Misled and Betrayed Gangstalking

9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
Misledandbetrayed:HowUScoverstoriesare
keepingaColdWarweaponandillegalhuman
testingsecret
ByCherylWelsh
MindJusticeHomePage
PublishedasthecoverstoryinTorture,AsianandGlobalPerspectives,Volume2,Issue2,JuneAugust
2013.
AthankyoutoJoEastonforhertimeandadvicewithrespecttothefinaldraftofthispaper.
Termsanddefinitions:Forthispaper,thetermelectromagneticradiation(EMR)isusedinterchangeably
withfrequencies,radiofrequency(RF),radiosignals,radiowaves,microwaves,microwavesignals,low
frequency,extremelylowfrequency(ELF),ELFfrequencies,EMfields,beamweapons,directedenergy
weapons.
1.Introduction
TheUSatomicbombexplodedandtheworlddiscoveredtheexistenceofaformidablesecretweapon.By
contrast,thispaperwillillustratethatthereisproofthatneuroweapons(mindcontrolweaponsdeveloped
duringtheColdWar)areanotherformidableweapon.However,theirpowerliespartlyinkeepingthem
secretsotheycanbeusedsurreptitiously.Inprinciple,thescienceispossibletotargetandinfluencea
personremotelyandgovernmentshavebeenconductingsecretresearchtodevelopneuroweapons.Based
largelyonthescienceofelectromagneticradiation(EMR),suchweaponscouldbeusedtostopapersonor
manypeoplebyinfluencingtheirbehaviorsbymanipulatingvariousphysicalandpsychologicalparameters
relatedtobrainfunctionsthiscouldchangehowwarsarefought.Shroudedinsecrecy,fewpeoplehave
evenheardofneuroweapons.Nevertheless,theirimportancehasoftenbeencomparedtotheatomic
bomb1andabriefsummaryofthesignificantamountofobscureinformationispresentedbelow.
Theconsensusisthatneuroweaponsarestillsciencefictionandanyallegationsofunlawfulhumansubject
experimentsinvolvingneuroweaponsarejustelaborateconspiracytheories.Thispaperwillarguethatthe
consensusiswrongshowingthatsecretCIAmindcontrolresearchbeganasfarbackasthe1950swiththe
scienceofphysicalandpsychologicaltorturebeinginvestigatedintheUSinresponsetofearsthatRussia
andChinahaddevelopednew,similartechniques.ProfessorAlfredMcCoy,anexpertonUSnotouch
torture,describedtheCIAresearchasamassivemindcontroleffort,withpsychologicalwarfareand
secretresearchintohumanconsciousnessthatreachedacostofabilliondollarsannually,averitable
ManhattanProjectofthemind.2Inthemid1970s,someCIAmindcontrolprograms,including
nonconsensualhumansubjectexperimentswithLSDandotherdrugs,wereexposedincongressional
hearingswhileotherprogramsremainclassified.3
Thispaperwillpresentemergingevidencesupportingtheargumentthattheconsensusisbasedon
misleadingUSgovernmentcoverstorieswhichhavebeenpresentedasofficialexplanationswhileactually
concealingsecretprogramsandactivities.4StevenAftergood,ahighlyregardedsecrecyexpertdescribed
theUSColdWarsecrecysystemasapoisonouslegacy:theexcessiveuseofgovernmentcoverstories
wasroutineandsecrecymanualsauthorizedactivedeceptioninordertopromotebelievablecoverstories.5
Thispaperwillpresentconvergingfactsthatstronglysuggesttwomajorcoverstoriesconcealedthe
existenceofneuroweaponsandillegalhumantesting,foolingnearlyeveryoneforsixtyyearsandcounting.
Thesecoverstoriesshouldnowbeseenasobsoletewiththeevidencebeginningtorevealthat
neuroweaponsarelikelytohavealreadybeendeveloped.Asmentionedabove,thefirstcoverstoryisthat
secretneuroweaponsarestillsciencefiction.ThesecondcoverstoryconcernstheofficialUSpolicyonEMR
bioeffectsitbeingthattherearenoproveneffectsofEMRotherthanheating.6Forexample,mostpeople
knowhowamicrowaveovenworksthemicrowavesproduceathermaleffectandheatorcookfoodasin
amicrowaveoven.
http://mindjustice.org/misled.htm#sdfootnote1anc
1/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
1.1Neuroweapons
Neuroweapons,notouchtorture,andnonlethalweaponsarethreemajorUSstatetoolsthathaveemerged
fromtheCIAsColdWarprogramsallthreeareidealforintelligenceandpsychologicaloperationsand
counterinsurgencywarfare.Theyaretoolsdesignedtoneutralizetheenemywithoutkillinganyonebutby
influencingtheirbehavior.Allthreeprogramsrepresentanewformofweaponrywhichcanbeusedona
largescale.ThefirstofthreeUSstatetools,theCIAsnotouchtorture,hasbeendescribedasa
revolutionarypsychologicalapproachandthefirstnewscientificinnovationaftercenturiesof[physical]
torture.7Thesecondtoolisthenonlethalweapon,whichisaweapondesignedtostoptheenemywithout
killing.Nonlethalweaponsincludeseveraltypesofweaponsbutthispaperwillonlydiscussnonlethal
weaponsbasedonEMR.In1994,Aftergoodreportedthatprogramstodevelopsocallednonlethal
weaponsareslowlyemergingfromtheU.S.governmentssecretblackbudget....Theconceptofnon
lethalweaponsisnotnewthetermappearsinheavilycensoredCIAdocumentsdatingfromthe1960s.8
FewpeopleareawareofthescienceresearchshowingthatEMRhassignificantbioeffectsonhumansother
thanjustheatingthiswillbeshownbelow.
Foroverhalfacentury,theUSandothergovernmentshavekeptnonlethalweaponsoutofthepubliceye.
Afewexamplesillustratethepoint.A1991LondonGuardiannewspaperarticledescribedEMRcrowd
controlweaponsthatdoexistandwerelistedintheBritishDefenseEquipmentCatalogueuntil1983when
theMinistryofDefenseorderedanyadvertisementsormentionoffrequencyweaponsberemoved.9A1990
InternationalCommitteeoftheRedCrossReviewarticledescribeddirectedenergyweapons,weapons
basedonEMRthatcouldtargetapersonatbattlefielddistances.Somescienceseemstohaveconfirmed
modulatedEMRcanadverselyaffectbrainfunction,althoughtheresearchwasheavilyclassified.10
In1976,aUSFederalTimesarticledescribedallegedSovietmicrowaveweaponswhichcaused
disorientation,todisruptbehaviorandcauseheartattacks.11(Tobeclear,theUSgovernmentofficialEMR
bioeffectspolicyisthattherearenoprovenbioeffectsotherthanheatingandtheUSgovernmentconsiders
theSovietweaponsresearchscientificallyunproven.)Anotherdevicetargetedapersonwithmicrowave
hearingtocausevoicesinheadofthepersonthatonlythetargetedpersoncanhear.12Themicrowaves
weremodulatedlikearadiosignaltocarrythesoundofwordsormusicthatapersoncanhear.13
Microwavehearinghasbeendemonstratedonasubjectwithsuccessfullyencodedspeech(thespokendigits
fromonetoten)inapulsedmicrowavesignal.14Perhapsitisnotsurprisingthattheonenonlethalweapon
basedonEMRthathasbeenrevealedisthemicrowaveheatweaponwhichbeamsEMRtocreateaburning
sensationonwhomevertheweaponisdirectedtowards.15
ThethirdUSstatetoolistheneuroweaponsprogramneuroweaponsareconsideredaweaponofmass
destruction.Forexample,in2012,RussianpresidentVladimirPutindescribedanewmilitaryprogramto
developEMRweaponsthattargetthenervoussystem:Suchhightechweaponssystemswillbe
comparableineffecttonuclearweapons,butwillbemoreacceptableintermsofpoliticalandmilitary
ideology.16In1986,MikhailGorbachev,theSovietleaderatthetime,describedEMRweaponsthatcould
beusedasantipersonnelweapons,callingthemnolessdangerousthanmassstrikeweapons.17
GorbachevstatedthattheSovietUnionhadnotandwouldnottestordeploysuchweapons.Sincethe
1940s,theSovietUnionhasbeenstudyinghowEMRinteractswiththehumanbodyandbraincalledEMR
bioeffectsandtheUShasmonitoredtheresearchtofindoutiftherewasanypossibleadvantagegained
bytheSovietsforespionageorweapons.18
Additionally,negotiationsbytheUSandtheformerUSSRattheUNDisarmamentAgencyregardingEMR
weaponsfrom1975through1985weredescribedinaUNDepartmentforDisarmamentAffairsbook.19For
example,theformerSovietUnionsubmitteda1979UNCommitteeonDisarmamentdocument.Itconsisted
ofadraftagreementfortheprohibitionofnewtypesofweaponsofmassdestructionandnewsystemsof
weapons.ThedocumentspecificallylistedweaponsthatuseEMRtoaffectbiologicaltargets,withthe
likelihoodofremotetargetingwithinhalfadozenyears.20Thedocumentstatedthatweaponscouldtarget
thebrainandwerescientificallypossible,relyingoninternationalscientificliterature.21
USmilitaryresearchincludesEMRneuroweaponssimilartotheRussianweapons.TheUSAirForce(USAF)
isfunding"ControlledEffects"researchandUSAFchiefscientistsstated:"Withtheadventofdirected
energyandotherrevolutionarytechnologies,theabilitytoinstantaneouslyprojectverypreciseamountsof
varioustypesofenergyanywhereintheworldcanbecomeareality."22DespitethedecadesofUS
governmentsecrecyandinterestinneuroweapons,theUS,likeRussia,deniesanysecretdevelopmentof
suchweapons,theargumentbeingthattheUSgovernmentinterestinEMRneuroweaponscouldbeaploy
2/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
tothrowofftheRussiansintospendingmoremoneyonsciencefictionweapons.23However,asshown
below,furtherevidenceseemstoindicatemuchmoreisgoingon:anongoingsecretarmsraceover
neuroweaponsbetweenUSandRussiathatbeganinthe1950s.
ThegoaloftheUSneuroweaponsprogramistodevelopthecapabilityofremotelytargeting,
communicatingwithandinfluencingapersonsbrain.Itisaweaponofsurveillance,influenceandcontrol.
USgovernmentpublicationsonfutureweaponsindicatethatsomeneuroweaponsarebasedonthescience
ofEMRwhichallowsfortwomainweaponscapabilities,firstinprinciple,EMRcanbeutilizedasthemost
likelymethodforremotehumansurveillance,similartoradarthatutilizesEMRtotrackobjectssuchas
airplanesorcellsphones.Asshownbelow,inprinciple,thiscapabilityispossible24butitisnotknownin
unclassifiedresearch.
Secondly,EMRbioeffectscancausesymptomssuchasnausea,disorientationorconfusion.25Inprinciple,
thiscapabilitycanalsobedevelopedtoincludeprecisemindcontrol,includingforcingsomeonetocarryout
certainspecifictasks,howeveritisunreportedinunclassifiedscience.26Foralloftheabovereasons,EMR
technologiesforsurveillanceandEMRbioeffectsforinfluenceandcontrolwouldseemtobemajorareasof
thesciencerequiredforneuroweaponsdevelopment.However,theconsensushascompletelydismissedthe
scienceofEMRandEMRbioeffectsforneuroweaponsasrudimentaryintheirlevelofdevelopmentandthus
sciencefiction.However,asshownbelow,theconsensusleftoutcriticalinformation,andthereforeits
conclusionishighlyquestionable.
ThedeploymentofthethreemajorUSstatetoolswouldnotnecessarilyeliminatetheold,politically
unacceptablemethodsofbrutalphysicaltortureandbattlefieldmaimingandkilling,butalternativemethods
(especiallyiftheyremainsecretandthereforecovert)couldbeusedagainstenemies.Notouchtorturehas
alreadyproventobehighlysuccessfulasatoolofdominationandcontrol:severalgovernmentmanuals
showthatsincethe1960s,thetechniqueshavebeendisseminatedfromVietnamthroughIrantoCentral
America.27Likewise,nonlethalweaponscontinuetobesecretlydevelopedinseveralUSprograms.28It
willbeshownbelowthattheneuroweaponsprogram,theleastknownandarguablythemostconsequential
ofthethreeCIAColdWarprogramshasalsobeensecretlyexpanding.
1.2Allegedmindcontrolvictims
AtthesametimetheCIAprogramshavebeentakingplace,alargeandgrowingnumberofvictimsfrom
aroundtheworldhaveallegedtheyhavebeenremotelytargeted,trackedandsufferedillegalhuman
experimentation.Whetherthisisacoincidenceoracauseandeffecthasremainedanunanswered
question.Theclaimsoftargetingseemtoincludephysicalandpsychologicaltorturewithsomefeaturesof
advancedneuroweaponsthatthemilitaryclaimshavenotyetbeendevelopedbutthatareincludedin
futureweaponsplans.Theclaimsincludefarfetchedaccountsoffuturisticweaponsthatsoundsobizarre,
theyhavebeendismissedasconspiracytheoryormentalillnesswithoutfurtherinvestigation.Mosthuman
rightsgroupsandnewspapershavereceivedinnumerableletters,callsoremailsfromvictimswith
desperatepleasforhelpcoupledwithramblingaccountsofcrazysoundingmindcontrolzappingand
torture.29Somepeoplemaywellbesufferingfrommentalillnessbutwithoutinvestigatingthenumerous
claims,noonecanbesure.
The2006NaturereviewedbookMindWars,Brainresearchandnationaldefense,anda2007Washington
PostMagazinearticle,ThoughtWars,coveredthedesperatevictimaccountsandraisedissuesofconspiracy
theoryandmentalillness.30Althoughthepublicationsincludedstatementsbyscientistsandmilitary
expertsonsecretgovernmentweaponsprograms,theinterviewstatementssupportedthatthesymptoms
andtechnologiesdescribedbyvictimswerenotscientificallypossiblebasedonunclassifiedresearchand
thereforethevictimsmustbeconspiracynutsordelusional.Thestatementswereacceptedatfacevalue
withonlyverygeneralquestioning,howeverasAftergoodnotedabove,secretmilitaryweaponsprograms
canbecloakedindeceitfulcoverstories.Neitherpublicationincludedindependentinvestigationor
recommendedfurtherevaluation.
Bycontrast,thispaperexaminesexperts,weaponsandtechnologiesandlooksbeyondthecommonly
acceptedinformationtoreachtheoppositeopinion,thatthevictimallegationsmaybetrue.Despitethe
completerejectionoftheclaimsbynearlyeveryoneandfindingnorelieffromthetargeting,victims
continuetopubliclypleadtheircase.Forexample,oneactivistgrouprecentlyplacedaWashingtonPostad
addressedtoPresidentObamaseekinganinvestigationofadvancedtechnologiesthatillegallytargetthe
brain.31
1.3Theconsensuspositionandallegedmindcontrolvictimposition
3/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
Thecoreofthedisagreementbetweentheallegedvictimsandtheconsensusisthequestionhowadvanced
isthescienceofsecretneuroweaponstoday?Theallegedvictimssaythescienceisalreadydeveloped,
extremelyadvancedandhighlyclassified.Theconsensuspositiondisagrees:statingthatalthoughsuch
weaponsmightbepossible,theyhavenotbeenresearchedordeveloped.Itisagreedthatneuroweapons
withthecapabilityofremotelytargeting,communicatingwithandcontrollingtheenemysbrainisthe
ultimateweaponthatmajornationswouldwanttodevelop.Expertsalsoagreethatinprinciple,
neuroweaponsandthecapabilityofdirectaccesstothebrainandadvancedprecisemindreadingand
influencinghumanbehaviorevenmindcontrolarescientificallypossible.32However,theconsensusis
thatsuchweaponsareonlysciencefiction.Anumberofreasonsaregiveninsupportofthisconsensus.
Firstly,itistruethatthereisnotheoryforhowthebrainworksandtechnologiestoremotelyaccessthe
brainremainundeveloped.Also,ethicistshaveonlyjustbeguntoalertthepublictothecurrentexplosion
ofneuroscienceprogressandthelikelihoodofthedevelopmentofcontroversialnewtechnologies.Itis
arguedthatneuroscienceisstillatarudimentarylevelofdevelopmentandthereforethedevelopmentof
advancedneuroweaponsisnotpossibletoday.Soitisarguedthatalthoughadvancedneuroweaponsare
scientificallyfeasible,theirdevelopmentisonlypossibleinthefarfuture.Secondly,itisargued
governmentswouldnotbeabletokeepsuchweaponssecretfordecades.
However,thispaperwillarguethattheconsensusiswrongforthefollowingreasons.Fordecades,theUS
governmentpreventedthesciencerequiredforneuroweaponsfromdevelopingintheunclassifiedrealm
therebyallowingtheUSgovernmenttoclaimneuroweaponsaresciencefiction,basedonthebestUS
scienceliteratureavailable.Atthesametime,secretneuroweaponsresearchflourishedandtheUS
governmentemployedextensivesecrecymethodstodisguisethefactthatneuroweaponswerescientifically
possiblenotonlyinprinciplebutwerealsoprovenwithscienceexperiments.Consequently,secret
neuroweaponsthatarealreadydevelopedareaseriousthreatbutexpertsarenotwarningthepublicand
theyshouldbe.
Thepaperisorganizedasfollows.Section2presentsasummaryoftheneurosciencerequiredfor
neuroweapons.Section3presentsthefirstoftwocoverstoriesthatneuroweaponsarestillsciencefiction.
Thiscoverstoryreliesontheassumptionthatsecretneuroweaponsresearchwouldadvanceatafasterbut
similardevelopmentrateasunclassifiedneuroscience,thereforeabriefchronologyofthehistoryof
classifiedandunclassifiedneurosciencerelatedtoadvancedneuroweaponsispresented.Thecoverstory
andalternativepositionarecomparedbeforeabriefanalysisandconclusionarepresented.Section4
considersthesecondofthetwocoverstoriesforneuroweaponsthattherearenoprovenEMRbioeffects
exceptheating.TheevidencethatthiscoverstoryisobsoleteissetoutbypresentingthescienceofEMR
bioeffectsrelatedtoneuroweaponsandUSmilitaryresearchbasedonEMRbioeffects,followedbya
summarizedhistoryoftheirdevelopment.Thecoverstoryandalternativepositionsareagaincompared
withabriefanalysisandconclusiontofollow.Section5brieflydiscussesonelesserknownandextremeUS
secrecymethodthatwasimplementedtomaintainthesecrecyofaCIAdomesticsurveillanceprogram
uncoveredwiththeCIAmindcontrolprogramsinthe1970s,mentionedabove.Section6presents
conclusionsandarecommendationforfurtherinvestigation.
2.Thescienceofneuroweapons
Thepublicneedstoknowverybasicneurosciencerequiredforneuroweaponsdevelopment.Thisdoesnot
requirerocketscienceoraneuroscientisttounderstanditbutitdoesrequireinformationthathasbeen
missinginthepublicforum.Generallyspeaking,thesciencerequirementsnecessarytodevelop
neuroweaponsareasfollows.Itisthoughtthatthescienceofneuroweaponswouldrequireageneral
theoryforhowthebrainworksandsofarthereisnounclassifiedtheoryandneuroscienceistoo
rudimentarytoformthebasisofaclassifiedtheory.However,thisignoresthefactthattoagreatextent,
neuroscientistsdonottheorizeincomparisontootherfieldsofscience,forexamplephysicistsbuild
theoriestobetested.33Itiswellknownthatneuroscienceliteratureincludesvoluminousresearchbutfew
theoriestomakesenseofthedata,assciencewriterJohnHorganexplained:Unfortunately,noonehas
anyideahowthebrainintegratestheoutputofallitsdisparatecomponentstocreatewhatwethinkofasa
mind,orself....Neuroscientistshavedoneagreatjobofbreakingthebrainintopieces,buttheyhaveno
ideahowtoputitbacktogetheragain.34Therefore,thelackofabraintheorycouldbebecause
neuroscientistsdonttheorize,notbecauseageneraltheoryforhowthebrainworksisnotpossible.
Furthermore,inhis2010book,Creatingmodernneuroscience:Therevolutionary1950s,GordonShepherd,
aprominentneuroscientist,wrotethatthe1950scanbeconsideredthegreatestdecadeinbiologyand
neurosciencebecausethereweresomanydiscoveries,breakthroughsandmilestones.Forexample,in
biology,thestructureofDNAwasdiscoveredandthisledtoriseofmolecularbiologyandtheHuman
GenomeProject,aUSprojectthatsequencedhumanDNA.35Inneuroscienceofthe1950s,theionic
4/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
hypothesisexplainedhowbraincellsutilizeelectricitytocommunicate36andthehypothesiswasthebasis
fora1963NobelPrize.Agreatnumberofsimilarbreakthroughsinthe1950slaidthefoundationfor
modernneuroscience.37Shepherdsuggestedthatthisexceptionalscientificactivitywasunparalleledin
neurosciencebeforeorsinceandforthemostpart,ageneraltheoryofhowthebrainworkscouldbebased
on1950srevolutionaryresearch.38
Shepherdsbookreceivedfavorablereviewsithasnotbeencontestedbyneuroscientistsanditisthe
basisoftwoYaleUniversitycoursesonneuroscience.Thebookwona2010InternationalSocietyforthe
HistoryofNeurosciencesaward.Areasonablespeculationisthatscientistsconductingunclassifiedresearch
wouldnothaverecognizedageneraltheoryforhowthebrainworksasaresultofbeingdiscouragedand
preventedfromresearchingcriticalareasofneurosciencerequiredtodevelopneuroweapons,asshown
below.Atthesametime,theutilitarianCIAmindcontrolresearcherswouldhaverecognizedthepotential
forapplyingthisknowledgetoneuroweaponsdevelopment.TheUSgovernmentwouldhaveclassifiedany
furthercriticalneurosciencerequiredtodevelopneuroweaponsandwouldhaveutilizeddeceitful
governmentcoverstories,thusdiscouragingunclassifiedresearchinneurosciencethatmightrevealthe
scientificpossibilityofneuroweapons.
Inadditiontotherequirementofatheoryforhowthebrainworks,developingneuroweaponsrequires
knowledgeofneuroscience.Neuroscienceconsistsofthecollectedmultidisciplinarysciencesthatanalyze
thenervoussystemtounderstandthebiologicalbasisforbehavior.39Consciousnessisabranchof
neuroscienceresearchthatisalsodefinedasthestudyofthebrainbiologyrelationship.40Likewise,
neuroweaponsareweaponsdesignedtoinfluenceandcontrolthebehavioroftheenemybycontrolling
brainbiology.Therefore,researchonthebrainbiologyandbehaviorrelationshipisessentialforprogressin
bothneuroscienceandneuroweapons.However,asshownbelow,itishardtobelievebuttruemainstream
neurosciencedidnotincludethestudyoftherelationshipbetweenbrainbiologyandbehaviorthevery
basisofneuroscienceandneuroweaponsuntilveryrecently.
2.1Theelectrochemicalbrain
Solvinghowtheelectrochemicalbrainworksanddevelopingneuroweaponsarebothaphysicsproblemand
abiologyproblem.Thestudyofelectricityinbiology,includingtheelectricalpropertiesofthehumanbrain
iscalledbioelectricity.Bioelectromagnetics,thestudyofelectromagnetisminbiology,isabranchof
bioelectricity.BioelectromagneticsincludesthestudyofEMRbioeffectswhichisacriticalareaofscience
forneuroweapons,asshownbelow.Neuroscientistshaveestablishedthattheelectricityofthebrain
communicatesinformationbetweenbraincellswithelectricalsignalsbutmuchremainstobediscovered
andunderstood.Significantly,forthelastsixtyyears,thebasicscienceandtechnologyrequirementsfor
solvinghowthebrainworksandlikewisefordevelopingneuroweaponshaveremainedthesame.Sincethe
midtwentiethcentury,neuroscientistshaveknownthatbraincellsincludingthemoststudiedbraincells
calledneuronscommunicatewithelectrochemicalsignals.Thiscommunicationprocesstranslatesinto
humanactivitiessuchasdreams,thoughts,emotions,actions,hearing,seeingandmore.Neuroscientists
agreethatthekeytosolvinghowthebrainworksistodecipherthelanguageoftheelectrochemical
signals,calledtheneuralcode.41
JohnChapin,aDefenseAdvancedResearchProjectAgency(DARPA)programmanagerexplainedthat
decipheringtheneuralcodeisahighresearchpriorityforneurosciencebecauseitisoneofthreegreat
scientificunknowns,alongwiththeoriginoftheuniverseandoflifeonEarth.42Solvingtheneuralcode
couldleadtofinallyunderstandingthemindbrainproblem,whichishowthebiologyofthebrainresultsin
consciousnessandhumanbehavior.43Itcouldleadtomajoradvancesintreatingbraindisordersand
improvingthecapabilitiesofhealthypeople.44Whileneuroscientistsagreethatthebrainisthemost
complexscientificproblemtoday,45thereisnoagreementamongneuroscientistsonhowtogoabout
solvingtheneuralcode.Nevertheless,thebraincanbedividedintotwofundamentalcomponentsthatthe
publiccanunderstand.
Neuroscientistsoftendescribethebrainastheelectrochemicalbrainbecausethebrainconsistsoftwo
essentialandequallyimportantpropertiesbioelectricalandbiochemical.46Significantly,twocriticalfacts
toknowaboutneuroweaponsarethatfirst,theyarebasedonthebioelectricalpropertiesofthebrain,not
thebiochemicalpropertiesofthebrainandsecond,theyrequirethedevelopmentoftechnologiesfor
remotecommunicationandsurveillanceofthebrainandonlyabioelectricalapproachnotabiochemistry
approachcanleadtoremoteaccesstotheelectrochemicalbrain.VictorChaseauthoredabookonthe
importanceofresearchontheelectricalactivityofthebrain.Chaseexplainedthatelectricalsignals
providethemostefficientmethodoftransmittinginformationwithinthebody.Nolivingcreaturecould
5/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
survivewithoutelectricity,becausethebodyis,inessence,anelectricalmachine.47Neuroscientistsstill
dontunderstandhowthebrainselectricalsignalsaretransformedintohumanthought,actions,hearing,
seeingandmore.48
Thereisnodisputethattheelectrochemicalbraincommunicateswithelectrical,electromagneticand
magneticsignalsaswellaschemicalsignals.Additionallyitiswellestablishedthatelectrical,
electromagneticandmagneticsignalsfromoutsidesourcescanmimic,interferewithordirectly
communicatewithbraincells.Forexample,neuroscientistshavecommunicatedwiththebrainbywayofits
electricalproperties.Brainimplantsutilizeelectricalsignalstoaffectorcausemovementsandactions,and
toalter,influence,evencontrolbehavior.JoseDelgado,aYaleUniversityneuroscientist,conducted
researchinthe1960sand1970swhichhelpedtoestablishthatbrainimplantscouldberemotelycontrolled
toelectricallystimulateananimal'sbraintocontrolvariouscomplexbehaviours,instinctsandemotions.49
Delgadostated:Anewtechnology...hasprovedthatmovements,sensations,emotions,desires,ideas,
andavarietyofpsychologicalphenomenamaybeinduced,inhibited,ormodifiedbyelectricalstimulation
ofspecificareasofthebrain.
Itbecomeshighlyrelevantthatresearchontheelectricalpropertiesoftheelectrochemicalbrainhas
laggedfarbehindresearchonthebrainsbiochemicalproperties.Progressontheelectricityofthebrainis
stillconsideredrudimentary.50Furthermore,sincethe1960s,biochemistryistheareaofresearchthat
mainstreamneurosciencehascompletelyfocusedon,attheexpenseoftheequallyimportantresearchon
thebioelectricalpropertiesofthebrain.Consequently,itcanbearguedthatbioelectricity,asoneoftwo
fundamentalpropertiesoftheelectrochemicalbrain,shouldbeamajorfocusofneurosciencebutforsome
reasonitisnot.
Thesecondcriticalfactaboutneuroweaponsistherequirementofthedevelopmentoftechnologiesfor
remoteaccesstothebrain.Notably,onlyabioelectricalapproachnotabiochemistryapproachcanlead
toremoteaccesstotheelectrochemicalbrain.Anexamplehelpstoclarifythedifferencebetween
bioelectricalandbiochemicalbraintechnologiestoaccessthebrain.Acellphonecallermakesacalland
thecellphonetransmitsthevoicemessageintheformofmicrowavestravelingthroughtheairinphysics
thisisknownasactionatadistancetothemicrowavecellphonetower.Thecellphonetowerthen
transmitsthecallintheformofmicrowavestothecellphoneofthepersonreceivingthecallwhichdetects
themicrowavesandconvertsthembacktoavoicemessage.Bycontrast,actionatadistanceisnot
possiblewithbiochemistry.Forachemicalreactiontooccur,suchastwochemicalsreactinginasolutionto
makeathirdchemical,physicalcontactisrequired.Likewise,biochemicalbraintechnologiescannot
communicateremotelywiththebrain,physicalcontactisrequired.
Becauseexperimentswithinvasivetechnologiesonhealthyhumansubjectsareunethical,technologiesfor
remoteordirectaccesstothebrainarethepreferredwaytoaccesstothebrainratherthaninvasive
technologiessuchasbrainimplantsandsurgeries.Whileneuroscientistshaveconductedsomebrain
implantresearch,theconcentrationofresearchhasbeenonindirectmethodstoaccessthebrain,suchas
brainscanningtechnologies,forexample,magneticresonanceimaging(MRI).Onepossiblereasonforthe
lackofremotetechnologiestoaccessthebrainisthatmuchofthisareaofresearchhasbeenclassified
sincethe1950sandhasbeenofflimitstounclassifiedresearchers.Sincethen,onlytheUSgovernment
hasbeendevelopingtechnologiesforremoteaccessofthebraintoanysignificantextent.
Tosummarize,thefollowingwillbeshownbelow.Thefourmajorareasofneurosciencethatareessential
forneuroweaponsdevelopmenthavebeenlargelymissingfrommainstreamneuroscienceresearchfirst,
thebrainbiologyandbehaviorrelationshipsecond,thestillundevelopedandrudimentarybioelectricity
researchthird,bioelectromagneticsresearchonthebrainwhichseemstoprovideamethodtoremotely
communicatewith,influenceandperhapsevencontrolthebrainandfourth,thebioelectricaltechnologies
notbiochemicaltechnologieswhichallowforremoteordirectaccesstothebrain.Thenextsectionsarea
chronologyofthedevelopmentofthebasicsciencerequiredtodevelopneuroweaponsinclassifiedand
unclassifiedneuroscienceresearchsinceWorldWarII.
3.Thedevelopmentofbioelectricityinneuroscience
Bioelectricityinneurosciencehasrootsinthestudyofelectricityinmedicineandbothhavefacedextreme
controversy.Sincetheeighteencentury,whenBenjaminFranklininvestigatedelectricityinmedicineand
concludeditwasacharlatansgameithasremainedhighlycontroversial.51In1910,theCarnegie
FoundationconductedareviewofU.S.medicaleducationanditdismissedthe"unscientific''useofelectric
devicessomebutnotallwereofquestionablemedicalvalueandalsoanymedicalpracticenotbasedon
theprevailingbiochemicaltheory.52Soallmentionsofmedicaldevicesbasedonbioelectricityweredriven
6/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
fromtheclassroom.53However,somemedicalelectricityhasbeenestablishedasvalid,asshownbelow.
Althoughtherewaslittleinterminglingbetweentraditionalbiologyandthestudyofelectricity,Nobel
LaureateAlbertSzentGyorgyiconductedresearchonsolidstatephysicsinbiologyandanothertypeof
electricitybesidestheioniccurrentinneuronsdescribedabove,knownassemiconduction.Forexample,
semiconductionisfoundinmostcomputerstodayitsimportanceinbiologyisthatthecurrentissmallbut
itcancarryinformationratherthanenergyandtravellongdistances.54
Intheearly1940s,SzentGyorgyiproposedanideathatwaspublishedinScienceandNaturethatproteins
maybesemiconductorsandthismightprovetobethebasisofthephenomenonoflife.55Thepaper
createdmuchexcitementbutthetheorywasrejectedontheoreticalgroundsthescientificcommunitylost
interestandtheresearchlackedfunding.Nevertheless,SzentGyorgyistheorylaterprovedtobevalid,
althoughtherewasnointerestinpursuingtheresearch.56Inthelate1970s,SzentGyorgyiprovideda
possibleexplanationforwhyhisresearchwasneverfollowedupinmainstreamneuroscience:Tosumup,
therearefourdimensionswithwhichthebiologistmustbeconcerned:macroscopic,microscopic,
molecular,andsubmolecularorelectronic.Biologyreadilyfollowedphysicsintothefirstthree,buttook
practicallynocognizanceofthefourth.57
SzentGyorgyiunderstoodthatbiologyincludedavarietyofelectricalproperties,however,mostbiologists
havefocusedonlyonbasicbioelectricitywhileconcentratingmostoftheirresearchonthemanyother
areasofbiologytobestudied.Significantly,oneofthefoundingfathersofneuroscienceunderstoodthe
importanceofthemanyelectricalpropertiesofthebrain.Intheearly1960s,FrancisSchmittwas
instrumentalinestablishingthefieldofmodernneuroscience.58Inajournalarticle,Schmittdescribed
promisingfutureresearchthatincludedbioelectricitywithanemphasisontheelectricalpropertiesofthe
brainsuchassemiconductivity,EMRbioeffectsandelectrostaticfields.59Significantly,Schmittcitedand
recommendedSzentGyorgyisresearchasapromisingareatopursue.However,Schmitts
recommendationsonbioelectricityinneuroscienceresearchhavenotbeenfolloweduptoanysignificant
extent.
Anotherexampleoftheoverallrejectionofbioelectricityisthe1950sbiophysicsbubblewhichburstinthe
1960s.60Forashorttime,biophysicswhichincludedbioelectricityexperiencedashortbiophysicsboom
inthe1950swhichincludedmultidisciplinaryresearchbyphysicistsandbiologistsonthestudyofnerveand
brainfunction.ArchibaldHill,DetlevBronkandSchmitt,citedabove,wereallprominent
neurophysiologists,scientificadministratorsandmilitaryadvisorswhopromotedtheimportanceof
biophysicsduringandafterWorldWarII.61Inthemid1950s,Schmitt,adirectorintheUSNational
InstituteofHealth,(NIH)unsuccessfullyattemptedtoimplementbiophysicsresearchasamajorareaof
governmentresearchonthesamefootingasbiochemistryormolecularbiology.62However,government
documentsindicatethatNIHbiochemistsrejectedthisapproachinvariousways.63Inthelate1950s,
biochemistsincludedphysicalchemistryintheirresearchandthisseemstohavecontributedtothe
disappearanceofbiophysicsresearchinthe1960s.64
Significantly,sinceWorldWarII,althoughmostneuroscientistsonlystudythebrainthroughbiochemical
research,USgovernmentscientistsconductingclassifiedneuroscienceresearchareknowntohaveutilized
EMRtechnologiesandbioelectricityaswellasbiochemistrytostudythebrain.Toexplain,the1940sledto
thediscoveryofsemiconductors,theinventionoftransistorsandintegratedcircuits,andtheinventionof
thecomputer.Inthe1950s,quantumphysics,electricalengineeringandsolidstatephysicsledtoclassified
researchonradar,NationalSecurityAgency(NSA)surveillancecapabilitiesandsatellitereconnaissance.
Radar,NSAsurveillanceandsatellitereconnaissancerequiredEMRtechnologiestodevelopthecapabilityof
remotesensing,detectionofforeigncommunicationssignalsandmore.AsHill,themilitaryadvisorcited
aboveexplained,radarworkwouldbeusefulpreparationforacareerinbiophysics.65Infact,the
physiologistAlanHodgkin,oneofthreementobecomea1963Nobellaureatefortheionichypothesisof
neuronsinthebrain,discussedabove,appliedhissecretWorldWarIIresearchonradartoconstructing
electronicequipmentfordetectingthetinyelectricalsignalsofsquidbrains.66Hodgkinwasoneofthefew
scientistsknowntohaveappliedhiswartimephysicsresearchtounclassifiedneuroscienceresearch,with
greatsuccess.
AmajorportionofphysicspapersafterWorldWarIIremainclassified67andmajorareasofphysicsthat
couldcontributetothedevelopmentofresearchonthebioelectricityofthebrainremainunavailableto
unclassifiedresearchers.PaulForman,authorofajournalpaperonquantumelectronicsfornational
securitystated:Duringthe1950sthecumulativenumberofannouncedandavailablenumberofpapers
[thatwere]properlypublishedinUSphysicsjournals[was]about50,000butitwasprobablyonlysome
7/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
smallpercentageofthe(unknown)numberofsecurityclassifiedreportsinphysicsanditstechnical
applicationspreparedinthatdecade.68Furthermore,classifiedscientificwarresearch,whichconcentrates
onnationalsecurityobjectives,isdifferentinstylefromunclassifiedpeacetimeresearchinwar,research
goalswereset,deadlinesweretightbutresourceswerenoproblemtheonlythingthatmatteredwerethe
researchgoals.69
Asmentionedabove,sincethe1950s,onlytheUSgovernmenthasbeendevelopingtechnologiesfor
remoteaccessofthebraintoanysignificantextent.Inthe1980s,RichardCesaro,deputydirectorfor
advancedsensorsatDARPAstatedthatanimalexperimentsinthe1960sand1970sconfirmedmicrowaves
canpenetratethebrainandwithmodulationmaybeabletocarryinformationtoinfluencethebrain.70
ClassifiedresearchsuchastheDARPAEEGresearchisbasedonthebioelectricalpropertiesofthebrain
whichseemtoallowforremotesurveillancein1976,DARPAreportedtoCongressthatmindreading
machinesarebeginningtodecipherapersonsbrainwavesorEEG.71Agencyscientistsstatedthatcurrent
technologiesrequireelectrodesplacedonthescalp,however,theydescribedmagneticbrainwavesthat
couldbedetectedafewfeetawayandgreaterdistancescouldbeachievedinthe1980s.72Itisnotknown
whethertheDARPAresearchonremoteaccesstothebrainwaseverdeveloped.
AsDr.IchijiTasakiwroteinhis1982book,Physiologyandelectrochemistryofnervefibers:Oneofthe
difficultiesencounteredinwritingthisbookhasbeenthatmanystudentsofbiologyandmedicinearenot
sufficientlyfamiliarwiththebasicconceptsinthermodynamicsandelectrochemistry.Itseemslikelythat
neuroscientistsdonotstudybeyondthebasicphysicsoftheireducationalrequirements.Itbecomes
obviousthatbiophysicsandbioelectricitycouldhavebutdidnotbecomeasignificantpartofmainstream
neuroscienceresearch.
3.1Bioelectricityandtheneurondoctrine
Bioelectricityinneurosciencehasbeenmetwithfurtheroppositionfromanunlikelysource,the
neuroscientiststhemselveswhodonotwanttolookbeyondestablisheddoctrineseventhoughtheyhave
beenshowntobelacking.Theneurondoctrineisafundamentaltenantofmodernneuroscienceitstates
thattheneuronistheprimaryfunctionalsignalingunitofthebrainandconnectswithotherneurons.73This
isalsotheprinciplebehindthesocalledconnectionistmodelconnectionismisaninfluentialschoolof
neurosciencethought,aswillbeshownbelow.Theneurondoctrineistaughtineveryneurosciencetextbook
today,74however,itisconsideredincompleteandtoosimplistictoexplainhowbrainbiologyisrelatedto
humanbehavior,withoutextendingitsprinciples.75Thisisnothappeningandsomeneuroscientistssaythat
itshouldbe.76Theactionpotentialwhichismadeupoftheioniccurrentoftheneurondescribedinthe
NobelPrizewinningionichypothesiscitedabove,remainsthemoststudiedareaofbioelectricityin
neuroscience.However,bioelectricityisbasedonthelawsofphysicswhichstatethereisnoelectricity
withoutelectromagneticandmagneticfields,includinginthebrain.Therefore,besidestheactionpotential,
bioelectricityofthebrainalsorequiresthestudyofinteractionsofelectricity,magnetismand
electromagnetisminthebrainandmeasuringandstudyinghowthebraincommunicateswithelectrical
currents,electricsignals,semiconduction,directandalternatingcurrents,EMR,magneticsignalsand
more.
Fordecades,neuroscientistshaveknownthatbrainelectricityismuchmorethanjustioniccurrentsinthe
neuron.Nevertheless,theneurondoctrineprevailedthroughoutthetwentiethcentury77andithadthe
effectofpreventinganysignificantresearchondiscoveriesofadditionalmethodsofbioelectricalbrain
communicationsystems.In1961,RobertGalambos,aneurophysiologist,wrotethatthedecadesof
researchontheneuronanditsactionpotentialhasnotandwillnotprovideanexplanationforhuman
behaviorsuchasrememberinganame.78Theneurondoctrineandtheneuronsactionpotentialwillnever
beabletoexplainhowthebrainworks.79TheodoreBullock,anotherpioneeringneuroscientist,echoed
Galambosina1996journalarticle,describingtheneurondoctrinesgripoverneuroscienceasnearly
absolute.80Regardingtheelectricityofthebrainlittleelsebuttheneurondoctrineandtheneuronsaction
potentialareacceptedasvalidinmainstreamneurosciencetoday.Ina2005sciencemagazinearticle,The
MythofMindControl,WalterFreeman,aneuroscientistattheUniversityofCaliforniaatBerkeley,also
explainedthatthefocusontheneurondoctrineismisplacedandotherbioelectricityapproachesshouldbe
consideredsuchasfurtherstudyofEMRbioeffects.81
Withoutadoubt,bioelectricityresearchremainedrudimentaryandnarrowlyfocusedontheneuron
doctrine,ioniccurrentsandactionpotentials.Itistruethatsomeneuroscientistshavemadesignificant
progressonlesserknownbioelectricityresearchotherthantheneurondoctrine,however,theresearch
8/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
remainseitherasmallpartofneuroscienceresearchasawhole,oritissidelinedandmarginalized,with
someoftheresearchconsideredfringescience.82
Nowthelimitsthattheneurondoctrinehasplacedonbioelectricityresearchseemstobeextendingto
majorareasoffutureneuroscienceresearchfundedbytheUSgovernment.Inhis2013stateoftheunion
address,PresidentObamaproposedaBrainMappingProjectwhichisbasedontheneurondoctrineandthe
connectionistmodel.83AninterviewofColumbiaUniversitysRaphaelYuste,includedthisdescriptionofthe
project:Bymappingcircuitactivity,Yustethinksresearcherscan"discoverpatternsthatarethephysical
representationandoriginofmentalstatesofthoughts,forexample,ormemories."84Yusteexplainedthat
researcherswanttochartafunctionalmodelofthebrainbymappingeachofthebillionsofneuronsinthe
humanbrainandobservingtheiractions.NeuroscientistsacknowledgethatObamasbrainprojectwilltake
decadestocomplete.
ItisalsosignificantthatObamasBrainMappingProject,whichisnowapartoftheBRAINInitiative85has
focusedondevelopinginvasiveelectronictechnologiessuchasnanoprobesandwirelessmicrocircuitsthat
willfloatfreelyinthebrain.Theproposedtechnologiestoaccessthebraininvolvephysicalcontact,
invasiveproceduresorbulkymachinesandcannotbedoneremotely.DARPAwillhavesomeinfluenceon
theBRAINInitiativetheagencyisfunding40millionofapproximately132millionofthestartupfunding.
Itseemslikelythatthelimitsonbioelectricityresearchbytheneurondoctrinewillcontinue.
3.2Threerevolutionsinscience
AsShepardexplainedabove,therevolutionary1950ssetthecourseformodernneuroscience.Inthe
1950s,threerevolutionsinsciencethebiologyrevolution,psychologysbehavioristrevolutionandthe
cognitiverevolutionresultedintumultuouschangesforneuroscience.Unclassifiedneurosciencedeveloped
withafocusonmolecularbiologyandbiochemistryandasignificantlackofbothbioelectricityandalsothe
studyofthebrainbiologybehaviorrelationship.86Asdescribedintheprevioussection,neurosciencesince
the1960shasfocusedonbiologyandbiochemistryoverbiophysics.Thissectionwilllookathow
neuroscienceisdefinedastherelationshipofbrainbiologytohumanbehavior,however,neuroscientistsin
the1960sandbeyondhavefocusedonbehavioralapproachestothestudyofthebrainwithnostudyofits
relationshiptothebiologyorbiochemistryofthebrain.The1950swasthebeginningofthebiology
revolution.87Thebiologyrevolutioninscienceandthecognitiverevolutioninpsychologytookoffinthe
1960sandsincethen,molecularbiology,cognitivepsychologyandbiochemistryhaveremainedthe
dominantareasofresearchinneuroscience.88Asexplainedabove,thegreatinterestinbiophysicsinthe
1950sdidnotlastthroughthe1960s.89
Althoughthestudyofbioelectricityisequallyasimportantasthestudyofbiochemistyofthe
electromagneticbrain,inunclassifiedneuroscienceresearch,bioelectricitywasabsorbedbybiochemistry,
andmolecularbiology.Today,themajorareasofresearchthathavedominatedneurosciencearecellular
andmolecularbiology,cognitivepsychologyandsystemsneuroscience,whichdevelopedintobrain
imaging.90Forexample,in2012,therewere40,000membersofAmericanSocietyforNeurosciencewith
massiverepresentationofmolecularbiology,cognitivepsychologyandbrainimaging.91[M]olecular
biologyisnowexpectedtotakethedominantroleinthetwentyfirstcenturythatphysicsplayedinthe
twentieth.92
Additionally,sincethe1950s,thebehavioristrevolutionhashadthesignificantimpactofpreventingstudy
oftherelationshipofbrainbiologytobehavior,untilthelastfewdecades.Fromtheearlytwentiethcentury
throughthe1960s,thebehaviorismmovementdominatedpsychology.Behaviorismincludedexperiments
utilizingforexample,stimulusresponseandobservablebehaviorstudies.Significantly,behaviorism
excludedanystudyofbiologicalfactorsandbrainprocesses.Inthe1950s,prominentscientistswerealso
activelysupportingthebehavioristapproachinCIAmindcontrolresearch.Forexample,JollyWest,aCIA
scientistandthedirectoroftheUniversityofCaliforniaatLosAngelesNeuropsychiatricInstitute,was
instrumentalinpromotingbehaviorism.TherewereseveralCIAscientistsincludingHaroldWolffandEwen
Cameron,andotherswhowittinglyandunwittinglywerereceivingCIAfundsfortheresearch.93Thishad
theoveralleffectoflimitingresearchonthebrainbiologyrelationship.
Inthe1960s,theinabilityofbehaviorismtoexplaincognitivefactorssuchasintelligenceandpersonality
ledtoitsdownfall.Afterthe1960s,itsrestrictingeffectonbiologicalcausesofbehaviorremainedin
evidence,fordecades.Onepsychologistexplained:Advocatesofbiologicalapproachestopsychological
problemsfoundlittlefinancialsupport,littleacademicencouragement,andfewoutletsinpsychological
publications.94Thecognitiverevolutionreplacedbehaviorismandbyjoiningthebiologyrevolution,
9/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
cognitivistsbegantostudymentalprocessesinthebrain,althoughprimarilywithindirecttoolssuchas
brainscanningtechnologies.Twomajorareasofcognitivepsychologydevelopedmolecularbiologyand
systemsbiology,whichisthestudyofmappingelementsofcognitivefunctionontospecificbrainareas.95
ThebrainscanningtechnologiessuchasthePETscansandFMRIenabledresearchonsystemsbiologyto
flourish.Althoughitisslowlystartingtochange,cognitivescientistshavestudiedthementalprocessesbut
haveignoredbrainbiology,insteadtakingafunctionalistapproachbasedonthebeliefthatthefunctioning
ofapersoncanbestudiedindependentlyofotherfactors.96Thefunctionalistapproachinneuroscience
remainedasignificantinfluence,forexampleinconnectionistresearch97neuroscientistswhofocusedtheir
researchonthebiologyofthebrainhavenotembracedtheconnectionistapproach,98forreasonssuchas
theconnectionistmodelingdidnotusuallymatchhowthebrainfunctionsinreality.99Thus,boththe
cognitiverevolutionandalsotheconnectionistapproachhavebeenslowtoreducetheenormousgap
betweenthestudyofbrainbiologyandhumanbehaviorthatbeganwithbehaviorism.
Thestudyofconsciousness,whichisanotherareaofstudyofthebrainbehaviorrelationship,hasbeen
subjecttocenturiesoldreligiousandphilosophicaldebates.Thescientificapproachtothestudyof
consciousnesswasconsideredheresy100andthestudyofconsciousnesswasofflimitsinpsychologyand
alsoneurosciencethroughoutmostofthe20thcentury.101Inthelate1980s,FrancisCrick,aphysical
chemistandNobellaureatefordiscoveryofthestructureofDNA,andChristofKoch,aneuroscientist,
begantostudyandpublishpapersonconsciousness,inspiteofthecompleterejectionofsuchresearchby
mostoftheirpeers.102Thescienceofconsciousnessremainsarelativelysmallareaofneuroscience
researchtoday.103BenjaminLibet,aneuroscientist,describedthattheUSNationalInstitutesofHealth
(NIH)andtheNationalScienceFoundation(NSF)wouldnotfundconsciousnessresearch.104Atthesame
time,Libetstatedthatalargenumberofinternationallyprominentfiguresinneurosciencesupportedhis
consciousnessresearch.105Fordecades,mostneuroscientistsdidnotbelieveanythingcouldbefoundinthe
studyofbrainbiologyandbehaviorrelationship.106Crickaskedsomeofhispeersinneurosciencewhy
theythinkthiswayreasonsgivenincludedthatthebrainissocomplicated,examiningthebrainclosely
wontresultinsignificantprogress.107Crickstatedthathefoundthisreasoningmostpeculiar.108
Briefanalysisandconclusionsofthefirstoftwocoverstories
Itcanbearguedthatthenewevidenceofa1950stheoryforhowthebrainworksiscompellingevidence
thatshouldbeconsideredinanyevaluationofwhetherneuroweaponsaresciencefictionorsciencefact.
Theconsensusthatneuroweaponsaresciencefictionisbasedontheassumptionthatsecretneuroweapons
researchwouldadvanceatasimilardevelopmentrateasunclassifiedneuroscience.Nevertheless,this
positioncannowbeshowntobesignificantlyflawed.Missingfromtheconsensusisthefollowing
information.Unclassifiedneuroscientistshadnotheoryforhowthebrainworkstoguidethem.Themajor
areasofunclassifiedneuroscienceresearch,molecularbiology,cognitiveneuroscienceandbrainimaging
research,whichhadtheirbeginningsinthe1950s,remainthedominantareasofresearchinneuroscience
today.Atthesametime,researchonthebioelectricityofthebrainwiththeexceptionoftheextensive
researchontheactionpotentialoftheneuronhasremainedclassifiedinthe1950sCIAmindcontrol
programsandDARPAprogramstodeveloptechnologiesforremoteaccesstothebrain.Itcanbeargued
thattheextremelyskeweddevelopmentofneuroscienceresearchdescribedabovemayhavecomeaboutin
largeparttoallowonlyclassifiedCIAscientiststodevelopneuroweaponsandthereforemaintaincomplete
secrecy.
Asaresult,unclassifiedneuroscientistscouldonlystudythebiochemistryofthebrain,evenlessso
becauseoftherestrictionsimposedbytheneurondoctrineandtherestrictionsonthestudyofthebrain
biologyandbehaviorrelationship.Withouttoolsbasedonbioelectricitytoremotelyaccessthebrain,few
humanexperimentscanbedoneethicallyandneuroscientistsconductingunclassifiedresearchcanonly
studythebrainindirectly,forexamplewithbrainscanningtechnologies.Atthesametime,theevidence
suggeststhatUSgovernmentscientistsconductingclassifiedneuroweaponsresearchhadtremendous,
almostunbelievableadvantages.Alloftherequirementsforthedevelopmentofneuroweaponscitedabove
wereavailable:a1950stheoryforhowthebrainworks,thestudyofbothbiochemistryandalso
bioelectricityofthebrain,thebrainbiologyandbehaviorrelationshipandmoreadvancedtechnologiesfor
remoteaccessthebrain.
Areasonableconclusionwouldseemtobethatthedevelopmenttrendsfoundinclassifiedandunclassified
neuroscienceresearchareeitheranalarmingcoincidenceorastrongindicationthatthescienceof
neuroweaponshavebeenwellhiddenandwellknownfordecadesbutonlytoUSgovernmentscientists
conductingsecretresearch.Furthermore,unclassifiedresearchgivesglimpsesofwhatispossible:the
10/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
expectationisthatclassifiedresearchintobioelectricitywouldbefarmoredeveloped,asfurthershownin
thenextsection.
4.ThesecondoftwocoverstoriesEMRbioeffectspolicy
Sincethe1950s,theUSgovernmenthasendorsedanEMRbioeffectspolicywhichstatesthatthereareno
provenEMRbioeffects,onlyheatingeffects.Thissectionpresentsthefollowing.ThescienceofEMR
bioeffectsisbrieflysummarized,thenasummaryofthescienceofEMRbioeffectsforneuroweaponsis
described.Next,abriefchronologyofsomeofthehistoryofEMRbioeffectspolicy,includingabriefhistory
ofbioelectromagnetics,thescienceofEMRbioeffectsispresented.Additionally,itwillbeshownthatthere
arestrongindicationsthattheUSEMRbioeffectspolicyisconsequentialtotheColdWarhistoryofan
ongoingsecretarmsracebetweentheUSandRussiaoverneuroweapons.Ashortanalysisandconclusions
aregiven.
4.1ScienceofEMRbioeffects
Inthenineteenthcentury,JamesClerkMaxwelldiscoveredthatallphysicalphenomena,fromenergiesto
chemicalandsolidbodiesarebuiltonoscillations.WithoscillationcomesEMR.Maxwelldiscoveredall
wavesaremathematicallyidenticalwithrelationshipsalongacontinuumknownastheelectromagnetic
spectrum,forexamplemicrowaves,lightandalsothekilohertzoscillationsbytheneuronsinthebrain.109
EMRbioeffectsarebasedonthefactthatelectricity,magnetismandelectromagnetismareinterconnected
phenomena,includinginthehumanbodyandthebrain.EMRbioeffectsarebasedonthewellestablished
factthatelectricalcurrents,(includingthoseinthebrain)produceelectromagneticfields.Thebraincan
alsobeinfluencedbyexternalelectricityandelectromagneticandmagneticfields.110Anexampleof
magneticsignalsthatcaninfluencebehavioristranscranialmagneticstimulation(TMS),amedicaltherapy
thatdirectstinymagneticsignalsatcertainareasofthebraintorelievedepression.
AlanFrey,aphysicist,neuroscientist,andoneofthefoundersoftheBioelectromagneticsSociety,wrote
thatEMRisubiquitousinbiologyandsignificantly,internalEMRsignalsaremodulatedwithinformationlike
aradioforbraincommunication:[L]ivingbeingsareelectrochemicalsystemsthatuseverylowfrequency
electromagneticfieldsineverythingfromproteinfoldingthroughcellularcommunicationtonervoussystem
function.TomodelhowEMfieldsaffectlivingbeings,onemightcomparethemtotheradioweusetolisten
tomusic....Thisisthemodelthatmuchbiologicaldataandtheorytellustouse.111
ThebasicscientificconceptbehindEMRbioeffectsisasfollows:Numerousindependentexperiments
reportedinthepeerreviewedjournalresearchliteratureconclusivelyestablishthatnonthermalbioeffects
oflowintensityEMfieldsdoindeedexist....ExtremelyweakEMfieldsmay,attheproperfrequencyand
siteofapplication,producelargeeffectsthatareeitherclinicallybeneficialorharmful.Somespecific
frequencieshavehighlyspecificeffectsontissuesinthebody,justasdrugshavetheirspecificeffectson
targettissues.112Significantly,a1991InternationalReviewoftheRedCross(ICRC)reportondirected
energyweaponsdescribedthesamefinding:Researchworkhasalsorevealedthatpathologicaleffects
closetothoseinducedbyhighlytoxicsubstancescouldbeproducedbyelectromagneticradiationevenat
verylowpower,especiallythoseusingapulseshapecontainingalargenumberofdifferent
frequencies.113
A2010reviewofEMRbioeffectsliteratureconcludedthatalthoughEMRbioeffectsscienceremains
unsettled,thereisnodoubtthatbiosystemscanbeaffectedbyEMFsatseverallevels:Thereisalsolittle
doubtthatbiosystemscanbethesourceofEMFs.Themainquestionathandiswhetherbiosystemsuse
EMFforapurposefulinteraction(communication)andifsoatwhatlevelofthebioorganismwillithappen?
Theamountofdatathatsupportthelatternotionisrapidlymounting.114Mostwouldagreethat
bioelectromagneticsisfundamentaltohumanbiologyandyetotherprevailingscientificviewpointsabout
EMRsupporttheargumentthisresearchisstillrudimentary:Eventhoughthebodyisbasicallyan
electrochemicalsystem,modernsciencehasalmostexclusivelybeenconcernedwiththechemical
aspect.115
4.2EMRbioeffectsforneuroweapons
Conventionalneurosciencemaintainsthatelectricityistheprimarycommunicationsysteminthebrain,
basedontheneurondoctrine.Asnotedabove,thecurrentstateofEMRbioeffectsresearchisthe
determinationofwhetherthebraincommunicatesinformationamongthebraincellswithelectromagnetic
wavesthataregivenoffandreceivedbythebraincells.Thisisunsettledscience,asmuchremainstobe
discoveredandunderstood.Thisistheareaofsciencethatisalsopoliticized,controversial,andclassified.
11/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
Nevertheless,inthe1980s,researchhadbeguntoestablishbothinternalandalsoexternalsourcesof
electromagneticradiation(EMR)cancommunicatewiththebrainandalterbehavior.116
EMRbioeffectsseemstobeimportantforbothfutureneuroweaponsandforsolvingthebrain'ssocalled
neuralcode.117LewisSlesin,editorofthetradepublicationMicrowaveNewsexplainedthatthesciencefor
EMRanditseffectonhumanbehaviorhasbeenestablishedandtheCIAsmindcontrolprogramshave
exploredwhetherEMRcantargetpeopleatadistance.118TheresultsoftheCIAresearcharenotknown
theresearchremainsclassified.119Aswillbeshown,thescienceofEMRseemstobeextremelyimportant
toUSnationalsecuritybecauseitprovidesthemostviablemethodknownforremoteaccesstothebrain.
Therefore,afewexamplesofthescienceofEMRbioeffectsresearchonthebrainasitrelatesto
neuroweaponsispresentednext.Theresearchhasheldgreatweaponspotentialfordecadesandwhatlittle
informationthatisavailableinunclassifiedresearchremainsextremelyrudimentaryandspeculative.
RobertBecker,oneofthefoundersofthescienceofbioelectromagneticsinthe1960s120andtwice
nominatedforaNobelPrizeforhisbioelectromagneticsresearch,121describedamajorscientificprinciple
ofbioelectromagnetics:
Themicrowavesalone(unmodulated)havenoeffect.Thetwotypesofmodulationthatare
biologicallyimportantarepulsedandamplitude.Modulationisthesecretoftransmitting
informationbymeansofelectromagneticfields.Itappearsthat[likeAMradio]thebodyalso
demodulatesthesignalwhenexposedtomodulatedradiofrequencyormicrowavefieldsthe
biologicaleffectisthatofthelowfrequencymodulation.Inthisview,allbiologicaleffects
areproducedbyELFfrequencies.Thismakessense,becausethebodysystemsthatpickup
electromagneticfieldare"tuned"tonaturalfrequenciesbetween0and30Hz.122
Inthe1980s,Beckerdescribedamilitaryreportthatstatedmicrowavepulsesappearedtoproduce
stimulationinthecentralnervoussystem.123BeckerstatedthestimulationwascomparabletoJose
Delgadosresearch,citedabove,thatfoundbrainimplantscouldberemotelycontrolledtoelectrically
stimulateananimal'sbraintocontrolvariouscomplexbehaviours,instinctsandemotions.124Inother
words,thesameprecisebehavioraleffectsproducedbystimulationofbraincellsbyimplantscouldbe
producedbyEMRalonedirectedatthebrainwithoutimplants.Howeverpromisingtheresearchis,there
hasbeennofollowupinunclassifiedresearch.
ThefollowingclassifiedCIAresearchplanwasreleasedundertheFreedomofInformationAct.This
researchhasyettobeexperimentallyproven,however,ifproven,precisemindcontrolwouldbepossible:
Theexperimenter,J.F.Schapitz,stated:"Inthisinvestigationitwillbeshownthatthe
spokenwordofthehypnotistmayalsobeconveyedbymodulatedelectromagneticenergy
directlyintothesubconsciouspartsofthehumanbraini.e.,withoutemployinganytechnical
devicesforreceivingortranscodingthemessagesandwithoutthepersonexposedtosuch
influencehavingachancetocontroltheinformationinputconsciously.Asapreliminarytest
ofthegeneralconcept,Schapitzproposedrecordingthebrainwavesinducedbyspecific
drugs,thenmodulatingthemontoamicrowavebeamandfeedingthembackintoan
undruggedperson'sbraintoseeifthesamestateofconsciousnesscouldbeproducedbythe
beamalone....
Thesecondexperimentwastobetheimplantingofhypnoticsuggestionsforsimpleacts,like
leavingthelabtobuysomeparticularitem,whichweretobetriggeredbyasuggestedtime,
spokenword,orsight.Subjectsweretobeinterviewedlater."Itmaybeexpected,"Schapitz
wrote,"thattheyrationalizetheirbehaviorandconsiderittobeundertakenoutoftheirown
freewill."125
Significantly,ascitedabove,theICRCandthereportfortheNIHalsodescribedEMRbioeffectsthatactlike
drugs.Additionally,ina2002USDepartmentofCommerce,ConvergingTechnologiesForImprovingHuman
Performance,RobertAsherofSandiaLaboratoriesproposedresearchontheeffectsofEMRonthebrain:
Thisinvestigationmayspawnanewindustryinwhichthehumanisenhancedbyexternallyapplied
electromagneticpulsessoshapedastoenhancespecificbiochemicalchangeswithinthebodywithout
drugs.126
MichioKaku,aphysicist,explainedhowEMRcouldbeutilizedtodevelopthecapabilitiesthatare
fundamentaltoneuroweapons:Inprinciplethebrainisatransmitteroverwhichourthoughtsare
broadcastintheformoftinyelectricalsignalsandelectromagneticwaves....Radiowavescanbebeamed
12/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
directlyintothehumanbraintoexciteareasofthebrainknowntocontrolcertainfunctions.127Kaku
explainedthatinthe1950s,WilderPenfield,aneurosurgeonfoundthatifheusedelectrodestostimulate
thebrain,hispatientswouldreporteffectsashearingvoicesorseeingthingsthatoriginatedintheir
mind.128Today,Penfieldsresearchremainsrudimentaryinitsdevelopment,neverthelessKakumadethe
followingconclusion:Inthefutureitmaybepossibletobeamelectromagneticsignalsatprecisepartsof
thebrainthatareknowntocontrolspecificfunctions."129
In2010,theprominentphysicistFreemanDysonspeculated:Theessentialfactsthatwillmakedetailed
observationorcontrolofabrainpossiblearemicrowavesignalsandtwotoolsfirstmicroscopicradio
transmittersandreceiversandsecond,atooltoconvertneuralsignalsintoradiosignalsandvice
versa.130Numerousfurtherspeculativeexamplesoftherudimentaryleveloftheunclassifiedscienceare
available.
4.3ChronologyofEMRbioeffectspolicy
ManyarguethatthestudyofEMRbioeffects,calledbioelectromagnetism,hasbeendiscreditedduringthe
firsthalfofthetwentiethcenturyandhasnoscientificvalidity.131PhysiciansdiscoveredthationisingEMR
frequenciessuchasinxrayscouldproducecancerandthatnonionisingEMRfrequenciesbelowlightdid
notseemtocausecancer.ThereforethegeneralconclusionwasthatnonionisingEMRhadnobiological
effects:Classicalconceptsofphysicssimplydidnotallowforanymeaningfulinteractionbetweenany
formofnonionisingelectromagneticradiationandlivingorganisms.132Inaddition,sinceWorldWarII,
theDepartmentofDefense(DoD)hasheavilyreliedonradarandotherEMRtechnologies.Somearguethat
topreventlawsuitsoverpossiblehealtheffectsfromexposuretoEMR,theDODmaintainapolicythatthere
arenoprovenbiologicaleffectsfromEMRonlyheatingeffects.133Theelectricalpowerlinecompanies
havealsomaintainedthattherearenoprovenEMRbioeffects.134Inbothcases,anEMRbioeffectspolicy
avoidslargelegalpayoutsforpossiblehealtheffectsfromexposuretounhealthylevelsofradarorfrom
livingnearpowerlines.135
Fordecades,theAmericanPhysicalSociety(APS)hasmaintainedthepolicythatEMRdoesnotinteractwith
humanbiologyincludingthebrainandthereareonlyheatingeffects.136TheAPShasstatedthatthe
scientificbasisforthepolicyisthatthereisnoprovenphysicalmechanismtoexplainbioeffectsofEMRso
therecantbeanyEMRbioeffectsexceptheating.137Thisreasoninghasbeencriticizedonthegroundsthat
mechanismstoexplainEMRbioeffectsmayexisteventhoughphysicistshaventdiscoveredthemyet.138
Manyexperimentaleffectsareshowninsciencewithoutatheoreticalbackground.Forexample,gravity
remainsanunexplainedphenomenonalthoughitobviouslyexists.Anotherexample,scientistsdonthavea
theoryforhowthebrainworksbutallknowthatthebraindoeswork.
Morerecently,somehavearguedthatexposuretomicrowaveradiationfromcellphonesandcellphone
towersmaybeharmfultoapersonshealth.In2012,areportreviewed1800newstudiesonEMR.The
reportreferredtoradiofrequencyradiationandwirelesstechnologiesandconcluded:Overall,thereis
reinforcedscientificevidenceofriskwherethereischronicexposuretolowintensityelectromagneticfields
andtowirelesstechnologies(radiofrequencyradiationincludingmicrowaveradiation).139Cellphone
companiesalsoseemtohaveaninterestinmaintainingtheEMRbioeffectpolicytoavoidlawsuitsfrom
possibleEMRhealtheffects.140
Theseprevailingscientificviewpointshavebeenfirmlyinplacefordecades,somesinceWorldWarII,and
likelycontributedtothecurrentconsensusthatthereisnoprovenscientificbasisestablishingEMR
neuroweaponscouldbeaseriousthreatcomparabletotheatomicbomb.Despitethedecadesoffundingfor
secretEMRneuroweaponsresearchbeginningwiththe1950sCIAmindcontrolexperiments,theweapons
arenotconsideredasignificantthreattonationalsecuritytoday.Thisishighlightedbyrecentcivilian
reportsandarticlesonneuroscienceapplicationstonationalsecurityonlyexaminingrudimentarydirected
energyweaponsunderdevelopment.141However,thenextsectionswillhighlightthereasonswhythe
developmentofthescienceofEMRbioeffectshasremainedrudimentary.
4.4The1950sEMRbioeffectsnationalsecuritythreat
Inthe1950s,theUSandformerSovietUnion(USSR,calledRussiaforthispaper)seemedtohave
discoveredtheweaponspotentialofEMR.In1953,RussiabeganbombardingtheUSEmbassyinMoscow
withlowlevelEMRandfivepresidentskeptitsecret.142TheCIAanalyzedthebombardmentoftheUS
Embassywithmicrowavesanddiscovereditmatchedthosemicrowavecharacteristicsmentionedin
13/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
publishedSovietexperimentsinvolvingbehavioraleffectsinrats.143MiltonZaretwascontactedbySamuel
Koslov(theadvisortothePresidentonthisissue)ZarethadpreviouslyconductedresearchfortheCIA
whichsuggesteditmightbepossibleformicrowavestobeusedtocreatemindcontrolweapons.Zarets
experimentsfortheCIAreplicatedSovietratexperimentsonthebehaviouraleffectsofmicrowaveswhich
weretranslatedintothedifferentscientificnomenclatureusedintheUnitedStates,likeamicrowave
RosettaStone.144Thisisoneofseveralindicationsthatdespitetheprevailingscientificviewpointsonthe
lackofEMRbioeffects,someEMRbioeffectsresearchwasscientificallysoundanditwasalsoasignificant
nationalsecurityconcern.In1965,Koslov,whoalsoworkedfortheAdvancedResearchProjectsAgency
(ARPA,nowknownasDARPA),ranthePentagon'sProjectPandorawhichsecretlystudiedthebehavioral
andbiologicaleffectsoflowlevelmodulatedmicrowaves.145
RossAdey(apioneerofbioelectromagneticmedicine),Zaretandotherbioelectromagneticsexpertswere
consultedbyUSgovernmentagenciesorconductedsecretworkonProjectPandora.146Theseexperts
foundthatEMRaffectedthenervoussystemhoweverKoslovlaterdestroyedtheProjectPandora
documents147,reportinghedidnothaveenoughroomtostorethem.148Koslovconcluded,without
explanation,thattheMoscowmicrowavebeamwasnotaneffectivemindcontrolweapon149however,a
recentWashingtonPostarticlestatedthatProjectPandoraconclusionswereuncertain:'Theresultswere
mixed,andtheprogramwasplaguedbydisagreementsandscientificsquabbles.' 150Atthesametime,CIA
EMRmindcontrolresearchwasconsideredofprimaryimportancetonationalsecurity.151Forexample,ata
1977UScongressionalhearingonCIAmindcontrolprograms,CIAmedicaldoctorSidneyGottliebs
testimonydiscussedCIAmindcontrolprograms,thepossibilityofmindcontrolusingradiowavesandthe
Embassybombardment:Itwasfelttobemandatoryandoftheutmosturgencyforourintelligence
organizationtoestablishwhatwaspossibleinthisfieldonahighprioritybasis. 152
4.51960sand1970sbioelectromagneticsresearchflourishes
Ascitedabove,studyoftheneurondoctrineandtheactionpotentialseemedtorestrictnearlyallother
possiblemethodsofelectricalbraincommunicationinunclassifiedneuroscienceresearch.Atthesame
time,theEMRbioeffectsresearchonthebrainseemedtothriveinclassifiedresearchandinRussia.For
example,a1961RussianpaperbyZ.V.GordontheorizedthatEMRledtochangesinratbraincells.153At
thattime,theUSmilitarycontrolledmostoftheEMRresearchfundingandmadethemajorpolicydecisions
aboutEMRhealthexposurelevelsandotherrelatedmatters.154TheUSmilitarywasconcernedaboutthe
RussianEMRbioeffectsbrainresearchandasaresult,USneurosciencestudiesinvolvingEMRbioeffects
werenolongerfundedinunclassifiedresearchandpublicdiscussionsofEMRbioeffectresearchwere
discouraged.155Asmentionedabove,secretmilitaryresearchwasincreasedtodetermineiftheRussians
weredevelopingEMRbasedmindcontrolforespionageorweaponspurposes.156Inthe1960sand1970s,
theelectromagneticaspectofneuroscienceresearchwaswellfundedandclassifiedbytheUS
government.157ItseemsclearthattheUSgovernmentwasawareoftheEMRresearchthatsuggestedthe
weaponspotentialofEMRbioeffects.
Furthermore,asmallnumberofscientistswereinstrumentalinestablishingthescientificbasisfor
bioelectromagneticmedicine.158Thebioelectromagneticsresearchersfoundtrulyremarkableinteractions
betweenelectromagneticfieldsandthebrainbuttherelevantexperimentswerehiddenfromviewbythe
ColdWar.159Asaresultofbothsecrecyandprevailingscientificthought,however,bioelectromagnetic
researchhasremainedunderfundedanddisregardedbythemainstreamscientificcommunity.160EMR
bioeffectsresearchhasevenbeencalledjunkscience,howeverasHenryLai,coeditorofElectromagnetic
BiologyandMedicineexplained,thelackoffundingmeansthatresearcherscantstayinthefieldfor
long161andconsequentlytheresearchsuffers.Inthe1960s,Frey,citedabove,testedmicrowaveradiation
onanimalsandfoundevidencethatelectricityseemstoaffectbrainactivity.162Freystatedthatthe
PentagonhiredscientistswhopublishedresearchdisputingFrey'sfindingswhileatthesametimerefusing
torevealtheirmethodologyanddata.163Moreover,inthe1970s,hisgovernmentcontractorstoldhimto
coveruphisresearchortheywouldterminatehiscontract.164Numerousbioelectromagneticsscientists
reportedsimilartreatmentbytheUSgovernment.165Atthattime,mostresearchers,including
neuroscientists,stillheldtheprevailingscientificviewpointsonthelackofprovenbiologicaleffectsof
EMR.166Thus,theweaponspotentialofthebioelectromagneticsresearchremainedoutofthepublicview.
4.6The1980saturningpointforbioelectromagneticsresearchers
14/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
Inthe1980s,bioelectromagneticsresearchersfeltthattheirresearchcouldleadtoEMRweapons
comparabletotheatomicbombafurtherindicationthatthestudyoftheelectromagneticaspectofthe
electrochemicalbrainseemedtobecriticaltonationalsecurity.167Theseresearchersdiscoveredthatwhen
informationwasembeddedontoacarrierEMRwaveitinducedthewidestvarietyofbiologicaleffects
althoughhowthishappenedwasnotknown.168Theirexperimentssuggestedexternallyapplied
electromagneticfieldshadascientificallymeasurableeffectonelectromagneticprocessesof
transformation,transfer,coding,andstorageofinformationinlivingsystemsincludinginthebrain.169
Inthe1980s,Cesaro,citedabove,helpedtomakesenseofthisdisregardedscience.Hestatedthata
microwaveweaponbasedonsuccessfulhumanexperimentswouldbemorepowerfulthantheatomic
bomb.170SeveralresearchersfeltthatalettershouldbewrittentothePresidentabouttheemerging
weaponspotentialofbioelectromagneticsresearch,similartothe1939letterwrittentoPresidentRoosevelt
abouttheweaponspotentialofnuclearphysics.171Asnotedabove,Beckercitedamilitaryreport
describingmicrowavepulseswiththecapabilityofprecisemindcontrolwithouttheneedforimplants172
andinthemid1980s,Beckerrecountedseveralresearcherssurmisedsuchaweaponwasapossibility.173
Mostwouldagreethatifdeveloped,suchaweaponcouldbecomparabletoanatomicbomb.
Beckerhadwitnesseddecadesofbioelectromagneticsresearch,thegrowingUSandRussianinterestinEMR
weaponsandexcessivegovernmentsecrecyincludinggovernmentdeceptionanddisinformationtechniques.
Inconversationwithanotherpioneerofbioelectromagneticsresearch(ProfessorA.R.Liboff),Becker
alwaysmaintainedthebeliefthatboththeUSandRussiangovernmentswereverymuchinvolvedinEMR
mindcontrolresearch.174BothBeckerandAdeyfeltthatelectromagneticmindcontrolwasinevitable.175
Ona1984BBCdocumentaryonProjectPandora,Beckersurmisedthattherecouldbeasupersecret
ManhattanProjecttodevelopEMRweaponsandthatthebestcoverstory,theofficialexplanationforsecret
governmentresearch,wouldbethatEMRweaponswerenotscientificallypossible.176Itseemsthat
Beckersspeculationwascorrect:theEMRbioeffectspolicyisaUSgovernmentofficialsciencepolicythat
deniesEMRbioeffectsandasshownbelow,themostprominentofexpertshavecitedtheEMRbioeffects
policytoclaimthatEMRneuroweaponsarenotpossible.
4.71990sandbeyondEMRneuroweaponsandexcessivesecrecy
Fordecades,themilitaryhasofficiallyendorsedtheEMRbioeffectspolicy.TheUSseemstohavegoneto
greatlengthstokeepEMRbioeffectsscienceanditsweaponspotentialoutofthepubliceye.However,with
thebreakupoftheSovietUnion,someintheUSmilitarythrewoutthisfiftyyearoldofficialpolicy.In
1997,theUSmilitarybeganprovidingnewfundingforthedevelopmentofnonlethalweaponsbasedonthe
biologicaleffectsofEMR.177Nevertheless,wellestablishedacademicscientificorganizationsandofficials,
includingtheUSAirForce,citedbelow,continuedtoendorsetheEMRbioeffectspolicy.
RichardGarwinisaphysicistandoneofthefoundersoftheUSNationalReconnaissanceOffice(NRO),the
agencythatconductssecretsatellitesurveillancefornationalsecuritypurposes.Inhis1999Councilon
ForeignRelations,(CFR)report,NonLethalTechnologies:ProgressandProspects,Garwinreportedthere
werealreadyestablishedmajorclassifiedprogramsthatincludedpsychologicalwarfare,information
warfareandnonlethalweapons.178Ina2004CouncilonForeignRelationsreport,Garwinrecommended
thatskilledengineersandscientistsworkondirectedenergy,electromagneticcoupling,modelingand
physiology.Hedescribedtheongoinginterserviceconflicts,theproblemofredundancy,aburdensome
secrecysystemandthelackofaccountabilityforweapons.179
Ina2005fortherecordemailtothisauthor,Garwinstatedthathasevaluatedelectromagneticweapons
fortheUSDefenseDepartmentseveraltimes,buttherearealwayscompartmentstowhichevenpeople
withhighlevelsecurityclearancesdonothaveaccess.180GarwincitedtheofficialEMRbioffectspolicyto
unequivocallydismissthepossibilityofEMRweaponsthatcouldtargetandcontrolthebrain.181TheEMR
bioeffectspolicyseemstoreachtothehighestlevelsofUSgovernment.
PerhapstheclearestexamplethatEMRbioeffectsaredisregardedinmainstreamneuroscienceisthe
following.In2001,agroupofexpertsincludingProfessorKennethFoster,wroteanarticleintheIEEE
Spectrum,anacademicelectronicengineeringjournal:Suchtechnology[newratimplanttechnology
capableoftransmittingsignalstoaratsbrainfromadistance]hadnothingtodowiththefantasiesofmind
controlbyelectromagneticfields,longastapleofsciencefictionandlatelyofconspiracytheoryWeb
sites.182Today,mostneuroscientistsareconvincedthatEMRbioeffectsonthebrainarefringescience.
15/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
In2004,TheLancetobituaryforAdeydescribedhisresearchshowingthatbraintissueissensitivetoEMR.
TheobituarynotedthatsomerejectedAdeyscontroversialresearchbycitingtheEMRbioeffectspolicy,
suchasFoster,oneoftheauthorsoftheIEEESpectrumarticleabove.However,othershaveconfirmed
AdeysresearchandthewriteroftheobituaryopinedthatAdeyscontroversialresearchwillsomeday
provetobetrue.183FostermayarguethattheUSgovernmentsEMRbioeffectspolicyhasnothingtodo
withneuroscience,however,inlightoftheevidencepresentedinthispaper,itcanbearguedthatthis
wouldappeartobeanexampleoftheEMRbioeffectspolicyutilizedasaUSgovernmentcoverstoryspread
byexperts.Fostersconclusionsomittwomainfactsfirst,thedecadesofhighlypoliticizedEMRbioeffects
researchandsecondly,thedecadesofUSgovernmentmonopolyoverunclassifiedandclassifiedEMR
bioeffectsresearchthiscombinationresultedinthenearlycompleterestrictionofEMRbioeffectsresearch.
Asexplainedabove,EMRbioeffectsseemtohavearoleinbrainfunctions,howevertheunclassified
researchremainsrudimentaryinitsdevelopment.
In2007,theofficialUSAFsciencepolicystatedthatitsEMRbioeffectspolicyisthattherearenonon
thermaleffectsofmicrowaves.184Atthesametime,DennisBushnell,chiefscientistatNASA'sLangley
ResearchCenter,hasdescribedmicrowaveattacksagainstthehumanbrainaspartoffuturewarfareina
2001presentationtotheNationalDefenseIndustrialAssociationabout"FutureStrategicIssues.185
RecentlytheprestigioussciencejournalNatureadmonishedtheUSAFinanopinioneditorialforclassifying
EMRbioeffectsresearchandstatedthatonlyweapons,notscienceshouldbeclassified.186
4.8Briefanalysisandconclusions
ItcanbearguedthattheEMRbioeffectscoverstoryisobsoleteevenastheUSgovernmentcontinuesto
endorseofficialEMRbioeffectspolicy.SinceWorldWarII,scientistshavehadfewoptionsforconducting
researchonEMRbioeffectsonthebrainthescientistswhodoconductEMRbioeffectsresearchface
governmentdiscreditingtactics,lossoffunding,ostracizingbythescientificcommunityandmore.Asa
resultoftheUSgovernmentsdominanceoverEMRbioeffectsresearch,theinfrastructurethatisnecessary
foranareaofsciencetoflourisharecompletelyabsentinthefieldofEMRbioeffectsresearchincluding:
consistentfunding,thedevelopmentofadvancedtechnologiesandadequatenumbersofacademicexperts
andconsistentstandardsforEMRbioeffectsacademicliterature.Mostscientistshavenowayofchallenging
theUSgovernmentpolicyofEMRbioffects.Nevertheless,EMRbioeffectsresearchhasafirmscientific
foundationinthestudyofbioelectromagnetics.Ratherthanafringeareaofscience,EMRbioeffects
researchremainsextremelyrudimentaryandhasbeenhighlyclassifiedandpoliticized.
AreasonablespeculationisthattheutilitarianCIAmindcontrolresearcherswouldhaverecognizedthe
potentialofEMRasalikelymethodforremotesurveillanceofthebrainandalsoEMRbioeffectsresearch
forinfluencingandcontrollinghumanbehaviorforuseinneuroweaponsdevelopment.Itcouldbeargued
thattheofficialEMRbioeffectspolicywasutilizedtopublicallyencouragethebeliefthatEMRonlyhada
thermaleffect.Atthesametime,theUSgovernmentcontinuedsecretresearchlookingatotherimpacts
suchasthepossibilityofalteringandinfluencingbehaviorevenmindcontrolandalsothepossibilityof
EMRforremotesurveillanceandtargetingofthebrain.
TheUSgovernmentsreasonsforimplementingtheEMRbioeffectsmaynotbeclearlyestablished,however
significantevidencesuggeststhattheEMRbioeffectspolicywasinstrumentalinblockingnearlyallEMR
bioeffectsneuroscienceresearchforoversixtyyears.ThescienceofEMRbioeffectsonthebraincontinues
tobemarginalized,controversial,andmislabeledasfringe,evenjunkscience.
5.AnextremeUSsecrecymethod
Theconsensusisthatgovernmentscantkeepsecretsfordecades.However,asoneexpert,WilliamArkin
explained,secrecyexpertsareinagreementthatintherealmofnationalsecuritysecrets,vitalorgenuine
nationalsecuritysecretsremainsecret.187Recently,headlinenewsreportedtheNSAsPrismprogramfor
clandestinemasssurveillancedataminingthatwasleakedbyEdwardSnowden,188butfewpeoplehave
heardofthemoreextremesecrecymethodofconstantsurveillanceofgovernmentemployeesinhighly
sensitivepositionsandalsotheconstantsurveillanceoftheirfamilies.Forexample,ProfessorHughGoodall
describedthathisfatherworkedfortheCIAconductingdomesticsurveillancewhichtookplacemuchlonger
thanthe1970scongressionalcommitteesuncovered.Goodallsfatherwasscheduledtotestifybeforethe
hearingsbuthedied,hishousewasbrokenintoandamovingvanhauledawayeverythingincludinghis
diary.189ThishappenedtoothersincludingBillHarveywhoworkedfortheCIAandwasinvolvedinthe
attemptedassassinationsofFidelCastro.190
16/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
Goodalldescribedgrowingupinaclassifiedfamilyhismothertoldhimthattheywerealwaysbeing
watchedeverywheretheywentandintheirhome.191Theirhomewasfittedwithlisteningdevicesandeven
theirsexliveswerenotsecret.Inthe1960sand1970s,someclassifiedfamilieslivedonmilitarypostsand
vehicleswithlisteningdeviceswouldconstantlyrecordtheirdailyconversation.192Goodallstated:
Weweretoldwewerebeingwatchedforourowngoodaswellasforthegoodofour
country.Weweretoldthatitwasimportanttobewatchedbecausemyfatherworkedina
sensitiveposition,andpeopleinthesepositionshadtobecarefullyobserved,aswellastheir
familiesandfriendsandassociates,becauseyoujustneverknewwhomightbespillingwhat
towhom.193
Itseemsunlikelythatavitalnationalsecuritysecretsuchastheexistenceofsecretlydeveloped
neuroweaponswouldbeleakedgivensuchextremesecrecymethods.Contrarytotheconsensus,itis
plausiblethatneuroweaponswhichbeganinthe1950sCIAmindcontrolprogramscouldbekeptsecret.
6.Conclusionsandrecommendation
ThenewevidenceinthispapersuggeststhattwoColdWarcoverstoriesarenowobsolete.Itcanbe
arguedthattheconsensus,includingnearlyalloftheprominentexperts,overlookedsignificantinformation
thathasresultedindevastatingconsequences.Significantevidencesupportsthattheunsettledareasof
neurosciencebioelectricityandbioelectromagneticsarealmostsurelycriticalareasofsciencefor
neuroweaponsdevelopment.USsecrecymethodssurroundingthisresearchhaveincludedactivedeception,
spreadingdisinformation,distortingandsuppressingscienceresearch,coveringuppromisingresearchand
withholdingfundingfromscientistswithaninterestintheareaofresearch.Bykeepingthesciencefrom
developingintheunclassifiedrealm,theUSgovernmentcancitemainstreamscienceliteratureandclaim
neuroweaponsarenotpossible,thuscompletelynullifyinganyopposingopinions.Inthisway,theUS
governmentbreacheditstrustwiththepublicbyclassifyingandmonopolizingwholeareasofscienceas
wellasneuroweapons.
Thetwocoverstorieswerebasedontheparadoxbetweenclassifiedandunclassifiedneuroscienceresearch
thatbeganinthe1950s.First,therevolutionary1950sneuroscienceresearchwasthebasisforatheoryof
howthebrainworks.Furthermore,theunparalleleddecadeoftherevolutionary1950sanditcanbe
argued,the1950sCIAmindcontrolprogramsdeterminedhowmodernneurosciencedevelopedintothe
twentyfirstcentury,apatternofdevelopmentwithnoforeseeableendinsight.Second,bybothchance
anddesign,unclassifiedneurosciencedevelopedinanextremelyskewedpatternwithafocuson
biochemistry,molecularbiology,cognitiveneuroscienceandbrainimagingandasignificantlackof
bioelectricityresearch.Third,althoughtheUSgovernmentactivelydiscouragedmainstreamneuroscience
frominvestigatingbioelectricity,researchontheelectricalpropertiesofthebrainisnotonlyscientifically
possibleinprinciplebutalsoexperimentallypossible,althoughitremainsrudimentary.Additionally,theUS
governmentimplementeditsofficialEMRbioeffectspolicy,therebyactivelyrestrictingtheresearch.
Nevertheless,ahandfulofresearchersestablishedthebasicbioeffectsscienceinprincipleand
experimentally,althoughitremainsrudimentary.BoththebioelectricityandalsoEMRbioeffectsresearch
suggestthatneuroweaponsdevelopmentisscientificallypossible.
Last,thestudyoftheelectrochemicalbrainhasbeendividedintotwoentirelyseparateresearch
approachesfirst,unclassifiedresearchwithitsincompletebiochemicalbrainapproachthatcanneversolve
howthebrainworksandsecondly,theclassifiedresearch,completewithallfouroftherequirementsfor
thedevelopmentofneuroweapons.Thus,itispossiblegiventhesecrecysurroundingvitalnational
securitysecretsneuroweaponsresearchhasflourishedincompletesecrecysincethe1950s.
Itsoundsabsolutelyimpossible.Howcouldsomanyhavebeenmisguidedbyneuroscienceandthe
biophysicsofneuroweaponsforsolong?Asthesayinggoes,"Iftheonlytoolyouhaveisahammer,you
willseeeveryproblemasanail."Likewise,fordecades,prominentexpertshaveoverlookedobscurebut
criticalinformationandthushaveremainedabsolutelyconvincedthatthescienceofneuroweaponsis
sciencefiction.Thisunwaveringconsensusremainsfirmlyinplace,however,todayitcanbeshownthat
neuroweaponsarenotsciencefiction.Thisiswhyfurtherresearchandinvestigationiscalledforthe
allegedmindcontrolvictimsdeserveafairandimpartialhearing,asitishighlypossiblethatsecretUS
neuroweaponsaremorelikelythannotalreadysuccessfullydeveloped.
17/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
1HughGusterson,Themilitarizationofneuroscience,BulletinoftheAtomicScientists(Online),April10,
2007.Availableat.http://www.thebulletin.org/militarizationneuroscience.
18/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
2AlfredMcCoy,Questionoftorture,CIAInterrogation,fromtheColdWartotheWaronTerror(2006),
Introduction,Outline,2.
19/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
3MarkMazzettiandTimWeiner,FilesonillegalspyingshowCIAskeletonsfromColdWar,NewYork
Times,June27,2007.Availableathttp://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/27/washington/27cia.html?
pagewanted=all&_r=0.
20/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
4StevenAftergood,TheSoftkillfallacy,theideaofnonlethalweaponsispoliticallyattractiveand
purposelymisleading,BulletinofAtomicScientist,September/October1994,45.
21/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
5Ibid.
22/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
6SharonWeinberger,Thoughtwars,WashingtonPostMagazine,January14,2007,p.W22.Availableat
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2007/01/10/AR2007011001399.html.
23/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
7McCoy,14,n.2above.
24/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
8Aftergood,n.4above.SeealsoDouglasPasternak,Wonderweapons:ThePentagonsquestfornonlethal
armsisamazing.Butisitsmart?USNewsandWorldReport,July7,1997,38.Availableat
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/culture/articles/970707/archive_007360.htm.
25/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
9PeterKennard,Fieldofnightmares,WeekendGuardian,February23,1991.
26/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
10LouiseDoswaldBeckandGeraldCauderay,Thedevelopmentofnewantipersonnelweapons,
InternationalReviewoftheRedCross,279,November1,1990,19,20.
27/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
11MicrowaveweaponsstudybySovietscited,FederalTimes,December13,1976.
28/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
12Ibid.
29/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
13StevenWright,Weaponsofcontrol,NewScientist,55.Seealson.11above.
30/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
14DonJustesen,Microwavesandbehavior,AmericanPsychologist,March,1975.Availableat
http://www.raven1.net/v2success2.gif.Alsoavailableathttp://www.raven1.net/v2success3.gif.
31/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
15U.S.militaryheatrayweaponunveiled,HuffingtonPostCanada,March13,2012.Availableat:
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/03/13/usmilitaryheatrayweapon_n_1343092.html.
32/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
16ChristopherLeake,WillStewart,Putintargetsfoeswithzombiegun,MailonSunday,April1,2012.
33/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
17PressconferenceonGorbachevsnucleararmseliminationproposals,BBCSummaryofWorld
Broadcasts,January21,1986:Tassforabroad:SU/8162/A1/1.AvailableatLexisNexis.
34/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
18NicholasSteneck,Microwavedebate(1984),84.
35/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
19TheUnitedNationsandDisarmament:19451985(1985)NewYork,UNPublicationSalesNo.E.85.IX.6,
114,115,116.
36/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
20V.L.Issraelyan,RepresentativeoftheUSSRtotheCommitteeonDisarmament.UnionofSoviet
SocialistRepublics,Negotiationsonthequestionoftheprohibitionofnewtypesofweaponsofmass
destructionandnewsystemsofsuchweapons,U.NCommitteeonDisarmamentdocumentCD/3510July
10,1979.
37/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
21Ibid.
38/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
22WilliamBaker,etal.,Controlledeffects:Scientistsexplorethefutureofcontrolledeffects,AFRLs
DirectedEnergyDirectorate,KirtlandAFBNM,(2004).Moreinformationavailableat
http://www.afrl.af.mil/techconn/index.htm.
39/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
23JonathanMoreno,Mindwars,Brainscienceandthemilitaryinthe21stCentury(2012),86,87.
40/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
24MichioKaku,Physicsoftheimpossible,Ascientificexplorationintotheworldofphasers,forcefields,
teleportation,andtimetravel(2008),8485.
41/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
25BarbaraHatchRosenberg,Sidebar:NonLethalweaponsmayviolatetreaties,BulletinofAtomic
Scientists,September,October1994,45.
42/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
26RobertBecker,Thebodyelectric:Electromagnetismandthefoundationoflife(1985),321.
43/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
27McCoy,Outline,14,n.2above.
44/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
28Pasternak,n.8above.
45/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
29KevinPoulsen,Mindcontrolmadness,Wired.com,February5,2007.Availableat
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2007/02/mind_control_ma/.SeealsoWeinberger,n.6above.
46/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
30Moreno,n.23above,neweditionof2006book.SeealsoWeinberger,n.6above.
47/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
31TheBoardofFreedomfromCovertHarassmentandSurveillance,TothePresidentoftheUnitedStates
ofAmericaWashingtonPostExpress,July16,2013.Availableat
www.freedomfchs.com/washpostexprad.pdf.
48/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
32Kaku,n.24above.
49/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
33JamesLivingstonDrivingforce:Themagicpowerofmagnets(1997),249.
50/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
34JohnHorganBrainteaser:Wethink,thereforeweare.Butwedontknowhowwethink,Washington
Post,October17,1999.
51/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
35GordonShepherd,Creatingmodernneuroscience:Therevolutionary1950s(2010),11,12.
52/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
36EricKandel,LarrySquire,Neuroscience:Breakingdownscientificbarrierstothestudyofbrainand
mind,Science,November10,2000.
53/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
37Shepherd,12,n.35above.
54/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
55/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
39LarrySquireetal.,Fundamentalneuroscience,Fourthedition(2013),3.
56/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
40Ibid.at1091.
57/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
41JohnHorgan,Themythofmindcontrol:Willanyoneeverdecodethehumanbrain?DiscoverMagazine,
October29,2004.Availableathttp://discovermagazine.com/2004/oct/cover.
58/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
42Ibid.
59/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
43Ibid.
60/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
44Ibid.
61/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
45GwenIfill,WillUSforgepublicprivatepartnershiptodrawbrainactivitymap?PBSNewsHour,February
20,2013.Availableat:http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/health/janjune13/medical_0220.html.
62/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
46Horgan,n.41above.
63/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
47VictorChase,Shatterednerves:Howscienceissolvingmodernmedicinesmostperplexingproblem
(2006),1,2.
64/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
48Ibid.
65/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
49JoseDelgado,Physicalcontrolofthemind:Towardapsychocivilizedsociety,Volume41,World
Perspectives(1969)
66/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
50Chase,1,n.47above.
67/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
51Becker,70,82,n.26above.
68/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
52AndrewMarino,Goingsomewhere:Truthaboutalifeinscience,(2010).73.Availableathttp:
//www.goingsomewherebook.com/.SeealsoAbrahamFlexner,TheFlexnerReport,BulletinNumberFour,
CarnegieFoundationfortheAdvancementofTeaching,(2010).Availableat
http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/publications/medicaleducationunitedstatesandcanadabulletinnu
mberfourflexnerreport0.
69/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
53Becker,82,n.26above.
70/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
54Ibid.at92,n.26above.
71/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
55AlbertSzentGyorgyi,Studyofenergylevelsinbiochemistry,Nature,3745:157,August9,1941.See
also,AlbertSzentGyorgyi,Introductiontosubmolecularbiology(1960).
72/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
56RalphMoss,Freeradical,AlbertSzentGyorgyiandthebattleovervitaminC(1988),244.
73/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
57AlbertSzentGyorgyi,Thelivingstateandcancer(1978),4.
74/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
75/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
59FrancisSchmitt,Psychophysicsconsideredatthemolecularandsubmolecularlevels,inMichaelKasha,
BernardPullman,eds.,Horizonsinbiochemistry:AlbertSzentGyorgyidedicatoryvolume(1962),453.
76/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
60NicholasRasmussen,Themidcenturybiophysicsbubble:Hiroshimaandthebiologicalrevolutionin
America,revisited",HistoryofScience(1997),35:245.
77/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
61SoroyadeChadarevian,Designsforlife:MolecularbiologyafterWorldWarII(2002),1.
78/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
62GordonRasmussen,Picturecontrol:Theelectronmicroscopeandthetransformationofbiologyin
America,19401960(1997),195.
79/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
63Ibid.
80/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
64Rasmussen,195,n.62above.
81/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
65Chadarevain,74,n.61above.
82/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
66Ibid.at87,88.
83/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
67PaulForman,Behindquantumelectronics:NationalsecurityasbasisforphysicalresearchintheUnited
States,19401960,HistoricalStudiesinthePhysicalandBiologicalSciences,18:1(1987),170.
84/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
68Ibid.
85/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
69Chaderevian,88,74,n.61above.
86/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
70BartonReppert,LookingattheMoscowSignal,thezappingofanEmbassy35yearslater,Themystery
lingers,WashingtonAssociatedPress,May22,1988.
87/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
71NormanKempster,Mindreadingmachinetellssecretsofthebrain:SciFicomestrue,LosAngeles
Times,March29,1976.
88/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
72Ibid.
89/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
73Kandel,n.36above.
90/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
74Horgan,n.41above.
91/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
92/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
76Horgan,n.41above.
93/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
77RobertGalambos,AGlianeuraltheoryofbrainfunction,ProceedingsoftheUSNationalAcademyof
SciencesVolume47.No.1,January15,1961,136.
94/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
78Ibid.
95/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
79Shepherd,112,113,n.35above.
96/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
80TheodoreBullock,Neuralintegrationatthemesoscopiclevel:Theadventofsomeideasinthelasthalf
century,JournaloftheHistoryofNeuroscience,Volume4No.34,1995,231.
97/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
81Horgan,n.12above.
98/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
82A.A.P.Leao,Furtherobservationsonthespreadingdepressionofactivityinthecerebralcortex,Journal
ofNeurophysiology,10:409,November1947.SeealsoB.Libet,&R.W.Gerard,Steadypotentialfieldsand
neuroneactivity,JournalofNeurophysiology4:438,September1941.
Forbrain/EMRinteractions,seeR.H.W.Funketal.,Electromagneticeffects,fromcellbiologytomedicine,
ProgressinHistochemistryandCytochemistry43:185,189(2009).
Fordcbraincurrents,seeRobertBecker,Electromagneticforcesandlifeprocesses,TechnologyReview38
December,1972.Foradvancesindcbrainresearch,seeMichaelNitscheetal.,Transcranialdirectcurrent
stimulation:Stateoftheart,(2008)206.
Forsemiconduction,seeJanosLadik,Solidstatephysicsofbiologicalmacromolecules:Thelegacyof
AlbertSzentGyrgyi,Theochem,666667:1,December2003.
Foranalogdigitalbraincommunication,seeGeorgeGilder,Thesiliconeye(2005),141.SeealsoGeorge
Dyson,TuringsCathedral,theoriginsofthedigitaluniverse(2012),280,281.
99/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
83Ifill,n.45above.
100/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
84RobertGonzales,HereshowObamasbrainmappingprojectwillactuallywork,IO9blog,February22,
2013.Availableathttp://io9.com/hereshowobamasbrainmappingprojectwillactually5986161.
101/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
85JoshuaSanes,Mappingthewaytoabrainsurvey,HarvardMagazine.July/August2013.Availableat
http://harvardmagazine.com/2013/07/mappingthewaytoabrainsurvey.Seealso
http://www.bioethics.gov/sites/default/files/news/Charge%20from%20President%20Obama.pdf
102/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
86LarrySquire,EricKandel,Memory:Frommindtomolecules,(1999),5,6,7.
103/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
87Ibid.
104/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
88JeanPierreChangeux,Thegood,thetrueandthebeautiful(2012),317.
105/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
89Rasmussen,245,n.60above.
106/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
90Squire,preface,n.39above.
107/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
91Changeux,317,n.88above.
108/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
92Chadarevian,1,n.61above.
109/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
93RebeccaLemov,Worldaslaboratory,Experimentswithmice,mazes,andmen(2005),189,190.
110/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
94HansEysenck,Thefutureofpsychology,inRobertSolso,ed.,Mindandbrainsciencesinthe21st
Century(1999),283.
111/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
95Squire,6,7,n.86above.
112/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
96FrancisCrick,Whatmadpursuit:Apersonalviewofscientificdiscovery(1988),149,150.
113/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
97DouweDraaisma,Metaphorsofmemory:Ahistoryofideasaboutthemind(2000),190.
114/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
98Ibid.at201.
115/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
99Ibid.
116/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
100DavidChalmers,ThePuzzleofconsciousexperience,ScientificAmerican,December1995.
117/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
101Ibid.SeealsoSolso,306,n.94above.
118/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
102ChristofKoch,Consciousness:confessionsofaromanticreductionist(2012),5,6.
119/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
103GregMiller,Whatisthebiologicalbasisofconsciousness?Science,Volume309,July1,2005,79.
120/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
104LarrySquire,ed.,Historyofneuroscienceinautobiography,Volume1(1996),446.
121/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
105Ibid.
122/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
106Draaisma,190,n.97above.
123/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
107Crick,150,n.96above.
124/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
108Ibid.
125/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
109GeorgeGilder,Telecosm:Howinfinitebandwidthwillrevolutionizeourworld(2000),16.
126/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
110RobertBecker,Crosscurrents:Theperilsofelectropollution,thepromiseofelectromedicine(1990),
69.
127/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
111AllanFrey,ed.,Onthenatureofelectromagneticfieldinteractionswithbiologicalsystems(1994),4.
128/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
112BeverlyRubik,et.al,Bioelectromagneticsapplicationsinmedicine:ReporttotheNIH,(1992).
129/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
113DoswaldBeck,n.10above.
130/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
114MichaelCirfra,etal.,Electromagneticcellularinteractions,ProgressinBiophysicsandMolecularBiology
(2010).
131/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
115SimonNorth,Warinthedesert,Electronicweapons,LondonGuardian,February2,1991.
132/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
116SamuelKoslov,Bridgingthegap,inRossAdey,AlbertLawrenceeds.,Internationalconferenceon
nonlinearelectrodynamicsinbiologicalsystems(1984),586.SeealsoR.H.W.Funketal.,n.82.
133/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
117Horgan,42.n.163above
134/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
118LouisSlesin,editorial,Nation,14March1987.
135/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
119Ibid.SeealsoMazzetti,n.3above.
136/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
120PaulRoschandMarkoMarkov,ed.,Bioelectromagneticmedicine(2004),vii.
137/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
121North,n.115above.
138/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
122Becker,Crosscurrents,212,atn.110above.
139/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
123Ibid.at304,n.110above.Thereportis:PaulTyler,Lt.Col.DavidDean,ed.,TheElectromagnetic
SpectruminLowIntensityConflict(MaxwellairForceBase,Ala.:AirUniversityPress,1986).Availableat
http://www.icomw.org/archives/index.asp.
140/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
124Becker,Crosscurrents,304,n.110above.SeealsoBecker,Bodyelectric,319,320,n.26above.
141/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
125Becker,Bodyelectric,321,n.26above.
142/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
126USDepartmentofCommerce,ConvergingTechnologiesReport(2002),355,356.Availableat
http://www.wtec.org/ConvergingTechnologies/.
143/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
127Kaku,n.24,above.
144/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
128Ibid.
145/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
129Ibid.
146/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
130FreemanDyson,Radiotelepathy:Directcommunicationfrombraintobrain,inJohnBrockman,ed.,This
willchangeeverything:Ideasthatwillshapethefuture(2010),146.
147/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
131Becker,Bodyelectric,70,82,n.26above.
148/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
132U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgencywebsite.Radiationthathasenoughenergytomoveatomsina
moleculearoundorcausethemtovibrate,butnotenoughtoremoveelectrons,isreferredtoas"non
ionizingradiation."Examplesofthiskindofradiationaresoundwaves,visiblelight,andmicrowaves.
Availableat:http://www.epa.gov/radiation/understand/ionize_nonionize.html.RobertBecker,
Electromagnetismandlife,inAndrewMarino,ed,ModernBioelectricity(1988),1.SeealsoAndrewMarino
websitehttp://andrewamarino.com/.
149/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
133ChristopherKetcham,Warning:Yourcellphonemaybehazardoustoyourhealth,Gentleman's
Quarterly,February2010.Availableathttp://www.gq.com/carsgear/gearandgadgets/201002/warning
cellphoneradiation?currentPage=2.
150/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
134Ibid.
151/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
135Ibid.SeealsoMarino,GoingSomewhere,73,n.52above.
152/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
136DavidHafemeister,ResourceLetterBELFEF1:Biologicaleffectsoflowfrequencyelectromagnetic
fields,AmericanJournalofPhysics64.8,1996,974.Availableat:http://works.bepress.com/dhafemei/13.
Foracritique,seeLewisSlesin,ThescienceandpoliticsoftheEMFpuzzle:Themissingpiecesinthe
Frontlinestory,MicrowaveNews.Availableathttp://microwavenews.com/front.html.
153/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
137Ibid.
154/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
138Livingston,249,n.33above.
155/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
13929authorsfromtencountries,BioInitiativeReport2012:Arationaleforbiologicallybasedexposure
standardsforlowintensityelectromagneticradiation(ELFandRF).Availableat
http://www.bioinitiative.org/
156/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
140Ibid.
157/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
141KateKelland,Neuroscience:Thenewfaceofwarfare,Reuters,February7,2012.Availableat
http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2012/02/07/3425093.htm.SeealsoJasonKoebler,Scientistswarn
ofethicalbattleconcerningmilitarymindcontrol,U.S.News,March20,2012.Availableat
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/03/20/scientistswarnofethicalbattleconcerningmilitary
mindcontrol?google_editors_picks=true.
158/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
142DavidJones,OpeningPandorasbox,FulcrumCentralProductions,BBCdocumentary,Channel4,
England,1984.
159/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
143Marino,1,n.132above.SeealsoAndrewMarinowebsitehttp://andrewamarino.com/.
160/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
144Jones,n.142above.SeealsoSteneck,94,n.18above.
161/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
145Marino,Goingsomewhere,163,n.52above.SeealsoSteneck,94,n.18above.
162/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
146Ibid.Marino,n.52above.
163/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
147Ibid.at164,n.52above.SeealsoReppert,n.70above,citinganApril1979reportbySenate
CommitteeonCommerce,ScienceandTransportationcriticizingtheStateDepartment'shandlingofthe
microwavesaffair.
164/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
148Ibid.Marino,n.52above.
165/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
149Ibid,Marino,164,n.52above.SeealsoJones,n.142above.SeealsoReppert,n.70above.
166/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
150Weinberger,n.6above.
167/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
151HumandrugtestingbytheCIA,SubcommitteeonHealthandScientificResearchoftheCommittee
onHumanResourcesUnitedStatesSenate,(Washington:U.S.GPO,1977)September20,211977,202.
CIAmedicaldoctorSidneyGottliebtestimony.
168/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
152Ibid.
169/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
153Steneck,84,250,atn.18above.
170/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
154Ibid.
171/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
155Ibid.
172/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
156Ibid.
173/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
157KathleenMcAuliffe,Mindfields,Omni,February1985.
174/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
158Roschetal.,vii,n.119above.
175/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
159VladimirBinhi,Electromagneticmindcontrol:Factorfiction?Ascientificview(2010),1.Seealso
Pasternak,n.8above.
176/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
160Slesin,n.136above.
177/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
161LouisSlesin,Aremagneticfieldsinincubatorsconfoundingcellculturestudies?MicrowaveNews,March
12,2013.Availableathttp://microwavenews.com/newscenter/incubatormagneticfieldsconfounding.
178/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
162Ketcham,n.133above.
179/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
163Ibid.
180/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
164Ibid.
181/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
165Ibid.SeealsoPasternak,40,n.8above.SeealsoBecker,Crosscurrents,344347,n.110above.See
alsoSteneck,118,n.18above.
182/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
166Steneck,121,n.115above
183/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
167Koslov,582,n.115above.SeealsoAlexsanderPresman,Electromagneticfieldsandlife,(1970).
184/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
168Ketcham,n.133above.
185/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
169Koslov,586,n.115above.SeealsoPresman,n.167above.
186/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
170Reppert,n.70above.
187/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
171Koslov,586,n.115above.
188/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
172Becker,Crosscurrents,304,n.110above.Thereportis:PaulTyler,Lt.Col.DavidDean,ed.,The
electromagneticspectruminlowintensityconflict(MaxwellairForceBase,Ala.:AirUniversityPress,
1986).Availableathttp://www.icomw.org/archives/index.asp.
189/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
173Ibid.Becker,Bodyelectric,319,n.26above.
190/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
174Binhi,xi,n.159above.
191/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
175Ibid.
192/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
176Jones,n.142above.
193/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
177Pasternak,n.8above.
194/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
178RichardGarwin,IndependentTaskForce,NonLethaltechnologies:Progressandprospects,Councilon
ForeignRelations,(CFR),1999.Availableathttp://www.cfr.org/defenseandsecurity/nonlethal
technologies/p3326.
195/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
179RichardGarwin,IndependentTaskForce,Nonlethalweaponsandcapabilities,CFR,2004.Availableat
http://www.cfr.org/defensetechnology/nonlethalweaponscapabilities/p6793.
196/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
180RichardGarwin,emailcommunicationtoCherylWelsh,2005.Onfilewithauthor.
197/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
181Ibid.
198/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
182KennethFoster,etal.,Bioethicsandthebrain,IEEESpectrum,June2003,34.Availableat
http://www.eng.ucy.ac.cy/cpitris/courses/ece001/notes/IEEEarticles/Bioethics%20and%20the%20Brain%20
%20June%202003.pdf.
199/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
183IvanOransky,Obituary:WilliamRossAdey,Lancet,Volume364,July17,2004.Availableat
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS01406736%2804%29166993/fulltext.
200/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
184Weinberger,n.6above.
201/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
185Ibid.
202/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
186Editorial,Secretweapons,Nature,Volume489,September13,2012,177178.
203/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
187WilliamArkin,Codenames:DecipheringUS.militaryplans,programs,andoperationsinthe9/11
world(2005),13.
204/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
188MichaelKelly,ParttwoofSnowdensGuardianinterviewcouldrekindlethePrismdirectaccessdebate,
BusinessInsider,July8,2013.Availableathttp://www.businessinsider.com/snowdensaysnsahasdirect
accesstotechcompanies20137.
205/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
189HughGoodall,Jr.,Aneedtoknow:TheclandestinehistoryofaCIAfamily(2008),133,229,230.
206/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
190Ibid.
207/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
191Ibid.
208/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
192Ibid
209/210
9/14/2016
Misledandbetrayed
193Ibid.
Contents|Top
MindJusticeHomePage
210/210

Misled and Betrayed Gangstalking

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Misled and Betrayed Gangstalking

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

9/14/2016

You might also like