New Non-Lethal Weapons May be Used Against U.S. Citizens Source: Leading Edge
http://www.leadingedgenews.com/Nonlethalwarfare.htm
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Report Presented to the World
Foundation for Natural Sciences on October 17,1998, Interlaken
Switzerland Dr. Begich is the author of "Angels Don't Play This
HAARP", a report on the U.S. Star War's-type weapon in Alaska (High
Frequency Active Auroral Research Program), and publisher of
"Earthpulse Flashpoints" and "Earthpulse Press in Anchorage, Alaska.
He can be contacted at www.earthpulse.com or Box 201393, Anchorage,
Alaska 99520 USA, Telephone: 907-694-1277. Fax: 907-696-1277.
Earthpulse explores subjects related to improving the
human condition and exposes projects which we believe are risky or
unnecessary. This presentation is about some of the science being
developed and contemplated by military planners and others which could
profoundly effect our lives.
The intent of this presentation is to focus discussion
on these new systems by bringing them into the light of day. Is it
possible to trigger earthquakes, volcanic eruptions or weather changes
by man-made activities? Is it possible to create and direct balls of
energy at lightning speeds, to destroy an enemy? Is it possible to
manipulate the behavior, and even the memories, of people using
specialized technologies? The United States military and others
believe that this is the case. Many of these systems are well on their
way to being used in the battlefield.
There are many new technologies being explored that will
cause people to experience artificial memories, delusions and
physical problems. These new technologies are being designed to
minimize death (although death is possible) and to be virtually
undetectable. Many of these new weapons are being called "non-lethal"
in terms of their effect on people. In a February 6, 1998, hearing in
a Foreign Affairs Subcommittee of the European Parliament the issue of
these new technologies was discussed. I was one of those called to
testify along with a number of other people. One of the most
interesting speakers was from the International Red Cross in Geneva,
Switzerland, who gave an excellent presentation on "non-lethals". One
of the points which he made involved the definition of "non-lethal".
Part of the definition involved the idea that such
weapons would result in a less than 25% kill factor for those exposed
to them. He explained the fallacy in this by noting that land mines
would even fit this definition because they did not kill over 25% of
their victims. He explained that lasers which could permanently blind
a person could also fit the definition. He also gave the example of
"sticky foam" being used on an adversary and that this might not kill
the person unless it landed on the victim's face and caused a slow and
agonizing death by suffocation. The main point made was that
non-lethals could indeed be lethal.
Many of the panelists concluded that the term non-lethal
was not accurate in describing these new systems and seemed more like
a ploy by military planners to gain acceptance for the new technology.
Another relevant point made in the
hearing was the frequency of use of these weapons in non-combat
situations or policing actions. Comparisons between Bosnia and
Northern Ireland were made.
It was pointed out that in conflicts where rubber
bullets and other non-lethal systems were available they tended to be
used with greater frequency because the troops using them believed
that they would not kill. Others in conflict situations using weapons
clearly designed for killing used much greater restraint. As of the
date of the hearing, "peace keepers" armed with modern weapons had not
fired a shot in Bosnia whereas in Northern Ireland there were often
injuries and deaths from the use of "non-lethals".
One of the most revealing documents I have found
regarding these new technologies was produced by the Scientific
Advisory Board of the Air Force. The Air Force initiated a significant
study to look forward into the next century and see what was possible
for new weapons. In one of the volumes published as a result of the
study, researchers, scientists and others were encouraged to put
together forecasts of what might be possible in the next century. One
of those forecasts shockingly revealed the following:
"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.
"Think about this for a moment - a system which can
manipulate emotions, control behavior, put you to sleep, create false
memories and wipe old memories clean. Realizing this was a forecast
and not necessarily the current state of technology should not cause
one to believe that it is not a current issue. These systems are far
from speculative. In fact, a great deal of work has already been done
in this area with many systems being developed.
The forecast went on to say: "It would also appear
possible to create high fidelity speech in the human body, raising the
possibility of covert suggestion and psychological direction. When a
high power microwave pulse in the gigahertz range strikes the human
body, a very small temperature perturbation occurs. This is associated
with a sudden expansion of the slightly heated tissue. This expansion
is fast enough to produce an acoustic wave. If a pulse stream is used,
it should be possible to create an internal acoustic field in the 5-15
kilohertz range, which is audible. Thus, it may be possible to "talk"
to selected adversaries in a fashion that would be most disturbing to
them."
Is it possible to talk to a person remotely by
projecting a voice into his head? The forecaster suggests that this
would be "disturbing" to the victim - what an understatement, it would
be pure terror. A weapon which could intrude into the brain of an
individual represents a gross
invasion of their private life. The idea that these new systems could
be created in the next several years should be cause for significant
discussion and public debate.
On July 21, 1994, Dr. Christopher Lamb, Director of
Policy Planning, issued a draft Department of Defense directive which
would establish a policy for non-lethal weapons in the United States.
The policy was intended to take effect January 1, 1995, and formally
connected the militaryıs non-lethal research to civilian law
enforcement agencies. The government's plan to use pulsed
electromagnetic and radio frequency systems as a nonlethal technology
for domestic Justice Department use rings the alarm for some
observers. Nevertheless, the plan for integrating these systems is
moving forward. Coupling these uses with expanded military missions is
even more disturbing. This combined mission raises additional
constitutional questions for Americans regarding the power of the
federal government to use military systems in domestic police actions.
In interviews with members of the Defense Department the
development of this policy was confirmed. In those February, 1995,
discussions, it was discovered that these policies were internal to
agencies and were not subject to any public review process. In its
draft form, the policy gives highest priority to development of those
technologies most likely to get dual use, i.e. law enforcement and
military
applications. According to this document, non-lethal weapons are to be
used on the government's domestic "adversaries'. The definition of
"adversary" has been significantly enlarged in the policy: "The term
adversary" is used above in its broadest sense, including those who
are not declared enemies but who are engaged in activities we wish to
stop.
This policy does not preclude legally authorized
domestic use of the nonlethal weapons by United States military forces
in support of law enforcement." This allows use of the military in
actions against the citizens of the country that they are supposed to
protect. This policy statement begs the question; who are the enemies
that are engaged in activities they wish to stop, what are those
activities, and who will make the decisions to stop these activities?
An important aspect of non-lethal weapon systems is that the name
non-lethal is intentionally misleading. The Policy adds, "It is
important that the public understand that just as lethal weapons do
not achieve perfect lethality, neither will non-lethal weapons always
be capable of precluding fatalities and undesired collateral damage".
In other words, you might still destroy property and kill people with
the use of these new weapons.
In press statements, the government continues to
downplay the risks associated with such systems, even though the
lethal potential is described in the context of their own usage
policy. In Orwellian double speak, what is nonlethal can be lethal. In
an article published in the Spring 1998 edition of Parameters, US Army
War College Quarterly, an article by Timothy L. Thomas appeared - "The
Mind Has No Firewall." The article was perhaps the most revealing in
terms of what can be expected in the future.
For decades the United States, former Soviet Union and
others have been involved in developing new sophisticated systems for
influencing human physical and mental health. The desire and focus of
this research has been to discover ways of manipulating the behavior
of humans in meeting political ends in the context of war-making and
defense. What is interesting in all of this is the sophistication of
external devices which can alter our very nature.
In the article "The Mind has No Firewalls" the author
states: "A recent Russian military article offered a slightly
different slant to the problem, declaring that
humanity stands on the brink of a psychotronic war' with mind and body
as the focus. That article discussed Russian and international
attempts to control the psycho-physical condition of man and his
decision-making processes by the use of VHF-generators, noiseless
cassettes, and other technologies. The article goes on to describe
that the aim of these new weapons is to control or alter the psyche or
interfere with the various parts of the body in such a way as to
confuse or destroy the inner-body signals which keep the living system
operational. The article describes the way "Information Warfare
Theory" neglects the most important factor in information warfare -
the human being. Militaries publicly focus on hardware and software
neglecting the human "data-processor".
In the information warfare theories put forth in the
past, discussion was limited to man-made systems and not the human
operator. Humans were considered in information warfare scenarios only
in that they could be impacted by propaganda, deceit and deception -
all tools recognized as part of the
military mindset and arsenal. This article publicly explores a more
sinister approach, an approach which must be considered in the context
of basic human rights and values....fundamentally and foundationally
based on our right to think freely. The article went on: "Yet the body
is capable not only of being deceived, manipulated, or misinformed but
also shut down or destroyed - just as any other data-processing
system. The data the body receives from external sources - such as
electromagnetic, vortex, or acoustic energy waves - or creates through
its own electrical or chemical stimuli can be manipulated or changed
just as the data (information) in any hardware system can be altered."
The United States military in Joint Publication 3-13.1
considers the human body in the context of information warfare in
addressing "psychological operations (PSYOP)" where it is noted: "the
ultimate target of (information warfare) is the information dependent
process, whether human or automated...Command and control warfare
(C2W) is an application of information warfare in military
operations...C2W is the
integrated use of PSYOP, military deception, operations security,
electronic warfare and physical destruction." The aim of any
information war ultimately deals with human beings. The policy of the
United States is to target all information dependent systems "whether
human or automated" and the definition extends the use of these new
technologies to people - as if they were just data-processing
hardware.
The Parameters article went on to discuss the work of
Dr. Victor Solntsev of the Baumann Technical Institute in Moscow. He
insists that the human body must be viewed as an open system instead
of simply as an organism or closed system. This "open system" approach
has been held by many Russian researchers and others going back to at
least the early 1970's according to documents held by Earthpulse. What
is interesting is that it has taken thirty years to be seen in the
open literature as a credible view of reality. Dr. Solntsev goes on to
suggest that a person's physical environment can cause changes within
the body and mind whether stimulated by electromagnetic,
gravitational, acoustic, or other stimuli.
The same Russian researcher examined the issue of
"information noise" which can create a dense shield between a person
and external reality. The "noise could be created as signals,
messages, images or other information with the target population the
consciousness of the group or individuals. The purpose would be to
overload a person so that they no longer reacted to the external
stimulus or information. The overloading would serve to destabilize
judgment or modify behavior. According to Solntsev at least one
computer virus has been created which will affect a person's psyche -
Russian Virus 666. This virus appears in every 25th frame of a
computers visual display where a mix of color, pulse and patterns are
reported to put computer operators into trance. The subconscious
perception of the display can be used to induce a heart attack or to
subtly manage or change a computer operators perceptions. This same
system could be used in any television or visual broadcast.
In a July 7, 1997 U.S. News and World Report article it
was revealed that scientists were seeking for specific energy patterns
which could be externally applied to the body of individuals for the
purpose of modifying their behavior. The article addressed some of the
important public revelations about these new systems. These
"revelations" represent but a small part of the story. Why has the
military begun to present these new systems in the major media? An
earlier work quoted by Earthpulse may shine some light on the answer.
The "Revolution in Military Affairs" (RMA) encapsulates the idea that
technology has changed to such a degree the very foundation of war is
altered. The paper on this subject was put forward by the United
States Army War College and it suggested that what was coming in new
technology could be equated to the introduction of gun powder to
Europe a few centuries ago or the discovery of the atom bomb in more
recent history. That paper also suggests that these new systems may be
contrary to American
values and that their introduction would be heatedly opposed in the
United States.
On the one hand, I am thankful that the writers of that
paper recognized that Americans had values; on the other hand, in the
same paper the writers proposed that in order to introduce these new
weapon systems that American values would have to be changed! It is
particularly alarming when military "think-tanks" begin to publish
material in which they propose that commonly held national and human
values are insufficient to meet the demands of desired military
objectives in introducing new technology. What is wrong with this
picture? Do these institutions and their extension to other public
enterprises reflect popular values or do they create popular values?
Are these public and quasi-public institutions, focused
on defense and warfare the right groups to determine values or should
they be the reflectors of popular values so that a nation's
foundational truths are expressed through their national institutions.
Are Americans, our allies and our enemies all targets of a
sophisticated PSYOP which makes fiction pail in comparison? The
buzzwords haunting the Pentagon today are revolution in military
affairs". The idea, simply put, is that the same technologies that
have transformed the American
workplace may have no less profound an effect on the American way of
war." This concept, "revolution in military affairs" (RMA), first
emerged in a document issued by the U.S. Army War College in July,
1994 - The Revolution in Military Affairs. This document said a
philosophy of "conflict short of war" ("terrorism, insurgency or
violence associated with narcotrafficking") requires new weapons and a
change in public opinion.
It asserts that this change in opinion does not have to
evolve naturally, but can be deliberately shaped by the government.
The idea is that belief systems of Americans can be slowly altered to
allow the military to introduce new weapons technology which, at this
time, would be resisted by most Americans. What this book puts forward
is: ³In its purest sense, revolution brings change that is permanent,
fundamental, and rapid. The basic premise of the revolution in
military affairs (RMA) is simple: throughout history, warfare usually
developed in an evolutionary fashion, but occasionally ideas and
inventions combined to propel dramatic and decisive change. This not
only affected the application of military force, but often altered the
geopolitical balance in favor of those who mastered the new form of
warfare.
"The Revolution in Military Affairs describes "people's
wars", which it limits to Marxist ideologies. The phrase could be
equally applied to what occurred in the Philippines and to Eastern
Europe's popular revolutions in the late 1980's. The military's
writers say that there is a shift to "spiritual" and "commercial"
insurgencies, which they do not define well. They imply that these
kinds of "insurgencies" represent national security risks to be
defended against. This may be the case but, who will decide what is
"spiritually" or "commercially" correct? The military's authors
discuss emerging technologies which may go against Americans' beliefs
in such things as the presumption of innocence, the right to disagree
with the government, and the right to free expression and movement
throughout the world. At one point in the document they discuss the
need to use new technology to keep track of Americans traveling out of
the United States:
"While advances in robotics and information
technologies may make it possible to perform many commercial
activities with fewer employees in dangerous regions, those Americans
who are overseas will be more isolated and dispersed. This complicates
the main problems of NEOs (noncombatant evacuation operations):
identification and notification of the individuals to be evacuated,
identification of safe routes, and
assessment of threats to the evacuation. Technology could diminish
these problems. In the near future every American at risk could be
equipped with an electronic individual position locator device (IPLD).
The device, derived from the electronic bracelet used to
control some criminal offenders or parolees,would continuously inform
a central data bank of the individuals locations. Eventually such a
device could be permanently implanted under the skin, with automatic
remote activation either upon departure from the U.S. territory (while
passing through the security screening system at the airport, for
example) or by transmission of a NEO alert code to areas of conflict.
Implantation would help preclude removal of the device (although, of
course, some terrorists might be willing to remove a portion of the
hostage's body if they knew where the device was implanted). The IPLD
could also act as a form of IFFN (identification friend, foe or
neutral) if U.S. military personnel were equipped with appropriate
challenge/response devices.
The most likely people to receive the implants are
military personnel who will be told that this will help rescue them if
they are captured. They may be the first, setting the
stage for the rest of the country. Will our military personnel object
seeing this as an invasion of their private lives? Another technology
mentioned is a method for interfering with activities the government
judges to be wrong. In the examples given (drug traffickers and
terrorists), most of us would agree intervention should take place at
some level. However, the methods contemplated are extreme. Will those
with the power to invade the privacy of individuals do so and without
just cause? Will the holders of the power be trusted by the rest of
the population? The military planners anticipate a resounding - "NO"!
Therefore, they propose a series of events to shift the popular view
to the opposite extreme. They propose a revolution of society which
will allow for a Revolution in Military Affairs.
At this point, they lay out a fictional scenario where
the illusion of the need for this kind of control could be created. In
the scenario, a plan to desensitize the population to increasing
control and, introduction of the new technology, through systematic
manipulation and disinformation by the government is initiated. What
they have put forward might even
be underway. Under their nonfiction scenario the military's writers
say: "For example, remote intrusive monitoring of the financial
computer networks of offshore banks could identify the deposits
associated with money laundering. If desired, such accounts could be
electronically emptied."
In another section, the document emphasizes behavior and
attitude alteration. This is the very heart of an RMA. "Greatly
improved intelligence gathering and fusion is a primary component of
the RMA, and proposed information warfare capabilities might be
ideally suited for helping develop desired emotions, attitudes, or
behavior." The entire text of this little book will leave readers
wondering - If this is the kind of material the military is letting
out for public review, what are they hiding in those billion dollar
"black budgets"?
In another section The Revolution in Military Affairs
discusses the reality of the RMA: "Even with all the constraints and
countermeasures, there is some value in applying emerging technology
using existing strategy, doctrine, organization, force structure,
objectives, concepts, attitudes and norms. But there is another
alternative: we could deliberately engineer a comprehensive
revolution, seeking utter transformation rather than simply an
expeditious use of new technology. However alluring, such a program is
rife with hidden dangers and unintended consequences. Unlike the
Manhattan Project, we are not forced to pursue revolution without
considering the implications. In conflict short of war, RMA is a
Pandora's box desperately in need of careful scrutiny before opening.
Questions are not just being raised just by Earthpulse,
they are being raised by the International Committee of the Red Cross.
In their report from mid-1994,10 a number of points were raised. The
idea of "war without death" is not new but began in the 1950's,
according to the report. The military interest in these systems
originally dealt with chemical weapons, later advancing to electronic
systems. The report looked at the ramifications of international law
regarding use
of these new technologies. It pointed out weaknesses in the
international conventions regarding the use of chemical weapons which
can be extended to these other emerging technologies:
"Therefore, when the Convention (Chemical Weapons
Convention) comes into force next year, activities involving them -
activities such as development, production, stockpiling and use - will
become illegal, unless their purpose is a purpose that is expressly
not prohibited under the Convention. One such purpose is law
enforcement including domestic riot control purposes. Unfortunately,
the Convention does not define what it means by law enforcement (whose
law? what law? enforcement where? by whom?), though it does define
what it means by riot control agent, namely any chemical...which can
produce rapidly in humans sensory irritation or disabling physical
effects which disappear within a short time following termination of
exposure. States parties are enjoined not to use riot control agents
as a method of warfare".
In other words, we can use on our own citizens what we
cannot use in warfare with real enemies who are threats to national
security. This explains why the development of some types of
non-lethals has moved out of the Department of Defense into the
Department of Justice. For the Department of Defense to continue to
work on some of these weapons, as instruments of war, is now illegal
under international law. The Red Cross report went on to discuss the
shift from weapons of war to police tools which they called - "riot
control agents". What
does this mean for people? This places Americans, and citizens of
other countries, in a lesser protected class than individuals seeking
to destroy our countries - our real adversaries. This language really
represents a way for countries to continue to develop these weapons.
This is a loop-hole in the agreement. So while the treaty looks good
on the surface, it is hollow rhetoric underneath.
In a section of the report, "Future Weapons Using High
Power Microwaves" are discussed at length. This section describes
microwave frequencies developed for use in weapons against machines
and people. One of the uses described is an Electromagnetic Pulse
(EMP) weapon which gives an operator the same ability to wipe out
electronic circuits as a nuclear blast would provide. The main
difference is that this new technology is controllable, and can be
used without violating nuclear weapons treaties. This section of the
report then described
energy levels needed for the following to occur:
* "Overheats, damages animal tissue". The effects are based on radio frequency radiation. The
report confirmed that non-thermal effects were being researched. These
non-thermal effects included damage to human health when the effects
occurred "within so-called modulation frequency windows (Hertz is one
such window) or power density windows". The way these weapons work was
clearly described when the report noted their effect on machines: "A
HPM (High Power Microwave) weapon employs a high power, rapidly
pulsating microwave beam that penetrates electronic components. The
pulsing action internally excites the components, rapidly generating
intense heat which causes them to fuse or melt, thus destroying the
circuit...HPM (weapons) attack at the speed of light thus making
avoidance of the beam impossible, consequently negating the advantage
of weapon systems such as high velocity tactical missiles."
In other words, with this kind of weapon there is no
machine which could get by this invisible wall of directed energy.
Another report on non-lethal technologies, issued by the Council on
Foreign Relations points out that, "The Nairobi Convention, to which
the United States is a signatory, prohibits the broadcast of
electronic signals into a sovereign state without its consent in
peacetime." This report opens discussion of the use of these weapons
against terrorists and drug traffickers. The CFR report recommends
this be done secretly so the victims do not know where the attack is
from, or if there even is an attack.
There is a problem with this approach. The use of these
weapons, even against these kinds of individuals, may be in violation
of United States law in that it presumes guilt rather than innocence.
In other words the police, CIA, DEA or other enforcement organizations
become the judge, jury and executioner. Going to another document by a
Captain Paul Tyler, we can look at the debate between classical
theories and recent research. There is a gulf of conflict between
these two schools of thought. The debate centers on the classical idea
that only ionizing radiation (that which generates heat in tissue) can
cause reactions in the body, while new research indicates that subtle,
small, amounts of energy can cause reactions as well. What Tyler wrote
in 1984, as an officer in the Air Force, puts the debate simply. He
said, "Even though the body is basically an electrochemical system,
modern science has almost exclusively studied the chemical aspects of
the body and to date has largely neglected the electrical aspects.
However, over the past decade researchers have devised many
mathematical models to approximate the internal fields in animals and
humans. Some of the later models have shown general agreement with
experimental measurements made with the phantom models and animals.
Presently most scientists in the field use the concept
of specific absorption rate for determining the Dosimetry (dosages) of
electromagnetic radiation. Specific absorption rate is the intensity
of the internal electric field or quantity of energy
absorbed...However, the use of these classical concepts of
electrodynamics does not explain some experimental results and
clinical findings. For example, according to classical physics, the
frequency of visible light would indicate that it is reflected or
totally absorbed within the first few millimeters of tissue and thus
no light should pass through significant amounts of tissue. But it
does. Also, classical theory indicates that the body should be
completely invisible to extremely low frequencies of light where a
single wave length is thousands of miles long. However, visible light
has been used in clinical medicine to transilluminate various body
tissues."
In other words, the classical theories are partially
wrong in that they do not fully explain all of the reactions which are
observed in the body. The Navy has abstracted over a thousand
international professional papers by private and government scientists
which explore these issues. Tyler continues, "A second area where
classical theory fails to provide an adequate explanation for observed
effects is in the clinical use of extremely low frequency (ELF)
electromagnetic fields. Researchers have found that pulsed external
magnetic fields at frequencies below 100 Hertz (pulses/cycles per
second) will stimulate the healing of nonunion fractures, congenital
pseudarthroses, and failed arthroses. The effects of these pulsed
magnetic fields have been extremely impressive, and their use in
orthopaedic conditions has been approved by the Food and Drug
Administration." Even the FDA, one of the most vigorous regulatory
authorities in the country, accepts these non-thermal effects. Tyler
adds, "Recently, pulsed electromagnetic fields have been reported to
induce cellular transcription (this has to do with the duplication or
copying of information from DNA, a process important to life).
At the other end of the non-ionizing spectrum, research
reports are also showing biological effects that are not predicted in
classical theories. For example, Kremer and others have published
several papers showing that low intensity millimeter waves produce
biological effects. They have also shown that not only are the effects
seen at very low power, but they are also frequency-specific." Tyler
goes on to discuss the results of this new thinking and the possible
effects of these low energy radiations in terms of information
transfer and
storage, and their effects on the nervous system. Research has shown
that very specific frequencies cause very specific reactions, and,
once a critical threshold is passed, negative reactions occur.
It has been fourteen years since Tyler's paper was
delivered and the controversy began to take form. Now there is even
more energy being pressed into the anchoring of the newest means of
killing and maiming one another. "Imagine a world where land mines
don't blow up but give off an eerie sound that makes intruders feel
sick. Or a war where attackers don't use missiles to stop tanks but
microwaves to shut down engines."
The Institute for Non-Lethal Defense Technologies at
Penn State College has been established in cooperation with the United
States Marines. The institute was created to evaluate weapons created
by organizations outside the military. The new institute will look at
legal, ethical, political, environmental and physical effects of these
new technologies. There has been a good deal of speculation about the
possibilities of creating artificial weather and of controlling the
weather. This it not new and has been the subject of on-going military
research for decades.
Moreover, in 1976 the United States signed international
treaties calling for a ban on "geophysical warfare". The use of new
weapons is not limited to governments and sophisticated science
laboratories. In April, 1997, the United States Secretary of Defense,
William Cohen made the following comment: "Others are engaging even in
an eco-type of terrorism whereby they can alter climate, set off
earthquakes and volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic
waves." This is not new either but has its roots in 1960-70's era
research by American scientists and continues to appear
in numerous articles and reports. The idea of creating artificial
weather including cyclones is being explored.
In a recent article in the Wall Street Journal it was
reported that "a Malaysian company, BioCure Sdn. Bhd., will sign a
memorandum of understanding soon with a government-owned Russian party
to produce the Cyclone." The deal with the Russians was set up so that
if the technology did not work the
Malaysians did not have to pay for the attempt. There have been other
reports of Russian research into this area. What else might be on the
way? In a 1989 patent a most interesting bit of science is revealed.
The development of new energy weapons has occupied the imaginations
and resources of our national and private laboratories. One such
weapon idea is owned by the United States Department of Energy. It is
a new kind of weapon which allows electromagnetic or acoustic energy
to be focused into a tight package of energy which can be projected
over great distances without dissipating. When scientists thought of
this energy being projected through the air it was always assumed that
the energy would dissipate, dispersing at such a rapid rate that no
weapon's effect could be realized. What has been discovered is that
there is a way to create such a system.
In a U. S. patent the following summary appears: "The
invention relates generally to transmission of pulses of energy, and
more particularly to the propagation of localized pulses of
electromagnetic or acoustic energy over long distances without
divergence." "As the Klingon battle cruiser attacks the Starship
Enterprise, Captain Kirk commands "Fire photon torpedoes". Two darts
or blobs of light speed toward their
target to destroy the enemy spaceship. Stardate 1989, Star Trek
reruns, or 3189, somewhere in intergalactic space. Fantasy or reality.
The ability to launch localized packets of light or
other energy which do not diverge as they travel great distances
through space may incredibly be at hand." The patent describes the
energy effect as "electromagnetic missiles or bullets" which could
destroy almost any object in their path. Remember Star Wars? That
weapon concept would move the theater of war to space. In 1995, the
funding for Star Wars was widely reported as a dead issue when full
funding was defeated by the United States Congress. Star Wars did not
end. As many unpopular
programs do - they just get new names.
"This year the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization
(once called the Strategic Defense Initiative) got $3.7 billion.
That's up from $2.8 billion in 1995, and is very near the peak level
spent during the Cold War." What is interesting is that - the billions
spent on Star Wars systems, which these became known as, were only for
"research" according to the military's mission statement. The
technology is being advanced in the hope that a system might be
developed early in the next century. The external threats are now
being characterized as rogue states and terrorist organizations which
might gain delivery technologies. While the threats are not imagined
and need to be addressed, it is not responsible to create word games
which end public debate and allow systems thought to be discontinued
the latitude to proceed.
In several recent news reports in Alaska the issue of a
new defense initiative has begun to surface. United States Senator Ted
Stevens, the Chairman of the most powerful committee in the Congress,
is insisting that a new system be created which protects Alaska and
Hawaii. The current defense system for intercontinental ballistic
missiles does not protect these regions. Additionally, President
Clinton has made statements that the problem of Alaska and Hawaii
should be addressed. The suggestions now being filed include basing
the new 11 billion
dollar system in Alaska. What is also interesting is the discussion
surrounding agreements with the former Soviet Union which preclude
such an initiative. The rationale of some elected officials suggests
that "if the Soviet Union no longer exists then these agreements are
no longer in effect". Earthpulse takes the position that this approach
is highly destabilizing and provocative particularly given the state
of domestic policy and ideological shifts taking place in Russia.
In another "offshoot of the Reagan administration's
Strategic Defense Initiative" satellite-disabling lasers have been
developed. A test, at less than full power, was performed at the end
of 1997 to demonstrate the ability of the system to hit its target.
The demonstration was a
success and now many are concerned that this may provoke an arms race
in space. This is the same concern which was raised when this
technology was first discussed in public forums. There was a good deal
of objection and yet here we are two decades later delivering on the
"impossible" technology.
New energy weapons have been described as being capable
of creating symptoms of sea sickness, signals can be used to resonate
the inner organs to cause pain and spasms, induce epileptic-like
seizures or cause cardiac arrest. Other weapons include, according to
the article, those which cause or prevent sleep, override voluntary
muscle movements or otherwise affect the brain. The "Black Widow"
overrides muscle movement with 100,000 units being added to the
Russian government's arsenal in recent years. "The term
Opsycho-terrorism' was coined by Russian writer N. Anisimov of the
Moscow Anti-Psychotronic Center.
According to Anisimov psychotronic weapons are those
that act to Otake away a part of the information which is stored in a
man's brain. It is sent to a computer, which reworks it to the level
needed for those who need to control a man, and the modified
information is then reinserted into the brain.' These weapons are used
against the mind to induce hallucinations, sickness, mutations in
human cells, zombification,' or even death. Included in the arsenal
are VHF generators, X-rays, ultrasound, and radio waves. Russian army
Major I. Chernishev, writing in the military journal Orienteer in
February 1997, asserted that psy' weapons are under development all
over the globe. Specific types of weapons noted by Chernishev (not all
of which have prototypes) were:
* A psychotronic generator, which produces powerful
electromagnetic emanation capable of being sent through telephone
lines, TV, radio networks, supply pipes and incandescent lamps.
* An autonomous generator, a device that operates in the
10-150 Hertz band, which at the 10-20 Hertz band forms an infrasonic
oscillation that is destructive to all living creatures.
* A nervous system generator, designed to paralyze the
central nervous systems of insects, which could have the same
applicability to humans.
* Ultrasonic emanations, which one institute claims to
have developed. Devices using ultrasound emanations are supposedly
capable of carrying out bloodless internal operations without leaving
a mark on the skin. They can also, according to Chernishev, be used to
kill.
* Noiseless cassettes. Chernishev claims that the
Japanese have developed the ability to place infra-low frequency voice
patterns over music, patterns that are detected by the subconscious.
Russians claim to be using similar "bombardments" with computer
programming to treat alcoholism and smoking.* The 25th-frame effect,
alluded to above, a technique wherein each 25th frame of a movie reel
or film footage contains a message that is picked up by the
subconscious.
* Psychotropics, defined as medical preparations used to
induce a trance, euphoria, or depression. Referred to as "slow-acting
mines,".... Symptoms include headaches, noises, voices or commands in
the brain, dizziness, pain in the abdominal cavities, cardiac
arrhythmia, or even the destruction of the cardiovascular system.
In the course of research by Dr. Janet Morris, coauthor
of The Warriors Edge, in 1991 was given a tour of the Russian
Department of Psycho-Correction at the Moscow Medical Academy where
she was shown a method whereby researchers could monitor the human
mind of an individual and then using infra-sound, very low frequency
transmissions, a message could be transmitted subliminally to the
brain. Earthpulse has a device designed for behavior modification and
other applications which can demonstrate this "infra-sound" effect.
The Russian research suggested the vigorous exploration
also of the military possibilities of ESP research including reading
human thoughts, influencing objects at a distance, moving objects with
the mind or directly interfering with the thoughts of other people.
The U.S. has also followed this research and engaged in its own
explorations. The main point here is that other countries are engaging
in this kind of research with the expressed purpose of attacking the
physical bodies of their adversaries. Research efforts by private and
government labs continue to be advanced. The issue of acoustic or
sound transfer to the human brain of radio frequency radiation (RFR)
in the public literature was summarized in June 1996 in a document
Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Radiation: A Review Pertinent to Air
Force Operations (Al/OE-TR-1996-0035).
This document was prepared by the Air Force Materiel
Command located at Brooks Air Force Base, Texas. The report summarized
a number of the studies on the effect of RFR for military
applications. This information builds on the earlier efforts of the
military in RFR research, specifically the call for weapons research
in this area. An earlier work prepared to advance this research was
put together by the same organization - Radiofrequency Radiation
Dosimetry Handbook, United States Air Force School of Aerospace
Medicine, Brooks Air Force Base, Texas, October 1986. This publication
is an index to research and a summary of findings into the specific
radio frequency effects on the various parts of the human body. In
"Radical Destabilizing Effects of New Technologies" written by Thomas
Adams for the U.S. Army War College's publication, Parameters (Autumn
1998), three areas continue to grow in
importance in both civilian and military environments.
Information systems, biotechnology and nanotechnology
are mutually reinforcing in their development and are changing the
very nature of knowledge disbursement. The advances in these areas,
according to the article, are transferring enormous power and
potential to the general public.
Technology is advancing in a way which is creating a diffusion of
power best exemplified by the Internet. The Internet places huge
research resources at the fingertips of anyone willing to ask a
question and pursue a line of thinking. The results can be incredible.
While for many individuals it represents an opportunity to expand and
advance knowledge, for military planners the idea that knowledge
allowing access to powerful technologies can not be restricted creates
a great deal of fear.
The article expressed concern that the availability of
the technology emerging from these three areas could shift power in a
way which could create greater breakups of composite states such as
the former Soviet Union and increase the possibility in China and
other parts of the world. One of the primary concerns in this article
dealt with access to this new technology becoming a destabilizing
force within regions. Specifically, the article suggested that
organized crime, private armies, urban gangs, insurgents, regional
separatists, conspiracy theory terrorists, radical cults,
neo-Luddites, and violent environmentalists together with
anti-government militias and "hobbyists" who disrupt information
systems as a form of recreation, will gain access to this new
technology.
The future, to a great extent, is already here. What
remains of this predicted future to occur has probably already been
designed or will be in the next few years. Already the privacy of
individuals is compromised by every purchase we make where the
information is digitized. From the list of goods purchased at the
store with a scanner and charged to a debit or credit card to all
telephone calls and other forms of communication - all are transparent
to those who have access to the systems. In the future, given the pace
of miniaturization and information processing, it will soon be
possible to monitor all forms of communication, create miniature
surveillance equipment at a cost where the monitoring of inner cities,
then whole cites and regions will be possible.
In March 1998 a paper, "Non-Lethal Technologies:
Implications for Military Strategy", was authored by U.S. Air Force
Colonel Joseph Siniscalchi and published by the Center for Strategy
and Technology, Air War College, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama. The
paper suggests that a "focus on Global Management" is the direction of
militaries because the overriding unifying force of the great powers
of the United States, Europe, Japan, China and Russia is now a shared
and interdependent economic system driven by expansion and growth. The
lack of competing ideologies with the exception of China removes the
primary threats to global security and replaces them with new ones.
These new military threats are groups or "non-state actors" motivated
by religious causes, nationalism, ethnic rivalries and
narco-interests. Dealing with these groups in the territorial
boundaries of other countries limits military intervention or, at
least it was assumed so, until the United States attacked a suspected
terrorist organization inside
Afghanistan.
The distance from adversaries is also increasing
primarily because of the accuracy and range of conventional arms and
because of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. War will
resemble more of a video game for those countries using the most
sophisticated technologies, removing the fighting person from the
conflict entirely. What does this do? In the past when wars were
fought there was always the distaste for conflict based on the actual
experience of war on the battlefield. Returning men and women had a
high motivation for guarding against future conflict because of the
emotional impact of warfare. Not so now. With these new systems a few
operators can level a region without any contact with those they kill.
The military insists that because of the changes in the
nature of the conflicts that there is greater need to bring forward
the newest weapons with the hope that these new systems will minimize
noncombatant casualties, reduce property destruction and increase
control in areas judged to be a threat. The proliferation of first and
second generation non-lethal weapons will occur quickly because the
technologies and equipment are not uniue and are widely available to
those with the knowledge to use and assemble them. These same advances
make possible the use of these new technologies against governments,
with the increases in electronic sophistication making developed
countries' systems even more vulnerable to attack.
An additional risk with the use of these new non-lethal
systems is the risk of conflict escalation. If a country is unable to
counterattack in kind it will likely resort to conventional war
fighting methods, terrorism or weapons of mass destruction. The idea
that non-lethal weapons could be used in conflicts with the emerging
threats of "non-state" actors presupposes that all of the conflict
participants are operating at the same "logic or rational thought
basis" or that they make decisions based on similar value-sets. This
is a bad and inaccurate assumption given the history of conflicts
involving these players. The fact is they do not react in predictable
ways and to expect them to be coerced by new systems is probably
unrealistic and may serve to only increase the combatants resolve.
The newer technologies offer militaries and states the
possibility of non-visible combat. The idea that a country'
s communications, power generation and transfer systems, and all forms
of electronic data processing can be shut down is mind boggling. The
paper suggests that adding this factor to economic sanctions would
increase the immediacy of the effect of such sanctions and eliminate
all access to supply. As an example: "...disrupting television, radio,
and commercial communications can isolate a state's leadership, or
denying electrical production can grind an economy to a halt." "...The
following are examples of non-lethal technologies that are employed to
augment sanctions. To enforce sanctions, EMP munitions, delivered via
cruise or air launched missiles, can disable suspect shipping within a
designated restricted area. EMP sea mines may be employed in the
restricted area to deter any maritime traffic. The port activities can
be disrupted via air-launched EMP weapons to disable electronic
components of infrastructure equipment and the electronic ignition of
transportation vehicles at selected port areas."
One of the things which has always bothered me as a
researcher is how the little guy is always held to a high standard of
accountability while big organizations get away with murder. I am not
suggesting that individuals should be held to a lesser standard -
quite to the contrary. Organizations responsible for the security of
our nation should be held to the highest standards. We must ask
ourselves what these agencies are charged with protecting and whether
their actions follow the values expressed in law. Are there reasons
that the government should be excused from meeting the requirements of
the law?
Is there good cause for hiding behind laws which allow for the
exploitation of other laws? An article appeared recently which
illustrates the point, as follows:
"A former CIA officer from the agency's top secret black
bag' unit that breaks into foreign embassies to steal code books was
charged with espionage Friday for tipping off two countries about the
CIA's success in compromising their communications." Douglas Groat was
fired in 1996 from the CIA's Science and Technology Directorate and
could now face the death penalty. These super secret teams are sent
around the world to break into embassies and other locations to steal
codes and other information so that the National Security Agency (NSA)
can
intercept a country's classified communications and know their
contents. The article concluded, "The CIA has never publicly
acknowledged the existence of its Oblack-bag' teams because their
operations, are by their nature, illegal. And they not only target
America's adversaries but embassies of friendly powers."
Consider the contents of this article from the
perspective of one of our allies. Remember a few years ago the outrage
of our government when we discovered that the State of Israel was
using its intelligence gathering resources in the U.S. It was an
outrage - or was it just the game we all play? Why should we expect
anything less of our allies then we expect of ourselves? One of the
hidden aspects of these new systems as well as a major complication
for all countries relying on complex computer systems to operate their
war making and civilian systems is the Y2K computer bug. This is a
situation where certain computer programs and hardware circuits have
been designed to interpret which year it is, based on the last two
digits of the year. We can all think of the forms we have completed or
the times when for a date we just give the last two numbers such as
O98' when indicating the date.
In the August 6, 1998 issue of Computer Weekly an
article titled "G8 Triggers Date Bug Fear" appeared. In the article it
was disclosed that: "Minutes from a closed door meeting of officials
from the G8 group...show that the nuclear industries have been
identified as being at risk from the date bug." The article went on to
describe some of the potential problems with only a few hundred days
remaining until the calendar turns over to the next millennium. The
third world and even industrialized countries, particularly Eastern
Europe, are a particular "worry" according to the report. The
potential for problems in the nuclear industry, financial sectors, and
military forces relying on communication, information and
transportation systems which may be adversely effected are huge and,
for the most part, full of risks which have not been assessed. The
reliance on these systems is causing bleak forecasts for the future
and may even, in the most extreme scenarios being put forward by
experts from around the world,
push the planet into a large scale recession or possibly depression.
The potential risks are growing and government assurances of being
able to resolve the problem are unrealistic according to the experts
in the field. In the United States, audits conducted by the government
on military systems reported to be compliant and ready for the
calendar change have in many instances indicated their non-compliance.
For weapon systems, communications and transportation the impact could
be devastating.
The HAARP story provided an opportunity for Earthpulse
as a beginning point of our investigations into new weapon system
developments. Of particular interest, given my background, was the
public policy considerations of the deployment of these new weapons in
the context of democratic and free societies. The ethical and moral
questions which are not being adequately debated and addressed has
become the greater focus of our work. HAARP, although it occupies the
majority of our time, represents a very small fraction of our work.
In this presentation I hoped to disclose some of the
technology which is here now and advancing rapidly. More than this, I
am hopeful that the information would be useful in assessing the state
of technology from what appears in some of the open literature. What
has happened in the United States, which has allowed segments of our
government to set agendas which run counter to the values most of us h
old? The transparency of government - the idea that we should be able
to look into our government and see clearly the values of the
population reflected there is an absolute expectation. Are there risks
in transparent government? Yes, an open society necessitates that
certain risks be taken.
As technology advances, the ability to control
populations and manipulate outcomes also advances. Because we know how
to control the weather, create earthquakes, force behavioral changes
and manipulate the physiology of people does not mean that we should
do so. The age we are in requires even greater safeguards of personal
freedoms, not further constraints upon them. If freedom is what is
being defended then maintaining the values which form the basis of
freedom is what must be inherent in the actions our governments take
in creating aspects of our reality. The Cold War is not over, but has
changed. We know that there are concerns which, being a free people,
we must address and bring to the attention of others. We believe that
the greatest threat to freedom is an over-oppressive and increasingly
secretive government.
To many, the government has shifted from one "of the
people, by the people and for the people" to a government "of special
interests, for their own benefit, at the peoples' expense". What went
wrong, and where it went wrong, to a large extent, is a product of the
intelligence bureaucracies which thrive through one administration to
the next with unrestrained growth. These secretive bureaucracies hide
more and more of their agendas under a cloak of "national security",
while drifting further from the principles which have allowed
democratic states to exist. Secret government policy is not sanctioned
by the free will of the population, and threatens the core beliefs of
liberty, honest government and public responsibility.
The only truly free people are those who live in an open
society, a society which cherishes above all the right of men and
women to control and set the values that their government should
reflect. These are the popularly set values which must be pressed into
the philosophy of all projects, policies and programs our governments
seek to institute. No program should be permitted to grow out of
democratic governments which does not reflect the values and will of
those
governed. Our military and economic policies are increasingly empty of
the values upon which our democratic forms of government rest.
What then is our calling in terms of what we do with the
information presented today? It is time to put human values ahead of
other agendas. It is time to drag our military institutions out of
their veil of secrecy to higher levels of accountability. It is time
for all people to recognize, and demand, that increases in security
are not made at the expense of freedom. The rights to privacy, free
speech and most importantly free.
Author Dr. Nick Begich, M.D.
Interviewed By Kenneth Burke
* "Possibly affects nervous system".
* "Threshold for microwave hearing".
* "Causes byte errors in unshielded computers".
* "Burns out unprotected receiver diodes in antennas".