Chapter 11

Progress

Progress has been made internationally where the US suppression seems to be less effective. Below are the milestones and preliminary analysis of the international remedies through treaties, human rights law and international law.

1. Beginning with the CWC or chemical weapons convention, reported by Barbara Hatch Rosenberg in Bulletin of Atomic Scientist Sept./Oct 1994 p45, Hatch Rosenberg stated that under "The Certain Conventional Weapons Convention (also known as the Inhumane Weapons Convention and by its full name, "Convention on Prohibition or Restriction of the use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects", international discussions are now under way that may lead to the development of a specific new protocols covering electromagnetic weapons;. The current surge of interest in electromagnetic and similar technologies makes the adoption of a protocol explicitly outlawing the use of these dehumanizing weapons an urgent matter. "An article on nonlethal weapons entitled, " A Fate Worse Than Death" New Scientist, 10-18-97, p. 27, Dr. Robin Coupland of the ICRC or International Committee of the Red Cross , "believes nations need an international treaty that specifically covers the new technology. "
      
2. European Union Resolution on A4-0005/99, environment, security and foreign policy passed on Jan. 29, 1999
      
   The draft resolution included the following section and is indicative that victim's allegations are getting through to officials. H. (c) whereas there is mounting documented evidence, from as early as the 1960s, much of it from official and military sources, clearly indicating the potential of electromagnetic radiation to profoundly affect humans, positively or negatively, leading to the possibility of new medical treatments and/or methods for manipulation of human central nervous system, including brain function, and even high energy weapons."
      
   In section (4) of the draft resolution, there is an example of the actual use of the technology. It read, "Hi-Tech Psychological Warfare arrives in the Middles East", Bulletin, 23 March 1991, ITV London News Bureau Ltd, quoting accounts from Iraqi troops explaining the negative psychological effects of the electromagnetic transmissions;"
      
   And section H (h) read, "whereas, with hindsight, it is clear that allowing the military to operate in secret had not protected their secrets from their perceived enemies, and has in fact enabled all sorts of excesses, including environmental and health ones, so that they have come to threaten the security they purport to provide, ." And most importantly to victims, section 15 (b) read, " Calls for a Committee of Inquiry to investigate the very extensive research in this field, and in particular the multitudinous claims of victims of being exposed to various forms of electromagnetic systems and other so-called "non-lethal" weapons, to include in particular the claims of the women of Greenham Common, but not limited to victims within the EU, so that former Iraqi troops or others could at least be interviewed:"
      
   The relevant section to EU A4-005/99, which passed this years read, "27. Calls for an international convention introducing a global ban on all developments and deployments of weapons which might enable any form of manipulation of human beings;" It is posted on the European Parliament website at http://www.europarl.eu.int/sg/tree/en/. Find activities, then click on Plenary Sessions, then click on Reports by A4 number, then fill in 0005.
      
3. Electromagnetic Weapons Summary: by Grattan Healy, Advisor on Energy & Research Green Group in the European Parliament: February '99
      
   Electro-Magnetic (EM) weapons are one of the newest and most serious military developments in the world today. Enormous secrecy surrounds their development, which is helped by the fact that they rely on the complex physics of non-ionizing radiation and on bio-electromagnetics. They can be broadly broken down into two categories- those aimed at the environment and those aimed at living systems, or in reality the human central nervous system. In the case of the environment and those aimed at living systems, or in reality the human central nervous system. In the case of the environment, very large quantities of energy can be literally 'broadcast', like radio, to create certain special environmental effects- radical changes in the ionosphere to affect communications, and possibly even the weather, as well as reflection to earth to perform such feats as x-raying the earth to find underground installations, possibly large transfers of energy to power equipment, or to apply destructive forces anywhere on earth, including EMP effects (Electro-Magnetic Pulse, associated with nuclear explosions), and simpler tasks like submarine communication, using very long waves. The more sinister aspect concerns the ability to use low energy density waves of particular frequencies and special waveforms to literally 'tune into' the human central nervous system (CNS), something that has been achieved in the laboratory, according to publicly available scientific literature. This might be done on an individual scale, to temporarily or perhaps permanently alter psychological states, so as to elicit certain behaviours temporarily or perhaps permanently alter psychological states, so as to elicit certain behaviours from human beings. It is alleged that many victims have been tested involuntarily for decades now with this technology. It is also suggested that these weapons have been used in some actions, most especially the Gulf War and against the Greenham Common women in the UK. In this case they would have a mass effect, in that they are aimed at large groups. This use is sought not only by the military, but, alarmingly, by the police forces as well, clearly for the purpose of controlling unruly domestic populations. Once achieved, such a system might become irreversible, or unstoppable. The subject came to the attention of the Green Group in 1996, and we have slowly developed a knowledge base and large archive in this highly specialized area. Several special meetings culminating in a Foreign Affairs Committee Parliamentary Hearing have been help at the European Parliament as a result, and finally the Group managed in early January '99, with the help of interested Members in other Groups, to have Parliament pass a resolution referring very critically to this subject. This subject also has very serious implications for standard setting for non-ionizing radiation, because the levels of exposure at which one can manipulate the human being are very low indeed, since it is the tuning and the waveform which matter, not the levels, which is the reason that Russian exposure standards are apparently 1000 times lower than the US standards. Setting standards suited to the use of mobile phones and power lines, so as to avoid the long term health effects, while very desirable indeed, may not even be low enough to prevent the use of these weapons, and may even legalize their use, something the Greens must be very careful of, since we have been responsible for this subject to date in the European Parliament (Lannoye, Belgium and Tamino, Italy). Ideally, for now, we should exclude military sources, specifically weapons, as opposed to communications equipment, from EU legislation on non-ionizing radiation altogether.
      
   It is worth comparing the standard setting processes for non-ionizing and for ionizing radiation, as they are remarkably similar. The military, via the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), played a major role in originally setting ionizing standards at ridiculously high levels burying or ignoring the science, leading to the need for continuous reductions in the acceptable exposure levels. Something similar appears to happening with non-ionizing radiation, in that a very similar unelected 'independent' advisory committee (ICNIRP-International Commission on Non-ionizing Radiation Protection) has offered advice in this area, which is accepted blindly by the European Commission, despite the fact that, once again, much of the science is being ignored, and the precautionary principle, for some odd reason, seems not to apply. The fact that two of the US representatives on ICNIRP are associated with the military has echoes of the past, and is most suspicious. The focus of public attention so far has been a project in Alaska called HAARP (High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program), which is a massive 'array' transmitter designed to manipulate the ionosphere for military purposes- communications effects, earth x-rays, and possibly weather manipulation (despite conventions banning this). But the range of uses of this basic technology is very wide, much wider than its predecessor, ionizing radiation (nuclear). The primary difference is that electromagnetic waves can be 'tuned' so as to have certain effects on living systems, whereas the 'chaotic' nature of ionizing radiation does not facilitate this and the result of exposure to it is normally direct damage only. As stated above, scientists have been able to 'tune EM to facilitate remote direct communication with the central nervous systems of living creatures, and they are of course especially interested in using this fact to manipulate human beings. According to their own official documentation, the military and the police themselves are planning to use these technologies to control populations. They were used in a crude form by the Soviets against the US Moscow embassy in the '60s with fatal consequences for the ambassador himself, and it is believed that they were used in what is called a 'superfence' against the Greenham Common women, and also to demotivate the Iraqi troops during the Gulf War. The Soviets tried in the 70s to prevent an arms race in this area by means of a Convention, but the US rejected these efforts, and has moved ahead very rapidly, also within NATO, into a dominant position. Unless this development is stopped, we are entering an Orwellian '1984' type scenario, which could potentially permanently transfer enormous power to those in control of the technology. It must also be seen in the wider context of the on-sided arms race currently underway, where the US is re-arming, by continuing with "Star Wars", and is aiming to be totally dominant in 'Space Power' by 2020. Electromagnetic weapons play a key role here, alongside ABMs, lasers and particle beam weapons.
      
   Group Position: We are of course totally opposed to the development and deployment of these weapons. We regard the unsuccessful attempts in the 70s of the former Soviet Union to have these weapons controlled by a UN Convention as having been a major missed opportunity, which has now led to a new arms race in this field. We have sought to renew the attempt to have a Convention to outlaw these weapons and the research that lead to them, primarily that concerning external manipulation of the human central nervous system. We are alarmed that, already, the US is moving toward deployment of ABMs, in Alaska for example, in breach of the 1972 ABM Treaty (possibly arguing that the USSR no longer exists!), and is also developing weather modification weapons, which would breach the 1977 UN ENMOD Convention. Adherence to these existing Treaties is absolutely essential from our point of view.
      
   Positions of Other Groups:
      
   The focus for debate so far in Parliament not his issue has been provided by a report on the environment and the military, authored by Swedish Socialist and peace activist Maj Britt Theorin. She referred to this very sensitive matter in a rather passing fashion in her draft report, having met, during a Parliamentary hearing on the matter, some of the main activists on the issue, and having also apparently met some anonymous scientist. Enormous pressure was imposed on the rapporteur Mrs. Theorin, we believe via her 'scientific' advisers, and she opposed every attempt to strengthen the resolution on this subject. At some points the PPE divided, and important Green amendments were lost, such as our call for a convention banning the human CNS research!. The Left (GUE/NGL) followed the Socialists, while the Liberals were mixed, but helpful on this question to some extent. In the end, we achieved a quite remarkable Parliament resolution on January 28th, damning the US for not being willing to even come to discuss the matter with the Parliament, and in particular attacking the HAARP project in Alaska, calling for a Parliament STOA study on it, while also calling in rather vague terms for a ban on the manipulation of human beings.
      
   Initiatives Taken by the Group:
      
   Being a very difficult subject, as it is (or seems) so new and very technical, and seemingly science fiction, it has been necessary to move carefully and not too quickly. We began in 1996 with two special Green Group meetings, one showing an excellent BBC Horizon documentary on HAARP, and involving experts like Dr. Rosalie Bertell from Canada, an Dr. Nick Begich from Alaska, author of the best-selling book on HAARP, as well as MEPs like Tom Spencer and Carlos Pimenta, to make Members aware that this was no science fiction. That let the Parliamentary Hearing on HAARP and 'Non-lethal' Weapons in February last year, in the Foreign Affairs Committee. The culmination so far was the Theorin report, and the considerable success in adding references on this sensitive subject, by adoption of our amendments, and some by the PPE.
      
   Future Plans:
      
   Not much has happened since the adoption of the Theorin report and resolution, and changes in the Membership of the Parliament in June may bean having to start again to some extent. However, the media have now started to take the matter more seriously since Theorin. The STOA study should be produced in the next year. Green Ministers will now be urged to act on the matter. The new group will have to face this new issue after the election to decide how to proceed.
      
4. There are steps forward and back, Dec/Jan 97/98 Nexus, p8 stated that "On 19 November 1996 something happened in Strasbourg, France, which could fundamentally remove many of the rights of patients. It had no public airing beforehand, and has been little reported on ever since. After marathon discussions, the Committee of Ministers of 39 European Union member states adopted the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine. This allows for future drug use and other medical trials to be carried out on potentially huge numbers of people, possibly without their consent. those particularly at risk include the mentally ill who are deemed not to be able to give their consent; those with diseases for which there is no "known" cure(i.e., AIDS, cancer, CJD); people who are in a coma; those needing emergency treatment; and, perhaps most worrying of all, children. Although the convention applies only to EU member countries, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) simultaneously, and very quietly, changed its rules to be almost identical to those of the Strasbourg Convention. These new rules also mean that some groups of people may be involved in medical research programs without their knowledge or consent. Under the guise of individual "protection", the Convention says that in certain situations "general interests" will take priority over those of individuals. There is even the provision for organ removal from a living person, without consent, for transplant purposes in "exceptional circumstances". Source: Doris Jones, What Doctors Don't Tell You, Sept.97).
      
5. The United Nations General Assembly has adopted this 1996 Resolution 51/37. Prohibition of the development and manufacture of new types of weapons of mass destruction and new system of such weapons. This resolution has interesting history that began in 1975. The Soviets first proposed this resolution and it has been up for debate with the United States ever since as the UN record reflects. In 1979, the Soviets specified what they meant by "new weapons of mass destruction" The list included " (c) Infrasonic "acoustic radiation" weapons. They would utilize harmful effects of infrasonic oscillations on biocurrents of the brain and nervous system." and "(d) Electromagnetic weapons operation at certain radio-frequency radiations, which could have injurious effects on human organs. " Quote from United Nations and Disarmament: 1945-1985 by the UN Department for Disarmament Affairs. (1985) NY.
      
   Here is more documentation from the UN. The next quoted four paragraphs are from the 10 July 1979 Committee on Disarmament 1-52, V.L. Issraelyan, Representative of the USSR to the Committee on Disarmament. "As a result of research into the effects of electromagnetic radiation on biological targets, the existence of harmful effects of radio-frequency radiations within a wide range of frequencies on such vitally important organs of the human as the heart, the brain and the central nervous system may now be regarded as a firmly established fact. Assessments quoted in international literature of the potential danger of the development of a new weapon of mass destruction are based on the results of research into the so-called "non-thermal" effects of electromagnetic radiation on biological targets. These effects may take the form of damage to or disruption of the functioning of the internal organs and systems of the human organism or of changes in its functioning."
      
   "As regards the possibility of devising technical means of generating electromagnetic radiation, many countries already have a highly developed technical base in the field of radio engineering and radio electronic. Powerful high-frequency generators, radar devices and other radio engineering installations serving various purposes have been developed and brought into use. The development of these means reflects a common trend in that efforts are being made to improve their characteristics, increase their efficiency and reduce their dimensions. Data available in the scientific literature show that the peak capacity of electromagnetic radiation generators has increased almost a hundredfold during the past four years alone. It is expected that, in the next five or six years, means capable of the directional transmission of electromagnetic radiation density in excess of known safety standards will be attainable in areas measuring dozens of square kilometres."
      
   " It is therefore to be expected that, taking into account further achievements in science and technology, it may be possible in time to devise means of generating powerful electromagnetic oscillations whose parameters could make those means suitable for use as a new type of weapons of mass destruction."
      
   " During the course of the discussion in the Committee on Disarmament of the question of the prohibition of new types and systems of weapons of mass destruction, Soviet experts as well as experts from a number of other countries adduced concrete scientific data and facts which convincingly demonstrate that, in view of the present level of science and technology in certain areas, it is scientifically justified to speak of the possibility of developing corresponding new types of weapons of mass destruction, and in particular those listed in the annex to the expanded draft agreement. It is practically no long possible at the present time to dispute the fact that the possibility of developing new types and systems of weapons of mass destruction--the consequences of whose emergence are as yet difficult to foresee--exists, and that the problem of the comprehensive prohibition of the development, manufacture and stockpiling of new types and systems of such weapons is therefore a pressing one."
      
6. International Committee for the Convention Against Offensive Microwave Weapons 1998 Civil Court Case Dismissed and Appealed to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
      
   Andrews Electromagnetic Field Litigation Reporter, Oct. 98 (www.andrewspub.com) reported "Human Testing Claims 'Too Vague to Confer Standing,' U.S. Argues". The article continued, "United States government attorneys say that a class action suit, allegedly on behalf of persons who have been unwitting subjects of government-sponsored radiation and electric and magnetic field exposure tests, should be dismissed because its "vague allegations are insufficient to confer organizational standing." The government tells U.S. District Judge Gladys Kesler of Washington, DC, that not only does the plaintiff group appear to have only one identified member, but the allegations contained in its complaint are too speculative to support its claims that unauthorized testing has violated the constitutional rights of an untold number of Americans." On page 6, the article continues with ".The International Committee alleges that Girard, and others whom the group seeks to represent in the suit, have "experienced symptoms which are consistent with exposure to biological process control weapons and microwave technologies. The complaint alleges that government agencies are compelled by a March 1997 presidential directive to develop regulations preventing nonconsensual human testing. The government, in reply, holds that the executive order cited by the group does not have the force of law and, thus, does not confer a private right of action upon the plaintiffs."
      
   JAMA, Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 277, No. 20, p. 1583, reviewed the March 27 memorandum by President Clinton. The article stated that "President Clinton has directed federal agencies to adopt stricter rules for the conduct of classified research on human subjects. The directive follows most of the recommendations made by a committee he appointed in 1994 to investigate radiation experiments conducted on unsuspecting people by the US government during the Cold War. In his March 27, [1997] memorandum, Clinton directed federal agencies to propose new rules that would require scientists conducting classified research on humans always to obtain informed consent from potential subjects, to tell the subjects that the research is classified and explain what classification means, and, in most cases, to disclose to subjects the identity of the agency sponsoring the research. The rules also should require agencies to keep permanent records of all secret research involving humans, ." It is relevant to Girard's court case that the JAMA article continued with the following. "Clinton has directed federal agencies to issue a formal report annually on the number of classified human research projects and the number of subjects in each project." According to the Girard court case, this was not done.
      
   As reported in Microwave News Nov/Dec 1998, p16, ".In September, a lawsuit brought by the International Committee for the Convention Against Offensive Microwave Weapons (ICOMW) was dismissed in the U.S. district court in Washington." "We were asking the court to enforce a presidential memorandum which bans involuntary research on human subjects," "The Philadelphia-based organization had alleged that the DOD and the CIA have conducted such experiments in their efforts to develop weapons systems using EMFs, lasers, microwaves and sound waves(see MWN, M/J98). The judge ruled that the group did not have standing to bring suit because the people alleged to have suffered from such testing were not ICOMW members. She acknowledged that Girard himself was a member, but stated that his own complaints were "too generalized and nonspecific to support a complaint." Girard told Microwave News that the ICOMW could not afford an appeal. Instead, he said, the committee plans to raise the matter with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights."
      
   The above case was dismissed and it required a large sum of money, out of the reach of most victims. It is interesting to note that the court case cited a violation of the 4th,5th and 8th amendments to the U.S. Constitution. It also cited "Violation of Treaties and International Law". This included the Nuremberg Code, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Helsinki Declaration, the ICCPR and the Convention against Torture. The case is US District Court for the District of Columbia, ICOMW v US Case # 1:98CV00939.
      
7. World Organization Against Torture USA October, 1998 Report on "Torture in the United States, The Status of Compliance by the U.S. Government with the International Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment"
      
   This report is another milestone, thanks to the three years of lobbying efforts by Harlan Girard of the ICOMW. This report was prepared by "The Coalition Against Torture and Racial Discrimination, A Joint Working Group of Non-Governmental Civil and Human Rights Groups in the U.S., Compiled and Edited by Morton Sklar, Director, World Organization Against Torture USA The project to organize a working group of U.S. based civil and human rights organizations, and compile and issue a joint report on U.S. compliance under the Convention Against Torture, was made possible through grants provided by the Ford Foundation and the World Council of Churches". A partial list of individuals who contributed to this report were the ABA, ACLU, AI, Meiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute and many more. There were 11 chapters and over 99 pages. A copy can be obtained from OMCT Suite 400, 1015 18th St. NW Washington, DC 20036 tele, (202) 861-6494 and it is posted on their website at http://www./omct.org/woatusa/CATreport/science.htm.  [moved: http://www.woatusa.org/]
      
   The relevant chapter is chapter 10. Involuntary Human Scientific Experimentation. Here are the highlights.
      
   "The 1995 Initial Report of the United States to the United Nations Human Rights Committee acknowledges that a number of Cold War era experiments involving the exposure of humans to radiation were conducted that would be in violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It does not however discuss in any detail: .whether any steps have been taken to ensure that such experimentation does not take place in the future." The report then discussed radiation experiments and stated, ". while high level officials were aware of the dangers and the ethical considerations involved, there was a consistent lack of effective regulation governing administration of the tests." This section on experimentation ends with the following two paragraphs.
      
   "In summary, although the U.S. government has taken important steps to acknowledge some of the errors that occurred in the past involving improper human experimentation, very little has been done to properly compensate those adversely affected by these experiments, and courts have refused to hold the government financially responsible for what has occurred in many areas not presently covered by legislation. In addition, full disclosure of improper experimentation still has not taken place, and the adequacy of safeguards to guarantee that these types of unlawful practices do not occur is still very much open to dispute."
      
   "Similar concerns also are being raised about involuntary human experimentation involving new forms of classified research and testing of high technology military weaponry, including microwave and laser equipment. Groups working on these issues cite, among other evidence of the existence of these unauthorized testing procedures, a White house intergovernmental memorandum dated March 27,1997, establishing stronger guidelines prohibiting non-consensual testing for classified research, but suggesting, by implication, that this type of human subject research may, in fact, be taking place. Because of the classified nature of these activities, it is very difficult to confirm or disprove that they are taking place. Given the serious negative impacts on non-consensual human subjects that classified research of this type is capable of producing, and given the past history of secret experimentation by the government, these allegations of continuing improprieties involving secret government sponsored human testing should not be dismissed without more thorough, impartial investigation."
      
8. The International Bioethics Committee IBC of UNESCO, Proceedings of the Third Session September 1995, Volume1 included the conclusion to chapter 1 entitled "Ethics and Neurosciences" by Jean-Didier Vincent, Director of the Alfred-Fessard Institute, ". As a possible instrument of encroachment on human liberty and dignity, the neurosciences may also turn out to be a poisoned chalice on which the worst forms of ideology may thrive. The purpose of this report is to examine in a clear-sighted way and without complacency, the hopes and risks involved and to issue a few warnings of an ethical nature."
      
9. The medical profession and the effects of weapons, Excerpts from the Reports of the Symposium held under the auspices of the International Committee of the Red Cross Montreux, Switzerland, 8-10 March 1996
      
   Human rights professionals are coming up with new ideas on how to deal with arms control. The March 8-10 -96 Montreux, Switzerland Symposium entitled "The Medical Profession and the Effects of Weapons by the ICRC, International Committee of the Red Cross included the following. "Mission Statement for the Symposium. .Attempts to limit the development, design and transfer of weapons have met with little success. It is possible that the future will see epidemics of the effects of the weapons using acoustic beams or electromagnetic waves. These weapons are being developed. It is not known how their effects can be treated. .A framework for negotiation is needed to which both military and humanitarian arguments can relate. A primary consideration of the effects of weapons in terms of health provides just such a framework. .Conclusions.The participants agreed that to study and communicate the effects of weapons on health both present and future was primarily the responsibility of the medical profession. .the global epidemic of the effects of weapons should be viewed as a public health issue; the effects of weapons on health provided an objective means of communication and a common language among doctors, lawyers, scientists and military decision-makers; weapons of the future should be assessed in terms of their effects on health; .Recommendations of the Symposium . 2. a special meeting should be convened to establish the means whereby the effects of weapons on health, including their psychological effects, can be objectively assessed to facilitate a proper balance with military utility; this meeting should also address means of assessing the effects of future weapons."
      
   The 3-16-96 Lancet, Vol. 347, p. 749, gave a positive review of the Montreux conference. The article stated that "the first hurdle to overcome is the popular misconception that the methods, means and targets of warfare are unlimited. I n fact, targeting of civilians is illegal under international law, as is the causing of "superfluous injury" or "unnecessary suffering to combatants." It discussed the importance of the organization WHO, World Health Organization "with its mandate to monitor and publish international public-health trends, is the only agency capable of mobilizing the necessary resources". There is a need to collect epidemiological data on the public health aspect of the effects of weapons. The article concluded that "the time for coordinated and robust clinical involvement in prevention's has begun".
      
10. Russian State Duma Expert Yuriy Lopatin Calling for Legislation Banning Illegal Development and Sale of Mind-Control Devices Excerpt form the "Man and Law Program, Moscow Russian Public Television First Channel Network in Russina 1610 GMT 6 Oct 95. This report was distributed to several government agencies such as Lawrence Livermore lab and Wright Patterson AFB. It is an unclassified FOIA response and the whole excerpt is below.
       
    "Program includes a 5-minute report over video by Uriy Vorobyevskiy on Psychotronic weapons. Report opens with footage of Branch Davidian Siege and the claim that FBI has used a psychotronic device developed by Moscow scientist Igor Smirov. Video includes footage of Smirnov's laboratory, interview with Smirnov on possible uses of psychotronic technology; footage of special-troop recruits under instruction said to have been filmed at MVD Research Institute; interview with Alexsandr Kachurov, member of Moscow Psychotronic Institute, who says psychotronic devices are available to people who are willing to pay for them."