Why Hasn't It Been Turned Off?

If this experience is the work of a military deployment, then it is the work of a machine operated by human beings. And a machine can be turned off at any time. So why hasn't it been?

This concept is the author's speculation. It does not assert that the system it describes exists. Every statement recorded in the journal is an external communication, and every statement heard on the bullhorn, like the bullhorn itself, requires verification. Read this concept under the Critical Disclaimer.

Two tragic ironies

The first is the story people are told: that this is the spirit world, or something extraterrestrial; that no one can stop it; that there is no hope. If it is a machine operated by human beings, none of that is true.

The second is the simplest. The surest way never to "euthanize" anyone for communicating is not to harass them in the first place. The offices doing this can stop at any time. They can simply choose not to communicate. No law of nature compels any of it. This is the work of human beings, and no one has to communicate with anyone.

Who gains from harassment?

Doesn't law enforcement lose every covert opportunity the moment harassment begins? A person who is being harassed knows they are being watched, and a person who knows they are being watched is no longer a covert source of anything. The author is not an intelligence analyst, but the logic seems plain.

And if someone has been experimented on through this system, isn't the best thing anyone could do for them to stop, immediately? What would be surreal, and unusually cruel, is the opposite: Zersetzung tactics used to force a person to accept a home invasion, a beheading, a dissection.

How it began, for the author

According to statements the author has received, he was observed with similar technology from as early as 1998. In all that time he was never spoken to and never harassed, except on rare occasions, and on those occasions what he heard was supportive.

Looking back, the first event that was different from anything before came within weeks of his first COVID-19 vaccination, with Moderna: a silent observer, a brain-to-brain connection. A Pfizer booster followed.

Then, in Portland, Oregon, after his divorce, came something the author can only describe as a horror film. There was no verbal communication at all: only phantom sensations and internal mental images.

When he returned to Denver, the conversations began, with people introducing themselves as the spirit world or as extraterrestrials. As a research professional he was always skeptical, but for a long time he had no explanation.

And then the violence began; the author calls it ultraviolence. Verbal harassment. Attempts to gain entry to his home, or to lure him outside. Shouting, with everyone listening: "Put your hand up for assistance." "Put your motherfucking hand up." Public outcry at three in the morning. Ultrasonic sound attacks, tinnitus, and relentless harassment.

There is no proof that the vaccination has anything to do with this experience, and the author does not claim it does. It is simply the one event that may have affected his health, and the timing is what he observed. Statements on the bullhorn have said, again and again, that no implant is needed to experience voice-to-skull (V2K) communication.

On the record: the ingredients of the COVID-19 vaccines are published, and none of them is a device, a sensor or anything that could receive or transmit a signal. That two things happen close together in time does not mean one caused the other (see Next to each other is not because of each other).

Has it been turned off before?

Based on past statements, and on the author's own experience, the machine has been turned off more than once, and each time the author felt a significant drop, as if his body's chemistry had fallen away.

Statements on the bullhorn, and the author's experience, suggest that anyone connected to this system may feel a rise in serotonin and dopamine simply from being connected to others who are also connected. If so, what happens when it is switched off abruptly? It has been suggested that it should not be: given the ultrasonic sound attacks and the tinnitus people may be living with, the system should be tapered off rather than cut, because of its effect on the human brain.

On the record: no published research documents a remote system that raises serotonin or dopamine. What is documented is that social connection affects mood, and that abrupt changes in stimulation, sleep or stress can make people feel worse before they feel better. Anyone feeling a sudden drop in mood should talk to a doctor; if you are struggling, you can call or text 988 at any time.

The flip side: what if it simply stopped?

How safe would you feel if you were living with this, and out of nowhere it stopped?

Statements have suggested that the author has a degree of protection. When the system goes down, he does not feel better; he feels worse. At the moment, the observation feels like protection, from at least one part of those observing. If the system were turned off, would mayhem follow? Would the people carrying out the harassment and the Zersetzung tactics, and pressing for euthanization, take that cover of darkness to enter people's homes?

Without an explanation, everything feels like a terrible vulnerability, even when the system is off. That is the author's personal opinion. Turning it off is not enough on its own. It has to be explained.

What has been said about why

Over time, statements have offered reasons for leaving it running.

"We do their bidding." One, in paraphrase: We need to get to know the people speaking with us. We do their bidding, in an attempt to understand what they want. If that is the reasoning, the author asks, what does it mean for everyone else? While someone studies the people giving the orders, who is studying what the orders do to the people living under them?

"There is an investigation." Another, repeated historically: it cannot be turned off because there is an investigation; the people responsible have to be caught and identified, and that need is being weighed against keeping things covert. But here is the tragic irony again. Because of the bullhorn, and because of how horrifying a first experience of telepathic communication is, there is nothing covert about what the general population is living through.

A campaign, in public. Consider what it means to run a campaign against a journalist, or against anyone from any country, and to keep it going on the bullhorn with statements like these. Attempts to gain permission to enter someone's home: "Put your hand up. Put your motherfucking hand up for assistance." Another large pattern: "Open your door for the spirit world." If a person puts their hand up, does someone record that as legally binding consent to euthanasia? If someone then comes to the door and is let in, what happens? In the author's view, that person loses their life. Do not raise your hand, do not open the door, and call 911.

It is the predatory nature of all this, intensely predatory, that the author cannot reconcile with anyone trying to prolong a relationship to learn what an enemy wants. It feels less like a strategy than a reaction.

"It's always been this way" — or "it never existed." Asked why anyone would try to gain entry to a home, a very large pattern of statements has answered, in paraphrase: It's an industry standard. It's always been this way. This is just how it's done. Lately, as of October 2026, the suggestion has been the opposite: This never existed. It's a new process. Both cannot be true. Which is it?

Where is the news media?

Why is there no explanation in the news? The record includes another large pattern of communication, which may not appear in the downloadable transcripts: that the news media industry, along with other technology organizations, has been given access to government cloud systems, and the opportunity to experience the eyesight system.

As part of that system, statements describe a risk-mitigation layer. In paraphrase: We have to include euthanization. We have to include it. As if healthcare, and an explanation, were not options. Other statements, again in paraphrase: Historically, we protect national security. But as a citizen, the author was never harassed before his vaccination.

Another statement goes further. In paraphrase: Euthanization is in the building. The suggestion is that news offices have a "euthanization therapist," a psychologist or mental-health professional, on site. Is there any truth to this? And if there were, how would it affect the people who work there, knowing that someone in the building was there for that purpose?

These are reported statements, not findings. Is any of it true? And if it is, who decided that silence was the safer course? (See Why isn't any of this in the news?)

Is anyone in government being told?

Are local and federal leaders being harassed right alongside everyone else, without an explanation? Are we paralyzed as a nation?

Statements also describe local law enforcement taking part in the Diving process, and being remarkably receptive to any education or speculation that might give them an advantage.

Historical statements go further: that the United States, the People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation are each divided down the middle, and that what is being experienced is the harm done by a union of private organizations, representing neither the United States nor the Communist Party. Is that so? And if it is, what is the explanation?

Why 2027?

For two to three years, statements on the bullhorn have pointed to 2027 as a year of significance. One, in paraphrase: I think the window for unconsented research has closed early.

Set that beside the law on ending a life. In most of the world, killing a person, even at their request, is a serious crime; only a handful of countries and states allow assisted dying, and only under strict conditions. Jack Kevorkian, who helped more than a hundred people die, was convicted of second-degree murder in Michigan in 1999 and served eight years in prison.

In Colorado, where the author lives, the End-of-Life Options Act allows medical aid in dying only for an adult with a terminal illness, a prognosis of six months or less, and the capacity to decide for themselves.

Canada's law is broader. Since 2021 a person need not be terminally ill: a serious and incurable illness, disease or disability, in an advanced state of decline, with intolerable suffering, can qualify. But where a mental illness is the only condition, eligibility has been paused, twice, and is now set to begin on 17 March 2027. A bill introduced in 2025 would make that pause permanent. Financial hardship has never been a ground for eligibility under Canadian law, although critics have raised concerns that poverty and a lack of support may lie behind some requests.

That is a documented fact, and it sits alongside the bullhorn statements. When the author asked about it, the answer, in paraphrase, was that 2027 marks the end of unconsented research, and that Canada is protecting its citizens until then from choosing to end their lives unnecessarily.

Is that the connection? And if something is meant to end in 2027, why wait for it?

A machine, not a spirit

This experience is the outcome of a machine. A machine can be turned off, and, if what the author describes is true, it has been before. So why is it still running? And when it is turned off, who will explain what it was?

Remember, all of this is hypothetical. Every statement heard on the bullhorn, and the bullhorn itself, requires verification.

Related glossary: Zersetzung tactics · Phantom sensations · Tinnitus · Telepathy · Diving · Voice-to-skull (V2K) · The Mosquito · Targeted individual · Self-elected suicide

Related concepts: The Diving Ecosystem · Diving · What is the neurotech bullhorn? · Why isn't any of this in the news? · Your house is not haunted · Zersetzung's methods are crimes · Next to each other is not because of each other

Topics: Speculation · Technology · Harassment · Euthanization · Health & physical effects · Proposed solutions