by Judy Wall
excerpts from Nexus Volume 5, Issue 6
About the Author:
Judy Wall is Editor and Publisher of Resonance,
the Newsletter of the Bioelectromagnetics Special
Interest Group. pp.11--13,15-16
This article shows clearly the military's intent to use every
possible thought-influencing technology. This technology is largely
classified but there are leaks, like this article.
We involuntary test subjects can tell
you from first hand experience that far more invasive devices now
This article represents one of the two parallel "tracks" on which
thought-influencing technology is being used and further developed:
Radio frequency signals, based
on the WW II phenomenon called "radar hearing"
Ultrasound signals, which can be
transmitted through the air or piggybacked on to
WEAPONRY USED IN THE PERSIAN GULF WAR
For years, rumors have persisted that the United States Department
of Defense has been engaged in research and development of
ultra-sophisticated mind- altering technology. Confirmation of this
came to me recently in the form of two ITV News Bureau Ltd (London)
wire service bulletins.
The March 23, 1991 news-brief,
“High-Tech Psychological Warfare Arrives in the Middle East”,
describes a US Psychological Operations (PsyOps)
tactic directed against Iraqi troops in Kuwait during Operation
The maneuver consisted of a system in which
subliminal mind-altering technology was carried on standard
radiofrequency broadcasts. The March 26, 1991 news-brief states that
among the standard military planning groups in the centre of US war
planning operations at Riyadh was “an unbelievable and highly
classified PsyOps program utilizing ‘silent sound’ techniques”.
The opportunity to use this method
occurred when Saddam Hussein’s military command-and-control system
was destroyed. The Iraqi troops were then forced to use commercial
FM radio stations to carry encoded commands, which were broadcast on
the 100 MHz frequency. The US PsyOps team set up its own portable FM
transmitter, utilizing the same frequency, in the deserted city of
This US transmitter overpowered the
local Iraqi station. Along with patriotic and religious music,
PsyOps transmitted “vague, confusing and contradictory military
orders and information”.
Subliminally, a much more powerful
technology was at work: a sophisticated electronic system to ‘speak’
directly to the mind of the listener, to alter and entrain his
brainwaves, to manipulate his brain’s electroencephalograph i.e. (EEG)
patterns and artificially implant negative emotional states-feelings
of fear, anxiety, despair and hopelessness.
This subliminal system doesn’t just tell
a person to feel an emotion, it makes them feel it; it implants that
emotion in their minds.
I noticed that the ITV wire service was from outside the United
States. Readers of Resonance may recall that in the Electromagnetic
Weapons Timeline in issue no. 29, reference is made to the
documentary video, Waco: The Big Lie Continues, which contained
video footage of three EM weapons. This segment of the film was from
the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). I wondered if there was
any significance to this.
At the library I pulled up back issues of my local newspaper for the
same time-period of the Gulf War to see what the American wire
services had said, if anything, about the use of this special PsyOps
There was nothing said about it
directly, but three news articles seemed related. In a news release
from Associated Press during the same timeframe of the Gulf War
truce, I read:
“The American pilot who shot down
the second Iraqi warplane in 48 hours said Friday that continued
Iraqi flights suggested that US warnings were not filtering down
to Iraqi pilots…
He said he hopes Saddam gets the message now.
‘It’s really too bad that these people have to die for their
unwillingness to heed our warnings... What I really think is,
they don’t communicate down to the people,’ he said. ‘If they
have a communications problem, I suggest they fix it.’” 
That may have been coincidence but two
earlier news articles, dated March 1, 1991, apparently have a common
origin with the ITV news bulletin.
The first article tells us
that approximately 100 members of the US 101st Airborne Division,
fluent in Arabic, talked the enemy into surrendering. These soldiers
rode in the Apache helicopter gunships that were involved in the
longest helicopter-borne assault in history.
They told the Iraqi troops that they
would be slaughtered if they didn’t give up.
“They got the point,” one soldier is
quoted as saying.
This all sounds very unremarkable,
except when you read the editor’s note:
“The following dispatch was subject
to US military censorship.”
Now why would they want to censor such a
mundane tactic, except out of embarrassment that the US Army
fighting forces had fallen to the level of a cheer-leading squad?...
in which case they would have nixed the thing entirely.
But upon re-reading the article, we may pick out certain key
“He [the soldier interviewed] was
one of dozens of Arabic speakers that played a key role in the
allied ground attack against Iraq, and part of an attempt by the
US Army to use finesse, intelligence work and tactics to
complement brute strength.”
If we fill in the missing blanks with
such descriptions as “the megaphone was used to direct
psychoacoustic frequencies that engaged the neural networks of the
enemy’s brain, causing him to think any thought and feel any emotion
that the Americans chose to lay on him”, then it starts to make
And it would no longer seem so
surprising that one soldier could talk 450 enemy soldiers into
surrendering. The possibilities are there, and, as the next article
documents, that is exactly what happened. Iraqi troops gave up en
“They were surrendering in droves,
almost too fast for us to keep up with...”
“...two Iraqi majors, both brigade
commanders, who gave up their entire units...”
“...one of them gave up to an RPV
[remotely piloted vehicle]. Here’s this guy with his hands up,
turning in a circle to give himself up to a model airplane with
a camera in it.”
Irrational? Not if there was also a
voice being beamed into his head from that little flying toy,
saying, "Give up, give up!"
Otherwise, how do we account for the
editor’s note at the beginning of the article:
“The following is based on pool
dispatches that were subject to military censorship.”
Without that note, we could smugly think
that the Iraqi soldiers were cowards or crazy, but why censor that
WITH SILENT SOUNDS
The mind-altering mechanism is based on a subliminal carrier
technology: the Silent Sound Spread Spectrum (SSSS),
sometimes called “S-quad” or “Squad”.
It was developed by Dr
Oliver Lowery of Norcross, Georgia, and is described in
US Patent #5,159,703, “Silent
Subliminal Presentation System”, dated October 27, 1992.
The abstract for the patent reads:
“A silent communications system in
which non-aural carriers, in the very low or very high
audio-frequency range or in the adjacent ultrasonic frequency
spectrum are amplitude- or frequency-modulated with the desired
intelligence and propagated acoustically or vibrationally, for
inducement into the brain, typically through the use of
loudspeakers, earphones, or piezoelectric transducers.
The modulated carriers may be
transmitted directly in real time or may be conveniently
recorded and stored on mechanical, magnetic, or optical media
for delayed or repeated transmission to the listener.”
According to literature by Silent
Sounds, Inc., it is now possible, using supercomputers, to analyze
human emotional EEG patterns and replicate them, then store these
“emotion signature clusters” on another computer and, at will,
“silently induce and change the emotional state in a human being”.
Silent Sounds, Inc. states that it is interested only in
positive emotions, but the military is not so limited. That this is
a US Department of Defense project is obvious.
Edward Tilton, President of Silent Sounds, Inc., says
this about S-quad in a letter dated December 13, 1996:
“All schematics, however, have been
classified by the US Government and we are not allowed to reveal
the exact details... ... we make tapes and CDs for the German
Government, even the former Soviet Union countries! All with the
permission of the US State Department, of course... The system
was used throughout Operation Desert Storm (Iraq) quite
The graphic illustration, “Induced Alpha
to Theta Biofeedback Cluster Movement”, which accompanies the
literature, is labeled #AB 116-394-95 UNCLASSIFIED” and is an output
from “the world’s most versatile and most sensitive
electroencephalograph (EEG) machine”.
It has a gain capability of 200,000, as
compared to other EEG machines in use which have gain capability of
approximately 50,000. It is software-driven by the “fastest of
computers” using a noise-nulling technology similar to that used by
nuclear submarines for detecting small objects underwater at extreme
The purpose of all this high technology is to plot and display a
moving cluster of periodic brainwave signals. The illustration shows
an EEG display from a single individual, taken of left and right
The readout from the two sides of the
brain appear to be quite different, but in fact are the same
(discounting normal left-right brain variations).
By using these computer-enhanced EEGs, scientists can identify and
isolate the brain’s low-amplitude “emotion signature clusters”,
synthesize them and store them on another computer.
In other words, by studying the subtle
characteristic brainwave patterns that occur when a subject
experiences a particular emotion, scientists have been able to
identify the concomitant brainwave pattern and can now duplicate it.
“These clusters are then placed on
the Silent Sound[TM] carrier frequencies and will
silently trigger the occurrence of the same basic emotion in
another human being!”
SYSTEM DELIVERY AND
There is a lot more involved here than a simple subliminal sound
There are numerous patented technologies which can be
piggybacked individually or collectively onto a carrier frequency to
elicit all kinds of effects.
There appear to be two methods of delivery with the system. One is
direct microwave induction into the brain of the subject, limited to
short-range operations. The other, as described above, utilizes
ordinary radio and television carrier frequencies.
Far from necessarily being used as a weapon against a person, the
system does have limitless positive applications. However, the fact
that the sounds are subliminal makes them virtually undetectable and
possibly dangerous to the general public.
In more conventional use, the Silent Sounds Subliminal System
might utilize voice commands, e.g., as an adjunct to security
systems. Beneath the musical broadcast that you hear in stores and
shopping malls may be a hidden message which exhorts against
shoplifting. And while voice commands alone are powerful, when the
subliminal presentation system carries cloned emotional signatures,
the result is overwhelming.
Free-market uses for this technology are the common self-help tapes;
positive affirmation, relaxation and meditation tapes; as well as
methods to increase learning capabilities.
In a medical context, these systems can be used to great advantage
to treat psychiatric and psychosomatic problems. As a system for
remediating the profoundly deaf, it is unequalled.
(Promises, promises. This is the most
common positive use touted for this technology over the past 30
years. But the deaf are still deaf, and the military now has a
weapon to use on unsuspecting people with perfectly normal hearing.)
In fact, the US Government
has denied or refused to comment on mind-altering weapons for years.
Only last year, US News & World Report ran an article titled “Wonder
Weapons” basically a review of the new so-called
‘non-lethal’ or ‘less-than -lethal’ weapons.’ Not one word about
S-quad, although the technology had been used six years earlier!
Excerpts from the article read:
“Says Charles Bernard, a former Navy
weapons-research director: ‘I have yet to see one of these
ray-gun things that actually works…”
"And DARPA (Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency) has come to us every few
years to see if there are ways to incapacitate the central
nervous system remotely,’ Dr F. Terry Hambrecht, head of the
Neural Prostheses Program at NIH, told US News, ‘but nothing has
ever come of if,’ he said. ‘That is too science-fiction and
It may sound “science fiction and
far-fetched” but it is not.
However, that is just what the
powers-that-be want you to believe, so as to leave them alone in
their relentless pursuit of... what?
The idea behind non-lethal weapons is to incapacitate the
enemy without actually killing them, or, in the case of riot control
or hostage situations, to disable the participants without permanent
injury, preferably without their knowing it. The electromagnetic
mind-altering technologies would all fall into this class of
weapons, but since they are all officially non-existent, who is to
decide when and where they will be used?
And why should selected companies in the entertainment industry
reportedly be allowed access to this technology when the very fact
of its existence is denied to the general public?
As recently as last month [February], this stonewall approach of
total denial or silence on the subject still held fast, even toward
committees of the US Congress!
"The Joint Economics Committee,
chaired by Jim Saxton (R-NJ), convened on February 25, 1998 for
the 'Hearing on Radio Frequency Weapons and Proliferation:
Potential Impact on the Economy'”.
Invited testimony included statements by
several authorities from the military:
Dr Alan Kehs, of the US Army
Laboratories, discussed the overall RF threat.
Mr James O’Bryon, Deputy
Director of Operational Testing and Director of live fire
testing for the Office of Secretary of Defense at the
Pentagon, discussed the role of Live Fire Testing and how it
plays a role in testing military equipment with RF weapons.
Mr David Schriner, Principal
Engineer of Directed Energy Studies with Electronic Warfare
Associates and recently retired as an engineer with a naval
weapons testing facility, talked about the difficulty in
building an RF weapon and about the terrorist threat.
Dr Ira Merritt, Chief of
Concepts Identification and Applications Analysis Division,
Advanced Technology Directorate, Missile Defense and Space
Technology Center, Huntsville, Alabama, discussed the
proliferation of RF weapons primarily from the former Soviet
Although these statements gave
information of technical interest, they are perhaps more important
for the information they did not give: information on the existence
of radiofrequency weapons that directly affect the human brain and
This technology did not spring up overnight. It has a long history
of development and denials of development-by the US Government and
probably half of the other governments of the world as well.
We know that the former Soviet Union was actively engaged in this
type of research. In a previous article we reported that during the
1970s the Soviet KGB developed a Psychotronic Influence System
(PIS) that was used to turn soldiers into programmable ‘human
weapons’. The system employed a combination of high-frequency
radiowaves and hypnosis.
The PIS project was begun in response to a
similar training scheme launched in the US by President Carter,
according to Yuri Malin, former security adviser to USSR
In my Electromagnetic Weapons Timeline I covered a
period of 60 years of interest and development in EM
weapons—information gathered from the many articles and news
clippings sent in by readers of Resonance. In my article on
I traced the development of the ‘voice
in your head’ technology dating back to 1961, all my references
coming from the open scientific literature.
POWER OF THE
Jan Wiesemann has written an apt description of the situation
which now exists in the United States, about the ‘forces that be’
and how the situation came about:
“During the Cold War the United
States not only engaged in a relatively open nuclear arms race
with the Soviet Union, but also engaged in a secret race
developing unconventional weapons.
As the intelligence agencies (which
prior to the Second World War had merely played a supporting
role within the government) continued to increase their power,
so did the funds spent on developing techniques designed to
outsmart each other.
“And as the US intelligence
community began to grow, a secret culture sprang about which
enabled the intelligence players to implement the various
developed techniques to cleverly circumvent the democratic
processes and institutions...
“Like many other democracies, the US Government is made up of
two basic parts the elected constituency, i.e., the various
governors, judges, congressmen and the President; and the
unelected bureaucracies, as represented by the numerous federal
“In a well-balanced and correctly functioning democracy, the
elected part of the government is in charge of its unelected
bureaucratic part, giving the people a real voice in the agenda
set by their government.
“While a significant part of the US Government no doubt follows
this democratic principle, a considerable portion of the US
Government operates in complete secrecy and follows its own
unaccountable agenda which, unacknowledged, very often is quite
different from the public agenda.“
Jan goes on to quote one of the United
States’ most popular war heroes: Dwight D. Eisenhower, who served as
Supreme Commander of Allied Forces during World War II and was later
elected 34th President of the United States.
In his farewell address to the nation in
1961, President Eisenhower said:
“...we have been compelled to create
a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to
this, three and a half million men and women are directly
engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on
military security more than the net income of all United States
“This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a
large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total
influence-economic, political, even spiritual-is felt in every
city, every state house, every office of the federal government.
We recognise the imperative need for this development. Yet we
must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil,
resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very
structure of our society.
“In the councils of government, we must guard against the
acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or
unsought, by the military -industrial complex. The potential for
the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our
liberties or our democratic processes.”
CONCERNS OVER NEW WEAPONS
The United Nations was established in 1945 with the aim of “saving
succeeding generations from the scourge of war”.
In 1975 the General Assembly considered
a draft first proposed by the Soviet Union:
“Prohibition of the Development and
Manufacture of New Types of Weapons of Mass Destruction and New
Systems of Such Weapons”.
In 1979 the Soviet Union added a list of
some types of potential weapons of mass destruction:
Radiological weapons (using
radioactive materials) which could produce harmful effects
similar to those of a nuclear explosion
Particle beam weapons, based on
charged or neutral particles, to affect biological targets
Infrasonic acoustic radiation
operating at certain radio-frequency radiations which could
have injurious effects on human organs.
In response, the US and other Western
They gave a long, convoluted reason, but
the result was the same. In an article entitled “Non-Lethal Weapons
May Violate Treaties”  (below insert), the author
notes that the Certain Conventional Weapons Convention
covers many of the non-conventional weapons—“those that utilize
infrasound or electromagnetic energy (including lasers, microwave or
radiofrequency radiation, or visible light pulsed at brainwave
frequency) for their effects”.
"Non-lethal" weapons may violate
by Barbara Hatch
Development of many of the proposed weapons described on
these pages has been undertaken by NATO, the United
States, and probably other nations as well. Most of the
weapons could be considered "pre-lethal" rather than
They would actually
provide a continuum of effects ranging from mild to
lethal, with varying degrees of controllability. Serious
questions arise about the legality of these expensive
and highly classified development programs.
treaties are particularly relevant.
The Biological Weapons Convention
The development of
biological agents for "non-lethal" uses such as
degradation of aircraft fuel, lubricants, or electrical
insulation would appear to violate the Biological
Weapons Convention (BWC), which prohibits the
development, production, or possession of biological
agents that have no justification for prophylactic,
protective, or other peaceful purposes.
Although "protective purposes" is not defined in the
treaty, by analogy with the Chemical Weapons Convention
(CWC) it can be presumed to mean protection against
dangerous biological agents. U.S. law implementing the
treaty provides criminal penalties for the development
or possession of "any biological agent" for use as a
weapon; "biological agent" is defined to include any
microorganism capable of causing "deterioration of food,
water, equipment, supplies, or material of any kind; or
deleterious alteration of the environment."
There is no exemption for
use in law enforcement.
The Chemical Weapons Convention and the Geneva
The development of
"non-lethal" chemical weapons, such as sedatives
delivered in aerosols absorbed through the skin or
supercaustics that corrode roads and tires (and
inevitably also clothing, shoes, skin, and flesh),
threatens to violate the Chemical Weapons Convention.
The convention is expected
to come into force next year. It prohibits the
development, production, or retention for prohibited
purposes of toxic chemicals, defined as "any chemical
which through its chemical action on life processes can
cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm
to humans or animals." The definition would include
substances such as caustics and other harmful chemicals
not usually classified as poisons.
The convention permits the production of toxic chemicals
if they are used for peaceful purposes, as in
agriculture; protective purposes (against toxic
chemicals); "military purposes not connected with the
use of chemical weapons and not dependent on the use of
the toxic properties of chemicals as a method of
warfare"; and "law enforcement including domestic riot
control purposes." The third of these permissible
purposes might be construed to include chemicals such as
supercaustics, on the grounds that "life processes" are
not the intended target, provided that use of the
chemicals as weapons would entail little contact with
living things. For some weapons, this would be difficult
The Geneva Protocol of 1925 prohibits "the use in war of
asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and of all
analogous liquid materials or devices." The "or other"
appears to broaden the prohibition beyond asphyxiating
or toxic substances. Thus, the use in warfare of harmful
chemicals such as supercaustics and sticky foams (which,
in addition to forming a kind of "roach motel" for
people, could act as asphyxiating agents) may be
illegal, and the use of metal embrittlement agents,
superlubricants, chemicals that interfere with fuel
combustion, and so forth could also be questioned.
Under the CWC, the fourth permissible purpose for
developing chemical weapons agents-law enforcement,
including domestic riot control-is the major reason
currently offered for developing non-lethal weapons.
This permissible purpose, however, contains an ambiguity
in urgent need of clarification. "Law enforcement" is
not defined in the treaty. Does it include anything more
than riot control? If so, what? And what law?
In contrast, the convention defines "riot control
agents" narrowly and prohibits their use in warfare.
Regarding law enforcement, it excludes the use of
"Schedule 1" chemicals (one of several categories of
chemical weapon agents) but says no more. This implies
that for any law enforcement purposes other than
domestic riot control, any nonSchedule 1 chemical may
be developed, produced, acquired, stockpiled, or
transferred as a weapon. Furthermore, although riot
control agents must be declared, the treaty says nothing
about declaring other agents that might be developed or
held for law enforcement.
In the report containing the final text of the CWC,
several of the national delegations to the negotiating
body pointed out the problems raised by the undefined
term "law enforcement' as a permissible purpose.1
One delegation stated that
"this might give rise to far-fetched interpretations of
what the negotiators intended." Indeed, the three
delegations that commented on this issue interpreted
this permissible purpose in widely different ways: as
limited to domestic actions, as applicable outside
national boundaries, or as including only domestic and
U.N. peacekeeping activities. Unless the CWC Preparatory
Commission takes steps to define more closely and limit
this wild card, it could subvert much of the intent of
the convention and render its elaborate verification
For domestic riot control, the development of chemical
agents is clearly permissible under the CWC, although
their use in warfare is prohibited. Riot control agents
are defined in the CWC as chemicals "which can produce
rapidly in humans sensory irritation or disabling
physical effects which disappear within a short time
following termination of exposure." This might be true
of certain sedatives, depending on the dose; it is
certainly not true of corrosive chemicals or
immobilizing glues. No agent that causes a deleterious
effect not automatically reversible can be considered
acceptable and humane for use in domestic riot control;
it would be unethical to subject innocent bystanders,
children, or hostages to severe psychological stress,
possible permanent injury, or death.
The development of chemical weapons in the guise of
domestic riot control agents must not be allowed as a
means of circumventing the CWC. The treaty states that
every chemical held for domestic riot control purposes
must be declared; the CWC Preparatory Commission needs
to specify that these chemicals must fit the
convention's humanitarian definition of a riot control
The Certain Conventional Weapons Convention (also
known as the Inhumane Weapons Convention)2
Many of the non-lethal
weapons under consideration utilize infrasound or
electromagnetic energy (including lasers, microwave or
radio-frequency radiation, or visible light pulsed at
brain-wave frequency) for their effects.
These weapons are said to
cause temporary or permanent blinding, interference with
mental processes, modification of behavior and emotional
response, seizures, severe pain, dizziness, nausea and
diarrhea, or disruption of internal organ functions in
various other ways. In addition, the use of high-power
microwaves to melt down electronic systems would
incidentally cook every person in the vicinity.
Typically, the biological effects of these weapons
depend on a number of variables that, theoretically,
could be tuned to control the severity of the effects.
However, the precision of control is questionable. The
use of such weapons for law enforcement might constitute
severe bodily punishment without due process.
In warfare, the use of these weapons in a non-lethal
mode would be analogous to the use of riot control
agents in the Vietnam War, a practice now outlawed by
the CWC. Regardless of the level of injury inflicted,
the use of many non-lethal weapons is likely to violate
international humanitarian law on the basis of
superfluous suffering and/or indiscriminate effects.3
In addition, under the
Certain Conventional Weapons Convention, international
discussions are now under way that may lead to the
development of specific new protocols covering
electromagnetic weapons; a report is expected sometime
The current surge of
interest in electromagnetic and similar technologies
makes the adoption of a protocol explicitly outlawing
the use of these dehumanizing weapons an urgent matter.
1. Conference on
Disarmament, Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on
Chemical Weapons to the Conference on Disarmament,
Aug. 26, 1992, Nos. 22, 25, 34 (CD/1170).
2. The full name of
this treaty is "Convention on Prohibition or
Restriction of the Use of Certain Conventional
Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively
Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects."
3. Louise Doswald-Beck,
ed., Blinding Weapons: Reports of the Meetings of
Experts Convened by the International Committee of
the Red Cross on Battlefield Laser Weapons,
19891991 (Geneva: Internal Committee of the Red
Harlan Girard, Managing Director of the International
Committee Against Offensive Microwave Weapons, told me he
believes the strategy behind the government’s recent push for
less-than-lethal weapons is a subterfuge.
The ones that are now getting all the
publicity are put up for scrutiny to get the public’s approval. The
electromagnetic mind-altering technologies are not mentioned, but
would be brought in later under the umbrella of less-than- lethal
weapons. These weapons were recently transferred from the Department
of Defense over to the Department of Justice.
Because there are several international
treaties that specifically limit or exclude weapons of this nature
from being used in international warfare.
In other words, weapons that are barred from use against our
country’s worst enemies (notwithstanding the fact that the US did
use this weapon against Iraqi troops!) can now be used against
our own citizens by the local police departments against such
groups as peaceful protestors of US nuclear policies.
The secrecy involved in the development of the electromagnetic
mind-altering technology reflects the tremendous power that is
inherent in it. To put it bluntly, whoever controls this technology
can control the minds of men-all men.
There is evidence that the US Government has plans to extend the
range of this technology to envelop all peoples, all countries. This
can be accomplished, is being accomplished, by utilizing the nearly
HAARP project [15,16]
for overseas areas and
the GWEN network now in place in
The US Government denies all this.
Dr Michael Persinger is a Professor of Psychology and
Neuroscience at Laurentian University, Ontario, Canada. You have
met him before in the pages of Resonance where we reported on his
findings that strong electromagnetic fields can affect a person’s
“Temporal lobe stimulation,” he
said, “can evoke the feeling of a presence, disorientation, and
perceptual irregularities. It can activate images stored in the
subject’s memory, including nightmares and monsters that are
normally suppressed.” 
Dr Persinger wrote an article a few
years ago, titled “On
the Possibility of Directly Accessing Every Human Brain by
Electromagnetic Induction of Fundamental Algorithms”.
The abstract reads:
“Contemporary neuroscience suggests
the existence of fundamental algorithms by which all sensory
transduction is translated into an intrinsic, brain-specific
code. Direct stimulation of these codes within the human
temporal or limbic cortices by applied electromagnetic patterns
may require energy levels which are within the range of both
geomagnetic activity and contemporary communication networks.
A process which is coupled to the
narrow band of brain temperature could allow all normal human
brains to be affected by a sub-harmonic whose frequency range at
about 10 Hz would only vary by 0.1 Hz.”
He concludes the article with this:
“Within the last two decades a
potential has emerged which was improbable, but which is now
marginally feasible. This potential is the technical capability
to influence directly the major portion of the approximately six
billion brains of the human species, without mediation through
classical sensory modalities, by generating neural information
within a physical medium within which all members of the species
“The historical emergence of such
possibilities, which have ranged from gunpowder to atomic
fission, have resulted in major changes in the social evolution
that occurred inordinately quickly after the implementation.
Reduction of the risk of the inappropriate application of these
technologies requires the continued and open discussion of their
realistic feasibility and implications within the scientific and
It doesn’t get any plainer than that.
And we do not have open discussion because the US Government has
totally denied the existence of this technology.
I would like to give special thanks to:
Jan Wiesemann for sending the
Silent Sounds[TM] statement and patents which were the
keystone of this article
Mike Coyle, whose computer
search turned up many more related patents
Harlan Girard, who has provided
numerous official government documents
to the many who have provided
newsclippings and articles, moral and financial support to
Resonance, without which we’d have ceased publication long