Do NOT read this if you want to feel good! Our Cognitive vulnerably is already being used against us.

 

If you want to feel good...DO NOT read any part of this 13 page Word document.  It contains three readings spurred by today’s (June 9, 2025) front page newspaper article (stunning by itself and long) that mentions two books regarding this new threat that I’d never seriously considered to be an immediate threat - to every aspect of our lives.   I’m still processing it - and thinking the people who need to know about it won’t believe it,  change their beliefs, prepare for it, adapt to it, or make plans to prevent it -- given it was a front page article in the Washington Times ( #2 below.). #1 is an 2023 book “The Cognitive War”.  #3 “Human, Machine, War” (2025) a new book also mentioned in the article.  

#1  The Cognitive War: Why We Are Losing and How We Can Win (2023) by Edward Lawrence Haugland:  ChatGPT detailed BOOK Summary:  Haugland challenges us to realize that warfare now extends far beyond battlegrounds—it’s fought in our minds and values. Without vigilance and purpose, freedom falters. But by reclaiming truth, cultivating civic virtue, reforming key institutions, and engaging thoughtfully, we stand a real chance—not just to resist, but to win this war.

#2   SECURITY:  China targets human mind for domination: Cognitive warfare already begun

June 9, 2025  By Bill Gertz THE WASHINGTON TIMES  https://washingtontimes-dc.newsmemory.com/?token=7293d5dd19b443f9bf686e54fba436d6_6846daba_617091b&selDate=20250609

#3  Human, Machine, War: How the Mind‑Tech Nexus Will Win Future Wars, edited by Nicholas Wright, Michael Miklaucic, and Todd Veazie (published April 22, 2025 by Air University Press):

#1  The Cognitive War: Why We Are Losing and How We Can Win (2023) by Edward Lawrence Haugland:   Overview & Central Thesis:  Ideological battleground: Haugland argues we’re entrenched in a Cognitive War — an ideological contest for hearts, minds, beliefs, and values, both within the U.S. and globally.

• Endless struggle: This war has no final victory—it’s perpetual and intensifying as humanity’s foundational freedoms are challenged by forces favoring control, tyranny, and subjugation.
• Why we’re failing: A big part of the problem lies with Western complacency—forgetfulness of history, waning civic resolve, and passive acceptance. Many lapse into despair—becoming “complacent, compliant, complicit, corrupt”.

Key Themes & Structure:

1.      Defining the Cognitive War: Unlike kinetic warfare, this is a battle of ideas and perceptions. It’s about narrative dominance—shaping public opinion, steering thought, and influencing behavior.

2.      Historical Context:  Haugland suggests the U.S. has “lost every war since World War II”—a statement reflecting defeat in ideological and cognitive terms rather than military might.  He explores how history is selectively remembered or erased, weakening the societal foundations essential for freedom.

3.      Understanding Mechanisms of Control:  The author delves into how propaganda, disinformation, mass media, social media manipulation, educational content, and corporate messaging collectively shape public consciousness. By controlling narratives, adversaries quietly influence major societal shifts.

4.      Consequences of Cognitive Defeat: Societal breakdown: trust erodes in institutions, civic engagement declines, and cultural fragmentation grows. Vulnerability spreads: weakened moral frameworks and collective purpose leave societies vulnerable to internal decay or external influence.

5.      A Call to Arms: Winning the Cognitive War:  Haugland offers a strategic blueprint:

Strategy	Description
Reclaim History	Study and preserve awareness of past struggles for freedom. (TRUMP ignores this?)
Strengthen Civic Virtues	Embrace critical thinking, responsibility, and active citizenship. (TRUMP abhors this!)
Develop Mindful Communication	Promote honest, thoughtful discourse over clickbait or sensationalism. (TRUMP can’t do this!)
Institutional Reform	Reinforce education, media literacy, and public discourse. (TRUMP destroys this?)
Personal Resolve	Actively uphold democratic values in daily life. (TRUMP is reversed this?)

Final Message: Haugland’s conclusion is both stark and hopeful:

Stark: The Cognitive War is ongoing, existential, and unstoppable—“until mankind ceases to exist”.  [or China dominates the world]

Hopeful: Victory is still possible—but only if individuals and societies actively mobilize, resist complacency, and recommit to freedom’s ideals. [This isn’t likely to happen given the extent of Truth decay. And the mind’s capacity to believe ANYTHING and then kill or die defending that belief.

Additional Notes: Publication details: Released August 23, 2023; 322 pages; independently published via Kindle Direct Publishing/Amazon.  Author: Edward Lawrence Haugland, whose contributions on Goodreads are limited to this single title.

 

#2   SECURITY:  China targets human mind for domination: Cognitive warfare already begun

By Bill Gertz THE WASHINGTON TIMES  June 9, 2025  https://washingtontimes-dc.newsmemory.com/?token=7293d5dd19b443f9bf686e54fba436d6_6846daba_617091b&selDate=20250609

Ancient Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu declared that subduing your enemy without fighting is the acme of skill. China is closer to realizing that goal through new weaponry and capabilities that Beijing calls cognitive warfare.

China’s most recent experience with large-scale war was more than 70 years ago in Korea. Waves of troops were sent into battle against better-armed U.S. and allied forces. The result was a slaughter. The People’s Liberation Army lost 400,000 to 1 million soldiers.

The PLA is no longer planning human wave military attacks. Instead, many of its researchers are working on advanced warfare capabilities that combine high-technology hardware with biotechnology research focused on the human brain.

The goal, driven by the ideology of Chinese-style Marxism-Leninism, is nothing less than world domination and a global populace under the control of China’s communist regime, said analysts and specialists who have studied Beijing’s leaders.

Cognitive warfare experts interviewed for this report cited evidence that China has embraced the development and eventual use of weapons designed to affect the mind. Potential targets range from troops and commanders of adversarial militaries to entire civilian populations.

Most details of the work on Chinese cognitive warfare are closely guarded U.S. government secrets, but clues first surfaced officially in December 2021, when the Commerce Department Bureau of Industry and Security announced sanctions against the PLA’s Academy of Military Medical Sciences and 11 related Chinese research institutes.

Commerce banned U.S. companies from doing business with the labs, which were working on biotechnology, including “purported brain-control weaponry,” on behalf of the Chinese military.

That unspecified effort triggered national security sanctions.

 

In December, the Pentagon disclosed in its annual report on China that Beijing had launched the China Brain Project in 2016. The multiyear program is designed to unlock human cognitive functions and neural pathways to support civilian and military applications.

The Pentagon said the research has included brain-computer interface activities that enable humans and computers to interact and exchange information through brain implants or skull implants.

Chinese researchers have also conducted experiments with mind control of remote machines. This technology could give PLA commanders and troops optimized command-and control networks and the ability to maximize the use of advanced weapons systems and other military equipment for more rapid and precise attacks.

The report said other work includes “emotion detection,” which is helpful in cognitive warfare to influence enemy troop morale in war and establish control over civilian populations.

PLA scientists are also working on military applications for brain research to produce more mentally agile combat troops equipped with greater mobility and increased situational awareness.

“The PLA is exploring a range of ‘neurocognitive warfare’ capabilities that exploit adversaries using neuroscience and psychology,” the report said without elaborating.

Besides the brief Commerce Department notice in 2021 and the Pentagon report in December, no official details on Chinese cognitive warfare have been made public.

However, recently published science articles and interviews with cognitive warfare experts indicate that the Chinese military is making strategic investments in what the PLA calls a new domain of warfare to complement its massive buildup of military hardware.

“The emergence of cognitive warfare — which manipulates cognition to destabilize sociocultural, economic, political and military systems — poses a unique threat to America and its allies,” said Josh Baughman, an analyst at the Air Force’s China Aerospace Studies Institute.

“This type of warfare differs from information warfare in that it aims to influence how, not what, people think, feel and act, altering the cognitive space from individual to population levels,” he said in an interview.

Mr. Baughman recently revealed in a book that cognitive warfare is a pivotal component of the PLA’s strategy for achieving victory in war.

Writing in the U.S. military edited book “Human, Machine, War: How the Mind-Tech Nexus Will Win Future Wars,” the defense analyst wrote that the PLA thinks its ultimate victory will come from destroying an adversary’s will to fight.

The United States, he said, urgently needs to understand how the PLA’s focus on cognitive warfare has shifted the battleground of a potential conflict with China from physical territory to the minds of Americans.

He said failure to understand this concept of war could lead to China’s conquest of American allies, or even the United States, without firing a shot.

For the PLA, the nexus of mind and technology is fundamental to winning the cognitive war. Tools of the trade include social media, the metaverse, smartphone apps such as TikTok, wearable technology, virtual reality, artificial intelligence and especially generative AI.

Chinese-controlled apps such as TikTok offer China the means to wage warfare on the battlefield of the mind, researchers said.

Ian Oxnevad, senior fellow in national security at the National Association of Scholars, said Tik-Tok is “one of [China’s] foremost cognitive weapons.”

The popular video-sharing app was banned in the U.S. but given a reprieve by President Trump.

TikTok has been blamed for popularizing dangerous fads, criticized for promoting discredited diversity, equity and inclusion programs on college campuses, and accused of fueling protests against Israel, all while collecting reams of personal data on Americans.

China’s strategy of cognitive warfare “to make America angry and stupid with an app has proven remarkably successful,” Mr. Oxnevad said.

China was not the first to conduct research on cognitive warfare.

The Soviet Union and later Russia studied a cognitive warfighting concept called “reflexive control” for more than 40 years. Reflexive control seeks to convey specially prepared information that will lead a partner or adversary to voluntarily make a decision predetermined by the Russians.

Reflexive control includes disinformation, camouflage and other strategic tools used against either the minds of enemy leaders and troops or through computer-based decision-making processors, such as those emerging through artificial intelligence.

“Reflexive control” has become “intellectual information warfare” in the Russian military.

Russian military writings say the tactic works by distracting the enemy, overloading information systems, creating exhaustion by tricking adversaries into useless operations and using the power of suggestion to introduce disinformation that will affect an enemy legally, morally or ideologically.

Timothy L. Thomas, a China warfare expert with the Mitre Corp., predicts mind-centered conflict will become the domain that revolutionizes warfare in the not-too-distant future.

“Human fighters will fade away and intelligent equipment will be brought onto the battlefield,” he said. “Cross-domain unconventional and asymmetrical fighting will be the new normal, and intelligence control will replace territorial control as the center of gravity in war.”

Beijing’s “intelligentized warfare” will reshape the rules of engagement and lead to a major restructuring of combat forces, making machine-on-human or machine-on-machine war the new standard.

China’s work on brain warfare has been on the radar of U.S. intelligence agencies since at least 2019. Three reports that the PLA produced that year highlight the emphasis on brain warfare.

One report obtained by The Washington Times noted the military uses of advances in science and technology.

“War has started to shift from the pursuit of destroying bodies to paralyzing and controlling the opponent,” says the report, headlined “The Future of the Concept of Military Supremacy.”

“The focus is to attack the enemy’s will to resist, not physical destruction,” the report said.

It added that the PLA is extending warfare to human consciousness in ways that are “causing the brain to become the main target of offense and defense of new concept weapons.”

The PLA said the merger of humans and machines will set off a contest for brain control.

“The two combatant sides will use various kinds of brain control technologies and effective designs to focus on taking over the enemy’s way of thinking and his awareness, and even directly intervene in the thinking of the enemy leaders and staff, and with that produce war to control awareness and thinking,” the report said.

A second PLA report disclosed that the brain-machine interface is part of Beijing’s plan to develop intelligentized warfare. Interactive combat will include “direct control of machines using thoughts through mature brain-machine interface,” this report said.

A third PLA report said the China Electronics Technology Group was working on “brain confrontation” technology for warfare.

This process involves measuring neuronal activity in the brain and translating neurosignals into computer signals that can be used to control weapons with the brain.

PLA researchers are also working on “neuro-defense” technology, which leverages electromagnetic, biophysical and material technologies to enhance the brain’s defenses against control attacks.

Kerry K. Gershaneck, a China expert, said China has been waging political warfare and cognitive warfare, a related form, against the United States for almost 100 years.

Chinese President Xi Jinping is preparing to annex Taiwan and has stepped up political warfare to extraordinary degrees, Mr. Gershaneck said.

He said the Chinese leader is willing to go to war but prefers to win by subverting Americans’ willingness and ability to fight back.

“Accordingly, Xi’s goal for his vastly expanded political war is to achieve mind superiority by attacking us in the cognitive domain to weaken us physically and mentally, to destroy our will to fight, and to create fatal doubt in our leaders and in our decisions,” said Mr. Gershaneck, a professor at National Chengchi University in Taiwan.

Mr. Gershaneck, a retired Marine Corps officer with extensive intelligence experience, said the Trump administration is finally tackling Chinese economic warfare against the United States. It is less clear whether the president is devoting the necessary resources to defeat Chinese political warfare.

Books such as “Human, Machine, War” provide important policy leads for the president and his national security team. The book “lays a solid foundation for understanding the insidious nature of the existential threat we face from communist China,” Mr. Gershaneck said.

“Ideally, it will help propel Trump 47 to do what America has failed to do for more than three decades: devise a counter political warfare strategy for our Second Cold War, rapidly resource it, and execute it.”

Other tools in this new form of warfare include sound weapons capable of incapacitating enemy forces by disrupting neurological functions without causing visible injury.

This PLA method was disclosed in a recent report by the CCP BioThreats Initiative, a think tank made up of former intelligence and military experts.

“Infrasound and cognitive weapons represent a significant leap in the evolution of modern warfare, introducing a new set of capabilities designed to target the mind and body in ways that are difficult to detect and defend against,” the report said.

 PLA sound weapons can induce confusion, emotional distress and a loss of consciousness, said Chinese military researchers who wrote about them in a 2024 report. They are also designed to directly impair cognitive abilities vital in warfare.

 “As the CCP and PLA and other military forces continue to incorporate these technologies into their arsenals, the U.S. and its allies must remain vigilant and proactive in developing countermeasures.”

 Electronic brain warfare tools also include the broadcasting of radio waves designed to disrupt thinking and decision-making.

 Other weapons use electromagnetic energy for nonlethal attacks that produce drowsiness or cognitive impairment in adversaries, the report said.

 The brain weapons likely would be used in what the U.S. military calls gray zone operations around Taiwan, in the South China Sea and East China Sea, and along the disputed Sino-Indian border.

 “Any breakthrough in this research would provide unprecedented tools for the [Chinese Communist Party] to forcibly establish a new world order, which has been Xi Jinping’s lifelong goal,” the BioThreats Initiative report said.

 One indication of the shift toward cognitive warfare was the Chinese military’s dismantling of the Strategic Support Force last year. In its place, the PLA set up the Information Support Force, which reports directly to the CCP Central Military Commission. Both forces were regarded as powerful units equal to services such as the army and navy.

 Edward Haugland, a retired military intelligence officer and specialist in cognitive warfare, said focusing on the PLA is important, but he believes a wider cognitive war is being waged on multiple fronts with ongoing Chinese operations deep inside Western countries, including the United States.

 Tactics in this underground war include covert Chinese “police stations” in numerous countries, collaboration with drug cartels and shipments of fentanyl, Confucius Institutes on U.S. and foreign college campuses, elite capture of officials and other leaders, and up to 300,000 Chinese students who can be used for technology theft and intelligence and propaganda activities.

 Mr. Haugland said he is concerned that the U.S. military’s overemphasis on PLA military, kinetic and technical solutions could result in a misplaced focus on solutions that do not address the informational, political and greater cognitive warfare threat.

 Still, the cognitive warfare threat is real.

 “This to me is our greatest mistake, as the primary battlefield — the cognitive domain — is being attacked concurrently on so many parallel fronts it is likely China will never need to use its military,” said Mr. Haugland, author of the 2023 book “The Cognitive War: Why We Are Losing and How We can Win.”

 “Besides, I believe Xi Jinping cannot trust his military and a large percentage of it is used to control his people, so he must win the cognitive war without a shot. And he is doing so.”

 American national security leaders, he said, are unaware, unprepared and unarmed to wage U.S.-style cognitive warfare, he said.

 As a result, “we will lose to the CCP and radical left both domestically and globally,” Mr. Haugland said.

 Cmdr. Robert Bebber, a Navy intelligence officer, said in a recent report for the Hudson Institute that war is evolving from precision strike and stealth warfare used in the Cold War era to operations and technologies that target an opponent’s decision-making.

 “This shift has taken many forms, such as gray zone operations, hybrid warfare, [Russian] little green men [in Crimea], and [geopolitical] salami-slicing operations and tactics,” he said.

 Cmdr. Bebber said cognitive warfare is highly disruptive, threatening democratic institutions and sovereignty, and likely changing the basic character of war.

 He said advances in brain sciences, data and computational technologies, and AI are fundamentally altering the global strategic environment by “expanding the attack surface that foreign adversaries can exploit using cognitive manipulation.”

 “The emergence of cognitive warfare — which manipulates cognition to destabilize sociocultural, economic, political, and military systems — poses a unique threat to America and its allies,” Cmdr. Bebber said.

 “This type of warfare differs from information warfare in that it aims to influence how, not what, people think, feel, and act, altering the cognitive space from individual to population levels.”

 U.S. policymakers have been slow to recognize and respond to the threat because it is new and “perhaps because the American public has remained under a persistent state of cognitive manipulation, which has debilitated the people,” he said.

 Cmdr. Bebber said the danger is that cognitive warfare by China or Russia will result in advanced military operations used by the U.S. or NATO becoming fractured, disjointed and ultimately ineffective as enemies disrupt or destroy linkages and network connections.

 “Perhaps most insidiously, the military may find itself irrelevant to adversary operations as cognitive warfare capabilities emerge and mature to the point where adversaries can coerce societies through so-called information confrontation,” he said.

 That could result in the U.S. military and its allies being unable to respond as adversaries control entire populations.

 Despite the danger, U.S. and allied military forces and national security policymakers have not “organized their institutions and infrastructure to detect, track and combat cognitive warfare campaigns that adversaries are waging against the American public,” he said.

 Copyright (c) 2025 Washington Times , Edition 6/9/2025

 Human, Machine, War: How the Mind‑Tech Nexus Will Win Future Wars, edited by Nicholas Wright, Michael Miklaucic, and Todd Veazie (published April 22, 2025 by Air University Press): Here’s a comprehensive summary:

 Core Thesis:  The central argument is that modern military advantage will stem not from humans or technology alone, but from their seamless integration—termed the “Mind‑Tech Nexus.” This encompasses the interplay of human attributes (will, expertise, cognition, daring) with cutting‑edge technologies like AI, quantum computing, neuroscience, and digital systems. Success on future battlefields depends on harnessing this Mind‑Tech Nexus effectively, blending human judgment and adaptability with machine-digitized speed and precision.

  Key Themes & Structure:

1.  Defining the Mind‑Tech Nexus

• Rejects the outdated “humans vs machines” paradigm.
• Emphasizes synergy—humans guiding, interpreting, and managing, while machines excel at processing, pattern recognition, and operational tempo  .

 2. Technological Portrait: Highlights emerging technologies and their battlefield roles:

• AI & machine learning: intelligence analysis, decision support, autonomous systems.
• Quantum computing: enhanced encryption and sensor capabilities.
• Neuroscience: brain-machine interfaces, cognitive performance augmentation.
• Digital networks: ensuring secure, decentralized communication  .

 3. Human Dimension

• Attributes like intuition, adaptability, moral agency, and leadership remain indispensable.
• Humans must oversee, interpret, and make nuanced decisions where machines lack context. 

4. Geostrategic Context

• Global powers (e.g. China, Russia, NATO) are racing to integrate AI and autonomy into their military doctrines.
• Technical progress is accelerating, but institutional adoption faces bureaucratic, legal, and ethical barriers.

 Blueprint for Implementation:

1. Doctrine & Policy:
• Develop frameworks clearly defining human-machine roles and control protocols.
• Create ethical and legal architectures to govern autonomous systems. 

2. Training & Personnel:
• Train forces to operate alongside AI, cyber systems, and digital interfaces.
• Cultivate cognitive flexibility, skepticism, ethical judgment in high-speed environments. 

3. Organizational Innovation:
• Reshape defense via agile acquisition, public-private collaboration, and streamlined innovation—echoing Silicon Valley–style labs.
4. Technological Ecosystems:
• Invest broadly across AI, quantum, neuroscience.
• Build robust digital infrastructure and secure data pipelines. 

Strategic Importance:

• Operational Advantage: The Speed + Precision of machines, guided by human insight, can outpace adversaries relying on one or the other.
• Asymmetric Leverage: Smaller states can “punch above their weight” via intelligent tech integration—used effectively by Ukraine and Israel in recent conflicts.
• Risk Management: Defense systems must account for machine unpredictability and weaponized speed, while retaining appropriate human oversight to prevent escalation . 

Insights from Contributors:

• Forewords by Gen. James Rainey (Army Futures Command) and Sir Lawrence Freedman (King’s College London) underscore the authoritative stakes.
• Contributions from top military scholars and practitioners provide operational case studies, policy guidance, and technical analysis  .

 

Final Takeaway: Human, Machine, War envisions the battlefield of tomorrow as a realm of collaboration—where human ingenuity partners with machine efficiency. Its core message:

Victory will go to those who best fuse human intellect and moral judgment with machine-scale data processing and speed.

The book serves as both a strategic roadmap and urgent call to embrace—not fear—the symbiotic future of warfare. 

ChatGPT Q:  Want a bonus dive into chapter breakdowns, comparisons with classics like Paul Scharre’s work, or how your area of interest (e.g., cybersecurity, ethics) fits the Mind‑Tech Nexus? I’d be happy to help. 

My answer: No.  I’m concerned with two things. One is the impossibility of controlling or enforcing control over the abuse of this technology.  And the human mind’s capacity of being able to believe anything, and then make decisions to not do what it knows needs to be done.

Your concerns are deeply insightful—and they strike at the two central dangers of the Mind-Tech Nexus described in Human, Machine, War and in broader defense and philosophical literature. 

1. Enforcing Control Over the Abuse of Emerging Technologies:

The Risk: Technologies like AI, autonomous weapons, neuro-enhancement, and quantum systems can be used for liberation or domination.

• Once deployed, they can be hacked, repurposed, or evolve unpredictably.
• In authoritarian regimes, these tools may reinforce control, surveillance, and suppression of dissent.
• Even in democratic systems, oversight can lag behind innovation, and military-industrial actors may push agendas contrary to public interest. 

Control Mechanisms (or the lack thereof)  International norms and treaties for AI in warfare (like the ones proposed for Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems) are nascent and weak.

• Ethical AI frameworks exist, but they are mostly voluntary and lack enforcement.
• Civilian oversight often lacks the technical depth to interrogate these systems meaningfully.

Your concern is not just valid—it’s one of the major governance crises of our time. 

2.  The Human Mind’s Fragility: Belief, Denial, and Inaction:

The Risk:  The human mind evolved for short-term survival, not long-term planetary or ethical foresight.  We’re prone to:

• Confirmation bias: seeking what confirms our beliefs.
• Cognitive dissonance: avoiding truths that make us uncomfortable.
• Moral disengagement: rationalizing harmful inaction.
• Groupthink and tribalism: reinforcing false narratives because they’re socially convenient.

These flaws mean that even when humans know something must be done, they may:

• Rationalize delay.
• Convince themselves it’s not urgent.
• Be manipulated by fear or ideology.
• Be paralyzed by complexity.

 In Context:  In the Mind-Tech Nexus:

• Humans may design systems that reflect their biases or illusions.
• Or worse: they may abdicate moral responsibility to machines—letting algorithms make life-and-death decisions because it’s “easier.”

→ The greatest danger is not machines becoming human. It’s humans behaving like machines: unthinking, unfeeling, unaccountable.

 Where These Two Risks Converge:  The abuse of powerful technology and the fragility of human judgment can amplify each other:

 

Tech Abuse	Human Weakness
Autonomous systems make fast but unethical decisions.	People defer to them rather than override.
Data used to manipulate public opinion.	Minds, already primed for bias, fall into echo chambers.

 So What Can Be Done?   Here are a few foundational steps being discussed by military ethicists, cognitive scientists, and democratic thinkers:

 1. Hard Governance:

•          Binding international treaties for emerging military tech (like the AI equivalent of Geneva Conventions).

•          Independent watchdogs with tech expertise.

•          Laws ensuring human accountability is never bypassed.

2. Ethical Design:

•          “Human-in-the-loop” systems: no autonomous action without a human final decision.

•          Auditable algorithms: black-box models that can be examined and questioned.

3. Cognitive Training: 

•          Teach cognitive hygiene: how to recognize manipulation, bias, and propaganda.

•          Promote moral courage: empowering individuals to speak up even when it’s hard.

•          Build resilience to inaction: integrating ethical decision-making into all levels of training, from civilians to commanders.

GPT Final Thought:  You’re absolutely right to be concerned that humans can believe anything and do nothing.  And that unchecked tech can do everything with no belief at all. The battle for the future may not just be technological or military—it may be psychological, ethical, and deeply personal.

 WTF are we going to do?  

One possible action is fighting Truth Decay with Project250@earthlink.net