"The Stack"

A Case Study in Cybernetic Totalitarianism

We have moved into an epoch in which the misuse of science has created a society that is already close to technocracy. The very language – the dehumanized jargon – in which the powerful talk about the wars they wage, or powerful companies talk about the people frankly makes me vomit.  

- Stafford Beer, “Cybernetic Praxis in Government” (1973)

Self-described technocrat Benjamin Bratton opens his 2016 technocratic tome, The Stack, with an allied reference to war criminal Hillary Clinton.¹ Bratton recalls that in her 2013 address to the Council on Foreign Relations, the former U.S. Secretary of State called for “‘a new architecture for this new world.’”² According to Clinton, global information systems are the engine driving the formation of a New World Order. And as a NWO cybernetic theorist, Bratton celebrates the power of “planetary-scale computation,” arguing that it heralds a new and welcome mode of techno-evolutionary global governance in which technology ineluctably emerges as sovereign over all spheres of existence.³

“Platform sovereignty,” as Bratton names his proposed principle of global techno-governance, “is where the costume changes of User into citizen and citizen into User are worked out.”⁴ The euphoric vision Bratton shares “sees a technological totality as the armature of the social itself. It does not focus on computation in the service of governance, or in resistance to governance, but rather on computation as governance.”⁵ The material/architectural apparatus in and through which the citizen is converted into a User and society into “a technological totality” is described by Bratton as “an accidental megastructure called The Stack”⁶; and its temporality is theorized using techno-animistic and Darwinian ideological tropes:

[T]he computational city activates human-object networks that are both new and primordial at once. You should anticipate the rapid coevolution of urban behavior and urban software, such that the mobile handsets themselves and their capacities will appear to be evolving more in relation to each other than to us. This fast Darwinism of the device will make it seem as though we are their media, and not the other way around. Such appearances may prove to be true. The explosion of hyperlocal and hypervisual information will both amplify and multiply the intensities of social interaction, but will also reveal the scale and complexity of communication between nonhumans (animals, ecologies, infrastructures), such that at just the moment at which our collective urban cultural cognition comes online, it will be exposed as a hopelessly outflanked minority discourse, a dying language even.⁷

That our dying languages also betoken dying species – notably, the death of humanity as we know it – is everywhere implicit and explicit in Bratton’s “hyper” this, “hyper” that, hyper-dystopian ideological construct of an historical trajectory that “accidentally” invents an algorithmic species said to simultaneously evolve with and train our cultural systems.⁸

But what exactly is Bratton advocating? What sort of political society is it that dictatorially declares and institutes the conversion of citizens into “accidentally” evolved Users whose sociality is mediated by “The Stack,” or what Bratton alternatively refers to as both a “diagrammatic image of totality” and “the machine as state”?

In a word, it is technocracy; in two word, it is cybernetic totalitarianism.

In a point that bears emphasis, Bratton forecasts the inevitable evolutionary unfolding of cybernetic totalitarianism as occurring in response to “the permanent emergency of ecological collapse.” He therefore embraces emerging virus and climate change alarmist ideology, since in response to such emergencies, two key components of Bratton’s technocratic vision of the future are alleged to be justified: “panoptic surveillance platforms” and “the big data biopolitics of population medicine.”

I will return to Bratton’s advocacy for panoptic surveillance and big data biopolitics and will show in this briefing precisely how state-of-emergency biopolitics allows for the cybernetic coupling of panoptic surveillance platforms and big data population “medicine.” Through these, citizens qua “users” are to be biodigitally bound to the state qua “machine” via biodigital identification, Central Bank Digital Currencies, and the Internet of Bio-Nano Things.

(A full PDF version of this briefing is available. Click here to access.)

Adapt or Die

“What if effective citizenship in a polity were granted,” the NWO cybernetic theorist muses, “not according to categorical juridical identity, but as a shifting status derived from any user’s generic relationship to the machinic systems that bind that polity to itself?”⁹ Importantly, vaccination status is one such “shifting status” of identity for which Bratton has since campaigned (I will return to this point below). Although he frames his question of political identity as a hypothetical, in the context of the full 500-page book, Bratton’s hypothetical reads more like a program to be implemented than it does an upsy-daisy “accident” of evolution.

Indeed, a major theme of The Stack is that the destiny of the digital “‘city’ wrapping around the planet” that it theorizes is in the hands of the technocrats whose evolutionary mandate it is to design it. It is they who are responsible for programming, for example, which User is granted “one type of provisional sovereignty and others another type, some incarcerating Users and others offering lines of flight.”¹⁰ But then who are these technocrats, designers, and programmers who would seize command and control power over every aspect of our digitized lives?

In a 2014 essay that critically appropriates earlier iterations of Bratton’s theory of The Stack, Tiziana Terranova notes that the latter’s organizational structure “involves the overlapping of national governments…transnational bodies (the IMF, the WTO, the European Banks and NGOs of various types), and corporations such as Google, Facebook, Apple, Amazon, etc.”¹¹

Such an organizational structure is similarly reflected in the public-private partnerships that are promoted, politically coordinated, and economically planned through networks like the World Economic Forum. It is clear that Bratton is ideologically aligned with these interlocking powers when he writes that “The Stack, like any other technology of such scale and significance, both constitutes a new political-geographical order and enforces an existing cultural-economic order already in place.”

We may anticipate that to some significant extent, the dovetailing of the future evolution of both [state and market] agendas will transform one another and may even allow one to fully envelop the other: neither state as machine nor market as machine because the platform is state, market, and machine at once.¹²

And as for states which would prefer not to betray the people, or which the people might attempt to capture for democracy, Bratton issues an unsympathetic warning that “the option may prove to be, quite literally, adapt or die.”¹³

Biodigital Convergence

The term “cybernetics” is formed from the Greek word meaning “steersman” and denotes a field of experimental research that was first outlined in Norbert Wiener’s 1948 Cybernetics: or, Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine. A pet project of the Rockefellers, its aim, both then and now, is to merge man with machine for purposes of control or “effective governance.” More recently, the fundamentals of the merger have been reimagined and are being engineered – or “steered” – at the bio-nano level. “Biodigital convergence,” as it has been dubbed by some,¹⁴ is to be total, including human brains, bodies, and central nervous systems. As Bratton anticipated in 2016, both state and market are dovetailing to steer humanity into totalizing corporate-state-machine control platforms with adapt-or-die biopolitical applications. The NWO steering bodies for biodigital convergence are interlocking national governments, corporations, banks, transnational state apparatuses like the United Nations, and shareholder groups.¹⁵

“Digital technologies and biological systems are beginning to combine and merge in ways that could be profoundly disruptive to our assumptions about society, the economy, and our bodies. We call this the biodigital convergence” (https://horizons.gc.ca/en/2020/02/11/exploring-biodigital-convergence/).

And so nearly seventy years after the science of cybernetics was first outlined, an ascendant ensemble of NWO revolutionaries – including Bratton, as one of their theorists – are enthusing over the imminent realization of the very evil of which its founder, Norbert Wiener, warned:

Long before Nagasaki and the public awareness of the atomic bomb, it had occurred to me that we were here in the presence of another social potentiality of unheard-of importance for good and for evil….

As we have seen, there are those who hope that the good of a better understanding of man and society which is offered by this new field of work may anticipate and outweigh the incidental contribution we are making to the concentration of power (which is always concentrated, by its very conditions of existence, in the hands of the most unscrupulous). I write in 1947, and I am compelled to say that it is a very slight hope.¹⁶

The evil of which Wiener cautioned has been critically noted by others as well. For example, in reference to the 1946-1953 Macy Conferences in cybernetics, Executive Intelligence Review expressed concern over what it referred to as “its participants’ demonic drive to create the ultimate engineered society, based on the fusion of man and machine.”¹⁷

Constitutive of such a drive is the NWO vanguard’s self-aggrandizing perception that the populations to be subjugated through biodigital convergence are as cattle to be herded and controlled through mass psychology. Indeed, a compelling piece of evidence to justify Wiener’s premonition of scientific evil always afoot is “Lord” Bertrand Russell’s The Impact of Science on Society (1953). In it Russell outlined a path to technocracy, or “scientific dictatorship,” through mass psychology. Russell’s anticipations in 1953, as cybernetics was in its infancy, would coalesce with Bratton’s anticipations in 2016, in a world on the verge of biodigital convergence:

Physiology and psychology afford fields for scientific technique which still await development…. [But] I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is mass psychology. Mass psychology is, scientifically speaking, not a very advanced study, and so far its professors have not been in universities: they have been advertisers, politicians, and, above all, dictators. This study is immensely useful to practical men, whether they wish to become rich or to acquire the government... Its importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of  propaganda. Of these the most influential is what is called “education.” Religion plays a part, though a diminishing one; the press, the cinema, and the radio play an increasing part. What is essential in mass psychology is the art of persuasion…. It may be hoped that in time anybody will be able to persuade anybody of anything if he can catch the patient young and is provided by the State with money and equipment.

This subject will make great strides when it is taken up by scientists under a scientific dictatorship…. The social psychologists of the future will have a number of classes of school children on whom they will try different methods of producing an unshakable conviction that snow is black. Various results will soon be arrived at. First, that the influence of home is obstructive. Second, that not much can be done unless indoctrination begins before the age of ten. Third, that verses set to music and repeatedly intoned are very effective. Fourth, that the opinion that snow is white must be held to show a morbid taste for eccentricity. But I anticipate. It is for future scientists to make these maxims precise and discover exactly how much it costs per head to make children believe that snow is black, and how much less it would cost to make them believe it is dark gray.¹⁸

Recall that as part of his machine-as-state technofascist proposal, Benjamin Bratton advocates for panoptic surveillance and big data biopolitics. In 2022, a former professor of mine, whose name appears in the Acknowledgements of The Stack, informed me that (like himself) Bratton is a vociferous proponent of the medical dictatorship introduced worldwide in 2020. Indeed, the medical dictatorship – which is ongoing – would seem to be the realization of the scientific dictatorship anticipated by Russell, and as such provides an opportune segue into installation of a big data biosurveillance apparatus envisioned as part of Bratton’s cybernetic control grid.

First, through mass psychology, a scientific dictatorship conditions humanity to believe lies and behave as sheep. That is, first MindWar “truths” are deployed to form a “moral community.”¹⁹

The mass conditioning of humanity through the MindWar epidemic has paved the way toward permanent medical marshal law and the worldwide implementation of a CCP-style One World biofascist police state. Biofascism overlaps entirely with technofascism insofar as both treat human populations as data aggregates to be cybernetically integrated with machines through biotech such as biometric sensors, brain-machine interfaces,²⁰ neuro-psychopharmacologics, neuro-sensory augmentation devices,²¹ programmable nanotech, and intravenously administered biocompatible near-infrared quantum dots used for biodigital identification.

The infrastructure for biodigital identification has been built, and the sociopolitical conditions necessary for its “activation” have been MindWar engineered. As pertains to the infrastructure, a NewsRX Vaccine Weekly Report dated January 1, 2020 states that intradermal quantum dots “delivered with a vaccine” can be used to reliably “encode the medical history of a patient,” with records accessible through a smartphone linked via the QDs. Funding for this experimental biosurveillance research unsurprisingly came from NWO steering bodies, including the National Science Foundation, U.S. Department of Energy, National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, National Natural Science Foundation of China, and Youth Innovation Promotion Association of the Chinese Academy of Sciences.²²

World Bank ID4D: “The need to close coverage and quality gaps in ID and civil registration has only been made more   urgent by the COVID-19 pandemic.”

Many patents likewise feature biodigital identification technology. For example, Patent No. US 11,107,588 B2 (August 31, 2021) “comprises a plurality of electronic devices comprising instructions to generate an ID…. Then, a score is generated based on a plurality of such received IDs…to generate a prediction of likelihood of a subject transmitting…[a] pathogen.”²³ Or Patent No. US 2016/0178652 A1 (June 23, 2016), which links “self-adapting, scalable, and communicating sensor platforms that are further capable of autonomous and/or cognitive action” with “biomedical sensor platforms, bio-molecular sensor platforms, electronics sensor platforms, communications sensor platforms, information processing sensor platforms, and the like.”²⁴

Korean-owned Patent No. KR20170090373A “relates to a mind control system for controlling a human using a brain wave map and a genetic map,” and is expected to be used for “financial transactions” and “personal identification”:

According to the present invention, the mind control system comprises: a nano-electronic chip (NEC) inserted or attached to a human body to transmit and receive a wireless signal; at least one nano-biosensor (NBS) for transmitting an electrical signal generated from the NEC to nerve cells and human cells, and embedded or connected to the NEC for sensing biometric information; and a main super computer (MSC) for transmitting the wireless signal to the NEC to arbitrarily control the nerve cells and genes of the human body…. Also, the mind control system of the present invention is expected to be used for trading means and financial transactions including confirmation of personal identification.²⁵

As this patent indicates, with the infrastructure readied and the demonic drive moving us full-speed ahead, some humans (or “transhumans”) may soon be biodigitally linked to their financial transactions through a “mind control system.” Indeed, Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) managed by BlackRock²⁶ and the Bank for International Settlements are currently being planned by Central Banks around the world, including in Canada and the U.S.²⁷ In this scenario, a User’s biometric data score will determine whether or not they are eligible to receive cryptocurrency to access/afford basic goods and services, as outlined in Bill Gates’s appropriately numbered 2020 Patent WO 2020/060606 A1:

Human body activity associated with a task provided to a user may be used in a mining process of a cryptocurrency system. A server may provide a task to a device of a user which is communicatively coupled to the server. A sensor communicatively coupled to or comprised in the device of the user may sense body activity of the user. Body activity data may be generated based on the sensed body activity of the user. The cryptocurrency system communicatively coupled to the device of the user may verify if the body activity data satisfies one or more conditions set by the cryptocurrency system, and award cryptocurrency to the user whose body activity data is verified.²⁸

Through such adapt-or-die biopolitical interventions, NWO steering bodies aim to fully integrate human populations into a totalitarian “machine as state” cybernetic prison in which, recalling Bratton, some Users will be granted “one type of provisional sovereignty and others another type, some incarcerating Users and others offering lines of flight,” as the NWO vanguard sees fit.

The plan to implement a biodigital surveillance and control system worldwide has a military history. In 2012, U.S. war criminal Barack Obama ratified the DOD’s National Strategy for Biosurveillance.²⁹ The Strategy for Biosurveillance points back to the U.S. National Reconnaissance Office’s panoptic satellite surveillance project, titled “CORONA” (1960-1972; declassified 1995),³⁰ and forward to biosurveillance interventions accomplished through a second iteration of project “CORONA,” this time under the guise of a public health emergency.

It is disputed what is contained in the project CORONA injections administered in the U.S. by the DOD starting in 2021. A plausible hypothesis is that they contain synthetic biotechnology intended to biodigitally link human brains and bodies to the NWO cybernetic control grid.

Undeclared nanocontamination has been found in “vaccines” prior to 2021,³¹ and numerous studies have found undeclared nanostructures in the project CORONA injections as well.³² Here I cite two especially well-researched and comprehensive studies on the question of CORONA injection contents, both published in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research.

First, in 2021, D. Broudy and Valerie Kyrie report:

Incontrovertible evidence has now made clear that much of what has been perceived publicly about the story of SARSCoV-2 and the pharmaceutical remedies offered (then mandated) was/is part of a sophisticated international fabrication of unprecedented proportion, depth, and deception. The origins of the virus, the approved testing regime, the flawed predictive models of spread and mortality, associated social-distancing mandates, and so-called vaccines and their claimed efficacy and safety, all point to a coordinated effort to manufacture public fear and hysteria so as to propagate and normalize transhumanist interventions in healthcare and human biology. This article begins with the simple question of how adjuvants in traditional vaccines are theorized to work and proceeds to analyze how the new injectable mRNA platforms deploy nanomaterials as delivery vehicles for genetic interventions with a range of other potential actions inside the human body…. The authors draw upon the chronological and logical development of adjuvants and their use across disciplines in materials science, genetic engineering, and programming. The authors aim to disentangle the known, unknown, possible and likely contents and objectives of COVID-19 injections, in the context of the surrounding corporate, political, and ideological landscape. They conclude that the social disruptions created by COVID-19 have served as a means of instigating rapid transition to what unelected policymakers have called a Bio-Nano Age.³³

Second, in 2022, David A. Hughes reports:

Between July 2021 and August 2022, evidence of  undisclosed ingredients in the COVID-19 “vaccines” was published by at least 26 researchers/research teams in 16 different countries across five continents using spectroscopic and microscopic analysis. Despite operating largely independently of  one another, their findings are remarkably similar and highlight the clear and present danger that the world’s population has been lied to regarding the contents of the COVID-19 “vaccines.” This raises grave questions about the true purpose of  the dangerous experimental injections that have so far been shot into 5.33 billion people (over two thirds of  the human race), including children, apparently without their informed consent regarding the contents. Surprise findings include sharp-edged geometric structures, fibrous or tube-like structures, crystalline formations, “microbubbles,” and possible self-assembling nanotechnology. The blood of  people who have received one or more COVID-19 “vaccines” appears, in case after case, to contain foreign bodies…. If the findings of these 26 studies are confirmed, then the political implications are nothing short of  revolutionary: a global crime against humanity has been committed, in which every government, every regulator, every establishment media organization, and all the professions have been complicit.³⁴

The purpose of including self-assembling nanomaterials in the project CORONA injections could be manifold, including for experimentation, prototyping for biosurveillance, social credit and CBDCs, gene therapy and/or quantum biocomputing on nanonetworks. All of these purposes and more are envisioned as part of what is called the Internet of Bio-Nano Things (IoBNT) in pioneering cybernetic and biomaterials sciences. According to IoBNT specialists:

Internet of bio-nano things (IoBNT) is a novel communication paradigm where tiny, biocompatible and non-intrusive devices collect and sense biological signals from the environment and send them to data centers for processing through the internet. The concept of the IoBNT has stemmed from the combination of synthetic biology and nanotechnology tools which enable the fabrication of biological computing devices called Bio-nano-things. Bio-nano things are nanoscale (1-100 nm) devices that are ideal for in vivo applications, where non-intrusive devices can reach hard-to-access areas of the human body (such as deep inside the tissue) to collect biological information. Bio-nano things work collaboratively in the form of a network called nanonetwork. The interconnection of the biological world and the cyber world of the Internet is made possible by a powerful hybrid device called Bio Cyber Interface.³⁵

On March 16, 2023, addressing the Advanced Technology Research Council, Dr. Ian F. Akyildiz delivered a lecture on nanotechnology and the transition “from 56 to 6G” in which he stated that “in terms of bio-nano applications…for injecting into the body and always monitoring health problems – that is also going really well with these COVID vaccines. These mRNAs are nothing other than small-scale, nano-scale machines. They are programmed and they are injected.”³⁶ Akyildiz highlights several interrelated applications of injectable nanodevices, including for use as nano-transceivers, nano-antennas, quantum computing, and graphene-enabled communications.³⁷

In a 2018 Advanced Science Progress Report on flexible bioelectronics, “Blending Electronics with the Human Body: A Pathway toward a Cybernetic Future,” Mehrali et. al. describe cybernetics as “the  possible  merging of inanimate materials with living organisms.” Broadly speaking, the authors write, “cybernetics…represents an expansion of the material-making industries of the past. However, in striking contrast to ordinary materials, cybernetic extensions  are items that can integrate with the body to overcome the limitations of human biology in an even more daring manner compared to external clothing, tools, or machines…. Therefore, cyborgs (short for ‘cybernetic organisms’) could ultimately be the logical evolution of humans into a more adaptable, smarter, and stronger organism.”

The abstract of Mehrali et. al.’s flexible bioelectronics Progress Report celebrates that, in the dawning “age of cyborgs,” human biology “can be hacked at will to yield beings with abilities beyond their natural capabilities.”

At the crossroads of chemistry, electronics, mechanical engineering, polymer science, biology, tissue engineering, computer science, and materials science, electrical devices are currently being engineered that blend directly within organs and tissues. These sophisticated devices are mediators, recorders, and stimulators of electricity with the capacity to monitor important electrophysiological events, replace disabled body parts, or even stimulate tissues to overcome their current limitations. They are therefore capable of leading humanity forward into the age of cyborgs, a time in which human biology can be hacked at will to yield beings with abilities beyond their natural capabilities. The resulting advances have been made possible by the emergence of conformal and soft electronic materials that can readily integrate with the curvilinear, dynamic, delicate, and flexible human body. This article discusses the recent rapid pace of development in the field of cybernetics with special emphasis on the important role that flexible and electrically active materials have played therein.³⁸

Professional seminars, summits, conferences, and symposia are regularly convened on these and related topics.³⁹

In 2014 former Soviet counterintelligence officer, Dr. Daniel Estulin, warned humanity that the “final merging of One World Company Inc. is finally upon us.” Estulin specifically pointed to the many pandemic preparedness tabletop exercises that he observed being conducted by NWO powers and anticipated that “global pandemics” would be used as a cover for the deployment of “vaccines” used to biodigitally reprogram what the U.S. Pentagon calls “undesirable human behaviors.” Bio Cyber interfaces, nanonetworks, and biometric data – in short, the IoBNT – according to Estulin, would be instrumental in the NWO control program.⁴⁰

This briefing has been on cybernetic totalitarianism in an era of biodigital convergence. Planetary-scale computation, panoptic satellite surveillance and IoBNT biosurveillance, big data biopolitics, biohacking, social engineering through mass psychology, biodigital identification, social credit, CBDCs and covertly administered nanomaterials with a range of potential actions inside of human bodies all belong to contemporary NWO cybernetic initiatives.

Vibe of the day:

1. https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/10/24/hillarys-war-crime/.

2. Benjamin Bratton, The Stack (MIT, 2016), p. 3. Emphasis mine.

3. Ibid., pp. 5-17. Emphasis mine.

4. Ibid., p. 36. Emphasis mine.

5. Ibid., p. xviii. Emphasis mine.

6. Ibid.

7. Ibid., p. 171.

8. Ibid., p. xx.

9. Ibid., pp. 4-10. Emphasis mine.

10. Ibid., p. 37. Emphasis mine.

11. Tiziana  Terranova, “Red Stack Attack! Algorithms, Capital and the Automation of the Commons,” #ACELERATE (2014), pp. 379-397. Emphasis mine.

12. Bratton, pp. 56-58. Emphasis mine.

13. Ibid., p. 15. Emphasis mine.

14. See Policy Horizons Canada: https://horizons.gc.ca/en/2020/02/11/exploring-biodigital-convergence/. See also: https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2022/7/28/pentagon-biological-defense-programs-at-pivot-point; https://bioconvergence.jp/en/.

15. See also Daniel Estulin, TransEvolution: The Coming Age of Human Deconstruction (Trine Day, 2014).

16. Norbert Wiener, Cybernetics: or, Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine (Martino Publishing, 2013), pp. 28-29.

17. Jeffrey Steinberg, “From Cybernetics to Littleton: Techniques of Mind Control,” EIR Review (2000). Emphasis mine.

18. Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society (AMS Press, 1968 [1953]). Emphasis mine.

19. See “What Is MindWar?” (2023):

What Is MindWar?

20. See, for example, RAND Corporation: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2996.html.

21. For a briefing on emergent neurotechnologies see James Giordano, “The Risk and Threat of Radical Leveling and Emergent Neurotechnologies in Non-Kinetic Operations,” 2018-2019: https://www.ffcoi.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/The-Risk-and-Threat-of-Radical-Leveling-and-emergent-Neurotechnologies-in-Non-Kinetic-Operations-James-Giordano-July-2019.pptx.

22. See also EU, “The use of chip implants for workers” (2018): https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/34cb538d-58b7-11e8-ab41-01aa75ed71a1/language-en; ID2020 Alliance: https://id2020.org/; World Bank ID4D: https://id4d.worldbank.org/; WEF, “A Blueprint for Digital Identity” (2021): https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_A_Blueprint_for_Digital_Identity.pdf.

23. https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/68/80/73/6a17a66e9ec8c5/US11107588.pdf.

24. https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/60/f4/84/f1638d97b4e0cf/US20160178652A1.pdf.

25. https://patents.google.com/patent/KR20170090373A/en. Emphasis mine.

26. https://reclaimthenet.org/blackrock-russia-cbdc-push.

27. https://www.bankofcanada.ca/research/digital-currencies-and-fintech/projects/central-bank-digital-currency/;  https://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/news-updates/2022/09/16/technical-possibilities-for-a-u-s-central-bank-digital-currency/. See also CBDC explained: https://www.bitchute.com/video/i6f7Ar4TmofB/.

28. https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/11/a4/fe/095b0d0459d9c4/WO2020060606A1.pdf.

29. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2012/07/31/national-strategy-biosurveillance. See also “Biodefense for the 21st Century” (2004): https://irp.fas.org/offdocs/nspd/hspd-10.html; “A Manhattan Project for Biodefense” (2019): https://biodefensecommission.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/LiteratureRetrieve.pdf; “Biodefense Strategy and Implementation Plan for Countering Biological Threats, Enhancing Pandemic Preparedness, and Achieving Global Health Security” (2022): https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/National-Biodefense-Strategy-and-Implementation-Plan-Final.pdf.

30. https://www.nro.gov/History-and-Studies/Center-for-the-Study-of-National-Reconnaissance/The-CORONA-Program/.

31. Antonietta M. Gatti and Stefano Montanari, “New Quality-Control Investigations on Vaccines: Micro and Nanocontamination,” International Journal of Vaccines and Vaccination 4(1), 2017: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4399/0b6411e7b46cf47b62932e1248fa3ffcbf15.pdf. “The results of this new investigation show the presence of micro- and nanosized particulate matter composed of inorganic elements in vaccines’ samples which is not declared among the components and whose unduly presence is, for the time being, inexplicable.”

32. See, for example, Pablo Campra, “Graphene Oxide Detection in Aqueous Suspension: Observational Study in Optical and Electron Microscopy,” Interim report (I), Madrid (June 28, 2021): https://www.docdroid.net/Ov1M99x/official-interim-report-in-english-university-of-almeria-pdf; Project CUNIT-2-112Y6580, “Qualitative Evaluation of Inclusions In Moderna, AstraZeneca and Pfizer Covid-19 vaccines” (2021): http://xochipelli.fr/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/UK-LAB-REPORT-BY-UNIT.pdf.

33. D. Broudy and Valerie Kyrie, “Syllogistic Reasoning Demystifies Evidence of COVID-19 Vaccine Constituents,” International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(1): https://ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/32.

34. David A. Hughes, “What is in the so-called COVID-19 ‘Vaccines’? Part 1: Evidence of  a Global Crime Against Humanity,” International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2): https://ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/52/121.

35. Zafar et al., “Securing Bio-Cyber Interface for the Internet of Bio-Nano Things using Particle Swarm Optimization and Artificial Neural Networks based parameter profiling,” Computers in Biology and Medicine (2021): https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0010482521005011.

36. The Advanced Technology Research Council (ATRC), “ARRC Seminar Series - Prof. Ian F. Akyildiz” (uploaded Mar 21, 2023):

37. See also Ian F. Akyildiz, “6G and Beyond: The Future of Wireless Communications Systems,” IEEE vol. 8 (2020): https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=9145564; Akyildiz et al., “PANACEA: An Internet of Bio-Nano Things Application for Early Detection and Mitigation of Infectious Diseases,” IEEE vol. 8 (2020): https://ianakyildiz.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/panacea.pdf.

38. Mehrali et. al., “Blending Electronics with the Human Body: A Pathway toward a Cybernetic Future,” Advanced Science (2018): https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/advs.201700931. See relatedly, Yuval Noah Harari: “We humans should get used to the idea that we are no longer mysterious souls – we are now hackable animals. That’s what we are,” World Economic Forum (2020): https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/01/yuval-hararis-warning-davos-speech-future-predications/.

39. For example, in 2022: “Biomimetic and Biohybrid Systems,” 11th International Conference on Living Machines (July 19-22); “Lipid Nanoparticles Development Europe Summit” (October 18-20, London, UK): https://drive.google.com/file/d/14c1D3gJQpJ1RJLm15WAjLiBmo37MxW5t/view; “Lipid Nanoparticle Immunogenicity and Toxicity Summit” (December 6-8, Boston, MA): https://drive.google.com/file/d/15utESVIFguuti0iHAPcp2_W1hzxGUriZ/view. See relatedly: “Lipid Nanoparticles (LNPs): Gold Standard Delivery Technology for Small Molecules and Nucleic Acids,” Precision NanoSystems: https://drive.google.com/file/d/14gcqPV2gvqVFzN-AzqjrjOTIqsuN_OFR/view.

40. Daniel Estulin, TransEvolution: The Coming Age of Human Deconstruction (Trine Day, 2014).