>From [surfingtheapocalypse[at]egroups.com]
NEW NON-LETHAL WEAPONS SYSTEMS MAY BE USED AGAINST U.S.
CITIZENS Part III
Author Dr. Nick Begich, M.D. Interviewed By Kenneth Burke
http://www.leadingedgenews.com/Nonlethalwarfare.htm
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no longer in effect".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€ '²s 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€ '²s arsenal in recent years. "The term
€ '¬psycho-terrorism€ '² was coined by Russian writer N. Anisimov
of the
Moscow Anti-Psychotronic Center. According to Anisimov psychotronic
weapons are those that act to € '¬take away a part of the
information
which is stored in a man€ '²s 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.€ '²
These
weapons are used against the mind to induce hallucinations, sickness,
mutations in human cells, zombification,€ '² 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€ '² 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€ '²s
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€ '² 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€ '²s 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€ '²s
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€ '²s top secret black bag€ '²
unit
that breaks into foreign embassies to steal code books was charged
with espionage Friday for tipping off two countries about the
CIA€ '²s
success in compromising their communications." Douglas Groat was
fired
in 1996 from the CIA€ '²s 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€ '²s classified communications and know their
contents. The article concluded, "The CIA has never publicly
acknowledged the existence of its € '¬black-bag€ '² teams because
their
operations, are by their nature, illegal. And they not only target
America€ '²s 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 € '¬98' 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 hold? 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€ '²
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.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid
matters
and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
<A HREF="http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
