The 2020 Neural Chip Implant

The control of crime will be a paramount concern in the 21st Century. We must be ready with our security products when the demand for them becomes popular. Our Research and Development Division has been in contact with the Federal Bureau of Prisons, the California Department of Corrections, the Texas Department of Public Safety, and the Massachusetts Department of Correction to run limited trials of the 2020 neural chip implant. We have established representatives of our interests in both management and institutional level positions within these departments.

Federal regulations do not yet permit testing of implants on prisoners, but we have entered into contractual testing of our products. We have also had major successes in privately owned sanitariums with implant technology. We need, however, to expand our testing to research how effective the 2020 neural chip implant performs in those identified as the most aggressive in our society. Limited testing has produced a number of results.

In California, several prisoners were identified as members of the security threat group, EME, or Mexican Mafia. They were brought to the health services unit at Pelican Bay and tranquilized with advanced sedatives developed by our Cambridge, Massachusetts laboratories. The implants procedure takes 60-90 minutes depending upon the experience of the technician. We are working on a device which will reduce that time by as much as 60%. The implants on 8 prisoners yielded the following results:

• Implants served as surveillance monitoring device for threat group activity.

   

• Implants disabled two subjects during an assault on correctional staff.

   

• Universal side effects in all 8 test subjects revealed that when the implant was set to 116 MHz all subjects became lethargic and slept on an average of 18-22 hours per day.

   

• All subjects refused recreation periods for 14 days during the 116 MHz test evaluation.

   

• 7 of the 8 subjects did not exercise, in the cell or out of the cell and 5 of the 8 subjects refused showers up to three days at time.

   

• Each subjects was monitored for aggressive activity during the test period and the findings are conclusive that 7 out of the 8 test subjects exhibited no aggression, even when provoked.
• Each subject experienced only minor bleeding from the nose and ears 48 hours after the implant due to initial adjustment.

   

• Each subject had no knowledge of the implant for the test period and each implant was retrieved under the guise of medical treatment.

One of the concerns raised by R & D was the cause of the bleeding and how to eliminate that problem. Unexplained bleeding might cause the subject to inquire further about his "routine" visit to the infirmary or other health care facility.

The security windfall from the brief test period was enormous. Security officials now know several strategies employed by the EME that facilitate the transmission of illegal drugs and weapons into their correctional facilities. One intelligence officer remarked that while they cannot use the information they have in a court of law that they know who to watch and what outside "connections" they have. The prison at Soledad is now considering transferring three subjects to Vacaville where we have ongoing implant research. Our technicians have promised that they can do three 2020 neural chip implants in less than an hour. Soledad officials hope to collect information from the trio to bring a 14 month investigation into drug trafficking by correctional officers to a close.

Essentially the implants make the unsuspecting prisoner a walking talking recorder of every event he comes into contact with. There are only five intelligence officers at the Commissioner of Corrections who actually know the full scope of the implant testing.

In Massachusetts, the Department of Correction has already entered into high level discussions about releasing certain offenders to the community with the 2020 neural chip implants. Our people are not altogether against the idea, however, attorneys for Intelli- Connection have advised against implant technology outside strict control settings. Under present government structure our liability would be enormous. While we have a strong lobby in the Congress and various state legislatures favoring or product, we must proceed with the utmost caution on uncontrolled use of the 2020 neural chip. If the chip were discovered in use not authorized by law and the procedure traced to us, we could not endure for long the resulting publicity and liability payments.

Massachusetts officials have developed an intelligence branch from their Fugitive Task Force Squad that would do limited test runs under tight controls with pre-release subjects. Corrections officials have dubbed these potential test subjects "the insurance group." (the name derives from the concept that 2020 implant insures compliance with the law and allows officials to detect misconduct or violations without question) A retired police detective from Charlestown, Massachusetts, now with the intelligence unit has asked us to consider using the 2020 neural chip on hard core felons suspected of bank and armored car robbery. He stated, "Charlestown would never be the same, we'd finally know what was happening before they knew what was happening."

We will continue to explore community uses of the 2020 chip, but our company rep will be attached to all law enforcement operations with an extraction crew that can be on-site in 2 hours from anywhere at anytime.

We have an Intelli-Connection discussion group who is meeting with the Director of Security at Florence, Colorado's federal super- maximum security unit. The initial discussions with the Director have been promising and we hope to have an R & D unit at this important facility within the next six months. (ADX Florence, CO has replaced Marion. Illinois as the federal prison system's ultra maximum security unit)

Legislative and executive branch efforts continue to legalize the implant technology. (See Intelli-Connection Internal Memorandum No. 15)

End Communication . . . 10/20/95

Distribution: Eyes Only: Project Group 7A

• Location: The document states that it originates from "INTELLI-CONNECTION, A Security Division of IBM, 1200 Progress Way, Armonk, New York 11204."

  The zip code for Armonk is 10504. The code identified in the report is actually for Brooklyn. It is not likely that a genuine company document, on official letterhead, would misstake the zip code.

  Allan Parmelee, who investigated this report on behalf of Prison Legal News, notes that the street address does not correspond with any known division of IBM or its affiliates. IBM denies that it has a Intelli-Connection Division.

   

• California Law: The report notes that federal regulations do not permit testing of implants on prisoners. As a result, Intelli-Connection states that it was unable to conduct testing in federal prisons. The report does not explain why a similar legal barrier did not prevent the company from entering into contractural agreements with the California Department of Corrections.

  Experimental implant procedures that are conducted without the knowledge of prisoners violates California law. Cal. Penal Code, sections 2670.5, 3521. It is hardly logical for a company to state that is prohibited by law from engaging in research in federal prisons, yet conduct equally unlawful experimentation in California. Its descriptions of the testing program in California are not believable.

   

• Potential Exposure: The personal liability in the Intelli-Connection project would be enormous -- affecting correctional officials, lawyers, and doctors who are said to be involved in the project.

  The memorandum identifies operations in at least two California state prisons, with contacts in at least four state and national prison systems. Such an operation could not be suppressed indefinitely. It therefore poses a substantial risk to all involved.

  It also is evident from the report itself that the security of the operation has been breached. According to Intelli-Connection, the implant program operated at Pelican Bay -- in a unit that was under intense court scrutiny -- and the California Medical Facility (CMF). Only the "Commissioner" of Corrections and five intelligence officers knew about the full scope of the program. Yet, the "prison at Soledad" was considering transferring three subjects to CMF in order to collect intelligence data. The report does not explain how Soledad became aware or involved with the program. Knowledge about the secret program was apparently widespread.

  Although the massive nature of the conspiracy makes it unlikely that it could remain hidden, no other evidence of a national implant program has been brought to light.

   

• Identification: The report purports to be a high-level internal communication. As such, it author would strive for accuracy. Yet, Intelli-Connection identifies California's Director of Corrections as the "Commissioner" of Corrections. It also identifies prisons in Vacaville and Soledad by their location, rather than their name. Although these terms do not necessarily mean the report is false, they raise further suspicions about its contents.

   

• Federal Contacts: The report claims that an Intelli-Connection group met with the Director of Security at the federal prison in Florence, Colorado. According to the projections contained in the report, such a unit would now be in place. The author of the report cannot make up his or her mind: either Intelli-Connection is constrained by federal law or it isn't.

  Although the report claims that the legislative and executive branches have worked to legalize the implant technology, such efforts have not come to light or resulted in any substantial change in law.

   

• Medical Evidence: Allan Parmelee contacted a physician who is board-certified in emergency and industrial medicines. He reports:

   

  • The memo does not state where is the device installed in the body;
  • Extremely rigid rules exist regulating human experiments;
  • The memo does not state whether any previous tests were performed on animals or their results;
  • If planted in the head, bleeding from the nose and ears is medically inconsistent because they are not directly interconnected and are physically separated by bone;
  • Bleeding from the nose and ears are caused by separate problems, none related medically to the procedures described in the Intelli-Connection memo;
  • There is no medical evidence that such procedures are possible.
  
  It is worth keeping in mind one court decision that considered a case alleging neural implants:

   

  "Plaintiff's claim -- that prison officials implanted a mind control device in his head and ahve been using it to control his thoughts and actions -- must be dismissed. The court finds, as a matter of law, that intracranial thought control devices such as plaintiff describes, are far beyond the reach of currently- available technology. . . . In so ruling, the court fully understands that technology marches on and that mechanisms throught impossible in an earlier age are now common. However, unless and until a litigant can produce tangible or scientific evidence that shows the existence of a "telepathic mind control device," or at least the technology to produce it, the court shall recognize no legal obligation to be guillible." Doran v. McGinnis, 158 F.R.D. 383 (E.D.Mich. 1994.)

• Clockwork Orange: There can be no doubt that certain agencies and officials have been interested in the possibility of mind control. The documented CIA experiments with LSD attest to this. However, there is nothing in the Intelli-Connection report to suggest that the "security division" actually exists, that the technology is available, or that there is a massive conspiracy at the highest level of correctional officials -- involving both the legislative and executive branches of government --in violation of the law. The report bears more resemblance to the film A Clockwork Orange than it does to reality. It should not be credited.

This article was written in part from information obtained Allan Parmelee, a prisoners rights activist and the author of two books: How to WIN Prison Disciplinary Hearings anness>How Good Was Your Lawyer. Mr. Parmelee investigated the issue on behalf of Prison Legal News.

Return to The Other Side of the Wall.

http://www.prisonwall.org/intelli.htm