How does this new research affect anti-terrorism technology?
The future of U.S. anti-terrorism technology could lie right here at the Psychotechnology Research Institute of Moscow where human subjects submit to experiments aimed at supposedly testing involuntary responses to subliminal messages. The technology is currently marketed in the United States as Semantic Stimuli Response Measurements Technology (SSRM Tek), and it is expected that it will soon be tested for airport screening by a US company under contract to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Elena Rusalkina, the woman who runs the Psychotechnology Reasearch Institute, said:
“If it's a clean result, the passengers are allowed through. If there's something there, that person will need to go through extra checks.”
How did this technology spread to the West and how does it work?
The technology is marketed as a program called Mindreader 2.0. Rusalkina does not work alone and has teamed up with a Canadian firm, which is now working with SRS Technologies, a US defense contractor. SSRM Tek looks like an innocent computer game that flashes subliminal images across the screen. Some examples might include pictures of Osama bin Laden or the World Trade Center. The "player" of the game is a traveler at an airport screening line. According to the theory behind the technology, the traveler would press a button in response to the images, without consciously registering what he or she is looking at. The terrorist's response to the scrambled image differs from that of an innocent person.
Who originated this unusual mind-control technology?
All of the institute’s technology is based on the work of Rusalkina’s late husband, Igor Smirnov, a controversial Russian scientist known for his Rasputin-like personality and referred to as the “father of psycho-tronic (mind control) weapons.”
Will this anti-terrorist mind control technology make a difference to tomorrow’s threats of terrorism?
Well, no one’s a mind reader and predicting the future is a skill most of us don’t have.
Or do we?