In response to a recent article I published about a country music singer, the late, great Dave Dudley, and the USA's FUBAR military mission, one of the OpEdNews readers, Mr. Timothy Gatto, posted this, which I take as interesting but tangential good counsel:
"Wait a minute. All a nation has to do to send us back to around say 1850 is to shoot a few EMP nukes over the US. It would shut our grid down for years. These are the threats they should be looking at instead of the false crap they throw at us on a daily basis."
I have been aware of EMP technology since a book appeared in 1995 describing the HAARP (High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program) Project, which was conducted in the wilds of Alaska. That book is Angels Don't Play This HAARP (Manning, Jeane, and Begich, Dr. Nicholas; Earthpulse Press, Anchorage, 1995).
Manning and Begich introduce the technology, of which the roots were certan experiments by the great and suppressed inventor Nikola Tesla, near the end of the 19th century. In 1940, old man Tesla (52 years after his crucial invention of alternating current) announced the invention of a "death ray." (P. 1-2)
Tesla, of course, was suppressed, and Thomas Alva Edison got most of the credit, and most of the money, for the inventions upon which modern electrical power are based.
The researchers learned that "HAARP represents a technology which could lead to a new class of weapons that could change our world profoundly-- an all-purpose military tool. If misused, the tool could mess up the weather. It could be used against humanity in a way that would change the way people think, believe and feel. It could be used for good or evil, just the way a harp can produce the music of Mozart or the melody of a death march..."
"...(EMP technology) can: manipulate global weather; hurt ecosystems; knock out electronic communications (its primary use as a military weapon); and change our moods and mental states." (Angels Don't Play This HAARP, P. 9)
Having read this back then, I have been waiting for OUR government to use EMP on some other country. Unfortunately for such warmongers, as the authors of Angels note, there is no way (or there was not, as far as they were able to find out, in 1995) to reliably unleash this technology on a country or its military force such that the effects do not also affect the attacker. If you blast the ionosphere with this incredible power, it's just as likely to knock out the WHOLE WORLD's electricity as it is to just stop America's grid from operation.
It is a sign of how fast the rate of increase of technological innovation is increasing (increase of rate of increase, graphed, is called logarithmic, and the graph is a hyperbola, where the x axis represents linear time, and the Y axis represents the present, which is always receding at a linear rate into the future. The hyperbola, representing increase of rate of increase, climbs, infinitely, and gets closer and closer to the y axis, but never touches it. That's the way hyperbolas work.
In their conclusion (P. 204-206), Begich and Manning tick off various technologies now fully, ubiquitously in use (GPS for one). The corporations E-Systems and its controller, Raytheon, were, in 1995, the OWNERS of the HAARP patents.
Even the military (at least the military during the Clinton Administration) understood, though, that they were playing with fire, or worse.
The concept, "revolution in military affairs" (RMA) first emergd in a document issued by the US Army War College in July 1994: The Revolution In Military Affairs. This document said a philosophy of "conflict short of war" ("terrorism, insurgency or violence associated with narcotrafficking") requires new weapons and a change in public opinion. It asserts that this change in public opinion does not have to evolve naturally, but can be deliberately shaped by the government. The idea is that belief systems of Americans can be slowly altered to allow the military to introduce new weapons technology which would, at this time, be resisted by most Americans. (P. 202)
However, in another section of the same document, the authors urge (perhaps disingenuously) caution:
"Even with all the constraints and countermeasures, there is some value in applying emerging technology using existing strategy, doctrine, organization, force structure, objectives, concepts, attitudes and norms. But there is another alternative: we could deliberately engineer a comprehensive revolution, seeking utter transformation (of warmaking) rather than simply an expeditious use of new technology. However alluring, such a program is rife with hidden dangers and unintended consequences. Unlike the Manhattan Project, we are not forced to pursue revolution without considering the implications (IS THAT A DAMNING STATEMENT OR WHAT? THEY WENT AHEAD WITHOUT CONSIDERING IMPLICATIONS, JUST BECAUSE SOMEONE ELSE MIGHT DROP A "FAT MAN" FIRST??). In conflict short of war, RMA is a Pandora's Box desperately in need of careful scrutiny before opening." (P. 205)
This book is now 16 years old. I have not kept current (it is probably impossible to do so, since certainly the cutting edge of this technology is held in top secrecy) on the latest wrinkle in EMP technology, and by now, certainly, any nation that is our adversary with the capability to actually make a successful missile attack on the US (and there are only three such nations-- China, Russia and Israel) certainly possesses all the information described or alluded to in this book.
But I am not in the least scared of foreign domination. It's our own rulers, Timothy, who are out of control, have a military budget as large as the rest of the world combined, who have shown that they are a clear and present danger to the security of the world. You are correct that what they are throwing at us is "false crap" designed to TERRORIZE US. The bugbear-touting of the Bush and Obama Administrations is all part and parcel of the RMA of 1994, the central tenet of which is not the new technologies themselves, BUT THE BEHAVIORAL MODIFICATION OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO ACCEPT THOSE TECHNOLOGIES.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
2
2
1
