"a world of made is not a world of born" ee cummings
"Today the human brain is the devil's playground", Michael La Crosse
To David Benford
INTRODUCTIONThe text of "Einswine's Rat" chronicles the effect of research on the brain as practiced on an involuntary subject. Experiments on thinking, physiology and sexuality are documented as manipulations developed. Also included are essays and commentaries pertaining to the experiments as they affect the subject and her sense of self and free will. Central to the ideologies presented are the ever- present control issues which drive the researcher(s). The primary threat of the acknowledged technologies to which the "rat", Anna, is exposed is the develop- ment of mind control capabilities in the form of remote electromagnetic opera- tions: these include thought broadcasting, programming, entry to the unconscious dream manipulation, sensory overrides, subliminal suggestivity and the establish- ment of pain centers throughout the body. Sexual torture was frequently employed as a political directive. It is believed that this work was achieved in concert with surveillance and film crews, as well as with the cooperation of hospital personnel. It is further implied that these violations are endorsed and enjoyed by a large portion of the public.
The research provided extensive findings regarding the functioning of the brain. Again, it must be emphasized that this work was criminal and aimed at acquiring mind controls. An example of this is the inducement and cessation of mania – it is not believed that these achievements are intended to serve the psychiatric community, but are rather intended as weaponry useful in combating an enemy. The designated enemies can attest to the force and cruelty of their effectiveness.
While the experiments were excessively and unrelentingly sexual in nature, it is believed that the most potentially destructive findings pertain to the infiltration and overtake of the psyche and thought processes. The frontier of the human mind is being excavated, ravaged, and infiltrated: the technology exists. Currently fashionable sexual alterations (D and DD), while affording heightened sensations, serve to mask the dominant and potentially lethal control mechanisms behind them. It is the intent of this writing to visit the very real societal fears about technological abuse, and to encourage the inverstigation of humane regulation of brain exploration.
Page 4lInterrogator: In order to expand the dialog I am now calling Mr. Frankie Experienced Fingers to the stand. I have a few questions for him and then he will be asking Anna a few things.
Mr. Experienced Fingers, how long have you worked for Dr. Einswine?
Frankie: Twelve years. He hired me when he began experimenting on Anna – he had just done her.
Frankie: Made her D and started broadcasting her thoughts. She coulda gotten off the broadcasting right away if she'd a been compliant.
Interrogator: Compliant in what way?
Frankie: In a sex way – if she'd a had a masectomy or genital mutilation, or a same sex affair or you know any of the choices we gave her: incest, interracial, something with kids – anything we could film and frame her with later.
Interrogator: What do you mean when you say you made her "D"?
Frankie: That means we rigged her private parts so we could jab her good if she disobeyed – pain usually works pretty good when it comes to getting somebody to cooperate. And of course it keeps them from having sex with the wrong person. Anna was very funny, very sensitive – we had her running across the room screaming In pain from just the little jolts. Whenever we really let her have it she'd get mad – Really mad – and say thing like who do you think you are, hee, hee.
Interrogator: Given this control mechanism you established in the body of Anna, how do you account for the fact that you could not get her to comply with your regenderingf scheme?
Frankie: She endured the pain. She had an idea about what she called the material of her life and the center of her womanhood – she refused to let us violate these. We weren't really sure what she was talking about but in the end it was like private property she wasn't letting anyone get near. She couldn't undo the rerouting we had done, but she could protect that inner whatever it was where the real lady part of her was. We couldn't figure out what she was talking about – I mean you know she was a girl – she had no tools – no nothin', but in her own mind there was something she wasn't about to let us get at. And then she'd go on about the m aterial of her life, and how we were ruining her psyche and exploiting her ownership of her self just because we were developing subdivisions and time sharing of her consciousness. She was a pain, and toward the end she was always mouthin' off and laughin' at Einswine – not a very grateful rat.
Interrogator: But what about you Frankie, did she try to convince you to defect?
Frankie: Yeah, she tried. She had a whole rap about free will and privacy and the ideas our country was founded on. She was pretty square – she actually believed in the judicial system and the higher morals of our government and leaders. I tried to tell her that what we were doing was exactly the same as what the CIA, The Navy, the KGB, organized crime and the Russian Mafia were doing – only we had an edge because we had long term subjects like her who we really ran through the mill – people we knew and could predict. Maybe we couldn't manipulate her sexually but there were plenty of others for that, we could still use her for sensory fake-out, thought implants, personality transfers, subliminal sleep programming and psychic deconstruction. She was used to being enslaved by our regimented programs so that part of the conditioning was in place. She would endure the worst we could dish out and then she would say something pathetically hopeful. She'd say maybe you could get together with the others, the CIA, the Navy, the KGB and the Russian mafia and work out agreements about mind control manipulations, restrictions which would make a level playing field for everyone. If we didn't have the National Security Act the general public could have a say in what's o.k., what's fair and in the best interest of everyone, what's democratic. So I would have to explain to her concepts like "Because we say so" and "If you don't like it we'll do something worse". She would always say "D" was unfair. Unfair, that always cracked me up. It wasn't unfair, it was funny. But she would talk about how we were stealing childhood from children, and torturing the old and infirm. She'd really yank at the old heart- strings, and talk about doom in the future. She'd say future generations were going to be total puppets and monkeys on strings with no will or fight or bite. They would just be dead weight which we the power elite would have to maintain. So I tol' her there's one solution for that – rub 'em out. If they can't be subservient who needs 'em?