Judy Wall can be contacted by mail at: Aerial Mind-Control
The Threat to Civil Liberties
by Judy Wall, Editor/Publisher Resonance
Newsletter of the MENSA Bioelectromagnetics Special Interest GroupNEXUS Magazine, October-November 1999
Vol. 6, No. 6Judy Wall, Editor/Publisher
RESONANCE
684 County Road 535
Sumterville FL
USA 33585
** She has stated that her interest is in objective reports only - not victim testimonials.**
Eleanor White's comments: This hard hitting article by Judy Wall, who is NOT a mind control victim and in fact avoids victim testimonials in favour of only factual objective material, contains some POWERFUL items not widely known among involuntary mind control experimentees. These items in her article below have had the font size increased a notch so that the visitor can scroll down and see just those items if time or interest is short.WAY TO GO, Judy!
USAF COMMANDO SOLO: AERIAL MIND CONTROL BROADCASTS The United States Air Force uses aerial mind-control broadcasts against civilian population as well as enemy troops. Some of these actions against civilians are done with the intent of influencing public opinion and the outcome of elections. In a previous article, we examined mind-control technology, especially that utilizing Silent Sound [TM], in which radio-frequency broadcasts carry subliminal patterns that entrain the listener's brainwaves into a pre- selected emotional state. According to ITV wire service reports, this technology was used during Operation Desert Storm in 1991, as part of the US Psychological Operations (PsyOps) directed against Iraqi troops. [1,2] To the Desert Storm offensive we can now add several other incidents. Alex Horvat, editor of The Probe, calls to our attention the 1998 video, Exotic Weapons of Mass Control, produced by Bob Fletcher. "The excerpt played on Fletcher's video is from TLC (The Learning Channel) and clearly states that Commando Solo was used in Haiti for what was called Operation Uphold Democracy. As the general populace was violently opposed to Aristide and most in favor of his ouster, it took nearly a year of this clandestine counter-programming to get them to change their minds. Instead of butchering a population physically, we can no manipulate them mentally, virtually enslaving their thoughts with a criss-cross pattern of flights by an EC-130 (which is just a C-130 heavily laden with electron- ic hardware.) [3] We were not at war with the citizens of Haiti, yet the U.S. Government directed military weapons against this friendly, or at least neutral, civilian population. The U.S. Government sanction the "rigging" of the Haitian election by mental control of the people, programming them to cast their votes for the Americans' favored candidate. And they had the nerve to call it "Operation Uphold Democracy". Some sense of humor! Stalin would have loved it. Hitler would have loved it. Why is the U.S. Government doing this? Who is behind this flagrant violation of civil liberties? Is it the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) which has a long history of interfering in foreign government politics? Or has this become standard military procedure? The rationale is always the same: "to make the world safe for democracy". Yet what is democracy if not freedom? Freedom to think your own thoughts; freedom to express your own opinions; freedome to vote for the candidate of your own choice. Fletcher's video also mentions that the same technology was used against the Bosnia population for a week to influence their election. [4] This was probably done during Operation Joint Guard in 1995. [5] The questions arise: If they have used mind-control broadcasts against foreign civilian populations to influence elections, will they use them against American citizens -- or have they already? What other countries may be the recipients of this innovative technology? Just what is this EC-130E Commando Solo? The United States Air Force has helpfully published a fact sheet that describes the Lockheed built air- craft. [6] This 1995 bulletin states that the "unit flyaway cost" is more than US $100 million each, and that there are eight in the inventory. Its primary function is "Psychological operations broadcasts". The crew consists of four officers (pilot, copilot, navigator, control chief/EWO) and seven enlisted members (flight engineer, loadmaster, five mission crew.) According to the fact sheet: "Air Force Mission: Commando Solo conducts psychological operations and civil affairs broadcast missions in the standard AM, FM, HF, TV and military communications bands. Missions are flown at maximum altitudes possible to ensure optimum propagation patterns. The EC-130 flies during either day or night scenarios with equal success, and is air refuealable. A typical mission consists of a single ship orbit which is offset from the desired target audience. The targets may be either military or civilian personnel. "Secondary missions include command and control communications counter- measures (C3CM) and limited intelligence gathering. "Air Force Features: Highly specialized modifications have been made to the latest version of the EC-130. Included in these modifications are enhanced navigation systems, self-protection equipment, and the capability of broadcasting color television on a multitude of world-wide standards throughout the TV VHF/UHF ranges. "Air Force Background: Air National Guard EC-130 aircraft flown by the 193rd Special Operations Group were deployed to both Saudi Arabia and Turkey in support of Desert Storm. Their missions included broadcasts of 'Voice of the Gulf' and other programs intended to convince Iraqi soldiers to surrender. "The EC-130 was originally modified using the mission electronic equipment from the EC-121, known at the time as the Coronet Solo. Soon after the 193rd SOG received its EC-130s, the unit participated in the rescue of US citizens in Operation Urgent Fury, acting as an airborne radio station informing those people on Granada of the US military action. "Volant Solo, as the mission is now known, was instrumental in the success of coordinated psychological operations in Operation Just Cause, again broadcasting continuously throughout the initial phases of the operation." Operation Just Cause? this is another propaganda name, applied to the U.S. invasion of Panama to take out that country's leader, General Noreiga, the CIA's erstwhile partner in drug smuggling. Apparently the General had made someone mad -- how else to account for the massive in- vasion of this tiny tourist country? To wit: "A superpower whipped the poop out of 10 percent of the police force of a Third World nation. You are supposed to be able to do that. It was done well, and I credit those who did it. But it is important that we draw the right lessons from it" according to an anonymous US Marine. [7] Our Commander-in-Chief had another point of view: "...the roll call of glory, the roster of great American campaigns -- Yorktown, Gettysburg, Normandy, and now Panama." --President George Bush, March 1990 [8] MILITARY PSYOPS AGAINST CIVILIANS In a phone call to the USAF Special Operations Command Public Affairs Office, I questioned the legitimacy of using these subliminal broadcasts against civilian populations. [9] [Judy Wall's article on Silent Sound for details.] I was told that it was all perfectly legal, having been approved by the U.S. Congress (!). It may be okay by Congress, but I sincerely doubt that it would be approved by the recipient populations. That conversation also elicited more information concerning the Commando Solo units. For instance, the Air National Guard of the individual states in the U.S. can also operate Commando Solo aircraft, should the Governor of a state request assistance. That means the PsyOps mind-control technology can be directed against U.S. citizens. The Commando Solo aircraft have participated in the following missions-- possibly more, as the early missions of Volant Solo 1 were not known to this spokesperson: - Operation Urgent Fury (Grenada, Oct-Nov 1983, Jan-Jun 1985) - Operation Just Cause (Panama, late December 1989) - Operation Desert Shield (Kuwait, Iraq, from August 1990) - Operation Desert Storm (Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iraq, 1991) - Operation Uphold Democracy (Haiti, 1994-1995) - Operation Joint Guard (Part of a UN oepration in Bosnia-Herzegovina, 1995) - Operation Desert Thunder (part of a UN operation in Iraq) - Operation Desert Fox (Iraq, 2 to 3 days in December 1998) Other countries are known to have a similar aircraft, but the PR officer declined to identify them, suggesting that I check out Jane's Defence Weekly for such information. Not having access to that particular publication, I searched through my copy of Jane's Radar and Electronic Warfare Systems 1993094. [10] The Commando Solo unit was not listed, but a browse through the book was informative as to the numerous types of electronic offence and defence systems available. These include sta- tionary and mobile land units (many housed in large trucks), shipboard and airborne models as well as well as space-based technology. If the military is spending US $100 million per airborne unit (times eight, we're talking US $800 million here), I think it is safe to assume that they have tried out mind control equipment with less expensive, roving land units (trucks), but use the airplanes to cover wider areas and hard-to-reach locations of the world. And I might add, we can asume that they have tried out the efficacy of this mind-control technology. Even the US military would not waste $800 million on something unless it has been proven to work, and work effectively, even under the adverse situation of military combat. This is an important point. The initial research into mind control in the USA was conducted udner the auspices of the CIA. The flagrant abuse of human rights in experimenting on unsuspecting persons was based on the supposition that the veracity of experiments would be compromised if a subject knew that he was participating in an experiment. In the case of mind-control technology, tehis supposition might very well be true. But that does not justify its use -- or so said the Nuremburg Code, the tenets of which were used as a legal basis to pro- secute Nazi scientists for war crimes. However the US seems to have excused its own military and scientific community from adhering to that Code. [11] MANIPULATING MIND AND BODY BY SATELLITE The next logical step in mind control would be to incorporate this tech- nology into satellite communications. Since other countries are known to have similar capabilities, there could occur a sitution in which electronic mind control warfare is waged against a civilian population, receiving conflicting mental manipulation from both sides. What would be the mental state of individuals so targetted? Would it cause a rise in mental aberrations and schizophrenia? And what are the limits of mind manipulations? Can people be forced to commit suicide? Can physical ailments or psychosomatic illnesses be induced? A March 1990 report from Bosnia-Herzegovina in the former Yugoslavia sug- gests the latter may have already happened. The report concerns 2,990 ethnic Albanians who were admitted to hospital with complaints of lung and skin problems for which doctors could find no physical cause. [12] It is not a far step from manipulating a person's emotional state to influ- encing bodily functions. Indeed, much of the literature on documenting microwave effects on biological systems deals with precisely this phenom- enon. In fact, studies of the physical effects of microwave exposure (including radio frequencies) generally preceeded studies of mental effects. A meeting sponsored by Defense & Foreign Affairs and the International Strategic Studies Association was held in Washington DC in 1983. High-level officials from many countries met for this conference. They discussed psychological strategies related to government and policymaking. A summary of the agenda reads: "The group will be discussing the essence of future policymaking, for it msut be increasingly clear to all that the most effec- tive tool of government and strategy is the mind... If it's any consolation to the weapons-oriented among defense policymakers, the new technologies of communications -- satellites, television, radio, and mind-control beams -- are 'systems' which are more tangible than the more philosophically based psychological strategies and operations. [Eleanor White's comment: Anyone know where to get a copy?] "But we should make no mistake; it will be the 'psychologically based' systems which determine the world's fate in coming years: the condition of the minds of populations and leaders. And we should not ignore the fact that the USSR [this was in 1983] is working on electronic systems to 'beam' messages directly into the brain. What good, then, are conventional systems if these types of weapons are not countered? And, on a more basic level, what good is a weapon system if public opinion or political con- straints prohibit its deployment?" [13] It is obvious that they found the answer to that last question. If the public does not know about a weapon system, it cannot prohibit its deploy- ment. This is the situtation that applies to mind-control technology. MIND CONTROL AGAINST 'POTENTIAL' ENEMIES The US military is aware that certain actions or procedures may not be acceptable to the American public. Metz and Kievit express these concerns in their paper, "The Revolution in Military Affairs and Short Conflict War." [14] "The use of new technology may also run counter to basic American values. Information age -- and in particular, information warfare -- technologies cause concerns about privacy... American values also make the use of directed-energy weapons ... morally difficult, perhaps unacceptable. The advantage of directed-energy weapons over conventional ones is <font color=#cce000 size=+1 FONT people.?< American the at aimed be must deniability ... aimed? such is whom Against> Later they state: "We must decide whether innovative military capabilities are, in fact, acceptable and desirable. That can only happen through open debate. The military must be a vital participant, but not the sole one." But there has been no open debate. On July 21, 1994, the US Department of Defense proposed that non-lethal weapons be used not only against declared enemies, but against anyone engaged in activities that the DOD opposed. That could include almost any- body and anything. Note that the mind-control technology is classified under non-lethal weapons. [15] A 1998 news item states that US Air Force General John Jumper "predicts that the military will have the tools to make potential enemies see, hear, and believe things that do not exist" and that "The same idea was con- tained in a 15-volume study by the USAF Scientific Advisory Board, issued in 1996, on how to maintain US air and space superiority on the battle- fields of the 21st century". [16,17] It seems that, in miltary parlance, a "prediction" means: "Don't be surprised when you find out we've already got this, but it's classified and we can't admit to it just yet." Notice that General Jumper predicts that mind control technology will be used against potential enemies. The military and government agencies may apply this term to any group or individual they perceive as a threat to their own interests. Potential enemies may be counter-culture individuals, those of opposing political viewpoints, economic or financial competitors, biological undesirables, etc. It is part of the military agenda to identify potential threats so as to be prepared to meet them. Experience has shown that the US Government (the CIA and FBI, for example) has moved against these people or groups, slandering, harassing, even killing them, without adequate cause or legal sanction. A weapon that can be used in secret lends itself to abuse by unethical individuals in positions of power. The military and secret services have shown themselves often to be lacking in ethical constraints. After all, the job of the military is war; it is killing people; and so, just how this is accomplished may be considered irrelevant. Lesser evils, like mind control, pale by comparison. Of course, it can be argued that it is far more humane to brainwash a person via mind control technology than it is to torture or kill them. Others vehemently deny this. They'd rather be dead than a mental slave to Big Brother! That is what revolutions are about. And if I recall correctly, that is the idea behind the US Bill of Rights. EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT WARNS OF DANGERS Awareness of the existence of mind-control technology, and hence its dangers and possibility for misuse, seems to be more prevalent than in Europe than in other areas. The European Parliament recently passed a "Resolution on environment, security, and foreign policy". [18] This document includes these articles: "23. Calls on the European Union to seek to have the new 'non-lethal' weapons technology and the development of new arms strategies also covered and regulated by international conventions... "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." The United States will ignore these resolutions, of course, as it has other EP requests; for example, as mentioned in the same document: "24. Considers HAARP (High Frequency Active Auroral Research Project) by virtue of its far-reaching impact on the environment to be a global concern and calls for it's legal, ecological and ethical implcations to be exam- ined by an international independent body before any further research and testing; regrets the repeated refusal of the United States Administration to send anyone in person to give evidence to the public hearing or any subsequent meeting to be held by its competent committee into the environ- mental and public risks connected with the HAARP programme currently being funded in Alaska..." One of HAARP's potential uses is a communications system. The military officially acknowledges two communications-related applications: (1) to replace the existing Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) submarine communica- tions system now operating in Michigan and Wisconsin; (2) to provide a way to wipe out communications over an extremely large area, while keeping the miltary's own communications system working. [19] As we have seen, the mind-control subliminal messages are carried on radio- frequency broadcasts. [Judy Wall's article on Silent Sound for details.] The HAARP facility could be used to broadcast global mind-control messages, or such messages could simply be inserted into existing systems. Dr. Igor Smirnov, of the Institute of Psycho-correction in Moscow, says in regard to this technology: "It is easily conceviable that some Russian 'Satan', or let's say Iranian [or any other 'Satan'], as long as he owns the appropriate means and finances, can inject himself [intrude] into every con- ceivable computer network, into every conceivable radio or television broad- cast, with relative technological ease, even without disconnecting cables. You can intercept the [radio] waves in the aether and then [subliminally] modulate every conceivable suggestion into it. If this transpires over a long enough time period, it accumulates in the heads of people. And even- tually they can be artificially manipulated with other additional measure- ments, to do that which this perpetrator wants [them to do]. This is why [such technology] is rightfully feared." [20] A WORLDWIDE MIND CONTROL MISSION To return to the USAF Fact Sheet, it concludes: "In 1990 the EC-130 joined the newly formed Air Force Special Operations Command and has since been designated Commando Solo, with no change in mission. This one of a kind aircraft is consistently improving its capabilities. The next few years should see continued enhancements to the EC-130 and its worldwide mission." About the Author: Judy Wall is the Editor of RESONANCE, the newsletter of the Bioelectromagnetics Special Interest Group of American MENSA Ltd. Viewpoints expressed here are her own personal views. ENDNOTES 1. Wall, Judy, "Military Use of Mind Control Weapons", NEXUS, 5/06, Oct-Nov 1998 2. "Psychological operations" are defined as: "Planned operations to convery selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of foreign governments, organizations, groups and individuals. The purpose of psychological operations is to induce or re-inforce foreign attitudes and behavior favorable to the originator's objectives. Also called PsyOps." From "Joint Doctrine for Information Operations", Joint pub- lication 3-13, 9 October 1998. Thanks to Harlan Girard of the International Committee on Offensive Microwave Weapons (PO Box 58700, Philadelphia PA 19102-8700, USA) for the excerpt. 3. Horvat, Alex, "Commando Solo", The Probe, vol. 4, No. 1, Winter 1998/99, p.44; available from PO Box 905, St. Peters, MO 63376, USA. 4. Fletcher, Bob, Exotic Weapons of Mass Control; video available from The Probe (see above) or Global Insights, A675 Fairview Dr. #246, Carson City NV, 89701 USA, tel 1-800-729-4131. 5. An item of interest is that the US had a new type of aerial reconnaissance plane positioned over the former Yugoslavia from July 14, 1995, about six months before the US officially intervened. The 10-million-dollar unmanned saucer-shaped spy craft is nicknamed "Dark Star". Information from C-Com (Classified Communications 3(12), Dec 1995; Erich A. Aggen, Jr., (editor), citing CE Chronicles nos. 1 and 2 and Raising Awareness newsletter. 6. Fact Sheet, dated March 1995. The address on the publication is AF Special Operations Command Public Affairs Office, 100 Bartley Street, Hurlburt Field, FL 32544-5273, USA. They no longer supply printed copies, but you can access the document at http://www.hurlburt.af.mil 7. Morrison Taw, Jennifer, "Operation Just Cause: Lessons For Operations Other Than War", Rand Corp., 1996, p. vii; quoting from "Some Questions Whether the US Is Ready for LIC", Navy News and Undersea Technology, August 27, 1990, p.7. 8. Morrison Taw, Jennifer, ibid,. p.1. 9. Telephone conversation of February 26, 1999, with AF Special Operations Command Public Affairs Office; voice (850) 884-5515, email paprhode@hqafsoc.afoc.af.mil 10. Blake, Bernard (ed.) Jane's Radar and Electronic Warfare Systems 1993-94, Jane's Information Group Inc., 1340 Braddock Place, Suite 300, Alexandria VA 22314-1651, USA; also Jane's Information Group, Sentinel House, 163 Brighton Road, Couldson, Surrey CR5 2NH, UK. 11. (a) "US Nullifies Nuremburg Law", Earth Island Journal, Winter 1996-97. (b) Hightower, Jim, "Unregulated Experiments on Humans", New Times, June 19-25, 1997; cites Stolberg, Sheryl Gay, "Unchecked Research People Raises Concern on Medical Ethics", New York Times, May 14, 1997. (c) See "Ban on Medical Experiments Without Consent is Relaxed", New York Times, November 5, 1996, p.1; copy available for 50 cents from David Park Brooks, 3456 17th St., San Francisco CA 94110. (d) Also see Senator John Glenn's bill S-193, "Human Subjects Research Protection Act of 1997", Congressional Record, US Senate, January 22, 1997. (e) "In 1994, a congress- ional subcommittee found up to 500,000 Americans between 1940 and 1974 were endangered by secred defense-related tests including radiation experiments, mustard gas, LSD and biological agents." See Pitch Weekly, April 17-23, 1997. 12. Schaefer, Paul, "Experimentation and Warfare", article citing The Kansas City Star, between March 25 and 31, 1990. 13. Summary, The Perth Corporation, Defense & Foreign Affairs, November 1983. 14. Metz, Steven, and James Kievit, "The Revolution in Military Affairs and Conflict Short of War", US Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, PA 17013-5050, USA, pp. 15-16 and 29. [See also Krawczyk, Glenn, "Big Brother's Recipe for 'Revolution in Military Affairs'", NEXUS 2/26, June-July 1995.] 15. Schaefer, Paul, "Psyops: Invisible Warfare", Zuni Mountain Citizen (precise date unknown, late 1998/ early 1999), p.5. 16. "Microwave Weapons", Microwave News, March/April 1998; Louis Slesin (editor), citing Aviation Week, March 9, 1998. 17. Same article as above, citing Microwave News, January/February 1997. 18. "Environment, Security, and Foreign Affairs", Resolution A40005/99, Minutes of 28/01/99 - Provisional Edition, European Parliament. For copy, thanks to Grattan Healy, Advisor on Energy & Research, Green Group in the European Parliament, LEO 2C35, Rue Wiertz Straat, B-1047 Bruxelles, Belgium, email ghealy@europarl.eu.int 19. For more info on HAARP, see Begich, Nick and Jeanne Manning, Angels Don't Play This HAARP, Earthpulse Press, PO Box 201393, Anchorage AK 99520, USA, Tel. (907) 249-9111. 20. From a German documentary, "Geheimes Russland: Moskau - Die Zombies dr roten Zaren" ("Secret Russia: Moscow - The Zombies of the Red Czars") aired on German TV network ZDF on December 22, 1998. Script translation by Jan Weisemann. The full text is to be published in Resonance, No. 35. 21. Reed, Chris, Lockheed C-130 Hercules and Its Variants, Schiffer Publishing Ltd, Atglen, PA, 1999.
via raven1.net
No comments:
Post a Comment