From: psyberdude <cyberdude@jps.net
by David Guyatt
Archive file# re020101d.html
From Fortean Times

> The Pentagon's crew-cut communication commandos say that less-than-lethal
> (LTL) weapons won't kill you, but what they don't tell you is that their
> new-age, high-tech, armoury has been secretly honed to mind-boggling
> efficacy and it is your mind that's been scheduled for boggling.
>
> Your future shot of non-lethal Novocain might be an electromagnetic field
> that cocoons your every thought and inserts an inaudible 'command' message
> directly into your unconscious. The whole caboodle has been lovingly
> designed to re-programme the way you think ­ and even what you think.
> Alternatively, at the flip of a switch you might be turned off altogether.
>
> Thought can be controlled ­ remotely. There's no need to attach wires or
> electrodes. Nowadays, the spooks of Langley, Fort George Meade and
> elsewhere, can hack straight into your brain. This might sound like the
> rabid fantasising of an X-Files fruitcake, but the technology is out there
> and so is the will to use it.
>
> In 1996, the US Air Force Scientific Advisory Board published a 14-volume
> study of future developments in weapons called New World Vistas. Tucked away
> on page 89 of an ancillary 15th volume are some hair-raising insights into
> the future 'coupling' of man and machine in a section dealing with
> 'Biological Process Control'. The author refers to an 'explosion' of
> knowledge in the field of neuroscience, adding, ominously: " One can
> envision the development of electromagnetic energy sources, the output of
> which can be pulsed, shaped, and focused, that can couple with the human
> body in a fashion that will allow one to prevent voluntary muscular
> movements, control emotions (and thus actions), produce sleep, transmit
> suggestions, interfere with both short-term and long-term memory, produce an
> experience set, and delete an experience set."1 Translating the words
> 'experience set' from military jargon into plain English, this means,
> simply, that they envisage the ability to erase your life's memories and
> substitute a new, fictitious set.
>
>  There is some debate whether these mind-weapons are not already in 'low
> profile' service. By projecting such developments into the future, the
> authors of New Vistas might be camouflaging present day capabilities. A
> similarfuturistic scenario with many references to mind manipulation is
> described in The Revolution in Military Affairs and Conflict Short of War(US
> Army War College, 1994). Authors Steven Metz and James Kievit declare:
> "Behaviour modification is a key component of peace enforcement" and "The
> advantage of [using] directed energy systems is deniability." Savvy
> individuals, the authors ask: "Against whom is such deniability aimed?" The
> direct answer is "the American people". So much for 'open government'.
>
> Set in the year 2010, Metz and Kievit write of "perception moulding" and
> "advanced psycho-technologies" to avoid irksome public protest, but that is
> just the beginning. The major obstacle, they believe, is that "traditional
> American ethics [are] a major hindrance," and thus, sadly "old-fashioned
> notions of personal privacy and national sovereignty [are to be] changed."
>
> Individuals unwilling to go along with the revolutionary changes are
> "identified using comprehensive inter-agency integrated databases." They
> will then be "catergorized" and "sophisticated computerized personality
> simulations" will be used "to develop, tailor and focus psychological
> campaigns for [ie. against] each."
>
> Other techniques to be used in association with these new mind weapons,
> including 'morphing' ­ a present-day ability that controls the distortion of
> TV images.8 So, if you are lucky enough not to have your brains
> electronically scrambled ­ or erased ­ the electronic news media will be
> manipulated especially for you, presenting convincing near-real-life visual
> images through your combined TV set-cum-internet interface.
>
> While these new-age Da Vinci's continue to create their speckled visions of
> our future, we should ask some hard question now; specifically: " Is this
> technology just a futuristic dream or is it here today?"
>