- Download my books for free
New World War: Revolutionary Methods for Political Control
Dedication & Thanks
Volume I: Current Political Situation
- Revolution in Warfare
- The Other World
- Dictatorship Creation
- The Groups Facilitating the Revolution
- Their Goal is Neo-Feudalism
- Volume I Commentary
Volume II: The New War
- The New War
- The New Enemy
- Initiatives to Remove Civil Liberties
- The Investigation
- Surveillance Technology and Methods
- Volume II Commentary
Volume III: Weapons of The New War
- Introduction to Nonlethal Weapons
- Psychological Operations
- Introduction to Directed-Energy Weapons
- High-Powered Microwaves
- High-Powered Lasers
- Sonic Weapons
- Computer Network Operations
- Microwave Hearing
- Silent Subliminals
- Use of Citizen Informants
- Chemical and Biological
- Weather Warfare
- Miscellaneous Weapons and Tactics
- Volume III Commentary
Volume IV: The Coverup
- Volume IV Introduction
- Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders
- Control of the Medical Industry
- Another Look at Schizophrenia
- Political Considerations
- Punitive Psychiatry in Communist Russia
- Coverup Initiatives
- Volume IV Commentary
- A Brief History of PsyOp
- Small-Scale Wars
- Nongovernmental Organizations
- Human-Computer Intelligence Network
- Electronic Tyranny
- Other Devices Connected to the GIG
- My Experience
Audible sound has been used as a weapon in most wars since the beginning of recorded warfare.1 It is sometimes referred to as acoustical warfare. “Using sound as a non-lethal weapon is historically well documented,” proclaimed the Journal of Electronic Defense in 1993. “Sound, from one source or another,” added the US Army Office of the Surgeon General, in its Controlled Offensive Behavior report of 1973, “has been used to elicit behavior changes in man in every war ever recorded.”
The Scottish military is said to have used bronze trumpets and bagpipes at the front of their formations when facing Roman soldiers and other adversaries, which allegedly caused some opposing troops to run in terror. During WWII German dive-bombing Stukas were equipped with loud sirens that caused a psychological impact on targeted ground troops, resulting in panic. Various forces throughout history have used trumpet calls prior to infantry charges.
More recently, in December of 1989, loud music was used by the US Marines to force Manuel Noriega from a building in Panama City. The FBI used loud aggravating noises against the Branch Davidians in Waco Texas in April of 1993. The British have used loud sounds for riot control in Northern Ireland. Powerful loud speakers were used against Haitian refugees in 1994 at the US Naval Base in Guantanamo Bay Cuba.
Noise is used as an irritating NLW for area denial, crowd control, to clear facilities, or to persuade a target to stop their activities. The NRC says that “aggravating” noise will be used for behavior modification. The CFR mentioned that an entire town could be rendered uninhabitable using just loud noise and obnoxious smells.
Various methods of producing aggravating noise include powerful loudspeakers, acoustic canons, stun grenades, whistles, musical instruments, sirens, yelling, mechanical devices, and others.2 Audible noise, occurring between the human hearing ranges of 20 to 20,000 Hz is a very potent weapon that can cause both psychological and biological effects. Noise can be used to modify behavior and trigger negative emotions such as fear and panic.
The repeated use of loud noise as a weapon can result in mental trauma, which the NATO NLW report defines as a psychological injury. The biological effects of consistent loud noise include temporary deafness, dizziness, vertigo, nausea, and possibly vomiting. Loud noise is dangerous to the auditory and respiratory systems. Chronic exposure to even low-level noise is considered a health hazard, which can cause high blood pressure as well as other biological problems.
A burst of sudden noise can cause a something called a startle response, which NATO says includes involuntary physical reactions such as verbal remarks, the stiffening of the body, flexion of limbs, or a fall to the ground. Sudden noise at about 140 decibels has been known to knock people sideways, away from the exposed ear, similar to the effect of a blunt impact. The Journal of Electronic Defense refers to noise as an actual or psychological weapon.
Three-dimensional images that look like real objects called holograms are in the DOD’s arsenal. Holograms are created using lasers. Scientists at the University of Arizona have been working on advanced holographic technology since at least 1990. Holograms are considered a NLW and are to be used on the civilian population as part of PsyOp.
Holograms can be projected to specific areas. Some of the following uses have been considered: To cloak small or large objects so they are temporarily invisible to the enemy, to confuse and terrify people in the battlespace, to distract the enemy, to create illusions, to project gigantic images of certain gods over enemy territory.
Holograms are also to be projected into rooms occupied by the enemy. The DSB mentioned that sophisticated PsyOp to be used on the civilian population includes the projection of sounds and images to specific points in space. Holograms can be used, says the Air Force, “to scare a target individual to death.” The Air Force has also considered using satellites with holographic laser projectors to send these holograms to anyplace on the ground, sky, or air.3
A Show of Force Operation (SOFO) is an activity that is used to warn, intimidate, and showcase capabilities to a potential threat. The US Army defines it in this way: “A show of force is an operation designed to demonstrate US resolve, which involves increased visibility of US deployed forces in an attempt to defuse a specific situation, that if allowed to continue, may be detrimental to US interests or national objectives.”
The BSSR describes a SOFO as an impressive display of police power and resolve, which is used to convey an overwhelming impression of the power of the state in order to persuade the target of the futility of their activities.
Although SOFO are military in nature, they are used for both military and political objectives. According to the US Army, they are designed to demonstrate a credible and specific threat to an aggressor or potential aggressor. They may occur during times of peace or war. During times of peace SOFO are often conducted during training missions. It has been described as a type of MOOTW that uses the physical presence of a credible force to demonstrate US resolve.
SOFO are conducted for a few primary reasons: to bolster and reassure allies, to deter potential aggressors, and to gain or increase influence. Examples of SOFO include the temporary buildup of forces in a specific area, combinations of training exercises in an area, demonstrations of capabilities, and a projected increase in the level of readiness.
SOFO may be used by the military, police forces, or other non-military groups. According to the US Air Force, the military works with police and other civil authorities to conduct SOFO during training missions. “These operations,” explain the US Air Force, “usually involving routine overhead flights, [to] demonstrate our capabilities and intent.” “Training missions flown by long-range aircraft,” they added, “are one way to demonstrate the responsiveness of airpower.”
The US Army too mentioned that aircraft and even ship visits to a specific area during training exercises are used for SOFO.4 In their 2006, Homeland Operations document, the US Air Force described that as part of a national strategy for homeland security, military support to law enforcement is occurring, which includes air patrols over specific locations. These patrols are done during training missions in support to civil authorities in order to deter incidents.
A primary component of this new type of warfare includes the isolation of an adversary physically and psychologically from their support structure, the civilian population, and any international support.
In its 1996 Concept for Nonlethal Capabilities in Army Operations, the US Army says that NLW will be used with surveillance to isolate adversaries. The US Army defines the term in this manner: “Isolate: In the context of defeat mechanisms, to deny an enemy or adversary access to capabilities that enable the exercise of coercion, influence, potential advantage, and freedom of action.”
Basically any city, state, or country that an adversary moves to they will be denied sanctuary, and attacked with nonlethal weapons and PsyOp. Public diplomacy, public affairs, resource control measures, and other methods are used to accomplish this.
Multinational capabilities, says the US Army in its Unconventional Warfare manual, as well as interagency and international partner leaders, are used to “further isolate, and deny sanctuary to the enemy.” To achieve this, US law enforcement entities cooperate with each other, international partners, and the DOD to maximize intelligence and legitimacy and to constrain adversary’s freedom of movement.
At a military history symposium in 2007, Lieutenant General William B. Caldwell mentioned that the survival of the enemy depends on them finding places to foster ideas of lies and discontent. They depend on the sanctuary and the external resources provided by such havens, says General Caldwell. “[It] therefore, becomes paramount to denying their popular acceptance and use for any sanctuary in the world.”
General Caldwell’s solution is the same as what has been mentioned in other government reports, which is to isolate adversaries from the population and international community, interfere with their finances, disrupt their internet services, and prevent them from interacting with the media.
Psychological isolation can be accomplished with what the military calls command and control warfare (C2W), also called information warfare (IW). What this essentially amounts to is the placement of an electronic dome around a person to interfere with all forms of communication.
The RAND Corporation calls this neocortical warfare, which it defines as: “Warfare that strives to control or shape the behavior of enemy organisms, but without destroying the organisms. It does this by influencing, even to the point of regulating, the consciousness, perceptions and will of the [enemy].”
In the spring 1998 issue of the US Army War College’s quarterly journal Parameters, Timothy L. Thomas described how electronic isolation can be achieved in an article called, The Mind Has No Firewall. His description is identical to RAND’s neocortical warfare.
“The human body,” say Thomas “much like a computer, contains myriad data processors,” including “the chemical-electrical activity of the brain, heart, and peripheral nervous system, the signals sent from the cortex region of the brain to other parts of our body.”
According to Thomas, auditory, visual, and other signals could be interrupted and replaced with bogus information, termed “information noise,” which creates a dense shield between a person and external reality. The main target of this noise, he mentioned, would be the consciousness of a person or a group of people.
There have been multiple references in government documentation that the enemy will have their utilities disrupted.5 This means heat, electric, water, energy, etc. It was suggested by Lord Bertrand Arthur Russell in 1931, and again in 1951, that this tactic could be used against individuals by those who governed states.
The blatant use of both bribery and financial sanctions was explained in the US Army’s Unconventional Warfare report of September 2008, which stated, “many declared or potential adversaries can be persuaded or dissuaded by economic or financial means.”6 The application of economic or financial incentives, they wrote, is among the best ideas in the US arsenal of power.
Destroying people financially has been mentioned in other government reports, such as the Defense Science Board’s Future Strategic Strike Forces of 2004, and the US Army’s Field Manual Operations, released in February 2008. “The interagency,” explained the Army, “can apply economic and financial incentives and disincentives to interdict adversary financing.” The disruption of the enemy’s credit system has also been described as an important NLW by the CFR.
Animals are used for antimaterial, antipersonnel, and surveillance purposes. They can also cause a psychological effect. Genetically altered insects, for example, can be used to destroy specific crops. Chemicals which attract existing indigenous insects can also be used for this purpose.
Chemicals called pheromones, which are released by animals to influence the behavior of other members of the same species, are considered a NLW. These pheromones can be spread in areas or on people and will attract certain insects, rodents, and larger animals, causing them to act aggressively (biting, stinging).7
Some of these chemicals can allegedly cause infestation for up to 6 months. “Imagine,” suggested John Alexander, “trying to sleep or work in an area that is attracting every ant, cockroach, or spider for miles around.”
In addition to causing infestation, animals can be used for surveillance and attack by being trained or remote controlled. The use of animals for surveillance purposes dates back at least to the early 1940s, when Professor B.F. Skinner was given a contract by the DOD to develop methods to train pigeons to guide missiles onto targets.
In 1944 he discovered that pigeons could distinguish man-made objects from natural ones. Teaching can now be done using photographs. It consists of rewarding the birds with food when they peck on the photographs of the intended targets.
The Israelis took an interest in this in the late 1960s when they began to use pigeons to spy on the Arabs. The birds were trained to fly over Arab territory and land on specific objects. They were equipped with small radio receivers, which allowed them to be easily located. The birds were even able to follow moving troops.
The US Navy has used whales, porpoises, and dolphins as weapons to spot enemy ships and harass divers. Some have been fitted with explosives. Dogs have regularly been used by the military and police. They can be trained to respond in certain ways when they encounter objects or people. It has been suggested that they can be outfitted with radio transmitters to reveal their locations.8
Radio waves can also be used for the remote control of animals. The DOD has had an interest in this at least as far back as the mid 1960s. In 1964 Dr. Jose Delgado of Yale University demonstrated the remote control of a charging bull. Dr. Delgado, funded by the DOD, implanted radio-controlled electrodes in a bull’s brain, which allowed him to successfully stop the creature from charging using a radio transmitter.
More recently, DARPA contracted the JASON Group and MITRE Corporation to conduct research on the possibilities of using remote controlled robots that resembled animals for surveillance.9 In 1997 they released their conclusions in a report entitled, Small Scale Propulsion: Fly on the Wall, Cockroach in the Corner, Rat in the Basement, Bird in the Sky.
Creating tiny robots in the form of insects or birds is possible, they described, but they would be less capable than living creatures of maneuvering through difficult terrain. On reason for this is that there has been difficulty integrating the sensory and motor systems of these machines.
For instance, if a robot sees an object ahead, it must send the information to the proper actuating systems that will allow it to avoid the obstacle. This also requires that the actuators themselves are advanced enough to allow for such precise movements.
Instead, DARPA suggests using living creatures such as insects, rodents, dogs, birds, horses, and other animals. Living creatures already have natural organic actuators (muscles) and sensors (ears and eyes), which are perfectly coordinated. Implanted with a tiny receiver/microprocessor, these creatures can be directed by a human operator.
The creatures, says DARPA, can be equipped with tiny sensors such as cameras, IR imagers, photometers, magnetic wave detectors, chemical detectors, acoustic detectors, meteorological instruments, and radiation detectors. These sensors would transmit the information back to the operator, who would control the creature remotely, and monitor its activity.
Lethal and nonlethal weapons can also be attached to the animals. Another possibility that DARPA revealed includes using nanotechnology with artificial intelligence for this purpose. In 1997 DARPA mentioned that scientists at Tsuka University successfully implanted a microprocessor in a living cockroach which allowed them to control the creature remotely.
In 2002 it was reported by the UK Guardian and National Geographic News that scientists at the State University of New York demonstrated the remote control of living rats. Tiny electrodes are implanted in the brains of the rodents which respond to remote electrical signals from a laptop computer up to 500 yards away. The basic system, including electrodes, a microprocessor, and receiver, is very cheap.10
The navigation system uses the creatures own neurological system, which learns appropriate responses to signals sent by the computer by activating the pleasure areas of their brains when correct movements are made. The rats can be steered up and down vertical objects, along narrow edges, into crevices, etc.
The control that they were able to establish over the creatures was accurate and instantaneous. Not only is the performance impressive, but the training sessions are quick, and the rodents retain the knowledge for about a half a year when they’re not deployed.
The rodents are to be used for rescue missions and military surveillance. “Next time you see a rat scurrying across the room,” revealed National Geographic News, “beware, it might not be as innocent as it seems. It could be a remotely operated robo-rat working for an intelligence agency.” According to the scientists, the same technology could be applied to birds.
Barriers have been used by military forces for many years. Their potential use is extensive. They are used to separate adversaries from friendly forces, deny access, prevent escape, block and delay an adversary’s movement, and stop vehicles. According to the NRC, they have many other applications where delaying an adversary’s action is required.
The standard types of barriers include movable walls, fences, nets and caltrops. But they also include a wide range of other objects which could block or delay an adversary’s movement. Precision delivery and rapid deployment are two necessities for barrier usage. The NRC says they are used to cause peaceful changes in behavior in enemy personnel.11
The US Army suggests that physical obstacles, combined with noise to create or enhance psychological effects, are classic military tactics that are used to influence the behavior of people. NATO’s 2006 Human Effects of Non-Lethal Technologies report mentions that physical obstacles are used to deter, prevent, or discourage from acting, as well as to impose fear and doubt regarding the consequences of the action.
1 Audible noise would technically be an acoustic weapon as part of acoustic/sonic warfare (AW).
2 There has been recurrent noise of various types in every place I've lived, which also occurs in areas I frequently visit. It is synchronized with EW. Much of it originates from the activities of the DOD's civil defense network. Some types of noise that commonly occurs around my livingspace include: fire, police, and ambulance sirens; horns; a multitude of tools and appliances; chainsaws and lawnmowers; ongoing construction projects; barking dogs; door slamming; gun shots; low-flying helicopters and propeller planes. There is also a fleet of vehicles with loud exhaust systems that has encircled every place I've lived as well as places I've visited for short periods. It continues during swarm attacks as I move through a neighborhood (battlespace). Noise is often synchronized. As I walk by houses or apartment buildings people who are leaving or arriving slam doors and trunks. Their timing is such that the noise occurs the second I'm closest. A frequent variation of this includes small construction projects that are hidden as I approach them, which emit explosions of noise from various kinds of machinery just as I pass by. The recurrent noise continues in stores and transportation systems with loudspeaker announcements that are blurted out the instant I'm under a speaker. In shopping centers, for instance, during a single visit, multiple clerks will slam items on shelves the second I pass. This continues in restaurants and any public place. Roommates and relatives consistently slam doors and cabinets, as well as silverware and other objects on countertops.
3 The holograms that the DOD has transmitted so far include bugs on walls and a space ship that hovered approximately 100 feet above me. These images lasted only a split second.
4 I first began to notice frequent visitations by helicopters and propeller planes while on a farm in Maine during the spring of 2006. This continued throughout the summer and followed me to the next farm, where they continued for several years. Occasionally they would fly so low they would shake the room. These SOFOs have also occurred at places I've visited for short periods.
5 Electrical outages were quite common on both farms that I lived on in Maine. Some lasted for days and others only for a moment. The DOD would usually let me know that they caused these using their themes. The DOD has also connected their C4ISR system to the wiring of the places that I've lived, which has allowed them to synchronize their EW attacks with the lights being dimmed. This has occurred with lights wired into walls and ones connected to outlets. Shocks, stings, and pulses of pain are quickly followed-up by a dimming of the lights, after which, microwave hearing attacks such as "got that?" and "gotcha" occur.
6 Most targeted individuals are unemployed or underemployed.
7 Once while I was holding a 9/11 Truth sign in Harvard Square, Cambridge, a bee came out of nowhere and stung me. Then, in Copley Square, Boston, while two people stopped to talk to me about the sign, one repeatedly tapped my hand during the conversation. When they left, a single bee quickly landed on the exact area of my hand that was touched. At a farm I lived on for several years in Maine there were lots of insects indoors, usually year-round. At times the place was infested. They included ants, ladybugs, bees, hornets, and others. I have also noticed that hornet nests would frequently show up in doorways and common outdoor areas. Also, sometimes several mice per day would be caught. This allowed for other types of attacks, such as the farm manager placing mouse traps in areas that I typically used when preparing meals, or storing food, which resulted in rodent excrement appearing in those areas. Presumably this was done to block and disgust me.
8 Dogs are used to harass targets. The owners of these animals are frequently inconsiderate, allowing enough distance on the leash for them to disturb you.
9 In their book, War and Anti-War, Alvin and Heidi Toffler also mentioned the possibility of using remote controlled micro-robots that resembled insects for surveillance.
10 In December of 2008 Wired announced that scientists at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory created a nanoradio, complete with a tunable band, antenna, and an amplifier. The radio was one ten-thousandths the width of a human hair. It was so small it could be inserted into a single living cell. Not only did it make possible the creation of subcellular remote control devices, but it was reported that the scientists were working on ways to integrate it into living creatures. This allows for the possibility of even the tiniest of creatures being fitted with a remote control device. See Wired, World's First Nanoradio Could Lead to Subcellular Remote-Control Interfaces, December 5, 2008.
11 In multiple places that I've stayed and visited, entire areas have been cluttered from the floor to the ceiling with common objects that are used as temporary barriers. These objects appear on countertops, tables, sofas, and chairs, so there is no place to sit or to place anything. Doorways in particular are blocked with a variety of objects. Traps are set in cabinets resulting in items falling out when they're opened. These traps extend to other areas that are frequently used. Draws and cabinets are also blocked. Using physical objects as barriers the DOD can restrict your movements and significantly interfere with simple functions such as preparing a meal, showering, or shaving. This tactic also appears to be intended to induce a claustrophobic effect. Blocking occurs out in public during swarms. Every time I go out in public I'm crowded and blocked by citizens. This includes people going in and out of doorways, at street corners, in any public place, vendors making deliveries that burst out of doorways and walk in front of me, etc. They use objects which naturally appear in a public setting as barriers. Some include: vehicles, bikes, carts, baby carriages, pets, and the people themselves. I've noticed that they rarely acknowledge that they're cutting you off, blocking you, or invading your space. Again, their movements are perfectly timed, which clearly indicates to me that they are connected to a robust C4ISR system which is guiding their attacks. Blocking occurs on operational/strategic levels as well. Stores are consistently out of items I plan on buying. I'm usually told either by the store clerks or the customers who swarm me while uttering key phrases that it had been arranged. New brands of items become unavailable in stores after I develop a liking for them. Sometimes only products which promote their themes are available. This also allows them some control over my living area. After an item is in a particular place for a while, it will be moved to another part of the store (basically hidden). I've determined that they are probably also altering the signs on the isles which list products. Print material information, such as maps and schedules which I plan on obtaining in public places is not available. This extends to people at service desks who are unable to answer simple questions. Vendors and restaurants, in person, online, and on the phone, will slow you down, delay you, appear incompetent, and act rude. They will frequently mess up and delay your orders. While on the phone with operators or service representatives, you can expect long hold times and multiple transfers, in addition to poor service. Whenever I must contact some type of service support, usually to fix sabotage that the DOD has arranged, I understand that I will be on the phone or online with them for hours, during which time I will also be attacked with PsyOp.