Post is pinned.Post has attachment
Globalist Watch International http://tiny.cc/gwi
http://www.globalistwatch.com

Join us @ Minds.com
Click on the photo below to join.

Minds is an open source social networking service. Anonymous supports Minds based on its foundation of transparency and privacy.

Native device support

Minds is supported on both desktop and mobile devices. An official mobile Minds application is available for iOS and Android.

Multimedia

Minds allows the sharing of photos and videos. Playback options for video include 360p and 720p using HTML5 video and H.264/MPEG-4 AVC.

Security

The Minds social network includes full end-to-end encryption and asymmetrically encrypted chat messaging with private passwords.
Rewards system

Minds rewards content and engagement (swipes, votes, referrals and comments) with points, which users can then spend towards "boosting" posts.

Users may also purchase points with PayPal and the Bitcoin cryptocurrency, which are added to Minds' digital wallet.
Voting and swiping

With Minds, users can vote on content and other users using swipe gestures, similar to the app Tinder.

Geofiltering

Minds allows its users to discover people and brands with geofiltering for local and global networking.

Click on the photo below to join.

Post has attachment
US blames hearing loss of its diplomats in Cuba on ultra sonic signal in scare reminiscent of the "Moscow Signal"
WikiLeaks
8/11/17

https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/1976STATE166451_b.html#efmBiSBy7

THE MOSCOW "SIGNALS" ARE DIRECTIONAL MICROWAVE BEAMS
WHICH ARE DIRECTED AT THE UPPER FLOORS OF THE EMBASSY
BUILDING FROM TRANSMITTERS LOCATED IN THE VICINITY.
THEY INCLUDE THAT PORTION OF THE ELECTROMAGNETIC SPECTRUM
DESIGNATED AS "MICROWAVES" WHICH ARE ULTRA- AND SUPER-
HIGH FREQUENCY RADIO WAVES. THE FREQUENCY OF THE
MOSCOW SIGNALS ARE IN THE GIGAHERTZ RANGE (BILLIONS OF
CYCLES PER SECOND). SPECIFICALLY THEY ARE IN THE
FREQUENCY RANGE OF 0.5-9.0 GIGAHERTZ. FOR REFERENCE TO
WHAT REGULAR AM RADIO IS IN THE ONE MEGAHERTZ RANGE (1
MILLION CYCLES/SECOND), FM RADIO AND TV ARE IN THE
RANGE OF ONE HUNDRED MEGAHERTZ TO ONE GIGAHERTZ (100
MILLION CYLCES TO ONE BILLION PER SECOND). SINCE THESE
MICROWAVE RADIATIONS ARE ON THE ORDER OF 10 CENTIMETERS
OR SO IN LENGTH, SHORTER THAN OTHER RADIOWAVES OF
METERS OR MORE, THE NAME MICROWAVE (MEANING SHORTER
WAVELENGTHS) HAS BEEN USED TO DESIGNATE THIS FREQUENCY
RANGE. SOME FAMILIAR USES OF MICROWAVES INCLUDE MEDI-
CAL DIATHERMY MACHINES, MICROWAVE OVENS, TELEVISION
TRANSMISSION, RADARS AND COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS.

LIKE VISIBLE LIGHT, INFRARED AND OTHER RADIO FREQUENCIES,
MICROWAVES ARE OFTEN REFERRED TO AS NONIONIZING ELECTRO-
MAGNETIC RADIATION. THE TERM "RADIATION" SIMPLY REFERS

TO ENERGY WHICH CAN TRAVEL THROUGH THE AIR WITHOUT THE
USE OF WIRES. "NONIONIZING" RADIATION IS ENERGY WHICH
DOES NOT BREAK MOLECULAR BONDS OR PRODUCE IONIZED
PARTICLES WHEN ABSORBED. THIS RADIATION SHOULD NOT BE
CONFUSED WITH "IONIZING" RADIATION SUCH AS X-RAYS OR
RADIOACTIVE ISOTOPES AND GAMMA RAY NUCLEAR RADIATION
WHICH CAN BREAK MOLECULAR BONDS, PRODUCE IONIZED PARTICLES
CONFIDENTIAL

PAGE 05 STATE 166451

AND DO SIGNIFICANT STRUCTURAL DAMAGE.

NONIONIZING ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION IS PRESENT IN ALL
URBAN ENVIRONMENTS AT VERY LOW LEVELS; SMALL FRACTIONS
OF A MICROWATT GENERALLY. THE COMMONEST SOURCE OF SUCH
BACKGROUND OR AMBIENT RADIATION TODAY IS TELEVISION AND
FM RADIO BROADCASTING BUT THERE ARE OTHER INDUSTRIAL,
MILITARY AND COMMUNICATIONS SOURCES AS WELL. SUCH
RADIATION IS PRESENT ALL OVER MOSCOW AS IT IS IN WASHING-
TON, BUT IN THE EARLY SIXTIES WE FIRST VERIFIED THAT A
DIRECTIONAL MICROWAVE SIGNAL OF VERY LOW INTENSITY WAS
BEING AIMED AT THE TOP FLOORS OF OUR MOSCOW EMBASSY
BUILDING.

THIS SIGNAL, WHICH WE WILL CALL SIGNAL NUMBER 1, WAS ON
THE AIR INTERMITTENTLY FOR A FEW HOURS A DAY UNTIL JUNE
1975. IT WAS MONITORED CONTINUOUSLY AND MEASURED
PERIODICALLY WHENEVER A CHANGE WAS DETECTED. AT ALL
TIMES IT WAS FOUND TO BE WELL BELOW ANY LEVEL ASSOCIATED
WITH KNOWN BIOLOGICAL HAZARDS. NEVERTHELESS, A SPECIAL
RESEARCH PROJECT WAS CARRIED OUT TO DETERMINE WHETHER
THERE COULD POSSIBLY BE ADVERSE PHYSIOLOGICAL OR PSYCHO-
LOGICAL EFFECTS. NO POSITIVE EVIDENCE OF SUCH EFFECTS
WAS FOUND, AND THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT WAS ENDED. A
BROADER, MORE COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM ON THE EFFECTS OF
NONIONIZING RADIATION WAS THEN INSTITUTED AND CONTINUES
THROUGH THE PRESENT.

IN THE SPRING OF 1972, A NEW SIGNAL NUMBER 2 WAS DETECTED.
HOWEVER, IT WAS ONLY ON THE AIR INFREQUENTLY AND IT
DISAPPEARED AFTER A BRIEF PERIOD.

IN 1973, A SIGNAL (WHICH WE WILL CALL 3-A) APPEARED ON
THE SCENE FOR A FEW DAYS. IT REAPPEARED FOR A FEW MORE
DAYS IN 1974. ITS CHARACTERISTICS WERE SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT
IT HAD A DIFFERENT BAND-WIDTH (SPREAD OF FREQUENCIES)
AND SOMEWHAT HIGHER INTENSITY. BECAUSE OF ITS INFREQUEN-
T OCCURRENCE, IT DID NOT AROUSE CONCERN. IT CAME BACK
ON THE AIR IN MAY OF 1975, HOWEVER, AND HAS PERSISTED
SINCE THAT TIME. SOON AFTERWARDS SIGNAL NUMBER 1
SINCE THAT TIME. SOON AFTERWARDS SIGNAL NUMBER 1
CONFIDENTIAL

PAGE 06 STATE 166451

DISAPPEARED ENTIRELY.

IN OCTOBER 1975, ANOTHER SIGNAL, 3B, SIMILAR TO 3A,
BEGAN OPERATING. SINCE THEN WE HAVE HAD TWO SIGNALS--
3A AND 3B. BOTH ARE HIGHLY DIRECTIONAL, SOMEWHAT LIKE
SEARCH-LIGHT BEAMS, BUT WIDER, AND DIRECTED AT THE TOP
FLOORS OF THE CENTRAL WING OF THE EMBASSY. THESE TWO
BEAMS ARE SOMETIMES ON THE AIR SIMULTANEOUSLY FOR 3 - 4
HOURS A DAY. BECAUSE OF THE BEAM-LIKE NATURE OF THE
SIGNALS ONLY LIMITED AREAS OF THE CHANCERY ARE AFFECTED
AND THE LEVELS OF RADIATION EVEN IN THESE AREAS ARE NOT
UNIFORM, BUT VARY FROM PLACE TO PLACE AND WITHIN ANY
ONE ROOM.

A NUMBER OF THEORIES HAVE BEEN ADVANCED AS TO THE
PURPOSE OF THESE SIGNALS; ONLY THE SOVIET AUTHORITIES
ARE IN A POSITION TO GIVE A DEFINITIVE ANSWER AS TO
WHICH OF THEM IS CORRECT.

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE WHATEVER THAT THE AMBASSADOR'S
RESIDENCE OR STAFF, APARTMENTS, OFFICES, ETC., OUTSIDE
THE CHANCERY ARE AFFECTED BY SIMILAR SIGNALS. RECENT
CHECKS HAVE CONFIRMED THIS AND THEY WILL CONTINUE TO BE
MONITORED.

SIGNAL CHARACTERISTICS:

THESE RADIO SIGNALS ARE DEFINED BY THE INTENSITY,
DURATION, SPECIFIC FREQUENCIES, BANDWIDTH (SPREAD OF
FREQUENCIES) AND MODULATIONS (HOW THE WAVEFORMS ARE
SHAPED). WE MEASURE THE POWER LEVEL BY CARRYING INSTRU-
MENTS AROUND THE EMBASSY WHICH REGISTER THE INTENSITY
OF THE ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS. BECAUSE THE POWER LEVEL
IS SO VERY LOW, THE UNIT OF MEASURE IS IN MICROWATTS
(ONE MILLIONTH OF A WATT) PER SQUARE CENTIMETER.
DURATION, MOST SIMPLY, IS THE NUMBER OF HOURS PER DAY
THAT EITHER OR BOTH THE SIGNALS ARE ON; IT ALSO REFERS
TO THE TOTAL PERIOD OVER WHICH EXPOSURES ARE EXPERIENCED.

THE INTENSITIES AND OPERATING TIMES OF SIGNALS 1, 2, 3A
CONFIDENTIAL

PAGE 07 STATE 166451

AND 3B ARE AS FOLLOWS:

-- SIGNAL 1, WHICH OPERATED UNTIL JUNE 1975, WAS ORIGINALL
ON THE AIR FOR ABOUT EIGHT HOURS A DAY OR LESS AND IN
RECENT YEARS FOR FIVE HOURS A DAY OR LESS. THE MAXIMUM
LEVELS WERE 1 - 5 MICROWATTS PER SQUARE CENTIMETER OR
LESS (THESE MAXIMUM READINGS WERE FOUND IN THE VICINITY
OF WINDOWS IN SOME UPPER FLOORS OFFICES AT THE BACK OF

THE BUILDING). (NOTE: EARLIER VERSIONS OF THIS PAPER
INDICATED THAT SIGNAL 1 PRODUCED A MAXIMUM INTENSITY OF
3 MICROWATTS. RECORDS EXAMINED SINCE THEN HAVE SHOWN
THAT IN CERTAIN LIMITED AREAS READINGS AS HIGH AS 5
MICROWATTS WERE REGISTERED AT CERTAIN TIMES.)

-- SIGNAL 2, WHICH CAME ON THE AIR ONLY VERY BRIEFLY
WAS VERY SIMILAR TO SIGNAL 1.

-- SIGNAL 3A WAS FOUND TO HAVE HIGHER INTENSITIES, UP
TO AS MUCH AS THIRTEEN MICROWATTS PER SQUARE CENTIMETER
IN SOME LOCALIZED AREAS. IT OPERATED FOR VARIOUS
PERIODS OF TIME UP TO AS LONG AS FOURTEEN HOURS A DAY.

-- IN OCTOBER 1975, SIGNAL 3B BEGAN OPERATING FROM A
DIFFERENT DIRECTION. THE SIGNAL CHARACTERISTICS WERE
SIMILAR TO THOSE OF 3A EXCEPT THAT ITS MAXIMUM INTENSI-
TY LEVELS WERE LOWER. SIGNAL 3B ALSO OPERATED FOR UP
TO FOURTEEN HOURS A DAY. THE TYPICAL TIME DURING WHICH
ONE OR BOTH SIGNALS OPERATED WAS 18-20 HOURS PER DAY,
WITH BOTH ON AT THE SAME TIME FOR 3 - 4 HOURS.

BETWEEN OCTOBER 1975 AND JANUARY 1976 THE TYPICAL
MAXIMUM LEVELS MEASURED WERE UP TO 13 MICROWATTS PER
SQUARE CENTIMETER. (THE TERM "TYPICAL MAXIMUM LEVEL"
TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE FACT THAT ROOMS ARE NOT ILLUMINATED
UNIFORMLY BUT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF AREAS WHERE RADIATION
LEVELS ARE VERY LOW AS WELL AS A NUMBER OF "MAXIMUM
POINTS." MAXIMUM LEVELS ALSO VARY CONSIDERABLY FROM
ROOM TO ROOM. THE "TYPICAL MAXIMUM" REFERS TO READINGS
WHICH ARE COMMONLY THE HIGHEST RECORDED, WHEN THE
SIGNAL WAS OPERATING IN A "HIGH MODE." BOTH LOWER AND
CONFIDENTIAL

PAGE 08 STATE 166451

HIGHER READINGS HAVE BEEN ATYPICALLY RECORDED AT INDIVI-
DUAL POINTS FOR LIMITED PERIODS.) THE HIGHEST "MAXIMUM
POINT" RECORDED IN AN ACCESSIBLE AREA WHEN BOTH SIGNALS
WERE ON THE AIR AT ONCE WAS EIGHTEEN MICROWATTS. FOR
THE MOST PART, HOWEVER, LEVELS WERE SUBSTANTIALLY LOWER
EVEN IN THE TOP FLOOR OFFICES WHERE THESE MAXIMUM
POINTS WERE OBSERVED.

MORE RECENTLY, POWER LEVELS HAVE DECREASED GREATLY AND
DURATION HAS VARIED. THE MAXIMUM LEVELS CURRENTLY
BEING MEASURED NEAR WINDOWS, WITH SCREENING REMOVED, ON
THE TOP FLOORS ARE TWO MICROWATTS PER SQUARE CENTIMETER
OR LESS. THESE LEVELS ARE BELOW BOTH THE U.S. AND THE
SOVIET STANDARDS, AND ARE BEING MONITORED CONTINUALLY.
ANY CHANGE WILL COME TO OUR ATTENTION WITHOUT DELAY.

WHEN THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SIGNALS CHANGED LAST
FALL, THE DEPARTMENT BEGAN TO CONSIDER COUNTER-MEASURES
INCLUDING VARIOUS KINDS OF WINDOW SCREENING. ALUMINUM
SCREENING WAS FOUND TO DECREASE THE INTENSITY LEVELS BY
A FACTOR OF 10, THAT IS BY 90 PERCENT. IT HAS BEEN
INSTALLED NOT JUST IN THE AREAS AFFECTED, BUT THROUGHOUT
THE BUILDING. THUS, WITH THE SCREENING IN PLACE AND
THE LEVEL OF INTENSITY OF THE SIGNALS THEMSELVES CUT
BACK TO TWO MICROWATT OR LESS MEASURED WITHOUT SCREENS,
MAXIMUM RADIATION LEVELS INSIDE THE EMBASSY ARE SMALL
FRACTIONS OF A MICROWATT.

IN THE PROCESS OF CAREFULLY MEASURING THE EFFECT OF THE
SOVIET SIGNAL OUR EXPERTS DETECTED ANOTHER PHENOMENON
WHICH DOES NOT INVOLVE MICROWAVE RADIATION BUT NEVERTHE-
LESS IS MENTIONED IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS FACT SHEET
COMPLETE. OUR MOSCOW EMBASSY HAS AN EMERGENCY TRANSMITTER
WHICH UP TO THIS YEAR WAS TESTED FOR A SHORT TIME EACH
MONTH (EXCEPT FOR LIMITED PERIODS OF USE DURING HIGH-
LEVEL VISITS). EARLY THIS YEAR, ONE OF THESE TESTS WAS
CONDUCTED WHILE MEASUREMENTS OF THE SOVIET SIGNAL WERE
IN PROCESS. IT WAS LEARNED THAT BECAUSE OF ITS PROXIMI-
TY TO OTHER ELECTRICAL CONNECTIONS, THE ANTENNA FOR THE
EMERGENCY TRANSMITTER PRODUCED HIGH LEVELS OF ELECTROMAG-
NETIC RADIATION FOR BRIEF PERIODS OF TIME IN THE AMBAS-
CONFIDENTIAL

PAGE 09 STATE 166451

SADOR'S OFFICE. HOWEVER, THE FREQUENCIES WERE WELL
BELOW MICROWAVE FREQUENCIES (15 MEGAHERZ, COMPARED TO
1000 TO 10,000 MEGAHERZ WHICH ARE THE MICROWAVE FREQUEN-
CIES). MEASUREMENTS OF THE LEVELS IN THAT OFFICE UNDER
BRIEF TEST CONDITIONS INDICATED THAT THE HIGHLY LOCALI-
ZED RADIATION FELL WITHIN U.S. SAFETY STANDARDS, EXCEPT
THAT AT DISTANCES OF A FEW INCHES FROM CERTAIN ELECTRI-
CAL INSTALLATIONS IN THE ROOM IT EXCEEDED U.S. SAFETY
STANDARDS. WE ARE ALTERING THE INSTALLATION TO PREVENT
SUCH EFFECTS IN THE FUTURE AND MEANWHILE THE TRANSMITTER
WILL NOT BE USED.

SAFETY STANDARDS

MOST COUNTRIES OF WESTERN AND EASTERN EUROPE, INCLUDING
THE SOVIET UNION AND OURSELVES HAVE DEVELOPED "OCCUPA-
TIONAL STANDARDS"-THAT IS, A LEVEL BELOW WHICH EXPO
SURE TO MICROWAVE RADIATION FOR A WORKING DAY FOR A
NORMAL ADULT IS CONSIDERED ACCEPTABLE (ACTUALLY THE
UNITED STATES DOES NOT EXPLICITLY LIMIT THE DURATION OF
EXPOSURE). THESE STANDARDS ARE INTENDED TO APPLY TO
PEOPLE WHO WORK WITH OR NEAR RADIATION OF THIS SORT--
INDUSTRIAL WORKERS, AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS, RADAR

OPERATORS, ELECTRONICS TECHNICIANS, MILITARY PERSONNEL
AND THE LIKE. THERE IS A CONSIDERABLE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN SOVIET AND U.S. OCCUPATIONAL STANDARDS. BOTH
COUNTRIES CONTINUOUSLY REEXAMINE THEIR SCIENTIFIC
BASIS. THE U.S. OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY STANDARD IS 10
MILLIWATTS PER SQUARE CENTIMETER (10,000 MICROWATTS).
IT IS BASED ON MINIMIZING THE HEAT STRESS PLACED ON THE
BODY BY EXPOSURE LEVELS ABOVE 10 MILLIWATTS PER SQUARE
CENTIMETER.

THE SOVIET OCCUPATIONAL STANDARD IS 1,000 TIMES LOWER,
10 MICROWATTS PER SQUARE CENTIMETER FOR A WORKING DAY.
IN SETTING STANDARDS THE SOVIETS HAVE TAKEN AN APPROACH
WHICH IS QUITE DIFFERENT FROM THAT WHICH SCIENTISTS OF
THE UNITED STATES OR WESTERN EUROPE BELIEVE IS JUSTIFIED
BY EITHER SCIENTIFIC DATA OR EXPERIENCE.

CONFIDENTIAL

PAGE 10 STATE 166451

IN THE UNITED STATES VARIOUS GROUPS CONTINUOUSLY REVIEW
NEW SCIENTIFIC RESULTS, ANY SPECIAL SITUATIONS AS WELL
AS STANDARDS. THESE INCLUDE THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH (NIOSH), ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA), BUREAU OF RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH
(BRH) OF THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION (FDA),
AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARDS INSTITUTE (ANSI) (AN
INDUSTRY/UNIVERSITY GROUP), THE ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION
MANAGEMENT ADVISORY COUNCIL (ERMAC) AN ADVISORY GROUP
TO THE OFFICE OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS POLICY IN THE
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, AND VARIOUS NATIONAL
ACADEMY OF SCIENCES GROUPS.

OCCUPATIONAL STANDARDS ARE NOT DIRECTLY RELEVANT TO THE
SITUATION IN THE EMBASSY. THERE SOME PEOPLE CAN BE
EXPOSED TO THIS RADIATION FOR MORE THAN 8 HOURS A DAY
IF THEY LIVE IN CERTAIN AREAS OF THE CHANCERY. THOSE
WHO LIVE AND WORK THERE INCLUDE NOT ONLY HEALTHY
ADULTS BUT ALSO CHILDREN, SICK PERSONS, PREGNANT WOMEN
AND OTHER GROUPS TYPICAL OF A GENERAL POPULATION. THE
APPROACH IN SETTING ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS FOR THE
GENERAL POPULATIONS WOULD BE THAT THEY SHOULD BE LOWER
THAN OCCUPATIONAL STANDARDS. HOWEVER, THE LACK OF
CONFIRMED DATA SHOWING ANY HAZARD AT LEVELS BELOW 10
MILLIWATTS PER SQUARE CENTIMETER (10,000 MICROWATTS PER
SQUARE CENTIMETER) HAVE NOT MADE THE SETTING OF A
GENERAL POPULATION STANDARD APPEAR NECESSARY IN THE
UNITED STATES. IN THE SOVIET UNION AN ARBITRARY FACTOR
OF 10 HAS BEEN APPLIED TO THEIR OCCUPATIONAL STANDARD
SO THAT THEIR PUBLISHED GENERAL POPULATION SAFETY LEVEL
IS ONE MICROWATT PER SQUARE CENTIMETER FOR INDEFINITE
EXPOSURE.

EFFECTS OF EXPOSURE

CONCERN OVER POSSIBLE ADVERSE HEALTH IMPLICATIONS FROM
THE SIGNALS AT THE EMBASSY WAS STIMULATED BY THE CHANGES
IN THEIR CHARACTERISTICS AND OPERATION--I.E., APPEARANCE
OF 2 SIGNALS, INCREASES IN INTENSITY LEVELS AND PERIODS
OF OPERATION--AS PREVIOUSLY DESCRIBED. ALTHOUGH THE
MAXIMUM LEVELS OBSERVED AND THEIR DURATION RESULTED IN
CONFIDENTIAL

PAGE 11 STATE 166451

ONLY EXTREMELY LOW EXPOSURES, WE FELT OUR APPROACH
SHOULD TAKE ACCOUNT OF THE POSSIBILITY THAT THESE
INCREASES MIGHT CONTINUE AND COULD REACH POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS LEVELS.

THERE HAS BEEN CONSIDERABLE RESEARCH AND MUCH KNOWLEDGE
HAS BEEN ACCUMULATED ON THE EFFECTS OF MICROWAVE EXPO-
SURES AT POWER DENSITY LEVELS ABOVE 10 MILLIWATTS OR
10,000 MICROWATTS PER SQUARE CENTIMETER. AT SUFFICIENTLY
HIGH LEVELS (E.G., AROUND AND ABOVE 100 MILLIWATTS OR
100,000 MICROWATTS PER SQUARE CENTIMETERS) MICROWAVE
EXPOSURES CAN CAUSE HARMFUL BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS ASSOCIA-
TED PRIMARILY WITH TISSUE HEATING DUE TO ENERGY ABSORP-
TION. THIS PRINCIPLE IS USED IN SUCH FAMILIAR PROCESSES
AS MICROWAVE COOKING, MEDICAL DIATHERMY TREATMENT, AND
VARIOUS INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES. THE KINDS OF EFFECTS
THAT CAN OCCUR AT HIGH LEVELS INCLUDE CATARACT FORMATION,
BURNS AND OTHER EFFECTS TYPICALLY ASSOCIATED WITH
HEATING. CLAIMS THAT CATARACTS HAVE OCCURRED AT LOWER
LEVELS HAVE NOT BEEN SUBSTANTIATED AND NO CAUSAL CONNECT-
ION HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED BETWEEN MICROWAVE RADIATION
AND DEVELOPMENT OF CANCER.

THERE ARE SOME REPORTS IN THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE
ASSOCIATING EFFECTS WITH EXPOSURES TO LEVELS BELOW
THOSE KNOWN TO PRODUCE MEASURABLE HEATING. FOR EXAMPLE,
THESE INCLUDE A VARIETY OF NONSPECIFIC COMPLAINTS--SUCH
AS INABILITY TO CONCENTRATE, FATIGUE HEADACHES--AND
OTHER FUNCTIONAL AND REPORTEDLY REVERSIBLE CHANGES
INCLUDING SHIFTS IN THE RATIOS OF DIFFERENT BLOOD
CELLS. EVEN THESE REPORTS, WHICH ARE MOSTLY IN THE
EAST EUROPEAN LITERATURE, ASSOCIATE EFFECTS WITH PROLONGED
EXPOSURES AT LEVELS GENERALLY IN THE RANGE OF HUNDREDS
TO THOUSANDS OF MICROWATTS PER SQUARE CENTIMETER, WHICH
IS FAR GREATER THAN ANYTHING OBSERVED IN THE EMBASSY.

THERE IS GENERAL, IF NOT TOTAL, UNANIMITY AMONG AMERICAN
EXPERTS THAT EXPOSURE BELOW THE MILLIWATT (1,000 MICRO-
WATTS) PER SQUARE CENTIMETER LEVEL DO NOT PRODUCE
HAZARDOUS EFFECTS. THERE IS LESS UNANIMITY ABOUT THE

CONFIDENTIAL

PAGE 12 STATE 166451

LOWEST LEVEL AT WHICH EFFECTS ARE OBSERVED, EVEN IF
THEY ARE NOT HAZARDOUS. THIS IS THE SUBJECT OF RESEARCH
IN THE UNITED STATES AND OTHER COUNTRIES, INCLUDING A
RECENTLY SIGNED US-USSR COOPERATIVE RESEARCH AGREEMENT.

THE EXPERT CONSULTANTS WITH WHOM THE DEPARTMENT HAS
BEEN WORKING ON THE POSSIBLE MEDICAL ASPECTS OF THIS
PROBLEM HAVE CONCLUDED THAT WITH CURRENT LOW INTENSITY
LEVEL AND WITH THE SCREENING IN PLACE THERE IS NO CAUSE
FOR CONCERN OVER HEALTH HAZARDS. THEY HAVE ALSO CONCLUDED
THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT ESTABLISHES A CONNECTION
BETWEEN THE RADIATION AND ANY HEALTH PROBLEM EXPERIENCED
BY THOSE AT THE EMBASSY NOW OR IN THE PAST. ALTHOUGH
IT IS VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVE THE ABSENCE OF A
CAUSE AND EFFECT RELATIONSHIP, THE VALIDITY OF THIS
CONCLUSION WILL BE TESTED BY A DETAILED STATISTICAL
EVALUATION AND SURVEY PERFORMED BY OUTSIDE CONSULTANTS.
WE ARE ALSO KEEPING THE HEALTH OF OUR MOSCOW EMPLOYEES
UNDER CLOSE OBSERVATION. IN ORDER TO BE SURE THAT WE
ARE NOT OVERLOOKING ANY HEALTH PROBLEMS WE ARE LOOKING
FOR BROAD, GENERAL INDICATORS OF ANY POSSIBLE DIFFERENCES
IN BODILY FUNCTIONS. ONE VERY EASILY OBSERVABLE HEALTH
INDICATOR IS THE EVALUATION OF THE BLOOD. THIS CAN
DETECT CHANGES ASSOCIATED WITH A BROAD SPECTRUM OF
HEALTH CONDITIONS, AND DEVIATIONS FROM ACCEPTED WHITE
CELL COUNTS NOT EXPLAINED BY OTHER PHENOMENA (FLU,
INJECTIONS, ALLERGIES, PARASITES ETC.) WOULD BE A
WARNING SIGN. THUS BLOOD SAMPLES OF THOSE AT POST ARE
BEING EXAMINED MORE CAREFULLY THAN BEFORE AND A MEDICAL
TECHNICIAN HAS BEEN ASSIGNED THERE FOR THIS PURPOSE.
ANY PERSISTENT ABNORMALITIES, WHATEVER THE CAUSE, ARE
THOROUGHLY INVESTIGATED. END TEXT.
9. BEGIN TEXT OF PRESS GUIDANCE:

QUESTION ONE: HAS THERE BEEN ANY PROGRESS IN DISCUSSIONS
WITH SOVIETS REGARDING THE MOSCOW SIGNAL?

ANSWER ONE: THE SECRETARY HAS ON PREVIOUS OCCASIONS NOTED
THE DELICACY OF OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH THE SOVIETS ON
THIS ISSUE AND I DO NOT INTEND TO DISCUSS THOSE TALKS IN
DETAIL. HOWEVER, AS A RESULT OF OUR DISCUSSIONS, THE
CONFIDENTIAL

PAGE 13 STATE 166451

STRENGTH OF THE SIGNAL BEAMED AT OUR EMBASSY IN MOSCOW HAS
BEEN GREATLY REDUCED FROM PREVIOUS RECORDINGS WHICH WERE
THEMSELVES WELL BELOW ESTABLISHED U.S. SAFETY STANDARDS.
-URRENT SIGNAL LEVELS ARE ALSO BELOW THE ESTABLISHED
SOVIET STANDARD (10 MICROWATTS PER SQUARE CENTIMETER),
WHICH IS 1,000 TIMES LOWER THAN OUR OWN STANDARD.

QUESTION TWO: WHAT ABOUT THE HEALTH OF THE EMPLOYEES IN
MOSCOW NOW OR OF THOSE WHO HAVE SERVED THERE IN THE PAST?
AMBASSADOR STOESSEL?

ANSWER TWO: THE HEALTH OF OUR EMPLOYEES IS AN ISSUE OF
PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE FOR THE DEPARTMENT. AS I HAVE
INDICATED BEFORE, HOWEVER, WE WILL NOT DISCUSS THE HEALTH
OF ANY EMPLOYEE AND THAT INCLUDES AMBASSADOR STOESSEL.
THIS IS PRIVATE AND MEDICALLY PRIVILEGED INFORMATION.
HOWEVER, AS A RESULT OF THE REDUCTION IN SIGNAL STRENGTH,
AND UNILATERAL STEPS WE HAVE TAKEN, CURRENT RADIATION
LEVELS WITHIN THE EMBASSY ARE BELOW CURRENT SOVIET
OR U.S. SAFETY STANDARDS. THE EXPERT CONSULTANTS WITH
WHOM WE HAVE WORKED ON THIS PROBLEM HAVE CONCLUDED THAT
THERE IS NO CAUSE FOR CONCERN REGARDING HEALTH HAZARDS.

QUESTION THREE: WHAT UNILATERAL STEPS HAVE WE TAKEN?

ANSWER THREE: ALUMINUM SCREENING HAS BEEN INSTALLED IN
WINDOW AREAS THROUGHOUT THE EMBASSY. THIS SCREENING
EFFECTIVELY CUTS THE SIGNAL STRENGTH BY 90 PERCENT.

QUESTION FOUR: WHAT ABOUT THOSE WHO SERVED IN MOSCOW
BEFORE THE SIGNAL STRENGTH WAS REDUCED?

ANSWER FOUR: IN VIEW OF QUESTIONS RAISED ABOUT THE
POSSIBLE EFFECTS OF RADIATION AT LEVELS EXISTING IN THE
PAST, CONSULTANTS ARE NOW WORKING ON A DETAILED EVALUATION
AND SURVEY TO TEST THEIR PROVISIONAL CONCLUSION THAT
THERE IS NO CORRELATION BETWEEN THE MICROWAVE RADIATION
LEVELS AT OUR EMBASSY IN MOSCOW AND ANY HEALTH PROBLEM
ENCOUNTERED BY EMPLOYEES WHO HAVE SERVED THERE.

QUESTION FIVE: DO THE SOVIETS PLAN TO TURN THE SIGNALS
CONFIDENTIAL

PAGE 14 STATE 166451

OFF ALTOGETHER?

ANSWER FIVE: THE STRENGTH OF THE SIGNALS HAS BEEN
REDUCED BUT THEY HAVE NOT BEEN TURNED OFF. THE TERMINA-
TION OF THESE SIGNALS IS OUR OBJECTIVE. WE PLAN TO CONTINUE
TO MONITOR THE TRANSMISSIONS TO ASSURE THAT WE WILL KNOW
IMMEDIATELY IF THEIR STRENGTH IS AGAIN INCREASED. THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH AN INCREASE IS OF COURSE A MATTER
OF GREAT CONCERN FOR THE DEPARTMENT AND FOR OUR EMPLOYEES.
WE REGRET THAT THE SOVIETS HAVE FAILED TO TURN THE TRANS-
MISSIONS OFF COMPLETELY, THEREBY DEMONSTRATING A LACK OF
CONCERN FOR THE LIVING AND WORKING CONDITIONS OF OUR
PEOPLE IN MOSCOW.

QUESTION SIX: WHAT CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT THE CHARACTERIS-
TICS OF THE RADIATION ITSELF?

ANSWER SIX: OUR EMPLOYEES HAVE BEEN BRIEFED FULLY ON THE
SITUATION IN MOSCOW AND HAVE BEEN PROVIDED A DESCRIPTION
OF THE NATURE OF THE RADIATION. I CAN TELL YOU THAT THE
RADIATION IN THE EMBASSY WITH SCREENING IN PLACE AT
PRESENT IS A FRACTION OF A MICROWATT PER SQUARE CENTIMETER
IN ALL LIVING AND WORKING AREAS. AS I HAVE ALREADY IN-
DICATED, THIS IS BELOW CURRENT SOVIET OR U.S. SAFETY
STANDARDS.

QUESTION SEVEN: IS THIS LIKE X-RAY RADIATION?

ANSWER SEVEN: NO, X-RAYS ARE IONIZING RADIATION, THE
DELETERIOUS EFFECTS OF WHICH IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES
ARE WELL KNOW; MICROWAVE TRANSMISSIONS ARE NON-IONIZING
AND HAVE BEEN PROVED HARMFUL ONLY AT VERY HIGH POWER
DENSITIES. END TEXT. ROBINSON

CONFIDENTIAL

Post has attachment
Karma Police (surveillance program)

Karma Police is the code name for an Internet mass surveillance and data collection program operated by Britain's Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ).

In 2015, documents obtained by The Intercept from U.S. National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed that GCHQ had carried out the KARMA POLICE operation since about 2008.[1] The KARMA POLICE operation swept up the IP address of Internet users visiting websites. The program was established with no public scrutiny or oversight. KARMA POLICE is a powerful spying tool in conjunction with other GCHQ programs, because IP addresses could be cross-referenced with other data.[1] The goal of the program, according to the documents, was "either (a) a web browsing profile for every visible user on the internet, or (b) a user profile for every visible website on the internet."[1]

Karma Police was apparently named after the Radiohead song Karma Police (which includes the lyric "This is what you’ll get when you mess with us").

Post has attachment
Surrender or We'll Slime You
wired.com
02.01.95

Some say John Alexander is on the trail of the greatest advance in warfare since the invention of gunpowder - nonlethal weapons. Others believe he shouldn't be spending taxpayer money without adult supervision.

The Los Alamos National Laboratory, a sprawling complex of beige buildings, stretches across a series of mesas above the stark beauty of the New Mexico highlands. Nearby street names like Oppenheimer and Trinity remind visitors of the facility's reason for being: revolutionary research and development of America's first atomic bombs. Devising weapons of hideous death and massive destruction in the service of national security has long been the name of the high-technology game around here.

If John Alexander's vision of the future is realized, that kind of Cold War thinking might one day become as obsolete as a cavalry charge. A retired Army colonel-turned-technocrat and a member of the lab's Special Technologies group, Alexander is a leader of a growing movement that could change the way the US military thinks about conducting the business of war. How? By providing strategists with a new class of weapons designed *not *to kill.

The efforts at Los Alamos are just part of an innovative new trend in national defense: nonlethality. At facilities ranging from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California and the Army's Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey, government-funded scientists and engineers are developing an array of high-tech devices that are supposed to incapacitate, not decapitate, their targets.

"The entire concept of national security has changed," Alexander declares. "Therefore, you need other sorts of force options." If the ideas circulating around the nation's top-secret weapons labs pan out, the nonlethal arsenal of the millennium could include such exotic "force options" as electromagnetic pulse generators and high-powered microwaves, which would short out communication systems and fry electronics. Computer viruses would infiltrate and paralyze banking networks and command-and-control operations. Aircraft-targeting sensors could fall prey to "demons," directed-energy munitions that emit flashes of light brighter than the sun. Clouds of combustion-inhibiting chemicals would choke engines, stopping tanks and troop carriers in their tracks, while metal-eating microbes and super-caustic chemicals would eat away at their armor. Enemy soldiers might be confused by holographic projections, dazzled by laser rifles, or disoriented by low-frequency acoustic beams that provoke vomiting and diarrhea. And if being blinded and humiliated isn't enough to sap their will, they could find themselves trapped in stinging nets or glued in place by ultrasticky foams.

These weapons may seem like they've sprung from the pages of Marvel Comics, but haphazard research into these and other nonlethal technologies has been underway for decades. As far back as 1972, a National Science Foundation report on the subject listed over 30 nonlethal concepts. Details on most of the current projects are hard to come by, as many of the ideas are being developed in highly classified, or "black" fashion. But the Pentagon is pushing to get the technology out of the labs and into the field. The 1995 defense budget includes US$41 million in seed money for some of the more promising devices. Once some of those are selected, insiders say, Secretary of Defense William Perry is expected to authorize a Nonlethal Weapons Steering Committee to introduce the new capabilities into the US arsenal.

While $41 million is pocket change in terms of the Pentagon's $262 billion budget for defense, it marks the first step in the development of a coordinated nonlethal weaponry program. And it's not just international bad guys who could be dazzled, disabled, and immobilized. The Justice Department is also getting into the nonlethal act. Spurred by the 1993 disaster with the Branch Davidians at Waco, Texas, Attorney General Janet Reno and Deputy Secretary of Defense John Deutch last April signed a "memo of understanding" under which the Pentagon will share "dual-use" nonlethal technology with domestic law enforcement agencies.

At first glance, sending an American soldier into battle with a nonlethal weapon makes about as much sense as handing a Buddhist monk a bazooka. But according to a growing number of military officers and national-security experts, the new technologies will allow commanders the opportunity to accomplish the same goals as conventional weapons while minimizing casualties as well as the destruction of hardware and the environment. "Anything you can conceive of using lethal force against you could use nonlethals instead, potentially with a faster effect and less political baggage," says Colonel John Warden, Commandant of the Air Command and staff College at Maxwell Air Force Base in Montgomery, Alabama.

This sort of claim is driving Washington's interest in the new technologies. Traditional US military doctrine - using overwhelming force to "break things and kill people" - has its limits in the New World Order, where a monolithic opponent like the Red Army has been replaced by a scattered mishmash of Middle Eastern dictators, African warlords, and Caribbean /lites. With public tolerance of the costs of intervention at an all-time low, decision makers are hoping that nonlethal alternatives might ease the task of playing Globocop. "It's coming from the president's desire to have wars that are bloodless," says Harvey Sapolsky, who is a political scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "We don't want Americans killed, we don't want civilians killed, and we don't even want some of the enemies killed. That's a big constraint."

Fans of nonlethal weaponry assert that the technologies will apply across the strategic spectrum, from special operations against terrorists and international drug cartels to full-scale battles with rogue states. Believers like General Edward "Shy" Meyer, a retired Army Chief of staff, suggest that advanced nonlethal capabilities could even help avoid some wars altogether by allowing the US to impose "techno-sanctions" against its enemies. A dose of combustion-inhibiting chemicals, for example, could have neutralized the threat that arose last fall when Iraq moved a division close to the Kuwait border. "If you had the ability to make all the motor-driven vehicles unable to move without killing any Iraqis," Meyer explains, "that would be a relatively peaceful and nonlethal solution to a very difficult international problem."

At least initially, however, the Pentagon seems to be setting its sights a bit lower. One senior strategist at the Department of Defense says nonlethal weapons have the most potential in "low-intensity conflicts" like those in Somalia and Haiti, where it is difficult to tell enemies from civilians. "When we defeated the Iraqi army in the desert, if we didn't know exactly where an Iraqi artillery piece was, we just covered a whole area with lethal fire," says the Pentagon official, who asked to remain anonymous as the new policy for nonlethals has not been announced publicly. "We can't do that in downtown Mogadishu. If I can neutralize a group of people in a nonlethal way, then go in and sort out who the bad guys are, that's an interesting kind of capability."

That's also a kind of capability that appeals to domestic law enforcement types, who are desperate to update their crime-fighting abilities while avoiding the lawsuits and bad press that stem from excessive force. "State and local police are still equipped much as Wyatt Earp was in the late 19th century, and they still have the same basic options when confronting a subject," writes David Boyd, science and technology chief at the National Institute For Justice. "They can talk him into cooperating, beat him into submission, or shoot him. Law enforcement clearly needs more alternatives."

Boyd argues that the 1992 Los Angeles riots might have been avoided if police confronting Rodney King had had more than primitive nonlethals (batons and Tasers) at their disposal. Like a gun that shoots "sticky foam," for example. Originally developed by Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque to protect nuclear facilities from terrorism, the coffee-colored liquid expands up to 50 times its original volume when mixed with air, turning into a harmless, taffylike goo that immobilizes its target on contact. Also being researched at Sandia: a "smart gun" with an electronic chip that prevents anyone except its owner from firing it, and an aqueous foam that can fill a room with soap-like bubbles, temporarily preventing occupants from seeing and hearing while still allowing them to move and breathe.

Still, problems remain. Before cops can start yelling "Stop, or I'll slime you!" to fleeing suspects, researchers have to figure out how to get sticky foam unstuck. Baby oil works best, but it takes about a minute to clean up each square inch of the stuff.

More importantly, some weapons being touted as nonlethal can have some pretty brutal side effects. The International Red Cross opposes laser weapons because it fears the devices might permanently blind combatants. Looking for law-enforcement applications of high-powered microwave technology, a researcher at Los Alamos claims to have figured out a way to stop a car engine by disrupting the electronics with a burst of energy. Unfortunately, it could bake the vehicle's occupants. Other observers fear that the various nonlethal gasses, liquids, and microbes under consideration could violate UN-sponsored treaties on chemical weapons and biological warfare.

Steve Aftergood, an analyst at the Federation of American Scientists, cites an incident in the Persian Gulf War - when the Air Force launched a missile carrying a warhead filled with carbon fibers that shorted out Baghdad's electrical plant - as an example of how supposedly nonlethal technology can inflict serious harm. "The loss of that electrical power led to immense suffering, at least comparable to a bomb strike," he says. "Hospitals and a whole range of civilian activities were shut down." Aftergood accuses advocates of deliberately obscuring such worries to sell the nonlethal program. "What concerns me is the marketing of nonlethal weapons as a kind of violence-free means of conflict," he says. "The concept of nonlethal is admirable, but it is unlikely to lead to a fundamental change in the character of warfare. War by definition means killing people, and it will continue to mean killing people."

Some experts are concerned US soldiers could be the ones who end up in body bags. MIT's Sapolsky wonders how useful the weapons will be against adversaries who are armed to the teeth, a question also on the minds of skeptics in the military. "When it comes to dealing with really bad people," he says, "it's going to be hard to stop them with nonlethal technologies and have none of our soldiers get killed in the process. This is going to be impossible to do. So I think there's another answer besides nonlethal, and that's staying home."

Advocates like John Alexander caution that nonlethal technologies are intended to augment, not replace, conventional weapons. "If they shoot real bullets, we'll shoot real bullets," he insists, adding that nobody is suggesting that American troops be placed at undue risk. And while he concedes that "nonlethal" can conjure up unrealistic visions of bloodless war, Alexander argues that critics are missing the point. "There is nothing that is totally nonlethal," he says, pointing out that any device, under the right circumstances, could kill somebody. "What you are talking about is objectives. How do you minimize the number of casualties?" The fact that the rubric is proving a bit controversial, he continues, only points up its usefulness. "There is a need to capture imaginations," Alexander says. "There is equally a need to think rationally. We keep saying this is not a panacea."

Alexander, 57, is very good at capturing imaginations with the idea of nonlethality. A white-haired technology manager sporting a shirt pocket full of pens, he can't claim to have invented any of the technology. But for the last six years, Alexander has been giving speeches, writing papers, organizing conferences, and pestering the defense establishment about nonlethal weapons. "If this thing ever turns into a pearl," says General Meyer, "he's been the sand in the oyster."

Asked why he has devoted so much time and energy to promoting nonlethals, Alexander explains that the US will always project force to defend its interests and values. "I think it is in our best interests to do that as humanely as possible. Killing folks just doesn't get you a lot." In recognition of his efforts, the respected journal *Aviation Week & Space Technology *honored Alexander in January 1994 as an "Aerospace Laureate." He is "the intellectual leader in the field," according to Robert Kupperman, a senior advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington, DC, think tank.

Despite the accolades, another side of Alexander has fueled skepticism of the nonlethal idea. And it's easy to see why - parts of his r/sum/ seem lifted from *The X Files. *A former Special Forces commander who led Cambodian mercenaries behind the lines in Vietnam, he holds a doctorate in education from Walden University in Florida for his work in "thanatology" - the study of death and dying - with psychiatrist Elisabeth Kübler-Ross. In 1980, Alexander published an article in *Military Review *called "The New Mental Battlefield," in which he advocated investigating military applications of telepathy, out-of-body experiences, and other paranormal phenomena. He has been a president of The International Association For Near Death Studies, has written papers and organized conferences on alien abductions and other "anomalous phenomena," and has advised PSI-TECH, a company founded by former intelligence officers that reportedly claims to use "remote viewing" - a kind of telepathy - to gather information for corporations and government agencies.

Alexander's adventures in the twilight zone have proven to be easy fodder for critics like Aftergood. "John Alexander is by all accounts a resourceful and imaginative individual," Aftergood concluded last year in an article for the *Bulletin of Atomic Scientists. *"He would make a splendid character in a science-fiction novel. But he probably shouldn't be spending taxpayer money without adult supervision."

Alexander insists that his interest in things paranormal is an intellectual avocation completely unrelated to his work at Los Alamos. "My position has been that there's really a fruitful area for science to get involved in. It ought to be done rigorously, with the same kind of standards that apply in any other field. But you don't reject the evidence just because it doesn't fit your hypothesis." He complains that critics like Aftergood adhere to a double standard by attacking him for his beliefs but not going after scientists whose religious faiths incorporate a belief in the mystical and the miraculous.

Linking Alexander's explorations of the nether world with nonlethal technologies does seem like a cheap shot - after all, the weaponry will stand or fall after being tested by scientists and soldiers. But there is an indirect connection. Alexander, who had begun working on antimateriel technologies in the latter part of his military career, retired from the army in 1988 and joined Los Alamos. Shortly after, he hooked up with writer Janet Morris on a book project. The result of their collaboration was The Warrior's Edge, a self-help manual that shows executives how to use the mind-training techniques Alexander studied in the military - "remote viewing" among them - to achieve victory on the business battlefield.

Morris, a research director of a DC think tank called the US Global Strategy Council, and her husband, Chris, a fellow writer and national security expert, were also intrigued by the nonlethal possibilities of some of the futuristic technologies being researched at the government labs. With the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the time seemed especially ripe for new ideas. Janet Morris enlisted the support of her boss at the time, Ray Cline, a former deputy director of the CIA whose connections opened doors in Washington. Cline put together the Nonlethality Policy Review Group, which was made up of various ex-government officials and military chiefs of staff. The group spent a year studying the issue and forming recommendations. Janet Morris then published a widely circulated white paper outlining the nonlethal idea and listing the various available technologies. In Nonlethality: A Global Strategy, she trumpeted the concept as a "revolutionary strategic doctrine" that would allow the US to seize the moral high ground in coping with the demands of a new world order marked by threats ranging from ethnic violence to narco-trafficking.

Intrigued, Dick Cheney, secretary of defense under George Bush, appointed his own nonlethal task force after the gulf war. Though the task force enthusiastically endorsed the concept, the efforts of Cline, Alexander, and the Morrises to lobby for a comprehensive policy of nonlethality limped along at the Pentagon during the Bush years. "We spent three years supporting the Cheney defense department's nonlethal task force but couldn't get anywhere," Morris complains, "because there was such a great desire to resuscitate the Cold War."

Then came the Clinton administration, which inherited the foreign policy headache in Somalia. With US forces stymied by stone-throwing mobs and teenage snipers on the streets of Mogadishu, Alexander and members of the Council of Foreign Relations, an independent advisory group, met with then-Defense Undersecretary John Deutch on the pacifying potential of nonlethals. Deutch was impressed enough to appoint a task force that is now assessing the technologies and forging a policy for their use.

While the Pentagon is keeping mum about exactly which technologies are up for initial funding, insiders suggest that dual-use devices, potentially effective on the streets of both Philadelphia and Port-au-Prince, are likely to receive top priority. Sticky foam is one candidate, as are acoustic weapons being developed at Picatinny Arsenal. Also attracting attention is "Lifeguard," an antisniper apparatus under development at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The device, which can be mounted on military vehicles or buildings in high-crime areas, uses a computer-linked sensor that can identify the exact location of gunfire in less than a second. The military application, however, is not necessarily nonlethal; the developers suggest that Lifeguard could be attached to a gun that would fire back instantly and kill any would-be snipers.

Still, it will probably be years - in some cases decades - before any of these technologies show up on city streets or overseas battlefields. Some nonlethal advocates say acoustic beam weapons may be the first. But according to Cline, who is a project manager at the Army's Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center at Picatinny Arsenal, a field prototype is three to five years away, "if we get consistent funding."

That's a big if. One highly placed defense official doubts nonlethals will receive major financial backing in the near future: "We live in a zero-sum environment," says the Pentagon official. "Anyone who proposes spending money on new things has to find money to take from old things first. And that's always a contentious process." Nonlethal funding promises to be even more so, as many of the defenders of "old things" remain skeptical of weapons that neutralize a target rather than destroy it. "If I hit these guys between the eyes and say, Hey, your bomb is obsolete, or your rifle is obsolete," says Colonel Warden of the Air Force, "then they get real mad and make it a heck of a lot more difficult to get any movement in the nonlethal area."

Even if the money is allocated and the weapons perform as advertised - another big if, as few of the devices have progressed beyond the lab model stage - the extreme secrecy of some of the weapons' development could be another stumbling block. Both skeptics and advocates have criticized the government for keeping much of the research under such ultratight wraps. "A large fraction of this work is highly classified and unaccountable to anyone," says Aftergood. "We know from the human radiation experiments that the government will sometimes violate ethical standards in conducting experiments." On a different tack, Janet Morris worries that the projects may be buried in the "black" world by opponents of nonlethality within the defense establishment. And Alexander acknowledges that progress on some of the highly classified technologies may be slowed by the resulting lack of peer review that normally accompanies scientific research.

Other observers fear that certain nonlethal weapons may have dangerous consequences. Experts point out that technologies like computer viruses and information warfare - which Alexander calls "as serious as weapons of mass destruction" - would be more effective against a high-tech society like the US than most of its likely opponents. "If we could destroy a banking system, I bet that would really screw up, say, the Japanese," says Harvey Sapolsky of MIT. "But it would probably screw us up, too."

And some nonlethal advocates worry that putting a potentially low-risk military capability into the hands of politicians could be like giving a child a loaded gun. "There's a subset of Congress and consenting intelligent Americans that doesn't want to hand a US administration a ticket to adventure that's totally unconstrained," Morris says. Indeed, last spring, The American Assembly, an august congress of academics and national policy experts that meets twice yearly, recommended that the National Security Council conduct an urgent review of nonlethality. But it also warned that "effective nonlethal technology might increase the chance that we would intervene simply because we could, rather than because we should."

John Alexander acknowledges that such potential pitfalls are reason for concern. But as the nonlethal program moves forward, he says, the various issues will be debated and resolved, one way or another. He just hopes that it will be done quickly, as he believes the technology is going to be developed - if not by the US, then by someone else. "This is a classic area in which the technology is outstripping ethics and philosophy, " Alexander says. "What we need are mechanisms to come to grips with these sorts of problems faster. We no longer have the time to have decades of debate." And while the debate over nonlethal technology rages, Alexander adds, it is important not to forget the bottom line.

"I had a guy who wrote me saying, This is terrible, this is awful, look where you're going with this," Alexander recalls. "I said, Compared to what - being dead? You know? What are the alternatives? You've got to think about it in terms of alternatives."


Post has attachment
Listen to Max & Stacy, they are very hip.

Post has attachment

Post has attachment
Techno Crime Fighters Forum
Episode 22
pineconeutopia
10 hours ago

On today's Techno Crime Fighters Forum Episode 22, NSA Whistleblower and retired Intelligence Analyst Karen Stewart, High-Energy ex-CERN Physicist and Systems Analyst Dr. Katherine Horton, Social Justice Activist, Researcher and Pastor Dr. Millicent Black, and Writer & Independent Journalist Ramola D join World Beyond Belief host Dr Paul Marko to offer open conversation on issues related to the global and criminal EMF/Neuro-tech targeting that is ongoing worldwide (under cover of “Surveillance”), particularly on issues related to exposing, addressing, and resolving these 21st-Century crimes.
Please visit our websites:
https://pineconeutopia.wordpress.com

Post has attachment

Post has shared content

Post has shared content
Two Down Many to go
Wait while more posts are being loaded