[sacw] ELECTROMAGNETIC WEAPONS

[Harsh Kapoor]

FYI (scarry stuff)
Harsh
===========================
ELECTROMAGNETIC WEAPONS
SUMMARY:
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, 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 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, sule, 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
held 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 by 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 themcontrol 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 one-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 leads to them, primarily that
concerning external manipulation of the human central nervous system. We
are alarmed that, already, the US is moving towards 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 on this 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
scientists. 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, and 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 led to 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 cahnges in the Memberhip of teh Parliament in Jne may mean
having to start again toi 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.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/group/act
http://www.eGroups.com - Simplifying group communications