Speaker 1: Imagine a future, maybe not so distant, where our basic
understanding of human autonomy is well profoundly challenged, where your thoughts,
your identity, even your free will, they might not be
solely your own anymore.
Speaker 2: Sounds like something from a movie, right, a thriller.
Speaker 1: Exactly speculative fiction. But today we're doing a deep dive
into some sources that make these extraordinary claims. They say
technologies are already in motion right now that could lead
to what one source actually calls an extinction level event
for human consciousness as we know it.
Speaker 2: Precisely, we're looking closely at some remarkable claims from an individual,
James Martinez. He says he's been involved in exposing hidden
programs for decades decades, Wow, yes, specifically focusing on mind
control and how it's evolved alarmingly so. So our mission
today is really to unpack these claims, look at the
historical context he.
Speaker 1: Provides, based only on the material we.
Speaker 2: Have, of course, absolutely based only on the sources provided,
and explore what these developments, if true, could mean for
our individual sovereignty, our freedom, and really the future of
humanity itself.
Speaker 1: That's right, this deep dive, it's designed to pull out
those critical nuggets of information, try to connect the dots
between things that might seem unrelated historical events, new tech,
and help you, our listener, understand the potential urgency and
the profound implications here.
Speaker 2: As described in the sources.
Speaker 1: Naturally, as described in the sources, this isn't just about
learning something new, It's about examining claims that suggest a
fundamental redefinition of our future. So let's begin.
Speaker 2: Okay, let's unpack this first part our source Today Martinez
brings us face to fates with claims that, like you said,
sound like they're plucked straight from a spy novel. The
CIA's and k Ultra progress from us. Yeah, we've all
heard bits and pieces, maybe see movies. But what exactly
was mk Ultra according to this material and how does
its legacy, you know, decades later supposedly set the stage
for these really alarming modern claims.
Speaker 1: Well, from what our source eat tome, mk Ultro was
a deeply secret CIA program focused on mind control, a
truly clinted destin operation, he says, that started back in
the post World War two era.
Speaker 2: Right after the war. Yeah, and its origins are apparently
quite significant. It reportedly used research and development projects, some
of which were actually brought into the US from overseas
after the war. I think Operation paper Clip perhaps, though
the source is connecting dots here, okay, and the program's goals,
according to Martinez, were chillingly direct brainwashing, psychological manipulation, different
forms of torture, all aimed at gaining control over human
thought and behavior.
Speaker 1: So not just understanding the mind, but controlling it exactly.
Speaker 2: The Source frames it as a concerted, scientifically driven effort
to understand and ultimately manipulate the human mind on a
really profound level, not some small side project.
Speaker 1: And the details that have emerged over the years about
this program, yeah, they are genuinely chilling, aren't they. It
wasn't just lab coats and theorists, no.
Speaker 2: Far from it. We're talking about real people experiments, often
with devastating consequences for those involved. Yeah. Absolutely. The Source
highlights several deeply unsettling aspects. A key one is the
use of unwitting American human subjects, people who had no
idea they were part of an experiment.
Speaker 1: That's just staggering, no knowledge, no consent, none.
Speaker 2: For instance, Martinez points to documented cases where LSD was
given to patients in civilian hospitals without their awareness.
Speaker 1: In hospitals, not secret labs.
Speaker 2: Sometimes yes, According to the source, it wasn't about treatment,
it was about observation and control. He even mentions that
specific tragic example someone jumping out of a window after
being given LSD by CIA operatives.
Speaker 1: I think I've heard about that case.
Speaker 2: Horrible it is, and maybe one of the most shocking details.
Underlying how insidious this allegedly was is that many experiments
weren't even in secret government facilities. They were supposedly conducted
in what looked like normal civilian buildings.
Speaker 1: Blurring the lines completely.
Speaker 2: Completely blurring the lines between legitimate research and covert, unethical experimentation.
It suggests a really profound breach of trust, of ethical
boundaries woven into seemingly ordinary places.
Speaker 1: It's incredible to think about the level of secrecy, the
deception involved. And then the source introduces someone else, right,
the first whistleblower who really started pulling back the curtain
years before Martinez got involved.
Speaker 2: That's right, Walter bowert describing Martinez is a business partner
and a fellow whistleblower. Bower's contribution sounds really significant. He
founded the East Village other, Oh yeah.
Speaker 1: The Underground Paper in New York.
Speaker 2: That's the one. Became a voice for alternative views in
the sixties and seventies. But his major work here was
the book Operation Mind Control, published in nineteen seventy.
Speaker 1: Eight, okay, seventy eight. What made it so groundbreaking?
Speaker 2: Well, according to Martinez, it was the first major expose,
a detailing mk ultra, drawing heavily on the Church Committee hearings,
the Watergate hearings. That those moments when some official light
was shown on these things, right, Bowart's book apparently laid
ba are the systematic use of human subjects, how neuroscience
was being applied for manipulation, the use of torture, and
even alarmingly claims of child abduction, all framed as part
of this ongoing R and D project that Martinez suggests
was effectively imported after WWII child abduction.
Speaker 1: Goodness. So that was Bowart's book Volume one, in a
way the first big reveal, but you hinted there was more.
Speaker 2: Oh yes, imagine thinking you've uncovered the worst, only to
find out years later there's a volume two revealing things
maybe even more audacious, more mind bending.
Speaker 1: And this is where James Martinez is our main source
for today really.
Speaker 2: Steps in exactly. Martinez came into the picture years after
Bowart's book. They collaborated and this resulted in Operation Mind
Control Volume two, the Special Researchers Edition.
Speaker 1: Special Researchers Edition sounds intense.
Speaker 2: It does, and this second volume, as Martinez describes it,
brought forward newer, even more startling information. It picked up
where Bowert left off, but dove into claims that are
frankly far more bizarre and unsettling.
Speaker 1: Okay, I'm brace what kind of claims are we talking about?
Speaker 2: In volume two, well, Martinez apparently provided testimony to Boward
detailing how behavioral science was allegedly used for get this,
faking alien buctions on the public.
Speaker 1: Wait, what faking alien abductions? How is that even possible?
It sounds completely fantastic.
Speaker 2: I know it sounds utterly unbelievable, but that's the claim.
It takes mind control to a whole different level, doesn't it,
Not just twinking thoughts, but constructing entire complex, fabricated realities for.
Speaker 1: People, complete with traumatic memories I guess.
Speaker 2: Exactly, vivid, terrifying traumatic memories of abduction. According to Martinez,
the methods were disturbing mix deep hypnosis okay, a technique
he calls screen and scramble memory, presumably to implant fake memories,
block real ones, strategic use of drugs, obviously to disorient
and control, and deploying what he just vaguely terms advanced technology.
Speaker 1: Advanced technology back then? Interesting? And why what was the
alleged point of creating these fake traumatic abduction experiences?
Speaker 2: Well, the source claims the intent wasn't trivial. These manufactured
experiences were supposedly designed to be so intense, so psychologically damaging,
that they would intentionally create post traumatic stress disorder PTSD
and other related syndromes.
Speaker 1: Intentionally causing PTSD for what purpose?
Speaker 2: The overarching goal, Martinez insists, tying back to mk ultra
projects that he says never really stopped, was broad spectrum behavior.
Speaker 1: Modification, okay, behavior modification.
Speaker 2: Like like maintaining government secrets, maybe using these traumatized individuals
to pass messages covertly facilitating sex slavery, which is horrific,
And even something called codification of information.
Speaker 1: Codification like programming someone embedding data.
Speaker 2: It sounds like it, doesn't it embedding instructions or information
within someone's psyche. Volume two apparently del deep into how
neuroscience was affecting culture, court cases, the mental health business.
He specifically calls.
Speaker 1: It a business interesting phrasing.
Speaker 2: And its connection to dissociative identity disorder the ID as
per the DSM. Five. Martinez claims, all this research was
quietly published, painting this incredibly detailed and disturbing picture of consciousness, behavior,
identity itself being systematically manipulated, and these extreme claims like
fake abductions really highlight the links these programs allegedly went to.
Speaker 1: It's a truly shilling picture, the idea of manipulating someone's
reality so profoundly, and out of this, out of understanding
this alleged depth of control, came a new concept, cognitive liberty.
Tell us about the Freedom of Thought Foundation.
Speaker 2: Right, So, Martinez states that after all this research and collaboration,
he and his colleagues formed the Freedom of Thought Foundation
five o'h one c three nonprofit okay, and its mission,
he emphasizes, was genuinely pioneering at the time. He claims
they were the first to do that, the first to
really try and educate the public about the importance of
cognitive liberty.
Speaker 1: Which means defying cognitive liberty for us. Based on his explanation, at.
Speaker 2: Its core, it's the fundamental right to your own thoughts,
your own identity, the sovereignty over your own brain, your
sovereign self, that basic inherent right to exist without being
controlled or co opted by outside forces, whether that's the
state or corporations.
Speaker 1: Oh right, we probably take for granted, assuming it's untouchable exactly.
Speaker 2: Martinez notes that back then, very few people were even
aware these kinds of manipulations were possible, let alone being
claimed to happen. The early group involved was small, but significant.
Colonel Fletcher Prouty.
Speaker 1: From the JFK investigation, that's.
Speaker 2: One, Colonel Tom Barton, Older Brewert himself and Martinez, and
they face this really complex ethical issue needing to sign
agreements with psychiatrists and psychologists why because many of their
clients were allegedly victims of these very programs. It highlights
the trauma, the sensitivity, the real world impact being claimed.
The Foundation was essentially created to address the societal fallout,
legal and ethical mess of neuroscience's alleged impact on US culture,
and to start a conversation about rights nobody had really
needed to define before.
Speaker 1: And this connects directly to why Martinez sounding the alarm
so loudly now. The common story is MK Ultra ended
in the seventies right after the hearing.
Speaker 2: That's the official narrative, yes, but Martinez explicitly challenges that.
He vehemently states it didn't just end.
Speaker 1: What does he say happen.
Speaker 2: His assertion is that it became even more robust, It evolved,
adapted with technology, and crucially, he says, we're in it
right now.
Speaker 1: Right now, so it never stopped, just changed form.
Speaker 2: That's his claim, a continuous, escalating evolution, and that's why
he feels compelled to come forward so publicly now. He
thinks that while movies might have made historical mind control
seem like, you know, a Cold.
Speaker 1: War relic, yeah, something in the past.
Speaker 2: What's happening now, in his view, is far more urgent,
far more pervasive, and may be harder for people to
grasp because it's woven into our daily lives, into our technology.
This claim of continuity sets the stage perfectly for what
he calls the modern extinction level event. It's presented as
a seamless evolution of those same programs, just with much
more powerful tools.
Speaker 1: Okay, So if the old programs mk Ultra and its
alleged successors were about secret experiments drugging people, manipulating individuals
in the shadows, what's the modern equivalent and why this
incredibly strong term extinction level event that feels like a huge,
terrifying jump.
Speaker 2: It is a massive lead, absolutely, but it's one James
Martinez directly connects to his very recent work. He reveals
he was asked to be the chief advisor on a
committee dealing specifically with brain computer interface technology PCI BCI.
Speaker 1: We hear that term more and more. What was this
committee focused on?
Speaker 2: Its relation to international technology standards? He describes these international
committees as incredibly important. There where representatives from nations worldwide
meet to decide the global standards for tech before it
gets commercialized, before it spread everywhere.
Speaker 1: Like standards for Wi Fi or USB ports, that sort
of thing.
Speaker 2: Exactly your phone, your toaster, They all follow standards agreed
upon in committees like these. But now, he says, this
same process is being applied to something infinitely more personal,
the direct interfacing of the human brain with computers, with AI,
even with quantum technology.
Speaker 1: Wow. So these committees aren't just technical not according to Martinez.
Speaker 2: He says, they are in effect shaping public policy around
this profound integration. They're deciding the future rules, the legal landscape.
The operational framework for BCIs globally and.
Speaker 1: That's where the extinction level event warning comes from. It's
tied to this standardization.
Speaker 2: Process that seems to be the core of his immediate alarm. Yes, yeah,
he sees this development, this push towards standardized, widespread BCI,
not just as technological progress, but is something far more fundamental,
potentially catastrophic.
Speaker 1: How catastrophic? What terms does he use?
Speaker 2: He delivers an incredibly stark warning. He characterizes this BCI
development as the end. He even goes so far as
to call it the decapitation of our relationship to God.
Speaker 1: That's incredibly strong language. Decapitation of our relationship to God.
Speaker 2: It is. He paints a picture of a future where
humans undergo a fundamental transformation, shifting from being carbon based
life forms biological to becoming cybernetic and ultimately silicon based
life forms.
Speaker 1: So a literal change in our physical biological nature.
Speaker 2: That's the implication, a complete redefinition of what it means
to be human. He views this alleged technological path with
immense gravity, framing it as an existential threat to our species.
Very nature.
Speaker 1: Okay, if this profound transformation is claimed to be underway,
how does it happen? Is it forced on us? Is
it like a Sci Fi scenario with mandatory implants, or
is it something else?
Speaker 2: The mechanism Martinez describes as unsettling because it sounds so plausible,
so familiar.
Speaker 1: Voluntary compliance voluntary compliance meaning we choose it.
Speaker 2: Essentially, yes, he warms that most people will walk right
into it, not even knowing that they're doing it or
want to do it. He even identifies a specific group
he thinks is particularly vulnerable, oh, younger generations. He claims
these younger people allegedly feel humanity has no hope, that
the future looks bleak, and so they're already willing, maybe
even eager, to fuse with this technology.
Speaker 1: A kind of techno optimism born from pessimism about humanity that.
Speaker 2: Seems to be his interpretation. It suggests a powerful societal
conditioning maybe or a widespread sense of resignation that makes
them receptive to something that for others might look like
a dystopian nightmare. It's not necessarily about overt force, but
about gradual, appealing, pervasive integration that people opt into step
by step.
Speaker 1: And this BCI tech it's not some isolated thing, is it.
The Source claims, it's woven into well everything.
Speaker 2: That's a critical point he really hammers home. He asserts
the BCI is or will be inextricably tied into virtually everything,
all warfare systems, all global banking systems, all health systems, critically,
all the ways we do commerce, how we move about,
how we interact in society.
Speaker 1: So unavoidable infrastructure completely.
Speaker 2: The ultimate consequence, he warns, is that if this goes unchecked,
you no longer are an organic, free will human being. Instead,
you are fused, tied into the.
Speaker 1: Cloud, fused into the cloud that paints its shilling picture,
complete digital enmeshment, individual autonomy, thought processes, maybe even our
biology just gone.
Speaker 2: Replaced, perhaps by a technologically augmented controlled existence. That's the
future he's warning against, obsolete as independent beings.
Speaker 1: When we hear extinction level event, most of us think
physical destruction, right, asteroids, nukes, plagues. But what does the
Source mean here, specifically in the context of BCI and
altering humans. It sounds like it's different, maybe more insidious.
Speaker 2: You're right, it's a crucial distinction he makes. Martinez clarifies
this isn't just about killing people, although he does mention
that as part of a larger claimed agenda.
Speaker 1: Okay, so population reduction is still part of.
Speaker 2: It, yes, but his primary focus, the core of the
extinction warning, seems to be about the fundamental alteration of
the human species. He outlines what he sees as a
two pronged approach.
Speaker 1: Two prongs. What are they?
Speaker 2: First? He talks about what he calls soft kill weaponry,
allegedly being used to reduce global population.
Speaker 1: Soft kill meaning.
Speaker 2: Meaning He claims it's designed to be invisible, undetectable, making
deaths look like they happen from natural causes, existing health problems,
so the groups behind it can avoid blame. He doesn't
specify how these supposedly work, but the implication is silent,
pervasive population control.
Speaker 1: Okay, that's prong one. What's the second?
Speaker 2: The second, and arguably more central to his main thesis,
is biological and cognitive control. And this is where the
claims get even more unsettling, if that's possible. He states
that some human bodies are allegedly being used as energy
chargers for the cloud, especially those who, in his words,
have received the kill shot quel shot.
Speaker 1: What does he mean by that? Is he talking about vaccines? Nanotechnology?
Speaker 2: He strongly implies nanotechnology. Yes, microscopic devices inside the body
may be introduced via injection, ingestion, skin contact. He doesn't
specify the delivery mechanism fully, but the idea is these
nanodevices could interface with and somehow power a global cloud.
Speaker 1: Network, turning human biological energy into a resource like the matrix.
Speaker 2: The comparison is hard to avoid, isn't it. That's the
claim humans as batteries for this new technological system.
Speaker 1: That is truly chilling. Okay, but what if someone hasn't
received this alleged kill shot. Are they safe from control
or does the risk remain?
Speaker 2: According to Martinez, the risk absolutely persists even without that
specific nanotech integration. He claims there's an ability to transmit
synthetic telepathy.
Speaker 1: Synthetic telepathy sending thoughts into someone's head.
Speaker 2: That's what it sounds like, influencing thoughts communications directly into
the mind, dissolving the privacy of your own inner world.
Beyond that, he asserts the capacity to alter moods remotely
and even induce what he calls modules of schizophrenia.
Speaker 1: Induce schizophrenia remotely, essentially generating severe mental health conditions through
external technological means.
Speaker 2: The overall objective, he states, is to dissolve the boundaries
between your inner world and your outer world, blurring the
line between your own thoughts and externally imposed ones.
Speaker 1: Making it impossible to know what's real, what's you.
Speaker 2: Exactly, And he poses this really chilling thought experiment to
illustrate the gravity. If I want to get rid of you,
I can kill you and then you're dead dead. But
if I also want to get rid of you, I'll
just alter you. Alter you, meaning, he suggests, includes the
ability to accelerate death through complete control over your mental state,
your physical body, your nervous system, effectively making someone cease
to be themselves long before they physically die, a living puppet,
eventually disposable. It's not just control, it's redefining existence than
ending it.
Speaker 1: This sounds like a massive, globally coordinated agenda. Is there
a public face to this or is it all hidden
all covert ops.
Speaker 2: Martinez points directly at the World Economic Forum, the WEF.
He describes it as the public arm of groups who
have allegedly decided to drastically reduce the global population and
completely alter what it means to.
Speaker 1: Be human the WEF. That's a big claim any specifics.
Speaker 2: He specifically references public statements made by figures like Noah
Yuval Harari, who is a prominent advisor to the WEF. Haerrari,
the author of Sapiens Yes Horari, has openly talked about
humans as hackable animals. Martinez claims this public discourse is
part of the agenda preparing us for what he interprets
as the separation or division of your divine incarnation.
Speaker 1: Divine incarnation. What does he mean by that?
Speaker 2: He seems to me the removal of our innate connection
to Godhood or our higher spiritual self, our soul. Perhaps
the ultimate goals Martinez describes it is creating a synthetic, different,
silicon based type of human fused with technology.
Speaker 1: Whether through chips or behavior modification.
Speaker 2: Exactly, either chipped physically or controlled via sophisticated behavioral tools
that reshape consciousness itself. He sees the WEF as legitimizing
and publicizing parts of an agenda that would otherwise stay hidden.
Speaker 1: Okay, this is where it gets really unsettling on a
daily level. If this is happening, who are the key players,
the corporations, the entities allegedly pushing this extinction level event forward,
and how does it manifest in our everyday lives.
Speaker 2: Martinez directly identifies several major industries. He calls them out
as aiding and abetting this agenda. Which industries the entire
computer industry, the cell phone industry, the cell tower industry,
and the satellite industry all named as key facilitators.
Speaker 1: Basically an entire digital.
Speaker 2: Infrastructure pretty much. His argument is that for these pervasive
control programs to work, subjects be fully invested and almost cybernetic,
with all their.
Speaker 1: Devices invested in cybernetic and.
Speaker 2: He points to something we all see as evidence of
this voluntary compliance, people spending eight to ten hours a
day with their faces buried in their phones.
Speaker 1: That sounds about right for many people.
Speaker 2: Sadly, he states, this constant, immersive interaction isn't harmless. It
has already profoundly altered cultural behavior in biology, and this widespread,
almost unconscious engagement is laying the groundwork, he believes for
deeper integration. It's subtle but pervasive control through technology we
readily embrace.
Speaker 1: He names one company specifically doesn't mean a major data
analytics firm with a very serious accusation.
Speaker 2: Yes, he does, Palantier Technologies. Martinez levels a specific and
really skating accusation against them.
Speaker 1: What does he accuse him of.
Speaker 2: Aiding and abetting the end of our species by designing
and implementing what he claims is the biggest, most gigantic
surveillance system ever conceived.
Speaker 1: The end of our species? Wow, and the consequence of
this surveillance.
Speaker 2: System he states it plainly, the end of your free will,
the end of your own cognitive liberty, full stop. He
also states his firm intention, along with others, to sue
Pell and Teer and its co founder Peter.
Speaker 1: Teel Teel the tech billionaire, Yes, and.
Speaker 2: Also Elon Musk for their alleged involvement in pushing this
technological transformation. He clearly sees their specific technologies as central
to this alleged erosion of human freedom.
Speaker 1: Suing feel and Musk. That's ambitious. It feels like this
is escalating potentially towards legal battles. Are there any laws
or legal precedence starting to emerge that even touch on
these issues seems like law is always way behind tech.
Speaker 2: He does highlight one interesting, very recent development, new laws
passed by the governor of California.
Speaker 1: Oh what do they protect?
Speaker 2: Specifically protecting somebody's individual brain in their personality.
Speaker 1: Brain and personality. Why now?
Speaker 2: He explains. The trigger is the growing reality of people
cloning their personalities, cloning their voices and putting them into.
Speaker 1: The Internet, like deep fakes, but more fundamental, cloning a personality.
Speaker 2: That's the implication. Imagine your voice, your personality, perfectly replicated
and used for fraud, misinformation, anything without your consent or knowledge.
These California laws are an attempt to grapple with that
emerging threat.
Speaker 1: A necessary step, it sounds like, perhaps.
Speaker 2: However, Martinez stresses the much bigger problem. There's no law
in anything in the world prepared to deal with this,
meeting the broader issues of BCI, cognitive liberty, synthetic telepathy,
the things he's warning about. This massive legal vacuum, in
his view, leaves individual rights incredibly vulnerable globally. It's a
race against time and the laws lagging way behind.
Speaker 1: We've covered the alleged intent, the chilling goals, even some
specific corporate players named by the source. But how is
this transformation supposedly being executed day to day? Our source
claims the tech we embrace daily as part of this
larger unseen control system.
Speaker 2: Right. Martinez doubles down on the idea that mk Ulter
didn't end, It just became even more robust. It morphed
adapted to modern tech infrastructure. Shed it's purely clandestine skin maybe.
Speaker 1: And corporations are helping this evolution.
Speaker 2: He claims. Corporations across the computer, cell phone sells, tower
satellite industries are actively aiding it. The core premise, again
is that for these control programs to work widely, subjects
be fully invested in almost cybernetic with all their devices.
Speaker 1: That phrase again, invested and cybernetic, and.
Speaker 2: He points again to that visible behavior people spending eight
ten hours a day faces and phones. He argues, this
isn't just a bad habit, it has altered cultural behavior
and biology, affecting attention interaction. He sees this widespread use
as voluntarily complying with the conditions needed for the system.
Speaker 1: So our tech habits are, in this view, paving the.
Speaker 2: Way unwittingly serving a larger alleged purpose, its control through integration,
adopted willingly.
Speaker 1: And he also talks about weapons weapons you can't see,
allegedly being used on the public. Now, that sounds like
sci fi warfare, but he claims its current.
Speaker 2: Yes. He speaks extensively about neurostrike weapons allegedly targeting the
brain and specifically what he calls targeted individuals.
Speaker 1: Targeted individuals. Tis we hear that term in certain circles.
Speaker 2: Indeed, and he claims there's even been congressional testimony on this,
suggesting it's not purely fringe, it's entered official discourse at
some level. He points to a specific lawsuit in Texas
filed by Attorney Anna Toledo as evidence of these weapons
impact on real people designated as targets.
Speaker 1: Why would they test weapons on the pup?
Speaker 2: His explanation is chillingly pragmatic. To perfect weaponry or perfect
a system, you need to test it. He asserts, these
systems are being tested publicly using electricity. Electricity by leveraging
the fact that humans are fundamentally electric beings. Our heartbeats,
brain waves, nerve signals, all electrical, These weapons, he implies,
exploit that inherent electrical nature to reduce effects, manipulate biology
or cognition.
Speaker 1: Okay, that's disturbing, and this connects to his points about connectivity.
Right on, pagers up to six G conditioning us somehow exactly.
Speaker 2: He lays out a clear deliberate progression in technology. Pager's
first creating an anticipatory state, always checking, waiting for info.
Speaker 1: Right, I remember that feeling.
Speaker 2: Then mobile phones evolving quickly to the powerful smartphones we
have now providing instant connection. He claims this relentless speed
up created an effect of instantaneousness, instantaneousness which he argues
has profoundly altered our central nervous system, our cognition, how
we interact with everything, every one. Our brains are literally
wired differently.
Speaker 1: Now, he suggests in five G fits into this.
Speaker 2: How he views current five G networks as micro escalation
or training wheels, specifically designed he claims to prepare the
public for future synthetic telepathy direct mind to mind or
mind to machine communication without devices.
Speaker 1: Training wheels for telepathy.
Speaker 2: Wow, and his warning is stark. When six G comes
in and it's common, We're done. He sees it as
a systematic step by step conditioning each this new tech
level makes the next step of brain computer interfacing seem natural, inevitable,
maybe even cool, blurring the lines until we're fully integrated.
Speaker 1: If this agenda is so pervasive, so global, with such
huge implications, why don't we hear about it from politicians,
from mainstream sources. Why does it feel so hidden? The
source points to a historical event, doesn't he and this
idea of a breakaway civilization.
Speaker 2: Yes, this breakaway civilization concept is central to Martinez's explanation
for the secrecy. He defines it as some group or
entity that essentially split off from the public, operating with
advanced tech and knowledge far beyond what's commonly.
Speaker 1: Known outside of normal government oversight.
Speaker 2: Completely outside, he claims, and he links its emergence directly
to a specific piece of legislation, the National Security Act
of nineteen forty seven.
Speaker 1: Nineteen forty seven, right around Roswell, the start of the CIA.
Speaker 2: Exactly, he emphasizes. It was passed quickly, secretly around those
pivotal moments. His claim is that this act chopped everything
in half. It created a legal and operational war all
stopping the free flow of information between this secret group
and the public, including elected officials.
Speaker 1: So a deliberate split in reality.
Speaker 2: That's his assertion. He says, we don't even live in
a reality that's cognitively close to where we're at technologically
or anything else, because of this bifurcation, a fundamental split.
Speaker 1: And this breakaway group kept advancing in secret.
Speaker 2: He posits that after Operation paper Clip brought over scientists,
this group perfected these advanced sciences covertly, and they've allegedly
used the National Security Clause ever since to hide their activities,
creating a permanent veil of secrecy. Information just doesn't flow out.
Speaker 1: Who are the architects of control? Then? Is it just
this breakaway group or others?
Speaker 2: He stresses, it's not just the CIA, not one single entity.
He implicates multiple groups. He explicitly names organizations like the
World Economic Forum, DARBA.
Speaker 1: The Defense Research Agency.
Speaker 2: Yes, the Department of Defense, military groups in Europe, even
historically the Soviets. He paints a picture of widespread, perhaps
sometimes competitive, sometimes cooperative involvement, saying everyone's involved in.
Speaker 1: This, and the goal in warfare has changed dramatically.
Speaker 2: He argues, it's not about bombs and occupation anymore. Primarily,
it's more sophisticated. If you want to take over a country. Yeah,
take it over and then you run their minds. That's
what you do. Mental cognitive conquest far more insidious.
Speaker 1: And this leads to another really unsettling connection he makes
the current mental health crisis. Is he suggesting this is
somehow manufactured a result of all this?
Speaker 2: Yes, he makes that direct and very alarming connection. He
asserts the crisis, especially in the US, citing rising anti
depressant prescriptions even for young kids, is manufacturing so a
factored by what not just social factors, but technology those
synthesize electromagnetic weapons. He mentioned pervasive Wi Fi, constant electricity
exposure in dense cities, and crucially, cell phone use from
a very young age.
Speaker 1: He thinks these things biologically alter us.
Speaker 2: Yes, he argues, they alter the brain, disrupt the central
nervous system, impact cognitive behavior decision making. He observes young
people immersed in instantaneousness develop zero attention, their nervous systems
operate totally differently from older.
Speaker 1: Generations, and the withdrawal fits when phones are taken away.
Speaker 2: He points to that as observable evidence of a profound
biological and psychological alteration. He frames this whole situation as
the spiritual fight of all fights. He calls it the
takeover of the brain, explicitly echoing neuroscientist Jose Delgado's prediction
decades ago of a coming psycho civilized civilization.
Speaker 1: Psycho civilized controlled through the mind.
Speaker 2: Exactly, not by force, but by manipulating the mind itself.
In Martinez's view, the mental health crisis isn't an unfortunate byproduct,
It's a deliberate outcome of these unseen technological forces.
Speaker 1: Okay, So, putting all this together, the alleged history, the
current tech threats, the scale of it all, what was
the specific trigger? Why is James Martinez coming forward so
urgently right now? Involved for decades? You said, what pushed
him over the edge?
Speaker 2: He explains the critical reason. The catalyst was his recent
experience as chief advisor on that BRING Computer Interface Committee.
What he says he discovered there was profoundly shocking to him.
Speaker 1: The BCI Standards Committee. Again, what did he find that
was so shocking it forced his hand after all this time?
Speaker 2: Well, first, he claims the committee, supposedly a US initiative,
wasn't actually financially organized or controlled by the US government. Second,
he alleges it was being actively blocked from properly participating
on the international.
Speaker 1: Stage, blocked by whom.
Speaker 2: He doesn't specify who was blocking, but the implication is
powerful forces were hindering US input. But the most alarming
discovery for him, the absolute deal breaker, was finding out
the US Committee was effectively taking orders from China regarding
BCI standards.
Speaker 1: Taking orders from China on BCI standards, That's his.
Speaker 2: Claim, which immediately led him to conclude this isn't right
at all. He asserts China is running us in this
air head, dictating global rules for this critical future tech,
apparently without proper US oversight or leadership. This perceives surrender
of control over a critical technology to a strategic rival
That seems to be the immediate national security threat that
propelled him into the public eye.
Speaker 1: And BCI tech with the capabilities Martinez alleges, has massive
national security implications. Doesn't it beyond just standards?
Speaker 2: Oh? Absolutely, He highlights critical infrastructure related to national security
is deeply embedded in BCI, advanced weapons systems surveillance.
Speaker 1: Most specifically, he gives.
Speaker 2: Chilling examples he claims are already happening. Drones being run
by the brain not just remote control, but direct neural interface,
and individuals writing code with their brain on the computer
in lifetime on operations.
Speaker 1: Writing code with thought during live operations.
Speaker 2: Imagine the speed, the advantage. It's a total paradigm shift
in warfare intelligence control, which makes the alleged subservience of
the Standards Committee to China seem incredibly dangerous.
Speaker 1: From his perspective, he actually spoke to someone involved in this,
someone writing code with their brain.
Speaker 2: Yes, he recounts that he tried to understand their pathology.
As he put it, Who were they before? Was it voluntary?
Did they feel in control of their own mind? What
kind of security agreements were involved?
Speaker 1: Did he get answers?
Speaker 2: Very few, He says, the individual was extremely guarded, wouldn't
say who they worked for, just mumbled something about a
joint operation between the US and somebody else.
Speaker 1: Vague, very vague.
Speaker 2: And the really unsettling implication, Martinez draws is that this
kind of deep brain computer interfacing isn't just for spies
or super soldiers anymore. He believes it's becoming quite common
for average people, too, woven into daily life in ways
we don't realize, making the threat pervasive and hard to
even see.
Speaker 1: This is all so deeply disturbing, the history, the tech,
the alleged control. But Martinez isn't just dropping warnings, is he?
He offers a strategy something individuals can actually do.
Speaker 2: Yes, he does emphasize a primary and urgent solution and
action people can take.
Speaker 1: What is it?
Speaker 2: He asserts that the most important thing someone can do
if they suspect they're a victim of directed energy weapons
or have unexplained health issues personality shifts, believe they're being
influenced by these texts, and crucially, if they have proof,
is to be first in line to make a declaration.
Speaker 1: For that, make a declaration. What does that mean? Practically?
Where do you make it?
Speaker 2: He specifies filing declarations in the county Recorder's office and
with the UCCC, the Uniform Commercial.
Speaker 1: Code, the UCCC that governs commercial transactions, right like Lin's
on property.
Speaker 2: Exactly, it's a public registry. By filing there, Martinez suggests,
you're publicly asserting your rights over your own cognitive self,
your mind, your biology, almost like property rights staking acclaim.
So the purpose is the purpose is declaring all my
cognitive rights, formally stating on public record that if violations
occur anywhere any time, claims will be filed based on
this prior declaration. He says, he's done this himself.
Speaker 1: Why is this necessary? Is it because the laws aren't
there yet?
Speaker 2: Precisely, he stresses again there's no law anywhere in the
world that is prepared to deal with this comprehensively. So
these declarations are an attempt to fill that legal vacuum
to establish standing. And he offers a stark legal warning,
which is, if you become fused with another technology, you
might lose your legal standing altogether. You can't be in
court because you're no longer human anyway. You're owned, You're
a product, an incredibly grim outlook. So asserting your rights
now before that point is paramount in his view.
Speaker 1: So he sees this heading straight for the courts, a
legal battle for human sovereignty.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, he states, with complete certainty, this issue is going
to be dealt with in the courts. He mentions his
own international efforts, meeting top judges and scientists in Europe,
suggesting a growing global awareness, at least in some circles.
Speaker 1: And he predicts a crisis in the US, yes.
Speaker 2: One of the biggest mental health crises ever, describing it
as horrible, horrible, and he links it back to that
voluntary compliance caring clicking agree on terms and conditions we
never read for phones, apps, credit cards. We all do that,
and he argues that's how companies potentially evade responsibility for
damages caused by the tech. He directly targets pallanteer Teal
and Musk for future lawsuits. He dismisses their public claims
of using tech for medical good as potentially disingenuous.
Speaker 1: Arguing tech is often used for evil, or.
Speaker 2: At least that its potential for harm is consistently downplayed
or ignored while its benefits are highlighted. History shows technology
is a double edged sword, he contends.
Speaker 1: And this leads to his final urgent warning about the
need to speak up to rebut not just passively accept things.
Speaker 2: Yes, this is a core message. He observes that those
allegedly running these programs are in his words, mentally ill
disassociated people. He really laments the lack of public challenge
to figures.
Speaker 1: Like Noah Harari who go unrebutted on stages.
Speaker 2: Exactly everybody bows to them, but nobody robuts, he says,
and he invokes that critical legal maxim. Silence is acquiescence.
Acquiescence is agreement. There's no ignorance under the law, meaning.
Speaker 1: If you don't speak out, you're legally agreeing.
Speaker 2: That's the principle he's applying. His warning is blunt. You're
not going to get second chances for this shit. He
directly tells the listener, you're not free. You have to
make declarations that you.
Speaker 1: Are free and understand your legal standing.
Speaker 2: Yes, understand who you are in a court of law too,
because that's where everything is going to end up. He argues,
you can't stop these powerful companies unless you sue them,
force discovery, get the information into the public domain for discussion.
Speaker 1: He doesn't have much faith in elected officials handling.
Speaker 2: This, not at all. He claims, they don't know shit
about this stuff. They're twenty years behind. He believes the
public must force the conversation, demand accountability through legal action
and public pressure.
Speaker 1: So what does this all mean for you listening right
now and for us? This idea presented by the source
that our own choices are seemingly harmless, voluntary compliance might
be paving a path towards a future where our very
humanity is redefined. It's a really challenging concept to grapple with.
Speaker 2: It really is.
Speaker 1: It forces us to think hard about how much we
truly value our inner world, our mental privacy, our sovereign selves.
This deep dive into James Martinez's claim certainly paints a
picture where being a passive spectator just isn't an option anymore.
Speaker 2: No, it really demands engagement, or at least conscious consideration.
Speaker 1: It asks us to confront some deeply uncomfortable possibilities about
where technology might be taking us and what our role
is in that journey.
Speaker 2: And the implications discussed today are profound. From the alleged
historical manipulations, the faked realities to this potential future of
brain computer interfaces and what Martinez terms an extinction level
event for organic humanity is presented as more than just
a tech shift.
Speaker 1: It's framed as a fundamental spirit, virtual, ethical, and legal battle.
Speaker 2: A battle for self ownership, for the very definition of
being human. And it raises that critical question echoing in
the silence every time we click agree without reading. In
a world where silence can be interpreted as agreement, what
declarations are you prepared to make for your own cognitive liberty?
Speaker 1: A powerful thought to leave you with our source for today.
James Martinez can be found, according to the material on
James Martinez Media on Patreon and also on x formerly
Twitter under the handle Electric one to eleven Media, and he.
Speaker 2: Apparently offers a template for making those declarations.
Speaker 1: He advocates for yes, emphasizing that taking that legal step is,
in his view, crucial for reclaiming personal power in this
unfolding situation. We encourage you to research these concepts further
look into his work if you choose, and consider the
actions he proposes. Thank you for joining us on this
deep dive into what our source calls the coming shift
in human consciousness.