.

The mismanagement, loss or leakage of private data has tremendous ramifications on the global economy. There have been several major data breaches that have occurred throughout the past couple of years that raise the need for better communication, planning, surveillance, risk mitigation and the development of better data security protocols. Even more importantly, the federal government has an obligation to prevent the leakage of information gathered from advanced surveillance techniques like radiation intelligence. Moreover, the federal government has an obligation and duty to prevent the misuse of collected data for any reason whatsoever.

The judicial branch's Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) was established as the proper venue for legal matters involving the Intelligence Community. It's important to note that the Intelligence Community (IC) is defined by federal law as, “"Intelligence Community"

(4) The term “intelligence community” includes the following:

(A) The Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

(B)The Central Intelligence Agency.

(C) The National Security Agency.

(D) The Defense Intelligence Agency.

(E) The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency.

(F) The National Reconnaissance Office.

(G) Other offices within the Department of Defense for the collection of specialized national intelligence through reconnaissance programs.

(H) The intelligence elements of the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, the Marine Corps, the Coast Guard, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and the Department of Energy.

(I) The Bureau of Intelligence and Research of the Department of State.

(J) The Office of Intelligence and Analysis of the Department of the Treasury.

(K) The Office of Intelligence and Analysis of the Department of Homeland Security.

(L) Such other elements of any department or agency as may be designated by the President, or designated jointly by the Director of National Intelligence and the head of the department or agency concerned, as an element of the intelligence community.”

It's important to know the "'Origins of The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court' The FISC began life as a reform, an attempt to put a judicial check on executive abuse of wire-tapping and surveillance. The exposure of these abuses in the 1970s shocked Congress and embarrassed the nation. Several sinister programs, including the FBI's COINTELPRO, the NSA's Shamrock and Minaret, and the CIA'S CHAOS, were shown repeatedly to have violated the privacy of thousands of innocent American citizens. Some of these programs even involved infiltration and subversion of legal domestic political groups (Mayer, 2002)."

"The National Security Agency is currently collecting the telephone records of millions of US customers of Verizon, one of America's largest telecoms providers, under a top-secret court order issued in April. The order, a copy of which has been obtained by the Guardian, requires Verizon on an "ongoing, daily basis" to give the NSA information on all telephone calls in its systems, both within the US and between the US and other countries…

The document shows for the first time that under the Obama administration the communication records of millions of US citizens are being collected indiscriminately and in bulk — regardless of whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing (Guardian, 2003)".

Paul Rosenzweig, J.D. from The George Washington University Law School explains the privacy concerns regarding the monstrous amount of sensitive data being collected, recorded and stored by the United States, “Welcome back Mr. Rosenzweig. Will you be looking for another pair of shoes today? They, too, know everything you've ever done in your life. You have a permanent record. The image is, in a word, horrifying. It portrays a world where everything about you is known and where your future actions can be predicted and anticipated with great accuracy. Fortunately, it's fiction of course. But nobody is sure for how much longer…

Every click you take in cyberspace can be tracked, your cellphone broadcasts your geolocation, and all your purchases and phone calls are cataloged somewhere. Taken together, this information can be analyzed to paint a picture of you, one that, increasingly, others can see. It may define who you are and let users predict what you will do in the future. The result is a real loss of privacy…

After all, the big problem with such data is the magnification of its effects by how pervasive it is. In an increasingly networked world, personal information is widely collected and widely available. As the storehouse of personal data has grown, so have governmental and commercial efforts to use the data for their own purposes. Commercial enterprises solicit new customers with targeted ads. Governments use the data to identify and locate previously unknown terror suspects, to find so-called cleanskins' who are not in any intelligence database.

We have discovered we can link together individual bits of data to build a picture of a person that is more detailed than the individual parts. Think of a tile mosaic or a Pointillist painting by the French post-Impressionist Georges Seurat. Each bit of color, by itself, isn't much.But put them all together, and you can see a complete picture. Clearly, Big Data offers all kinds of opportunities. As the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology said, it allows us to find serendipitous connections of new information. Yet the new capability comes at a price. That is, it creates an erratical trove of information about us as individuals, making it increasingly difficult to safeguard our privacy…

If the government collects data to build a picture of, let's say, a previously undetected terrorist threat, it can also, if it's so minded, use the same capability to build a picture of its political opponents. That navigable web of data poses threats to the free world and perhaps even more so in authoritarian nations. (4:47, S1 E7, Rosenzweig).”

The Intelligence Community must maintain its integrity by ensuring the proper compartmentalization of intelligence gathered and log all queries executed by querier / intelligence officer.Other than the implementation of deep logging and enforcement of proper access controls, more must be done to prevent leaks by significantly overhauling the current system.

"When a FISA wiretap or search reveals evidence of a crime, the FBI is obligated under both Executive Order 123337and the terms of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, to take reasonable steps to pass such evidence to the law enforcement community for use in investigating and/or prosecuting that case as a criminal matter. The “Wall” — There is, however, a host of issues attendant to that process. One of considerable significance, with which many in the law enforcement and foreign counterintelligence (FCI) communities have struggled for many years, is this: under what circumstances may an FCI investigation in which a FISA wiretap is used be maintained when the most dramatic and practical use of the information obtained from the wire is evidence of a crime. Since virtually immediately after its being signed into law, the majority of the FCI and foreign intelligence (FI) communities viewed FISA as being subject to the requirement that the primary purpose behind the use of wiretaps or searches executed under its authority be for the acquisition of FCI or FI. Conversely, the belief was that FISA could not be used as an investigative tool if the primary purpose of the investigation was, for example, the criminal prosecution of the target, even if the criminal prosecution would be for the crime of espionage. Indeed, the constitutionality of FISA was challenged under either or both of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments in several cases in which information acquired through a FISA electronic surveillance was used in a subsequent criminal prosecution. The courts rebuffed those challenges, however, because the government was able to demonstrate that, throughout the FISA surveillances, the purpose thereof had been to secure foreign intelligence information rather than being primarily oriented towards assisting a criminal investigation or prosecution. Nevertheless, these cases served as the genesis of the so-called 'primary purpose' test and as the catalyst for the view that foreign intelligence investigations and criminal investigations had to be kept separate from each other. During the years following these challenges, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the intelligence community developed a practice in support of the 'primary purpose' test aimed at foreclosing the perception that FISA authority was used primarily towards assisting a criminal investigation or to circumvent the more strenuous requirements imposed by federal criminal law in order to obtain a wiretap order in a criminal investigation. That practice eventually became policy, a policy that was reduced to writing by DOJ in 1995 and was commonly referenced as 'the wall.' Indeed, the 'wall' crept into the minimization and application procedures approved by the Attorney General for FISA intercepts such that by late 1995 all FISA applications contained sufficient information to justify the FISC's finding that the 'primary purpose' of any particular electronic intercept would be the acquisition of foreign intelligence. An inescapable consequence of 'the wall' was the inhibition of the sharing of information between the intelligence and law enforcement communities. In the 1990's and into the early 2000's, the two communities attempted to resolve their differences and concerns over this policy with the express purpose of improving information sharing between the two communities. While serving to highlight the difficulties of changing long-ingrained cultures, those efforts were largely unsuccessful, however, The USA PATRIOT Act That reticence notably lessened following the events of September 11, 2001, and the October 2001 enactment of the United and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act, or the USA PATRIOT Act.10 The Act consists of ten separate Titles and 156 sections, and which effected modifications of numerous existing federal statutes and rules.

In passing the Act, the President and Congress articulated four primary purposes:

(1) Enhancing the federal government's capacity to share intelligence,

(2) Strengthening the criminal laws against terrorism,

(3) Removing obstacles to investigating terrorism, and

(4) Updating the law to reflect new technology.

In pursuit of those objectives, the Act, among other things, amended the requirement that the applicant for a FISA order certify that the purpose of the surveillance is to obtain foreign intelligence to require only that the applicant certify that a significant purpose of the surveillance is to obtain foreign intelligence...

FISA has since its enactment been a bold and productive tool in this country's fight against the efforts of foreign governments and their agents to engage in intelligence-gathering aimed at the U.S. government, either to ascertain its future policy or to effect its current policy, to acquire proprietary information not publicly available, or to engage in disinformation efforts. With the enactment of the USA PATRIOT Act FISA has been expanded and broadened to make 10 it a useful tool in exposing and combating foreign terrorist groups' efforts to target the United States. In recognition that such acts cannot be neatly or easily separated into intelligence versus criminal cases, the FISA Court of Review has clarified the threshold that must be met in order for FISA to be used. The Court eliminated the “primary purpose” doctrine, under which no FISA-related operational undertaking could occur unless it was primarily intended to obtain foreign intelligence. Rather, the Court, relying on its understanding of the Congressional intent behind the enactment of FISA and the wording of FISA itself, held that a FISA-related operation is justified where “a significant purpose” of such operation is to obtain foreign intelligence. This has cleared away much of the detritus that developed around FISA that had historically impeded the use of FISA in criminal investigations and the use of FISA information in criminal prosecutions (Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers)".

I have heard the perspectives of many of the different agencies and I understand the gravity of the situation at hand. My simple conclusion is that we should restore “(old) wall” that metaphorically existed before the implementation of The Patriot Act with a [new wall].

NPR summarizes the collapse of the “(old) wall”, “Sections 203(b) and 203(d) of the Patriot Act are at the heart of the effort to break down the "wall" that used to separate criminal and intelligence investigations. The Justice Department has frequently blamed the wall for the failure to find and detain Sept. 11 hijackers Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Midhar prior to the attacks. CIA agents had information that both men were in the United States and were suspected terrorists, but the FBI says it did not receive that information until August 2001.

U.S. officials also blame the wall for the failure to fully investigate Zacarias Moussaoui, who has since pleaded guilty in connection with the Sept. 11 plot. The government says that existing procedures made investigators afraid of sharing information between the intelligence and criminal sides of the probe. Supporters say these provisions have greatly enhanced information sharing within the FBI, and with the intelligence community at large.

Civil libertarians say the failure to share information was largely a result of incompetence and misunderstanding of the law. They say investigators were always allowed to share grand jury information, which is specifically authorized by this section. They warn that the scope of the Patriot Act language is far too broad and encourages unlimited sharing of information, regardless of the need.

Critics say that investigators should have to explain why information is being shared, and that only information related to terrorism or espionage should be released. They warn that unrestricted sharing could lead to the development of massive databases about innocent citizens. (NPR, 2005)”.


Works Cited

50 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

50 USC 3003(4).

Abramson, Larry, and Maria Godoy. “NPR: The Patriot Act: Key Controversies.” NPR, NPR, 16 Dec. 2005,

Central Intelligence Agency. “The World Factbook: World.”, 1 Feb. 2018,

“Day Numbers for 2019.” Epoch Converter, Accessed 25 Oct. 2019.

Gellman, Barton. “In NSA-Intercepted Data, Those Not Targeted Far Outnumber the Foreigners Who Are.” The Washington Post, 5 July 2014,

Greenwald, Glenn. “NSA Collecting Phone Records of Millions of Verizon Customers Daily.” The Guardian, 6 June 2013,

Grossman, David. “Government Accidentally Releases Documents on 'Psycho-Electric' Weapons.” Popular Mechanics, Popular Mechanics, 19 Apr. 2018,

James H. McAdams III, “Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA): An Overview,” Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, accessed June 3, 2017,

Lueth, Knud. “State of the IoT 2018: Number of IoT Devices Now at 7B — Market Accelerating.” IoT Analytics, 2 Oct. 2019,

Mackey, Aaron. “NSA Spying.” Electronic Frontier Foundation, 11 Oct. 2019,

Mayer, Jeremy D. “9-11 and the Secret FISA Court: From Watchdog to Lapdog.” Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, vol. 34, no. 2, 2002, pp. 249—52,


“Monarch: The New Phoenix Program.” Google Books, Accessed 17 Oct. 2019.

Rosenzweig J.D., Paul. The Surveillance State: Big Data, Freedom, and You : Paul Rosenzweig, J.D., The George Washington University Law School, Amazon Prime Video, The Great Courses Signature Collection.

“Surveillance Under the USA/PATRIOT Act.” American Civil Liberties Union, Accessed 8 Oct. 2019.

Snowden, Edward J. Permanent record. New York: Metropolitan Books/Henry Holt and Company, 2019. Print. pp. 122-123.

The FISA Amendments Act: Q&A: The Intelligence Community's Top Legislative Priority for 2017 Is Reauthorization of the FISA Amendments Act. Office of the Director of National Intelligence, 18 Apr. 2017,

United States. Cong. Senate. FISA Amendments Reauthorization Act of 2017. 115th Cong., 2nd sess. S 139. Washington: GPO, 2017. Print.

U.S. Constitution., Amend. IV.