Electromagnetic Implications Of Modern Warfare Technology

In both cases the main danger lies with the ionosphere, 35 miles above the earth. The gas is so thin that free electrons can exist for short periods before they are captured by nearby ions. The ionosphere provides long-range capabilities for commercial ship-to-shore communications, aircraft links and for military communications and surveillance systems. It is to the ionosphere that Voice of America (VOA) and the BBC reflect signals back to earth, transmitting their programs around the world.    

The sun has a major affect on the ionosphere. For days before any solar activated magnetic disturbances, all organic life forms are affected (livingcosmos, p.5). Solar flares and coronal mass ejection can cause a worldwide communication blackout on short-wave bands. Incoming solar radiation is absorbed by atoms.  But the sun is not the only thing that can cause disturbances in the ionosphere. It is this discovery that has largely fueled the research on the ionosphere and the quest for warfare technology based there.

Research on the ionosphere began in the 1950’s. To support this research, a five-country consortium operates the European Incoherent Scatter Radar site for ionospheric research in Norway. Other facilities include Moscow, Peru and Tadzhikistan. The U.S. has two ionospheric research sites in Puerto Rico and Alaska. The facility that has raised the greatest concern is the one in Alaska. Chosen for its geomagnetic location, the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program was initiated in the early 1990’s. The capability of HAARP is more advanced than other facilities because of its unusual research tools. It provides electronic beam steering, wide frequency coverage and high effective radiated power. Under the Department of Defense, it is run by the Air Force and Navy Research Laboratories. The instruments employed include high frequency phased array radio transmitters and ionospheric research instruments.

High frequency phased array radio transmitters stimulate well-defined volumes of the ionosphere. Ionosphereic Research Instruments use the ionosphere to measure electron densities, electron and ion temperatures, Doppler velocities, high frequency, HF, electromagnetic low frequency, ELF, very low frequency, VLF receivers, magnetometers and light and optical infrared spectrometers. This transmits a narrow beam of high power radio signals in the 2.8 –10 MHz range. With 30 transmitter shelters including six pairs of transmitters at 10kW each produces 3600kW. The signals spread outwards and upwards and are partially absorbed at an altitude determined by HF. The balance of signals transmitted reflect back towards earth or pass through the ionosophere into space (HAARP #1, p. 1,2).  On the HAARP website, the Department of Defense states that the research is to “ensure the development of the knowledge, understanding and capability to meet national defense needs in the Arctic (HAARP #1, p.3).

However, the U.S. military’s white paper “Weather is a Force Multiplier; Owning the Weather in 2025” states, “U.S aerospace forces can ‘own the weather’ by capitalizing on emerging technologies and focusing development of those technologies towards fighting applications. Such a capability offers the war fighters tools to shape the battle space in ways never before possible. In the U.S., weather modification will likely become a part of national security policy with both domestic and international applications” (Fitrakis, p.1). This contradicts the statement that the HAARP project is purely for educational purposes.

When the Natural Resources Defense Council filed a suit against the Department of Defense last August, it was to aim for a new environmental impact statement (Lazaroff, p.1). Before NRDC, a hearing of the Alaskan States Affairs Committee took place in 1996 in response to Alaskan fears awakened by evidence published in “Angels Don’t Play This HAARP” (Begich, p.3). Documentation stated intentions to disrupt portions of the ionosphere by heating it with powerful pulse radio frequency beams. The radiation that bounces back to the surface of the planet would be in the long-wave ELF range. It would:

a) Communicate with submerged submarines with ELF radiation

b) Penetrate the land to find hidden tunnels or sites of military interest

c) Shield a territory from intercontinental ballistic missiles

d) Fry satellites, discriminate between incoming objects

e) Enhance communications

f) Disrupt communications over an expansive area

g) Change the chemical structure of the upper atmosphere

h) Affect human and ecological health.

The HAARP system has been tested since 1994 (Begich, p.1, 2). At the hearing of the State Affairs Committee, military representative, Dr. Hecshaw, testified the full-scale version has 3,600 kilowatts capability as on the website. Dr. Flanagan revealed the inconsistency with the statement given on the T.V program “Sightings.” He quoted, “HAARP can punch holes through the ionosphere and these holes would heal shortly after the HAARP system was turned off.” He continued, saying, “To punch a hole takes more than 3,600 kilowatts plus another disturbing possibility of ‘maser amplification’ of that energy by charged particles in the ionosphere the energy is powered by the sun’s energy – charged particles in the ionosphere can be caused to ‘mase’ so that puts out more energy than HAARP is putting in.”

MASER is an acronym for Microwave Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation. Atoms or molecules are raised to a higher energy level and then allowed to lose this energy by radiation emitted at a precise frequency like a laser (Hutchinson, p. 3). Under certain conditions it is thought that the effect can tap into the background energy of space with an unknown affect. 

“And when the heaven has its covering removed, and when the hell is kindled up, And when the garden is brought nigh, every soul shall (then) know what it has prepared” (Surat ul Takwir 131:11-14). 

HAARP has the potential to trigger floods, droughts, hurricanes and earthquakes. World-renowned scientist Dr. Rosalie Bertell confirmed, “U.S. military scientists…are working on weather systems as potential weapons. The methods include the enhancing of storms and the diverting of vapor rivers in the earth’s atmosphere to produce targeted drought or floods” (Third, p.1).

When the European Parliament heard about HAARP, a public hearing took place in Brussels, in February 1998. The Motion in January 1999 “Considers HAARP…by virtue of its far-reaching impact on the environment to a global concern and calls for its legal, ecological and ethical implications to be examined by an international independent body… [The Committee] regrets the repeated refusal of the United States Administration…and to gives evidence to the public hearing…into the environmental and public risks of the HAARP program.” 

Regardless, the program seems to continue and ignore the “Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques.” This agreement, signed by Russia and the U.S., it became effective in 1972, long before HAARP.

In preparing for war, President George W. Bush’s revised version of the National Defense System last May announced a multi-layered shield for the U.S. and its allies (Kettle, p.1). Other methods of war are also being explored. They include the spraying of barium salt, polymer fibers, aluminum oxide as in the crater bombs employed in Afghanistan and other chemicals. Why? The abstract statement on patent 6315213 filed last November states: “The polymer is dispersed into the cloud and the wind of the storm agitates the mixture causing the polymer to absorb rain. This reaction forms a gelatinous substance, which precipitates to the surface below. Thus, diminishing the cloud’s ability to rain” (Fitrakis, p.1, 2).  

Global governancy only considers the right to have not the right to be. One sometimes wonders what possesses us to do the things we do, but in this instance one is horrified at the small-minded schemes, which emphasize how far some people are willing to go regardless of the consequences.

Sources:

• Begich, Nick & Manning, Jeanne. “Ground-Based Star Wars.” Earthpulse.com. 10/22/01. 
• Hutchinson. “Dictionary of Science.” Britain: Helicon Publishing Ltd. 1994. 
• Lazaroff, Cat. “Star Wars Plan Violates Environmental Laws, Suit Charges.” Environmental News Service. 08/30/01. 
• Livingcosmos.com. “Natural Phenomenon That Occur in Cycles.” Livingcosmos.com. 10/22/01. 
• Best, Simon. “Electromagnetic Cover-Up.” The Ecologist. 21:1(1991) 33. 
• Fitrakis, Bob. “When the Army Owns the Weather” AlterNet.org. 02/09/02. 
• Healthwellexchange.com. “Electric Magnetic Field Reduce Melatonin.” Healthwellexchange.com.. 10/10/01. 
• HAARP. ALASKA.edu. #1. “HAARP Fact Sheet” HAARP. 03/10/02. 
• HAARP.ALASKA.edu. #2. “Why Conduct Ionosphere Research”. HAARP. 03/10/02. 
• Kettle, Martin. “Bush to Forge Ahead with Star Wars 2.” Guardian Weekly. 164:19(2001) 1 
• Kettle, Martin. “No Blank Check for Missile Shield.” Guardian Weekly. 165:8(2001) 6. 
• Third World Network. “Climate Change – An Integral Part of US Star Wars’ Program.” TWNOnline. 10/22/01. 
• Thompson, Mark. “Star Wars: The Sequel.” Time Magazine. 153:7(1999) 48-49. 
• Raloff, J. “Magnetic Fields can Diminish Drug Action.” ScienceNews Online. 10/10/01.

Hwaa Irfan is a staff writer for Health and Science section of Islamonline