Page 167 - Nick Begich - Angels Don't Play This Haarp Advances in Tesla Technology

www.earthpulse.com 160 www.earthpulse.com
Another interesting issue to contemplate is the Defense Department's new
Policy on non-lethal weapon systems, where "adversaries" and "enemies" have been
more broadly deftned, as here the use of such systems against American citizens. The
idea that these systems can be used almost without detection to manipulate the
behavior and thinking of people raises moral questions. This use also appears to be
in conflict with Constitutional rights regarding free expression and speech. The fact
that the military together with the United States Justice Department can now use these
technologies, under their broad definitions, should sound an alarm for all people, not
just Americans.313

In our opinion, the only redeeming discussion in Low-Intensity Conflict.
and Modern Technology, (a compilation of papers presented in 1984) was that some
at the meeting saw the "new" technologies for what they were, and began heated
debates about the morality of using these weapon systems. In the closing page of the
technology overview the following was written:

"Paul Tyler also discusses the application of electromagnetic radiation
(EMR) to low-intensity conflict. He surveys ongoing scientific research into the
biological effects of electromagnetic radiation. Tyler tells us current evidence
indicates that specific biological effects can be achieved by controlling the perimeters
of electromagnetic radiation directed at human subjects. Thus there is the potential to
use EMR to control human behavior or even to maim or kill adversaries. Tyler urges
that the United States should devote considerable resources to exploring the
possibilities of developing EMR weapons technology, which could be of particular
value in low-intensity scenarios. "314

It becomes increasingly obvious that the inner circle of the Department of
Defense placed a substantial amount of effort and emphasis in these areas.

The writer continued:
"Both Tyler's and Ruotanen's (another contributor to Low-Intensity
Conflict and Modern Technology) papers created heated discussions. Some panel
members questioned the advisability of employing nuclear, EMP (electromagnetic
pulse), and EMR (electromagnetic radiation) weapons.They felt the ever-present
danger of escalation would negate any advantage to be gained from surgical ground
or atmospheric nuclear burst. Some on the panel saw Tyler's article as bordering on
moral heresy. It is acceptable to have weapons and strategies to blow bodies into little
pieces or burn them to a crisp, but not to use medical research and techniques to
develop more subtle ways of eliminating or controlling enemies. There was some
feeling that any benefit to be gained from research into EMR effects - dangerous in
itself - might well be overshadowed by indignant outcries against the use of EMR
weapons on human beings. "315
313 Department of Defense Directive, Policy for Non-Lethal Weapons, Office of the Assistant
Secretary of Defense, Draft July 21,1994.
314 Low-Intensity Conflict and Modern Technology,. Lt Col. David J. Dean USAF, Editor, Air
University Press, Center for Aerospace Doctrine, Research, and Education, Maxwell Air Force Base,
Alabama, June 1986.
315 Ibid.