Remote
Behavioral Influence Technology Evidence
John J. McMurtrey, M. S.[a],
Copyright 2003, 23 Dec. 2003[b]
Significant professional
publication co-authorship negotiable towards NLM indexed journal. Email - Johnmcmurt@aol.com
People discerning remote manipulation by
technology
capable of such influence have formed protest organizations across the world.[1]
[2]
[3]
[4] Educated society is uninformed regarding
authentic documentation of the development and existence of these technologies,
and unaware of the dangers. Complaint
of `hearing voices' and perception of other remote manipulation must receive
appropriate scientific and legal investigation with protection. Professional awareness is virtually absent
with eminent texts and opinion being presumptuous, without appraisal of the
evidence.
Herein
is substantiated:
1.
Human
wireless internal voice transmission and tracking
technologies.
2.
Reports
of electroencephalographic (EEG) thought reading capacity, evidence of covert
development, and remote EEG capture technology.
3.
References
to the use of these, or similar technologies against
humans.
MICROWAVE HEARING
The first American[c]
[5]
to publish on the microwave hearing effect was Allan H. Frey in 1962,[6]
yet radar technicians had anecdotes of microwave perception in World War II.[7] Deaf and normal subjects, even with
earplugs, can hear appropriately pulsed microwaves at least up to thousands of
feet from the transmitter.[8] Transmitter parameters above those producing
the effect result in a severe buffeting of the head with dizziness and nausea,
while parameters below the effect induce a pins and needles sensation. Peak power is the major determinant of
loudness, though there is some dependence on pulse width. Pulse modulation appears to influence pitch
and timbre. The effect "is the most
easily and reliably replicated of low power density (microwave) illumination."
[9] Review of human and animal microwave
hearing confirmation by independent investigators of the effect establishes
validity.[10] [11]
[12]
[13]
[14] Designs for scaring birds away from aircraft
or other hazards by microwave hearing[15]
and induction of vertigo[16]
exist.[17]
[18]
While working for the Advanced Research
Projects Agency at Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, Sharp and Grove
discovered "receiverless" and "wireless" voice transmission. [19] Their method was simple: the negative deflections of voiceprints from
recorded spoken numbers were caused to trigger microwave pulses. Upon illumination by such verbally modulated
energy, the words were understood remotely.
The discovery's applications are "obviously not limited to therapeutic
medicine" according to James C. Lin in Microwave Auditory Effects and
Applications.[20]
A Defense Intelligence Agency review of
Communist literature affirmed microwave sound and indicated voice
transmission. The report states, "Sounds and possibly even words which appear to be originating
intracranially (within the head) can be induced by signal modulation at very
low average power densities." [21] Among microwave weapon implications are
"great potential for development into a system for disorientating or disrupting
the behavior patterns of military or diplomatic personnel." An Army Mobility Equipment Research and
Development Command report affirms microwave speech transmission with
applications of "camouflage, decoy, and deception operations." [22] "One decoy and deception concept presently
being considered is to remotely create noise in the heads of personnel by
exposing them to low power, pulsed microwaves . . . By proper choice of pulse
characteristics,
intelligible speech may be created" quotes the report.
The
Brunkan Patent # 4877027 "Hearing system" is a device capable of verbal
microwave hearing. [23] The invention converts speech for remote
introduction into the head by parabolic antenna with indication of direct
microwave influence on neural activity.
The microwave spectrum granted is broad: 100-10,000 MHz (0.1-10
GHz.) Pulse characteristics are
essential
to perception. Bursts of narrowly
grouped, evenly spaced pulses determine sound intensity by their amount per
unit time. Although a wide spectrum is
patented, with ranges of pulse and burst duration, preferred operation has
burst duration at 2 microseconds, and pulse duration at 100 nanoseconds.
Operation is at 1000 MHz, which is the frequency of optimal tissue
penetration.[24] Another patent application based on
microwave bursts is "designed in such a way that the burst frequencies are at
least virtually equal to the sound frequencies of the sounds picked up by the
microphone," though the transducer here is not remote.[25]
Stocklin Patent # 4858612
"Hearing device" 7 affirms the microwave hearing effect. Stocklin gives exposition to the concept
that a microwave component is part of neurophysiology and electroencephalogram
(EEG) potentials.[26] Microwaves are considered both emitted and
absorbed by nerve cell membrane proteins.
Microwaves generally excite the brain[27]
perhaps by influencing calcium,[28]
a central ion in nerve firing.[29] Stocklin represents the auditory cortex as
normally producing microwave energy, which the device simulates, thus eliciting
sound sensation. Each acoustic tone is
weighted for several microwave frequencies by a formula called the mode matrix,
which is used to calculate best perception requirements. Observation of EEG desynchronization, delta
waves, and brain wave amplitudes helps calibrate the device.[30] The lowest frequency for hearing is
estimated by the cephalic index.
Microwave speech transmission in this patent is unremote with the
antenna over and sized for the auditory cortex. Other patents have non-remote transducers of radiowave elicited
hearing. [31] [32]
Descriptions in the above patents attribute
microwave hearing to direct neural influence.
However, the most accepted mechanism in review is by thermoelastic
expansion,12 most likely inducing bone conducted hearing. The cochlea does appear to be involved, but
not the middle ear.14 This
divergence of mechanism illustrates the non-thermal/thermal controversy. US exposure standards are based on thermal
effects,
yet there are effects very difficult to explain by thermodynamics.13 [33] All accept thermal effects at some level,
yet the thermal only school is rather dogmatic related to liability issues of
commercial[34] and
national security concern.[35] It must be said that the open literature
regarding microwave hearing indicates a thermo-acoustic
mechanism.
"Communicating Via the Microwave Auditory
Effect." is the title of a small business contract for the Department of
Defense. Communication initial results
are: "The feasibility of the concept
has been established" using both low and high power systems.[36] A Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request
as to the project's outcome met with denial on the part of the Air Force, on
the grounds that disclosure "could reasonably be expected to cause damage to
national security." [37] Though the Air Force denied the FOIA
disclosure, such a contract's purpose is elaborated by the Air Force's "New
World Vistas" report: "It would also
appear possible to create high fidelity speech in the human body, raising the
possibility of covert suggestion and psychological direction . . . . If a pulse
stream is used, it should be possible to create an internal acoustic field in
the 5-15 kilohertz range, which is audible.
Thus it may be possible to `talk' to selected adversaries in a fashion
that would be most disturbing to them." [38] Robert Becker, whose eminence was enough to
have been twice nominated for the Nobel Prize in biological electromagnetic
fields research, is more explicit: "Such
a device has obvious applications in covert operations designed to drive a
target crazy with "voices" or deliver undetectable instructions to a programmed
assassin." [39]
The above Army efforts had results. A microwave voice transmission non-lethal
weapon is referenced in the thesaurus of the Center for Army Lessons Learned,
which is a military instruction website.18 The military thesaurus entry lists analogous devices using
"silent sound." [d] [40]
ULTRASOUND TRANSMISSION OF
VOICE
Internal voice capability, without discernment
by others nearby. is also evident in ultrasound-based technology. Lowrey Patent # 6052336 "Apparatus and
method of broadcasting audible sound using ultrasonic sound as a carrier"
clearly focuses on non-lethal weapon application against crowds or directed at
an individual.[41] Communication is understood as an inner
voice with loss of the directional quality of sound perception. "Since most cultures attribute inner voices
either as a sign of madness, or as messages from spirits or demons, both of
which . . . evoke powerful emotional reactions", quotes the Lowrey patent's
effect on people. Replaying speech,
with a delay impedes talking and causes stuttering. Normal brain wave patterns can be changed (or entrained), which
"may cause temporary incapacitation, intense feelings of discomfort." This technique is detailed by Monroe Patent
# 5356368 "Method of and apparatus for inducing desired states of
consciousness", with license to Interstate Industries and involves an auditory
replication of brainwave patterns to entrain the EEG as desired.[42]
Norris Patent # 5889870 "Acoustic heterodyne
device and method", directionally produces sound on interference (or
heterodyning) of two ultrasound beams.[43] The cancellation leaves the carried audible
sound perceivable. The effect becomes
apparent particularly within cavities such as the ear canal. An individual readily understands
communication across a noisy crowed room without nearby discernment. Sound can also be produced from mid-air or
as reflecting from any surface.
American Technology Corporation, which
licensed this patent, has an acoustic non-lethal weapons technology,[44]
a cooperative agreement with the Army Research & Development Command,[45]
and is working with numerous other government agencies.[46] The corporation's Long Range Acoustic
Devices (LRADTM) account for 60% of military sales, and have
integration into the Navy's situational awareness & radar surveillance
systems[47]
with deployment on naval vessels and fleet harbors.[48] A popular magazine writer describes the
device's inner nature of sound perception.[49] From separate references, non-lethal weapons
treatments affirm sound localization and
individual ultrasound effect limitation[50]
with obvious lack of nearby discernment;[51]
the latter by a non-lethal weapons program director. A similar ultrasound method of limiting sound to one person,
Audio Spotlight is marketed, with exhibition at Boston's Museum of Science and
the Smithsonian National Air & Space Museum.[52] Both the American Technology device and
Audio Spotlight are discussed in an article with some history of ultrasound
acoustics, which has origins in sonar.[53] Other acoustic influence methods may utilize
ultrasound.[e] [54]
TARGET TRACKING TECHNOLOGY
The maintenance of effects on
people requires obstacle penetration and target tracking. These internal voice capable energy forms
penetrate obstruction and can be localized.
Sound transmission through enclosures is commonly experienced. An inaudible ultrasound high intensity
carrier wave is unnoticed. Solid defect
inspection is one use of ultrasound, which is being developed to discern
movement through walls.[55] Common technology utilizes the microwave
hearing spectrum, which partly or completely encompasses cell phone,[56]
[57]
TV, and radar frequencies. [58] Commercial signals are not perceived, since
the hearing effect requires pulsation within the limits that elicit
perception. A variety of antennae
localize the structurally penetrating microwave illumination with collimation
or focusing.[59] [60] A patent, "compatible for mobile platforms
with DEWs," (Directed Energy Weapons) includes a modified Luneburg lens
emitting parallel rays with over 50 years utilization.[61]
Hablov Patent # 5448501
"Electronic life detection system" is for microwave radar within the hearing
spectrum that finds and distinguishes individuals through obstruction.[62] Therein is stated: "the modulated component of the reflected microwave signal . . .
subjected
to frequency analysis . . . forms a type of "electronic fingerprint" of the
living being with characteristic features, which . . . permits a distinction
between different living beings."
Though this patent has use in trapped victim rescue, another Hablov et. al. Patent # 5530429
"Electronic surveillance system" detects interlopers with security emphasis.[63] Other literature describes the basic
method.[64]
The Hablov et. al. patents
discern people thru structures by vital organ motion, but others offer more
detailed imaging. Fullerton et. al.
Patent # 6400307 "System and method for intrusion detection using a time domain
radar array" is such a design,[65]
and is commercially available as RadarVision by Time Domain. [66] Further designs for imaging within structures
include: a portable system determining suspect distance,[67]
and presentations by the International Society for Optical Engineering.[68]
[69] Software for displaying radar detection on a
personal computer is sold.[70]
Rowan Patent # 4893815 "Interactive transector
device commercial and military grade" describes the acquisition, locking onto,
and tracking of human targets.[71] Stated therein: "Potentially dangerous individuals can be efficiently subdued,
apprehended and appropriately detained."
The capability of "isolating suspected terrorists from their hostages .
. . or individuals within a group without affecting other members of the group"
is stated. Laser, radar, infrared, and
acoustic sensor fusion is utilized to identify, seek, and locate targets. Locking illumination upon the target until
weapons engagement accomplishes tracking.
Among available non-lethal weapons is an incapacitating electromagnetic
painful pulse. Another target tracking
system is the Manportable Surveillance and Target Acquisition Radar by Systems
& Electronics, Inc., which is capable of tracking moving targets including
personnel. This system has an auto
target track feature, and lists moving target detection as 12 km for a walking
man.[72]
A track initiation processor acquires a
target, while a data association filter maintains a tracking lock on the
target.[73] An original method for target tracking is
the Kalman filter. Numerous weapons
guidance examples utilize similar processes and illuminate targets for
tracking. Laser illumination is also
used for non-human targets.[74] Other examples utilize microwave beam target
recognition and weapons guidance.[75]
[76] Target illumination tracking systems have
nanosecond to microsecond response times.
Such responses do not require a wide scan area to lock illumination upon
persons at achievable speeds. At 90
miles per hour an auto travels less than 1/100 of an inch in a
microsecond.
DISCUSSION
Ultrasound voice transmission technology is
publicly demonstrated in museum exhibits.
The numerous microwave voice transmission citations rest on a
considerable foundation of microwave hearing literature. Internal voice non-lethal weapon
applications are discussed in many of the citations. There are are examples of either existence or sales of non-lethal
weapons based on both technologies.
Numerous designs involving human location, identification, and tracking
methods, have long demonstrated the feasibility of constructing devices capable
of producing internal voice continuously in isolated individuals. To deny such technological capabilities in
the face of extensive complaint is willfully to ignore documented development
of the relevant technologies and engineering competence for complete
integration.
THOUGHT READING CAPACITY
Many people who report experiencing remote
behavioral influence also perceive mind reading. Thought reading capacity, or brain wave analysis word
recognition, is seriously reported.
Publications
by a Stanford group support and report recognition of specific words from brain
waves,[77]
[78]
[79]
[80]
with recent enhanced success. [81] Other investigators publish above chance
magnetoencephalographic (MEG) word recognition.[82] The current publications lack reference to a
1975 US government technical report of prior results from Stanford comparable
to the recent articles,[83]
and an apparent Russian report of specific EEG word recognition before 1981.[84] Electroencephalographic (EEG) instant
detection by syllables of "a content of category which the testee wishes to
speak" quotes Kiyuna et. al. Patent # 5785653 "System and method for predicting
internal condition of live body." [85] A stated use: "the present invention may be use (sic) to detect the internal
condition of surveillance in criminal investigation" by EEG. NEC Corporation licensed this patent. Remote EEG communication with Armed Forces
or clandestine application are the cited uses for Mardirossian Patent # 6011991
"Communication system and method including brain wave analysis and/or use of
brain activity." [86] This patent affirms EEG word recognition,
proposes transmitter capable skin implants, utilizes neural networks
(artificial intelligence), and is licensed by Technology Patents,
LLC.
Activation of brain cell
assemblies provides a theoretical framework[87]
for the above word recognition reports, and extensive publications of averaged
EEG word category differentiation.
These differentiation reports themselves are consistent with specific
word recognition, since their basis is by visual analysis of averaged
categories, without the use of sophisticated computer programs as are essential
for specific word recognition. Based on
EEG/MEG responses, words can be differentiated as to length, [88]
and visual nouns can be differentiated from action verbs.[89]
[90]
[91]
[92]
[93] Brain wave patterns distinguish proper names
from common nouns, [94] animal
names from numerals,[95]
or content from function words.[96]
[97]
[98]
[99]
Face, arm, or leg action verbs
are reported distinguished by brain waves as well.[100]
[101] Concrete versus abstract words,[102]
and unambiguous versus ambiguous noun/verbs[103]
have distinctive EEG patterns.
Some of these word category
differentiation reports are consistent with both the specific recognition
reports, and/or the differentiation of non-verbal cognition. Based on EEG/MEG responses, words are
readily distinguished from non-words,[104]
[105]
[106]
or pictures.[107] EEG differentiation of words rated as to
affective meaning such as good-bad, strong-weak, or active-passive is
reported.[108]
[109]
Other literature indicates
EEG differentiation of completely non-verbal cognition. Emotion differentiation by EEG is patented,
referencing Air Force research.[110] Movement anticipation potentials
(bereitschaftspotential) and those of actual movement are detectable by EEG.[111]
[112] EEG movement signals have been used to move
a cursor left or right,[113]
and just the imagination of movement is sufficiently distinguished by EEG to
control switches,[114]
or control prosthesis grasp.[115] Guiding robots through simulated rooms by
EEG detection of imagining the spinning of cubes or arm rising of appropriate
direction is reported.[116]
[117]
[118] Even more complex grasping and
reaching robot arm control has been achieved by signals from implanted brain
electrodes in monkeys without body arm movement.[119] A number of groups have developed procedures
to detect deception based on the P300 (positive @ 300 millisec.) event related
potential (ERP) from EEG.[120]
[121]
[122]
[123]
[124]
[125] A commercial system, Brain Fingerprinting,[126]
which includes analysis of a late negative ERP potential and frequency analysis
in addition to the P300, even asserts 100% accuracy over five separate
studies.[127]
[128]
[129]
[130]
[131]
[f]
Functional magnetic resonance
imaging (fMRI) studies also report differentiation of cognitive states. Different fMRI brain activation loci for
face, natural and manufactured object recognition are reviewed.[132] Neural network differentiation of fMRI
response to noun categories for fish, four legged animals, trees, flowers,
fruits, vegetables, family members, occupations, tools, kitchen items,
dwellings, and building parts is reported.[133] Distinguishing truthful from deceptive
responses by fMRI is also reported.[134]
[135]
[136]
[137] The ability to discern the state of romantic
love towards an individual by fMRI has report as well.[138]
The research arm of agencies
with missions to covertly acquire information would certainly develop to
operational capability any technologic thought reading potential. Assertions that such development has
progressed are multiple, and two are confirmed by details of the 1975
government EEG specific word recognition report, which itself is evidence of
development covert to open databases.83 An International Committee of the Red Cross Symposium synopsis
states EEG computer mind reading development by Lawrence Pinneo in 1974 at
Stanford.[139] A letter by the Department of Defense
Assistant General Counsel for Manpower, Health, and Public Affairs, Robert L.
Gilliat in 1976 affirmed brain wave reading by the Advanced Research Projects
Agency.[140] "Thought reading or synthetic telepathy"
communications
technology procurement is considered in a 1993 Jane's[g]
Special Operations Forces (SOF) article:
"One day, SOF commandos may be capable of communicating through thought
processes." [141] Descriptive terms are "mental weaponry and
psychic warfare" Although contemplated
in future context, the availability of a technology without adaptation to troop
level requirements is implied, since anticipation of mobile deployment would
have to assume prior development.
In 1976, the Malech Patent #
3951134 "Apparatus and method for
remotely monitoring and altering brain waves" was granted.[142] Example of operation is at 100 and 210 MHz;
frequencies penetrating obstruction.
"The individual components of the system for monitoring and controlling
brain wave activity may be of conventional type commonly employed in radar";
and "The system permits medical
diagnosis of patients, inaccessible to physicians, from remote stations" are
quotes indicating remote capacity.
License is to Dorne & Margolin Inc., but now protection is expired
with public domain. The Malech patent
utilizes interference of 210 and 100 MHz frequencies resulting in a 110 MHz
return signal, which is demodulated to give EEG waveform.
The capability of remote EEG is predicted by electromagnetic
scattering
theory using ultrashort pulses, which are not part of the Malech patent.[143] Ultrashort pulses are currently defined in
the range of 10-12 to 10-15 second. Considering that EEG word elicited
potentials are comparatively long (hundreds of milliseconds), indicates that
remote radar EEG capture is adequate to word recognition, with ultrashort
pulses allowing some 109 or more radar reflections in a millisecond
(10-3 sec.)
The possibility of impressing
an `experience set' on an individual by ultrashort pulses is also
contemplated.143 The above patent can alter brain waves as
well as detect them. Microwave
non-lethal weapon brain wave disruption[144]
and behavioral change including unconsciousness[145]
are known.35
The above EEG telemetry
patent and ultrashort pulse method are by active radar probe. Yet a passive field extends as far as 12
feet from man as detected by a cryogenic antenna.[146] A technical article maintains this device as
entirely adaptable to clandestine applications, and pointedly comments on the
disappearance of physiological remote sensing literature since the 1970's for
animals and humans, while all other categories of remote sensing research
greatly expanded.[147]
DISCUSSION
Complete rejection of
assertions of a remote mind reading capability is just as presumptuous, in the
face of complaints, as has been the dismissal of internal voice capacity. Considerable capacity to detect and
differentiate mental states is evident from literature reports particularly by
EEG. The fact that EEG movement
imagination signals are detected for robot guidance on a voluntary unprompted
basis116 117 118 suggests a similar capacity is feasible for
specific EEG word identification, which has only been reported for word
prompted responses. Though references
to remote EEG are less, they provide plausibly exploitable mechanisms, which
may be covertly developed.
LEGAL AND INTERNATIONAL REFERENCES TO BEHAVIORAL
INFLUENCE TECHNOLOGIES
References to behavioral influence weapon use
by government bodies and international organizations are numerous. Negotiation submissions to the United
Nations Committee on Disarmament affirm the reality of microwave weapon nervous
system effects.[148] European Parliament passage of resolutions
calling for conventions regulating non-lethal weapons and the banning of
"weapons which might enable any form of manipulation of human beings" [149]
includes neuro-influence capability.[150] A resolution relates to HAARP, High
Frequency Active Auroral Research Project, which has environmental
consequences, and although utilizing high frequency, ionospheric extra low
frequencies (ELF) emanation results.
Since ELF is within brain wave frequencies the project has capacity to
influence whole populations.[151]
[152]
President Carter's National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, predicted
development of such capacity.[153] Nature News reports concern by a French
government panel about the potential for thought reading and such a remote
capacity.[154] An American draft law prohibiting land, sea,
or space-based weapons using electromagnetic, psychotronic (behavioral
influence), and sound technologies "directed at individual persons or targeted
populations for the purpose of information war, mood management, or mind
control" has not yet passed.[155] Russian electromagnetic standards are
nearly 1000 times lower than the West, so their weapon law forbidding
electromagnetic weapons exceeding Health Department parameters is strict.[156] The Russian draft law explicitly references
behavioral influence non-lethal weapons, and development in several countries.[157] Resolutions by the International Union of
Radio Science recognize criminal use of electromagnetic technology, though
largely relevant to use against infrastructure.[158]
MICROWAVE AND ULTRASOUND USE AGAINST
HUMANS
The
microwave irradiation of the American Embassy in Moscow received little
publicity until the winter of 1976 instillation of protective screening, but
irradiation was known since 1953.34
Original frequencies were 2.56-4.1 GHz with additional intermittent
0.6-9.5 GHz signals being permanent by 1975 in a wide band frequency hopping[h]
consistent pattern with one signal pulsating.
The irradiation was directional from nearby buildings and
modulated. Complaint to the Soviets had
no avail, but the signals disappeared in January 1979 "reportedly as a result
of a fire in one or more of the buildings." [159] A 9-11 GHz signal recurred in 1988.[160] Observed frequencies are basically within
the microwave hearing spectrum, and pulsation is required. Psychiatric cases occurred during the
exposure
period, though no epidemiologic relationship was revealed with fully a quarter
of the medical records unavailable, and comparison with other Soviet Bloc
posts.159 The CIA had Dr.
Milton Zaret review medical Soviet microwave literature to determine the
purpose of the irradiation. He
concluded the Russians "believed the beam would modify the behavior of the
personnel." [161] In 1976 the post was declared unhealthful
and pay raised 20% 140
The most documented citizen
microwave irradiation was of peace protesters at Greenham Common American Air
Force Base in Berkshire England, who prompted investigation of unusual
symptoms.[162] Radiation measurements exhibited microwaves
with symptom experience up to a hundred times the background level, and rose
sharply on protests nearer the base.160 Symptoms became pronounced on cruise missile transport, a protest
focus.160 Recorded were wide
ranging complaints: skin burns;
`severe' headaches; drowsiness; temporary paralysis; incoordinated speech; two
late (5 mos.) spontaneous abortions; an apparent circulatory failure; and
unlike usual menstrual synchronization, irregular or postmenopausal
menstruation. The symptom complex fits
well with electromagnetic exposure syndrome 160 It has also been reported that some of the
women `heard voices.'[163] The base closed finally in 1991.
Criminal directed energy
weapon use has been reported in Germany.[164] In a number of cases there is similarity of
circumstances, complaints, and symptoms.
In at least one case microwave fields have been measured with exclusion
of the usual sources (cell phone towers, etc.)[165] Plans for construction of a crude device
from a microwave oven are sold.164
Measurement of non-ionizing radiation fields in the vicinity of
an Australian victim is described.[166] The intensity ranged from 7 mV in an
adjacent room to 35 mV next to the head.
The victim suffered from multiple personality disorder attributed to
ritual abuse, and claimed an implant with radiological
evidence.
Ultrasound behavioral
influence technology use in Northern Ireland is cited [167] The device could focus on one person; and
utilized ultrasound cancellation like those patented. It was employed in Vietnam by the Americans, and is known as the
squawk box. Mentioned infrasound
frequency
(ultrasound carrier directed) is like Loos 1/25/00 patent, with psychological
effects summarized as `spooky.' More
detail by a defense journalist is quoted: "When the two frequencies mix in the
human ear they become intolerable. Some
people exposed to the device are said to feel giddy or nauseous and in extreme
cases they faint. Most people are
intensely annoyed by the device and have a compelling wish to be somewhere
else." [168] British police inventories list the specific
device, though a spokesman denied use.160
Sophisticated
behavioral influence capability is confirmed by ex-intelligence officers. Julianne McKinney, Director of The National
Security Alumni Electronic Surveillance Project is prominent. This is a largely classified employee victim
study with internal voice transmission avowal.[169]
CONCLUSION
The logic in the prediction
by Brzezinski[i] of the
appearance of a more controlled and directed society dominated by a power elite
willing to use the latest modern techniques for influencing behavior without
hindrance by liberal democratic values is compelling.153 Potential behavioral influence targets are
multiple. Since those supposedly expert
regard a victim's perceptions as psychotic, all complaints are disregarded, not
to mention capability to bear witness.
Targets may include anyone worth neutralization: domestic adversaries;[170]
security risks, which may only comprise classified disclosures; persons
witnessing serious improprieties; and those prone to committing advantageous
felonies. Legality is readily
circumvented by executive orders, (particularly declaration of a crisis or
emergency situation), which can be sealed, and this prerogative is only
accountable to co-equal branches of government as is now the case with
terrorism suspects. Internal voice
technology is most applicable within the same language and culture. Space here limits more than mention of
remote EEG influence capacity, hypnosis, and footnoting remote subliminal
technique. Hypnotic or subliminal
message presentation represent particularly insidious means of influencing
thought, mood, behavior, and undermining civil liberties.
Most complainants allege
public sector involvement or sub-contracted private companies.[171] Remote behavioral influence research has
long been funded by the US,39 with evidence of development19 22
36 45 46 and weapons,18 44 47 48 51 though denying on national
security grounds project results37 and foreign literature analyses.[172] Some thirty countries evidence active
behavioral influence weapon research.[173]
Though there is some scant
psychoanalytical acknowledgement,[174]
current medical awareness ensures effective neutralization of the
afflicted. Not all those affected are
stigmatized. However phenomena of
`hearing voices', or perception of remote manipulation, when recounted to
health professionals results in various stigmatizing diagnoses, [175]
[176]
totally without investigation.
Determination of relevant fields around complainants is mandatory, or
abatement by proven shielding of such phenomena. Professional opinions formed without excluding these technologies
are negligent.
The medical community has
long heard either identical or similar complaint[177]
to that above delineated as known internal voice technology from numerous
victims. This fact indicts the
scholarship and presumption of impossibility evident in the pertinent medical
literature. In addition, microwave
bioeffects
have considerable congruence with reported symptoms of major psychosis other
than 'voices.' [178] All of society should be disturbed at the
prospect of technologic induction of voice, since the unaware subject would
perceive such voices as his own natural thought, without such an assault as to
provoke complaint.
It is difficult to deny the
level of substantiation for the possibility that a thought reading capacity
exists, even with references that support a remote basis. The logic that in the thirty years since the
Pinneo work started, this capability has had full development is too sound to
dismiss victim corroboration. It would
have to be admitted that funding for projects by the defense and security
agencies is considerably greater than for open science, and that thought
reading would be a priority area.
Educated democracies should not be complacent at this prospect, given
the potential for political control, and existence of a remote EEG method in
the public domain.
Acknowledgements: Thanks are given to God for
inspiration, and a benefactor of Christians Against Mental Slavery for
financial support. There is gratitude
also to Dr. Paul Canner, and Dr. Allen Barker for their
suggestions.
All
patents are printable from the U. S. Patent Office website.
EEG
word recognition articles are printable thru Pubmed as
designated.
Each
is free
Pinneo
LR and Hall DJ. "Feasibility Study for Design of a Biocybernetic Communication
System" is available from Christians Against Mental Slavery at info@slavery.org.uk.
REFERENCES
[a] Address: 903 N. Calvert St., Baltimore MD 21202. Email- Johnmcmurt@aol.com Phone- 410-539-5140.
[b] Financial contribution to this article was made by fellow members of Christians Against Mental Slavery.
[c] American discovery may not be the first. Soviet and East European electromagnetic bioeffect literature is prior, more extensive, and transparent. A translated Russian treatment is the next text reference, which refers to F. Cazzamalli, an Italian, who mentioned radiofrequency hallucination about 1920.
[d] Also called S-quad, Silent Sounds, Inc. licensed Lowery Patent #5159703 "Silent subliminal presentation system", and has advanced brain wave entrainment technology (vide infra) with several classified patents. (See http://www.mindspring.com/~silent/menu.htm and links.) Unessential is individual direction, but possible by ultrasound.
[e] Loos Patent # 6017302 "Subliminal acoustic manipulation of nervous system" can "cause relaxation, drowsiness, or sexual excitement, depending on the precise acoustic frequency near « Hz used. The effects of the 2.5 Hz resonance include slowing of certain cortical processes, sleepiness, and disorientation."
[f] Referred to, but unavailable, however are a CIA Office of Technology Assessment report, a security industry publication, and a doctoral dissertation.
[g] Jane's is the most respected and authoritative of defense reporting services.
[h] A means evading detection.
[i] National Security Advisor to President Carter.
[1]
Mind Justice (Formerly
Citizens Against Human Rights Abuse), Director, Cheryl Welsh, 915 Zaragoza Street, Davis, CA 95616,
USA. Website at http://www.mindjustice.org/ Email is welsh@mindjustice.org
[2]
Christians Against
Mental Slavery, Secretary, John Allman, 98 High Street, Knaresbourough, N.
Yorks HG5 0HN, United Kingdom. Website
at http://www.slavery.org.uk/ Email is info@slavery.org.uk
[3] Moscow Committee for the
Ecology of Dwellings, Chairman, Emile Sergeevne Chirkovoi, Korpus 1006, Kvrtira
363, Moscow Zelenograd, Russia 103575.
. Website at http://www.moskomekologia.narod.ru Email is moskomekologia@narod.ru
[4] International Movement for the Ban of Manipulation of the Human Nervous System by Technologic Means, Founder, Mojmir Babacek, P. O. Box 52, 51101 Turnov, Czech Republic, Europe. Website at http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Campus/2289/webpage.htm Email is mbabacek@iol.cz
[5] Presman AS.
Electromagnetic
Fields and Life Plenum, New York-London, 1970. Presman mentions Cazzimalli and another English reference to this
Italian work is at http://www.datafilter.com/mc/jaski.html p 2, a semi-popular treatment with
references.
[6] Frey AH. "Human Auditory
System response to modulated electromagnetic energy" J Applied Physiol 17 (4):
689-92, 1962. Also at http://www.raven1.net/frey.htm
[7] Stocklin PL. Patent #4858612
"Hearing device" USPTO granted 8/22/89.
[8] Frey AH and Messenger R.
"Human Perception of Illumination with Pulsed Ultrahigh-Frequency
Electromagnetic Energy" Science 181: 356-8, 1973.
[9] Eichert ES and Frey AH.
"Human Auditory System Response to Lower Power Density Pulse Modulated
Electromagnetic Energy: A Search for Mechanisms" J Microwave Power 11(2): 141,
1976.
[10] Michaelson SM. "Sensation
and Perception of Microwave Energy" In: Michaelson SM, Miller MW, Magin R, and
Carstensen EL (eds.) Fundamental and Applied Aspects of Nonionizing
Radiation Plenum Press, New York, p
213-24, 1975.
[11] Puranen L and Jokela K.
"Radiation Hazards Assessment of Pulsed Microwave Radars" J Microwave Power
Electromagn Energy 31(3): 165-77, 1996.
[12] Hermann DM and Hossman K-A.
"Neurological effects of microwave exposure related to mobile communication" J
Neurol Sci 152: 1-14, 1997.
[13] Lai H. "Neurological Effects
of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation" In: Lin JC (ed.) Advances in
Electromagnetic Fields in Living Systems vol 1, Plenum, N Y & London, p
27-80, 1994.
[14] Elder JA and Chou CK.
"Auditory Responses to Pulsed Radiofrequency Energy" Bioelectromagnetics Suppl
8: S162-73, 2003. Also at http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/scc28/sc4/Human%20Perception%20FINAL.pdf
[15] Kreithen ML. Patent #5774088
"Method and system for warning birds of hazards" USPTO granted
6/30/98.
[16] Lenhadt ML and Ochs AL.
Patent #6250255 "Methods and apparatus
for alerting and/or repelling birds and other animals" USPTO granted
6/26/01.
[17] Nordwall BD. "Radar Warns
Birds
of Impending Aircraft" Aviation Wk Space Technol March 10, p 65-6,
1997.
[18]Center for Army Lessons
Learned Thesaurus at http://call.army.mil/products/thesaur_e/00018275,asp
[19] Justesen DR. "Microwaves and
Behavior" Am Psychologist, 392(Mar): 391-401, 1975. Excerpted reference at http://www.raven1.net/v2succes.htm
[20] Lin JC. Microwave
Auditory Effects and Applications Thomas, Springfield Ill, p 176,
1978.
[21] "Surveillance Technology,
1976: policy and implications, an analysis and compendium of materials: a staff
report of the Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights of the Committee of the
Judiciary. United States Senate,
Ninety-fourth Congress, second session, p 1280, US GOV DOC Y 4.J 882:SU
7/6/976.
[22] Oskar KJ. "Effects of low power microwaves on the
local cerebral blood flow of conscious rats" Army Mobility Equipment Command
Report,. # AD-A090426, 1980. Available
form NASA Technical Reports. Abstract at http://www.raven1.net/v2s-nasa.htm
[23] Brunkan WB. Patent #4877027
"Hearing system" USPTO granted 10/31/89.
[24] Frey AH. "Behavioral
Biophysics" Psychol Bull 63(5): 322-37, 1965.
[25] Thijs VMJ. Application #WO1992NL0000216 "Hearing Aid Based on Microwaves" World Intellectual Property
Organization Filed 1992-11-26, Published 1993-06-10. Also at http://www.delphion.com/details?pn=WO09310730A1 Not a US Patent.
[26] Stocklin PL and Stocklin
BF. "Possible Microwave Mechanisms of
the Mammalian Nervous System" T-I-T J Life Sci 9: 29-51,
1979.
[27] Beason RC and Semm P.
"Responses of neurons to an amplitude modulated microwave stimulus" Neurosci
Lett 333: 175-78, 2002.
[28] Adey WR. "Biological Effects
of Low Energy Electromagnetic Fields On the Central Nervous System" NATO Advanced Study Institute on Advances
in Biological Effects and Dosimetry of Low Energy Electromagnetic Fields
Erice Italy, Plenum, p 359-391, 1981.
[29] Shepherd GM.
Neurobiology
2nd ed. Oxford Univ. Press, New York-Oxford, p146-7,
1988.
[30] Bise W. "Low power
radio-frequency and microwave effects on human electroencephalogram and
behavior" Physiol Chem Phys 10(5):
387-98,
1978.
[31] Puharich HK and Lawrence JL.
Patent #3629521"Hearing systems" USPTO granted 12/21/71.
[32] Flanagan GP. Patent #3393279
"Nervous System Excitation Device" USPTO granted 7/16/68.
[33] Frolich H. "The Biological
Effects of Microwaves and Related Quiestions" Adv Electonics Electron Physics
53: 85-152, 1980.
[34] Steneck NH. The Microwave
Debate MIT Press Cambridge, Mass,
London Eng, 1984.
[35] Becker RO. Cross
Currents
Jeremy P. Tarcher, Inc, Los Angeles, St Martin's Press, p 297-304 & p
303-4, 1990.
[36] Kohn B. "Communicating Via
the Microwave Auditory Effect" Defense Department Awarded SBIR Contract #
F41624-95-C9007, 1993. Also at http://es.epa.gov/ncer_abstracts/sbir/other/monana/kohn.html
& http://www.raven1.net/v2s-kohn.htm
[37] Margo P. Cherney Freedom of
Information Act Memorandum at http://www.raven1.net/usafletr.jpg