The Cold War is over: What will the U.S. government do?
By examining a few of the many articles on nonlethal technologies, one can see the outlook of the military and government and how the 'crazy' claims of victims correlate with ideas such as the new 'war on terrorism' and the 'war on crime'. The military has found another campaign to sell their high technology to the US public.
The experiments described by victims fit the goal of governments to control and predict behavior. By conducting baseline studies, the breaking point of different personality types can be predicted. And there is a long history of psychological experimentation Just two examples is Pavlov who discovered a fixed number of personality types of dogs to B.F Skinner and his "control the environment and create the man," i.e. his behaviorism model of human behavior.
From the article, "The Soft-Kill Fallacy, Bulletin of Atomic Scientist, Sept/Oct94, p40, Steven Aftergood describes the origin of the military's public relations program to introduce non-lethal weapons to the public in the 1990s. " The concept of non-lethal weapons is not new; the term appears in heavily censored CIA documents dating from the 1960s." This supports the chronology of victim's claims which began as early as 1955.
The 1978 book The National Academy of Sciences by Cochrane echoed what others have observed; Page 343, " By December 1937, it was becoming clear that Germany, Italy, and Russia were using the Spanish Civil War for the field testing of modern weapons." The Americans used Viet Nam to test new electronic weapons and this is a good research lead. Evidence of the use of electromagnetic technologies has been found in the Vietnam war and the Gulf war so far, (see CAHRA [now Mind Justice] website and progress section below.)
It is difficult to predict government policy, but it is likely that the government believes that the formidable intelligence tool of reading people's thoughts, communicating directly with the brain, controlling every nerve in the body and discovering how the brain works for military purposes is too powerful a weapon to declassify. It's importance has been repeatedly compared to the atomic bomb by many experts since the 1950s See previous citations. The United States, it would seem, is declassifying non-lethal weapons because technology advances demand that they do so. This could be one of many reason why there has been so much talk of domestic tools to fight terrorism and nonlethal weapons to be used for peace-keeping purposes. Some of the rest of the world is catching up but the US has a major lead in technology.
A fifty year old cold war bureaucracy is controlling the use of this technology and no one person is deciding the policy on its use. U.S. Mind control technology was developed because the Russians were developing it too or vica versa. The exact facts are classified. But comparisons to the cold war mentality can help in the search for evidence and documentation. Here is an example of an unclassified abuse of power at the top levels of government, a system in which the democratic checks and balances are not working. The Iran Contra Affair was approved at the highest level, the presidency. As reported in Iran-Contra, The Final Report by Lawrence Walsh, Independent Council, 1994, p. 201, " As CIA director, Casey and President Reagan shared similar world views, at the center of which was their determination to roll back communism and bring about the collapse of the Soviet Union." What is worrisome is the unaccountability of billions of dollars in black budgets and groups of people in government who are breaking the laws, such as in the Iran Contra Affair. Even more disturbing, as reported in Iran-Contra,
p. 526, is that it was not "a "cabal of zealots" on the National Security Council staff, as the congressional select committees concluded in their majority report. Instead, it was the product of two foreign policy directives by President Reagan which skirted the law and which were executed by the NSC staff with the knowledge and support of high officials in the CIA, State and Defense departments. "
Similarly, the possibility of abuse of electromagnetic and neurological weapons is enormous. It is proving more difficult to keep mind control a secret forever, after fifty years of the development of behavior control weapons and since the technology is being tested covertly by so many people, on so many people, . The control of this technology is and will be played out by the major powers of the world. Unlike the case of biological weapons, third world countries cannot develop this weapon and are vulnerable and powerless in the face of this technology.
Corporate control of electromagnetic technology
Like the atomic bomb, mind control technology is or will end up in the corporate sector but with much governmental control. It most certainly is controlled internationally. The level of technology needed to develop this technology is available in a limited number of countries with the requirements to manufacture it but money can change this factor. This is important because it creates a direction for victims to further research.
Once the technological basis of mind control are deduced, it may be productive to investigate arms and technology export/ import reports for further evidence. A Los Angeles Times 6-7-98 A1 article stated that as a result of the DOD slashing weapon purchases by more than half, the arms maker industry turned to foreign markets as part of a strategy that also included mergers and diversification into some unlikely lines of business. "Lockheed Martin Corp., for example runs welfare offices in Florida and Texas." It is not difficult to figure out how the connections between government and corporations are overlapping. This is clearly a global issue.
Oak Ridge National Lab, which is operated by Lockheed Martin Energy Research Corp for the US Department of Energy reported the following in an abstract entitled "Virtual Human". A computational model of the human is being developed to evaluate nonlethal technologies. Science & Engineering Associates, Inc. have a website at http://www.seabase.com/engineer.htm with the following statements. "We also provide support of multiple government agencies for laser countermeasures, spectroscopic sensors and systems, high power microwave, electromagnetic environmental effects and less than lethal weapons technologies." Again, there is significant proof of the widespread corporate, military overlap in the development and distribution of electromagnetic technology. And the top arms makers such as Textron, Lockheed Martin and General Electric make significant political contributions to influence arms policy.
There are companies like E Systems, a corporation which develops classified electronic surveillance technology for the US government and hires many ex-intelligence agency personnel (Washington Post, 10-24-94, A1). Competition is increasing and E Systems want to enlarge their market. Loyalty to the United States takes a second seat to economic concerns. The program, 60 Minutes aired an expose on this decades-old corporation which hires ex-intelligence agency employees. "IBM subsidiary admits illegal exports to Russia" stated the 8-1-98 Sacramento Bee newspaper article.
There are again many examples of the motivation of money rather than patriotism. "Spy Director Has Ties to Firm" 10-23-95, Spotlight newspaper, p14. "While on the faculty at MIT, Deutch apparently spent more time serving on the boards of big corporations than in teaching or research," says a long-time Senate oversight investigator. .In 1988-91, just before Deutch became deputy secretary of defense, he drew hundreds of thousands of dollars as a board member of Scientific Applications International, (SAIC), a major California defense technology supplier. Now SAIC is under federal criminal investigation for allegedly selling the US Air Force defective electronic cockpit instrument designed for the F-15 jet fighter." There are many corporations and leads to investigate.
One more example is the 12-30-98 Washington Post front page article on retiring Air Force Lt. General Leonard Perroots who spent three year as DIA director and is now President of the company Vector Microwave Research Corporation. " Vector was a leading entrepreneur in a classified or 'black' specialty with high stakes and few rules: covertly acquiring foreign missiles, radar, artillery and other weapons for U.S. intelligence agencies." Federal agents are investigating the company for illegalities. Perroots has made public comments on mind control technologies.
Military cooperation with civilian law enforcement agencies: bureaucratic entanglement
An example of the military, civilian cooperation is the memorandum of understanding on 'Operations Other than War' between Deputy Secretary of Defense, John Deutch and Attorney General Janet Reno. ". The agencies agreed to joint development of "advanced technologies and systems" that can be applied to both military operations and civilian law enforcement.( this memorandum gave rise to the program now managed in large part by the Advanced Research Projects Agency.) This is an alliance that will expedite the entanglement of the military in domestic law enforcement." This article appeared in The Progressive, Jan. 1996 p22.
And another of the many examples, "FBI Gives Anti-Terrorist Aid for Local Agencies, New department to help train for domestic attacks". This 10-17-98,San Francisco Chronicle article discussed the new National Domestic Preparedness Office and Janet Reno is quoted as saying, "State and local governments (will be) a full partner in the planning effort." The overlapping jurisdictions are occurring more often.
No political will to declassify electromagnetic mind control technology
Those with the power have too much to lose to expose this technology to the public. There is an industry that has built up around this technology for over 50 years. Here are three examples. The San Francisco Chronicle on 8-28-98 p 21A headline reads "Livermore Lab to Join FBI in Fight on Terrorism. From nuclear research, Livermore is expanding in order to survive financially. Now they will work on international and domestic terrorism anti-crime technology. FBI director Louis Freeh has stated " the FBI potentially could be the most dangerous institutions in the United States" if its "awesome powers" are not held in check.(Washington Post National Weekly Edition Aug. 11, 1997). U.S. News and World Report July 7, 1997 reported the following in an article on "Wonder Weapons". "Louis Slesin, editor of the trade journal Microwave News stated "That's because the human body is essentially an electrochemical system, and devices that disrupt the electrical impulses of the nervous system can affect behavior and body functions. But these programs-particularly those involving antipersonnel research-are so well guarded that details are scarce." "People [in the military] go silent on this issue," says Slesin, "more than any other issue. People just do not want to talk about this."
The money to keep the electromagnetic programs going after the cold war may be found in war on drug and anti-terrorism programs. Here is a good example. Star-ledger, 4-26-90 Washington Post wire service page 5 reported that the " Air Force has put into service a costly new radar and have plans for radar systems in Alaska, the West coast and North Dakota to help impede drug trafficking flights. The radar's high-powered radio energy bounce off the ionosphere and scoop up billion of "return" signals at massive antenna farms on the northern coast of Maine. An array of computers "surveys the myriad returns to detect aircraft at extraordinary distances. The Air Force budget cuts forced the transfer of the program to the Pentagon's drug interdiction budget. "
In fact, this type of array could track people instead of planes, again, it is a physics problem to pick up the unique signals from each human. In Genesis Vol8 No. 6, Dr. Richard Clark of Flinders University of South Australia wrote that each person's brainwave is unique to that individual, like a finger print.
Mind control technology would be a business decision and distributed throughout the federal bureaucracy today. According to the GAO/NSIAD-90-07BR page 8, " Section 6163 of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 is based on a study performed by the Defense Science Board in 1987 to examine the use of innovative technologies for the detection and neutralization of illegal drugs and terrorist weapons." The DOD, CIA, NSA and National Laboratories are coordinating their research and technologies which include physical/electronic surveillance and radar to be used to curb drug abuse. This program may be a good program but much of it is classified and there is no public accountability. After the cold war, the need for funding is diverted to programs such as the drug war and terrorism. Again, the bureaucracy is large and involved huge sums of money and it can be seen how individual rights can be rationalized away for the greater cause.
If one examines the evidence and similarities to the accounts, the electromagnetic involuntary experimentation is a very systematic program based on principles of torture, psychological warfare and aviation technology which now includes space exploration. Radiation experiments have been replaced with controlling the body and mind remotely and its applications to space research. It is a weapons development program and the technology is designed to achieve the politically correct objective of controlling the enemy rather than the unpopular objective of death. Military planners learned the Vietnam lesson well. The U.S. public does not consider war deaths lightly and the political costs are tremendous. Therefore to keep the military in a good light, the policy is one of promoting a perception of a deathless war and to avoid the political costs of confrontations. Note the examples of President Johnson's resignation over the Viet Nam War and the Iran Hostage failed rescue attempt during Carter's administration and Carter's subsequent low standing in the opinion polls. The effect on presidential politics is clear.
Secrecy and billions of pentagon dollars
Here is an example of the problem with secrecy. "One immediate consequence of the excessive secrecy is a wasteful duplication of effort. Justice Department officials who surveyed some of the 'black budget' programs for possible law enforcement applications found the same technologies being developed in as many as six independent programs. " We've been startled at the number of times we've run into this, says David Boyd of the National Institute of Justice. The waste results from a lack of independent oversight of non-lethal programs, which-like other highly classified 'special access' or 'black' programs in defense and intelligence-operate beyond the reach of the checks and balances that US citizens take for granted." From Bulletin of Atomic Scientist, Sept/Oct94 p 43, entitled The Soft-Kill fallacy by Steven Aftergood.
"Spy agency leader apologize" reported the New York Times News Service on 8-11-94. This article is an example of how secrecy works, the huge sums of money spent on surveillance technology and the unaccountability by top government officials for over 30 years. The NRO is a multi-billion dollar fleet of spy satellites and a new NRO office was built with money concealed by breaking it up into different accounts in its operating budget. This was normal, they testified in a congressional hearing, because it was a covert operation. The NRO was a state secret until 1992, classified more secret than top secret. Jeffrey Harris is the director and Jimmy Hill, the deputy director. Victims have traveled all over the world and are harassed wherever they go. The level of technology supports the allegations by victims of electromagnetic nonconsensual experimentation.
"CIA to probe files for radiation abuse", Boston Herald, Jan. 5 1994. " Steven Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists, a private research group, said earlier he believed the CIA may have destroyed many of the relevant documents and the full extent of radiation tests, many on people who did not give their consent, may never be known." The article continued, "A commission led by Vice President Nelson Rockefeller reported in 1975 the CIA had conducted radiation tests, by implication on unsuspecting subjects, as part of a much larger CIA program to study possible means of controlling human behavior."
Here is an example of secrecy at top levels of the government and industry in the field of electromagnetic technologies. A foia [freedom of information act request] reply to the information below was unclassified rather than declassified and concerned protection of harbors from attack in war.
"In 1950, long after the end of WWII, Dr. Zacharias accepted an invitation for the U.S. Navy to be the director of a classified summer study called Project Hartwell. The esteem held for Professor Zacharias and the recognition of the value of this study was evident in the list of those who agreed to participate. It included, among others, an outstanding radio and radar authority, Dr. Harold T Friis, .supervisor at Bell Telephone Laboratories, and the following persons, Dr. Jerome Wiesner, President, MIT, Dr. Edward E David, Jr. President Nixon's Science Adivsor, Dr. James B Frisk President Bell Telephone Labs., and Dr. Ivan Getting President Aerospace Corp. Today many would find it surprising that a classified study, aimed at developing new avenues for further classified research, would have received such strong support as these names indicate."Here is an example of excessive secrecy in which the CIA admitting that it knowingly lied to the White House and the Pentagon. This false information "was crucial to Washington's perceptions of Moscow in the last seven years of the cold war, said members of the Senate and House intelligence committees," The threats reported in the disinformation "contributed to the Pentagon's decision to spend billions of dollars on weapons systems to combat threats that might have been illusions"(New York Times News Service, 11-1-95). Victims describe the technology as extremely sophisticated and the many attempts to monitor, block and escape from the signals used have failed. With billions of dollars available to the Pentagon for years and with the documented unaccountability and the motivations to develop state of the art weapons, victims who are enduring torture today deserve a thorough investigation.
The article in Times May ?, 199? entitled "Cold War Secrecy Shrouds Nearly 6,000 U.S. Inventions" discusses patents and national security. " Robert E. Garrett, director of the office that oversees secrecy orders at the Patent and Trademark Office, acknowledged that the restrictions were unusual in that they could block the publication of information developed entirely by private individuals. The only comparable law is the one that prohibits people from publishing information about building atomic weapons." It is not hard to imagine a secrecy order covering electromagnetic mind control weapons. The article continues, "Perhaps the most surprising shift is that a growing proportion of the inventions placed under wraps are ones in which the Government does not hold title to the patent. Some of these inventions have been developed in part with government funds, but the companies that obtain the patent holds all or part of the ownership interests. "John Preston, head of licensing for the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said that his university had received several secrecy orders over the years but that almost all had stemmed from inventions at the Linclon Laboratory, which MIT operates under contract for the Federal Government."
Michael Aaron Dennis, Cornell University, wrote the 1994 Isis article entitled "Our First Line of Defense, Two University Laboratories in the Postwar American State. He wrote about the MIT I-Lab or Instrumentation Lab and Charles Stark Draper, director. Dennis stated, " Classification plays an important role in the materials presented in this essay. Like so much else at each of these laboratories, much of the archives are inaccessible. Dennis described Draper's work, which " took place behind the laboratory's locked doors, [building an airplane inertial device]"
In response to a 1958 television interview with Draper and Eric Sevareid, veteran CBS reporter in which Draper displayed a plane outfitted with Draper's inertial device, the air force issued this memo to his lab. "To again reiterate AF [air force] policy on the matter of safeguarding classified information the following should be brought to the attention of all personnel: 1. The fact that articles and information will be reviewed by this HQ and DOD [Department of Defense] does not relieve each individual of his responsibility to safeguard classified information and further will not serve as a bar in processing violations of security regulations." Dennis stated, " What was visible on television remained unspeakable outside the I-Lab."
Dennis concluded, "Yet, if classification obscures our view of the military's role in society, especially in laboratories, then it is also through the classification system that the civilian and the military were connected in postwar America in novel, and still largely unexamined, ways." It is overclassification to keep the archives classified 30 years later.
A final example, Christophe Lecuyer, Stanford U, wrote the HSPS,23:1 (1992) article "The making of a science based technological university: Karl Compton, James Killian, and the reform of MIT, 1930-1957.On page 177:
MIT reluctantly agreed to carry out investigations of a classified nature. For example, the RLE [Research Lab of Electronics], which did mainly open research during the immediate postwar years, was asked to carry out large classified programs such as "communications systems for both combat areas and the zone of the interior" during the Korean war. More subtly, as Paul Forman has shown, researchers had to comply with unwritten rules. They were expected by such agencies as the ONR to practice self-censorship and to publish only results that would not endanger national security."There is a strong argument for revising the national security act. There are numerous examples of abuse and a need for limits and a democratic process of checks and balances imposed on the national security act.