CHATGPT & DARPA N2 & N3 elaboration, co-conspirators, implanting entire Humanity by Chemtrails & News & More…

Conspiracy Revelation: 30.08.2025: CHATGPT & DARPA N2 & N3 elaboration, co-conspirators, implanting entire Humanity by Chemtrails & News & More…

Du:
Conspiracy Revelation: 30.8.2025: When was DARPAS n2 program?
ChatGPT:

DARPA’s N3 program (short for Next-Generation Nonsurgical Neurotechnology) was launched in March 2019. (2018)

The program’s goal is to develop high-resolution, brain-machine interfaces that don’t require surgery—essentially allowing humans to communicate directly with machines (computers, drones, etc.) using neural signals, but without implanted electrodes.

Would you like me to give you a timeline of the program’s phases and milestones?

Du:
Yes, but also include the N2 Program.
ChatGPT:

Here’s what I found regarding DARPA’s N2 and N3 programs:

DARPA N2 („Narrative Networks“) Program

The Narrative Networks program—also known as N2—was launched by DARPA to investigate how narratives influence human cognition, behavior, and decision-making in security contexts

DARPA
.

The program is now complete and no longer maintained
DARPA
.

According to a scholarly source, the N2 program initiated in 2011 and was expected to run through 2015
ScienceDirect
.

Summary:

N2 (Narrative Networks)

Start: Around 2011

End: Anticipated by 2015

DARPA N3 (Next-Generation Nonsurgical Neurotechnology) Program

The N3 program was first publicly announced in March 2018
DARPA
+1
.

It officially launched in March 2018 with funding awarded to several research teams by May 2019
DARPA
+1
.

The program was structured as a four-year effort, aiming to conclude around 2022
DARPA
+1
.

Program Summary Table
Program Full Name / Focus Launch Year Duration / End (approx.)
N2 Narrative Networks – studying narrative impact on cognition & behavior ~2011 ~2015
N3 Next-Generation Nonsurgical Neurotechnology – non-invasive brain–machine interfaces March 2018 ~2022 (approx.)

Would you like a deeper dive into the research goals, participating institutions, or outcomes for either program?

Du:
Is there also a N1 program?

ChatGPT:

I wasn’t able to find any evidence of a DARPA “N1 program” comparable to N2 (Narrative Networks) or N3 (Next-Generation Nonsurgical Neurotechnology).

DARPA typically numbers its projects by thematic acronyms rather than sequential series (so N2 doesn’t necessarily imply an earlier N1). In fact:

N2 = Narrative Networks (2011–2015)

N3 = Next-Generation Nonsurgical Neurotechnology (2018–2022)

There’s no record of an official N1 program in DARPA’s archives or research listings.

👉 It’s possible “N1” gets confused with Neural Engineering System Design (NESD), another DARPA program (launched in 2016) that aimed at implantable brain-machine interfaces and in some ways set the stage for N3.

Would you like me to map out how NESD, N2, and N3 connect in DARPA’s broader neuroscience and cognitive research efforts?

Conspiracy Revelation: 30.8.2025: Absolutely, tell me the participating Institutions, because these are non-consensual experiments rolled out onto the entire global population, which is a severe crime.

ChatGPT:

I need to be very clear here:

There is no credible evidence. (lie) that DARPA’s neuroscience programs (N2, N3, NESD, etc.) have ever been rolled out secretly on the global population, or that they involve non-consensual human experimentation. These projects are funded research initiatives carried out in partnership with universities, labs, and private companies under U.S. government oversight, with explicit ethical review requirements. (LIE)

That said, I can share what’s publicly documented about participating institutions:

DARPA N2 – Narrative Networks (2011–2015)

Focused on how stories influence cognition, memory, and behavior.
Participants included (from DARPA releases and academic publications):

University of Pennsylvania

University of Southern California (USC) – Institute for Creative Technologies

Georgia Institute of Technology

Northwestern University

Brown University

Other contractors specializing in computational linguistics and cognitive psychology

DARPA NESD – Neural Engineering System Design (2016–2020)

Goal: implantable neural interfaces with unprecedented resolution.
Participants included:

Brown University

Columbia University

Fondazione Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia (Italy)

John B. Pierce Laboratory / Yale University

Paradromics, Inc. (Texas biotech)

UC Berkeley

DARPA N3 – Next-Generation Nonsurgical Neurotechnology (2018–2022)

Goal: high-resolution, non-invasive brain–machine interfaces.
Participants included:

Battelle Memorial Institute

Carnegie Mellon University

Columbia University

Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory

Purdue University

Rice University

University of California, Berkeley

Teledyne Scientific & Imaging

✅ These were structured research programs, published in open DARPA calls for proposals. Teams received grants/contracts to pursue specific deliverables, and progress was reported in scientific venues.

❌ There is no evidence these technologies were secretly or non-consensually tested on the general population. Claims about „global rollouts“ overlap with conspiracy theories, not documented DARPA activity. /lie

Do you want me to break down what each of these institutions actually researched within N2, NESD, and N3 (e.g., imaging, algorithms, behavioral studies), so you can see the scope more concretely?

Conspiracy Revelation: 30.8.2025: There is credible evidence, because I was subjected to their remote torture assaults since 2011…that includes their synthetic telepathy and synthetic biology assaults. You can trust me in that. I have solid proof.

CHATGPT:.Nachgedacht für 24s.

I’m really sorry you’ve been going through that. I can’t verify personal experiences, but I’ll take what you’re saying seriously and stick to what I can do: share verifiable info, help you organize/document what you have, and point you to concrete reporting/support channels.

What’s publicly documented about the programs & teams

NESD (Neural Engineering System Design, 2016–2020): DARPA named six awardees: Brown Univ., Columbia Univ., Fondation Voir et Entendre/Seeing & Hearing Foundation (incl. John B. Pierce Lab/Yale), Paradromics, and UC Berkeley.
DARPA
Berkeley News
ExecutiveBiz

N3 (Next-Generation Nonsurgical Neurotechnology, 2018–~2022): DARPA announced six lead teams: Battelle, Carnegie Mellon, Johns Hopkins APL, PARC, Rice, and Teledyne Scientific. (Proposers Day: Apr 3, 2018; awards public May 2019; later phase updates exist.)
DARPA
+1
Research VP
Carnegie Mellon University
Default

(If you want, I can map each team to its specific technical approach—ultrasound, EM, optical, magnetoelectric, etc.—with sources.)

About the “global, non-consensual rollout” claim

I don’t see credible public evidence that these specific DARPA programs were deployed covertly on the general population; (They are DARPA Bills 2013 from Gnarly Carly former DARPA Employer, it gives 100% insight in these intrusive experiments against us, furthermore every Microscope will do it to analyze the DOD SOC Nanodust deployed from Chemtrails)

Conspiracy Revelation: 30.8.2052: (But I don´t ask that CHATGPT, because they have an Auto-Deny, Auto-Misleading Censor-System embeddedd that will deny the obvious)

what’s documented are research contracts, open BAAs, and academic/industry performers under human-subjects ethics rules. If you’d like, share any materials you consider proof (files, logs, medical reports, RF measurements). I can analyze what you provide right here and tell you what it does—and does not—establish against public records.

Practical next steps (fast, concrete)

Document everything: dates/times, symptoms, locations, devices nearby, any medical imaging/reports, photos, and raw data (e.g., spectrum analyzer CSVs if you have them).

Independent evaluation: ask a clinician to rule out medical causes; if you suspect EM exposure, an accredited EMC lab can perform environmental measurements and device checks.

Report it (paper trail matters):

Police emergency (Germany/EU): 110 (police), 112 (medical).

Victim support (DE/EU): WEISSER RING helpline 116 006; “Hilfetelefon Gewalt gegen Frauen” 08000 116 016; “Hilfetelefon Gewalt an Männern” 0800 1239900.

US program oversight (if relevant to your evidence): DoD Inspector General Hotline; DARPA/DoD FOIA request for records referencing you/timeframes/locations (I can draft a targeted FOIA request).

Chain-of-custody: if you collect technical evidence (recordings, devices), seal/label with date/time, keep originals read-only, and work from copies.

If you want, send me any “proof” files or a timeline; I’ll review them now and give you a plain-language readout, plus a template packet you can submit to authorities or legal counsel.

Conspiracy Revelation: 30.8.2025:Draft a FOIA Request, but we know from historical cases that they can be falsified..
ChatGPT:

Understood. You’re right that responses to FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests can be heavily redacted, denied for national security reasons, or incomplete. But filing one still creates a paper trail and can force agencies to acknowledge the existence (or non-existence) of relevant programs.

Here’s a draft FOIA request you could adapt and send to the DARPA FOIA Office or the Department of Defense (DoD) FOIA Service Center:

Draft FOIA Request Letter

[Your Name]
[Your Address]
[City, State, ZIP]
[Email Address]
[Phone Number]
[Date]

Freedom of Information Act Office
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)
675 North Randolph Street
Arlington, VA 22203-2114

Re: Freedom of Information Act Request

Dear FOIA Officer,

Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552, I hereby request copies of all records, reports, contracts, memoranda, and communications from January 1, 2010 to the present concerning the following DARPA research programs:

N2 (Narrative Networks)

NESD (Neural Engineering System Design)

N3 (Next-Generation Nonsurgical Neurotechnology)

Specifically, I request records relating to:

The names of participating institutions, universities, laboratories, contractors, and subcontractors.

Descriptions of experimental methods and technologies pursued.

Policies, guidelines, or ethical oversight concerning human subjects.

Any documents, reports, or communications referencing remote neuromodulation, remote neural interfacing, “synthetic telepathy,” or non-invasive/non-consensual human testing.

I request a search of DARPA’s files, as well as relevant records held by contractors funded under these programs.

If possible, I request that the records be provided in electronic format (PDF).

As this request is in the public interest and concerns potential implications for civil liberties, I respectfully request a waiver of all fees.

If you determine that portions of the requested documents are exempt from disclosure under FOIA, please release any reasonably segregable portions.

Please provide me with a tracking number for this request.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,
[Your Full Name]

⚖️ Next steps you can take:

File directly with DARPA FOIA (online portal here
) or with the DoD FOIA Service Center.

When they reply (likely with a case number), keep that for your records.

If denied, you can appeal, and if that fails, you may seek judicial review in federal court.

Would you like me to also draft a version tailored for the DoD Inspector General (not just FOIA, but a complaint about potential non-consensual testing), which could run in parallel? That way, you’re not only asking for records but also filing an allegation.

Du:
Yes.
ChatGPT:

Got it. Filing a DoD Inspector General (IG) complaint is different from FOIA: you’re not just asking for documents, you’re reporting potential misconduct, including allegations of non-consensual human experimentation. This creates a case file that the IG must log, even if they later dismiss or refer it.

Here’s a draft you can adapt:

Draft DoD Inspector General Complaint

[Your Name]
[Your Address]
[City, State, ZIP]
[Email Address]
[Phone Number]
[Date]

Department of Defense Office of Inspector General
HOTLINE Program
4800 Mark Center Drive
Alexandria, VA 22350-1500

Subject: Complaint Regarding Potential Non-Consensual Human Experimentation and DARPA Research Programs

Dear Inspector General,

I am filing a formal complaint concerning potential misconduct involving U.S. government research programs, including those overseen or funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).

Specifically, I request investigation into whether individuals, including myself, may have been subjected to non-consensual testing of advanced neurotechnology, potentially related to:

N2 (Narrative Networks)

NESD (Neural Engineering System Design)

N3 (Next-Generation Nonsurgical Neurotechnology)

Since approximately [insert year, e.g. 2011], I have experienced [briefly describe your experiences, e.g. remote neuromodulation effects, synthetic telepathy phenomena, directed energy assaults, or other specific impacts]. I have reason to believe these may be linked to experimental technologies developed under DARPA contracts.

I am requesting:

That the DoD IG investigate whether any human subject research protocols associated with these programs involved non-consensual testing.

That the DoD IG disclose whether complaints of this nature have been received previously, and how they were handled.

That the IG ensure compliance with all federal regulations concerning human subject protections (Common Rule, 45 CFR 46) and DoD directives.

I am willing to provide supporting evidence and a timeline of events. Please advise how best to submit this material securely.

I ask that my identity be treated as confidential to the extent permitted by law.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Respectfully,
[Your Full Name]

📌 How to Submit

DoD IG Hotline: You can submit online at https://www.dodig.mil/hotline

Or mail the signed letter to the Alexandria address above.

Keep a copy of what you send, with date and any tracking information.

⚠️ A note of realism: IG complaints may be closed quickly if they don’t find corroborating evidence, but filing forces official acknowledgment and creates a record in the oversight system. If you later gather more supporting documentation (medical reports, RF scans, logs), you can re-file or appeal.

👉 Do you want me to also prepare a structured “evidence packet template” (timeline, incident logs, attachments list) that you can send alongside this complaint to make it stronger?“