Satellite Surveillance by ProphecyFactory

VIEWS: 52 PAGES: 201

									      Hearing Voices, Mind Reading, Secret
            Weapons, Media Crimes
      Information & Articles by Paul Baird

This site contains information relating to advanced satellite
surveillance and "harassment" technologies which are made
  available to covert government agencies and organised
                      crime syndicates.

    The secret technologies in question are covered by military/agency secrecy
  orders, mostly obtained under the US Inventions Secrecy Act, 1951. There are
     currently over 5,000 hidden devices, many computer - based and satellite
 facilitated, all with military / criminal applications. Neurophones, brain scanners
    and brain wave vocabulary software, directed energy and E-M weapons are
 amongst these as are technologies to affect the weather, cause earthquakes etc
  etc. Undemocratically, and to protect powerful criminals from scrutiny,various
 other Secrecy, National Security and Defamation legislation has been enhanced
    in recent years. The US Patriot Act, for example, protects governments and
 connected criminals from criticism and/or detection and prosecution. Under this
act anyone whistleblowing or fighting the system on a major concern is arbitrarily
  deemed to be unpatriotic (when it's the criminals they criticise who betray us).
They can then be listed (by a senior politician or at the request, through them, of
    a connected criminal) as a security risk and harassed covertly; using secret
technologies. Over 20,000 satellites currently target and silence countless people
  worldwide (est. 500,000 plus) as a result of such bad laws. The victims are not
    openly confronted as that would remove any feigned excuses and leave the
   perpetrators open to all manner of accusation. Instead the methods used are
  covert; employing high tech' to remotely torment and deceive victims without
leaving evidence. Often targets are tricked into believing they are having psychic,
   medical, psychiatric, religious or even alien experiences (which they are not).
 This leaves them discredited as they vainly seek help from ignorant or complicit
  authorities (police, MPs, doctors, media etc). This leaves them neutralised and
possibly even silenced on the issue they originally raised. This, along with various
                    research aspects, is the purpose of the exercise

Through this site the author seeks to provide a community service; to inform the
    general public and encourage forthright but peaceful protest against the
             corporate/military/government crimes outlined herein.

     I should also add that whilst the topic of violence (as a sad reality) was
 addressed in my fictional novel, "In the year 2252", at no stage and in no way
   was it my intention to encourage violent responses to the real life criminal
  conduct of corrupt members of corporate/government/military organisations.
 Passive resistance to oppression is the only acceptable method ... but resist we

                               Paul Baird
                            25 BELTANA WAY
                           NERANG, QLD, 4211
                         Ph: 0011617 5578 2787
           Email: (please put
                    'surveillance' in the subject line)
                      Guestbook: Leave a message

             NOW AVAILABLE Copies of 'Satellite Tyranny' by Paul Baird, a
     compilation of the articles on this site, can be obtained from -

                                       Diane Frola
                           Earthlink Publishing (Aust) Pty Ltd
                                      PO Box 738
                            Jimboomba QLD 4280 Australia
                                Phone: (07) 5548 7205

                                                                   To continue reading,
                                                                   please select a link below

                                                                   Categories of
                                                                   ent Technologies
 can watch                                                         Articles
 They can
  listen                                                                   Satellite Spies
                                                                           Illegal
 WHO ARE                                                                    on Humans
 "THEY"?                                                                   The Sons of Satan
                                                                           Brainwashing and
                                                                            It's Consequences
CRIMINALS !                                                                AN OVERVIEW ON
  (Corrupt                                                                  AND
"Businessme      NB: The satellites are not available to                    HARASSMENT
    n" /          law enforcement agencies. Instead                        SPIES – VILLAINS
 Oppressive        they protect illegal operators (like                     NOT HEROES
Government       drug traders and corporate criminals)
 Agencies /         who in fact spy on law enforcers,
   Media            lobbyists etc. They also facilitate            Surveillance Results
"Invaders")          remote, non-consensual human
                  experimentation by the US military,              Case Study
                 the CIA, Office of Homeland Security
                  and so on. In fact when asked who                References
                      was centrally responsible - the
                   military, defence contractors, the
                  agencies, the media, or the mafia -
                 one senior AFP executive replied:
                 "Well, they all have access don't


     (Source - US Congress Office of Technology Assessment)

         Electronic Eavesdropping Technology
   - (Audio Surveillance)

      Radiating devices & receivers (e.g. miniature radio & ultrasonic
      Non-radiating devices (eg wired surveillance systems including phone
      taps and concealed microphones)
      Tape recorders
      Laser-facilitated listening devices, rifle mikes and other "remote "
      equipment (incl. satellites)

   N.B. Even phones can be made "hot on the hook" i.e. turned into
   microphones when not in use.

          Optical/Imaging Technology
   - (Visual Surveillance)

      Photographic techniques (incl. zoom lens and infra red cameras)
      Television (e.g. closed circuit)
      Night vision devices (e.g. image intensifiers)
      Satellite based viewing (up to and including the monitoring of
      writings as they are written; indoors)
      Aircraft facilitated viewing

          Computers & Related Technologies
   - (Data Surveillance)

      Microcomputers - decentralisation of machines and distributed
      Computer networks
      Software (eg. expert systems)
      Pattern recognition systems
      Voice Activated & thought activated computers (incl. "remote"

N.B. In many countries the military operates tracking stations; assisting
the giant American National Security Agency. The NSA covertly monitors
every call, fax, e-mail, telex and computer data message. The relevant
computers search for key words/phrases. Anything/anyone of interest is
drawn to the attention of agency operatives. This can lead to a large
scale personal surveillance operation by the NSA or other agencies; like
the CIA and their criminal connections. The current system is called

       Sensor Technology

   Magnetic sensors
   Seismic sensors
   Infra red sensors
   Strain sensors
   Electromagnetic sensors (incl. brain wave sensors)

       Other Devices and Technologies

   CB radios
   Vehicle location systems (incl. satellite tracking)
   Machine readable magnetic strips
   Voice stress analysers
   Laser interception devices
   Cellular radio
   Anti personnel weapons - sonic and phasar weapons as well as
   psychotronic weapons; which target the nervous system. (These
   have been trialed in riot control in France etc)
   Scalar wave weapons - (scalar waves emanate naturally from living
   organisms and the earth itself).
   Infrasound weapons - inducing various forms of illness from remote
   sources (Also used on dissidents in France)
   Neurophones and similar (more advanced) technologies - Satellite or
   ground based. These can deliver aural harassment via microwaves or
   lasers aimed at the target.
   Visual harassment laser systems. These deliver blurred vision,
   holographs and so on to disorientate the target and/or experiment;
   victims' reactions being monitored to study how best to "control"
   Brain wave monitors/analysers (remote sensing). These newer
   technologies actually allow the target's thoughts to be interpreted.
   "Over the horizon" technologies - These facilitate ground-based
   methods of harassment (eg The Alaskan HAARP project which
    bounces signals off the ionosphere).

N.B. There are literally hundreds of ways of tracking the earth's
inhabitants which are available to corrupt agency officials and their
criminal contacts (e.g. the mafia). The last seven are examples of devices
used to covertly menace political targets who do not have a public profile.
Most can be satellite based and anyone can be targeted provided they
have neither influence nor contacts in public life. Government secrecy
provisions help to prevent public disclosures regarding these
technologies. However, there is more than an element of corruption /
complicity evident amongst politicians, journalists and other public figures
who are aware of what goes on. Others are afraid to interfere.

       Further Information

It is evident that countless people (world wide) have already lodged
complaints about the following technologies. They are available to
government agencies, defense contractors and "organised" crime figures.

    The Neurophone

Although the offered explanations for "Hearing Voices" can include
everything from trickery to hidden transmitters to tinnitus to
psychic/haunting experiences to possession or encounters with
God/aliens (to so - called schizophrenic episodes) by far the most
common REAL reason is covert Neurophone harassment as arranged by
government agencies and/or other criminals.

US Patent # 3,393,279. July 16th, 1968
US Patent # 3,647,970. March 7th, 1972
The Neurophone was developed by Dr Patrick Flanagan in 1958. It's a
device that converts sound to electrical impulses. In its original form
electrodes were placed on the skin but with defence department
developments, the signals can be delivered via satellite. They then travel
the nervous system directly to the brain (bypassing normal hearing
mechanisms). Dr Flanagan's "3D holographic sound system" can place
sounds in any location as perceived by the targeted / tortured listener.
This allows for a variety of deceptions for gullible victims.

Today, the CIA, DIA (etc) use satellites and ground - based equipment to
deliver verbal threats, deafening noise and propaganda; using
neurophone technology. Anything from TV's/radio's appearing to operate
when switched off through to "Voices from God" and encounters with
"telepathic" aliens are all cons using neurophone technologies to torment,
deceive and (most importantly) discredit agency/criminal targets.
Naturally, the system can mimic anyone's voice and automatic computer
translations (into any language) are incorporated.

Anecdotal evidence indicates that people like David Koresh, Martin Bryant
and others could have been programmed then remotely triggered (or
tricked) using harrassment technologies like the neurophone. (Although
most of the targets are intelligent and law-abiding). For example, John
Lennon's killer, Mark Chapman, reportedly heard voices before and after
silencing the agency-hounded peace advocate. "God" apparently told him
to confess verbally.

To explain why others physically moving into the path of the laser (or
whatever) do not pick up the signals, please note the following
"possibilities"... a) Kirlean photography may be an ancillary system so it's
attuned to the targets personal energy field (their unique EM waves).
b) The magnetite in our brains can act as a detectable fingerprint.
c)Equally each of us has a unique bioelectrical resonance frequency in our
brains. EMF Brain stimulation may be encoded so that pulsating EM
signals sent to the targets brain cause audio-visual effects which only the
target experiences. This, to me, is the best explanation.
d) The individuals "vibrational pattern" could be used as a signal filter like
a radio receiving only the sound modulating the frequency of the station
it's tuned to.
e) The monitors simply adjust the volume downwards when you're in a
position where the signal could hit someone else's body. Even if they
heard it (briefly) they'd attribute it to another voice in the crowd etc.

As with the final proof, the definitive answer lies in the actual blueprints;
secreted in the bowels of the Pentagon or some similar facility.
Nonetheless, there is no report of ANY intercepted neurophone signals. If
it wasn't so effective it would not have been used to facilitate silent
communications between U.S. government agents/military personnel.

    Psycho-Acoustic Projector

U.S. patent #3,566,347, (23/2/71)
A device/weapon which can actually deafen the target.

    Silent Subliminal Messages

US Patent # 5,159,703. October 27th, 1992
Inventor - Dr Oliver M. Lowery
Non aural carriers in extreme audio frequency ranges are amplified or
modulated with the desired material and propagated acoustically for
direct inducement into the brain. This is an excellent method of
influencing people without their knowledge. An alert reader would
recognise how this could create coincidences and stir up conflict;
especially if what's fed to one person corresponds with what's gathered
(via surveillance) from another. It can also help to create coincidences of
the sort the media creates (through surveillance feedback) only in
reverse... where the subjects are fed information prior to the event (eg. a
news story) and coerced into believing they are psychic.

Patented devices known to facilitate subliminal message delivery are too
numerous to list. However, examples include: - Auditory subliminal
message system and method. U.S. patent #4395600, Rene Lundy and
David Tyler, 26/7/83. A system to mix messages into background music
(ala the subliminal transmissions used in some U.S. department stores to
prevent shoplifting or boost sales).
- Subliminal message generator. U.S. patent #5,270,800, Robert Sweet,
14/12/93. To be used with TV, cable TV and computers. (A visual
- Superimposing method and apparatus useful for subliminal messages.
U.S. patent #5,134,484, Joseph Wilson, 28/7/92. Relates to video
signals. The subliminal data can be from a prerecorded or live signal.
And yes... the entertainment industry can use such technologies to boost
sales of CD's, movie tickets etc. As intimated earlier, the criminals
involved not only operate in media/political circles, they seek total control
of everything. In time they may win due to suppression of information
and their terrorist tactics.

N.B Sound can also be induced by radiating the head with microwaves.
One unpublished application was the Gulf War but, more times than not,
the targets are mostly innocent/oppressed civilians trying to exercise
their basic rights to free speech in so-called western democracies.

    Methods and Systems of Altering Consciousness

US Patent # 5,123,844. June 23rd, 1992
US Patent # 5,289,438. February 22nd, 1994
These systems stimulate the brain with different frequencies and wave
forms to alter the subject's state of consciousness.

Electro Magnetic Field (EMF) monitoring/interference is one of the most
insidious and secretive of all methods used by the agencies.

N.B. Similarly, EEG cloning feeds back the results of EMF monitoring in an
attempt to induce emotional responses (e.g. fear, anger, even sleep

This could possibly work on certain members of a crowd or
audience....again this could facilitate scams etc.

Dr Ross Adey concludes that all aspects of human behaviour can be
affected, even controlled. He used 0.75 milliwatts per square centimetre
of pulsed, modulated microwave at a frequency of 450 MHz.

Notably the Alaskan HAARP project (featuring the B.J.Eastland patented
technology - U.S. patent #4,686,605, 11/4/87 - "Method and Apparatus
for altering a region in the Earth's atmosphere, ionosphere or
magnetosphere". AND others) also facilitates experiments in the
disruption of human mental processes. It's the largest, most versatile
radio frequency radiation transmitter in the world also allowing
experimentation in weather "modification", wireless, electrical power
beaming and communications "disruption". Its systems like this which
could one day see attempts made to brainwash/control entire
populations. And that is just as feasible as a wholesale nuclear holocaust.
    Microwave Weapons

Twenty years ago a scientist, Allan Frey, found that if a microwave carrier
were to be sliced and carried audio modulation, that modulation could be
heard by someone in the signals path. The thin pulses of radio carrier
wave cause currents to flow through the nervous system - the result is a
remote transmission; no wires or contact is needed.

"A hearing system" U.S. patent #4,877,027, 31/10/89. Wayne Brunker.
"A hearing device" U.S. patent #4,858,612, 22/8/89. Philip L.Stocklin.

Eg. The latter involves microwaves aimed at the auditory cortex. A mike
turns the sounds to electrical signals which are treated so as to provide
multi frequency microwaves which are applied to the brain area.
Whatever sound the mike picks up (like a voice) is relayed to the target.

The first known experiment with microwaved voices was conducted by
Sharp and Grove in the early 70's. However, the Defence Intelligence
Agency and ARPA (The Advanced Research Projects Agency) are
principally to blame for the abuse of such technologies since. eg Project
Pandora etc. The CIA's Langley Research Centre as well as an army of
"mad" scientists working in Energy/Defence department labs across the
U.S. are also responsible.

As with the NASA Apollo program, many of those originally involved were
ex Nazi or Russian Cold war scientists (even WWII Japanese) recruited,
regardless of their earlier crimes, to commit more crimes, this time for
the U.S.A.

It's worth noting the reported experiments carried out in bygone days
included The MKULTRA (mind control)/LSD experiments, germ and
nuclear fallout testing (on military and civilian personnel), electro-shock
treatment on institutional victims and so on. The U.S. Energy and Justice
departments are now involved in such programs so the U.S. can escape
violation of international defence/agency treaties. That's also why the "D"
for "defence" was dropped from DARPA.

In any event, once a technology is labelled "Top secret-classified" they
can use it any way they like on anyone. God Bless America.

    Brain Wave Monitors / Analysers

Lawrence Pinneo, a neurophysiologist and electronic engineer working for
Stanford Research Institute (a military contractor) is the first "known"
pioneer in this field.
In 1974 he developed a computer system which correlated brain waves
on an electroencephalograph with specific commands.

In the early 1990s, Dr Edward Taub reported that words could be
communicated onto a screen using the thought-activated movements of a
computer cursor.
(Currently under secrecy provisions; "Classified")
In 1994, the brain wave patterns of 40 subjects were officially correlated
with both spoken words and silent thought. This was achieved by a
neurophysiologist, Dr Donald York, and a speech pathologist, Dr Thomas
Jensen, from the University of Missouri. They clearly identified 27 words /
syllables in specific brain wave patterns and produced a computer
program with a brain wave vocabulary.

It does not take much thinking to realise that the US agencies have
access to a perfected version of this technology. In fact the relevant
computers have a vocabulary in excess of 60,000 words and cover most

In fact, the NSA's signals intelligence monitor the brainwaves of their
targets by satellite and decode the evoked potentials (3.50Hz 5
milliwatts) that the brain emits.

So, using lasers / satellites and high-powered computers the agencies
have now gained the ability to decipher human thoughts - and from a
considerable distance (instantaneously).

    How is it done?

The magnetic field around the head, the brain waves of an individual can
be monitored by satellite. The transmitter is therefore the brain itself just
as body heat is used for "Iris" satellite tracking (infrared) or mobile
phones or bugs can be tracked as "transmitters". In the case of brain
wave monitoring the results are then fed back to the relevant computers.
Monitors then use the information to conduct a "conversation" where
audible neurophone input is "applied" to the victim.

Human thought operates at 5,000 bits/sec but satellites and various
forms of biotelemetry can deliver those thoughts to supercomputers in
Maryland, U.S.A, Israel, etc which have a speed of over 300 trillion
bits/sec which means just one (Blue Gene) supercomputer can process
more information than ten times the entire world's population. These,
even today, monitor millions of people simultaneously. Eventually they
will monitor almost everyone...worse than any Orwellian "Big Brother"
nightmare you could possibly imagine, only it will be a reality. Yet our
world leaders, who know this, do nothing.

UPDATE (2005) - IBM's Blue Gene computer can reportedly process 227
trillion flops per second. Even if each calculation involved only one 'bit' of
information, one such computer could process more information than five
times the earth's total population... With supercomputers taking overt
brain downloads within 40 years, total computer consciousness looms as
an open threat for the future of mankind, just as, secretly, it already
torments those victimised as covert targets of high tech brain monitoring
Usually the targets are aware their brain waves are being monitored
because of the accompanying neurophone feedback. In other words, the
computer repeats (echoes) your own thoughts and then the human
monitors comment or respond verbally. Both are facilitated by the

NB Whilst the live/human comments are individualistic and unrelated to
the victims own thought processes oftentimes the artificial intelligence
involved will parrot standard phrases. These are triggered by your
thoughts while the human monitors remain silent or absent.

To comprehend how terrible such a thorough invasion of privacy can be -
imagine being quizzed on your past as you lie in bed. You eventually fall
off to sleep, having personal or "induced" dreams, only to wake to the
monitors commenting / ridiculing your subconscious thoughts (dreams).

If the ability to "brain scan" individuals expands from the million or so
currently under scrutiny to include ALL inhabitants of the planet (as per
the Echelon surveillance system which already monitors ALL
private/commercial telecommunications) then no-one will ever be able to
even think about expressing an opinion contrary to those forced on us by
the New World Order. There will literally be no intellectual property that
cannot be stolen, no writing that cannot be censored, no thought that
cannot be suppressed (by the most oppressive/invasive means).


The combined use of these technologies enables remote torture and
interrogation. (Memories are triggered by neurophone questioning and
the brain wave analysers deliver the answers). Any nebulous arguments
about US national security and the need for classified research on human
subjects speak for themselves. (The writer has a copy of a White House
internal memo, signed by Bill Clinton on these matters).

Remember that in the past CIA mind control experiments have involved
LSD as well as electro-shock treatment.

The MK Ultra (Mind Control) program itself is infamous as are the
instances where implants have been detected by X-Ray etc. Also there
are those experimented on under the the cover of 'Alien visits'. Today,
Neurophone and mind reading technologies are at the forefront of similar
programs. In many ways these new technologies are an even more
sinister means of conducting illegal human experiments.

Colonel John Alexander, advising head of NATO'S non-lethal weapon
initiative, is the main proponent of these technologies. He favours all
manner of devices which can, from a distance, induce illnesses, read
minds and covertly harass innocent targets. If he could he would implant
a microchip in each newborn child and initiate a mind control programme
designed to brainwash the entire planet or at least those not fully in tune
with their New World Order. Even to entertain such a thought is criminally
insane yet he has said such things in public. In fact Scientific American
magazine and the major Scandinavian newspaper, Helsingen Sanomat,
have suggested all people will be implanted with a DNA microchip in the
future. E.g Prince William has already been implanted (for "location"
purposes?) while some U.S Military/Agency personnel, including NASA
astronauts, have been implanted so as to study their thoughts/emotions
etc. Think of the possibilities for robotics and cloning in the future.

Remember, these technologies (developed for times of war / terrorism)
are (post cold war) being used today on lobbyists, intellectual dissenters
and peaceful activists; to discredit and silence them. (So much for
democracy.) Notably different methods are often used on different
victims within a certain area (city) so as to avoid providing a pattern for
investigators to observe. This also provides a cross section of political
targets for their experimental programs.

It is also noteworthy that some of the victims are ex-agency / military
personnel who have rebelled or tried to blow the whistle on corrupt
practices within these organisations. Some of these report that not only
have the thoughts and emotions of millions of targets been catalogued by
military/intelligence agencies but all such agencies have
political/mafia/media links due to both infiltration and association. Many
of the actual monitors/harassers are also recruited from the worst
possible sources.

These people also report that experiments in controlling voters by these
remote methods were tried in Haiti, Bosnia etc AND that in 1994, the U.S
D.O.D proposed using such technology on all individuals opposing their
views(and competitors etc). The DIA would know.

N.B. These technologies are invariably used in conjuction with satellite
(audio / visual) surveillance; creating the effect of an electronic POW
concentration camp. Mental rape is only one of the many crimes
committed in this mobile environment. E.g scientists, writers,
political/military leaders etc can have their intellectual property stolen at
the source. Without doubt the computers store and analyse the
intelligence gathered by surveillance/harassment technologies. Their vast
memories allow detailed studies of how the human mind works so as to
learn how to influence and/or control people. Duplicating these processes
for robotics and other artificial intelligence purposes is another sinister

The US and other world governments are guilty of fostering gross human
rights abuses by using these methods. Their covert operators can now do
their worst without fear of detection. The cost is justified by the control
gained and the experimental results achieved. Of course, (as with the
space program and military expenditures in general) the funds used could
be better spent solving real problems like hunger, disease, poverty and

    Agencies such as the CIA, ASIS and ASIO should be accountable to
    appropriately selected committees etc.
    Military units, like Australia's DSD and the U.S. DIA, should not have
    the right to access satellite (or other) technologies to spy on or
    harass law-abiding citizens; especially in their own country. Equally
    they should not assist foreign governments with 'Big Brother'
    systems like Echelon, except where assisting with law enforcement
    activities (which they do not).
    Federal Police should be able to access oscillating scanners and EEG
    machines like SQUID (Superconductor Quantum Interface Detector)
    through the defence department or appropriate facilities. These can
    detect the relevant frequencies and this provides proof.
    There needs to be a United Nations Satellite Committee to oversee
    developments in satellite technology from a humanitarian
    UN weapons inspectors should include non-lethal weapons and
    satellite weaponry on their checklists.
    The International Criminal Court should deny veto rights to the US
    government. The threat of class actions against US government
    departments may then lead to the end of these atrocities.

On a positive note...

(i) Pres. Clinton has issued a memo promising greater protection for
human subjects of classified research. (The memos very existence is an
admission of guilt).

(ii) Sen. John Glenn introduced a bill (22/1/97) called The Human
Research Subject Protection Act. (And he'd know how necessary that is).

(iii) The European Parliament recently passed resolutions calling for a
world convention to ban all weapons used for human
experimentation/manipulation. (see Resolution on the environment
security and foreign policy A4 - 0005/99, Jan 28th, 1999.EP1159). The
European Parliament also called for a convention introducing a global ban
on any weaponry enabling manipulation of human beings. The
International Committee of the Red Cross also expressed its concerns in
July '94.

(iv) UNIDIR (The United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research) has
issued a media guide to disarmament esp. re weapons of mass
destruction. Non-lethal weapons are listed and the list includes mind
control weapons. Resolutions, treaties, international conventions/laws
must quickly be introduced to bridge the gap between rapidly advancing
(and usually 'classified') technologies and inadequate laws. UN weapons
inspectors should then seek access to government (et al) facilities
(worldwide - including the U.S.) to eradicate these evil weapons.

However these are only promises recognising the problem. None have yet
bore fruit. The use of most "non-lethal" weapons contravenes the spirit of
all privacy laws and criminal codes as well as every relevant code and
convention in play internationally; including The Declaration of Human
Rights. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The
Geneva Convention and The Nuremberg Code. The perpetrators are guilty
of crimes against humanity. Those supporting them are engaging in class
warfare of the worst kind.


                           Satellite Spies
                          The Shocking Truth
               Click the images above to view the larger version.


              Illegal Experimentation on Humans
              Proof of Anti Personnel Technologies
  Developed through Illegal Experimentation on Human Targets
                          By Paul Baird
              Exposure. Vol5. No4. 1998. pp 34-35

These technologies were tested (involuntarily) on civilian personnel using
remote satellite tracking and over-the-horizon technologies. Today they
are also used by covert government agencies to oppress political targets.
(It is a strong possibility that they are also "available" to certain defence
contractors and organised crime figures.)

It's a matter of US Congressional record that in the 50's and 60's the CIA
conducted behaviour or mind control experiments using LSD etc. on
innocent victims. Only the most naive would claim that the "control"
testing stopped…they merely changed their methods and focus. The world
also knows that US radiation experiments yielded tens of thousands of
victims; vindicated, though rarely compensated. Indications are that the
latest round of weapons testing will produce even more victims. Tens of
thousands worldwide have already lodged complaints. The truth must be
faced and publicised!!!

The Neurophone: U.S. Patent #3,393,279.
July 16th, 1968. Inventor - Dr Patrick Flanagan (Invented 1958).
Description: A device that converts sound to electrical impulses;
allowing information to be transmitted to the brain by means of radio
waves directed at any part of the body (skin). In other words, recorded
or live messages, noise, music can be directed at an individual and,
through the nerves, the signal will be carried (involuntarily) to the brain,
bypassing the inner ear, the cochlea, and the 8th cranial nerve.
Purpose: Practically, the Neurophone could be used to communicate with
the deaf but, more often, it is used to terrorise political/military targets.
The tracked individuals hear recorded/live threats, propaganda etc, which
those around them do not hear (delivered mainly via satellite laser). This
harasses and discredits the targets; especially if the problem is
communicated to those unaware of the relevant technologies.

Advanced Neurophone: U.S. Patent #3,647,970.
March 7th, 1972. Inventor - Dr Patrick Flanagan. (Invented 1967).
Description: This Neurophone incorporates an electronic circuit
duplicating the encoding of the Cochlea and 8th cranial nerve themselves.
The NSA placed a secrecy order on this development for over 5 years
because of the military applications of the technology. Further
Neurophone advances include the development of the time recognition
processor, improved memory applications and the advances in satellites
incorporating neurophone technologies.
Purpose: As Above

Psycho - Acoustic Projector; U.S. Patent #3,566,347.
February 23rd, 1971.
Description: A high directional beam, radiated from a number of
transducers and modulated by a speech, code, or noise beat signal. It
may take the form of a radiator mounted on a vehicle, aircraft or
Purpose: To produce aural/psychological disturbances and partial

Methods & Systems for Altering Consciousness :

1. U.S. Patent #5,123,899. June 23rd, 1992.
   Description: A system for stimulating the brain to exhibit specific
   brain wave rhythms and thereby altering the subjects' state of
2. U.S. Patent #5,289,438. February 22nd, 1994.
   Description: A system for the simultaneous application of multiple
   stimuli (usually aural) with different frequencies and waveforms.
   Purpose: To disorientate/manipulate a target.
Silent Subliminal Messages: U.S. Patent #5,159,703.
October 27th, 1992. Inventor - Dr Oliver M. Lowry.
Description: A communication system in which non aural carriers (in the
very low or high audio frequency range or the ultrasonic frequency
spectrum) are amplified or frequency modulated with the desired
"intelligence", and propagated acoustically or vibrationally for inducement
directly into the brain. This can be done "live" or recorded/stored on
magnetic, mechanical or optical media for delayed/repeated transmission
to the target. Sound can also be induced by radiating the head with
microwaves (in the range 100 to 10,000 mhz) that are modulated with a
waveform consisting of frequency modulated bursts.
Purpose: To instruct or pass messages; in theory. In reality it's used to
torment political/military targets. (One unpublicised application was the
Gulf War)

Brainwave Scanners/Programs: First program developed in 1994 by
Dr. Donald York & Dr. Thomas Jensen.
Description: A personal scanning and tracking system involving the
monitoring of an individuals EMF via remote means; eg. Satellite. The
results are fed to thought activated computers that possess a complete
brainwave vocabulary.
Purpose: Practically, communication with stroke victims and brain-
activated control of modern jets are two applications. However, more
often, it is used to mentally rape a civilian target; their thoughts being
referenced immediately and/or recorded for future use.
Note: In conjunction with Neurophone technology, this is a mechanism
for remote interrogation/torture via satellite.

EEG Cloning:
Description: A system whereby the target's EMF is monitored remotely
and EEG results fed back to them (or others) to mimic emotional
patterns; eg. Fear, anger etc.
Purpose: To induce emotional/psychological responses. For example, the
feedback of Delta waves may induce drowsiness since these are familiar
when in deep sleep.

This entire bracket of weapons was referred to by L.Brezhnev in 1978
when he told US President J.Carter that there should be a unilateral ban
on certain secret weapons "more frightful than the mind of man has ever
conceived". And clearly there are many others that we are yet to learn
about; including advanced forms of infrasound weapons that can induce
organ damage/illness from remote sources (esp.satellites).
What's needed includes the following:

1. A UN Satellite committee and non-lethal weapons inspectors.
2. An International Criminal Court prepared to handle class actions
   brought by the victims.
3. A growth in public awareness regarding the testing of experimental

Finally, it may also be worth noting the comments of one senior
investigator from NASA'S Inspector Generals Office. Having conceded the
existence of such technologies and commenting on the evil uses to which
they are put he advised: "I suggest you pray".


1. Mind Control: Neurophone www.nettimakako/mind/neurop.htm .
2. #3 Lee Books
3. The military use of electromagnetic,and mind control technology,
   Armen Victoria (PO Box 99, Westport District Office, Nottingham, N.G.8
   3NT UK)


                        The Sons of Satan
                           By Paul Baird
              'Hard Evidence' Vol. 4 No. 1 Jan-Feb 2004
                            Pages 18-25

Despite the defensiveness of groups suspected of having a secret agenda
people will always believe that wherever there is concealment there could
well be a conspiracy. Equally, if too many people are involved, you could
have dissention due to conflicting views. This could lead to ultimate
failure…Successful "plotting" therefore seems to be effected when certain
privileged groups, clubs, fraternities or societies of like-minded, and
wealthy, individuals band together to direct people and events to suit
their own vested interests. Unfortunately such groups promote inequality,
prejudice and often crime by their actions. These problems are the focus
of this article.

The higher profile groups, like political parties, religious organizations and
so on, govern, to a certain extent, openly. They have large numbers of
members. However the smaller, less well known, groups are often the
worst in terms of prejudice, promoting their own through the ranks of any
hierarchy, be it political, judicial, bureaucratic or whatever. By so doing
such groups infiltrate and impose their views, standards and lifestyles on
others in an underhanded, clandestine manner. Some have a finger in
every pie. Along the way they alienate and destroy many who question or
oppose their selfish goals. The groups or societies in question also seek to
protect their operations using subterfuge and lies to enlist the unwitting
help of those around them AND other criminal connections. The
ostensibly innocent often damn themselves by their silence, their apathy,
their fear.

For good or bad some of the better known clandestine societies include:-
The Bildeberg Club, The Club of Rome, The Illuminati, The Mafia, The
British Round Table, The Knights Templar, The Freemasons, The Trilateral
Commission, The Council of Foreign Relations, The RIIA, The Travistock
Institute, The KKK, The Skull and Bones Society and The Project for the
New American Century. Many World leaders are members of these
influential organizations. For example, failure to attend the annual
Bildeberg Club meeting is said to all but ensure failure at the next
national elections.

Additionally, there is an ever more worrying proliferation of criminally
based networks of paedophiles, satanists, cultists, illegal researchers and
so on. Each watches out for its own members and thereby allows them to
prosper and multiply. The more of them there are in any field of
endeavour, any sphere or sector, the more acceptable their ways and so
the greater their influence. Many use various forms or terrorism to
achieve their goals…

In the Middle East, the perceived hub or terrorism for us in the West,
many brand the US as "The Great Satan". This is as much for their
oppressive stance in the zone as for their perceived immorality. Certainly
there's no denying that The New World Order is an American concept.
Likewise, we in the west are encouraged to see Islamic/Arabic extremists
from that region as devils; fanatics waging a cowardly, "holy" war based
on religious differences. Their collective hatred is supposedly directed,
indiscriminately, at Jews, Westerners etc. Neither extreme view is strictly
correct and even then it only applies to some. However, both sets of
leaders are, with their allies, guilty of manipulation, provocation and
escalation. This has led to numerous, tragic acts of terrorism in recent
years; the World Trade Centre disaster, The Bali bombings and so on.
Whoever they are/were and wherever they're from they do/did Satan's

Now, "terrorism" is defined as the use of violence OR INTIMIDATION to
achieve your goals. Therefore, the abhorrent use of psychological and
emotional violence, pressure or harassment is just as much an act of
terror as a violent hijacking or a suicide bombing. So, bloodless hostage
crises, political or state repression/oppression, covert agency
harassment, media fear campaigns etc are all acts of terrorism.
Accordingly, the unregulated media mafia, the unchecked government
spy agencies and so on should all be placed under careful scrutiny during
any legitimate "war on terror". However we know why that won't happen.
Most people fear corrupt media representatives and covert agency people
(e.g. the CIA) more than anyone else, and with good reason. So much so
that mere mention of their involvement instills such fear that it's an
absolute conversation stopper; evidence of the worst terrorism
imaginable. And unlike known terrorist networks they cannot be
questioned let alone stopped. Of course, as the truth is always an early
casualty anyway, the media/agency/crime figures involved replace it with
whatever they choose; pointing away from themselves with suitable
indignation and outrage.
Many of the US's enemies were trained and armed by the US. This,
coupled with subsequent provocation of those enemies, must be
recognized as part of the terrorism problem. The provocateur escapes
detection then uses the retaliation as an excuse to escalate activity. The
fact that money is generated by all of this is both a central and disturbing
truth that is being largely ignored. If there was nothing to gain by it then
it wouldn't happen. The public are also unaware that covert methods are
used. For example…Regular readers of "Exposure" and now "Hard
Evidence" will be familiar with the existence of high tech' satellite,
microwave and ground based weapons such as thought scanners,
advanced neurophones and the like. Unlike the deaf-friendly miraphone,
modern neurophone based technologies are weapons used for state-
sponsored crime effected by agencies like the CIA, NSA, DIA, and their
criminal "business" associates. The technology allows operatives to use
advanced computer programs and voice overs to deliver aural
harassment/threats etc into the brains of millions worldwide via
microwave and satellite. Satellite brainwave monitors and powerful
computers (at secret facilities and relay stations) also allow for the
deciphering of the targets thoughts, simultaneously. This will be
explained more fully later on but suffice to say for now that the mind
reading capabilities of the relevant technologies are another conversation
stopper…not because of disbelief but because of fear.

The result of applying such techniques can be varied across the
community. Prominent persons who hold terrible secrets may suicide,
while unstable psychopaths and assassins may be driven to commit
murder(s). Meanwhile, protestors, writers, human rights campaigners,
whistleblowers etc may be severly traumatized by long term exposure to
techno-based torture and oppression. The results can be discrediting.
Some can even be wrongly institutionalized. Notably, nursing homes,
asylums and jails house many victims. They are easy targets for illegal
human experimentation but, interestingly enough, most who are
targeted, have a "political" background. To debase anyone is bad enough
but to exacerbate the suffering of such people is unbelievably cruel.

Yet another form of all too common terrorism is the media feedback of
surveillance results. This is often facilitated by the state through MP's,
agency personnel etc, who set up the spying, then relay the frequencies
or pass on results. How it works is that any unwelcome (though private)
comment leads to a response (directly with live TV/radio or later if not).

Your own words/views/thoughts/actions etc are thrown back at you from
the surveillance, usually from the appropriate public figure or sector (with
or without their knowledge). It often takes the form of a threat. For
example, the writers 91 yr old Aunt, who lives at Parramatta, had a turn
and was taken to Westmead hospital. The next day, as I prepared to take
the final draft of this article to my typing service (near my Aunts home) I
listened to the morning radio news. The no.1 item was about a 91 yr old
Parramatta woman (not my Aunt) who'd died at Westmead hospital after
a bashing outside her home. Investigation and subsequent reports
revealed that the news details were (deliberately) incorrect. "They"
search for coincidences, then time and prioritise the reports in an attempt
to terrorise their targets. When all else fails they just make it up. The
facts are wrong but the intention is clear.

The blame could be with whoever gets the surveillance results (solicited,
intercepted etc). That may be a researcher, a writer, editor, stage
manager, exec or presenter but all of them know what goes on. The
presenter is usually blamed, at least initially. This can lead to the victim
looking like an obsessed fan or something; a neat arrangement for
discrediting people. Infact many have fallen for this trap. Some have
even been wrongly institutionalised as a result of false complaints lodged
by criminals/celebrities working for corrupt media empires. Despite the
general public's suspicions most don't realise that the media's role in
controlling knowledge, perceptions and beliefs extends to this sort of
crime (against those who offend their criminal associates).

In any event, taking an undue interest in a non public figure to the point
of spying on them (yet refusing to talk to them) reveals the foul
intentions of all involved in such practices...and those journos that
oppose it are unwelcome in mainstream media circles. So only those who
are complicit or silent survive. Therefore, to give these media terrorists
the benefit of the doubt, to trust anyone in the mass media once
victimized in this manner, is to make a serious error in judgement. Lies
are spread, recordings made and there is no privacy at all. One example
of this involved a female whistleblower contending with corrupt media
execs, at channel 7. They lodged a false complaint through their own
media "crime stoppers" people with "friendly"/corrupt police. It was said
that she was about to rob a bank. This stopped her whistleblowing and
she hid in her house for fear of being framed/set up with weapons, drugs
etc. The terrible realization that those you should be able to turn to for
help are fully culpable themselves is shattering for most. Equally the
culprits go into denial and, in any event, are beyond the reach of any
frustrated/honest law enforcers who may offer to help.

Getting back to the governments themselves…with the
legal/constitutional amendments taking place these days (supposedly
only to combat terrorism) we now have a situation where innocent people
can be framed/tortured/oppressed by the state with "terrorist watch"
type excuses used to suppress the truth. Secretive societies, even groups
of criminally connected "mates", can arrange this all too easily through
their contacts…and a conspiracy of silence covers it up. It's an excellent
way of victimising and isolating people.

To illustrate, recent responses to the September 11, (01) tragedy have
seen civil liberties take a battering, bringing democracy itself under fire.
Draconion laws have been passed and corrupt agencies are covertly
targeting supposed suspects who I'm sure are (usually) nothing more
than concerned citizens exercising their democratic rights. By
"pretending" to doubt a target and refusing to talk with them agencies
(like the CIA, DIA, MOSSAD, MI6, ASIS, ONA etc) can use their arsenal of
"anti-citizen" weapons in a trial of how to terrorise/silence/discredit
people. Those responsible remain "beyond reproach" using remote space-
based technologies etc and quoting "National Security" as their
justification for silence and the secrecy orders placed on the weapons
themselves. As a result the public don't question this because they don't
know the technologies exist.

So…we have a situation wherein patriotic, compassionate people who are
raising awareness on important issues can not only be terrorized by
government agencies (silenced on behalf of corrupt "business" interests)
but they can also be falsely accused to justify the surveillance in the first
place. The "Don't talk to them" attitude of the ruling class and associated
"clubs" fuels the situation, along with their involvement in harassment
directed at the targets who are usually totally innocent, of anything.

In the post cold war era crimes against citizens are becoming a more
substantial part of agency operatives work. Protected agency/"business"
operations (like the drug and arms trades, prostitution, paedophile
networks etc) cannot be questioned without consequences, especially for
ordinary, unconnected people. These same people can be offered up for
experimental programs where techniques and technologies are employed
to study how to control/silence them…The visible results could be
anything from minor stress through to institutionalisation or even death.
This, of course is in keeping with the M.O. of criminals who trade in
human misery and murder (i.e. drug barons, arms dealers, terrorists

This all leads to another question. Isn't failure to act on the part of an
individual or agency part of the terrorist cycle? The technology mentioned
could solve the terrorist problem but that's not what "they" want. Firstly,
the space-based equipment available allows all telecommunications to be
intercepted (Echelon), then there's the audio-visual monitoring of
"persons of interest" and neurophone/brain-scanning of unconnected
targets…So why experiment with whistleblowers and decent people of any
sort while ignoring known terrorists? Maybe September 11 type tragedies
are allowed or even orchestrated by some vested interest groups with
agency connections; loathsome criminals who deliberately stir up trouble
and actively work against prevention or apprehension. After all, Big
Brother does see all. So, because any "agent" moving in the field would
be spotted they use patsies and Manchurian candidates to do their dirty
work and take the blame. This applies equally to individual assassinations
(e.g. John Lennon's death) and terrorist acts (like September 11).

To control the flow of ideas and information "they" must control
publishing, broadcasting and the mass media in general. So the number
of popular, published authors is kept to a manageable level. These, in
turn, feed off the plethora of unpublished material and, in the case of
harassers, surveillance/agency information as well. This indicates
something further about the systems by which organizations remain both
prejudiced and hidden. The ugly truth is that freedom of
thought/expression is an ideal not a reality. To dismiss writings is one
matter. To harass/destroy the writer is another.
Now propaganda can, like consent, be total invention. Control of the
mainstream media allows this to happen. Every media outlet is controlled
otherwise classified information would be leaked to the general public. So
"they" place or hire people to fill crucial roles and thereby ensure this. A
good example was the recent Iraqi war, 2003. Debate raged prior to
troop deployment, and in fact only three nations were actively involved,
but once troops were committed to the fight the media was almost 100%
behind the effort; the public reasoning being that our troops needed our
total support. However, there's little democracy or common sense in that.
The soldiers always have our sympathy/support anyway but the
instigators of any conflict, on either side, need to be questioned on their
motives before everyone just accepts war as a necessary evil.

The links between the Arabic political leaders and the terrorists, the
weapons sales and build ups, the stated intentions etc were all too readily
accepted, as presented. The money, the resources, the power up for
grabs (on both sides) were matters not fully addressed. Only afterwards
were better questions raised about the legitimacy of the whole affair.
Why, for example, is there still no concrete evidence for the UN to
support the action, even after the event? Why don't they all assist
(through member nations) in the rebuilding of Iraq?

Another good example is in the area of dual purposes. Many satellites, for
instance, have frightening abilities (to torment, mind rape and kill) but
the public only hear about telecommunications, weather and recon
capabilities. Similarly, people working as PI's, security guards, journalists,
MP's etc can also work for and/or with "them", thereby compromising
their legitimate work.

Clearly, suppression of information occurs at many levels, and the world
stage really is full of excellent actors. They say all the right things; some
even openly supporting charities, causes and so on but they secretly work
in a conspiratorial fashion to destroy genuinely good people. As a result
the truth may never surface on many matters esp. where those speaking
out are emotionally, psychologically (even physically) tormented for their
troubles. Public figures contend with threatened public ridicule/exposure
(on other matters) for dissenting but non public figures can be tortured
etc. Neurophones, brain scanners and directed energy weapons can
create a mobile P.O.W situation that's indescribably oppressive. To even
question the ruling class's crimes can leave some like modern day
Galileos (under house arrest - figuratively) for merely expressing their
views. All violence is wrong but State sponsored terrorism (emotional,
physical or psychological) is the worst intimidation imaginable, especially
when it's media backed.

It's claimed that the most powerful weapon in the hands of the oppressor
is the mind of the oppressed. To control our minds they need acceptance
and absorption (by the masses) of all the educational, media,
government propaganda that we're exposed to. Those elements of the
truth which, like public "acting", conceal the lies and deception are
essential to their plans. So, in response, we need to read and see a little
less and think a lot more. An example is the illicit drug trade; one of the
scourges of most modern societies. Drugs are used to control/occupy
both those in public life who indulge and those non public figures who
follow their lead but cannot cope or even afford it long term. Following
the money/control trail is a good indicator of who it is that's behind it.
The most powerful vested interest groups, "societies" and individuals are,
like the mass media that shapes our very thinking, linked to and/or
controlled by organised crime and corrupt bureaucracies, through their
agents/employees. These are the connections that point to the ugly truth.

The hardest thing to come to grips with is the breathtaking hypocrisy of
our political/media/business leaders. Only complicit or compliant people
reach the upper levels of these sectors so we find media identities
denouncing terrorists on the one hand while at the same time (and
sometimes with "feedback" in the same item) terrorizing their own fellow
citizens who are genuinely concerned. Also, Western democracies, esp.
the U.S, are guilty of gross hypocrisy on matters like terrorism, torture,
harassment, false institutionalization, weapons of mass destruction,
human rights, religious persecution and much more. For instance, there
are no U.N weapons inspectors swarming over Defence/CIA/NASA
facilities searching for evidence of advanced weaponry that's being tested
on the citizenry. Yet the very strategies to covertly silence those who are
awake to the truth are perfected by experiments - using these very same
technologies. The average, decent citizen takes time to grasp the concept
as it is evil on a scale that's difficult to accept. "They" count on that.

Individually, psychopaths like Martin Bryant and Timothy McVeigh can be
manipulated/steered onto a collision course with their unsuspecting
victims by monsters who brainwash/provoke them (using neurophone
voices etc) to execute the events for which they take sole blame. Not
only is there no authority to investigate the agency criminals behind it,
but the public don't understand how, let alone why, such evil is fostered.
The technologies are veiled by secrecy orders and the motives blurred by
MP's and the media but there can be no excuses.

Pretend you've never used electricity or watched a plane in the sky.
Forget all the modern inventions you take for granted. Now, if you were
told about them by honest people with knowledge/experience would you
believe it? Many technologies have military applications that their
inventor didn't envisage. These can have secrecy orders placed on them
and then only military bodies/contractors can work on developing and
advancing them. Once developed these inventions can be tested and
misused under a "National Security" screen of silence. Defence
contractors, criminals, agency oppressors…all of these have access but
not honest law enforcers or the general public.

For example, DARPA (The Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency)
has a program called LIFELOG which records TV viewing, photographs
taken etc over a lifetime. Another is ECHELON, the NSA system that
monitors all telecommunications worldwide. With Echelon advanced
computers highlight communications "of interest" for human operatives.
Those involved can then be placed on 24/7 audio-visual satellite
surveillance as "people of interest". They can be MP's, personalities,
activists, law enforcers, terrorists etc. On top of that the neurophone and
brainwave scanning technologies facilitate the torture and mental rape of
chosen targets.

Again, to reiterate (for those unfamiliar with what this means) U.S
satellites can track/monitor anyone using tags, infrared, brainwaves etc
etc. E.g. For brain/thought monitoring the evoked potential emitted by
the brain is scanned then decoded/interpreted by U.S/GB/Israeli
supercomputers with a brainwave vocabulary. Also neurophones relay
noise/voices via microwave/laser delivery systems. The signal travels the
nervous system to the brain (bypassing the ears). The two together
provide a means of remote torture/interrogation/deceit.

Law enforcers (honest ones) cannot access this equipment but criminals
in the agencies, in media circles, in politics etc can. Again, their defence
is the "National Security"/"Classified" tag but most of them, as outlined in
this article, are terrorists themselves.

We hear more of illegal research involving animals than people yet cancer
cures, LSD trials, nuclear weapons testing and so on have all involved
human guinea pigs. Even organ donors risk having more taken than they
planned for. Horrific anecdotes have been relayed on this alone; stories
involving hospitals, morgues, universities etc. In fact, so insidious and
deceptive are their methods that "they" use statistics to encourage
drivers to indicate their willingness to donate organs on their licenses.
Ostensibly, that's fine but where's the guarantee that the donated parts
go where they should and what of "the rest"? Interestingly, one recent TV
ad for brain tissue donors focused on schizophrenia studies. This also
smacks of another "cover" for illegal research. Their reassurances ring

These days the living guinea pigs for the experiments mentioned in this
material are no longer just volunteers, students etc. Instead, people in
institutions, helpless and alone, have been used and now anyone
offending/questioning powerful criminals can be offered up to those
involved in these experiments; studies in controlling other human beings

Unfortunately there is no human equivalent of the RSPCA. The Citizens
Commission on Human Rights (CCHR - Church of Scientology) and
CAHRA (Campaign Against Human Rights Abuse) do their best without
resources or a public profile but their impact on the problem is minimal.
However, sadly, mans inhumanity to man has few limits. Things you
wouldn't see done to a dog are done to humans in the name of science,
love, religion and the money/control they generate. Thankfully no other
species is so "intelligently" organised.

Again, writers of anti-crime works, whistleblowers, in fact any
honest/decent people who exercise their rights to freedom of speech,
thought, expression etc can be selected, (by their enemies), for these
programs. This terrorises, silences and discredits them personally but
more so it gives their tormentors opportunities to study methods of
covertly influencing (and altering if possible) belief systems, actions etc.
They hope to learn how to predict/normalize/control human behaviour.
They thereby want to discover how to deal (covertly) with dissenters;
people who see through the lies and propaganda and speak out against
evil practices.

Other purposes for the "research" may be to enhance methods of
computer/human interfacing to the point that computers can almost think
like humans. In fact, the US navy's National Research Laboratory in
Washington has already conducted extensive research on computer chips
with living brain cells. Stolen memories can also be used for robotics,
cloning and all manner of mischief including selling results to interested

Long term dream analysis (a personal favorite of psychiatrists we're told)
can also be carried out without reliance on the targeted persons
recollections. Subliminal suggestions, even false memories (and the
warping of surveillance results), can be planted in further attempts to
influence human thinking and reactions. In addition, for creative targets,
ideas can be stolen or implanted. For others still, fears/attitudes etc can
be moulded by the lies they're told and so on.

The goons delivering all of this harassment/torture can also facilitate
ancillary perversions such as gambling on the outcomes e.g. when will a
targeted person lose their temper, their job, their partner, their life.
Great fun for all concerned especially the filth that set the target up in the
first place. In the case of opposite sex monitors still more evil
"enjoyment" can be found. There is literally no limit to the level of
degrading, humiliating treatment these monsters can dish out.

Cross sections of the community can also be tested as a group; usually
without their knowledge e.g. crowd mood management during marches,
elections, riots can be arranged/attempted using EEG feedback over a
large area. And, of course, defence personnel are subjected to the testing
of some very nasty lethal and non/lethal weaponry (on both sides). E.g.
neurophones were used on Iraqi soldiers. Chemical, biological, even
nuclear weapons can also be tested on troops.

Also, worth mentioning are the people who "disappear" (30,000 a year in
Australia alone). You could be forgiven for wondering if some weren't
spirited away to some hidden facility for more face to face type research,
brainwashing etc. Runaways, custody pawns, murder victims, protected
witnesses, criminals, enslaved victims and so on form the bulk of the
numbers but I'm sure "science" takes its share. Those few who survive to
return to loved ones may be deluded (e.g. by their U.S/"alien" captors) or
worse still, programmed (like Martin Bryant) to commit horrendous
crimes for reasons only the criminally insane could comprehend (they're
usually political of financial reasons).
Although not too many remote targets can be successfully "triggered" to
commit crimes like Bryant's they must still endure torture and deprivation
of physical, emotional and mental liberty. For example, EM
radiation/laser/microwave weapons can mimic signals emitted by the
brain and nervous system. The relevant devices can also disrupt that
system. The symptoms are coordinated (deliberately) to mirror mental
illness which complicit psychiatrists diagnose, on cue, (as taught through
agency modified texts).

Dr Stefan Possony (the "father" or Star Wars) said, in 1995, that
"messaging directly into a target mind with low frequency waves" was
possible. But this had been known for decades before that and he would
have known it. Why the act? The suppression, then timely open
expression of such information is of concern… Another control freak, John
Alexander (a NATO chief) speaks of compulsory implants for newborns.
This is an evil, insane notion yet its dangers have been ignored. In any
event, it's unnecessary in one sense since mind modifiers, EEG feedback
devices, neurophones, brain-scanner and radiation technologies can
achieve total, submissive control of large sections of the citizenry without
their cooperation or even their knowledge, in some cases. So, if political
propaganda and media imaging fail, these devices are in reserve to effect
obedience and conformity to the New World Orders ways of thinking. Yes
they have ways…

Incidentally, Nazi/U.S scientist, Dr Herman P Schner, said: "There are no
proven biological effects from electromagnetic radiation". More patent
nonsense. Yet a colleague, Dr Schmitt, openly confessed to using a
magnetic interpreted neuron duplicator on inmates at San Quentin prison
where he was chief psychiatrist. Needless to say interference with
potentially violent criminals can have dire consequences. Nevertheless,
our jails, like our asylums, nursing homes, etc…are just playgrounds for
the monsters behind all of this. For instance, it's no surprise to learn that
NSW jails, at Goulburn and Junee, have large numbers of prisoners
complaining of neurophone harassment (voices in the head). Junee jail is
privately run by Americans who handpick their victims/inmates. The
inmate (from Goulburn) who relayed this information in the first instance
has been set up, robbed and so on for his troubles. False medical records
have been prepared claiming he has a heart condition (just in case they
want to dispose of him…) and a history of violence in Ireland (a country
he has not even visited). Yet the same victim successfully introduced
articles, patents and so on (relating to the high tech devices described
herein) to a jury which supported his contention that they'd been used on
himself and others. And this faced with a hostile judge, corruptible crown
prosecutor and three government psychiatrists all of whom claimed total
ignorance. Even armed with false psychiatric assessments (paid for by
the state to discredit this man) they could not have him labeled as
mentally unfit. Unfortunately, others harassed by neurophone voices
have, on their eventual release from prison, either been set up or killed
almost immediately.

Other interesting views on human research come from Mathew S
Meselson who said "we'll learn how to manipulate every life process,
genetic ones, mental ones, emotional ones" and Dr Robin Coupland who
talks of "weapons that can cause psychosis, epilepsy, blindness etc."
Instead of referring lovingly to such madness these "gents" would do well
to follow the lead of Dr Rosalie Bertell who, instead, sympathetically and
openly studied the victims of radiation weapons at Greenham Common.
This was another despicable series of murders by "the state" aimed at
peaceful anti nuclear protestors.

The fact remains that, overall, there is little open discussion (legal/moral)
on neurotechnology, dream analysis, human cloning research, advanced
(humanoid) robotics, directed energy weapons or any other diabolical
programs which misuse modern technological advances at the expense of
the citizenry. The law and the parliaments lag way behind…and
intentionally so. Like the LSD trials and the nuclear tests decades ago we
have protected military/agency operations going on which are removed
from public scrutiny by secretive government/"business" bodies. The
results are appalling, inexcusable evil directed at decent, honest people
from all walks of life.

For the privileged few, the complicit, the silent, (including our "secretive"
groups), the future is rosy. They'll survive unscathed and continue to
mock those of us who their delusions tell them are inferior. "Inferior"
because we think and act differently to themselves. This "inferior", largely
law abiding, majority will of course have less to look forward to.
Brainscanning technology is enough of a danger in itself.

To elaborate, aside from plans to cull the worlds population back to a
manageable billion or two (and you won't feel a thing) the covert
agencies are working towards total invasion of every home, every mind
on the planet. Microchipping for security/ID purposes is only the next
cover. The real motives are illegal research, larceny, perversion and total
control, up to and including euthanasia/extermination through incurable
disease/cancer etc. (By the way, one biblical interpretation refers to
microchip enslavement of the world at the end of time). Today,
astronauts submit to it for research and celebrities may agree for security
purposes but the public agrees at its peril. Anyway, as said earlier,
microchipping is unnecessary given the satellite-based technologies now
available. It's a cover; another diversion.

Given all of this, you could be forgiven for entertaining fanciful ideas such
as the thought that scientists could create human clones, insert stolen
human memories (extracted via brainwave scanning) then use
neurophone relayed instructions etc to get them to organise/ run the
whole world on behalf of their faceless, criminal masters. However, given
the enthusiastic way corrupt power brokers
(MP's/journalists/"businessmen") make a sport out of destroying decent
people (usually covertly) today that's probably an unnecessary scenario.
Perhaps it is only an illustrative notion like the "one world government"
described in my unpublished fictional novel, "In the year 2252" (1991). In
that story, given there were no more kingdoms to conquer, no causes to
unify the haves and have nots, no external distractions, no one to blame
for anything (be it social inequity, drugs, weapons/space research etc)
then an "alien" sham was viewed as being as good as any available to
shift the blame and divert unwanted attention. In the fantasy agencies,
military or otherwise, would use secret/classified technologies to
disastrous effect then rally public support (to play hero) in a scenario of
their own creation. Unfortunately that sounded a little too close to today's
reality for their liking, especially in an age where provoked global
terrorism was about to take centre stage…But apparently we don't need
to know the truth. Others more trustworthy than us have it all under
control. So, the 99% that would be sickened by the truth must simply
defer to their greater wisdom.

(Progress in the war on psychological/emotional terror).

The 80's was to be the "decade of the brain" according to the U.S
government. Unfortunately the secret research conducted was largely
inhuman and counterproductive. Sadly it continues to this day,
unchecked. This fact has been recognized recently by a number of
prominent international organizations. These include The International
Committee of The Red Cross, CAHRA (Citizens Against Human Rights
Abuse), CCHR (The Citizens Commission on Human Rights - Church of
Scientology) and CAMS (Christians Against Mental Slavery). Influential
individuals like U.S senator (and ex-astronaut) John Glenn, U.S rep
Dennis Kucinich and President Bill Clinton have introduced bills and so on
which address the problems associated with illegal human
experimentation, including the abuse of remote mind control weapons.
However, to date, nothing has been done in reply. Everything is watered

Regardless, perhaps the two most significant moves have been made by
the European Parliament and The United Nations. The European
Parliament passed the "Resolution on the Environment, Security and
Foreign Policy", A4 - 0005/99, Jan 28th, 1999. This called for a world
wide convention to ban all weapons for human manipulation. Also the UN,
through UNIDIR (the United Nations Institute for Disarmament
Research), recognised and listed "mind control" weapons, putting them
alongside nuclear and chemical weapons as weapons of potential "mass
destruction" because of the manipulative possibilities. The UN too wants
an international treaty to ban these weapons. They published material for
the world wide media to use/disseminate but they have failed to do so.
Ask yourself why. In fact the media is more likely to warp public
perception on matters like "mind control" than it is to inform them. For
example, a recent TV program with that title, "Mind Control" (2003),
focuses on hypnotism not high tech satellite interference. (See Addendum
for a list of organizations and contacts re formal opposition to the
weapons in question).

Because they anticipate further calls for treaties/bans on weapons for
human torture and manipulation the US government is now
systematically shifting responsibility for some of these technologies from
the Defence Department to the internal Department of Energy. This is to
evade the impact of any treaty/ban. Secretary of Energy O'Leary has
apparently admitted that half a million US citizens (at least) have already
been experimented on without their consent (or knowledge in the case of
most). This confession alone should rank the
emotional/psychological/physical torture and terror involved alongside
anything orchestrated by a Dr Mengele, a Saddam Hussein, an Idi Amin
or any other fiend for whom "crimes against humanity" are mere
recreational pursuits. They can call it conditioning or any other
euphemism they like, the fact is the victims are true "prisoners of
conscience", to apply a term Amnesty International uses for physical,
political prisoners, short or long term, (e.g. well known ex victims like
Pauline Hanson and Nelson Mandela). Again, because our media is
controlled by complicit vested interest groups they not only remain silent
on such matters but are likely to exacerbate a victim's pain by actively
participating; contributing to the suffering of targets with lies/deception,
surveillance feedback and more. With no regulation or watchdog, with no
empowered law enforcement agency to investigate and no politician free
of fear of favour it's little wonder that the UN has been largely ignored on
these matters…so far.

In my own view the greatest (and worst) inventions of all time have been
facilitated by the microchip. The brain scanning (mind reading)
technologies alone represent the greatest threat to the "free" world that
there has ever been. Aside from theft, oppression, torture, manipulation,
military/political conquest and control, the horrific human rights abuses
(starting with the most intrusive invasions of privacy) make these devices
horrific/evil beyond the comprehension of most people. Some I've spoken
to say they cannot imagine anything more frightening than mental rape.
But when the corrupt agencies eventually run their "Thought Police"
scans over the entire planet (in the same way Echelon monitors all
telecommunications already) then anyone even doubting what they're
told by those in high places will draw "special attention" from human
operatives. And this before they even mouthe their concerns let alone
convey them in a written form. This one alone could enslave the entire
world and change it, for the worse, forever. Oppression/repression will
lead to complete suppression. Freedom of thought, speech and
expression of any sort will be only a memory (and probably a forbidden
one at that). Democracy will become even more of a facade/farce than it
already is, a system where attempts to exercise your democratic rights
can lead to you losing them altogether. Differences of opinion on matters
relating to crime/corruption already top the list.

Even the silent majority who do, say or think only what they're told
(deviating only between a narrow band of opinions) could be affected.
The one safe democratic right, the right to vote for one of two
"controlled" political parties (the rest incapable of forming governments),
can be influenced unduly, not only by propaganda/lies but by
mood/thought management technologies that people are unaware of.
This raises an ancillary matter. In such an environment (which we call a
democracy) is it democratic to make any service/duty compulsory?
Electoral duty (voting), judicial duty (jury service) and military duty
(where there's national service) are all (or can be) compulsory. Yet to
vote for political representatives, take part in court proceedings or fight a
foreign war without reference to personal (informed) opinion is anything
but democratic. If the systems and individuals in question draw justifiable
criticism or rejection that should be addressed not sugar coated by
compulsory endorsement. Also, from my observations, class, cultural,
religious and ideological "cleansing" can be carried out very slowly, over
time, using stealth and deception. For example, very few whistleblowers
seem to have children once they're criminally harassed. The ones that do
wind up having those children harassed as well (some from birth). In the
long run society's views can be altered to correspond with what the ruling
elite believe, and few will be any the wiser. Those still disagreeing will
become afraid to even express their views; especially when they see the
dire consequences for others. We are being told not to think, only
react…and react as expected, or else.

In such a situation those in the affluent west who have a conscience are
also silenced on certain matters; powerless to help the starving,
diseased, war ravaged and oppressed peoples of the rest of the world
where 25,000 die of starvation alone every day. Today, opponents of all
manner of injustices are ridiculed, set up, robbed, (mentally) raped,
tormented and often totally destroyed (usually in private) using high
tech. Our media and political identities are often at the heart of the
problem (or sympathetic with the criminal activities in question) so they
will not intervene. Yet again, it is vital to understanding the problem that
the reader realises that "they" vet all who enter public life; especially in
politics and the mainstream media. Only the corruptible, malleable and
fearfully silent are tolerated. If confronted these people feign ignorance
and delude themselves into believing they are not to blame; being
beyond reproach. Meanwhile mass media surveillance feedback (including
sly references to private words/actions/thoughts) is responsible for the
grief of many targeted individuals. And the writers can't be blamed in
isolation. What of the sources? And what of the actors, singers,
presenters that deliver the pain? "It's my job"…"I only read it"…"I do
what I'm told" "I didn't know". None of these is a real/legitimate excuse.
They are used to drive a wedge between victims and any source of

From my perspective, our secret societies, our vested interest groups
either order, effect or allow all manner of ills in our world today. The web
of conspirational arrangements woven perverts justice and creates class
resentment. Honest endeavour is to be mocked by thieves in high places
and those speaking of justice? Ridiculed AND crucified…

Again, for those unaware of the fact - Big Brother is NOT the law. He's
the agent/criminal who thwarts the law enforcer. He works for the drug
baron, the arms dealer, the oppressor etc. So the old argument that you
don't need to be alarmed if you're doing nothing wrong is seriously
flawed. You don't have to do anything wrong; Big Brother and his
associates are the wrong doers and they monitor/harass those who
question their crimes. Law enforcers should have the resources to
investigate these high tech crimes but the criminals monitor them too
and so stay "one step ahead". This should change but I suspect it won't.

As for those that Big Brother fosters, obeys and protects, (those removed
from the sane, moral world by the exaltations of position, power and
science)…Technology allows them to see and hear from afar, to monitor
through all obstacles, to read men's minds and create/destroy life itself in
ever more bizarre ways…but they are not Gods. They are motivated by
greed not altruism, by hate not love…and standing on a podium or sitting
behind a desk and pretending to be something they're not, no matter
how good the act, is ultimately transparent to more and more, despite
the media staging. Meanwhile, for the majority, those that can't explain
let alone create whole universes, God cannot be removed from the
picture no matter how inconvenient that may be for "them". Theories
which seem to credit our existence to some sort of cosmic accident, no
matter how fancifully described, don't work for us. Yet for others it's as if
they legitimise the prevailing system, the law of the jungle, by endorsing
such theories/beliefs. Well we have it already; a world where crime pays
and the groups/societies behind it influence every sector in the
community. Deluding themselves into actually believing that they are
rightfully above the law, and therefore not subject to it, these people
have nothing but disdain and derision for anyone suggesting that
integrity and fair play should be the norm. An honest, level playing field
is not their idea of good sport.

Finally, for true believers, our free will is God given. May I suggest that
secretive organizations and individuals wishing to take his place (and
remove that gift) band together… Lacking integrity, conscience, faith or
good intention they proclaim all things are possible for man. All things
good or evil or both? I think we know. So perhaps a more correct title for
such a collection of rogues would be "The Sons of Satan" because,
whether they believe in him or not, they're following in his footsteps.

Our democratic and human rights are in jeopardy, right now. A total loss
of privacy, dignity and control in our own lives is on the horizon. For
many it's already here. The New World order will eventually enslave us,
one way or another, and it's not a conspiracy theory it's a reality. They
mould things to suit their own purposes yet the rest of us are told "you
can't change the world". No reversals, only "progress". Progress for who?
And at who's expense? To object is to invite terrorists into your life; to
silence/torture/discredit you.

Affluent onlookers are unaffected and so ignore the dangers for others
and the shameful truth is hidden by political/media/business groups.
They protect the ugly operations described in this article (just as "they",
in turn protect them). Dialogue is avoided, especially where majority
views and interests simply don't rate. The answers are also unclear for
the individual but silence is definitely not one of them. It is for the UN
and similarly empowered bodies to stand up to this openly and publicly.
Those promoting evil, perverting justice and suppressing the truth must
be held accountable and stopped.


   AND RECOMMENDS THEIR REMOVAL. (The Human Rights Committee
   should also help but are slow to react).
   ACT OF 2001”(HR 2977) (SEE
   684 CR 535
   FLORIDA 33585 USA
    LYNN SURGALLO, Peace / H.R. Activist and former Vice President US
    Psychotronics Association,
    Joan Farr Heffington, Association for Honest Attorneys, (AHA),
    Dr John Hall
    Derrick Robinson, FFCHS,
    Deborah Dupre, ICESH, HR journalist, The Examiner,



         Brainwashing and It's Consequences
                          By Paul Baird
       'Hard Evidence' pp20-31, Vol 4, No 5, Sept-Oct, 2004

As most of us realise there are numerous ways to manipulate people's
thoughts and beliefs. Propaganda and lies can be delivered through
education, literature, the media and so on. In particular, the status of
public figures of all sorts allows them to be used in the brainwashing
process, especially if they've been criminally compromised.

Read the rest of the article (PDF file download)




    Corrupt government agencies and their criminal contacts can covertly
    attack honest citizens especially those who criticize their criminal
    operations or conduct.
   They can abuse these people using high tech satellite surveillance
   equipment as well as satellite-based psychotronic and directed
   energy weapons.
   This is hidden from public scrutiny by bogus "National Security" laws
   drafted by the US government and its allies.
   The complicit mainstream media co-operates fully because of the
   legal ramifications and the fact that (as with the bulk of the
   entertainment industry) it is criminally owned and managed.
   The result of all of this is that many innocent people who attempt to
   highlight important issues are silenced, isolated, discredited or


   A "National Security"cover allows those responsible to PRETEND that
   their innocent targets are guilty of something… or under suspicion or
   potentially dangerous or anything that they can tell themselves to
   somehow justify the inhuman treatment they mete out to their
   enemies; in secret.
   Their secret (usually remote, satellite-based) technology can track
   targets by many means, including by their brains unique electronic
   resonance frequencies. It can monitor audio-visually, inflict
   pain/disease, create or change moods and reactions, deliver
   computer-generated or relayed voices to the brain, read minds and
   cause other seemingly inexplicable happenings of an apparent
   psychic, paranormal or extraterrestrial nature.
   These secret weapons can cause targets to suicide, commit murders,
   be driven to madness and so on but most victims avoid these pitfalls
   and simply seek help from doctors, law enforcers, MP's, journalists
   etc. Even that is generally not a good move because ignorance, fear
   and complicity mean that little or no help is forthcoming from these
   people. For many (including MP's and journalists) a further pretence
   involves the self-delusion that this is all somehow necessary to hide
   the truth or silence certain opinions that are different to their own.
   This then accompanies their general denial that such horrific thing
   even happen let alone that they're involved personally.


   Public figures are fed the results of 24/7 surveillance operations
   carried out on targets; the gathering, of their words, thoughts and
   Writers working for criminals/agencies sew the results into public
   figures speeches, scripts etc as they're gleaned from the surveillance.
   Celebrities may be told lies about the target or who/what the target
   is but, basically, they'll do it regardless (for money and opportunity).
   People are screened (by the CIA etc) as they enter public life to
   ensure that they'll remain silent/co-operative/pliable. Most can be
   easily blackmailed/threatened by agencies/criminals and are simply
   puppets dangling from the "Godfathers" strings with "Big Brother"
   overseeing their operations and intervening when necessary.
  All involved have sold out and sold their souls. Their conduct is
  illegal, indefensible, inexcusable and inhuman and they belong in
  prison for their part in it.
  Even those merely acquiescing are accessories/accomplices because
  they're providing a "legitimate" cover for these criminal practices.


  Police, like other professionals, are not officially told about any of this
  though some learn of it during their careers.
  They are not told because…
  (i) They themselves can be monitored/harassed by wealthy
  criminals, using the relevant technology, if they get too close to their
  operations (as one-time acting NSW Police Commissioner, Bev
  Lawson, confirmed for me personally). Knowledge of this would cause
  an outcry and a mass exodus from the forces. Similar monitoring
  occurs for ex-services personnel who leave with "classified"
  information about corrupt agency practices.
  (ii) Police ignorance prevents honest law enforcers from
  believing/helping victims, thus discrediting and isolating them.


  The psychiatric diagnostic manuals are (in part) written and set up by
  corrupt government agency personnel (especially in the U.S.A) so as
  to provide an easy means of discrediting people who complain about
  covert harassment. Psych students are basically taught that if you
  can't see it or it leaves no evidence it doesn't exist, didn't happen
  and the complainant must be delusional. Their position therefore
  protects government agencies and clever criminals, allowing the
  following injustices:-
  (i) All complaints about covert harassment can be dismissed as
  (ii) All complaints about voice to brain technology can be dismissed
  (iii) All complaints about media feedback of surveillance can be
  dismissed as "delusional".
  (iv) All complaints about oppression, torture, abduction etc can be
  dismissed as "fantasy".
  Most psychiatrists discredit complainants out of ignorance or self
  interest but others (including the spy agency psychiatrists who coined
  most of the numbered terms above) act with full knowledge and total
  malice. Some even work within the actual experimental programs
  that are designed to study human responses to "remote control"
  Those behind the programs help to create assassins and vegetables,
  conflicts and conspiracies, attractions or aversions, successes or
  failures… and all as an experiment for political/economic advantage.


Spoken or written opposition to       Intention to act as a vigilante or
criminal activity                     investigator
Fictional writing about corruption,   Intention to advocate real-life
war etc                               revolutionary action.
Natural anger at criminal             Intention to respond criminally
harassment by public figures          yourself
Observing and commenting on           Intention to join them in some way
what criminal public figures are      or other
Refusal to be "set up" by the media Intention to hide something
Refusal to be manipulated in any      Intention to remain idle/useless
way by criminals
Association with fellow victims of    Intention to adopt their beliefs,
high tech harassment                  lifestyles etc
Natural, normal defences to           Intentions that are mad, bad, sad
remote harassment                     etc


TOPIC                    THE                      THE TRUTH
"National Security"      They protect us          They're mainly a cover
laws                                              for the crimes of the
Spies                    They help and protect    They're mostly thugs
                         us                       working for oppressors
Conspiracy theories      They're paranoid         The world is run by
                         beliefs                  (and for) co-
                                                  conspirators (the
                                                  mafia, the illuminati,
                                                  the cosa nostra, the
                                                  CIA, DIA, MI6, the
                                                  mossad etc). They
                                                  control the media and
                                                  hence our
                                                       of their role
Public figures              They're worthy of our      Many work for/with
                            respect/trust              criminals in the drug
                                                       trade, war promotion,
                                                       ideas piracy etc. Most
                                                       are phonies
Democracy                   We choose our              All politicians are
                            representatives and        vetted by the CIA etc.
                            they work for us           At the entry, pre-
                                                       election and election,
                                                       scandals/blackmail etc
                                                       control them. They do
                                                       what the wealthy
                                                       criminals ask or they're
                                                       out of office (or worse)
War, famine, poverty,       All are unavoidable        All could be greatly
diseases, illicit drugs                                reduced if not
                                                       eliminated (but it's not
                                                       profitable to do so)

                       ADVICE FOR VICTIMS

    Live as normal a life as possible; work, play, socialise, pray. By doing
    this you partially thwart their monstrous remote control experiments.
    Maintain the rage; continue to speak out and write about their crimes
    especially the hellish mistreatment they force people to endure. By
    doing this you defeat their attempts to silence and discredit you.
    Speak only to honest, intelligent, courageous people about your own
    situation; to avoid frustration.
    Cope and survive.


Spying is an age old practice carried out on behalf of groups, governments,
corporations, even religious organisations but today’s spies are mostly desk
bound rather than operating in the field; they monitor surveillance screens, they
write, and they manipulate. Now, The Bard once wrote that all the world’s a stage
and at least as far as modern day public figures are concerned, that is clearly
true. However, few people realise that most players on the world stage are not
only performing scripted roles but that those scripts are often prepared by writers
who are spy agency plants or recruits.
Many other writers are also corruptible or worse, organised crime figures, many
of these also being agency connected. This effectively gives those directing spy
and/or crime operations direct control over world events and how they are
perceived as well as social attitudes, opinions and even in some cases, our minds.
Their first and best sell is to brainwash the public into believing that they are
heroes. Of course in reality they’re not. They’re villains and this essay addresses
that truth.
Many spies are placed in or recruited into key roles (both public and non public)
where they can betray the general public with immunity from
detection/prosecution. Contrary to the mass media portrayal of spying as some
noble, heroic venture it is, in fact, more times than not a significant part of an
overall conspiracy to oppress innocent citizens and suppress the truth. Again, this
is done not on behalf of the general community but for the benefit of the criminal
element that controls and preys on that community. In effect, that element is
“The country” which spies protect in that they own it financially (usually as a
result of criminal/dubious activity) and don’t want their crimes revealed. But by
doing their dirty work spies become traitors to their real country which, especially
in a democracy, should be the vast majority of the general population… not the
land or its wealth or those that corruptly control both but the normal, average,
law-abiding citizens that inhabit it.
This essay also deals with the various methods used by spies to betray us but the
focus is on their treachery. By serving corrupt masters through their deceptions,
their manipulations, their victimisations and other state sanctioned crimes they
make themselves enemies of the people. Their functions/methods are often no
less than crimes against humanity itself. A brief explanation of some of these
methods follows (in no particular order).

Agencies have for a long time relied on controlling the flow of information to
control our minds. That control has never been tighter than it is today. They place
operatives everywhere that deception is convenient: politics, journalism, law
enforcement, healthcare, beaurocracies etc. Forget the spy v spy scenarios of
fictional fame, most spies victimise ordinary citizens. Also misinformation officers,
like propaganda experts of all sorts, write for the mass media including writing
news reports, ads, comedy, movies, articles, songs, books (including history
books) etc. Hitler was infamous for organizing book burnings but these days
that’s hardly necessary as today’s villains financially (through ownership) and
practically (through staffing) control/censor the truth and/or totally prevent
publication of it. Sex, violence and so on are not stringently censored but the
truth regarding many important matters is brutally suppressed. Examples include
the covert methodology and secrecy order protected technology outlined in this
essay. Also course work in physics, psychiatry, law enforcement, even ethics
reveals none of it (by design and law) thus allowing a range of crimes, unknown
to most.
Sadly, people have become so comfortable with certain
government/media/corporate lies, so conditioned to being “protected” from the
truth, that they actually don’t want to hear or read the uglier truths. They prefer
instead to believe the fantasies that they’ve been fed. This is never more so than
when talking about the crimes of the ruling classes; public figures, wealthy
businessmen, powerful agency personnel etc. The excuses and self delusional
belief systems adopted by those associating with these criminals (other
community leaders, employees etc) is proof positive that aside from those
primarily guilty of the crimes in question there are many others prepared to turn
a blind eye for material reward, mateship, through fear etc. Then there’s the
distracted general public, brainwashed not to care about anything that doesn’t
directly affect them as individuals (see “DISTRACTIONS” below). I believe this to
be the single biggest problem of all... not the unintelligent who can’t understand,
not the corrupt who refuse to acknowledge but the inaction of the apathetic and
fearful who don’t want to know.
Selfish apathy and fear are problematic enough when looking at publicised issues
like the environment, climate change, war/terrorism, poverty, weapons/drug
proliferation etc but there’s something worse… The censorship/misinformation
issue is by its very nature self-concealing and so the real reasons for other big
problems often remain hidden from public view and so protected from community
comment. The real issues get scant and incomplete coverage. Many don’t even
know there is a “censorship” problem; brainwashed by mass media propaganda
into believing the media and thinking that spies are good not evil. They have no
idea of the crimes spies commit to protect the ruling criminal elite from criticism.
If people know and accept that many police are corrupt, that many public icons
are untrustworthy, that businessmen will rob them why are they so slow to see
that agency personnel are better placed than any of them to get away with
murder etc. Official state secrets privilege allows these criminals to cover their
activities with bogus national security laws. This secrecy in turn allows state
sanctioned treachery when open government is the only acceptable democratic

Persons of interest (both good and bad) are monitored via satellite 24/7; many
are also tormented and tortured through the use of satellite-based directed
energy weapons and psychotronic attacks using neurophones (voice to skull
technology), mind reading technologies and so on. For starters, all of us have our
telecommunications monitored (via satellite e.g. the Echelon system), public
figures also have audio/visual monitoring 24/7. Banned/censored writers,
whistleblowers and anti-crime campaigners etc also have harassment 24/7… On
top of that (strangely enough) terrorists, madmen and other criminals are also
monitored but rarely stopped; creating a chaotic state of affairs for governments
and agencies to control with legislation and high-tech interference in peoples
This allows convenient events to occur without reference to the technology that
could easily stop them but then, of course, people would wonder what else
they’re used for if they were used to stop crime…

Computers/spies monitor telecommunications as well as all submitted writings, all
real time conversations, and even some thoughts to create a mental slavery
scenario where ordinary disempowered people can have their ideas stolen without
recourse to the law. Monitoring of “persons of interest” who are not public figures
actually also helps the corrupt to stay in touch with the common man (the
silenced majority) and presents popular views and so on which are alien to the
privileged few who run society. They do this not only because they’re thieves but
because they will not tolerate honest men and women in their midst (there’s been
a kind of “ethic cleansing”) and so have only one way of accessing and using
those peoples ideas. The theft is covered with ridicule (the oldest spy trick of all)
and denial. Because only the corruptible are accepted into public life it’s no
surprise that most public figures are prepared to steal from the disempowered.

I should start by pointing out that this is very common and is a criminal practice
well known to all media bodies including Australia’s Press Council, Broadcasting
Authority and Journalists Association. To date nothing has been done to prevent
it. The main reason for this is that the mainstream media is today made up of
companies which are (almost exclusively) owned and controlled by organised
crime and influenced by corrupt agency connections. This feedback method
involves the most basic of spy methodology: to destroy opponents by ridicule. It
can involve leading questions, misquotes and/or apparent “mistakes” or covers.
OK, so this practice, the most common of all harassment techniques (except
maybe for tampering with mail and personal items, aircraft swoops and
emergency vehicle “appearances”) involves the satellite/computer collection and
dissemination of surveillance results and the “feeding back” of these results
through media scripts. For example, on a given morning a victim might say “I’ve
had a gutful of corrupt governments”, he may play golf, he may make his car
repayment etc etc. Later that day he tunes into his favorite news program or
reads his favorite afternoon newspaper etc only to find a clear focus on stories
involving the very things he said (out of context). As the days, weeks, months roll
by the coincidences multiply and the situation is repeated through ads, comedy,
songs etc etc each and every day (incessantly) sometimes for decades. The
intention is to criminally harass the victim in the hope that they go mad, bad etc
as they’re surrounded by coincidences. If they complain to friends, family,
authorities they can appear paranoid and be discredited (like the spreading of
false rumours and the encouraging of personal ridicule, spies fuel this process by
setting it all up to distance victims from any possible source of help). If victims
approach the presenters of the surveillance scripted material for an explanation
they can be institutionalized or at least severely embarrassed when the presenter
feigns ignorance and treats the victim like a stalker or something. These
presenters are accomplices who follow the instructions of criminal executives and
agency liars. They are no better than their puppeteers. Law-abiding people with
integrity would not participate in any of this. Unfortunately many prominent
people have no integrity, having sold their souls for opportunity.

The present day portrayal of many Muslims as crazed terrorists, through events
like The World Trade Centre tragedy of 11/09/01, is no different to Nero burning
Rome and blaming it on the Christians. Throughout history the guilty have
branded the innocent to cover their tracks and destroy their critics. One recent
example was confirmed by ex Italian President Francesco Cossiga who admitted
he helped set up Operation Gladio, a rogue spy network operating under the
auspices of the US intelligence apparatus. These “Gladio” villains carried out
bombings across Europe for over 3 decades (ending in the 80’s), all aimed at
branding their ideological political opponents as terrorists. Similar set ups can be
carried out against individuals to frame them to look like criminals when, in fact,
they’re innocent, even vehemently opposed to crime. Again the agencies and
their masters do this to conceal their own activities by discrediting their
opponents. With catch cries of “don’t talk to him/them” or “do something for your
country” or a combination of threats and rewards they also gain the co-operation
of associates who should, in reality, help the victim’s not the victimisers.

In Roman times rulers offered “bread and circuses”, the British spoke of “beer
and skittles” and today’s catch cry remains “sex and drugs and rock n’ roll”. But
whether it be a harmless pastime or a sordid preoccupation the effect is the
same… whilever people are focused on enjoying their own time and money with
little or no concern for others they are out of the socio-political equation. The
more time that’s spent on trivia and self gratification the harder it is for people to
display integrity, altruism and compassion when confronted with life’s harsher
realities. In other words, apathy takes hold. The encouragement of this situation
is another agency function.

Scientists who know too much about secret weaponry/plans or who may pass on
their knowledge/skills to others, celebrities who oppose crime in high places,
whistleblowers who have details on specific wrongdoings etc etc are the innocent
ones that can be killed. Whether it be by a convenient accident (overdose, plane
or car crash etc) or working off personal health problem (cancers, heart attacks
etc can be induced via technology) or an apparent assassination (Manchurian
candidates can be remote-controlled through brainwashing) the agencies are
often the attack dogs that do the dirty work of the ruling elite. That elite then sit
back smugly in denial and delusion about their role in the crimes in question.
Then there’s also the more widespread killings effected through things like the
promotion of the use of dangerous foods/chemicals or the use of appliances like
mobile phones. There’s also the suppression of cures for cancer and other
diseases and the introduction of others; such as AIDS. The CIA even has
contingency plans for culling a high percentage of the world’s entire population.

It’s not just Masonic organisations that interfere here, agency personnel can
masquerade as almost anyone (from a witness to a victim), they can stop
proceedings/arguments with secrecy orders, they can prevent investigations by
police or health experts and so on and so forth. They also sit behind the scenes
and ensure that whilst media/government hypocrites willingly line up and
condemn small time criminals (petty thieves, thugs, drug abusers etc) that more
serious criminals (such as corporate fraudsters, statesmen “war mongers” and
drug barons) are protected and are positively portrayed to the people. In
addition, division is created between those few good people who may be closer to
these criminals and those good people observing from afar. This removes any
possible conflict.
Also, corruptible court and law enforcement officials, psychiatrists and others help
to discredit those presenting the truth. It’s all part of the conspiracies of silence
which are run on certain important matters. For psych’ experts used in court
proceedings freeing the guilty and branding the innocent are well known
practices. What’s not so well known is that the psych’ texts were prepared/vetted
by agency psychiatrists to allow their colleagues to be used to silence anyone
speaking the harsher truths. Terms such as “brainwashing” and “paranoid
schizophrenia” were in fact penned by spy agency psychiatrists, principally to
brand victims of covert harassment as being deranged and therefore not to be
believed. Many agency targets as well as agency whistleblowers have been
destroyed in this way. Honest psychiatrists who try to blow the whistle on the
practice are, like knowledgeable scientists, murdered.

Naturally mere mention of organisations like the CIA or the Mossad or Office of
Homeland Security creates a panic in people because deep down inside they very
well know that spy agencies cannot be trusted. It’s not that members of the
public have done anything wrong but they know that spies have. So it is with
those agency/crime accomplices who are guilty by association; those who turn a
blind eye to what their mates or celebrity friends or business acquaintances are
up to. (One denial by a smiling celebrity negates a mountain of information).
They co-operate out of fear, self interest etc and will not give the time of day to
their associate’s targets. Even many members of the clergy are prepared to sell
their souls for the gains received in this way. Sadly they’ll support their powerful
contacts and sell out the innocent. They must do this with stars in their eyes, a
“nobody’s perfect” excuse with regard to powerful criminals and a “he must be
mad” delusion with regard to the innocent. The result is that instead of being
thrown to the lions with the innocent victims they join the crowd and enjoy the
blood sport. The level of hypocrisy is astounding.

The work of an agent provocateur has never been more effective than it is today.
Various harassment methods from surveillance feedback to audio torture by
neurophone transmissions to high tech brainwave monitoring and even directed
energy blasts are available to hurt/provoke their targets. Corrupt agency
personnel and their criminal associates can also arrange aircraft swoops, siren
wailing and face to face conflicts. With most people simple anger, fear etc may be
the emotional responses but they do nothing illegal or immoral in response; just
defend themselves. However, when this provocation is directed at potential
criminals or those mentally limited in some way the response can be catastrophic.
For example neurophone input (a form of remote brainwashing when used on the
weak-minded) was used on Martin Bryant (the accused from The Port Arthur
massacre) and John Chapman (the man who killed John Lennon). Modern
Manchurian Candidates like these can be fired up from a great distance. And in
fact people like this are more and more often becoming the useful puppets of
spies who are tagged/monitored themselves and so are confined to
surveillance/harassment room operations. They need dupes and scapegoats to do
their dirty work and high tech satellite equipment allows them to organise this

National security legislation, military acts, secrecy orders and all manner of
official protection for crimes of the state are lined up to hide powerful criminals.
Aside from what’s already been stated, if the resources/technology mentioned in
this piece was made available to honest law enforcers instead of corruptible spies
then everything from truth serums to satellite surveillance and mind reading
technologies could be used to monitor, prevent, detect, capture, interrogate etc.
Crime could be all but wiped out. But, of course, those controlling the technology
(being themselves the greatest criminals of all) don’t want that. They want the
mayhem to continue to justify crushing everyone’s basic human/civil rights so
they fight their “war on terror” and launch “criminal crackdowns”etc. Meanwhile,
spies and the ruling elite etc are protected, even from criticism, by the very
technology that should be used to stop them. It’s all about control and money.
There are no excuses, only lies and cover-ups. Goons from the secret service and
other covert groups are all too often used to harass the innocent to protect the
guilty from criticism.


Aside from the obvious personal promotion or destruction of the reputations of
individuals via, lies/rumours/harassment etc (and almost every victim is confused
about what has been said or how they’ve been set up) there are also elaborate
hoaxes and scams run (using the secret technology mentioned). These include
the promotion within the general community of notions such as the existence of
aliens, ghosts, psychic phenomena etc. False beliefs flourish as a result.
How is it done? Easy… With the surveillance systems I’ve outlined. Computers
hold a wealth of information on everyone. Couple that with secret technology that
can move objects in any way and at frightening speed, and/or put a voice in your
head and/or read your mind and/or cause you to hallucinate and/or feel pain,
anger, sorrow etc etc. It’s all possible and from quite a distance away: Space.
Why is it done? Governments and corporations etc may want to silence or
discredit someone; they may want human guinea pigs for an illegal experiment
that no one would ever volunteer for; they may want to manipulate people (e.g.
through a false psychic); they may want general community acceptance to
legitimize an operation (e.g. NASA/military spending) etc etc.
Personally I believe that in each and every case of apparent paranormal
psychic/alien phenomena there is a logical explanation leading back to the ruling
elite (who betray us all by their secrecy on such matters). It’s all man’s
inhumanity to man. There is a God and there is man. That is all. Everything else
is the result of brainwashing and delusion.


The crime/spy controlled media picks and chooses the timing, slant and effects of
its reports so as to warn, control, stop or destroy monitored persons. The
message being to do (or not do) something that may have no connection to the
“story” at all. For example, if powerful criminals want to warn a government on a
serious policy matter they can arrange for a sex scandal involving MPs to be
publicised or focus on some “slip of the tongue” and blow it out of proportion.
More seriously, with access to geophysical weaponry, spies (esp. military spies)
can alter the weather, cause earthquakes etc (using equipment like HAARP in
Alaska) etc. Satellite technology can also start fires, shoot down planes etc
(without detection). Agency personnel can deliver many nasty warnings to get the
co-operation of others

The modern term for brainwashing is mind control and today’s technology (incl
satellite based neurophones, mind-reading software and mood management
techniques) allows many mind control experiments as well as dream/idea/thought
studies, set ups, remote torment/torture, interrogation, murder and more. The
expanding scope of illegal human experimentation indicates that the oppressive
control of the politically aware population is increasing. No longer are these
operations restricted to the physical tampering with “missing persons” or “alien
abductees”, today’s remote technologies are used to manipulate/restrict members
of the wider population, across the broad spectrum of thinking, caring,
knowledgeable people.
On top of this mental slavery is part of the overall slave trade which is currently
third (behind the weapons and drug trades) on the list of illegal but lucrative
human activities. All three are partially run by the CIA and other agencies and
their criminal associates. And these are the people that are protected from
scrutiny by bogus national security legislation and secrecy provisions… Without
totally independent (and knowledgeable) regulatory or investigative bodies the
agencies can act as they wish; breaking any legal/moral code and feeding off the
population at will. All talk of a “need to know”, “protecting the population”,
“classified” documents etc is usually little more than a phoney cover for
sanctioned crime. In fact, the cover provided by bogus laws, wealth, power,
position etc should be no defence yet laws and resources are made and allocated
so as to provide cover for all manner of evil right up to and including illegal
human experimentation and environmental ruin. In the case of national security,
military, defamation and other laws the protection afforded the criminals far
outweighs that granted to their victims.

These range from conspiracies of silence concerning oppressed citizens (falsely
branded as anything from nuts to terrorists) right through to large scale
operations like wars and false terrorist threats (e.g. see the earlier reference to
Operation Gladio under “False Flag operations”). In between we have individual
assassinations (some using Manchurian candidates or dupes) and tragic events
like The New York World Trade Centre disaster. To shrink from the term
“conspiracy” like it implies some sort of paranoia is to ignore the real world and
retreat into fantasy land. The world is, in effect, run by conspiracies of one sort or
another. The term even appears on the statute books (“conspiracy to
murder”etc). It’s real and spies are the main culprits. Their harassment
campaigns can be as simple as interfering with mail, bank a/c’s, bills etc right
through to organizing overt/covert torment and high tech torture. The bigger
conspiracies present the world itself in the wrong light to an unsuspecting

The arms trade, the drug trade, illegal experimentation, paedophile networks,
prostitution rings, money laundering, financial scams and more are, to a large
extent, shielded from law enforcement intervention, criticism etc by spy agencies
which profit directly or indirectly from such criminal activity. The entertainment
industry, responsible for our opinions, distractions etc, is criminally controlled and
is also one of these protected operations.
What’s written here is based on research, observation, experts/victims anecdotes
and personal experience gathered over nearly 20 years.
To verify my position and convince the reader of my personal integrity and
genuine concern I should point out that I am a Uni graduate who has tried his
hand at a variety of jobs. I have held responsible positions in both the public and
private sector. I have neither committed nor seriously contemplated any
wrongdoing of any sort, yet out of ignorance/curiosity I have applied for a
number of jobs over the years with employers which I later learnt were involved
in criminal activity.
One of these organisations was ASIO… having completed their testing procedures
I was at a final interview when I was confronted by the question: “Are you
prepared to do anything that you’re told to without question?” This immediately
set off alarm bells. Clearly I would be asked to do things that were immoral or
illegal etc so at this point I said “No” and abruptly walked out. My privacy may
well have been invaded from that point. Certainly agency employees are
monitored when they leave their employment; perhaps job applicants are
similarly studied.
Similarly disturbing was the question I was asked when applying for work with a
politician. Again, the final question put me off... it concerned corruption and what
I’d do if the proverbial bag of money landed on my desk. My honest answer was
clearly unacceptable; only the corruptible are welcome.
A third example involved an application to a TV station for work. Afterwards I
criticised the media for their crimes of privacy invasion and harassment. That
particular station was later responsible for a set up in which an unsuccessful
attempt was made to silence me by having me committed. “This is what they (the
media) do to people that cross them” said an employee of the institution in
question. I later learned that many media targets had been silenced that way.
Clearly in all three cases my honesty was not to be tolerated. I later fielded
multisourced and multi-faceted harassment from corporations, the media,
government and (foreign) agencies etc after I wrote “In the year 2252”, a
fictional anti-corruption novel (which was not based on my own experiences). The
connections between organised crime (which runs the entire entertainment
industry, including publishing) and corrupt spy agencies which can access high
tech surveillance/harassment equipment became clearer from that point (1990-
1991) as powerful criminals (wrongly assuming the novel was based on today’s
criminals) came at me covertly to destroy me and prevent any chance of

There are countless bodies reporting on agency misconduct but, more generally,
Jack McLamb (ex police officer) runs an organisation called “Police and military
against The New World Order” through which he tries to educate police and
military employees about the ways they can be tricked into oppressing innocent
people. However many wrongdoers are not tricked at all, they just follow orders
and that’s no excuse.
It’s no excuse morally and it should be no excuse legally. We need independent
watchdogs in these areas but, more importantly we need them for the clandestine
and dangerously powerful world of spying where corruption is rife. There needs to
be a system of checks and balances on personnel and resources for bodies that
can kill/manipulate the mind, body, spirit and emotions as effectively as they can
using modern (secretive) technology. Existing systems, like the inspector
general’s office are a band aid in a battlefield; useless. For example, NASA’s
Inspector General’s office suggested prayer was the only answer to all of this.
Clearly they were as helpless as the victims.

The crimes committed by spies are, like those of connected criminals, protected
from scrutiny by corrupt laws, corrupt law enforcement bodies and a corrupt
media. Lesser criminals are apprehended, tried and punished and often vilified by
more serious criminals masquerading as community leaders. These same people
use spies and goons to do their dirty work and then go into denial about their role
in it all.
In the absence of a genuine regulatory framework and proper independent
supervision of spy operations all that individuals like myself can do is try to raise
public awareness of the problems. It is clearly NOT a free world. You have the
freedom to consume and live in blissful ignorance but that is all. As for
democracy, free speech and other apparent rights, it’s all illusionary; the illusions
being facilitated by agency criminals, the media and others. In other words, you
live without oppression only if you’re totally self-absorbed and distracted to the
point when you don’t want the truth; you don’t care. Those actually seeking the
truth and/or challenging the crimes of the ruling classes are brutally (but
covertly) destroyed.
Today, politics, the media and major corporate entities are primarily protected
criminal operations with spies used as the enforcers. These spies are not the
fictional heroes of entertainment fame but real life villains who betray the people.
They commit crimes against humanity itself and lead the law-abiding majority in a
direction they’d rather not go. If they only knew.

      Advanced surveillance / harassment technologies

 eg. Laser - facilitated listening devices (satellite or ground based - see "Technologies"
 page); rifle mikes; misused communications and military satellites.

 eg. Thermal imaging satellites; aircraft-based "monitors" (see "Technologies" page);
 weather satellites and "others", many with dual (unpublicised) capabilities.

 eg. Aural signals (voices/music/noise) heard by "targeted" individuals.
 eg. Visual interference (holographs, haze etc) seen by "targeted" individuals.

 eg. Brain wave monitoring (via satellite), the results being analysed by thought-
 activated computers.

 eg: "Remote" mind control.
 eg: More extensive "Star Wars" technologies.
 NB: Information currently available indicates that the US Star Wars project was largely
 a front for setting up these other technologies. They are designed to monitor and control
 those with knowledge / views which concern powerful criminals.

 The technologies are usually "non-lethal'. (Information on technologies which can affect
 weather patterns, cause earthquakes etc should be sought from other websites).
Advice for victims

  The best approach is to ignore the feedback and lodge complaints with the political unit
  of the relevant Federal Police department. Unfortunately this sort of satellite monitoring
  is common and nothing can be done to stop it BUT complaints ensure physical safety.

  Thinking on a "non-worded", multi-functional level and keeping busy seem to help as
  they reduce the effectiveness of the relevant computer equipment.

  In other words, don't think too intently on any one topic or on spelling etc because the
  computer's vocabulary is extensive and the equipment feeds off specifics. Remember, it
  is "thought-activated".

  Victims should endeavour to allow for the fact that fellow victims nearby are probably in
  different programs; so as to prevent networking and comraderie amongst targets. This
  also hinders investigators (e.g. AFP) as they cannot identify common patterns. Personal
  egos and self interest should be put aside as these too can lead to isolation for victims.

  It is also worth noting that mind reading technologies allow for stolen memories (good
  or bad) to be used to torment you. They facilitate illegal research, duplication, fraud and
  other crimes.

  Note:- The military have scanners which can detect the monitoring/interference but, for
  "political and legal reasons", they will not help. However, complaints can be lodged with
  Federal Police and the Head of State (or Leader) of your country of residence.

  Some of the companies involved in high tech 'human research' include :- Raytheon,
  General Dynamics, Systems and Electronics Inc., Technology Patents LLC, Dome and
  Magalin Inc and MRU (Mankind Research United). These, along with military/agency
  facilities like the CIA's Langley Research Centre and the NSA's Fort Meade Centre are
  involved in Remote Neural Monitoring (RNM), Electronic Brain Linking (EBL) and other
  hideously inhuman projects designed to study methods of controlling/using human
  beings without their approval.


  Although I believe advertised "defence" devices are of dubious value, they are
  available ...

  EG1 Masach Technologies Ltd - Tel 9722 5356 607 Fax 6617. They
  sell custom designed RF Shields

  EG2 Tintamerica - They sell GP/Window films
- Mind Justice- Contact - Cheryl Welsh
- Mind Justice News Group - Contact Allen Barker
- The Mind Control Forum -
- THE UN (UNIDIR - The U.N Institute for Disarmament
Research They recognise non-lethal/ "Mind control" weapons and
recommend they be banned.
- The European Parliament - Resolution A4-0005/99 Jan 28, 99 called for a world wide
ban on weapons for human manipulation.
- The International Committee of the Red Cross, Geneva. Contact - Dominique Loye Tel
- 02 2734 6001 Fax - 02 2733 2057
- U.S. Rep Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) - he introduced a bill to ban weapons in space (The
Space Preservation ACT of 2001, HR 2977.) It originally mentioned "mind control",
"psychotronic weapons" etc but was later watered down.
- The Church of Scientology - CAPP (Campaign Against Political Psychiatry)
- Christians Against Mental Slavery - CAMS
- John Allman (
- Amnesty International
- Mind Control Activists -
- Southeastern Christians - Dr Gillam,
- Movement to ban technical manipulation of humans - Mojmir Babacek
- UK Peace and Progress Party -

- Dr Nick Begich - Author, H.R. Lobbyist (to the UN, European Party etc)
- Dr Rauni Kilde - (Formerly Finland's Chief Medical Officer)
n.b. I share her view that all pyschic/alien "phenomena" can be traced to the exponents
of high tech experimentation.
- Carole Smith - Pyschologist, M.R. Activisit -
- Ted Gunderson - H.R. Activist -
- Ted Jackson - media commentator - - Joan Farr Heffington,
Association for Honest Attorneys, (AHA),
- Dr John Hall
- Derrick Robinson, FFCHS,

The following have been involved in saving victims from institutionalisation by using
letters from targeted individuals.

- Deborah Dupre -

- Bob S. Dewell -
Defensive technologies are advertised by the EMF Safety Superstore (check the
internet) although I, personally, place little faith in the ability of any device available to
the public to check fields or waves of the sort used by the perpetrators.
Victims should be aware that the definition of paranoid schizophrenia as "amended",
includes victims references to voices and the belief that someone's reading/controlling
their mind. Although, technology allows illegal experiments to involve the remote
causation of all these "symptoms". The psych bibles do not contain that "classified"
information. This is so that psychiatrists can be used to discredit victims by joining them
with those who have a genuine condition. Long term unemployment, isolation and other
social problems also fit the psych profile of schizophrenics but, again, most victims of
technology crimes finish up in the same position and so can easily be confused with
those having the disorder.
The US House Permanent Select Committee on intelligence should be looking into the
relevant crimes as should the US House oversight and government reform
subcommittee on national security and foreign affairs. Any approaches to these bodies
through MPS, should note that the Departments of Defence, Energy, Homeland Security,
Treasury, State etc as well as the CIA, NSA, DIA, NRO, ODNI, Office of Homeland
Security and (since '96 when this escalated) the NGIA (National Geospatial-Intelligence
Agency) are all involved or complicit in the crimes in question. The systematic covert
oppression, discreditation, experimentation and more in relation to caring, honest
citizens branded as dissidents by criminals in high places is one of the greatest hidden
crimes of the last 50 years. It is a 'silent holocaust'.
Particular note should be taken of the remote viewing operations at the CIA's Langley
Research Centre and the NSA's Fort Meade, Maryland Complex. Both have large teams
working on programs like "Mindstar" which involve experimenting on
media/environment/criminal critics. These programs involve the use of psychotronic,
directed energy and EM weapons; satellite facilitated and with media mafia feedback.
They are inhuman, evil and satanic. We must search for ways to inform the public, by-
passing the criminally complicit media whose members have clearly sold their souls on
this issue and many others.

PUBLIC LAW 95-79 [P.L. 95-79]

"The use of human subjects will be allowed for the testing of chemical and biological
agents by the U.S. Department of Defense, accounting to Congressional committees
with respect to the experiments and studies".

"The Secretary of Defense [may] conduct test and experiments involving the use of
chemical and biological [warfare] agents on civilian populations [within the United

Public Law 95-79, Title VIII, Sec. 808, July 30, 1977. 91 Stat. 334. In U.S. Statutes-at-
Large, Vol 91, page 334, you will find Public Law 95-79. Public Law 97-375, title II, Sec.
203(a)(1), Dec. 21, 1982, 96 Stat. 1882. In U.S. Statutes-at-Large, Vol. 96, page 1882,
you find will Public Law 97-375.

This is clearly outrageous in itself, but psychotronic EM and directed energy weapons
are also used these days. Satellite faciliation of the inhuman studies in question
presents international law problems (and deliberately so).
A list of "Crimes Against Humanity" under the guise of legitimate experimentation can
   be found at and similar sites.
   The Torture Prevention Society -
   The Stalking Resource Centre -




          COVERTLY. COMMITTEE – D.COYE 022 734 6001
          WEAPONS AND RECOMMENDS THEIR REMOVAL. (The Human Rights Committee should
          also help but are slow to react).

          (SEE –
          CCHR – KIM CULLEN AND ASHLEIGH MCSWAN (02) 9211 4787


684 CR 535
UN Human Rights Committee

ICESH (International Coalition Campaign)
US REP JIM GUEST (PH: 0011 1 660535 6664)








           WALDEMAR LOTZ,

           DARIUS MOCKUS
           DENISE S POMPL,
           ELEANOR WHITE,,

           The Torture Prevention Society -

PAUL BAIRD – PHONE: (02) 9635 0752 (H) OR

       Current Developments
Bob Boyce, inventor of a method of charging batteries with free energy, has had a
verichip removed that was planted by an agency seeking to rob/destroy him.
Another, Jesse Beltran, witnessed a police murder and was similarly chipped. His
chip removal story was (oddly enough) covered by mainstream Fox News. I believe
this was allowed to be publicised as a diversion from the fact that satellites are now
responsible for most monitoring; no chips are necessary.

Did You Know

   All users of mobile phones can be monitored via satellite and "affected" if necessary.
   Aside from the microwave health dangers, the current can be remotely increased 20,000
   times to fry your brains in a second. Chechnyan leader, General Dudayev may have
   been killed that way. He was on his mobile.

   Most public figures are constantly "monitored" by corrupt government agencies (esp.
   the CIA) and their criminal contacts. (Some of them even bragged about it to me). It's
   not a matter of "if you have nothing to hide, why worry" but rather "if you have nothing
   to hide, you are a worry". Only those in tune with the thinking of the "Nazis" of The New
   World Order, only those who can be bought, blackmailed, controlled and so on are
   allowed into mainstream politics, journalism etc. these days. This affects us all because
   these then are the people who determine/influence how we live and die. For instance, I
   know of many capable, "good" people who are excluded or pressured not to act because
they oppose criminals in high places. This is "thought policing" in the real world. It's
Covert surveillance is also used to rob inventors, writers etc who have been rejected or
"excluded". The published, in fact, often feed off the unpublished, especially through
editors "sympathetic" with "establishment" organisations and "business" interests.

Media entities spread their legal business to create conflicts of interest should a victim
wish to sue. Any litigation against powerful media identities can also be perverted
courtesy of surveillance provided by "connected" people. In this way they're always one
step ahead and cannot lose any but the most "public" cases.

The victims of experimentation (using remote viewing, neurophone and brainwave
scanning technologies) are often institutionalised people such as prisoners, psychiatric
patients or nursing home residents. These people can be easily discredited and isolated
(esp. in the USA). No-one would listen, no-one would care and mainstream psychiatrists
are all too willing to dismiss political histories etc. and give the expedient diagnosis...
especially as most of these victims wouldn't understand what's happening.
However, these days more and more educated, fully functional individuals have become
the targets of experiments in "remote" control methods. These elude the traps but
suffer nonetheless. These are usually the political targets.

So many psychiatrists work for or with government agencies (and/or criminally
connected organisations) that the American Psychiatric Associations manual (a
worldwide "bible" for the profession) has been written in such a way that the effects of
mind control technologies mirror those of paranoid schizophrenia. In fact "they"
invented the term originally to discredit whistle blowers/targets of all sorts. "You cant
prove it so its not happening" is their catchcry. Therefore, this "state secret" protects all
other secrets courtesy of a corruptible profession, especially those who amend the
"bible" of the profession.

Equally other professionals help to cover up the truth... For example... Those who have
seen the movie "A Beautiful Mind" may share my curiosity as to whether Nobel Prize
winner, John Nash, was actually a real agency target or genuinely schizophrenic, as he
was ultimately portrayed in the movie version of his life... as 'edited'(?) In fact, in an
interview he made it clear he only heard voices and was paid a hefty sum for the movie
rights. The simple fact is that anyone working on codes for government or preparing
game theory works on corporate/government strategies is bound to attract agency
attention. There is nothing in the circumstances which could not be explained by the use
of technology coupled with confusion/betrayal. (Remember, the mafia/agency
connection 'influencing' all media). Some may also notice the careers of certain artists
are given a boost for 'co-operating'. EG. K. Minogue's 'Cant get you out of my head' has
introduced her to U.S. audiences... It's a useful harassment tool in itself.

Star Wars is not only well under way but destructive laser weapons, like other satellite
weapons, do not just target military aggressors. (think about fires etc.) Even
spontaneous combustion mysteries etc.

Experts estimate it would take 100,000 earth years to travel to a planet supporting
similar lifeforms (if such a thing existed). The resources allocated to searching could
feed the world but are, in effect, often misused on other technologies directed at us,
right now.
The European parliament recommends that all telecommunications (e.g. emails) should
be encrypted as protection against echelon the US spy satellite/computer system which
allows theft of intellectual property etc.

Police lines (and senior investigators) are monitored by covert agencies and criminals.
This protects drug barons etc whilst also endangering police investigators and
informants (eg "project Noah" type calls).

    Any useful idea, script, invention etc solicited through the media (via a contest or
    otherwise) can be stolen/used and/or used as part of a harassment programme
    against you.

    30,000 people disappear each year in Australia alone. Not all are custody, kidnap,
    runaway, slavery type matters. Some become human guinea pigs in government or
    private institutions and elsewhere.

    History books are weighted, even commissioned, to spread propaganda. Other
    books (eg dictionaries) can display opinions as truth. The word "religion" for
    example, evokes an emotional response in most of us. Some dictionaries define it
    as "a system of belief in a deity" or "worship of a supernatural power" while others
    call it "superstition". (Hardly objective).

    ASIO, ASIS, The Office of National Assessments and other agencies cooperate with
    corrupt U.S agencies to the point of complete compliance regardless of proof or
    intention. They also facilitate campaigns of harassment and intimidation to discredit
    and destroy victims of U.S agency or crime syndicate hatred; using technology to
    oppress innocent people.

    Well known killers/assassins triggered by neurophone voices (which left evidence
    mirroring mental illness and thus providing a plausible cover) include:-

        TIMOTHY McVEIGH (Executed Oklahoma City bomber)
        JOHN CHAPMAN (John Lennon's assassin - jailed)
        DAVIS KORESH (Waco siege massacre - murdered)
        MARTIN BRYANT (Port Arthur massacre - jailed)
DNA databases held by private research institutes include information on: Military
personnel, institutionalised persons (jails and asylums), blood donors, the newborn, the
recently deceased, those operated on in hospital etc etc. The hereditary factor means
that partial DNA information is also available on those related to those on the
databases. Within a generation ALL of us will be listed. The information, samples etc can
be used for projects on cloning, weaponry (race, class, culture or chemistry specific),
security/access, fraud, tracking/harassment and more. DNA can be the key to
personalizing high tech crime against individuals or groups.

Ex employees of covert government agencies, defense contractors and the armed forces
are monitored to ensure they remain silent about what they've learnt. Those who are
not silent are threatened, and worse. Even those who pursue a cause may sell you (and
your cause) out, like compromised or fearful public figures.

Agencies have devices to record heartbeats remotely and fire back the inverse signal,
causing an arrhythmia to be introduced; killing the target "naturally". Mobile phone
signals (and others) can be similarly tampered with.

Circuit judges can be sent to target particular crimes in particular areas with heavy-
handed, prejudiced decisions that fly in the face of what a fair judicial system should be
all about. Without equity and uniformity in sentencing the system is corrupted and
biased. Because you get only the justice you can afford, people without the cash/advice
needed to access their rights are shafted.

Free Hepatitis B shots were offered to members of the San Francisco gay community
(many years ago). Without exception all who accepted the offer died of AIDS…i.e. they
were murdered.

Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh, was an ex soldier working for Calspan
Research (a defense contractor), as a security guard. Calspan are into microscopic
telemetrics, artificial intelligence and CIA mind control experiments (including
neurophone/voice harassment). Infamous CIA doctors Sidney Gottlieb, Ewen Cameron,
Louis Jolyn West and various/assorted Nazi scientists were involved at Calspan.

Dr Carl Sanders, inventor of the Intelligence Manned Interface Biochip, has admitted
that service personnel were implanted and tracked during the latest Iraqi war
(transmission - 2318 to 2398MHZ, with up to 120 digital channels).

Contrary to media reports the airlines and the U.S government not only plan to code
passengers into risk categories but, with NASA's help, will run security checks by
scanning the brainwaves/thoughts of suspected terrorists AND others. God knows what
else they'll do, illegally, with the results of such brain/thought fingerprinting.

And there's a potential here to set up the targets that "they" want discredited. E.G
Experts (including neurologists/psychiatrists) keep extensive files on the brainwave
patterns of patients, including criminals. I'm informed that it's entirely feasible for the
monitors of political/whistleblower targets to use their high tech equipment to remotely
influence the recorded brainwaves of such screened travelers, at airport security. This
could cause the B.W fingerprints to read like those of actual criminals or terrorists rather
than law-abiding persons who've been targeted by such criminals. Likewise the system
could be worked and bypassed by the people who are genuine threats; incl. terrorists.

The privatization of NSW state prisons is allowing corrupt connections (mainly from the
U.S.A) to buy, control and experiment in prisons at will. And Governments and media
bodies are fully aware that inmates are being used as guinea pigs. E.g. Junee, Kempsey
and Windsor prisons in NSW are privately run. Add Goulburn and a few in Sydney (Long
Bay, Silverwater, Parklea) and you'd find a very high percentage of high risk prisoners
diagnosed by government/prison "psychiatrists" as having paranoid schizophrenia;
suffering from auditory hallucinations, anxiety and so on. Neurophone technology,
brainwave scanners and EEC feedback are three of the control mechanisms involved in
the illegal experiments conducted on these inmates.

"Alien" sightings often involve political targets or their families. Military/agency officials
arrange it. The "suited up" operators of these scams could be total fakes or the victims
of failed procedures (experiments in a human zoo). Either way, they're human, NOT

Responsibility for classified weaponry (like satellite-based brainwave scanners,
    neurophones etc) is being transferred from the U.S Department of Defense to the
    Justice and Energy Departments to escape the impact of any international bans/treaties.
    Back in the early part of the last century, a man named Royal Rife discovered a cancer
    treatment that worked effectively for every patient in his trials. A web search under his
    name will reveal a wealth of suppressed information, including details of how he was
    abused and silenced.

    There is a document called a Carnet used by frequent travellers of certain types.
    Carnets exempt the holders from customs checks; meaning jewellery boxes, media
    camera cases etc can be used to transport drugs etc without the criminals concerned
    being caught.

    The "Silent Holocaust" is an "ethic" cleansing program involving the genocidal removal
    of those who question powerful criminals. The brainwave patterns / thinking of such
    people draws the attention of criminals and so such people are being bred out (none
    having children after targeting begins). The goal is to have no-one remaining, in the
    future, who dares to even think of opposing powerful / wealthy criminals.

    The brain being a transmitter and receiver for the high tech' signals referred to on this
    site, there is no real need for audio/visual monitoring. Remote Neural Monitoring reveals
    everything you think/see/hear etc through your brain's responses on to the
    scanners/satellites/computers/monitors. Eg If you don't want "them" looking at you in
    detail don't look at yourself in a mirror and the information won't go through your brain
    etc etc.

    "Mindstar" is one of the programs wherein targets are used as mental slaves; treated
    like celebrities in one "remote" sense, so as to provoke responses/ideas that can be
    used or mocked etc. Such cruel, evil practices also help the perps gather input from the
    honest majority who are excluded from their systems by the vetting of corrupt agencies.

    Coincidences fed back through the media prove that monitoring/harassment are taking
    place but the source of the material may not be clear to those delivering the pain. For
    example,a dozen pieces of feedback may hurt a target on any given day but those
    delivering it (be they agency people, organised crime personnel or whatever) may be
    told the source was someone else or from a number of sources. They think they're
    mocking someone else but the true target is the one hurt. Equally, by correlating target
    coincidences many can be hit with the same material. Eg. 5 out of 10 local targets
    mention golf, tax and sleeping pills on a given day so items on all three, picked from a
    pool of stories, run on a program they all watch will hit all 5 of them.

                        Social Engineering - Crimes Against Humanity
                                        By Paul Baird
                         "Hard Evidence" pp25-32, Vol 2, No 1, 2002

For as long as there have been leaders running our world communities there have
been formalised processes designed to encourage conformity, even subservience.
Whether they be religious, legal, political or peer group leaders, even glorified role
models, it is all the same…with respect to morality, manners, methods and attitudes
we are guided by these "leaders" to adopt certain acceptable behaviour patterns and
views. However, once you recognise who does the real guiding you begin to
understand who and what really controls our modern societies. It is not always our
apparent leaders but those that they, in turn, answer to that influence us…and their
motives are not always good ones. For example, organised crime is rife in politics,
business, entertainment etc.

Putting aside local teachers, community leaders etc I will focus on the bureaucratic,
political, business and entertainment ranks. The basis of the problem is that these
include criminal/agency infiltrators who warp the social framework to suit themselves.
Other leaders around them are either complicit or else they acquiesce (likewise for
law enforcers). These people are our real social engineers and they are unfortunately
above the law.

Propaganda spread courtesy of a controlled mainstream media goes further than
subliminal advertising (see the attached schedule of patents) and biased reporting.
Those executives, presenters and so on who are recruited by agency/criminal
contacts, either before or after attaining their positions, hide their secret agendas
well. Vested interests dictate at every level in public life. The reader must realise this
and dismiss the propaganda and carefully programmed notions, which these people
plant. Control the media and you control the world has more than an element of
truth to it. You need to question the information upon which you base your own

For example, people whose activities really should be opened up to public scrutiny
are often portrayed positively to preserve their reputation and usefulness. Many are
just good actors who deceive their acquaintances as well as the public. Many of our
more popular celebrities are, in fact, criminals. In the age of the real "Big Brother"
there is little the media don’t know but they’re corruptible and choose to only
present a small portion of the information at their disposal. The rest they "use" as

Also, the timing, tone and content of that information which is presented is often
tainted. This includes the common, but little known practise of surveillance feedback.
Under this oppressive system genuine details are spliced with the results of covert
surveillance to harass those viewers who challenge criminals in high places. The
resulting coincidences are carefully presented so as to avoid prosecution whilst
targeting writers, lobbyists and so on who oppose dishonesty and the suppression of
information. These whistleblowers and campaigners are alienated and discredited
using secretive methods like surveillance feedback. This is done effectively because
those not vetted out of the prominent ranks deny that such things happen, so there
are no decent, powerful people to complain to. Accusations are dismissed as

If cornered on all of this, the relevant media identities would quote national security
provision, oath acts, defamation laws and other convenient excuses for participating
(instead of helping the victims). But their reasoning is lame. They are willing
partners in the social engineering process, exchanging our rights for their
fame/fortune. In other words, they sell us out by their obedience and silence. They
are the reason you don't know about any of this.
Whether it be the Mossad, M16, the CIA or even our own ASIS criminals, suppression
of information and misinformation are the primary functions of these overstaffed
(post cold war) operations. For example, censorship is thought of as the function of
boards which sift out or rate movies, songs, etc. which are thought unsuitable for
certain sections of the public. Explicit sex and violence are the official targets
(targets all too often totally missed) but unofficially the agencies' spies prevent
publication/airing of material that would actually benefit the general public. This is
information dealing with blatant corruption and sanctioned crimes carried out by
powerful/protected criminals. It also covers the technologies and systems of
terrorism/tyranny used by governments. You, as a taxpayer, fund all of this but you
are not entitled to know how the money is spent. In extreme cases, a "D" notice is
used (in Australia) to stop publication of writings covering such matters.
Whistleblowers who are honest, decent and caring enough to breach such criminal
attempts to silence them have actually been incarcerated for their trouble by
repressive governments masquerading as democratically elected representatives of
the people. Justice today is often just a meaningless word.

Others, whose writings never enter the public domain, are covertly tortured and
harassed for trying to exercise their "democratic" rights to free
speech/thought/expression. An example of how this affects the reader can be found
in the instance of historical records. Historians can get government grants to write a
story the way "they" want it told, with Co-operative editors' assistance.
Unfortunately, because people tend to believe what's in black and white and question
anecdotal evidence to the contrary this is a very effective method of influencing
public perceptions.
Another example is the use of a political candidate, seeking preselection to run for a
parliamentary seat. That person must conform with party policy, which, in turn, is
strongly influenced by senior party members and their "business" contacts. These
puppeteers dictate absolutely on issues like drugs, arms and green policies. Oppose
their views and you are out. This is fundamental in a system where only two parties
have a realistic chance of victory. That is not democracy but a sham. What of minor
parties? Independents? Lobbyists? If they provide too much resistance they can be
harassed and silenced…covertly and not just through the media.

It is now public knowledge that the Echelon satellite system monitors all
telecommunications worldwide. It highlights (for agency operatives) those of interest
to agencies. It is a US system for hire. It searches not for criminals (as it should) but
the opponents of criminals. (If it were used properly, Terrorism, arms and drug
trading etc. could be wiped out. But of course, there is too much money involved).
People of interest are then placed under round-the-clock audio/visual satellite
surveillance. Again the results from the IRIS system etc. are for sale or interception
(especially by the media). The media can feed it back to the targets if they choose to
or are persuaded to do so.
Modern day spies use these technologies to monitor us and each other (esp. public
figures). Traditional financial, emotional, on-the-ground type methods are still in
evidence but are becoming rarer. Class warfare leaves us with prominent citizens
who are either complicit or too self-absorbed to help the victims. Sadly, information
is power and despite what you are told, the people have very little of either.
(See the schedule of patents)
Some of the secret technologies mentioned here have been used for over 50 years.
The victims, today, are usually political targets. However, in the fifties the CIA LSD
experiments used uni students. Other, even more shameful, experiments included
the annihilation of psychiatric patients and homeless people during early nuclear
tests. Man's inhumanity to man again is in evidence.
Today there are a number of US patented devices, which actually facilitate the
influencing of human thought process from remote locations. These incorporate
satellite/computer technologies, which you are completely unaware of. They do not
involve traditional hypnotic or brainwashing techniques but work via electrical
impulses input into the brain via satellite lasers etc.
Notably, the elderly (especially in nursing homes), the mentally unstable, the
incarcerated and the young (even the unborn) are among the most vulnerable in our
community. When starting illegal human experiments these are often the first
chosen. They are helpless and easily disbelieved; some even have political enemies.
In the case of the young there have no doubt been some poor souls subjected to
"womb to tomb" studies which Dr Mengele himself would have envied. It is insane
monsters like him who are also behind the whole New World Order idea. Those not in
tune with "their" way of thinking will be dealt with. Their favoured method is the use
of non-lethal weapons.
A specific example of one of these devices is the Neurophone. It has been used on a
limited cross section of the community for many years. In fact, information on this
device has been classified/suppressed for over forty years. A description of the
technology will explain why. A Neurophone converts sound into electrical impulses,
which can then be directed at the tracked target using ground-based emitters, which
bounce beams off geo-synchronous orbiting satellites. (Alternatively microwaves can
be used in a similar fashion). The impulses travel your nervous system from the
point of impact to the brain, bypassing the ears. Only the target hears it (despite
who may be in the path of the laser beam) because we all have unique bioelectrical
resonance frequencies in our brains. The EMP brain stimulation is encoded for that
purpose. What is heard is what is transmitted: audible voices, music, computer
tapes/conversation etc. There is no need for any direct contact; no wire, no
electrodes, not even a trespasser on your property. The system is satellite based.
Defence/agency whistleblowers join the list of victims at this point.
What does it mean for social engineering? A target can be threatened, disorientated
or deceived without the risks associated with physical confrontation; no chance of
identifying the perpetrator, no police intervention and no lawsuits. There is no
evidence. Only defence department scanners can prove what's happening and the
military will not intervene to help against government agencies. In addition to this
(and worse) is a system of utterly horrendous potential which allows satellites to
scan the magnetic field around the head of tracked targets and feed the brainwave
patterns to computers so powerful (with a proven brainwave vocabulary developed
through research) that they can instantaneously interpret the thoughts of millions of
people. The fact that the reader finds this astounding is just another example of how
thoroughly you have been mushroomed and misled. Contrary to popular belief the
human mind, though more capable of unique solutions and ideas, is not more
powerful than US Defence Department computers. These can operate at over 20
billion bits/sec each, compared to your brain's mere 5,000 bits/sec. When there are
enough of these to cover the entire world population, like the ECHELON
telecommunications interception system, the thought police will rule the world
absolutely. Just pray you are dead by then.
Aside from providing illegal research material for thought-enhanced robotics and the
possible microchipping of clones (and the rest of us) the study of remotely
influencing people's thoughts and actions is their principal purpose. Political targets
are chosen for these studies because they are real life "loose cannons" that "they"
want silenced, permanently. Make no mistake. This is a full on social control system
that operates TODAY. Agency personnel even infiltrated the medical/psychiatric
professions, actually introducing terms like "paranoid schizophrenia" to successfully
discredit those victims who complain. Political psychiatry is an effective tool for
discrediting whistleblowers worldwide.

Firstly, take another belief held by the majority of US citizens: that there are alien
life forms out there. Government/Media "statisticians" tell them that is so.
Media/Entertainment figures reinforce this belief. NASA uses this to boost spending
through congress (money actually spent mostly on the secretive earth-focussed
satellite programs) and the military play "bad cop", denying it all, competing for
funds yet remaining happy to boost their own stockpile of secret and not-so-secret
weapons (up to and including Star Wars weapons). By the way, it was this very topic
which was the focal point of my covertly banned novel, "In the Year 2252",
lampooning the deceptions and betrayals which they subject us to. The following is

So, to illustrate, suppose an anti-war or anti-drugs campaigner starts lobbying
heavily; writing/campaigning in a manner that's causing concern. Her efforts are first
noticed through the ECHELON system and later, the audio/visual viewing of the
prominent people she contacts (and then herself). She must be silenced but she's a
US citizen, living in a democracy where executive orders are supposedly banned;
restricted to more serious matters. The bizarre scenario unfolds as follows.... One
night, while she works late (her husband long since abandoning her and their two
children because of the harassment that her lobbying draws), her children are woken
from their bed by "aliens" who communicate with them "telepathically". The children
are sedated and placed in the alien's spaceship where they are implanted with
microchips before being released, sometime later. The mother finds them dazed,
confused and frightened.

The media coverage (if any) travels the anticipated line but the public is undecided.
Regardless, the mother gets the message. The threat has worked. She will never
speak out again as long as she lives.

Meanwhile, x-rays, discreetly ordered by the mother, who was smart enough not to
over-react (and wind up totally discredited) reveal that the children were NOT
implanted (so there is no evidence) only cut and stitched to make it look that way.
She also correctly suspects that the "aliens" were suited-up agency minions, using
drugs to cloud the tired children's perception. So what of the "spaceship"? Probably
some previously unsighted, military prototype secreted in hidden underground
hangers. The "telepathic" abilities were undoubtedly provided courtesy of the brain
scanning/neurophone technologies mentioned earlier. These effectively allow non
verbal communication. In other words, it was all a government sham. One of many.
And all conveniently blamed on a nonexistent "alien" threat.

Notably, the opportunity to carry out illegal human research is also provided by such
incidents. Incidentally, where in the past real implants have been inserted no doctor
has been allowed to remove them (as this would provide evidence and relief for the
target). Many times operations have been stopped mid-stream by government
agents. Patriotism, secrecy provisions, oath acts, threats…whatever it takes to
ensure they get their evil way. They'll use it as an excuse. And there are just as
many of these "monsters" today as ever. They're just better protected.
Those "alien believers" scoffing at this may mention photographs, eyewitness
accounts (verified under hypnosis/polygraph examination). They may also refer to
ancient carvings, cave paintings and the like. Without being too rude these people
are deceived/deluded. I'm not saying that people don't see and experience
"something" but they are deceived as to its true source /meaning. As for historical
accounts... fabrications have littered those at every level since time began.
Misinformation is just as effective as suppression of information as a means of
making you believe what "they" want you to believe. For instance, I know a man
who swears he saw dead aliens at Roswell. If he had, and they didn't want people
knowing, he'd be dead. He was deceived and is now used. The flow of information is
more controlled than you think and your beliefs are affected by that.

The use of satellite-based technologies (such as the ones mentioned in the attached
schedule), especially the neurophone and brain-scanners, can facilitate countless
deceptions. Psychic experiences involving ghosts, religious encounters with God,
personal psychic abilities, all of these can be faked using the available technologies.
And the person having the experience is just as likely to be the dupe as the deceiver.
Not surprisingly the targets are usually connected in some way to something or
someone "political" The effectiveness of the incident(s) being similar to the earlier
illustration. That is not to say there are no legitimate "experiences" at all (just as
there are genuine schizophrenics) but MOST are staged incidents or set-ups.

A perhaps even more worrying application is the ample anecdotal evidence that
seriously disturbed people can be triggered by these same technologies. David
Koresh (Waco) and Martin Bryant (Port Arthur) were subjected to neurophone
harassment and other agency prodding. Again, no spies were involved physically but
gun control policies and the need for the existence of the agencies themselves
seemed to be amongst the agencies' motives. Those who understand this realise how
our public heroes are often the villains who provoke these people in the first place.
The dead villains are therefore often also victims themselves, despite their actual
criminal or insane mentalities.

Computer/"human brain cell" interfacing has already been taken to levels that few
people appreciate. US Military contractors are at least twenty-five years ahead of
academics and their publicly lauded advances. Again, secrecy provisions etc. keep
people in the dark. Today's experiments in remotely controlling humans continue
with the accompanying crimes against humanity. You won't hear about these publicly
for at least thirty years, if at all. Cloning, single sex conception, microchipped
warriors, and its all possible right now. The prospect of an army of clones, born from
a nest of synthetic uteruses and microchipped by Big Brother, to protect the ruling
class from an increasingly suspicious and oppressed world citizenry, looms as more
than a sci-fi movie scenario. In fact our storytellers are often using their inside
information of "Real" advances to present fantasies which are no more bizarre then
reality. For now, the targets remain the helpless and those opposing criminal
practices; whistleblowers, troublemakers, do-gooders and the like. And they have no
one to turn to for help.

Also worth mentioning is the real concern that if the ECHELON satellite system allows
every telecommunication to be monitored right now, how long before the brain
scanning technologies can be similarly applied? Remembering that the USA, Israel
etc have super computers with capabilities four million times that of a human mind.
How many would they need to monitor the entire world? Also, how long before every
newborn child is microchipped as suggested by NATO's John Alexander. With
microchipping they could control everyone as well? Microchipping for security,
identification purposes is only the trick to sell the idea. Think about the other
possibilities, the subliminals, the pain, the terminations etc.
Also, while reading the attached schedules of patents ask yourself how different the
world would be if just a few of the simpler satellite-based surveillance technologies
were made available to honest law enforcers. Instead, dishonest politicians, agency
officials and other media/"business" contracts access all these technologies through
defence and other connections. They then use them against those who try (in vain)
to expose their crimes.

Ill conclude with a quote from Dr Jose Delgado, ex-director of Neuropsychiatry, Yale
University Medical School. "We need a program of psychosurgery and political control
of our society. The purpose is physical control of the mind. Everyone who deviates
from the given norm can be mutilated. Man does not have the right to develop his
own mind. We must electronically control the brain. Some day armies and generals
will be controlled by electrical stimulation of the brain" (US Congressional Recorder
No.26 vol 118, 24/2/74) Such insanity speaks for itself.

Again, are your thoughts still your own or have they already conditioned you? You
may consider that you're immune because you never speak out on any topic but if
those who try to speak up on your behalf are silenced (using technology) and if your
only sources of information are media/politically based you are still a victim. So,

(Judy Wall, Resonance)
A listing of various technologies available that can be combined for use in direct or
subliminal mind control systems. Please note that these are mainly private
inventions intended for positive uses, but could be applied for negative purposes as
well. We have no idea what the government may have in classified research.
However, it is known that many of these technologies are now satellite based.

   Silent Subliminal Presentation System. US Patent #5,159,703 Oliver Lowry, October 27,
   1992. A silent communications system in which nonaural carriers in the very low or very
   high audio frequency range or in the adjacent ultrasonic frequency spectrum are
   amplitude modulated with the desire intelligence and propagated acoustically or
   vibrationally for inducement into the brain.

   Hearing System. US Patent #4,877,027 Wayne Brunkan, October 31, 1989. A method
   for directly inducing sound into the head of a person using microwaves in the range of
   100 MHz to 10,000 MHz, modulated with a waveform of frequency modulated bursts.
   Each burst is made up of 10 to 20 uniformly spaced pulses tightly grouped together;
   burst width is between 500 nanoseconds and 100 microseconds; pulse width between
10 nanoseconds to 1 microsecond. The bursts are frequency modulated by the audio
input to create the sensation of hearing in the person whose head is irradiated.

Psycho-Acoustic Projector. US Patent #3,566,347, Andrew Flanders, February 23, 1971.
A system for producing aural psychological disturbances and partial deafness of the
enemy during combat situations.

Noise Generator and Transmitter. US Patent #4,034,741, Guy Adams and Jesse Carden
Jnr, July 12, 1977. An analgesic noise generator.

Method and Apparatus for Reducing Physiological Stress. US Patent #5,562,597, Robert
Van Dick, October 8, 1996. Physiological stress in a human is treated by generating a
weak electromagnetic field about a quartz crystal. The subject is positioned in the EM
field for a period of time sufficient to reduce stress. (Recall the Russian LIDA patent: by
reducing stress, subjects become more vulnerable to hypnosis)

Method and Apparatus for Reducing Physiological Stress. US Patent #5,480,374. Robert
Van Dick, January 2,1996. Similar to above, a weak electromagnetic field is generated
around a grounded electrode.

Method and System for Altering Consciousness. US Patent #5,123,899. James Gall,
June 23, 1992. A system for altering the states of human consciousness involving the
use of simultaneous application of multiple stimuli, preferably sounds, having differing

Method and System for Altering Consciousness. US Patent #5,123,438. James Gall,
February 22, 1994. Similar to above.

Subliminal Message Generator. US Patent #5,270,800, Robert Sweet. December 14,
1993. A combined subliminal and supraliminal message generator for use with a
television receiver permits complete control of subliminal messages and their
presentation. Also applicable to cable television and computers.

Superimposing Method and Apparatus Useful for Subliminal Messages. US Patent
#5,134,484. Joseph Wilson, July 28, 1992. Data to be displayed is combined with a
composite video signal, data read out to determine the frame sync pulses of the video
signal, location of data display within the video image etc. Data may be displayed as a
subliminal message, may be derived from pre-recorded or live signal.

Method of Changing a Person's Behaviour. US Patent #4,717,343. Alan Densky, January
5, 1988. A method of conditioning a person's unconscious mind in order to effect a
desired change in the persons behaviour which does not require the services of a trained
therapist. The person to be treated views a program of a video pictures appearing on a
screen. The program as viewed by the person's unconscious mind acts to condition the
person's thought patterns in a manner, which alters that person's behaviour.

Sound Recording System. US Patent #4,141,344. Louis Barbara, February 27, 1979. In
recording an audio program, such as music or voice, on a magnetic tape recorder, an AC
signal generator operating at a frequency below 14 Hz provides an A.C baseline for the
audio program signal. This 14 Hz or lower signal is sensed by the listener's ear to create
an Alpha or Theta state in the brain when the tape is played back.
Auditory Subliminal Message System and Method. US Patent #4,395,600. Rene Lundy
and David Tyler, July 26, 1983. An amplitude controlled subliminal message may be
mixed with background music.

Auditory Subliminal Programming System. US Patent #4,777,529. Richard Schultz and
Raymond Dolejs, October 11, 1988. An auditory subliminal programming system
includes a subliminal message encoder that generates fixed frequency security tones
and combines them with a subliminal message signal to produce an encoded message
signal which is recorded on audio tape or the like. The decoder/mixer filters the security
tones, if present, from the subliminal message and combines the message signals with
selected low frequency signals associated with enhanced relaxation and concentration to
produce a composite auditory subliminal signal

Apparatus for Inducing Frequency Reduction in Brain Wave. US Patent 34,834,701.
Kazumi Masaki, May 30, 1989. Frequency reduction in human brain wave is inducible by
allowing human brain to perceive 4-16 Hz beat sound. Such beat sound can easily be
produced with an apparatus, comprising at least one sound source generating a set of
low frequency signals different from each other in frequency by 4-16 Hz.
Electroencephalographic study revealed that the beat sound is effective to reduce beta-
rhythm into alpha-rhythm, as well as to retain alpha-rhythm.

Ultrasonic Speech Translator and Communication System. US Patent #5,539,705.
M.A.Akerman, Curtis Ayers, Howard Haynes. July 23, 1996. A wireless communication
system undetectable by radio frequency methods for converting audio signals, including
human voice, to electronic signals in the ultrasonic frequency range, transmitting the
ultrasonic signal by way of acoustical pressure waves across a carrier medium, including
gases, liquids, and solids, and reconverting the ultrasonic acoustical pressure waves
back to the original audio signal. This invention was made with Government support
under contract DE-AC05-840R21400 awarded by the U.S. Department of Energy to
Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc.

Non-Audible Speech Generation Method and Apparatus. US Patent #4,821,326. Norman
MacLeod, April 11, 1989. A non-audible speech generation apparatus and method for
producing non-audible speech signals which includes an ultrasonic transducer or vibrator
for projecting a series of glottal shaped ultrasonic pulses to the vocal track of a speaker.

Apparatus for Electrophysiological Stimulation. US Patent #4,227,516. Bruce Meland
and Bernard Gindes. October 14, 1980. Apparatus for the electrophysiological
stimulation of a patient for creating an analgesic condition in the patient to induce sleep,
treat psychosomatic disorders, and to aid in the induction of electrohypnosis and altered
states of consciousness.

Method and Recording for Producing Sounds and Messages to Achieve Alpha and Theta
Brainwave States and Positive Emotional States in Humans. US Patent #5,352,181.
Mark Davis. October 4, 1994. Also, US Patent #5,586,967. December 24, 1996.

Learning-Relaxation Device. US Patent #4,315,502. Denis Georges. February 16, 1982.
A device for relaxing, stimulating, and/or driving brainwave form function in a human

Method and Apparatus for Transcutaneous Electrical Stimulation. US Patent #4,503,863.
Jefferson Katims. March 12, 1985. A method and apparatus for monitoring and
obtaining actual bioelectrical characteristics of a subject under predetermined conditions
of evoked response stimuli, and by interaction with a computer, applying cutaneous
electrical stimulation to the subject, using a signal generator to modify current
amplitude and frequency in a direction to achieve bioelectrical characteristics in the
subject related to the actual bioelectrical characteristics monitored.

Method and Apparatus for Translating the EEG into Music to Induce and Control Various
Psychological and Physiological States to Control a Musical Instrument. US Patent
#4,883,067. Knispel et. Al. November 28, 1989. A method and apparatus for applying a
musical feedback signal to the human brain, or any other brain, to induce controllable
psychological and physiological responses. A signal representing the ongoing
electroencephalographic (EEG) signal of a brain preferably is obtained from the
electrode location on the scalp known as CZ or P3 in clinical notation. A signal processor
converts the ongoing EEG into electrical signals which are converted into music by
synthesisers, The music is acoustically fed back to the brain after a time delay
calculated to shift the phase of the feedback in order to reinforce specific or desired
ongoing EEG activity. The music is comprised of at least one voice that follows the
moment-by-moment contour of the EEG in real time to reinforce the desired EEG
activity. The music drives the brain into resonance with the music to provide a closed
loop or physiological feedback affect. Preferably, the musical feedback comprises
additional voices that embody psychoacoustic principles as well as provide the content
and direction normally supplied by the therapist in conventional biofeedback.

Method of and Apparatus for Inducing Desired States of Consciousness. US Patent
#5,356,368. Robert Monroe. October 18, 1994. Improved methods and apparatus for
entraining human brain patterns, employing frequency following response (FFR)
techniques, facilitate attainment of desired states of consciousness. In one embodiment,
a plurality of electroencephalogram (EEG) waveforms, characteristic of a given state of
consciousness are combined to yield an EEG waveform to which subjects may be
susceptible more readily. In another embodiment, sleep patterns are reproduced based
on observed brain patterns during portions of a sleep cycle; entrainment principles are
applied to induce sleep. In yet another embodiment, entrainment principles are applied
in the work environment to induce and maintain a desired level of consciousness. A
portable device also is described.

Method of Inducing Mental, Emotional and Physical States of Consciousness Including
Specific Mental Activity in Human Beings. US Patent #5,213,562. Robert Monroe, May
25, 1993. A method having applicability in replication of desired consciousness states; in
the training of an individual to replicate such a state of consciousness without further
audio stimulation; and in the transferring of such states from the one human being to
another through the imposition of one individuals EEG, superimposed on desired stereo
signals, on another individual, by inducement of a binaural beat phenomenon.

Device for the Induction of Specific Brain Wave Patterns. US Patent #4,335,710. John
Williamson. June 22, 1982. Brain wave patterns associated with relaxed and meditative
states in a subject are gradually induced without deleterious chemical or neurologic side

Method and Apparatus for Repetitively Producing a Noise-Like Audible Signal. US Patent
#4,191,175. William Nagle, March 4, 1980. A digital pulse generator and shift register
repetitively produce bursts of digital pulses at a first adjustable repetition frequency. A
low pass amplifier may be connected to the pink noise filter to generate a train of pulses
having a repetition frequency near 7 Hz, which pulses a light source in synchronism with
the audible noise-like signal.

Apparatus for Transforming Voice Using Networks. US Patent #5,425,130. David
Morgan. June 13, 1995. An apparatus for transforming a voice signal of a talker into a
voice signal having characteristics of a different person.

A computer program to read your thoughts : Computer program to interpret EEG
patterns that correspond to words, developed by Dr Donald York and Dr Thomas Jensen,
University of Missouri.

Same idea as above, originally developed in 1974 by Lawrence Pinneo at Stanford
Research Institute, California. See "Mind Reading Computer". TIME, July 1st, 1974.

Same idea as above, Dr. Richard Clark, Flinders University, Bedford Park, South
Australia, See GENESIS, Vol.8 #6, December 1991, Pg,1.

Apparatus for the Treatment of Neuropsychic and Somatic Diseases with Heat, Light,
Sound and VHF Electromagnetic Radiation. US Patent #3,773,049. L.Y.Rabichev,
V.F.Vasiliev, A.S.Pultin, T.G.Ilina, P.V.Raku and L.P.Kennedy. November 20, 1973. Don't
let the nice title fool you, this is the patent for LIDA, the infamous Soviet brainwashing
machine. The patient or victim receives the four physical stimuli named in the title which
are calibrated such that he "experiences psychical relaxation and gradual transference
to sleep" and "The whole system of stimuli which is addressed to the patient's organism
makes use of the first signal system channels.i.e. the receptor zones of the appropriate
analysers so that the second signal system channels (mind, intellect, psyche) are
avoided, thereby providing for a curative effect, no matter the patient's psychic
condition or his attitude towards the treatment procedure"

Non-Invasive Method and Apparatus for Modulating Brain Signals through an External
Magnetic or Electric Field to Reduce Pain. US Patent #4,889,526. Elizabeth Rauscher
and William Van Bise. December 26, 1989. This invention incorporates the discovery of
new principles which utilise magnetic and electric fields generated by time varying
square wave currents of precise repetition, width, shape, and magnitude to move
through coils and curtaneously applied conductive electrodes in order to stimulate the
nervous system and reduce pain in humans.

Nervous System Excitation Device, later named the "Neurophone". US Patent
#3,393,279. Gills Patrick Flanagan. July 16, 1968. A method of transmitting audio
information via a radio frequency signal modulated with the audio info through
electrodes placed on the subject's skin causing the sensation of hearing the audio
information in the brain. Perhaps the most remarkable thing about this patient is that
Flanagan was only 14 years old when he invented it! Uses vacuum tubes.

Method and System for Simplifying Speech Waveforms. US Patent #3,647,970.
G.Patrick Flanagan. March 7, 1972. A complex speech waveform is simplified so that it
can be transmitted directly through earth or water as a waveform and understood
directly or after amplification. An upgraded form of the above patient. Uses transistors.

Means for Aiding Hearing. US Patent #2,995,663. Henry Puharich and Joseph Lawrence,
August 8, 1961. Means for converting audible signals to electrical signals and conveying
   them to viable nerves of the facial system.

   Means for Aiding Hearing by Electrical Stimulation of the Facial Nerve System. US Patent
   #3,170,993. Henry Puharich. February 23, 1965. A radio frequency receiver for
   receiving transmitted signals corresponding to audible sounds, one terminal of which
   imparts modulated electrical signals to facial nerve to induce hearing in subject's brain.
   Similar to Flanagans patents.

   Hearing Device. US Patent #4,858,612. Philip Stocklin. August 22, 1989. A method and
   apparatus for simulation of hearing in mammals by introduction of a plurality of
   microwaves into the regions of the auditory cortex.

   PATENT #5785653 28/7/98 Tkiyuna et al. To detect the internal condition of
   surveillance targets in criminal investigations by EEG.
   USE OF BRAIN ACTIVITY U.S PATENT #6011991 1/4/00 A Mardirossian. To employ word
   recognition, (i.e. read minds), propose transmitter implants and utilise neural networks
   (create artificial intelligence).
   R.G MALECH, U.S PATENT #3951134 20/4/76

   The modulated component of the reflected microwave forms on “electronic fingerprint”
   of the target, with features; permitting distinction.
   ARRAY, U.S PATENT #6400307. L.W Fullerton et al. Allows detailed imaging not just
   vital organ monitoring.
   #4893815, L.Rowan, 16/1/90. Describes the acquisition, locking onto and tracking of
   human targets. Laser, radar, infrared and acoustic sensor fusion is used to identify, seek
   and locate targets.
   Brain fingerprinting U.S patent #5467777, 21/11/95, Dr Lawrence Farwell.
   See also US Patents No. #6,366,272 ; #5,742,748 ; # 5,734,373 ; # 5,850,352 ; #
   6,057,846 ; 6,169, 540

Again, devices covered by secrecy provisions (“classified”) are not listed here. Many
are now satellite based and, despite stated purposes, are deployed to use against
the law abiding citizens of ostensibly free states.

                            Nazis of the New World Order
                           Big Brother in the 21st Century
                                    by Paul Baird
                     Exposure Vol 7 #2 May-June 2000 pp 32-34

Most people are aware of the vast computer databases kept by government
departments, covert agencies and corporate entities. Many know that DNA databases,
retina scans, handprint scans and such are becoming more commonplace. However,
few know of the more advanced technologies used to monitor them RIGHT NOW!

Phone tapping, closed circuit monitoring and other security or law enforcement
surveillance is not questioned where it is "warranted" (to solve or prevent crime).
Nevertheless, covert agencies and their criminal contacts use more sinister and
advanced technologies to monitor "others". Unfortunately those "others" include law
enforcers, public figures and those opposing activities like drug trafficking, arms
build ups/sales, political manipulation and planetary degradation.

The Problems We All Share
The major concern is the NSA's global spy system (called Echelon). This system
employs computer/satellite technologies so advanced that they can intercept and
analyse EVERY phone call, fax, E-mail, telex and computer data message. EVERY

The agency computers can scan ALL satellite, microwave, cellular, and fibre-optic
contacts, looking for the key words/phrases contained in their computer "dictionary".
If they find any, the communication is highlighted for agency operatives and you
may gain "special attention" (See the next heading).

Notably, Martin Brady, of Australia's Defence Signals Directorate, has publicly
admitted Australia's role in this monitoring. Technology once used against the
Soviets is now used against us, with the sanction of our own governments.

Ask yourself how long international terrorism, crime syndicates and the like would
survive if this system were made available to honest law enforcers. Instead, those
accessing it (CIA, the Mafia etc.) use it to protect their operations, (such as the drug
trade), and spy on their opponents.

Those Who Draw Special Attention
Because of intercepted communications (especially lobbying) the following are very
closely monitored: Whistle-Blowers, Anti-nuclear activists, Anti-drugs campaigners,
outspoken religious figures, as well as organisations like Amnesty International,
Greenpeace and The International Red Cross. Some prominent public figures also
feature in this category.

Whether they realise it or not, most of these are monitored around the clock on a
real time audio/visual basis, courtesy of satellite systems developed by defence
contractors in the US. Even handwritten material prepared indoors can be
immediately accessed under this system. There is NO PRIVACY.

The Mass Media Role
It's said "what you don't know won't hurt you". However, if corrupt sections of the
mass media are controlled by the Mafia/CIA (and they are) then surveillance results
can be "used"; especially if the frequencies of the monitoring signals are made
available to the media who can "tune in" using their powerful communications
equipment. Public figures can be warned through surfacing scandals. Non-Public
figures can receive subtle media feedback; referencing things said or done in private
in a "careful" manner. In these ways the mainstream media can oppress political
targets. Much of what they gather is never used publicly, only privately. It is this
information which gives them much of their power.

Remember that much of what and who we are (and what we believe) is carefully
influenced by media presentation/propaganda. To control the population "they" must
control the media to some extent. Government secrecy provisions, oaths and
sanctions help the common interests of media owners and other controllers are very
interesting indeed..

Examples of media suppression, for instance, include the very technologies being
discussed here. Firstly, people know there are satellite systems capable of tracking
vehicles, which are police "tagged" but they are ignorant of the previously mentioned
audio/visual monitoring systems and the systems mentioned in the next section.

Equally, people accept that regulations require them to have certain pets implanted
with microchips but they have no idea that the head of NATO's non-lethal weapons
initiative, John Alexander, also wants all humans implanted, at birth.

Those Not Silenced By Special Attention
These are usually people without high profile contacts. They are the ones subjected
to remote/experimental technologies like infrasound laser weapons (inducing
illnesses/pain via remote satellite), neurophones (delivering verbal, threats, noises
etc.), silent subliminals (such as were used on Iraqi troops during the Gulf War) and
brain wave scanners (enabling actual mind reading). These are terrible technologies
available only to agencies and defence personnel. Their use is a gross violation of
human rights.

Many in public life know that there are millions targeted yet they do nothing. Some,
like corrupt politicians, journalists and "businessmen", are complicit; even selecting
targets. An exchange of favours if you like.

Example 1. The Neurophone (USPatent 3393279, 1968) This is a device that
converts sound to electrical impulses. A directional (satellite) laser or microwave
aimed at the body allows a signal to travel the targets nervous system directly to the
brain. Only the target hears the voices, sound etc. The CIA and US Military
intelligence are the main faciliators of this mode of torture but others do have access
to it.

For those aware of this technology (such as ex government agents or knowledgeable
whistle blowers) the constant torment of loud threats, noise etc is bearable though
very annoying. However, for others it's a confusing journey towards being
discredited and institutionalised. The symptoms mirror those of mental illness and
one word to the wrong medico or state police officer and you're committed. This is
their goal. It is called political psychiatry and it's their favourite method for silencing
people who know too much.

How does it work? Well the 3D holographic sound of the neurophone can make the
voices appear to be coming from any direction the operator intends. (Remember
from the last section that the operative probably has an audio/visual feedback
available in real-time). So, some are deceived into believing the sound comes from
switched off TV's or radios. Others hear it as "ghosts" or "voices from God" whilst
some have had "encounters with telepathic aliens" or "invisible" agents. Worse still
some have had been triggered to commit acts of violence by "Satan" or the
"laughter/comments" of strangers around them. More times than not, the victim is
sane and these deceptions are AGENCY TRICKS USING NEUROPHONE
TECHNOLOGIES. But openly or subliminally applied, assassinations, suicides etc. can
be effected by using these technologies on the unwary and susceptible.

In the same manner, visual holograms, blurred vision and so on can be effected
using satellite lasers aimed at tracked human targets. Little wonder that this
valuable system of oppression and manipulation has been shrouded in secrecy for
over forty years, since its invention in 1958. They have ways to quieten opponents
aside from using the media and one day these methods may, like the ECHELON
system, affect all of us.

Example 2 Brain Wave Scanners (US Government Classified)
These can be hidden in a computer screen or wall, but the most powerful are satellite
mounted and can track a target whilst scanning the magnetic field around his/her

One use is EEG cloning where the patterns evident when you are angry or sad or
fearful etc. can be fed back in an attempt to influence your emotional/psychological

Another, more effective and frightening, use of brain wave scanners occurs when
EEG results are relayed to US Government facilities where the actual thoughts of the
target can be interpreted, instantaneously. This is done by a computer program with
a brain wave vocabulary. The program was developed through extensive trials on a
group of volunteers (aka the CIA's LSD experiments decades ago). All the public
knows is that stroke victims can think words onto a screen using the thought-
activated movement of a computer cursor.

The combined use of brain wave scanning and neurophone technology allows a non-
verbal, remote interrogation or torture to be carried out by agency personnel (sitting
at a terminal thousands of miles away). Such techniques clearly helped to end the
cold war but can the victors be trusted not to use them against their own people.
Obviously not. I'm sure their experiments in control are also facilitating advances in
artificial intelligence using data gained from "silent" interactions with human minds.
I'm equally sure that psychic phenomena and "coincidences" concerning intellectual
property can be arranged using brain-scanning technologies.

If computer advancements eventually allow EVERY citizen to be brain wave scanned
constantly (like the complete monitoring of the ECHELON communications system)
then the "thought policing" of the New World Order will make life unbelievably
oppressive and anything but democratic. Even with the progressive monitoring
system now in place, those most likely to interfere with criminals are easily tagged.
Imagine if thoughts themselves are suppressed. Censorship could take place at the
ideas stage; before writing, submission etc. Credit for ideas, inventions and
strategies would always go to one of "their" people. Only those "in" with them would
profit, only those who questioned nothing would escape scrutiny. And no military or
federal law enforcement agency would assist; for political reasons.

Because politicians are our elected representatives only they can (ultimately) help.
Nevertheless, they will not do so without prompting. The media/Mafia/CIA
connection can ruin anyone's career just as, in fact, it made many of them in the
first place. It's an unpleasant truth but ignoring it won't change it. Many in public life
simply cannot be trusted.

Therefore, I urge the readers of this article to make contact with the representatives
of humanitarian organisations and ask them to pressure governments to act. For
instance, Amnesty International, The International Red Cross and the UN should all
help. The first two should expand their mandates and policies to enable them to
oppose those responsible for the relevant human rights abuses. The UN needs to
establish a Satellite committee and allow weapons inspectors to inspect NASA (et al)
payloads for non-lethal weaponry such as neurophones and brain wave scanners.

This article contains a clear warning. Please don't ignore it.

                       Microwave Mind Control :

Modern Torture and Control Mechanisms eliminating Human Rights and Privacy

                          by Dr. Rauni Leena Kilde, MD

                              September 25, 1999
Microchip Implants, Mindcontrol, and Cybernetics

         SPEKULA 3rd Quarter October 23, 1999

                    Dr Rauni Kilde

                                     MINORITY RULES
                         "Hard Evidence" Vol 6, No 4, pp 29-33, 2006.

It has become a standard cliché to declare that, on most matters and in most respects, the
majority rules. However, after studying the influence and power held by those within certain
minority groups you begin to understand that society is, in fact, not ruled by that principle
but by a number of small vested interest groups which are largely made up of wealthy
criminals. Because of this (on major issues) the only true representatives of the silent
majority are often isolated activists, whistleblowers, campaigners and other marginalised
figures who are neither in authority nor publicly recognizable persons, of any sort. On other
matters where elected officials or famous faces do speak for the majority it's only because
it's in their best interests to do so or it's a distraction; an issue of little real importance. The
big issues are rarely dealt with fairly, openly or honestly.
People who resent this situation (and want the truth told) are scorned, ridiculed and
(sometimes brutally) silenced, thus rendering them useless to the majority. Some of the
crimes and deceptions used to neutralise these people are mentioned in this article.
However, one of the more general means of deception is secrecy. "They" will argue that
official state secrets, the existence of high powered advanced technologies, the links
between agencies, media and criminal groups and much, much more must remain hidden
from public view for the purposes of national security. Of course, that argument is a
transparent nonsense. The powers that be and their criminal associates know all of these
things already; the only ones kept in the dark are the people. So this secrecy is part of their
system of terrorism, theft and control by stealth. The truth is that all involved in any of the
practices described herein are criminals and traitors to mankind itself.


People often use clubs to exhibit extreme prejudices… In general we are all stereotyped and
compartmentalised by ourselves and others based on our views, our lifestyles, our
appearances and our beliefs. Some of it is nothing more than identification for the purposes
of socialisation but some is far more sinister; eg criminal organisations like the Illuminati,
The Club of Rome and The Mafia.

Despite the media mafia brainwashing that tells us that we live in a free society and that
conspiracy theories are mostly based on paranoia, the truth is that the world is actually run
by groups who deliberately organise conspiracies to maintain control. Most such
arrangements amount to major criminal activity. An illustrative example is the Illuminati.
This "club" is apparently a Masonic, super rich group based in Israel and London boasting
member families like the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers. Groups like this organise or
foster war, terrorism and so on by secretly sponsoring the enemies of justice. They do so to
control the hearts and minds of the general population whilst destroying our world for their
short term gains. Those opposing them are dealt with. Such people lust after wealth and
control and use their lackies to do their dirty work; corrupt politicians, agency/military
madmen, the media mafia etc. They also have a total lack of conscience about their role;
being blinded by the rewards. In brief, rather than working for society those plotting and
planning in secret inevitably work against it thereby betraying the most important of all
clubs: mankind.

So why aren't the laws of the land drafted in such a way as to empower honest law
enforcers to deal with hidden crime at this level? Because although elected representatives
draft the laws "minority" groups effectively lobby/pressure politicians to do their bidding.
Also, because these politicians often really don't have a good feel for what the general
population expect/deserve, the powerful minorities (with ready access) are all the more
likely to be able to present their arguments in isolation. These same secretive groups also
control the mainstream media which, in turn, controls citizens views. This then determines
the tenure of governments. So, the fact is that on the really big issues the truth has no
chance of standing up alongside the lies because it's hidden from view. Remember, people
don't really know this because those advocating the truth are belittled by the criminals they
oppose. Naturally, criminals are only concerned with their own position and have no regard
for how it affects others.

News Nazis, political puppets, military madmen, soulless spies and a mixture of mobsters all
play their part. They work in unison, for mutual advantage, maintaining a code of silence on
the important issues that ought to be addressed publicly; thereby betraying most citizens. If
the truth were to be known they'd all be imprisoned instead many are trusted, admired, and
followed by the unsuspecting majority. Again, the same culprits work together to silence
and discredit those who advocate real democratic freedoms and public disclosure of the
crimes committed under the guise of "national security". Sadly, rather than working for
disclosure of the truth, television terrorists and others also monster and isolate those who
try to disturb their corrupt code of silence.

Quite simply, far more damage than good is done by secret spy/military technologies. Take,
for example, advanced satellite/computer systems. Some can detect, monitor, collect and
collate information at a phenomenal rate (over 220 trillion calculations per second). That
information can be gleaned from other computers, private conversations/communications,
even thought processes. The equipment is set up by government agencies like the DIA (US
Defense Intelligence Agency) and the NSA (National Security Agency) in places like Fort
Meade, Maryland and by the CIA etc in places like the Langley Research Centre, Richmond,
Virginia. The crimes of these organisations are deliberately hidden from the public,
protected, as are the technologies, by corrupt secrecy laws. This is so even when they farm
out the technology and/or the information to private sector criminals. Anyone
opposing/questioning this or other important matters can be placed in one of their electronic
Nazi concentration camps where they are slowly killed, by stealth. Vile experiments
involving brain rape, neurophone voices and directed energy weapons torture are conducted
on the targets to the immense amusement of those involved including the minority elite and
their goon squads.

Audio visual surveillance and brain rape technologies yield ideas, secrets and more.
Whether agency or syndicate connected, complicit writers, performers, statesmen and so on
can be fed the results in any number of ways. If, like some agents, they're agreeable they
can receive someone else's words or thoughts directly via neurophone input (subliminally or
audibly). This, like inputting ideas whilst someone is asleep, allows the thief/harasser to
delude themselves about how they obtained the information.

Similarly, reading off an autocue allows TV/radio presenters to distance themselves from
the theft/harassment they are affecting when large sections of that material is
mixed/matched/inserted (via computer) from surveillance results. Unfortunately, like the
spy agencies, the military, politicians and big "business", the mass media mostly attracts
and accepts people with limited compassion, social conscience and integrity. If they're
asked to do something wrong they rarely hesitate knowing that they cannot be questioned
or caught and that their "jobs" depend on it. The hypocrisy of this is that publicly they "ACT"
as if they they're caring, responsible people and there are many deceived by that.

Media brainwashing sets things up so that psychiatrists can be used to discredit those
targeted by the technologies involved. By failing to acknowledge that spies and connected
criminals use high tech equipment the psych "professionals" can dismiss all victims
complaints and label them as paranoid etc.. Eg they'll say that people getting remote
messages or feedback from the mass media are delusional, that people hearing voices are
schizophrenic and that anyone claiming to be persecuted using remote technologies of any
sort must be paranoid. They dutifully apply these diagnoses and often institutionalise the
targets. Personally I believe that many of them realise what they're doing but are too
selfish/evil to care. In this respect they rank with politicians and journalists. And the worst
amongst them are actively involved in destroying decent people to cover for their corrupt
masters. In other words, they work for/with corrupt agencies and other criminals before,
during and after their foul experiments.

It seems to me that if there were any honest psychiatrists we would be better served if they
were able to apply themselves to dealing with beaurocratic control freaks, megalomaniacs
and corporate fraudsters who, as part of the ruling minority, prey on the rest of society.
They do so whilst "acting", of course, but they're outside the reach of the law (as the
system stands) and so their power lust goes unchecked. If psychiatrists must meddle with
their quackery (to justify their existence) why don't they ever tackle such real problems.
The answer, as always, is self interest.


The ruling minority mould society to suit their purposes through brainwashing; propaganda
and mushrooming. Again, anyone who questions their actual motives or the truth behind
the facades is crushed quietly but thoroughly. Some of the more sinister, oppressive means
of doing this involve the use of advanced satellite/computer systems of which the public is
unaware. A few of these are:-

      ECHELON SATELLITE SYSTEMS… these are NSA systems designed to monitor ALL
       telecommunications worldwide scanning for persons "of interest".
      AUDIO-VISUAL SATELLITE MONITORING… these target public figures and citizens "of
       interest", 24/7.
      TRANSECTOR DEVICES… these effect the satellite location, tracking etc of targets (eg
       US Pat #4893815 16/1/90 L. ROWAN).
      NEUROPHONE SYSTEMS… these allow the satellite or microwave transmissions of
       voices etc directly to the brain of targets (eg US Pat # 3393279 16/7/68 P.
       FLANAGAN and US Pat #3647970 7/3/72 P. FLANAGAN).
      BRAINWAVE ANALYSERS… these allow satellite brainwave scanning or neural
       monitoring plus electronic brain link ups with thought - deciphering computer
       software (eg US Pat #6011991 1/4/00 A. MARDIROSSIAN)
      DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS… these are too numerous to list but they allow
       destruction, movement of objects, personal illness, debilitation, even death (eg US
       Pat # 5123899 23/6/92 J.GALL & US Pat #5289439 22/2/94 J. GALL allowing control
       of consciousness/moods of the target).

Again, defence of the official secrecy surrounding these technologies is patent nonsense.
N.B. properly applied, these technologies could wipe out terrorism, war, crime etc. They're
clearly not being used for that purpose but abused to hurt ordinary citizens. It's all
completely indefensible, that's the real reason why it's never discussed openly.


The technologies just listed allow for many crimes/deceptions as well as illegal human
experiments. Some of these are as follows:-

Obviously covert torture can be carried out on targets in remote locations or situations
without the need for the sort of criminal harassment that might leave evidence. Many
writers, whistleblowers and human rights campaigners are marginalised, discredited and
destroyed in this manner.

Many well known, published writers work for covert agencies and other criminals. By
monitoring those people that the ruling minority wants silenced (people who think freely
and honestly) they not only marginalize them but they also steal every idea at its source (ie
straight from their minds before the thought is spoken let alone written). They also oppress
monitored targets by feeding their own words back to them through the insertion of those
words/ideas/"coincidences" into the corruptible medias scripts. This provides a double-
barrelled attack on victims and halves the workload for "ghost"/spy writers who need to
keep providing material and harass targets at the same time. Effectively, this way, the
target helps harass themselves in a cruel, criminal game of cat and mouse. This is a very
common practice.

Notably, targets react in different ways (at different times)… Some targets continue to
produce ideas, falling for the fame trap, misinterpreting the maliciousness of all of this
because public figures are involved. Some fall apart; believing others (not just public figure
criminals) are in on it. Some believe they are inspiring thoughts and changes and so are
prepared to endure a lack of privacy for their influence. Whatever the position at whatever
time, all targets are victims of one of the cruelest most criminal systems of oppression ever

Remember that invasion of a persons own mind (an unimaginably evil crime in itself) allows
ideas to be passed to complicit writers (of any sort) directly or indirectly. Again, one indirect
method is the voluntary acceptance of neurophone input which relays others thoughts. This
could be done subliminally, using silent sound during sleep/dreams, or audibly. This would
also allow those thieving material to defend any accusation because they have had no
contact with those transferring the thoughts/ideas or the victim and can consciously call the
thoughts their own.

Many let their egoes and imaginations block their minds on this one.

Remember that surveillance results/frequencies can be fed to the media leading to almost
instantaneous live-to-air feedback if the target is tuned in. So, the gullible, observing media
"coincidences", could come to believe that they are psychic. This is worse when mind
reading/neurophone input makes one person receive anothers thoughts subliminally
(equally the monitors know what events they are about to stage, what news/scripts are
about to be presented and can feed you that subliminally). Therefore, in reality, the only
real psychic experiences are the result of electronic telepathy. In other words, they're scams
arranged courtesy of meddling by military/agency/criminal perps who are stealing,
experimenting, deceiving and worse. Intuition and experience form all other explanations
(the mind is a powerful instrument) even in the case of dreams or so-called "premonitions".
In fact if targets are involved the future (as planned by monitors) can even be fed into their
dreams/thoughts. It's all a trick and many are monitored without their knowledge.

Similarly people who honestly believe they've heard/seen ghosts or seen objects move
across a room or "know where the bodies are buried" are victims/dupes. They prop up the
covers for what's really going on by relaying their eerie tales in a vivid, convincing manner,
because they're convinced themselves. The truth is it's all military or agency nonsense
designed to manipulate people. Media entertainment focusing on all of this would be
harmless fun but for the fact that many believe in the paranormal as a result. The
presenters know that man-made hoaxing is rife but the public aren't given that knowledge
and so many form their opinions based on limited information. The truth is most
"supernatural" experiences are wrongly recorded or staged and the rest are errors of one
sort or another.

Remember, using mind reading and neurophone technologies a non verbal conversation can
be conducted. If you have no knowledge of that fact and are mesmerized by drugs
(administered without your consent) as well as being presented with a high tech "show"
(involving military "spaceships" and costumed "aliens") you could be forgiven for falling for
this trick. It's usually a warning, an experiment or propaganda (often all three). As with
other scams criticised here, I personally don't believe in anything except heaven and earth
and the place the perps will end up. Like provoked/allowable terrorism, alien fairytales
foster public approval of an obscene waste of vast amounts of government (and private)
money; wasted on weapons of war, space research etc. And most of the funds end up being
spent on even more evil technologies (such as those mentioned previously) rather than
actual searches for so-called extraterrestrials. Now, certainly radio telescopes and deep
space listening devices exist but many more viewing/listening devices are aimed at the
earth; tormenting easy targets.

Many "madmen" are "triggered" by remote controlling mechanisms made available to
military and agency organisations. Moods, physical pain levels, thought processes and so on
can be created and altered via satellite using various secret technologies. For example,
when neurophone voices are transmitted into the head of a potentially violent person
disaster can follow; especially if they're also stupid enough to really believe what the
transmissions tell them. Oklahoma city bomber, Timothy McVeigh and the Port Arthur
massacre perpetrator, Martin Bryant were both provoked and set up by various agency
scum who wanted to create disquiet and raise certain issues on behalf of their masters; our
minority rulers. The fact is that these manipulators not only caused these events and many
more but they could prevent most similar occurrences if they wanted to, using their
surveillance capabilities for good instead of evil.

Unfortunately the evil minority profits from war, terrorism, carnage and the insecurity and
misery they create. Tens of millions of lives could be lost in a war (eg WWII) and these
creatures just reap the rewards without a thought for their fellow man, so it's not surprising
that tragedies like the New York twin towers disaster are not only staged but then used. By
used I mean used to direct public opinion where they want it to go; to accept reductions in
civil liberties, to foster suspicion/hatred of certain ethnic/religious groups etc etc.

Because the powers that be can now listen, watch, talk, harm etc from remote locations
(including satellites) experiments in controlling peoples actions, thoughts, opinions etc are
constantly being conducted. Much of it involves media deception (as it always has) but they
also stimulate and analyse dreams, provoke and manouvre combatants, use human
thoughts for artificial intelligence/robotics research, and even carry out cloning studies.
Many missing persons or "alien abductees" are also used in illegal government studies.

The public would overwhelmingly oppose any and all of this if they knew but they cannot
because they are not told. In turn, those who know and do not try to tell the public are
traitors to mankind itself. Nobody's career (or life) is more important. Individually and/or
collectively public figures should make a stand but they do not because they have been
desensitised, dehumanised and bastardized courtesy of the processes of selection and the
system they work within. Equally, to ensure this works, they are all warned not to talk to
their victims or people working to raise awareness on the issues in question.


Military power brokers and spy masters are behind all of this. These in turn are working for
the minority elite. They target people who know the ugly truth as well as those who can be
used as "remote-controlled" assassins, terrorists, etc. They also very effectively cover up
the whole thing by manipulating puppets on the world stage through the control they exert
over the worldwide, mainstream media. However, to victims those puppets display their
master's real paranoia by their reactions to the words/actions of whistleblowers and others
who try to alert the majority to the truth. Meanwhile they use terrorism etc to tighten their
grip on society.

The media are more likely to cover up and condition/brainwash the public with things like
paranormal/psychic/alien stories and so-called reality TV, making us gullible acceptors of
the surveillance society yet to be fully revealed. Also, the media never present the truth on
major crime or the really big issues because they are controlled by those responsible. Again,
these same people control the surveillance technologies which could all but wipe out major
crime but they choose instead to use it to protect themselves from questions, exposure and
imprisonment. They do so by training their covert, anti-personnel weaponry on those
promoting the truth, to silence and destroy them. The law enforcement agencies are
powerless to stop this as they are understaffed, underresourced, undertrained and under
the direction of the same government bodies which facilitate and foster the relevant crimes
and oppression.


New methods of covert oppression are being discovered all the time. Whilever the laws (and
law enforcers) are made to lag behind these advances honest, decent people will be secretly
purged from "society" and given no opportunity to publicly address the big issues. Even
critical statements from publicly recognizable bodies like the UN (UNIDIR), The European
Parliament and the International Red Cross have not been reported openly where covert
torture/oppression mechanisms have been highlighted so what chance do isolated groups or
individuals have. This veil of secrecy is a disgraceful, treacherous means of dismissing the
views of the vast majority of the worlds citizens but again, even if it was raised then new
methods would take their place. So whilst the weapons used are of concern the mentality
that fosters their use is of even greater concern. The selfish, superior, suppressive and
secretive attitude of our minority "rulers" are the real problem. It is the criminal thinking
that allows one group of people to believe they are better than others and so have the right
to mistreat them. If no one thought that way it couldn't happen. And it's not just atheists or
those believing life is some incidental by product of a big bang (caused by no one or nothing
in particular) who are to blame. Anyone who can dismiss in their minds and hearts the
significance of hurting their fellow human beings (and the consequences) is a potentially
dangerous creature.

Whilst basic human nature can be used as an excuse these attitudes are taught and are
difficult to change so people should be taught otherwise in the first place. Community
education on moral and ethical values should encompass the need to face and embrace the
truth on all matters, the need to attain and maintain a high level of good character and the
acceptance of the common humanity of all people. The extent to which such idealism is
rejected or mocked by those who only pay lip service to what is right is the extent to which
criminals and hypocrites now rule our societies. Such evil cannot be eradicated but it could
be minimized if genuine efforts were made to engender our youth with the necessary values
through education, role modeling and so on. For example, current efforts by governments to
teach children to respect authority only serve the whole community if those taking on
responsibilities (in public and private life) behave in a manner worthy of that respect. If
authority figures do not exhibit integrity, morality and goodwill but instead seek control
through personal opportunism then they betray the community. You are then looking at
concealing their crimes when you ask people to respect them, regardless. You can respect
their rights and not respond criminally yourself but the veil of respectability should be lifted
before genuine respect is expected of anyone. To do otherwise is to foster corruption and
this is what our society has been doing for many decades. Everything should be transparent
and everyone accountable. No deceptions. No exceptions. Unless and until this is achieved
you might as well ask an honest, informed citizen to believe in Santa Claus as to expect him
or her to place their faith in authority figures who are clearly corruptible.

Now, walking alongside the corruptible we have others who are also part of the problem.
These are the apathetic self-servers who may not partake in crimes themselves but are
quite happy to assist those that do if it suits their purpose. The principles brought to mind
by symbols like national flags and anthems (equality, integrity, justice and freedom) are
just words, things to hide behind, for the criminal and his accomplices. Their hearts and
minds don't envelop anything but self promotion and deception. And those agreeing to the
secrecy surrounding the major betrayals going on today are in no ethical/moral position to
judge what the public should or should not know because they are blinded by corruption.
The only acceptable option is total disclosure. Only then could majority rule deliver equality,
fair play, justice etc. It's totally unacceptable for vested interested groups (incl. the media,
churches, govts etc) to talk about free speech, democracy etc yet be prepared to condone
and/or commit crimes when it suits them; crimes against those speaking the truth on
something that they want hidden.

Further to the "friendship/mateship" issue… Those associating with criminals must realise
that major issues such as human rights, public accountability and truth in reporting are not
going to be dealt with whilever they support criminals for their own personal gain. Those not
against them are for them and so their associates betray us as well. The media in particular
are controlled controllers who set the agenda, cover the truth on major matters and distract
us with bread and circuses, beer and skittles, hoo ha and hoopla. For example, many tens
of thousands of people die every day due to war, disease, famine and so on yet our
emotions are more likely to be focused on isolated acts of terrorism and madness
(occasionally) and mundane "cat up a tree" type matters (often) as well as celebrity gossip
etc. Even when major events are covered (such as acts of terrorism) there is no reference
to the real causes or the real culprits. Everything is presented so as to foster certain beliefs,
to hide, to scapegoat and to deceive. Anyone involved in that process is, to one degree or
another, a traitor. Once again, there is only one acceptable scenario: the truth in all things.
And make no mistake, the agencies and their connections will, like Satan himself, use
mockery and more to silence all talk of doing what is right with a "you're playing God" taunt.
It's a cheap trick.

Since few of us maintain our youthful idealism the sort of morality/ethics we all need to
accept the truth can often be lost, especially by those lured by promises made by our
minority rulers. Corrupted minds are more likely to promote criminal attitudes or, at least,
to accept them; especially in "business" dealings. Such people then bully/harass others into
silence or apathy thus removing any obstacles to their criminal empires. To complete the
argument, one long term answer is community/youth education; so that there are too many
strong willed people of integrity for them to ignore or destroy. At the moment it is all too
easy for them to select corruptible persons for influential or authoritative community roles in
the media, government, beaurocracy etc. We also need laws and law enforcers to deal with
the sort of technological evil referred to in this piece. That can only happen if the balance
between good and evil is shifted. Since evil cannot present itself as such but must hide (as
our public villains do) they could not openly oppose any suggestion that society, in general,
needs to have certain values reemphasised if it is to avoid eventual deterioration. Maybe if
we can somehow encourage that we may one day breed enough people of good character to
deal with the problems generated by the criminal minority who rule our world.


                                       By Paul Baird
                           "Hard Evidence" Vol 7. No 4. pp 46-55
                    Click here to read the article (PDF File Download)


This article contains discussion of genuine human/democratic rights and civil liberties
abuses with a focus on the restrictions to justice and individual freedom occurring whenever
and wherever the truth is suppressed.

Firstly, it must be said that because influential criminals do control not only the bulk of the
worlds wealth but also the more effective methods of information transfer (and personal
expression) it is possible for them to severely limit peoples choices through censorship of
the truth. For example, if a defence department (or one of its contractors) wants to develop
an invention with a military application they get the government to place a secrecy order on
it thereby gaining exclusive development rights and preventing the public from speculating
on how it could be misused. Anyone attempting to expose the truth will then be covertly
victimised, maybe even institutionalized. Also, to silence any wealthy/influential members of
the community who may have an attack of conscience over the matter they use national
security legislation, defamation laws, threats of scandals etc. It's all very neat, tight and
totally undemocratic, allowing well-placed villains to dictate to us all. In fact secrecy orders
are there to help governments to hide their crimes.

Another example relates to vital information connecting MP's with vested interest groups
(affiliations, contributions, secret deals and so on). As a result the public is frequently
hoodwinked by politicians and those that direct them. Accordingly, the voting, lobbying and
protesting decisions that people make are often badly skewed because they are not in
possession of all the facts. So, instead of governments being truly open and representative
of the general population they usually reflect elitist attitudes on how society should be run
and make decisions that favour the influential few. The rest of us are patronized with
rhetoric and lies, being expected to trust people who are clearly not worthy of our trust. The
systems of accountability (including the media) are inadequate and corrupt. MP's don't
represent the people just because they're from the people, yet they should represent their
views and ideals. Unfortunately democracy (government by the people) has become a
remote notion not based in reality. It's only talk. Equally, the media don't inform the public
or represent community standards on many issues; instead they harass and ostracise those
that do; (refusing to even confront them lest their consciences be threatened by the truth).
The barrier is placed there by agencies.

Our best solutions lie with our willingness to be open to the absolute truth and our demands
that it be given to us. Only total disclosure will suffice as those entrusted with power are
usually untrustworthy; abusing authority, opportunity and ability to make secret matters
that belong in the public domain.

              Click here to read the rest of the article (PDF File Download)

       What happens?
  Money is paid to (or by) corrupt agency officials or criminals in exchange for the
  surveillance material. Sometimes favours / goods are exchanged instead

  The recipients are usually media (mafia) executives, corporate criminals or political
  players. Also, direct monitoring of surveillance frequencies is arranged whereby corrupt
  media personnel monitor the audio (sometimes visual) frequencies of surveillance
  operations set up by the CIA, Office of Homeland Security etc.

  The results are used to arrange "coincidences" for the target to see or hear; ie to oppress
  them. Alternatively, theft of intellectual property can be the motive.

  With reference to innocent surveillance targets (and with full knowledge of the truth) the
  media can also be responsible for spreading false rumours and/or lodging false complaints
  with corrupt police. This helps them to avoid enquiries by honest law enforcers who are
  often monitored themselves. In any event, investigating "protected" public figures is
  almost impossible. Remember, large sections of the media / entertainment industry are
  controlled by organised crime (esp. in the US). All they have to do is deny it or make
  themselves "unavailable" to any would be investigator (with lawyers at the ready).

  Two thirds of what is gathered by the media is never presented, much being used only to
  blackmail / oppress political targets. In this manner the political process is warped beyond
  the mere agency vetting of those entering politics in the first place; taking it towards a
  situation where transient political figures are tightly "controlled" by the media which can
  destroy them just as quickly as it builds them up. In turn, large sections of the
  mainstream media are controlled by criminals with vested interests (eg the drug

NB: The links between organised crime, the covert government agencies and the media
(mainly at the executive level). Little wonder they say "control the media and you control
the world".

Notably, anyone from researchers to writers, from story editors to floor managers, from
producers (and other executives) to presenters can be involved in what is broadcast or
printed. It is only necessary for a few in each media outlet to be corruptible for damage to
be done through MANY articles, items, etc. Most would not know the origins of the
"inserted" material but many are aware they are party to a corrupt, oppressive practice.


The feedback procedures include the "spiking" of articles, program promos, advertisements,
news and current affairs items with comments, phrases and events which make it clear to
the target that they have no privacy. Specifically, what you say or write (or do) is "used" on
a timely basis again and again and again in print or on air (with no reference to the source,
of course). Public figures are also monitored closely (in private) but the results are not often
fed back. Only the disempowered get surveillance feedback.

       When and where?
Also the media mafia can arrange for the harassment of non public figures to come from
different sources. By asking leading questions of interviewees, timing when certain stories
or shows run, carefully editing and taking matters out of proper context they can paint a
deceptive picture, and a very familiar/annoying one for their targets. And they do
something similar with photos/video. For example if a target mentions a public figure (in
private) that celebrity's picture (etc) will soon appear somewhere the victim is likely to see
it. It will "appear" that the celebrity has been told what the target said (a positive comment
drawing a happy response and so on). Constant repetition of this transparent means of
harassment is very annoying.

Other media tricks involve presenting half truths, misquotes and deliberate mistakes (using
names, dates, statistics, no's etc). Even song/music selections for background can be
"familiar" or coincidental to monitored targets. On top of this they can prioritise stories on
news & current affairs programs, often using stories filed for another occasion or over
emphasizing the importance of relatively insignificant news.

A simple example of prioritizing: A target could spend their day as follows:- *Visiting a heart
specialist, *paying utilities bills, *talking golf and, perhaps *mentioning obscure or long
since retired celebrities at some stage. When viewing a current affairs program that night
there may well be items touching on each of these topics (to varying degrees). Bizarre
coincidences? Not when you throw in actual phrases used by the target, and this happens
night after night. It's clear that such people are targeted by the media mafia. Allowing them
to "agenda set" is just one of the lures/traps.


    The purpose is not to lure the target for an interview (or research a story) but to harass
    you, covertly. The media do have a political agenda and break many laws. Like most
    politicians they are directed by vested interests.

    Also stories / rumours are often released on a timely basis to pressure honest (or semi
   honest) public figures and law enforcers on certain issues. These people are often
   monitored around the clock, keeping those who will "stop at nothing" at least "one step
   ahead". Often the media watchdog role is merely a public facade presented to win public
   favour / confidence.

   Usually only those who are corruptible gain prominent positions within a corrupt media
   empire. No one who questions corrupt practices survives for long; their careers being

   In other words, instead of asking why a highly paid journalist / entertainer etc would be
   compromised just to damage (even) a non public figure the skeptic should ask himself
   whether that person would have such highly paid opportunities in the first place if they
   weren"t corruptible. Remember, as with any job / career, ability is not the only
   criterion for selection in public life.

       Alternative method of arranging 'coincidences' (experimental)

   Using subliminal messages, relayed via technologies mentioned in this web site, news,
   commentary, songs etc which are to be broadcast (whether prerecorded or live) can be
   planted. The effect would be as annoying as conventional audio-visual media feedback
   but less involvement would be needed on the part of on-air presenters. An agency
   operative need only have access to whats yet to be aired or insert material of his/her
   own by arrangement.

   More bizarre is the possibility that a targeted persons thoughts/words could be
   subliminally fed to on-air presenters (without their knowledge). They would then
   occasionally repeat the targets thoughts/words during ad-lib periods, without even
   realising it. Naturally this would work better during live broadcasts. Proof that such
   things have been tried is, of course, unavailable.

   Equally perverse is the potential to scan on-air presenters/writers for their thoughts and
   subliminally feed those to the victim and/or feed a monitors words etc to both victim
   and presenters so correlations occur in speech and thought.

   Like conventional (common) methods these possibilites could lead to deceptions and
   setups eg some targets may believe that they are psychic or directly accuse presenters
   of spying.


                                   The Media Mafia
                                      By Paul Baird
                        Hard Evidence. Vol 1. No.3 May-June 2001

Most people are aware that organised crime and covert Government agencies, especially in
the USA, control large sections of the worldwide mass media. What they do not know is how
they manage to do this so effectively.
Government agencies like the CIA and N.S.A have access to defence-developed technologies,
which facilitate round-the-clock monitoring.

The victims of such attention include law enforcers, lobbyists, writers, justice campaigners,
in fact anyone questioning the status quo by speaking out against corruption in high places.
The electronic media participate as recipients of the agency information. They oppress the
targets, helping to suppress information and views, ridiculing, discrediting and silencing
those with opposing views.

I am describing links between organised "businessmen", covert Government agencies and a
complicit media Mafia. A simple and readily understood example is the drug trade. Drugs
financially fuel the Mafia and the CIA, but that same scourge hides successfully behind
"legitimate" business operations including the entertainment industry (music, television, film
and radio). Their veiled acceptance is at odds with the lip service paid by celebrities to drug-
related health and social problems. Therefore, why doesn"t anyone point the finger…?

Observant readers may see that one of the answers is fear; fear of recrimination or
vilification or merely loss of job opportunities. Those that spoke out on behalf of Lady Diana
(especially after her death) are another example. Some were "quiet" for some considerable
time… Another case of media control.

How do they operate?
U.S. Government agencies have access to computer-driven satellites, which monitor all
telecommunications worldwide. The system is called Echelon. If certain phrases or topics are
mentioned, then you draw their interest and you are monitored around-the-clock by
audio/visual satellite systems so advanced that you have no privacy at all.

These surveillance signals have frequencies which can be "given" or "leaked" to the media.
They have equipment to tune in. Alternatively, results can be bought, exchanged or relayed.
In fact, even private investigators can be used on a simpler level to supply information to
media outlets.

The surveillance results are used to create coincidences for the target to see and hear.
Sceptics need to know at the outset that this is one of the media"s roles; a very common
practice with respect to media targets (especially people who are not public figures).

Remember that two thirds of what is newsworthy is never reported but through systems like
Echelon, the media knows most of what goes on, good or bad. They then "use" that
information to terrorise their victims.

Common methods include:

1. Using corruptible aircraft pilots and emergency services personnel to arrange aircraft
   "buzzes", siren wailing and more around homes, vehicles and individuals; on a timely
   basis. Letter writing, political discussion or criticism of media tactics is often the catalyst
   for this sort of harassment.

2. Surveillance based on harassment which can help fuel scams, bribes etc. The use of
   union/business/political connections to restrict work opportunities disempowers and
   discredits the victims.
3. Monitoring agency surveillance frequencies also facilitates blackmail etc through the co-
   ordination of media "coincidences". These involve references to things said or done in
   private on a timely repetitive basis (out of context and obviously without referring to the
   source). Any member of the entertainment industry can be involved in this very common
   practice. Notably, theft of intellectual property (especially by writers) is also a motive (on
   occasions) for the monitoring.

Using Surveillance Results.
The methods chosen depend on the habits, availability and character of the target as well as
what they are doing to justify drawing criminals attention. Silencing an objector or covert
censorship of a writer, for example, cannot be achieved via responses on a program he/she
does not watch, or a newspaper they do not read… another reason for constant monitoring.

Specifically, articles, news items, advertisements, in fact ANYTHING written or read can be
tainted. Researchers, writers, editors, presenters, performers, executives and others can be
involved. It only takes a few to create a web of harassment for innocent victims to endure,
although some media players have more corruptible employees than others. When publicly
presented material contains familiar phrases, ideas, topics and events in a unique, yet
constant flow (a daily or even hourly occurrence). The target can then be annoyed,
confused or deceived etc. The hope is that this will keep them occupied, stopping whatever
it is they were doing (lobbying, writing etc.). The more foolish can be discredited through
corrupt law enforcers or medicos; ie if they make a foolish move in response to references
to private conversations etc.

How frequently does this happen?
Harassing the enemies of criminals through the media Mafia is extremely common. Ridicule
and oppression of disempowered campaigners for justice and true democracy (and any
other righteous cause) is now a principal function of the mainstream media, but it is done
covertly, as mentioned earlier.

By owning/controlling the media, criminals avoid open challenge. The media "watchdog"
role is only a façade to win public approval (and ratings). A perfect example is the extended
vilification of media magnate Christopher Skase. Those who pursued him the most
vigorously have done worse themselves, but the public will never hear the full truth of it.
Instead, the self-regulated industry motors on carefully, influencing how people see and
interpret everything… yet no one watches the watchdogs…. we are listening to criminals.

This means that you only actually have democratic freedom to express your views provided
you do not oppose criminals in high places. In other words, without power or influence the
under classes are silenced. Little wonder the only values and views which many espouse are
those fed to them by public figures who have themselves been compromised by a system
which would have rejected them had they questioned the corruption around them.

My Favourite News Station(?)
Again, talent is only one prerequisite for any job. Without complicity or silence, no media
identity could survive. Lies of fact and omission, vendettas, blatant bias and smear
campaigns… "They" won"t ever let the truth get in the way of destroying their opponents.
Remember that we are looking at an industry dominated by criminals. Yes your
station…every station.

In balancing though, I have met some journalists who refused to harass innocent people nor
would they stand by and see their colleagues do it. For this they were harassed themselves,
losing jobs as well as opportunities. However, they are out of the industry for taking that
stand and can now help no one.

I could write a book on the matter but the summation is Freedom of the press should not
grant a freedom to oppress.

Media ownership laws allow criminals (organised or otherwise) to silence private citizens on
important issues. The more likely it is the activity will make criminals rich, then the more
likely it is opponents will be attacked. Drug trafficking, weapons sales, nuclear proliferation,
political corruption, environmental degradation, U.S. government agency global control
systems, paedophile/pornography networks, prostitution etc… these are practically
"protected" from public scrutiny. Naturally, the media run token stories which pay lip service
to what"s right. Nobody would be fooled if they did not. Yet people suspect…They may not
be able to follow the money trail to US agencies or crime bosses but they do see the media
injustices; how it feeds off society while returning half truths, propaganda, and working a
secret agenda.

Stories occasionally surface about scams, cash for comment scandals, manufactured reports
and so on, but these are presented by another arm of the mainstream media and they
amount only to in-fighting. People still believe far too much of what they are told by the
media. The popular myths, supplied by the entertainment industry itself survive. Just as the
media protects their co-conspirators from exposure, they, in turn, are protected by corrupt
crime/agency figures. Only in organised publications like "Hard Evidence" magazine will
differing views and absolute truths appear on a regular basis.

Examples of newsworthy items, which are suppressed include medical breakthroughs, laser
weapon developments and various other scientific advances, which the U.S. government
Defence/CIA etc want to keep secret (so they can use them for evil purposes rather than
our benefit).

"Classified" tags, defence "notices" and government secrecy provisions in general are
obstacles, but stories with lesser impact are constantly run. The real reason is that
information empowers people so criminals insist on controlling the flow of information. The
number one way to do that is by controlling the media directly through ownership, or
indirectly through sympathetic, planted staff.

Those speaking out on important issues should be protected from the practices outlined in
this article. However, no law enforcement or industry body has the power to do so. In
addition, both journalists AND politicians are prepared to betray us with their silence, some
going as far as to join the criminals in harassing innocent citizens. No one can stop media

Media identities may not always know who they are harassing, but when they read material
edited to contain surveillance results, they know. (Ever wondered why some comments, ads,
etc made no sense?) The fact is they care only for the privileges of their positions and scorn
the associated responsibilities. It means nothing that they report what is to become public
knowledge when that evades or ignores the vast majority of news. Then there is the media
complicity in harassing victims. Some media heavyweights have even gone as far as to
approve murders to silence those too forthright to give in to blackmail, bribes, threats etc.
So, if a public figure would endure a vendetta for addressing these matters and U.S.
satellite surveillance keeps tabs on everyone whos ever so much as written an angry letter
to a newspaper editor on more than one or two occasions, what can be done to raise public
awareness? Again, "very little" is the answer. The media are taken at face value by most.
Those few who know the truth see through their act and despise their hypocrisy but the
rest…. most do not care because they do not know or do not see how it affects their rights
and their lives.

It is worth adding that those not silenced or discredited by these methods may have to
endure further high-tech harassment at the hands of those responsible. Corrupt U.S.
military/agency personnel can access satellite or ground-based equipment designed to
torment and run experiments in "remote control" of individuals situations. Through
media/political connections, the targets are chosen for these programs. Some very nasty
laser driven devices, designed to harm and not kill, have been deployed (esp. on satellites)
to silence good men and women worldwide who will not be warned off… something else the
media won"t tell you. It is not quite the world you think it is.

Its little wonder many harbour an inherent distrust of the media. Unfortunately, it is all too
true… control the media and you control the world, and "They" do.


                             Crimes of the Ruling Class
                                       By Paul Baird
                     "Hard Evidence", Vol 2, No 4, June 2002 pp 30-34


The myth that we live in a free country and within a fair, semi-ideal system has already
been debunked. The truth is that in our capitalistic, money-driven world there remains a
clear hierarchy: the ruling class and the underclasses. Unfortunately, in their efforts to gain
more information, power and wealth, the ruling class often resorts to illegal methods which
create a class warfare (of sorts) between them and those that question those methods.
Those forming part of the elite group in question may be there by virtue of birth, association,
good fortune or talent. Accordingly not all are guilty, but those that are can achieve and
maintain their positions via corrupt and covert means. In turn they push their ideas,
systems, rules and wills onto the rest of us. Also, aside from actual crimes (like tax evasion,
theft, rape, paedophilia, murder and so on) many betray society in other ways. These range
from the co-operation of those compromised (through drugs, money, sex etc) through to
assistance with the concealment of matters which are of concern to the general public as
well as law enforcers. It is these offences, committed by that section of the community
which sees itself as above the rest of us, which form the basis of this article.


Wealth allows secrecy for some just as it robs others of their privacy. That secrecy allows
crimes to be carried out undetected and unchallenged. Whether you're talking about the
Bildeburg club, The Club of Rome, The Mafia of any other group, conspiracies/crimes
abound. One of the reasons the upper classes are above the law is that they can access
methods/technologies, which the rest of the community cannot. Sure, some celebrities have
been interrogated, even jailed for money related offences (tax evasion, fraud etc) but rarely
for crimes where there is no money trail to follow unless there are known enemies to set it

Take for example the advanced satellite surveillance systems made available by the U.S
Defence Department and other agencies. Corrupt "businessmen", including media and
political figures, can access audio-visual material as well as intercept telecommunications.
The results can be used to rob, blackmail, harass or humiliate targets. Targets include
competitors, researchers, writers, inventors, lobbyists, law enforcers etc. The Echelon, Iris
satellite systems (et al) leave the victims totally defenseless. Often wealthy public figures
actually pinpoint the targets themselves.

Many in high places are also as vulnerable, as if they lived in "glass houses". For example,
U.S agencies, like the CIA and NSA, monitor all government ministers from all governments
worldwide. They also keep a close eye on many celebrities. Ironically some celebrities help
to harass targets who are not public figures.

Notably, the police (State and Federal) cannot access these technologies to solve crime. If
they could, powerful people in politics, journalism and big "business" would be incarcerated.
Terrorism, the illegal arms and drug trades would be wiped out. Instead honest police are
thwarted in their attempts to investigate big time criminals. Lawyers and executives
working for organized criminals can make their lives hell. Some police, are even spied on
and harassed themselves by various criminals, including the media mafia.

Celebrities and other wealthy individuals simply make themselves unavailable to assist with
police enquiries. They'll even go as far as to call in executives and lawyers to stop police
harassing them and/or lodge false counter complaints against those who want them
investigated. Diligent investigators can be transferred, sacked or worse if they're too
persistent. This is especially so since they're not only dealing with the clout of "public
figures" but are working for or with fellow law enforcers who have been (or can be) got at.

Ultimately the top of the list of suspects is nearly always the CIA/Mafia. They have access to
technology, knowledge and huge sums of money. The CIA doesn't deal effectively with
terrorists but instead its employees vow to do whatever they're told without question.
They'll harass innocent civilians even going as far as to set them up in one of their remote,
illegal, human experimental programs. In truth they themselves are little more than
terrorists and would think nothing of killing their own and pinning it on someone else (a
possibility re Sept 11 01?)


They say you catch more flies with honey than vinegar, so corruptible public figures have to
be good actors: paying lip service to what's right, luring public opinion in a certain direction
and covering with publicised acts, like making charitable contributions. It is a willingness to
comply with instructions from their criminal employers which forms the basis for career
opportunities for all but the most talented amongst them. In fact the CIA, for instance,
screens entrants to the most public ranks of the media, politics etc. Some of the better
results achieved by so doing include the go-soft approach (in reality) on drugs and the
suppression of information regarding U.S/Big Brother technologies.

Media identities (esp. journalists) hurl ridicule (as a smoke screen) at thieves, druggies and
so on whilst indulging in worse themselves and/or working for corrupt "businessmen" who
foster petty crimes by committing serious ones: like drug trafficking. Still others go a step
further, making favourable references in music, film, interviews and so on to drug taking,
violent crime etc. Equally, instead of helping campaigners against crimes like drug
proliferation, arms trafficking, corruption, (even violence) these same public "icons" harass
such people covertly, mainly by feeding back surveillance results. Interweaving these
results into what's written, editors and the like have presenters read the "coincidences" out,
set agendas/topics for discussion etc. This is a primary and criminal media function of which
most are totally ignorant. In fact two-thirds of what's known to the media is never revealed
publicly but it's all used.

To elaborate, the media mafia co-operates fully with the covert agencies who spy on anti
nuclear, anti-war, anti drugs, anti corruption lobbyists/campaigners using advanced audio-
visual satellite surveillance equipment. The frequencies of the surveillance are fed to the
mainstream media technicians, they tune in and the executives ensure writers feed
"coincidental" phrases, ideas and topics to the on air presenters. The victim is thereby
harassed when they listen/view: picking up on the cryptic and not so cryptic references
sewn into the on-air material. This is a very common practice, which is tantamount to
criminal harassment. However, to openly question powerful public figures on this can lead to
set-ups involving police, psychiatrists etc.

Even church and other community leaders approve, or at least acquiesce, regarding such
practices. For instance, the Catholic Church co-operates with the Australian Labor Party and
their many media connections, even participating in the harassment themselves. They do so
for government funding (when Labor is in power) and to avoid smear campaigns over things
like paedophilia. The less hypocritical ones will merely go into denial or fail to help, out of
fear of those who arrange such conspiracies. In fact the church itself has its own spies.

In the same way most public figures glad hand and associate with known criminals. The
organized crime syndicates, (like the Mafia) control the media and entertainment industries,
especially in the U.S.A. There are not enough other opportunities to go after, so to oppose a
powerful media magnate, for example, may be the end of a career. Yet the same people
who can do this, who 'destroy what they cannot control' are just as likely to receive public
praise and adulation from others around them. For instance, there are criminals in high
places who have received humanitarian awards, knighthoods etc while secretly devoting
their time and resources to destroying decent people both in and out of public life.

Occasionally some are set-up or scapegoated because they've lost their 'protected' status
for some political or monetary reason. The fact is the media, through the agencies, have
something on most public figures (and many not so public ones too) and allow it to
"surface" if and when they deem it to be appropriate for their purposes. Those who are not
complicit therefore acquiesce out of fear. The rest actually profit by participating in anything
from political comedy to " cash for comment" broadcasting to murder. Many of the more
corrupt (especially politicians and journalists) are merely criminals with some acting ability.
And the public swallows all of it.


Again public ignorance of these practices is understandable. The "bread and circuses"
operate as a smoke screen leaving most happy to "consume and be silent". In Western
democracies life is free and easy for most: You work, play, even vote. But the freedoms on
offer are illusionary. In the same way that advertisements (brainwashing tools in
themselves) promote different brands/products which may actually be owned by the one
conglomerate, there is little genuine difference between political parties in the two party
system so when you vote you are responding to media hype surrounding a false plebiscite
because "they" manipulate the voter preferences (on the whole) and both parties; through
connections with the leaders.

The ruling classes, through big business, the agencies, the media and so on, justify their
existence through their public role but privately/secretively they illegally plot and
manipulate. Sport and other entertainment just like religion and "national conscience" type
causes, are used as distractions from other important matters. In the end we finish up
thinking and believing what we're conditioned to think and believe.

There is no more extreme example of public brainwashing than the general perceptions
regarding so-called alien life forms. What was considered insanity by most 100 years ago is
today embraced as truth and because we live in a more informed, enlightened age this must
be so. Right? Wrong! There are a number of very good reasons why the U.S Government
want people believing and a number of devious ways that they have used to convince them.
Firstly, regarding how they've done this well it's mainly courtesy of the approach of the
mass media (moviemakers, writers of all sorts etc) but also via falsified/staged sightings
(using military aircraft etc) and tampering with recorded history. The military and NASA
then play out a denial vs. confirmation scenario and so the fantasy builds.

The objects of these "sightings" are usually political targets or human guinea pigs
(especially re: alien abductions) but you won't read this in a newspaper. Instead you're
more likely to read how arrogant we would be to believe we are the only inhabitants of the
universe. This coming from people too arrogant to accept the existence of a God who may
just consider us more important than any human mind can acknowledge. So while they
can't even get along with their neighbours, can't even deal with the conflicts that surround
us here they approve of wasting time and money searching for aliens who would either
destroy, or be destroyed by, us.

So what are the reasons for this charade? Well it draws public approval for the space
program and Defence spending. The public doesn't realise that surveillance satellites, star
wars and other "nasty" technologies are the real focus of the spending. These are not
mentioned (the cover is national security). Secondly, it also acts as a cover for illegal
harassment and illegal human experimentation. A sort of "blame it on the aliens" or "he's
mad" cover. Finally, it focuses attention elsewhere than on the secretive ways of the New
World Order. This is becomingly increasingly important as technology allows BIG BROTHER
interference and monitoring on a level few readers would appreciate. Of course, none of this
would be possible without the co-operation of the mass media and many public figures,
many of whom have simply sold us out.


Covert agency personnel and crime figures are spread throughout the business, political,
literary, media ranks. Editors, writers, presenters and so on are involved in seeing to it that
vital information is suppressed, targets are harassed and propaganda reinforced. The only
opinions aired publicly, (on important matters) are those of these people. Those trying, in
vain, to expose corrupt practices, are silenced. The public only absorbs what it is fed, be it
misinformation or worse.

The workings of publishing houses, movie studios, recording companies and the like are
therefore, semi-controlled. Even history books are prepared by "chosen" writers; they're
then placed on school syllabuses and fed to our youth to regurgitate in exams and essays.
How much of this history is fiction? Who knows, but in a world where skeptics and others
are entrained from birth to accept whatever they read in black and white and question
anecdotal evidence to the contrary, it is difficult for the truth to surface. This is especially
true in relation to covert practices and technologies cloaked by government secrecy orders
and legislation. There are no blueprints to present, no proof to supply. So these activities go
on undetected. An example is the neurophone. This 40-year-old technology allows
broadcasting directly into the brains of targeted individuals (via microwave or satellite). The
CIA and 'Mafia' terrorise people with it but the general public is ignorant of this practice.


Because wealthy criminals can access covert methods to not only commit crimes but to
cover them up there exists an age-old defence to accusations of wrongdoing, it's called
political psychiatry. It effectively discredits and thereby silences whistleblowers who have
not been discouraged by covert harassment techniques such as aircraft swoops, corrupt
emergency services personnel, media feedback etc. It's especially effective when targeting
people with neurophones or brain scanners. Simply explained it works like this: When a
disempowered individual tries to expose practices or particular crimes being committed by
ruling class members they are branded as paranoid because they are unable to provide
evidence to back their claims (for those tuned in enough to appreciate it, the term "paranoid
schizophrenia" was originally penned by a psychiatrist working for the CIA). The police
cannot or will not investigate the allegations because they will meet resistance, harassment
and embarrassment if they try. Others will not join in the conversations out of fear and so
the accuser stands alone and totally vulnerable. If high-tech is used and they complain this
only worsens the situation.

A good example involves the teachers in NSW state schools who name paedophiles in the
system. They are threatened with a visit to "Healthquest" where government psychiatrists
could cost you your job if not your freedom. In this way paedophilia (even paedophile
networks) are allowed to thrive. "If you can't prove it it's not happening" is the assumption
made by the so-called experts. They not only feign ignorance of practices and technologies
outside of their experience but they will not bite the hand that feeds them. So the chances
of a fair assessment from a government psychiatrist are about the same as getting a
divorce lawyer to advise a client to talk things through with his or her spouse rather than
pursuing costly legal proceedings. No chance at all.

Another example of the ways that the ruling class use corruptible psychiatrists is in
deflecting any accusations of media surveillance feedback, using surveillance results. By its
very nature such a practice is criminal conduct but because of the methods used it cannot
be proven decisively in a court of law (and no lawyer has the courage to take on media
magnates or governments on such a secretive practice anyway). So a complicit researcher,
writer, editor or public figure can safely plead ignorance. One TV news presenter, for
instance, has been approached many times by innocent victims of agency/media
harassment. She not only fails to help but also sells each and every one of them out; using
corrupt cops in attempts to have them committed, saying they harass her. This is class
warfare at its worst. Such people are beneath contempt yet their public standing and the
public relations/legal machine behind them ensures they are not questioned on such
conduct. This is again proof of the different rights of different classes. Honest police are also
kept in the dark about such practices (and technologies) and would in any event be
dissuaded from investigating the criminal conduct of the public figures or fellow officers

Blackmailing, (using covert surveillance results gathered by agency personnel, media, PI'S,
cops etc) as well as set-ups, abductions, brainwashing, blacklisting,
imprisonment/commitment even murder are all methods used to silence people or get them
to do what "they" want. Aircraft swoops, siren wailing and general harassment are also
common, as is the use of certain satellite-based and microwave weapons (i.e. non-lethal


Whether "born to rule" or attaining wealth and thereby adopting a superior attitude, many
are prepared to commit crimes to advance. The combination of greed and opportunity helps
to formulate opinions, which they then seek to spread. Comments like "put them down and
keep them down" and "this is what happens when you educate the poor" reflect not only a
readiness to embrace corruption but a desire to eliminate those who do not. This is the
antithesis of fair play, democracy and everything our society is supposed to stand for.

One of the ways this is fostered is the agency/criminal vetting of those entering the more
prominent positions in public life. All must be corruptible or at least self-absorbed and
fearful or they are excluded. This is contrary to the widely held belief that there are good
and bad people in all sections of the community. This is generally true but not where the
system and those running it sift out the good. Unfortunately this is the case in modern
politics and mainstream journalism. Those few who are ok are usually too afraid to


Over the years a few have slipped the net and gone on to take courageous, dangerously
moral stances. I'm not referring to charitable works by B. Geldof or Mother Theresa but
rather those opposing criminality in the community from influential positions.

For example, smear campaigns were launched against singers M. Jackson and G. Michael
because they embarrassed or questioned powerful industry figures etc. Actors R. Redford
and V. Redgrave were harassed over their political stances and The Kennedy's, M.L King and
others were actually murdered for opposing racism, war, organised crime etc.

Notably this instills fear into others. Fear for their careers, fear for their lives. In extreme
cases a dupe can be persuaded, brainwashed or harassed into killing (or taking the blame
for killing) a public figure but the real culprits are the manipulators of the CIA, The Mafia etc
who encourage (or carry out) the crime. These people can topple governments, set up
assassinations or simply arrange accidents (e.g. the suspicious deaths of M.Monroe, Lady Di
and G. Kelly). The media know, the law enforcers suspect but the agencies and their
"business" connections run the world and operate unopposed and unquestioned.


It's no secret that the CIA/Mafia connection is largely drug funded. Many who see the folly
in allowing their children to play in traffic, or who wouldn't even consider entering a few
rounds of Russian roulette will, nonetheless, happily embrace a lifestyle that supports this
operation and the rewards are not only measured monetarily. If questioned about working
for or with such people most entertainers would claim to be drug free or quote the usual
lines about it being relatively harmless but the statistics speak for themselves. One drug can
lead to something stronger and so on and many, from all walks of life, suffer and/or die as a
result. They're defending the indefensible for the personal satisfaction and rewards it brings
them. But dare anyone express this simple truth too openly and they will be harassed for it.
The wealthy can afford the habit with little or no risk of detection. However, the poor often
steal or prostitute themselves to pay for it. Equally they can't afford detox programs etc. It
ruins their lives. The ruling classes "do drugs" but for the rest of the community, the drugs
"do them".


The ruling classes are clearly made up of some of the community's worst criminals leaving
targets not only open to harassment but with no one to turn to for help. The logical
approaches (to police, politicians, journalists, church leaders) reveal the truth about their
role. Those who can be trusted are fearful; many monitored themselves by powerful
criminals using high tech satellite equipment. Others still owe favours to, receive support
from or glad hand the offenders in question (employers, media contacts, "businessmen").
It's all about money and control.

The truth is, we in the Western democracies are no freer than our counterparts elsewhere in
the world. In fact serfs in Feudal England or slaves in ancient Egypt served masters no more
evil than some of those we deal with today. The only difference is that the ruling classes
today hide their crimes and attitudes better. They can't drag "do-gooders" out of bed at
2:00am and have them thrown into some hellhole to be tortured to death. Here, in a
"democracy", they have to use satellite spying and harassment technologies, media
feedback, political maneuvering, conspiracy etc. As a result none will be questioned let
alone caught and punished. Instead, while opponents are silenced and discredited, "their"
attitudes permeate society, drawing others to accept that invasions of privacy, drugs,
corruption and all manner of criminal conduct are to go unquestioned, as an acceptable part
of life. Their delusions and our apathy must be challenged.


          The Ultimate Blasphemy : Mind Reading Technologies etc
                                         By Paul Baird
                                          May 2005

This article is unashamedly scathing in its criticism of those behind the offences in question.
To understand and accept the horrible truth to follow, the reader must first realise that
corrupt beaurocracies, covert agencies and organised crime figures really do control the
entire world.

Read the rest of the article (PDF file download)


                                    Computer State
                                         By Paul Baird
                                         July 2006
                           "Hard Evidence" Vol 6, No. 5, pp 44-51

There is no doubt that the global conquest which has been secretly carried out by the U.S
based military/agency/corporate crime conglomerate would not have been possible without
the vast capabilities of extremely advanced computer systems.

Read the rest of the article (PDF file download)


                               Conspiracies of Silence
                                      By Paul Baird
                                        July 2009
                2010, "Hard Evidence",Vol 10, No 2, Mar/Apr '10, pp 46- 51.

Despite the stigma that’s been deliberately attached to the word “conspiracy” our modern
world is, in fact, run by conspiracies of one sort of another. Some conspiracies are more
benign than others but all of them involve undue secrecy and the presumption that those
involved have the right to influence the lives of others, without their knowledge or consent.

Read the rest of the article (PDF file download)


                                TRUTH AND OPINION

In the absence of absolute proof the truth can be dismissed as erroneous opinion by those
who do not wish to accept it. This is why, on many crucial social and economic issues,
people are not presented with all the facts before they form and express their opinions (eg
misled voters). Yet others, who have the relevant information, often express false opinions
based on corrupt vested interests (eg politicians). As a result there is an imbalance between
truth and opinion which criminals foster. This allows for a minimal amount of real challenge
/ contradiction to their lucrative, criminal operations. By brainwashing the public into
believing that everyone and everything presented publicly should be taken at face value and
that those talking of conspiracies, lies and covert operations are paranoid powerful criminals
escape detection and condemnation. The gullible are deceived and the few that know


Liars and hypocrites disguise their deeds by twisting the facts. Criminals are the worst of
these but since less than 5% of jailable offenders are actually apprehended most crime,
especially that committed by wealthy, protected operators, goes undetected and
In the case of governments," National Security" is often quoted as a defence to calls for
more open and accountable government. In this way the most hidden conspiracies, scams,
oppressive techniques and technologies are concealed from the public. Whistleblowers and
detractors who draw suspicion to such secrecy can be discredited in many ways; the
simplest being to say they have no proof and are therefore mad. With covert attacks on
such people orchestrated by the agencies and organised crime figures they are easily
discredited and silenced. A current example is the treatment given to Wikileaks founder
Julian Assange. He's been treated like public enemy no 1 for releasing US diplomatic
documents online. He's been framed, harassed and disparaged by the media and their
agency connections but I believe that this is primarily to discredit whistleblowers and
reenforce protections for the flow of classified information. If our military and political
leaders were totally trustworthy there'd be no concern but they're not to be believed so the
public needs greater access to the truth not less. Not surprisingly there's little of great
importance in what was "allowed"to be leaked by Wikileaks, only embarrassing commentary.
If it was serious we would never have heard about it.


In my view anyone or anything that encourages one person to hurt another is wrong;
immoral, criminal or both. In the case of used spies, entertainers, MPs and so on money is
not the only reward / motivation. Anything that breaks down the character and integrity of
the controllers puppets will work : drugs, celebrity, influence etc. Making these people
believe that they are above the law and above the rest of us is step one.

In Western domocracies, where freedom of expression, privacy, dignity and more appear to
present affluent citizens ( all of us) with the opportunity to help others, our criminal
controllers need to also control our thinking. If we're not distracted by self interest we might
put pressure on them to do something too difficult to really help our poorer neighbours.
Jesus Christ, whether you recognise him as God or just a great philosopher, had to be right
when he said we should love our neighbours as ourselves. However, in this age of advanced
transportation and communication, where it IS possible to feed, clothe, shelter and protect
the whole world, we're told that's impossible by those who mock "The way, the truth and
the life"because it's not in their avaricious best interests to recognise Christ's faultless call
to care... Funny too how those guilty of the biggest crimes are the ones who see right and
wrong as a "Grey area" whilst others just admit their mistakes.


Political leaders in Western democracies often criticise the human rights records of
communist and third world countries, and rightly so. Today there's a clear focus on Muslim
countries and those run by hostile military regimes. However, while such countries imprison
or kill those critical of their governments our supposed "free world" governments are really
no better. The only difference is that with free speech and democracy operating as facades
covert rumour spreading, blacklisting, surveillance and harassment are used to destroy such
people without detection. Corrupt spies and organised crime figures organise this on behalf
of power brokers who want to stifle discussion of the real reasons for wars, crime, poverty
etc. They do this because they profit from these things one way or another and so want
them to continue, at the expense of others. Their targets, those expressing views and truths
that these people want suppressed, are treated like political prisoners in mobile
concentration camps so the mistreatment cannot be proven; satellite surveillance and 24/7
harassment are the norm. So ,while criminals may freely offend, insult, mislead and corrupt
others through their public puppets those disagreeing with them too openly can be robbed
of their privacy, dignity, ideas, peace of mind and sometimes even their lives.


People on the world stage front for organised crime figures and members of secret societies
as well as cooperating with corrupt agency personnel. They sell their souls and for them the
old saying, "who do I have to kill" rings true because they'll do almost anything for money
or advantage. Some even willingly submit to subliminal influence and humiliation rather
than turning on their puppeteers. With public adulation guaranteeing their influence they're
ideally placed to deceive us.

Eg 1. Entertainers... Almost all take illegal drugs. That is not the major concern, though it's
less than good. The main worry is that drugs make them malleable and susceptible to
criminal suggestions. Drugs are about control first and money second and it's no surprise to
learn that the agencies and organised crime figures are involved for both reasons.
Entertainers are also exposed to underage groupies making them blackmailable as
pedophiles. (There are many teachers jailed for this but few public figures are investigated.
The reason is entertainers serve a far greater monetary and influential purpose). Add any
financial wrongdoings, infidelities and so on and it's easy to see how they are stopped from
stepping out of line.

Eg 2. Politicians and journalists...These present the world the way they want us to see it. As
well as the problems mentioned above these mislead the public and betray them with their
silence on many important matters. Add to this their criminal mistreatment of those who
attempt to expose the truth.


Our democratic right to freedom of thought / expression has been warped for most and
utterly destroyed for others. The silent majority may, for example, see more and more of a
certain lifestyle portrayed publicly but rather than expressing their concerns they remain
silent. For example, gay themes are constantly overrepresented , statistics inflated and
experimentation promoted because acceptance is not enough for many homosexuals who
control or work within the entertainment industry; they want lifestyle change from others.
Those questioning this for religious or other reasons are covertly harassed; their rights
removed by a criminal element.

The point is that in a democracy every citizen deserves the right to hold and express their
own views without fear of repercussions from criminals hiding behind celebrity, authority,
minority status or the political correctness that protects them from comment. The side that
resorts to criminal conduct of any sort has, of course, lost the argument and is most likely
wrong in opinion as well as action.

Also protecting criminals from accusations are today's beefed up defamation laws. In truth,
the only thing that should be censored is something actually inciting hatred and violence.
For criminals to seek to stifle illustrative fictional texts and discussion of their criminal and
anti-social conduct is ludicrous. Criminal conduct adversely affects the rest of the population
that's why there are laws and law enforcers. To try to bully critics of crime into silence with
a "you're not perfect, you dropped that gum wrapper" type defence is transparent nonsense.
In addition, bogus National Security laws are also an obvious attempt to hide military /
agency crimes that the public should know about. Independent and untouchable
investigative bodies should be able to ensure that the agencies, military, media and MPs
speak the truth so that faith in authority can be restored. Most citizens have nothing at all
to hide but it's impossible to trust or respect anyone in authority that spies on you
especially if they harass you with the results and insult you with their lies.


Fifty years ago (even twenty) if you claimed to believe in aliens, embraced homosexuality or
were a self confessed atheist you'd be ridiculed (but hopefully not criminally attacked).
Today, with belief in aliens reaching 80% in the US (thanks largely to NASA and Hollywood),
with large sections of the mass media now owned and run by homosexuals (who favour /
promote their own) and the arrogant "it's all about ME" generation turning from God the
situation is reversed. Because the wealthy and influential have initiated these changes those
not sharing these "modern" views are often criminally harassed.

Again, the point is that regardless of the time frame or the popular view of the day
everyone should feel confident and safe enough to express their honest and sincere views
without fear of repercussions from criminals who seek to enforce their own views.
Expressing a view is not a crime but to harass someone for their view IS a crime, casting
doubt on the validity of the criminal's opinions as well.

Censorship of opinions can also prevent any modification of views. Take for example the
jailing of Gerd Honsik for denying the holocaust. Are the relevant authorities afraid that he
may successfully alter views or are they claiming that he's inciting hatred / violence? I don't
think that either is likely. My view is that people ought to be able to put forward whatever,
idea, opinion, theory or whatever that they genuinely believe to be true. If you don't like it
or disagree you can ignore it ... even tell others they should ignore it. Nevertheless,
remember that conspiracies and lies abound in public life. When you say "you can't hear
him speak " or "you can't read that book" you raise curiosity and suspicion. It's not only
undemocratic to silence conspiracy theorists, it's stupid. In fact, people should be able to
stand in a public square and openly declare that the sky is down, it's green and falling
without criminal retribution or sanction.

By the way, given the growing skepticism about the official version of the 911 WTC disaster
and the suggestion that the Mossad / CIA were involved is it any wonder that a few would
also question the holocaust. Funny how mere mention of these organisations brings instant
reprisal from the controlled mass media.


Most opinions and lifestyles are cyclical; constantly changing. Today's fashion is tomorrow's
folly. Today's morality is tomorrow's immorality etc. Modern man is not always right or
nothing would ever change. And mockery of older or newer ways and opinions doesn't alter
that it only accentuates the insecurity behind it all, whether the abuse be harmless and
open or criminal and invasive.

Example 1. Today., 2010, tattoos and body piercing are extremely popular thanks largely to
the mass media promotion of both. But what happens when fashions change and a
significant no. of people (esp. women) want their body art totally removed... Hopefully by
then effective technologies will exist to facilitate that.
Example 2. Homosexuals. I use this example again because it's one where significant
change has taken place over a very short period of time. Today they've been lured out of
the closet by the very same media that not so long ago was oppressing them. But what
happens when public opinion sways back and those people are no longer comfortable in full
view. There should be no alteration in how the rest of us treat them but, for many, there
would be.

Yet again, the point is that it's not a free society in the past, present or future unless you
can say that there are no negative consequences for holding a view or adopting a lifestyle
AND there is no criminally applied pressure to be or think or act in one way or another,
within the law. That also applies to those running new concepts or conspiracy theories
especially as many, in time, are proven to be correct.

Eg 1 Galileo was under house arrest until his death thanks to the ignorance and evil
oppression of the church / government of his day. He was later vindicated but their small-
minded fears had ruined his life. He certainly didn't live in an enlightened, democratic
environment but we're supposed to and yet there's little difference today in the cruelty
meted out to those presenting new/old or counter cultural ideas. Even those looking at
things from different perspectives can be hounded. If it offends powerful people who are
prepared to react criminally then you will suffer.

Eg 2 A more recent example is the mistreatment of those doubting the official version of the
World Trade Centre disaster of 2001. Surveys show that even half the US population (the
most brainwashed) don't believe the gov't/media on this one...Despite that we only get one
version of events. Those saying too much can be harassed for it but anecdotal evidence
from people who were actually there, including firemen, WTC staff and more, backs up what
professional engineers and fire experts say: aviation fuel could not generate enough heat to
melt the structures and cause the collapses. Instead explosives were placed (by someone)
inside the buildings and detonated on cue. Witnesses confirm this and there's even film of
an explosion. Many believe that the Mossad or the CIA were involved; churning up
sympathy for Israel and hatred for other middle east countries. Oddly enough Mossad
backed security companies allowed the planes to be taken from the airports in the first place
and now all travellers bear the brunt of lost rights and airport security checks because of

Again, to ask people to believe everything they're told by unscrupulous public figures is
unreasonable. We may not have all the facts but that's part of why we doubt. To have those
asking questions covertly attacked by so many is unthinkably evil. Many brave men and
women fought and died in various wars and other conflicts (many unknown) to establish
and preserve our basic rights to dignity, privacy, free speech and freedom. Given the way
today's community "leaders" behave when they're out of public view you'd have to wonder
if democracy is just a cloak for dagger-wielding criminals to hide behind. It should be an
achievable system wherein equality is the central principle. However, with secret police and
organised crime dictating to the rest of us I suggest that true democracy is badly in need of
a renewal.


Many professionals (journalists, MPs, psychiatrists, spies, commentators and researchers)
are more than willing to misrepresent their opinions in exchange for money or advantage.
Spy agency investigators and medical researchers are prime examples. If a powerful
criminal wants a detractor harassed because their views/information may cost him money
or embarrass him he can use corrupt agency officials to have that person listed as a
subversive or a threat and see him/her covertly harassed. Agency officials have no interest
in the truth; they'll produce reports or harass people as instructed by their
political/media/business connections. Equally, (for example) ,cigarette companies have
been known to pay doctors to report that smoking isn't harmful , psychiatrists have helped
killers get off on insanity pleas and committed whistleblowers for speaking the truth. Also,
celebrities may endorse products, lifestyles or systems that they don't even approve of. It's
all arrant nonsense and very transparent if you care to think about it. Money becomes the
truth and the real truth often never surfaces because others are afraid to question the
corrupt "opinions" of powerful, "learned" people. I suggest that for many who prostitute
their views it's all about power and learning has nothing to do with it except as a barrier to
contradiction. Again, how can you trust anyone unless they're prepared to speak/write the
absolute truth regardless of the consequences.


All of this makes many afraid to express their opinions at all which is precisely what the
criminals/bullies behind the scenes want. They freely exercise their rights but seek to stifle
ours. It's as if they believe they are above the rest of us and have an extra right; the right
to evade scrutiny and criticism for their crimes The ones best protected are often the very
ones who most deserve to be imprisoned. Instead they're dictating trends, lifestyles,
morality and more without fear of challenge. For most citizens fear of ridicule from those
around them, who are influenced by public figures, is enough. For those pushing past that,
to the stage where they are known to these criminals,remote emotional and psychological
torture and harassment can be organised by gang stalkers including celebrities. These
people will do, read, say whatever they're told regardless of the source or the intended
target. All involved in such practices are criminals.

As well as hiding behind celebrity and all that goes with it these criminals try to mirror guilt
back onto the few who are not afraid to criticise their crimes. For example, imply that
politicians are sending innocents to their death in unnecessary wars and they'll call you
unpatriotic (the flag being the last resort for any scoundrel). Accuse them of betraying the
public with deception on serious matters like who and what is behind the drug trade, who's
really responsible for terrorism, poverty etc etc and they'll accuse you of being a conspiracy
theorist (though the world is run by conspirators). Try to blame them for any criminal or
immoral influence and they'll try to silence you with reference to any minor matter they
think you may be guilty of. And I can say from experience that when they find nothing
they'll try to embarass you instead with constant, subtle surveillance feedback; oppressing
you with surveillance and commentary.

None of this would survive public scrutiny but whilever it's done covertly the culprits
manage to tell themselves that they're right and that their targets deserve to be attacked.
It's self deception that only the prince of lies could arrange.


The following are personal views, most of them stated in a banned book, for which I've been
attacked covertly.
* We are alone in the universe. This is unpopular with NASA etc because they use
Hollywood and their own propaganda machine to boost funding. However, that funding is
primarily (but secretly) devoted to satellite deployment which is aimed back at us from deep
space; ie surveillance and harassment technologies use us ... sometimes as guinea pigs.

* There is no privacy. Because of the many satellites in geosynchronous orbit every word,
action and thought can be monitored if they choose to do so. All public figures are
monitored 24/7by the CIA/ NSA/ Military etc.

* Those entering public life are corruptible and/or self -serving. Crimes like
arms/drug/people trafficking aren't properly dealt with because of this. Equally, they keep
secret technologies from us as well as cures for diseases, inventions like frictionless engines
etc.. and all to secure continued financial advantage for those who gain from the status quo.
As a result people are mushroomed and progress stymied so that a few wealthy,
megalomaniacal criminals can maintain control of everything as long as possible.

* There are no coincidences, most events are stage managed. The air of vulnerability
evident after events like 911 doesn't really exist. Such events are orchestrated, provoked or
allowed so as to justify war, resource grabs and security clampdowns which greatly diminish
our rights and freedoms.

* Those who "have" want even more, including that owned by the "have nots". They have
no genuine regard for those who have little, regarding them with disdain and suspicion...
since they can't be trusted themselves and cannot relate to honest people. They do not
respect us or our rights and see us as inferior beings that they can mistreat as they wish.
Accordingly they have no concern for how they offend others. If we return the favour they
react criminally since they operate within a legal/moral vacuum.


The media and politicians have a moral and civic duty to tell the general public the full truth
on matters like the middle east conflict(s), 911, satellite capabilities, political
influence/pressure, the environment and crime. To do less is to serve corrupt, wealthy
vested interests on the false assumption that might ($$) is always right. It is also a betrayal
of trust and an abuse of position.

To silence critics and those searching for the truth through covert means is "master plan"
mentality and a crime against humanity that even the worst dictator would baulk at.

I do not respect or trust the views of criminals on the topics in question (where full
disclosure and accountability are absent). I object strenuously to such people telling us
what to think and how to live.


My belief is that Life is God's test and to pass you have to put others before yourself.
Nothing that you achieve for yourself has any value except to the extent it allows you to
help others. No-one has the right to misrepresent the truth publicly, to hurt others to
silence them or to feather their own nest at the expense of others...

These days politicians, media personalities and other community leaders reference free
speech, respect, dignity and so on by clearly exercising their own rights publicly and
commanding attention in a sort of illustrative "you have this right too" manner. However,
the sad fact is that (with the exception of staged tokenism to create a democratic veneer)
only those sharing their views are allowed to be heard in public or tolerated in private.
Those with opposing views are often silenced via covert criminal conduct which all in public
life are aware of.

A lack of honesty and integrity permeates the ranks of our most visible citizens whilst
insincere "world stage" acts cover this well. Many celebrities are actively involved in
oppressing those speaking or writing the truth and they betray the general public in the
process. Because of this covert and undemocratic oppression many truths are
hidden,allowing for many false opinions to be foisted on an unsuspecting public. A series of
diversionary discussions and distractions are paraded leading the public far from the truth.
Mushroomed as they are most people have views that reflect the level of information, half
truths and nonsense that they're presented by the mass media. Those seeing through all of
this are the ones criminally and covertly attacked.

This situation will only change if public figures have a change of heart and renounce their
criminal ways. Failing that, the rest of us need to resume thinking for ourselves rather than
lazily accepting the lies of the many criminals in public life.

             CASE STUDY
In 1991 I wrote a political satire entitled "In the Year 2252" (P. Barber, pseudonym).
Copies were circulated prematurely by a Chicago literary agent. As a result, many
publishers, editors and writers accessed copies.

Before a second draft was prepared it was clear covert censorship would prevent any
possibility of publication... I was already under 24 hour a day surveillance and was
fielding feedback from corrupt sections of the entertainment industry; especially the

The reasons for their objections are many. Although the fictional novel was ultimately
to be placed in a "virtual reality" setting the submitted draft drew too much attention
because it was critical of many things which criminals in high places do to get what
they want and control others. Corruption, drugs, war, media deception, and all
manner of immorality were openly attacked in the novel. I also lobbied on privacy
laws. The personal repercussions are outlined below. (What the media did is
highlighted under "Feedback")
While reading this account please keep in mind the wide reaching influence of covert
agencies and organised crime throughout our community. A few "well placed" people
in each area can create havoc for those being silenced. Others working with these
criminals are too selfish, scared or apathetic to intervene.

Also, because wealthy criminals may make false accusations I state, as fact, that not
only have I never committed any wrongdoing whatsoever but I have never even
contemplated any wrongdoing. I've responded to the harassment defensively but
verbally, with indignation, anger and even humour but that's all. Accordingly, any
misinterpreted or "altered" writings etc should be ignored.

NOTE: Examples of feedback that made me aware of the "set up" possibilities

(a) Learning (from the security/P.I industries) that the word was out to "wash your
hands of it" meaning not to talk to me and (b) being referred to media identities (esp.
T.V presenter M.Willesee) by one P.I who did investigate. Apparently, having sold his
horse racing interests, he was to be trusted.? Having little knowledge of corruption in
that industry or any other (including the drug trade/media/agency connection) I was
puzzled by this. In any event, being unable to see M.Willesee I tried meeting some of
his colleagues (see "Meetings" Jan 97).

       Who Knows?

The following people know who is involved:

    John Howard (Australian Liberal Prime Minister). Three people (incl. a senior
    Federal Police executive and an ex agency member) informed me that the Prime
    Minister "is aware of" the situation but that "his hands are tied". Early in 1996 he
    did, in fact, ask the AFP to investigate the surveillance but they were unable to
    (efficiently) for "legal reasons". Although I was told it was because the matter
    was "politically sensitive".
   NB: If the media could "tune in" so could the AFP. They couldn't help because of
   who is involved.

   Ros Chilvers (Ex agency / private investigator) - She spoke with Paul Keating
   when he was Labor Prime Minister and told me he was actually part of the
   vendetta against me.

   This is part of what makes it "awkward" for others to help. This and the Foreign
   Agency, Entertainment Industry connection.

   Warren College (Federal Cabinet Secretary's Office) - He spoke with current PM,
   John Howard, who said the situation was "too awkward" (for him to intervene).
   It's "awkward" because Federal Labor politicians, agency officials and the media
   ARE involved as are their counterparts in the US. It is, in fact, a criminal
   conspiracy of silence.

   Steve Duffield (Ex Sen. Alston's office) - He knew and tried to help. Within a
   week he was gone and cannot be found.

   Ms J. Bonner (Ex J. Howard's office) - Knew but now refuses to discuss it; even
   with liberal staffers.

   Matt Francis (Sen. Newman's office) - Said many working in politics knew I was
   monitored/harassed because of the book, adding it had " opened his eyes" to
   realise the full extent of what actually goes on (i.e. political crimes).

   Mick Roberts (Ex AFP) - On his retirement he told me that he'd always believed
   me totally but there was a wall of secrecy which he couldn't break through. No
   one would talk and it all "smells of journalists and politicians" he said.

   Nelson Chad (Investigator/Ex policeman) - Channel 9 journalists (in particular
   Ray Martin and others working on "A Current Affair") were involved. This was
   even confirmed by one ACP director, Mr. G. Cubbin.

Note: Channel 9 owner, Kerry Packer is not the only media magnate who wants me
silenced. No media player would want the general public becoming fully aware of the
invasions of privacy and crimes which journalists and agency officials commit.
Remember, I lobbied heavily on privacy laws for years with John Howard himself
supporting my views, in writing.

       Those harassed for helping me

   ROSS SAUNDERS, ex head of religious programming at Ch 2. He confirmed all
   my suspicions about the media's involvement and advised me. He was forced to
   move because of the covert harassment he endured.

   DAVID SANDERSON, B-Grade moviemaker. He called and volunteered to make
   a documentary on the covert, technological attacks on decent people who
   spoke/wrote about evil in high places. He said it sickened him…however, he and
   those he approached to help were frightened/blackmailed into dropping the plan

    HOMI BAHRAMALI - Neuroscience/psychiatry - Westmead Hospital. He was
    working on his own neurophone so his harassment was largely due to his own
    work. He now works at The Centre For The Mind (Sydney Uni) but is cautious
    about offering real help to victims, for obvious reasons.

    SEAN EDWARDS, ex Special Branch (NSW Police) and AFP officers, Graham
    Cane, Mick Roberts, Jeff Sundin, Chris Woods and Mark Andrews also helped but
    weren't harassed.

       Various means of harassment & persecution


Since mid 1991 I have been kept from full-time gainful employment. This is despite
the fact I have degrees in Law and Economics and a solid working background that
includes time with The Chamber of Commerce, a major bank and the Australian
taxation office. "Instructions" were probably circulated by those involved in criminal
activities. (One private investigator told me the word was out that everyone was to
"wash their hands" of the matter. No-one would dare help.) Many obstacles stand
between me and real work although I have been "allowed" simple work:

Overt Intimidation

    I've been followed and harassed by corrupt P.I.'s and police, however they have
    not accosted me at any stage.

    At crucial moments, crank phone calls come through to my home. Nothing is ever
    said. Silence... then they hang up.

    My mail (esp. from the USA) is often intercepted. IF I get it then it's either
    opened/annotated or a reply of little consequence. eg: one letter had a drawing
    of a surveillance satellite monitoring me and the words "Have a nice day".

    Helicopters and small planes deliberately "buzz" my home and follow (or even
    hover overhead) as I walk/drive. This can happen countless times on any given
    day or night in clear view of friends/relatives. This can be triggered by an event
    (eg. Going to the mailbox), a political statement I make in private (sometimes
    bringing in up to three "choppers" immediately) or a time of day (e.g. when a
    particular Channel 9 or Channel 7 current affairs program is running).

    Siren "wailing" can also be triggered in a similar manner to the aircraft
    harassment. Embarrassingly, these often coincide with trips to the bathroom etc.
    If I'm on the street, ambulances will wait on corners or stop their sirens as they
    approach me; often turning around (clearly going nowhere in particular).

    Occasionally public figures, who I've never met, would stare at me. e.g. At a function
    held at St George Leagues Club, Graham Richardson (Labor Party Numbers man and
    Ch 9 Employee) entered the auditorium from a side entrance and stared at me non-
    stop, as he walked through the room, all the way to the podium.There he delivered a
    jovial account of his own corruption. Now if I'd approached him for an explanation
    (or PM John Howard, who was also there), goons would of accosted me. This is not
    politics it's oppression and it's a crime. As is all similar intimidation, privacy invasion
    and harrassment.

NB: False alarms, corrupt dispatchers and bribes to pilots (for flight deviations) all
help effect these forms of harassment. My enquiries revealed all of these are
common practices.


From 1991 until this day I have been under 24 hour a day satellite audio/visual
surveillance. The results have been made available to politicians and journalists.
Private investigators confirmed that ex PM, P. Keating and Channel 9 "A Current
Affair" personnel were actively involved, but there were many others. (Notably some
Labor politicians worked for Kerry Packer's Channel 9 after retiring eg: Richardson,

Without their knowledge, my relatives were also frequently monitored in the early
'90's. Notably by late 1996 the direct media monitoring of the (agency) signals
stopped as more advanced satellite systems were employed. It is suspected this may
be due to the fact that the Liberal government (elected March '96) were not actively
involved in the harassment so other means of attacking me were found. However I
am uncertain of the precise reason.


    Countless speeches, news items, advertisements, scripts and "writings" have
    been peppered with my ideas/words/phrases. These came not only from the
    surveillance results but also the book which, though covertly "banned" by the
    criminals concerned, was also extensively "used" by many writers / editors;
    especially those working for Rupert Murdoch (eg: Harper Collins, the Telegraph
    etc). Not only did I find some TV executives that admitted such thefts and
    harassment techniques are used, but one even openly admitted his own people
    were partially to blame.

    Much of the feedback involves subtle but constant death threats.

    Many media personnel in Sydney were clearly informed of the relevant audio
    surveillance frequencies and were monitoring directly until late 1996. This was
    made most obvious by comments made by "live to air" broadcasters (TV / radio).
    Clearly the presenters were signalled and "fed". With the advent of neurophone
    harassment and brain scanning (in my case) there was a less direct (delayed or
    relayed) feedback…as if the media could no longer directly monitor the signals.
    However, the speed of feedback picked up again in later years. In any event, the
    feedback of thoughts can be even more oppressive than the feedback of
    words…Both continue to this day.
   In my case, the switch (to more advanced monitoring systems) also coincided
   with the PM's office instructing that I would no longer receive replies to my
   correspondence; though the significance may be minor. For all I know I may
   merely have been taking the place of another politically selected experimental
   target; for an illegal human research programme.

       Examples of feedback (by Channel 9)

1. PROMOS - eg: Kerry Packer's ACP Director, Mr Graeme Cubbin, admitted that
   the "I AM CHANNEL 9" promo was in fact aimed AT me. Many of the on air
   presenters working at 9 featured in that ad; I believe most knew what they were

2. PHRASES - eg: Just before "A Current Affair" ended on Channel 9 for 1992, then
   presenter Jana Wendt was quoted in a magazine as saying: "I guess I'll go to my
   grave not being able to think past the end of my nose", a comment I made
   (knowing it would be overheard) just prior to that interview (not exactly a
   common saying). And it was not the only reference in the article. Coincidences?
   Imagine such coincidences happening a dozen times a day - for years - and you'll
   appreciate why this "parroting" is so useful to them. It's extremely oppressive.

3. DIRECT FEEDBACK - eg: On at least two memorable occasions I responded to
   "live" taunts by Channel 9 employees only to have the entire transmission cut
   completely and immediately.

4. OTHER "COINCIDENCES" - eg: ACA, Ch.9 presenter, Ray Martin, ran an item
   on politicians who don't answer correspondence. They suggested viewers use a
   company called Voterlobby.

   The link is that I'd just contacted the Prime Minister's chief of staff about my
   many (and various) unanswered letters to Mr Howard and his Cabinet AND had
   used Voterlobby to question MPs on the need for enforceable privacy laws. (Prior
   to being elected in March 1996 Mr Howard had been supportive of my views)

   Also, on the day my mum received her cancer test results (Aug 04) Dr John Holts
   "cancer" treatments featured on Ch9's A.C.A. Subsequent items on Dr Holt
   coincided with treatment milestones for my mum. Cynical attacks like this test
   your patience and prove that those behind the harassment will stop at nothing.

       Meetings (Jan 97)

Remember, PI's AFP officers and even one Channel 9 director had admitted to me
that a Ch 9 ACA personnel were involved. Then presenter J. Wendt delivered constant
feedback / coincidences for years; fed by agency/syndicate writers, researchers etc.
She was not the only one... whichever programs I viewed would join in but the
current affairs shows were the worst.
Eg. 1 Mike Minehan (Ex Ch.9, ACA, UTS)
A security guard tried to prevent our appointment taking place; under
instructions from an "unknown" outside caller. Similarly, Minehan was
interrupted constantly by phone calls. On the last call he slammed the phone
down exclaiming: "They're telling me to get out. Now!" However he had
already told me that my situation was "not uncommon". He suggested I see
Jana Wendt. He seemed genuinely worried.

Although it seems naïve now, at the time I thought journalists (et al) may help
re the brainwave/neurophone torture. I even contacted one or two who had
personally harassed me with surveillance feedback.

Eg. 2 Jana Wendt (Ex Ch.9, ACA, Ch.7 etc)
"Wendt was approached firstly because, although she'd harassed me, she was
fighting with Ch7 execs at the time and I thought she may be disgruntled
enough to help me; esp. as the level of harassment had recently escalated
considerably. Secondly, one of her predecessors, Mike Minehan, who seemed
genuine, suggested that I should contact her. As I neared her Eastwood office
I saw her in the street and introduced myself. She said to meet her in her
office in one hour. However, during that hour she was called to the station and
dismissed. I was also harassed. Seeing this as a clear attempt to stop her
talking to me I located her home through her partner's details and arrived to
find her having a music lesson. She warned me that TV execs control
everything, including her, but, rather than refusing to talk, suggested I call
her secretary for an appointment. It would have been more honest to say "Go
away. I won't help you" I'd been lured into a mincer and what followed was
probably set up by Messrs David Leckie, Ch 7 GM, and Rice who both went
from Ch 9 to Ch7 with Wendt).

Eastwood police later harrassed me, at the request of their "friends" at Ch.7.
They refused to speak to Wendt personally. I was told not to make any
appointment and was taken to a psychiatric hospital as a "warning". Before I
was assessed and released (by a bemused psychiatrist who saw no reason for
my being there at all) "knowledgeable" staff told me that at least six others
who sought assistance from Wendt had also been sent there. "This is what you
get for crossing them "said one senior nurse. (They knew yet co-operated). An
FOI request indicated that Detectives Pollock and Spurr were warning me on
behalf of Ch7 execs but Police Internal Affairs did nothing (esp. as TV
identities were involved). I also discovered that the Police "psych" (a Dr. R.
Burek) had claimed that our 3 minute discussion took 45 mins and had later
tried to erase his annotation claiming I suffered from "auditory hallucinations".
He had to try to remove it before I got it because I hadn't mentioned that to
anyone during the incident, including him. The honest psychiatrist at the
hospital who had let me go also observed this but left it to me to pursue the
corrupt parties.

Since this worrying episode I have learnt much about the role of mainstream
media identities from agency officials, on-air targets etc. Little wonder
suppression and oppression are rife in this country (and many other western
"democracies"). The media mafia has far too much power.

Eg. 3 Kerry Packer (media magnate, ACP etc)
While I waited at reception Mr Packer and his son exited the car park and took
the lift; James Packer looking back at me before disappearing into the
elevator. Six goons then surrounded me, the leader claiming I'd been up to
Packer's 3rd floor office six times. (I wasn't even sure Packer would be there.
Also, this was my only visit and I was on the ground floor). When I scoffed,
asking for proof of this lie, he said "Oh just get out anyway". I did. I wasn't
going to give them an excuse to set something up.

N.B. Because of these experiences no further attempts have been made to
resolve this situation face to face. Employees of media magnates, Singleton,
Packer and Murdoch are all involved in my situation. Some, I'm told, are also
involved heavily in the drug trade (hence the mafia / C.I.A links, and the
technology access). It's also worth noting that in 1990-91, when this all
started, all three media bosses were staunchly behind the Australian Labor
Party; the central source of the problem.

However, employees of others, like Ch 7 owner Kerry Stokes, were also clearly


My own situation is known to many and some of the more bizarre/significant
"coincidences" have been deliberately omitted. However, the brief illustration
has hopefully served its purpose.

Like the covert agencies themselves (especially the CIA, Office of Homeland
Security), those using surveillance results to torment innocent people are little
more than modern day (electronic) Nazis. Many are prominent public figures
with no fear of the law and little or no respect for others. Controlling public
perception / opinion through such people is a priority for both the agencies
and those whose interests they protect. Obviously only those who are "co-
operative" gain prominent positions within the relevant media circles. In fact
some sections of the media are responsible for gross human rights abuses
including (ironically) the suppression of free speech.

Once again, freedom of the press should not grant a freedom to oppress.

NB: If a target is relatively unaffected by the media feedback or "tunes out" to
all media / entertainment output (to avoid the feedback / harassment) then
other, more advanced forms of harassment (like the neurophone and brain
wave analysers) can take their place. This switch may also occur if the agency
/ criminals responsible wish to prevent direct monitoring of their frequencies
by the media, Federal Police etc (for whatever reason).

In fact remote neural monitoring (RNM) uses the brain as a transmitter (and
receiver). In Mengele-like experiments, targets are used and sometimes killed.
Those surviving, like ex-members of secret societies, agencies etc, are
discredited to negate the truth of their claims.
Religious Persecution

Although I am of the Catholic faith, and was subtly ridiculed for that, the Catholic
Church (which is closely aligned with the Australian Labor Party, which fostered the
situation) has also harassed me using the results of the surveillance.

While some priests were sympathetic (one even admitting he'd heard about the
"banned" book), others did as the church hierarchy instructed. The links between the
church, the Labor party and overseas crime figures are well known. There may have
been some "pressure" applied.

Like other hypocrites and users corrupt members of the wealthy Catholic hierarchy
will use and abuse the word of God (and his children) to get their way. Even sainted
persons like Mary McKillop, today used for sainty 'cover" were once persecuted for
daring to speak their mind. Like other deluded megalomaniacs, many in the church
live far from 'Christ-like' lives. To victimise people criminally for their views, is
inexcusible and evil. If Christ were here today he would also be persecuted by these

It is interesting that one of the guilty priests, an ex bikie named Kevin Lee, was
chosen as a contestant on the Pentridge Jail Challenge run by A. Denton, Radio
2mmm, Nov 2001. Apparently he won. Odd coincidences like this were common in
the early 90s. (I wonder who else he harrassed).

Neurophone/Aural Harassment

Since September 1996, I've been receiving constant/clear threats and propaganda
from an unknown agency/criminal source; probably the CIA, Office of Homeland

This method of "torture" (which seems to be known to many political/media entities)
is usually delivered courtesy of a satellite which tracks you, personally. A laser directs
live talk, noise and computer-generated music at the body. It travels the nervous
system as electrical impulses and registers in the brain; bypassing normal hearing
mechanisms. Only the target hears it.

Prominent journalists and senior federal police say it's "not uncommon" and I know
there are thousands of political victims in the USA and hundreds here.

The motives for this form of oppression seem to go beyond providing an "annoyance".
The hope "seems" to be that the victim will be discredited if they react badly to the
verbal taunts OR approach the wrong people for assistance. For example, media
"mafia" personnel, politically naïve medicos or ignorant police could make matters
worse. In the US, where the authorities refuse to concede their own government
encourages such activities, the complainants are often committed.

Meanwhile, senior federal police, some political aides and human rights activists are
the most supportive here. Many are honest enough to admit they know which
technologies big brother agencies and criminals can access. However practical help
cannot be offered.

Experimentation - Brain wave Monitoring

Also since September 1996, I've been humiliated as a target of an experimental
technology (again, satellite based) which allows the magnetic field around your head
to be monitored. This powerful scanning and tracking system delivers the results to
an unknown (probably US) facility with an advanced computer system capable of
interpreting the brain wave patterns it receives; instantaneously.

The aural feedback then makes for a means of remote interrogation and/or
psychological torture. Combined with audio/visual surveillance the overall situation is
like being in an electronic POW camp. One senior AFP executive said this may
continue for many years and they are powerless to stop it.

The human rights abuses I'm experiencing are considerable. However, what concerns
me most is that ostensibly democratic governments can allow the development and
"use" of such evil technologies to stifle free speech.

Murdered Whistleblowers

Although I never met either man Neurosurgeon/psychiatrist, Alistair Stuart and Black
Mountain Tower (Canberra) chief technician, Bill Roy were both threatened, harassed
then killed for trying to disclose information on high tech surveillance/harassment
(Bill's area) and political psychiatry (Alistair's concern).

The extreme measures taken to stop good men who would have spoken with
knowledge AND authority serves as a warning to others. It, of course, doesn't excuse
the active participation of so many criminals in public life who help repress and
destroy decent people merely for speaking the truth…Instead of helping, the media
are the worst protagonists. They're antagonists, not allies, of the truth and those that
seek it.


       Many public figures betray us by their silence on these matters. Many
       politicians/journalists are actively oppressing others themselves; by stealth.
       And you won't read about it because the media are themselves part of the

       I have over 4,000 victims on my help files. Correspondence with other campaigners indicates 1/2
       million are targeted worldwide. Despite the campaigning / efforts of nearly 1,000 advocates for
       privacy and human rights (who try to spread information via the net etc) the perpetrators use
       countermeasures to mislead both victims and potential future investigators. Firstly, acts like The
       Inventions Secrecy Act, 1951 (US) conceal over 5,000 secret technologies. The general public is
       therefore only aware of a small fraction of what's possible in this world. National Security
       legislation and more helps to keep the truth from the people. One harsh truth, for example, is that
       there are currently over 20,000 satellites aimed back at the earth many facilitating high tech'
       harassment of innocent civilians in order to silence them. Weather forecasts/communications and
       so on are used as the covers but much of what is out there is misused.
As well as this those responsible also commission agency personnel to set up misinformation sites
and filter lies through the controlled media. For example, if you search under "hearing voices"
you'll be bombarded with nonsense about schizophrenia. If you search under "mind reading" you'll
get rubbish about psychics. To find sites like my/this one (which detail information on hidden
technologies) is thus made extra difficult. Added to this is the treachery and lying of the politicians
and journalists who know full well what the truth is yet remain silent and complicit because it suits
their own evil purposes.

Coincidences are also arranged not only to make the victims appear paranoid but also to discredit
whatever they've said or done to draw attention in the first place. Eg. The catalyst for my own
harassment was my unpublished book "In the year 2252", written in 1990-91 and circulated to
agents and publishers in 1991. The book was thoroughly "used" piece by piece by different writers.
In this way if I ever published it it would appear that I had stolen ideas from them. A good example
of how this is subtlely arranged can be seen if you search under the title of the book.."In the year
2252" ...(Something many people would do if it was published).References come up to the same
year (2252) for events in popular sci fi pieces written AFTER my book; eg modern
movies/episodes of Star Trek, Dr Who etc written post 1991.(I don't watch any of these by the way
but discovered this by scanning the web). What are the odds against that being a coincidence? Yet
since I'm not a public figure and those involved either are public figures or work with them their
celebrity would win out and the truth would be lost.

Finally, it may be worth noting the comments of a senior investigator from
NASA's Inspector General's office. Having conceded the existence of the
technologies mentioned in these pages AND commenting on the evil uses
made of such anti-personnel weaponry he advised: "I suggest you pray".

Please contact the UN, the International Red Cross or Amnesty International to
express your concerns.

Victims or concerned citizens can also contact the ACLU, ACHES, FFCHS,
CAMS, ICESH, Mind Justice, CAHRA, The European Parliament and UNIDIR.
Letters of Interest
   TV References

Discovery Channel 19. Science Mysteries: Beyond the Truth: The Real Men in Black,
Dandelion / Transmedia Corporation, 1998. Executive Producers. Bruce Burgess, Danny
Fenton, U.K.
Content - Mind Control Experiments (eg. MKULTRA) and Manchurian candidates
(programmed killers). Experiment examples include brainwashing, hypnosis, implants,
neurophone voices and more.
Actual targets include 'fall guys' Lee Harvey Oswald and Sirhan Sirhan and programmed
killers John Chapman and Timothy McVeigh.
"Beyond Treason" -
Content - A 90 min. video highlighting government experiments on the military and
civilian populations.
Others include cryptic reference to mind control or 'voices' in fictional programs e.g.
"The 4400', "Heroes', "Hermans Head" etc.

   Book References

"Non-Lethal Weapons", Dick Russell, Prevailing Winds, Premiere Issue. (March 1995)

"Armageddon: Killing Them Softly", Russell Shorto, GQ. (March 1995)

"Damage Control and Human Radiation Experiments", Glenn Alcalay, Covert Action
Quarterly. (Spring 1995)

"Electromagnetic Interaction with Biological Systems", Professor James C. Lin, Plenum
Press, N.Y. 1989

"Angels Don't Play This HAARP", Dr Nick Begich and Jeanne Manning, Earthpulse Press,
(Anchorage 1995). (Includes numerous patents)

"Earth Rising. The Revolution", Dr Nick Begich, James Roderick, Earth Pulse Press Inc.

"Towards a new alchemy - The Millennium Science" Dr Nick Begich. Earth Pulse Press
(Anchorage Alaska 95)
"A Nation Betrayed", Carol Rutz. See
"Bluebird", Dr Colin Ross. See
"Remote Control, The battle for your mind", Steve Lynch, 2006, VERTEX PUBLICATIONS
"Satellite Tyranny" - P. Baird, 2009. Earthlink Publishing
Copies of 'Satellite Tyranny' by Paul Baird, a compilation of the articles on this site, can
be obtained from -

Diane Frola, Earthlink Publishing (Aust) Pty Ltd
PO Box 738 Jimboomba QLD 4280 Australia
Phone: (07) 5548 7205
1996 - Gloria Naylor. "Third World Press Inc. "
"Torture, killing me softly", 2009, Tek Nath Rizal.
"A New Breed - Satellite terrorism in America",Dr John Hall, AEG Publishing.
"Soul Catcher Vol 2", Dr Robert Ducan", Amazon, JH.


"The Media Mafia", Paul Baird, "Hard Evidence" magazine, Vol 1, May-June 2001, pp34-
35 (See "Surveillance Results")

"Microwave Mind Control: Modern torture and control mechanisms eliminating human
rights and privacy", Dr Rauni, Leena Kilde, M.D, Spekula, Sept 25, '99 (Dr Kilde was the
chief medical officer for Finland) Click here to read the article

"Microchip Implants, Mind Control and Cybernetics", Dr Rauni Kilde M.D, Spekula, 3rd
quarter, October 23, '94 Click here to read the article

"Non-consensual brainwave and personality studies by the U.S government", Cheryl
Welsh, Web Site

"Proof of Anti Personnel Technologies - Illegal experimentation on humans", Paul Baird,
Exposure, pp 34-35, vol 5, no. 4, 1998. (See "Technologies")

"High Tech Civilian Control Studies", Warren Hough, The Spotlight, Washington, page 1,
vol 21, no. 31. (July 31st, 1995)

"Schneidas Hears Voices", Brad Clifton, The Daily Telegraph, Sydney. (Feb 25th,
1997) ... discrediting article

"Jana's Fanatic", Naomi Toy, The Daily Telegraph, Sydney. (May 20th, 1997) page 1. ...
discrediting article

"Secret Weaponry - Past Present and Future", Jerry W. Decker, (Director of Vanguard
Sciences. Tel: 214 924-8741), Exposure, vol.4, no.1, 1997 (pp29-32)

Newsfront - "Wonder Weapons", Douglas Pasternak, Melbourne, Sunday Herald Sun,
(July 20th, 1997) pp56-57. US news and world report.

"Nazis of the New World Order, Big Brother in the 21st Century" Paul Baird, Exposure,
pp32-34, Vol 7, No 2, 2000 (See "Surveillance")

"Mind Wars - Big Brother is out to get you", Tim Rifat, Enigma Magazine, UK ISSUE 6,
1998, pp13-16 (Contact Tel: 44 161 624 0414, FAX 44 161 628 4655).

"The Great Conspiracy", The News Monitor, no. 25, vol. 6/5, Part 1.

"Aerial Mind Control - The threat to Civil Liberties", Judy Wall (Editor "Resonance"),
NEXUS, Oct-Nov '99

"U.S Military use of mind control weapons confirmed", Judy Wall, Editor Resonance
(Includes countless patents on subliminal mind control technologies).

"Review of patents relating to synthetic telepathy", Judy Wall, Ed Resonance.

"The Military use of electromagnetic, microwave and mind control technology". Armen
Victorian, Lobster #34, Hull, UK.

"Social Engineering-Crimes against humanity" P.Baird "Hard Evidence" pp 25-32, Vol 2,
No 1, Jan-Feb 2001. (See "Surveillance")

"Synthetic Telepathy" - Dr Richard Alan Miller

"Crimes of the Ruling Class" - P. Baird "Hard Evidence" Vol 2, No 4, June 2002 p 30-39
(see 'Surveillance Results' section).

"The Sons of Satan" - P. Baird "Hard Evidence" Vol. 4 No. 1 Jan-Feb 2004 pages 18-25
(see the Technologies section)

"Brainwashing and it's Consequences", P.Baird, "HARD EVIDENCE", pp 20-31, Vol 4, No
5, Sept-Oct, 2004. (see the Technologies section)

"Remote Behavioural Influence Technology Evidence" John J McMurtrey, M.S. (© 2003,

"Electromagnetic and Informational Weapons : The Remote Manipulation of the Human
Brain" Mojmir Babacek, "New Dawn", Mar-Apr 2005 pp 51-56

"The Ultimate Blasphemy : Mind Reading Technologies etc", Paul Baird, May 2005 (see
"Using Surveillance Results" page) "Hard Evidence", Vol 5, No 3, 4,5 and 6 July - Sept

"Minority Rules", Paul Baird. "Hard Evidence" Vol 6, No 4, pp 29-33, 2006.

"Computer State", Paul Baird. "Hard Evidence" Vol 6, No 5, pp 44-51 (see "Using
Surveillance Results" page)

"Censoring The Truth (RIP Democracy)", Paul Baird. "Hard Evidence" Vol 7, No 4, July
2007 pp 46-55 (see "Surveillance" page)

"Spies - Villians not Heroes", Paul Baird. "Hard Evidence" Vol 9, No 2, March 09 pp 38-
42 (see "Technologies" page)

"Conspiracies of Silence", Paul Baird. "Hard Evidence" (see "Using Surveillance Results"
page) ,Vol 10, No 2, Mar/Apr '10, pp 46- 51.

"The Shocking Menace Of Satellite Surveillance "Hard Evidence" Vol 9 No 3, May-June
09, pp 22-26.
   Truth and Opinion (see "Using Surveillance Results" page)

NOTE: Whilst articles on the available technology can be located, accounts relating to actual
political targets are rare. The media cannot (or will not) run sympathetic items. They only
publish stories discrediting those who react badly, (or foolishly) to the harassment. In short,
certain sections of the media are both knowledgable AND complicit. Others are apparently
powerless to stop them.

       Mainstream Media / Entertainment
NOTE: References are subtle and ambiguous as the industry is criminally controlled with
many actively participating in harassment & cover ups.

Many writers source information from military and agency contacts then cover themselves
by using it only for 'inspiration'; altering the facts/context. So, for example, the true
capabilities of military/spy/mafia technologies may be attributed to 'psychic aliens'. Equally
the true mistreatment of innocent targets is also hidden. This complies with government
secrecy provisions and makes writers and entertainments partially to blame for the
suppression/brainwashing that allows for innocents to be destroyed without a public outcry.


   "Minority Report" - Mind reading and thought policing ( Cover -> the story refers to
   psychics in a futuristic setting).

   "The Matrix" - Computer / Human interfacing ( Cover -> A futuristic / fantasy tale).

   "Conspiracy Theory" - Covert victimisation of innocent people.

   "Enemy Of The State" - NRO & NSA Satellite Surveillance.

   "A Beautiful Mind" - Neurophone Harassment / Setup ( Cover -> Based on a true story
   where schizophrenia was the explanation).

   "The Hothman Prophecies" - Neurophone & Brain scanning experiments ( Cover ->
   Based on a true story... Labelled as a psychic phenomena).

   "The sixth day" - mind reading and cloning (cover sci fi)

   Replicant" - mind reading, programming/experimentation, cloning (cover - sci fi)

   "Vanilla Sky" - Computer / Human interfacing (cover - sci fi)

   "Independence Day" - Neurophones and government conspiracy (cover - psychic 'alien
   invasion' story)

   "Spiderman I" - Neurophones used on killers (cover - a schizophrenic comic book villian)
"Star Wars" (various) - Non verbal communication (cover - psychic aliens)

"The Truman Show" - Personal surveillance

"Stranger Than Fiction" - Neurophone / voices

"INCEPTION", 2010... Refers to the input and extraction of ideas during sleep.

"Deja Vu" ... Displays how satellite technology can be used to clearly show / record
people in real time INside buildings etc.

"Capricorn One" ...points to the willingness of agencies (including NASA) to deceive the
public to get what they want.

"Programming the Nation", a documentary by Jeff Warwick, released 19/8/11. Covers
"Big Brother" manipulation through the media, politicians, the military etc. Our beliefs
and views are coloured by the lies and subliminals we're fed. Entertainment industry
insiders. politicians and technology experts expose that truth and provide hope that we
can reclaim our democratic independence by raising awareness.


" I DON'T LIKE MONDAYS" ...esp. "Silicon chip inside her head is switched to
overload..." ( Cover -> Based on a true story of a young murderer.)

"FEEL" esp "I sit and talk to God but he just laughs at my plans. My head speaks a
language I can't understand."

"GOODBYE NORMA JEAN / ENGLISH ROSE" ...esp. "..And they whispered into your
brain, they put you on a treadmill..." ( Cover -> Based on the true stories of murdered
celebrities Marilyn Munroe & Lady Di).

"THE VOICE WITHIN" - Christina Aguilera

"GLORIA" esp…..or "the voices in your head" (Cover-the colloquial use of that phrase)


"HOTEL CALIFORNIA" esp. "and those voices from far away keep calling me… wake you
up in the middle of the night just to hear them say…"

Others making cryptic references include : " If you could read my mind ", " Every breath
you take ( I'll be watching you )" , " Cant get you out of my head " etc. Any of these can
also be used to harass monitored listeners / Viewers through corrupt djs.

"The Climb", Miley Cyrus (esp. "...there's a voice inside my head says you'll never make

"17", Jet, esp. "...there's a voice in my head, it won't leave me alone ..".
     Related Websites

  Citizens Against the Covert use of Bio Neural Telemetry Weapons
  Dr. Rauni Kilde
  Cheryl Welsh - Citizens Against Human Rights Abuse
  Cheryl Welsh - Mind Control Forum
  Mind Control: Neurophone
  Illegal Human Experimenting
  ACHES - Advocacy Committee for Human Experimentation Survivors
  The Centre for Democracy and Technology
  The Seed: UK Alternative Information
  International Committee of the Red Cross
  Steve Bratcher Former CIA
  Joe Vialls
  Earth Pulse Press Inc.
  Mind Control Forums
  mkzine (mind control magazine)
  Carol Rutz (author of "A nation betrayed: Secret cold war experiments performed on our
  children and other innocent people")
  MKULTRA CIA mind control
  MKULTRA continues
  CAMS, John Allman
  Dr John Hall
  MONARCH - The new Phoenix Program - Marshall Thomas



WEAPONS AND RECOMMENDS THEIR REMOVAL. (The Human Rights Committee should
also help but are slow to react).

(SEE –


684 CR 535
   UN Human Rights Committee

   ICESH (International Coalition Campaign)
   US REP JIM GUEST (PH: 0011 1 660535 6664)
   THE FEDERATION AGAINST MIND CONTROL EUROPE – http://www.mindcontrol-,,,
   *Dr John Hall, Author,

PAUL BAIRD – PHONE: (02) 9635 0752 (H) OR
"Secret Societies and Freedom of Speech" - John F. Kennedy, 1961 Press Conference
Address (unreported). To view see

"Secret geophysical, directed energy and neurological weapons - Technical and
Political/Historical information." - US CONGRESS, EUROPEAN PARL'T & UK PARL'T - Briefings
on secret geophysical weapons and mind control.

       Other Contacts
This is an extensive list of informational website relating to the crimes of
organised stalking, directed energy weapons, pyscho-electronic mind control,
and related topics.

High-Frequency Gravitational Wave (HFGW) Surveillance
On June 21, 2007, in In The News, by David Crane

by David Crane
defrev at

DefenseReview would like to alert our readers to a very interesting television program on The
Science Channel called Beyond Invention, and specifically to the episode called New Energy.
The show discusses some pretty out there stuff relating to propulsion and energy-generation

One of the people featured in the episode is Tim Ventura of American Antigravity, Inc.
(, who happens to be an industry friend/professional contact of
ours. A few months ago, Tim sent us some hypertext links to specific pages on his website that
deal with High-Frequency Gravitational Wave (HFGW) Surveillance Technology research being
conducted byphysicist Dr. Robert Baker.

HFGW Surveillance Technology is a bit outside Defense Review’s knowledge base (i.e. we
don’t know anything about it), so we’re just going to direct our readers to a few links, so you can
learn about it directly from the info source. Here are the recommended links…

HFGW Surveillance Applications: Intelligence Collection & Remote Imaging

HFGW Time-Standard for the Telecom Industry: STAIF 2007 Presentation

Surveillance and HFGWs: A Covert Imaging System Application: Surveillance Applications of
High-Frequency Gravitational Waves
Click here to visit the the corporate website of Dr. Baker’s company, GravWave LLC. You can
contact the company via email at

Click here to visit Dr. Baker’s personal website at You can contact
Dr. Robert Baker directly via email at drrobertbaker @

Click here to visit

Search terms for the article:
       hfgw, high frequency gravitational waves, high frequency gravity waves, high frequency
       surveillance, High-Frequency Gravitational Wave, High-Frequency Gravitational Waves, high
       frequesncy gravity waves, High Frequency Gravitational Waves (HFGW), high frequency
       gravitational waves hfgw, High Frequency Gravitational Wavess, high frequency gravity,
       surveillance high frequency waves, high frequency gravity wave, latest on HFGW, High
       Frequency Wave

Surveillance Applications of High‐Frequency Gravitational

AIP Conf. Proc. 880, pp. 1017-1025; doi: (9 pages)

SPACE TECHNOLOGY AND APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL FORUM-STAIF 2007: 11th Conf Micrograv.; 24th Symp Space Nucl.Pwr.Propulsion; 5th Conf Hum/Robotic Techn &Vision
Space Explor.; 5th Symp Space Coloniz.; 4th Symp New Frontrs &Future Con

Date: 11-15 February 2007

Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico (USA)

Robert M. L. Baker, Jr.

GRAVWAVE® LLC and Transportation Sciences Corp., 8123 Tuscany Avenue, Playa del Rey, California 90293

This paper explores the possibility of utilizing a novel means of imaging to establish a system of surveillance — a

system that may allow for the observation in three‐dimensions of activities within and below structures and within the

Earth and its oceans. High‐Frequency Gravitational Waves (HFGWs) pass through most material with little or no

attenuation; but although they are not absorbed their polarization, phase velocity (causing refraction or bending of

GWs) and/or other characteristics can be modified by a material object’s texture and internal structure. For example,

the change in polarization of a GW passing through a material object is discussed in Misner, Thorne, and Wheeler

(1973). Specifically, “If the wave is a pulse, then the backscatter will cause its shape and polarization to keep

changing …” Such an assertion will need to be verified both theoretically and experimentally, but the potential payoffs
are enormous. Applications of this technology include satellite‐based surveillance systems to image subterranean

weapons of mass destruction or WMDs, personnel of interest inside and behind buildings, deeply submerged

submarines, hidden missiles and rockets, oil and mineral deposits, etc. as well as acoustical surveillance. The Laser

Interferometer Gravitational Observatory or LIGO and other interferometer detectors cannot detect HFGWs due to the

HFGW’s short wavelengths as discussed by Shawhan (2004). Long‐wavelength gravitational waves having thousand

and million meter wavelengths, which can be detected by LIGO, are of no practical surveillance value due to their

diffraction and resulting poor resolution. Short HFGW wavelengths of a few meters to fractions of a millimeter and the

sensitivity of the HFGW generator‐detector system to polarization angle changes of yoctoradians to 10 −40 radians

could afford suitable resolution for practical surveillance systems. © 2007 American Institute of Physics

AIP Conference Proceedings/ Volume 880/ Issue 1

AIP Conf. Proc. 880, 1017 (2007); (9 pages)

Surveillance Applications of High‐Frequency Gravitational

Related Articles (back to article)
o   Thermal effects in the Input Optics of the Enhanced Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 83, 033109 (2012)
o   Carbon fiber reinforced polymer dimensional stability investigations for use on the laser interferometer space
    antenna mission telescope
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 82, 124501 (2011)
o   Invited Review Article: Interferometric gravity wave detectors
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 82, 101101 (2011)
o   A state observer for the Virgo inverted pendulum
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 82, 094502 (2011)
o   Apparatus for dimensional characterization of fused silica fibers for the suspensions of advanced gravitational
    wave detectors
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 82, 044502 (2011)
o   Note: Discharging fused silica test masses with ionized nitrogen
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 82, 046108 (2011)
o   Compact vibration isolation and suspension for Australian International Gravitational Observatory: Local control
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 80, 114502 (2009)
o   A mass analysis technique using coincidence measurements from the Interstellar Boundary Explorer-Hi ( ∼ 0.3–
    ∼ 6 keV) detector
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 79, 096107 (2008)
o   Magnetic polarization effects of temperature sensors and heaters in LISA Pathfinder
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 79, 084503 (2008)
o   Large area mass analyzer instrument for the chemical analysis of interstellar dust particles
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 78, 014501 (2007)
o   Development of a low energy ion source for ROSINA ion mode calibration
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 77, 103302 (2006)
o   Design and calibration of a cryogenic blackbody calibrator at centimeter wavelengths
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 75, 5079 (2004)
o   An investigation of eddy-current damping of multi-stage pendulum suspensions for use in interferometric
    gravitational wave detectors
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 75, 4516 (2004)
o   Mode-cleaning and injection optics of the gravitational-wave detector GEO600  
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 74, 3787 (2003)
o   A camera based position control of a suspended optical bench used in a gravitational wave detector
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 74, 2564 (2003)
o   Will the level of seismic noise at Livingston Observatory interfere with the detection of gravity waves from binary
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 73, 3946 (2002)
o   A low noise thermometer readout for ruthenium oxide resistors
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 73, 3659 (2002)
o   Monolithic fused silica suspension for the Virgo gravitational waves detector
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 73, 3318 (2002)
o   Development of a light source with an injection-locked Nd:YAG laser and a ring-mode cleaner for the TAMA 300
    gravitational-wave detector
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 73, 2136 (2002)
o   Measurement of the transfer function of the steering filter of the Virgo super attenuator suspension
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 72, 3635 (2001)
o   Measurement of the VIRGO superattenuator performance for seismic noise suppression
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 72, 3643 (2001)
o   Inertial control of the mirror suspensions of the VIRGO interferometer for gravitational wave detection
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 72, 3653 (2001)
o   Accurate calibration technique for a resonant-mass gravitational wave detector
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 71, 4282 (2000)
o   Control of the double pendulum optics suspension system of a 30 m triangular Fabry–Pérot cavity
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 71, 2890 (2000)
o   GEO 600 triple pendulum suspension system: Seismic isolation and control
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 71, 2539 (2000)
o   Vibration isolation support system for a truncated icosahedral gravitational wave antenna
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 71, 2552 (2000)
o   Full scale prototype of high Q pendulum for interferometric gravitational wave detectors
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 71, 2206 (2000)
o   Measurement of mechanical vibrations excited in aluminum resonators by 0.6 GeV electrons
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 71, 1345 (2000)
o   Suspension last stages for the mirrors of the Virgo interferometric gravitational wave antenna
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 70, 3463 (1999)
o   An inverted pendulum preisolator stage for the VIRGO suspension system
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 70, 2507 (1999)
o   Final isolation stage for a spherical gravitational wave antenna
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 70, 1553 (1999)
o   High Q tunable LC resonator operating at cryogenic temperature
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 69, 3690 (1998)
o   Aspects of the suspension system for GEO 600
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 69, 3055 (1998)
o   Eddy current damping of high Q pendulums in gravitational wave detection experiments
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 69, 2777 (1998)
o   Improved low frequency seismic noise isolation system for gravitational wave detectors
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 69, 2781 (1998)
o   Multistage active vibration isolation system
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 69, 2531 (1998)
o   An interferometric device to measure the mechanical transfer function of the VIRGO mirrors suspensions
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 69, 1882 (1998)
o   Optical transduction chain for gravitational wave bar detectors
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 69, 554 (1998)
o   Investigation of violin mode Q for wires of various materials
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 68, 4600 (1997)
o   Mechanical filters for the gravitational waves detector VIRGO: Performance of a two-stage suspension
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 68, 3904 (1997)
o   Simulation of gravitational wave detectors
    Comput. Phys. 11, 484 (1997)
o   Estimation of thermal noise in the mirrors of laser interferometric gravitational wave detectors: Two point
    correlation function
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 68, 3553 (1997)
o   Measurement of position and orientation of optical elements in interferometric gravity wave detectors
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 68, 3197 (1997)
o   Evaluation of an elliptical grid mirror electrostatic analyzer for space applications
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 68, 1604 (1997)
o   Improved multistage wide band laser frequency stabilization
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 68, 223 (1997)
o   Digitally controlled interferometer prototype for gravitational wave detection
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 67, 4353 (1996)
o   High‐electron‐mobility‐transistor gain stability and its design implications for wide band millimeter wave receivers
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 66, 4305 (1995)
o   Sensitivity analysis of a resonant‐mass gravitational wave antenna with a parametric transducer
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 66, 2751 (1995)
o   Low noise wideband accelerometer using an inductive displacement sensor
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 66, 2672 (1995)
o   Radio frequency superconducting parametric transducer for gravitational wave antennae
    Rev. Sci. Instrum. 66, 106 (1995)

Applications of High‐Frequency Gravitational Waves to the
Global War on Terror

AIP Conf. Proc. 1208, pp. 501-512; doi: (12 pages)

Thermophysics Applications in Microgravity 7th Symposium on New Frontiers in Space Propulsion Sciences 2nd
Symposium on Astrosociology 1st Symposium on High Frequency Gravitational Waves

Date: 24–26 February 2009

Location: Huntsville (Alabama)

Robert M. L. Baker, Jr.

GravWave® LLC and Transportation Sciences Corporation, 8123 Tuscany Ave., Playa del Rey, CA 90293

Applications of high‐frequency gravitational waves or HFGWs to the global war on terror are now realistic because

technology developed by GravWave® LLC and other institutions overseas can lead to devices, some already

constructed, that can generate and detect HFGWs. In fact, three HFGW detectors have been built outside the United

States and an ultra high‐sensitive Li‐Baker HFGW Detector has been proposed. HFGW generators have been

proposed theoretically by the Russians, Germans, Italians and Chinese. Because of their unique characteristics, such

as their ability to pass through all material without attenuation, HFGWs could be utilized for uninterruptible, very

low‐probability‐of‐intercept (LPI), high‐bandwidth communications among and between anti‐terrorist assets. One such

communications system, which can be constructed from off‐the‐shelf elements, is discussed. The HFGW generation

device or transmitter alternative selected is based upon bands of piezoelectric crystal, film‐bulk acoustic resonators or

FBARs energized by conventional Magnetrons. The system is theoretically capable of transmitting and detecting,

through use of the Li‐Baker HFGW detector, a signal generated on the opposite side of the Earth. Although HFGWs
do not interact with and are not absorbed by ordinary matter, their presence can be detected by their distortion of

spacetime as measured by the Laser Interferometer Gravitational Observatory (LIGO), Virgo, GEO600, et al., by

detection photons generated from electromagnetic beams having the same frequency, direction and phase as the

HFGWs in a superimposed magnetic field (Li‐Baker HFGW Detector), by the change in polarization HFGWs produce

in a microwave guide (Birmingham University Detector) and by other such instruments. Potential theoretical

applications, which may or may not be practical yet theoretically possible, are propulsion, including “moving” space

objects such as missiles, anti‐missiles and warheads in flight; surveillance through buildings and the Earth itself and

remote initiation of nuclear events. Such applications can only be quantified and established as practical by the

proof‐of‐concept generation and detection of HFGWs in the laboratory experiment. These important potential HFGW

applications are motivations for HFGW research and development and such an R&D program is recommended for

immediate initiation.

AIP Conference Proceedings/ Volume 1208/ Issue 1

AIP Conf. Proc. 1208, 501 (2010); (12 pages)

Applications of High‐Frequency Gravitational Waves to the
Global War on Terror

Related Articles (back to article)
o   Radiation-reaction in classical off-shell electrodynamics. I. The above mass-shell case
    J. Math. Phys. 53, 032902 (2012)
o   Maxwell's equations and electromagnetic Lagrangian density in fractional form
    J. Math. Phys. 53, 033505 (2012)
o   On the transition from microscopic to macroscopic electrodynamics
    J. Math. Phys. 53, 013513 (2012)
o   The Biot-Savart operator and electrodynamics on subdomains of the three-sphere
    J. Math. Phys. 53, 013102 (2012)
o   Numerical analysis of a multi-symplectic scheme for the time-domain Maxwell's equations
    J. Math. Phys. 52, 123701 (2011)
o   The canonical structure of Podolsky's generalized electrodynamics on the null-plane
    J. Math. Phys. 52, 102902 (2011)
o   The origin of the Schott term in the electromagnetic self force of a classical point charge
    J. Math. Phys. 52, 092902 (2011)
o   On the Green-functions of the classical off-shell electrodynamics under the manifestly covariant relativistic
    dynamics of Stueckelberg
    J. Math. Phys. 52, 082901 (2011)
o   Octonionic Maxwell's equations for bi-isotropic media
    J. Math. Phys. 52, 053511 (2011)
o   On the hyperbolicity of Maxwell's equations with a local constitutive law
    J. Math. Phys. 52, 042903 (2011)
o   Electromagnetic modes of an infinite cylindrical sample of two-level atoms
    J. Math. Phys. 52, 042107 (2011)
o   Magnetic wormhole solutions in Einstein–Gauss–Bonnet gravity with power Maxwell invariant source
    J. Math. Phys. 52, 042502 (2011)
o   Scattering asymptotics for a charged particle coupled to the Maxwell field
    J. Math. Phys. 52, 042701 (2011)
o   Mathematical model I. Electron and quantum mechanics
    AIP Advances 1, 012105 (2011)
o   Convergent perturbative power series solution of the stationary Maxwell–Born–Infeld field equations with regular
    J. Math. Phys. 52, 022902 (2011)
o   Electromagnetic bound states in the radiation continuum for periodic double arrays of subwavelength dielectric
    J. Math. Phys. 51, 102901 (2010)
o   Radiation fields of a uniformly accelerating point source in the framework of Stueckelberg’s manifestly covariant
    relativistic dynamics
    J. Math. Phys. 51, 052903 (2010)
o   Macroscopic Maxwell’s equations and negative index materials
    J. Math. Phys. 51, 052902 (2010)
o   Convergence of the nonisentropic Euler–Maxwell equations to compressible Euler–Poisson equations
    J. Math. Phys. 50, 123508 (2009)
o   Interference in the radiation of two pointlike charges
    J. Math. Phys. 50, 112901 (2009)
o   Inadequacies in the conventional treatment of the radiation field of moving sources
    J. Math. Phys. 50, 103510 (2009)
o   Near-field heat transfer mediated by surface wave hybridization between two films
    J. Appl. Phys. 106, 044306 (2009)
o   Multifrequency cloak with multishell by using transformation medium
    J. Appl. Phys. 105, 124505 (2009)
o   Electromagnetic fields produced by moving sources in a curved beam pipe
    J. Math. Phys. 50, 063510 (2009)
o   Analysis of radio-frequency absorption and electric and magnetic field enhancements due to surface roughness
    J. Appl. Phys. 105, 114908 (2009)
o   Duality and integrability: Electromagnetism, linearized gravity, and massless higher spin gauge fields as bi-
    Hamiltonian systems
    J. Math. Phys. 50, 042301 (2009)
o   Multisymplectic Preissman scheme for the time-domain Maxwell’s equations
    J. Math. Phys. 50, 033510 (2009)
o   Tellegen particles and magnetoelectric metamaterials
    J. Appl. Phys. 105, 013537 (2009)
o   Octonic representation of electromagnetic field equations
    J. Math. Phys. 50, 012901 (2009)
o   The discrete spectrum of the periodic Maxwell operator perturbed by a decreasing potential
    J. Math. Phys. 49, 063511 (2008)
o   Quantum and electromagnetic propagation with the conjugate symmetric Lanczos method
    J. Chem. Phys. 128, 064103 (2008)
o   Electrodynamics and the Gauss linking integral on the 3-sphere and in hyperbolic 3-space
    J. Math. Phys. 49, 023504 (2008)
o   Radiation relations for electromagnetic excitation of a layered chiral medium by an interior dipole
    J. Math. Phys. 49, 013510 (2008)
o   Acoustic cloaking in three dimensions using acoustic metamaterials
    Appl. Phys. Lett. 91, 183518 (2007)
o   A unified approach to the Darwin approximation
    Phys. Plasmas 14, 102112 (2007)
o   Radiation reaction in 2+1 electrodynamics
    J. Math. Phys. 48, 092901 (2007)
o   Conservation laws for the Maxwell-Dirac equations with dual Ohm’s law
    J. Math. Phys. 48, 053523 (2007)
o   On the mathematical structure and hidden symmetries of the Born-Infeld field equations
    J. Math. Phys. 48, 032301 (2007)
o   Electric field distribution within a metallic cylindrical specimen for the case of an ideal two-probe impedance
    J. Appl. Phys. 101, 044904 (2007)
o   Geometric integration of the electromagnetic two-body problem
    J. Math. Phys. 48, 012702 (2007)
o   New multisymplectic self-adjoint scheme and its composition scheme for the time-domain Maxwell’s equations
    J. Math. Phys. 47, 123508 (2006)
o   Test particles with acceleration-dependent Lagrangian
    J. Math. Phys. 47, 022904 (2006)
o   Some mathematical properties of Maxwell’s equations for macroscopic dielectrics
    J. Math. Phys. 47, 012902 (2006)
o   The equation for time-like extremal surfaces in Minkowski space 2+n
    J. Math. Phys. 47, 013503 (2006)
o   Covariant Hamiltonian for the electromagnetic two-body problem
    Chaos 15, 033107 (2005)
o   Derivation of particle, string, and membrane motions from the Born–Infeld electromagnetism
    J. Math. Phys. 46, 062305 (2005)
o   Global classical solution of the Vlasov–Maxwell–Landau system near Maxwellians
    J. Math. Phys. 45, 4360 (2004)
o   Energy momentum, wave velocities and characteristic shocks in Euler’s variational equations with application to
    the Born–Infeld theory
    J. Math. Phys. 45, 3468 (2004)
o   Calculation of the self force using the extended-object approach
    J. Math. Phys. 45, 2347 (2004)
o   Histories electromagnetism
    J. Math. Phys. 45, 2153 (2004)

© 2007 American Institute of Physics
                  Satellite Surveillance Within U.S. Borders
                                           PATRICK KORODY∗

A spy satellite owned and operated by the United States government can track the movements of individuals
on the ground, identify cars, and, perhaps, even read a license plate—all while operating covertly hundreds
of miles above in space and transmitting images in real time. Since 9-11 proved the reality that the United
States is indeed vulnerable to attacks from within its borders, government spy satellites have been
continuously and covertly snapping pictures of the United States. America’s spy satellite agency has even
established a special section to focus on imagery of the United States. Moreover, a growing commercial
spy satellite industry is profiting from selling slightly less detailed imagery to both the public and private
sectors. The government is also vigorously developing its next generation of spy satellites.

Historically, law enforcement quickly embraces new technology that aids in the collection of evidence of a
crime. Thermal imagers, night vision, and GPS tracking devices are all examples of new technologies that
are routinely employed by law enforcement. However, new technology, while increasing police surveillance
power, is usually accompanied by new legal questions that mostly center on whether the utilization of the
technology infringes on the privacy interests of individuals.

Spy satellites are no exception. Law enforcement is currently using spy satellite imagery in a wide variety
of law enforcement actions and for logistical purposes. As the government satellites focus more on
activities in the United States and the commercial spy satellite industry grows, coverage and access to
satellite imagery by law enforcement is likely to increase, and law enforcement will undoubtedly welcome
the new surveillance power.

The increased utilization of spy satellites by law enforcement only pushes the operational authority of
America’s spy satellite agencies and limits on government surveillance power imposed by the Supreme
Court’s Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. Nevertheless, a regulatory oversight framework should be
established that balances law enforcement needs with society’s privacy expectation that everyday activities
will not be monitored without a level of justification.
∗ J.D. candidate, Moritz College of Law, The Ohio State University, 2005. B.A., cum laude, Amherst College,
2000. Thanks to the Legal Department at the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, Professor Ric Simmons, and
Professor Douglas Berman for helping me formulate the topic of this Note. I also would like to thank my family
and friends for their support and tolerance during my academic pursuits. 1628 OHIO STATE LAW JOURNAL
[Vol. 65: 1627
                                                   I. INTRODUCTION

     When the sniper attacks in the fall of 2002 paralyzed Washington, D.C., officials from the National
Security Agency (NSA),1 and the Pentagon met to consider whether spy satellites would be useful in
hunting down the snipers.2 Pentagon officials eventually played down the use of satellites in the case, and,
instead, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld approved a plan to dispatch sophisticated military
surveillance aircraft with law enforcement personnel aboard. 3 Despite the fact that the Pentagon chose not
to utilize satellite technology in the sniper attack investigation, spy satellites are covertly operating over
the United States, snapping detailed pictures of cities, homes, cars, and persons. This satellite imagery is
being used by law enforcement in a wide variety of enforcement actions and for logistical purposes.
     Logistically, satellite imagery can be an exceptional way to get situational awareness over a large area
and “provide a single integrated picture of an incident area.”4 High-resolution satellite imagery was used
to assess the damage and destruction in Florida caused by the hurricanes of 2004. 5 Government agencies
responding to the attacks of September 11, 2001 on the World Trade Center used satellite images of the
site taken the day after the attacks to plan the recovery effort. 6 Satellite imagery was also used by the
Secret Service, local police, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to provide information
necessary to secure
      1 The NSA is a Department of Defense (DoD) agency and member of the Intelligence Community (IC). The NSA
primarily uses satellites to intercept and process signals, such as cellular telephone calls. For more information about the
NSA, see The IC is a federation of fourteen executive branch agencies and organizations, including
all three branches of the Armed Forces, that work separately and together to conduct intelligence operations necessary for
national security and foreign relations. For more information about the IC, see
      2 Robert Dreyfuss, The Watchful and the Wary: From FBI and CIA Headquarters to Small-Town Police Departments,
the Government Is Building a Massive Intelligence Network Designed to Spy on Terrorists—and on Everyday Americans,
MOTHER JONES, July–Aug. 2003, at 56, 61.
      3 Robert Cohen, Pentagon to Search Ground from the Skies, THE STAR -LEDGER (Newark, N.J.), Oct. 16, 2002, at 8.
Spy satellites could have provided detailed imagery of miles around the site of an attack immediately after it occurred that
could have aided in the identification of the vehicles in the vicinity. Id.
      4 Lt. Col. S. Didi Kuo, High Ground over the Homeland: Issues in the Use of Space Assets for Homeland Security,
AIR & SPACE POWER J., Spring 2003 at 47, 49.
      5 Press Release, DigitalGlobe, DigitalGlobe Delivers Before and After Satellite Imagery of Florida Gulf Coast
Following          Hurricane        Charley        Destruction          (Aug.      16,        2004),       available      at
      6 See Kuo, supra note 4, at 49. 2004] SATELLITE SURVEILLANCE 1629
    the venues of the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, Utah. 7 More recently, America’s spy
imagery agency provided information to help secure the Ronald Regan funeral procession in June 2004. 8
    State law enforcement agencies have found satellite imagery to be an effective tool to investigate
violations of zoning and environmental regulations. For example, the Arizona Department of Water
Resources has used satellite imagery from a French satellite to find violations of irrigation permits.9
Satellite imagery has been used to discover unreported timber harvesting. 10 Several counties in North
Carolina have used satellite imagery “to find unreported building activities, agricultural development and
other property improvements that would raise property-tax assessments.”11 Satellite imagery could also be
used to look for building permit violations involving the construction of small backyard porches. 12
    In most cases to date, spy satellites simply provide a more efficient form of aerial photography
because a single satellite image can cover an extremely large area. 13 This capability has made satellite
imagery an effective tool for law enforcement for both logistical purposes and to obtain evidence of a
violation of the law. As one Arizona farmer fined for violations of water permits based on evidence from
satellite imagery stated, “[y]ou can’t argue with a satellite.”14
    These examples, however, fail to illustrate the ability of satellites to operate as a covert surveillance
tool, observing individuals and activities invisibly and silently from hundreds of miles above in space. As
spy satellite technology advances and imagery becomes more available to law enforcement agencies in
the post-9-11 world, privacy concerns regarding the use of spy satellites to observe individuals, their
activities, and their movements will push the limits of constitutional protections and society’s privacy
    This Note argues that the use of spy satellites by law enforcement to conduct warrantless physical
surveillance is not illegal under current Fourth Amendment
      7 CNN Live at Daybreak, Agency Created to Spy on Others Now Keeping an Eye on This Nation (CNN television
broadcast, Dec. 11, 2002) (transcript available at [hereinafter
Agency Created to Spy on Others].
      8 Associated Press, Satellite Imagery Keeping Eye on U.S.,,2933,133635,00.html
(last visited Oct. 10, 2004) (“Roughly twice a month, the [NGA] is called upon to help with the security of events inside
the United States.”). Id.
      9 Ross Kerber, Privacy: When Is a Satellite Photo An Unreasonable Search?, WALL ST. J., Jan. 27, 1998, at B1.
      10 Id.
      11 Id.
      12 See id.
      13 The images being sold from Russian spy satellites cover about 10 square kilometers. Id.
      14 Id. 1630 OHIO STATE LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 65: 1627
     jurisprudence, but nevertheless should be regulated. 15 Part II evaluates sources of satellite imagery;
identifies, as accurately as possible, the imaging capabilities and parameters of these potential sources; 16
and describes possible applications of satellite imagery for law enforcement purposes. Part III discusses
the legal implications surrounding the use of spy satellites to conduct physical surveillance. Specifically,
Part III.A examines the restrictions imposed on military and intelligence agencies, the owners and
operators of government spy satellites, which limit their participation in law enforcement. Part III.B
discusses Fourth Amendment protections against warrantless surveillance by spy satellites. Finally, Part
IV discusses the benefits of a regulatory framework governing the use of spy satellites that balances
legitimate law enforcement needs and society’s privacy concerns.
     15 This Note focuses on the use of spy satellite imagery by law enforcement agencies. There are security and privacy
concerns that surround the sale of spy-quality images by non-U.S. government sources, such as the growing commercial
sector and foreign governments. See Soon Ae Chun & Vijayalakshmi Atluri, Protecting Privacy from Continuous High-
(Bhavani Thuraisingham et al. eds., 2001) (last visited Oct. 10, 2004)
(arguing that the sale of spy-quality photographs “can result in a technological invasion” of the privacy of individuals and
organizations). Chun and Alturi propose that access to images be controlled in two ways: control the depth, or resolution,
of the images a user can access on the Internet and control a user’s access to high resolution images to certain regions such
as property the user owns, public parks, etc. Id. at 237. There are also concerns that the sale of satellite imagery threatens
national security because anyone with a credit card may be able to purchase imagery of almost anywhere on Earth. See
Bob Drogin, Sale to Public of Satellite Photos Debated, L.A. TIMES, Jan. 15, 2000, at A1 (A former assistant secretary of
Defense “said that ‘all the bad guys around the world’ will find uses for the commercial satellite photos. ‘We’re entering a
brave new world that I think will cause us grief . . . .’”). Id.
     16 There are “four important satellite parameters: orbits, inclination, resolution, and sensor type.” C. J. D. Spicer,
Satellite Reconnaissance and Arms Control 12 (Apr. 8, 1993) (unpublished manuscript) available at (last visited Oct. 10, 2004). The orbit, the distance a satellite maintains
from Earth as it circles the earth, affects the lifespan, coverage area, and resolution capabilities. See id. A higher orbit
provides for expanded coverage, meaning it can take photos of a larger region, but a slower overflight time, meaning that
the satellite will pass over that region less frequently. See Roger Guillemette, Trio of NRO Spy Satellites to be Launched
During Next Two Months, at (Sept. 6, 2001). The
inclination “refers to the angle (measured from the equator) at which a satellite is to travel. . . . Inclination is directly
related to which of the seven continental land masses and four oceans over which the satellite will fly and so is obviously
of critical importance to strategic thinking . . . .” Spicer, supra, at 13–14. Resolution determines how small of an “object
can be seen and identified from space . . . .” Id. at 15. The sensor type of a satellite depends on its purpose. See id. at 16.
This Note focuses on the imaging capabilities of spy satellites for imaging purposes. 2004] SATELLITE
                                 II. THE WORLD OF SPY SATELLITE TECHNOLOGY

     Spy satellites exist in both the black and white worlds. The black world is composed of classified
intelligence gathering systems. 17 The white world consists of the unclassified systems. 18 Because much of
the cutting-edge capabilities of the spy satellites currently in space—such as the resolution of optical
images, the ability to see through weather using radar imaging, and the ability to capture images in
darkness using infrared sensors—are presumably classified, it is impossible to know exactly what
information the Intelligence Community (IC)19 can obtain from satellite imagery.
     In December 2002, Robert Zitz, the Innovation Director for the National Imagery and Mapping
Agency (NIMA), which is now the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and a member of the
IC with some responsibility for interpretation of satellite imagery, 20 stated that satellite technology,
although nowhere near, was moving in the direction of the video-like capabilities seen in the film “Enemy
of the State.”21 The IC’s satellites are thought to be able to tell
     17 Kuo, supra note 4, at 50. Lt. Col. Kuo argues that, in the wake of September 11, 2001, the United States should
integrate its space assets into the homeland-security mission for operation within U.S. borders. However, Kuo realizes that
there are “several challenges to overcome” before space assets can be used within U.S. borders. Id. at 47. The hurdles
include legal constraints, security classification, and complicated relationships among agencies that operate the space
assets and the agencies tasked with homeland-security responsibilities. See id. at 52–54.
     18 Id. at 50.
     19 See supra note 1.
     20 NIMA was created in 1996 to combine the old defense mapping agency and the Central Intelligence Agency’s
(CIA) satellite photo analysis office. See NGA History, at (last visited Oct.
10, 2004). With the signing of the fiscal year 2004 Defense Authorization Bill, NIMA became NGA. New Name
Symbolizes Profound Change For Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, NGA PATHFINDER, Nov.–Dec. 2003, at 8, available at (last visited Oct. 10, 2004). NGA specializes in geospatial intelligence,
which “is the exploitation and analysis of imagery and geospatial information to describe, assess and visually depict
physical features and geographically referenced activities on Earth.” Id. NGA touts that “with [geospatial intelligence],
decision makers are empowered to view the geographical context of their situation, visualize national security events as
they unfold, and ‘see’ possible outcomes as a situation develops.” Id.
     21 CNN Live at Daybreak, Look Inside National Imagery and Mapping Agency, (CNN television broadcast, Dec. 12,
2002) (transcript available at (last visited Oct. 10, 2004).
More information about NIMA is available at Enemy of the State, released in 1998, portrayed a
global spy satellite system producing real-time video of a subject moving throughout a city. E NEMY OF THE STATE
(Touchstone Video 1998). 1632 OHIO STATE LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 65: 1627
     whether a car has a license plate, but unable to read the plate. 22 Still, the most accurate answer is that
the true technological aspects of the most advanced spy satellites are classified. 23
     Although spy satellites continue to become more technologically advanced, the quantity, quality, and
availability of their images are constrained by two physical principles—orbit and inclination.24 The orbit
and inclination of a spy satellite play an important role in determining where and when a satellite will be
over a target and the quality of the image captured. The orbit is the distance a satellite maintains from the
Earth as it circles, and it affects the coverage area and resolution quality of spy satellite imagery. 25 Based
on the inclination of a satellite, “planners can predict when an area of interest will appear under the
sensors of their satellite . . . . With altitude control rockets, . . . [ground controllers] can also alter the
altitude of their space assets, dropping in for ‘close look’ purposes.”26
     For example, some of the United States’ spy satellites are in sun-synchronous orbits,27 a type of polar
orbit.28 A spy satellite in a sun-synchronous orbit will predictably pass over a target at the same time daily,
but will have the benefit of lighting from the sun to capture images with the optical sensor.29 Some spy
satellites are in an equatorial orbit. 30 A satellite in equatorial orbit flies along the line of the Earth’s
equator.31 This disadvantage can mean less than optimal
     22 See Vernon Loeb, Spy Satellite Effort Viewed as Lagging; Defense, Intelligence Officials Seek More Money, WASH.
POST, Dec. 11, 2002, at A31. The IC’s satellites “are thought to have the ability to depict objects as small as 10
centimeters in length. While they cannot read license plates, they can tell whether a car has a license plate. The satellites’
exact capabilities are classified.” Id.
     23 Id.
     24 See supra note 16 (discussing orbits and inclination). A satellite’s orbit and inclination are directly related; for
example, in a “polar orbit,” the word “polar” describes an orbit with a ninety degree inclination from the equator. See
Spicer, supra note 16, at 13. A satellite in a polar orbit travels from the north to south poles as the Earth spins below it.
     25 See supra note 16.
     26 Spicer, supra note 16, at 14. Most photoreconnaissance satellites operate in a lower earth orbit, circling between
200–400 kms above the earth. Id. at 13. The inclination of a satellite can also be altered by ground controllers. But,
altering the orbit and inclination of the satellite uses fuel, decreasing the lifespan of the spacecraft. See infra note 48.
     27 Craig Covault, Secret NRO Recons Eye Iraqi Threats, AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECH., Sept. 16, 2002, at 23
[hereinafter Covault, Iraqi Threats].
     28 See supra note 24 (describing a polar orbit).
     29 See Craig Covault, Advanced KH-11 Broadens U.S. Recon Capability, AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECH., Jan. 6,
1997, at 24, 25.
     30 For example, Israel’s Ofec military reconnaissance satellites are in an equatorial orbit. Craig Covault, Israel
Launches Recon Satellite, Pushes Global Space Marketing, AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECH., June 3, 2002, at 24.
     31 Equatorial Orbit, at /equatori.html (last modified Aug. 8,
     performance in areas that are distant from the equator. If a satellite is 35,850 km above the Earth, it is
in a geosynchronous orbit and hovers over one spot on the equator. 32 Weather satellites are often placed in
geosynchronous orbits so as to provide around-the-clock coverage of a specific region.
     Thus, when discussing the capabilities of spy satellites, it is important to remember that the satellites
are constrained by physical principles. The orbit and inclination of a satellite determine its ground tract,
footprint, overflight time, and influence the quality of images the satellite’s sensors can capture.

A. United States Government Satellite Systems

    In February 1958, President Dwight D. Eisenhower ushered in space-based reconnaissance by
approving the project that would lead to CORONA, the first operational space-based photo-
reconnaissance satellite system.33 Between 1960 and 1972, the CORONA satellite system collected at
least 860,000 images of the Earth’s surface using a panoramic camera filled with Kodak film, which was
delivered back to earth for recovery in a film capsule to be developed. 34 The resolution of the images
from the early years of the system ranged from thirty-five to forty feet, while in 1972 CORONA delivered
resolutions of six to ten feet.35
     32 Geostationary Orbit, at /geostati.html (last modified Aug.
8, 1997). A geosynchronous orbit is a type of equatorial orbit. Id. When a satellite is in a geosynchronous orbit, “its
instruments are looking at a certain part of the Earth” called a footprint. Id. Because these satellites are in extremely high
orbits, their footprints are pretty big. For example, “the footprint for most Canadian communications satellites is almost
the whole of Canada.” Id.
     33 Global Security.Org, CORONA Summary, at /systems/corona.htm (last visited Oct.
10, 2004). The Cold War, specifically the need to confirm developments in Soviet strategic missile capabilities, drove the
development of satellites to be used for intelligence gathering. Jeffrey T. Richelson, The Satellite Gap, BULLETIN OF THE
ATOMIC SCIENTISTS, Jan.–Feb. 2003, at 48, 49. Prior to the CORONA satellites, the United States relied on imagery from
high altitude reconnaissance flights by U-2 spy planes. Id. But when the U-2 missions came to a halt after Gary Powers’
U-2 was shot down over the Soviet Union, creating an international incident and a gap in U.S. intelligence, CORONA
became “the last, best hope to fill the [intelligence] gap.” D WAYNE A. DAY ET AL., EYE IN THE SKY: THE STORY OF THE
CORONA SPY SATELLITES 59 (1998). When the first successful launch of a CORONA satellite produced more photos of
the Soviet Union than twenty-four U-2 spy missions, satellite photo-reconnaissance became an invaluable part of
America’s intelligence gathering operations. Kathleen Johnson, CORONA and Spy Satellites, at (last visited Sept. 1, 2004).
     34 CORONA Summary, supra note 33.
     35 Id. An imaging satellite’s resolution is the minimum land area that can be represented with the smallest image unit,
called a pixel. See Orthophotographs, at (last visited Oct. 10, 2004). The
resolution directly corresponds to the level of detail revealed by the image. The smaller the resolution, the 1634 OHIO
STATE LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 65: 1627
    CORONA was able to provide accurate intelligence that showed there was a Cold War missile gap,
but that it was very much in America’s favor. 36
     smaller the objects the image will reveal. For example, a satellite that provides images with a resolution of six inches
can identify objects that are six inches wide. See id.
     Over thirty years since CORONA was retired, when the United States urgently sought new
intelligence on Iraq before the second Gulf War in 2003, six secret National Reconnaissance Office
(NRO)37 high-resolution photoreconnaissance satellites maintained almost an hourly watch on specific
Iraqi installations.38 Three of the satellites were advanced KH-11s with optical sensors capable of
providing digital images with resolutions as good as four to six inches during the day and infrared sensors
capable of two to three feet at night. 39 The satellites also have real-time capability, transmitting digital
images instantaneously40 and the ability to capture images 100 miles to the left or right of its ground
     In addition to the advanced KH-11s, the United States relied on three Onyx radar imagery satellites. 42
The Onyx satellites do not rely on optical or infrared sensors to capture images.43 Rather, the satellites
create images using radar technology, giving them the ability to see through weather that would obstruct
optical and infrared sensors.44
     The next generation government spy satellite system is in the works, designated the Future Imagery
Architecture (FIA).45 The goal of the system, which will work together with airborne reconnaissance
systems, is to provide the
    36 DAY ET AL., supra note 33, at 25.
    37 The NRO, a member of the IC and        a DoD agency, has primary responsibility for designing, building, and operating
U.S. reconnaissance satellites. For more information about the NRO, see
     38 Covault, Iraqi Threats, supra note 27, at 23.
     39 Id. In a different article, Covault specifically describes the advanced KH-11’s capabilities: “[T]heir infrared sensors
can pinpoint individual campfires at night. In addition to monitoring vehicles, artillery or activity around buildings, their
operations over Kosovo illustrated a remarkable capability to image and track the movements of small groups of people
walking on the ground from more than 200 mi. in space.” Craig Covault, NRO KH-11 Readied for Afghan Recon,
AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECH., Oct. 8, 2001, at 68.
     40 Richelson, supra note 33, at 49.
     41 Covault, Iraqi Threats, supra note 27, at 23. Ground tracks are a satellite’s path over the ground. A satellite may
only pass directly over a specific spot on the ground every few days because of its inclination. See id.
     42 Richelson, supra note 33, at 50.
     43 Id.
     44 Id. An Onyx satellite sends radio waves that bounce off their targets on earth and are returned to the satellite. Id.
The data from the returned waves are then converted into an image. Id.
     45 Id. 2004] SATELLITE SURVEILLANCE 1635
    ability to look anywhere, anytime—constant surveillance.46 However, Boeing, the developer of FIA,
has run into technical and funding problems in its development that have led to an overhaul of the
program and schedule.47 In fact, there is a growing fear that these new satellites will not be ready by the
time the current generation of KH-11s and Onyx satellites will stop working. 48
    In sum, government spy satellites have the ability to capture high-resolution images using optical,
infrared, and radar sensors. Further, given the drive for the FIA, coverage and capability of United States
government satellites will only increase in the future.

B. Commercial and Foreign Government Satellites

    In 1994, the U.S. lifted its restrictions on the sale of high-resolution satellite photos in response to the
Russian space agency’s49 sale of spy-quality photos to raise cash.50 This led two Colorado companies,
DigitalGlobe and Space Imaging, to launch commercial spy satellites in 2001 and 1999, respectively. The
quality of the images produced by these companies has been restricted by the government, although
President George W. Bush significantly reduced the controls on them in 2003, “allowing them to capture
images with high enough resolution to show people on the ground . . . .”51 Interestingly, the primary client
for both DigitalGlobe and Space Imaging is the IC. 52
ESPIONAGE 368 (2003).
     47 Peter Pae, Boeing Spy Satellite Program Overhauled, L.A. TIMES, Sept. 6, 2003, at C1.
     48 Loeb, supra note 22, at A31 (“A secret program for developing the next generation of spy satellites is underfunded
and behind schedule and could leave the CIA and Pentagon with gaps in satellite coverage critical to the war on terrorism
if the program cannot be restructured . . . .”); see also Vago Murdian, USAF’s New ‘Black’ Bird; Fast, Stealthy, Long-
Endurance UAV Would Fill Satellite Gap, DEFENSE NEWS, Aug. 2, 2004 at 1 (stating that the Air Force is developing
advanced unmanned reconnaissance aircraft to “fill a looming gap caused by delays in developing an ambitious new
generation of spy satellites”). Satellites require fuel to stay in orbit. “The lower the orbit, the more fuel is required to keep
a satellite (a ‘bird’) in that orbit. Thus planners must balance the enhanced usefulness of a satellite in a low orbit against its
reduced lifetime in that mode. Once the fuel runs out, the satellite plummets to a fiery death in the earth’s upper
atmosphere.” Spicer, supra note 16, at 12.
     49 The official name of the Russian space agency is Sovinformsputnik.
     50 Kerber, supra note 9, at B1.
     51 Dan Vergano, Limits on Commercial Spy Satellites to Ease; Changes Meant to Lower Cost, Boost U.S. Technology,
USA TODAY, May 13, 2003, at 4A. In addition to regulating the resolution capabilities of commercial satellites, the
government maintains censorship of the images captured by these commercial satellites through “shutter control,” the
ability to place certain regions of the earth off limits, and a daily “denied parties list.” Mark Carreau, Satellite Imagery
Gives New Look at Battle: Private Firms Help Provide Perspective, HOUS. CHRON., Mar. 30, 2003, at A14. Some critics
are concerned that images captured by the commercial spy satellites might “fall into the wrong hands, such as terrorists
targeting dams or power plants or 1636 OHIO STATE LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 65: 1627
     unfriendly nations looking for weak points in U.S. security. . . . But, [a senior administration official] said [the
commercial spy satellite companies] restricted sales that might have threatened national security . . . .” and referred to the
companies as “good citizens.” Vergano, supra, at 4A. For further information relating to the government’s ability to
impose “shutter control” on commercial spy satellites, see Raphael Prober, Note, Shutter Control: Confronting
Tomorrow’s Technology with Yesterday’s Regulations, 19 J.L. & POL’Y 203 (2003).
    Several foreign countries have joined Russia and have been selling photos from spy satellites to state
and local governments since the early 1980s. 53 These countries include France and India. 54 Additionally,
an Israeli company, working with the Israeli government, operates private spy satellites, and private
companies in several other nations plan to enter the commercial industry. 55
    With a worldwide interest in the commercial spy satellite industry, the number and quality of images
available from commercial spy satellites will grow in the future. To achieve this commercial growth,
President George W. Bush began allowing exportation of spy satellite technology by American
companies in 2003.56 On the government side, the NRO’s drive to develop a spy satellite system better
suited to tracking terrorists groups around the globe, and even possibly within U.S. borders, will
undoubtedly expand the coverage and capability for U.S. government-operated systems. As spy satellite
resources become more abundant, law enforcement will certainly embrace this unparalleled surveillance

                                 III. THE LEGALITIES OF SATELLITE SURVEILLANCE

    In addition to the technological and physical restrictions that limit the capabilities of spy satellites,
two prominent legal issues surround the use of spy satellites by law enforcement. First, there are statutes,
rules, and regulations that generally prohibit American military and intelligence agencies, who are the
owners and operators of government satellites, from engaging in civilian law enforcement.57 Second, the
Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches imposes restrictions on the surveillance
methods of law enforcement.58
     52 Vergano, supra note 51, at 4A; see also Media Release, NIMA Reinforces Its Commitment to Remote Sensing
Industry (Sept. 30, 2003), (last visited Oct. 10, 2004)
(describing a five-year contract awarded by NIMA to DigitalGlobe).
     53 Kerber, supra note 9, at B1.
     54 Id.
     55 Vergano, supra note 51, at 4A.
     56 Id. Of course, these exports will be heavily regulated.
     57 The Posse Comitatus Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1385 (2001), prohibits individuals from using “any part of the Army or the
Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws . . . .” Executive Order No. 12,333 prohibits the CIA from
“engage[ing] in electronic surveillance within the United States. . . .” 46 Fed. Reg. 59,941, 59,951 (Dec. 4, 1981). These
statutes, rules, and regulations do not apply to commercial spy satellites because they are not 2004] SATELLITE
     operated by a military agency or the CIA. The operation of commercial spy satellites is governed by different statutes,
rules and regulations. For a general description of the restrictions on the operation of commercial spy satellites, see supra
note 51. Most likely, law enforcement will rely on government satellite resources because of the high costs associated with
satellite surveillance. See Vergano, supra note 51, at 4A.

A. NRO and NGA Over-Head

    The NRO and NGA, the operators and image analyzers of U.S. government spy satellites, are
Department of Defense affiliated agencies and, therefore, are prohibited from directly engaging in law
enforcement operations59 by the 125 year-old Posse Comitatus Act (PCA).60 Additionally, Executive
Order No. 12,333 governs the activities of the IC, 61 of which the NRO and NGA are members, within the
United States. Although the PCA and Executive Order No. 12,333 impose significant restrictions on the
role that the NRO and NGA can play in law enforcement operations, they do not ban the use of U.S.
government spy satellites for law enforcement operations.
    The PCA makes it a crime for an individual to use members of the Army or Air Force to execute laws
or to act as a posse comitatus.62 Nevertheless, this statute has not been read to restrict the use of Army or
Air Force material or equipment for law enforcement purposes; rather, it prevents military personnel from
playing a direct and active role in civilian law enforcement.63 Thus, the PCA is not seen to prevent the use
of military assets to gather information in law
     58 See, e.g., Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 359 (1967) (finding warrantless use of a listening device attached to
the outside of a telephone booth by federal officers violated the Fourth Amendment); Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27,
40 (2001) (finding warrantless use of a thermal imager by law enforcement to scan defendant’s home violated the Fourth
Amendment). But see Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445, 451–52 (1989) (finding use of a helicopter overflight by law
enforcement to survey defendant’s backyard did not violate the Fourth Amendment).
     59 A law enforcement operation is an investigation or operation likely to obtain evidence of a completed crime or the
planning of a crime. They are formalized operations targeting specific persons or organizations. Law enforcement
operations are significantly distinct from logistical support of law enforcement agencies. Giving satellite imagery of an
area to help law enforcement develop a security plan does not constitute a law enforcement operation.
     60 18 U.S.C § 1385 (2001).
     61 Exec. Order No. 12,333, 46 Fed. Reg. at 59,941 (promulgated to “provide for the effective conduct of United States
intelligence activities and the protection of constitutional rights”).
     62 See 18 U.S.C. § 1385 (2001).
     63 See United States v. Red Feather, 392 F. Supp. 916, 922 (1975). Congress intended, “according to the legislative
history . . . , to eliminate the direct active use of federal troops by civil law enforcement officers. The prevention of the use
of military supplies and equipment was never mentioned in the debates, nor can it reasonably be read into the words of the
Act.” Id. 1638 OHIO STATE LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 65: 1627
    enforcement operations so long as the information is analyzed by civilian law enforcement
    The PCA also allows Congress to make exceptions to the rule against using federal troops to execute
the laws.65 To fight the “war on drugs,” Congress, in the 1980s, created several exceptions to the PCA,
such as the Military Cooperation with Law Enforcement Officials Act of 1981, 66 to encourage greater
cooperation between the military and law enforcement. 67 The military-civilian cooperation extended
beyond the war on drugs during the 1990s, and, after the September 11th terrorists attacks, the marriage
will continue to grow.68 Consequently, it is not unrealistic that Congress may pass laws permitting
military participation at some levels in the War on Terrorism within the United States.
    While the PCA focuses on the use of the military in law enforcement operations, Executive Order No.
12,333 directs the activities of members of the IC within the United States. 69 It generally prevents
agencies within the IC from
     64 Phillip Carter, Soldiers as Cops: How Far Can They Go?, THE STAR-LEDGER (Newark, N.J.), Oct. 20, 2002, at 1.
The use of military aircraft in the Washington, D.C. sniper case was an exception to the PCA because, while military
personnel flew the aircraft, civilian law enforcement authorities rode along to analyze evidence gathered while in flight. Id.
     65 18 U.S.C. § 1385 (2001). The PCA recognizes that the military may directly engage in civilian law enforcement
when “expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress . . . .” Id.
     66 10 U.S.C. §§ 371–378 (2001).
     67 Sean J. Kealy, Reexamining the Posse Comitatus Act: Toward a Right to Civil Law Enforcement, 21 YALE L. &
POL’Y REV. 383, 384 (2003).
     68 See id. at 384–87. To illustrate the growing marriage between the military and law enforcement, Kealy cites the
enlistment of military aircraft in the Washington, D.C. sniper case in the fall of 2002. Id. at 387–88. Kealy argues that the
line between police and military is becoming blurred. Id. at 386. “Since September 11th, moreover, many policymakers
have called for, and authorized, increased use of the military in domestic law enforcement. The most visible manifestation
has been the thousands of National Guard troops stationed at airports, bridges, power plants, and at the borders.” Id. at 387.
Furthermore, Congress has “allowed the military to transport suspected terrorists from foreign countries to the United
States for trial.” Id. Kealy also argues that, since September 11th, the public is more willing to accept the use of the
military in law enforcement operations because of the threat posed by terrorism. Id.
     69 Exec. Order No. 12,333, 46 Fed. Reg. 59,941, 59,943 (Dec. 4, 1981) (“The agencies within the Intelligence
Community shall, in accordance with applicable United States law and with the other provisions of this Order, conduct
intelligence activities necessary for the conduct of foreign relations and the protection of the national security of the
United States . . . .”). Some members of the IC also function as civilian law enforcement agencies. Executive Order No.
12,333 does not apply to law enforcement operations conducted by these law enforcement agencies. Exec. Order No.
12,333, 46 Fed. Reg. at 59,950 (“Nothing in this Order shall be construed to apply to or interfere with any authorized civil
or criminal law enforcement responsibility of any department or agency.”). The agencies that are members of the IC and
perform law enforcement functions include the FBI, the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS), which is tasked
with some intelligence responsibilities for the Navy as well as 2004] SATELLITE SURVEILLANCE 1639
    collecting, retaining or disseminating information concerning United States’ persons unless there has
been waiver by the target individual, it involves foreign intelligence or counterintelligence operations, or
the information acquired by any overhead reconnaissance was not directed at a specific person. 70
However, Executive Order No. 12,333 probably allows federal law enforcement agencies to task spy
satellites for surveillance purposes under the “specialized equipment” and “assistance of expert personnel”
exceptions.71 But availability of this technology to local law enforcement may only be offered in
situations where lives are in danger. 72 Additionally, Executive Order No. 12,333 specifically allows the
members of the IC to cooperate with law enforcement agencies in foreign intelligence, counterterrorism,
and, notably, narcotics investigations. 73
    investigating any crimes to or involving such Navy personnel or assets regardless of whether or not prosecution
occurs under civilian law, and the United States Secret Service, which investigates counterfeiting and other securities
crimes. Importantly, the NRO, NGA, and CIA only serve as intelligence agencies and, therefore, their activities within the
United States are strictly governed by Executive Order No. 12,333. In fact, the CIA is generally prohibited from
conducting electronic and physical surveillance inside the United States. See National Security Act of 1947, 50 U.S.C. §
403-3(d)(1) (2003); see also Weissman v. CIA, 565 F.2d 692, 695 (D.C. Cir. 1988) (“[The National Security Act of 1947]
was intended, at the very least, to prohibit the CIA from conducting secret investigations of United States citizens, in this
country, who have no connection with the Agency.”).
    There are also many directives and internal regulations that govern the use of spy satellites inside the
United States.74 However, these confusing directives most likely do not provide a legal barrier to the
tasking of spy satellites in law enforcement operations. 75 After all, it is common for the military to
provide aerial
    70 See Exec. Order No. 12,333, 46 Fed. Reg. at 59,950.
    71 Exec. Order No. 12,333, 46 Fed. Reg. at 59,951. (“Agencies          within the Intelligence Community are authorized
to: . . . [p]rovide specialized equipment, technical knowledge, or assistance of expert personnel for use by any department
or agency, or, when lives are endangered, to support local law enforcement agencies.”). The National Security Act of 1947
specifically provides that the NRO and NGA can share with federal law enforcement agencies information about non-U.S.
citizens collected outside the United States. 50 U.S.C. § 403-5a (2003).
      72 See Exec. Order No. 12,333, 46 Fed. Reg. at 59,951.
      73 Exec. Order No. 12,333, 46 Fed. Reg. at 59,951 (Subject to restrictions in the Order and other laws, agencies in the
IC can “participate in law enforcement activities to investigate or prevent clandestine intelligence activities by foreign
powers, or international terrorist or narcotics activities.”).
      74 There are many regulations affecting the use of spy satellites in the U.S. But, as Lt. Col. Kuo suggests, almost all of
the direction is subject to interpretation. Kuo argues that now is the time to revise the regulations in order to provide clear
guidance for the collection of intelligence from space within the United States. It is important to note that Kuo is talking
about the use of satellite imagery by members of the IC for Homeland Security, not law enforcement agencies. See Kuo,
supra note 4, at 52–53.
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS E3.2, E4.1.5.4 (Jan. 15, 1986) (permitting the military 1640 OHIO STATE LAW JOURNAL
[Vol. 65: 1627
    reconnaissance support for law enforcement agencies in customs, drug, and border patrol
     to make equipment and bases available to civilian law enforcement for law enforcement purposes but preventing the
direct use of DoD personnel for surveillance of individuals). But see Walter Pincus & Dana Priest, Congress Moves to Lift
Intelligence Spending; Hill Also Told of Afghan War Cost: $17 Billion, WASH. POST, May 15, 2002, at A1 (stating that
classified laws prohibit domestic satellite spying without a special waiver).
     Moreover, after the 9-11 attacks, the NGA created an “Americas Office” to focus on activities within
the United States, and this group has offered “passive assistance” to federal law enforcement agencies for
law enforcement purposes.77 But the director of the Americas Office minimized the aid provided to law
enforcement because the agency likely does not have satellite imagery for the particular time and place
requested.78 Still, the NGA’s legal counsel understands that, as a member of the IC, its participation in
law enforcement operations means toeing the “fine lines” of its legal authority. 79
     Although the satellite imagery produced by the Americas Office at the request of law enforcement
was not collected for law enforcement purposes, the creation of the Americas Office and increased
tasking of spy satellites within U.S. borders signals a shift in the utilization of intelligence resources from
abroad to at home. As spy satellite coverage within U.S. borders expands and law enforcement access to
the NGA’s resources increases to include tasking spy satellites for law enforcement purposes, the
restrictions imposed on the members of the IC by Executive Order No. 12,333 will be toed. However,
with clear guidance, these limits will likely not be crossed, and government spy satellite systems can
provide support for law enforcement agencies.

B. Spy Satellite Surveillance and the Fourth Amendment: Is Satellite Imagery a “Search”?

    The Fourth Amendment protects “persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches
and seizures . . . .”80 When law enforcement has
      76 Aerial reconnaissance flights by military planes are authorized by statute in some instances. For example, they are
allowed to be flown in the enforcement of certain customs laws. See 50 U.S.C. § 220 (2003).
      77 Satellite Imagery Keeping Eye on U.S., supra note 8.
      78 Id. Referring to a hypothetical strikingly similar to the Washington area sniper case, Americas Office director Bert
Beaulieu stated that law enforcement officials could request information, for example, such as “whether a white truck was
at a location at a certain time.” Id. The NGA has yet to provide “a smoking gun” to law enforcement officials. Id.
      79 Id. The NGA’s associate general counsel concedes that its authority to participate in law enforcement operations is
restricted under Executive Order No. 12,333 and “that toeing such fine lines can be difficult.” Id.
    80 U.S.   CONST. amend. IV. 2004] SATELLITE SURVEILLANCE 1641
     employed advanced technologies to collect information, the debate has largely centered on whether
this activity constitutes a “search” under the Fourth Amendment. 81 If law enforcement activity does not
constitute a “search,” “the Fourth Amendment simply does not apply to the case.”82 Thus, the critical
analysis for this Note is whether the use of satellite imagery by law enforcement to obtain evidence of a
crime constitutes a “search” under the Fourth Amendment.
     The current Fourth Amendment “search” analysis was outlined in a concurring opinion by Justice
John Marshall Harlan in Katz v. United States.83 Prior to Katz, “search” law was based on property rights.
Pre-Katz, the Fourth Amendment did not apply absent a trespass or physical intrusion into a
“constitutionally protected area,” most notably an individual’s home. 84 With the advent of modern
technology,85 the Court in Katz realized that the property-rights model was “bad physics as well as bad
law,”86 and that “electronic as well as physical intrusion into a place that is . . . private may constitute a
violation of the Fourth Amendment.”87
     Katz had been placing bets from a Los Angeles phone booth to Miami and Boston in violation of a
federal statute prohibiting interstate gambling. 88 FBI agents attached an electronic listening and recording
device to the exterior of the public telephone booth from which Katz placed his calls. 89 The lower courts
found that there was no violation of the Fourth Amendment because there had
     81 See, e.g., Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 353 (1967) (government’s use of a listening device constituted a
“search and seizure” within the Fourth Amendment); Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27, 34–35 (2001) (finding that the
information obtained by the thermal imager was a product of a search within the Fourth Amendment).
     83 389 U.S. at 360.
     84 “The well known historical purpose of the Fourth Amendment, directed against general warrants and writs of
assistance, was to prevent the use of governmental force to search a man’s house, his person, his papers, and his
effects . . . .” Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 463 (1928), overruled by Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347
(1967). In Olmstead, the Court found that the use of a wiretap by federal agents to listen in on the defendant’s
conversations did not constitute a search because, among other reasons, the taps were installed without physical
intrusion—the taps were installed on wires coming from the defendant’s home and office. Id. at 463–64.
     85 ALAN WESTIN, PRIVACY AND FREEDOM 67–168 (1967) (examining the new surveillance technology); see also
William C. Banks & M.E. Bowman, Executive Authority for National Security Surveillance, 50 AM. U. L. REV. 1, 44
(2000) (“As new surveillance technologies continued to emerge . . . , the law of privacy and surveillance by government
was forced to modernize. The courts were forced finally to develop a legal theory of privacy in the surveillance context
that did not depend upon the outmoded property model.”).
     86 Katz, 389 U.S. at 362 (Harlan, J., concurring).
     87 Id. at 360–61 (Harlan, J., concurring).
     88 Id. at 348.
     89 Id. 1642 OHIO STATE LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 65: 1627
    been no physical intrusion into the phone booth while Katz was making his calls. 90 But the Supreme
Court ruled that the trespass doctrine was no longer controlling, and Justice Harlan’s concurring opinion
survived as the operative test for determining if a “search” under the Fourth Amendment had occurred.91
    Under the Katz test, law enforcement efforts to obtain evidence only constitutes a Fourth Amendment
“search” if the person first “exhibited an actual (subjective) expectation of privacy and, second, that the
expectation be one that society is prepared to recognize as ‘reasonable.’”92 If either prong of this test is
lacking, then the activity does not constitute a “search.”93 Harlan’s first prong embodied the majority’s
comment that “[w]hat a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a
subject of Fourth Amendment protection.”94
Katz made it possible for a Fourth Amendment “search” to occur without a physical intrusion into a
constitutionally protected area. But Katz probably went further than simply repudiating the trespass
doctrine and made the method of surveillance irrelevant. Professor Simmons argues that “[i]n adopting
the language ‘legitimate expectation of privacy,’ Katz was presenting a test that focused solely on the
activity or information that was being monitored, without regard for how it might have been observed or
acquired by the government.”95
90 Id. at 348–49.
91 See Smith v. Maryland,   442 U.S. 735, 741 (1979) (construing the Katz decision based on Justice Harlan’s concurring
opinion). In Smith, the Court found that the use of pen registers installed at a telephone company to record numbers dialed
from a residence did not constitute a “search” because, even if the particular defendant expressed an actual expectation of
privacy in the numbers he dialed, such an expectation is not one that society is prepared to recognize because the
information was voluntarily conveyed to a third-party, the phone company. Id. at 742–43.
92 Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 361 (1967) (Harlan, J., concurring). More simply put, “[u]nder the Fourth
Amendment and most of its state equivalents, there is no search within the meaning of the Constitution when the
government intrudes into some place or interest where the person has no ‘reasonable expectation of privacy.’ . . . The
target of the search must actually expect privacy, and that expectation must be one that society is not prepared to recognize
as reasonable.” MARK L. MILLER & RONALD F. WRIGHT, CRIMINAL PROCEDURES 93–94 (2d ed. 2003).
93 Courts have suggested that the objective prong might be enough to satisfy the analysis. See United States v. White, 401
U.S. 745, 751–53 (1971). See also Ric Simmons, From Katz to Kyllo: A Blueprint for Adapting the Fourth Amendment to
Twenty-first Century Technologies, 53 HASTINGS L.J. 1303, 1314 (2002) (“[I]n applying the Katz test a court’s sole
purpose is to determine what expectations of privacy society deems to be reasonable.”).
94 Katz, 389 U.S. at 351. Because Katz held his conversation in a closed telephone booth, he exhibited an actual
expectation of privacy that society was prepared to accept as reasonable. Id. at 352 (“One who occupies [a telephone
booth], shuts the door behind him, and pays the toll that permits him to place a call is surely entitled to assume that the
words he utters into the mouthpiece will not be broadcast to the world.”).
95 Simmons, supra note 93, at 1305–06. 2004] SATELLITE SURVEILLANCE 1643
     Therefore, only the results of the surveillance should be considered in determining if the surveillance
infringed on an individual’s legitimate expectation of privacy. 96
     Even while adopting Professor Simmons’ results-based articulation of the Katz test, a property-based
analysis remains relevant to determine societal expectations of privacy. 97 In determining whether an
individual’s reasonable expectation of privacy has been infringed, thus amounting to a search under the
Katz test, courts consider the location of the individual or information being observed. 98 Additionally, in
determining societal expectations of privacy, courts look at advancements in technology and the intimacy
of the details revealed by the technology. 99 The location of the satellite, outer space, although inconsistent
with the results-based articulation of the Katz test, might be a relevant factor in determining whether a
“search” has occurred. Thus, these three factors—the location of the surveillance target, the location of
the satellite, and the nature of the information or intimate details revealed by satellite imagery—are
central to determining whether or not the use of satellite imagery by law enforcement constitutes a
“search” under the Fourth Amendment.

                   1. The Surveillance Target and the Plain View and Open Fields Doctrines

    Even when property-based Fourth Amendment search jurisprudence prevailed, the Supreme Court
took the position that surveillance of a target in plain view from a lawful vantage point by law
enforcement did not constitute a “search.”100 The results-based articulation of the Katz test reinforces this
     96 Professor Simmons proposes that “the method of surveillance should be irrelevant, and the results of the
surveillance are all that should matter in determining whether an individual’s reasonable expectation of privacy has been
infringed.” Id. at 1321–22.
     97 See Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27, 40 (2001) (holding that a warrantless thermal imaging scan of a home
constitutes an unreasonable search under the Fourth Amendment); Dow Chemical Co. v. United States, 476 U.S. 227, 239
(1986) (concluding that aerial photography of an industrial park from lawful navigable airspace is not a search under the
Fourth Amendment). But see United States v. Johnson, 42 Fed. Appx. 959, 962 (9th Cir. Aug. 5, 2002) cert. denied, 537
U.S. 1113 (2003) (holding that warrantless thermal imaging scan during overflight of barn-like structure was a not a
search under the Fourth Amendment).
     98 See infra Part III.B.1.
     99 See Dow, 476 U.S. at 238–39 (finding that technology enhancing human vision does not give rise to constitutional
problems because the intimate details of the plant, such as trade secrets, were not revealed by the aerial photographs). By
focusing on the technology used by law enforcement rather than the information revealed by a search, courts will have to
examine new technologies on a case by case basis, which inevitably would lead to inconsistencies. See Simmons, supra
note 93, at 1322.
     100 See On Lee v. United States, 343 U.S. 747, 754 (1952) (comparing the lawfulness of evidence obtained by an
undercover officer using a hidden microphone to information obtained 1644 OHIO STATE LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 65:
    “What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of
Fourth Amendment protection.”101 Similarly, there is no Fourth Amendment protection for activities
conducted in “open fields.”102 These doctrines have provided the foundation for the now glossed finding
that surveillance from the skies of individuals or activities in plain view or “open fields” does not
constitute a “search” under the Fourth Amendment. 103
     using “bifocals, field glasses or the telescope to magnify the object of the witness’ vision [that] is not a forbidden
search or seizure”).
    Flyovers by law enforcement searching for evidence of a crime or conducting surveillance provide
the ideal setting for examining the above proposition. These flyovers fall into two categories. The first
category is law enforcement surveillance over “open fields,” which are generally private property and
public places such as public thoroughfares, parks, or other areas generally accessible by the public. Under
Oliver, “open fields do not provide the setting for those intimate activities that the [Fourth] Amendment is
intended to shelter from government interference or surveillance.”104 Thus, the Court has ruled that they
are simply not covered by the Fourth Amendment. 105 Surveillance or investigations of “open fields” or
activities conducted within those areas will never implicate the Fourth
    101 Katz v. United States,   389 U.S. 347, 351 (1967).
    102 See Oliver v. United     States, 466 U.S. 170, 180–83 (1984). In Oliver, the Court, rejecting an ad-hoc analysis,
created a bright-line exception to the warrant requirement by reaffirming the common law “open fields” doctrine. Id. The
doctrine states that “an individual may not legitimately demand privacy for activities conducted out of doors in fields,
except in the area immediately surrounding the home.” Id. at 178. “Open fields,” the Court stated, were lands usually
“accessible to the public and the police in ways that a home, an office, or commercial structure would not be.” Id. at 179.
Because the objective prong of the Katz test can never be met, any surveillance of an activity or target in an “open field”
will not constitute a “search,” regardless of an individual’s attempts to make the area private. Id. (finding that fences and
“No Trespassing” signs to prevent public access do not create a reasonable expectation of privacy that society is willing to
accept). Some states have found that an “open field” is subject to protection under state law. See, e.g., People v. Scott, 593
N.E.2d 1328, 1335–38 (N.Y. 1992); State v. Kirchoff, 587 A.2d 988, 994 (Vt. 1991); State v. Myrick, 688 P.2d 151, 153
(Wash. 1984). Other states have recognized “open fields” as protected areas when an individual unmistakably makes it
clear that entry is not permitted by, for example, fencing. See State v. Bullock, 901 P.2d 61, 75 (Mont. 1995).
     103 Courts have consistently found that aerial surveillance does not constitute a “search” under the Fourth
Amendment because there is no reasonable expectation that the individual or his home will not be visibly observed from
the skies. See, e.g., California v. Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207, 213–15 (1986) (holding that there is no reasonable expectation of
privacy even in one’s backyard); Oliver v. United States, 466 U.S. 170, 179 (1984) (Both parties conceded “the public and
police lawfully may survey lands from the air.”); United States v. Knotts, 460 U.S. 276, 281–85 (1983) (holding that there
is no reasonable expectation of privacy from visual observation when in a car on a public highway).
     104 Oliver, 466 U.S. at 179.
     105 See id. at 176–77. 2004] SATELLITE SURVEILLANCE 1645
     Amendment, regardless of the method or technology employed by law enforcement. 106
     The second category involves areas that are entitled to some Fourth Amendment protections. These
areas are commonly known as “cartilage,”107 and are clearly protected from physical trespass.108 However,
“[t]hat the area is within the curtilage does not itself bar all police observation. The Fourth Amendment
protection of the home has never been extended to require law enforcement officers to shield their eyes
when passing by a home on public thoroughfares.”109 The essence of the “plain view” doctrine is that
there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in matters left within the open view of others.
     The Court first addressed the issue of flyovers in California v. Ciraolo.110 Law enforcement officers,
acting on an anonymous tip that the defendant was growing marijuana in his backyard and without a
warrant, flew a fixed-wing aircraft at 1,000 feet and were able to see with the naked eye what officers
concluded to be marijuana plants.111 The backyard was not visible from ground-level because there was a
six-feet high outer fence and an even higher inner fence. 112 Based on the flyover, a search warrant was
issued, and marijuana plants were found when it was executed. 113
     The Court found that the defendant had exhibited an actual expectation of privacy by shielding his
yard with the fences so as to prevent observation from ground level, but that an expectation to be free
from aerial observation was not one that society was “prepared to honor.”114 The Court’s basis for this
conclusion was that private and commercial flights were routine, and, therefore, the backyard
     106 See Simmons, supra note 93, at 1314–15 (arguing that the Court’s statement that the fields in Oliver could easily
have been seen by airplanes flying overhead implied that the method of investigation was immaterial).
     107 The most frequently recognized curtilage is the area immediately surrounding and associated with the home. See
United States v. Dunn, 480 U.S. 294, 300 (1987). The Dunn Court outlined four factors relevant to determining whether
land falls within the curtilage: “the proximity of the area claimed to be curtilage to the home, whether the area is included
within an enclosure surrounding the home, the nature of the uses to which the area is put, and the steps taken by the
resident to protect the area from observation by people passing by.” Id. at 301.
     108 A physical trespass of curtilage is clearly a “search” under the Fourth Amendment. See id. at 301.
     109 California v. Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207, 213 (1986); Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27, 32 (2001) (“[W]e have held
that visual observation [of a portion of a house that is in plain public view] is no ‘search’ at all . . . .”).
     110 476 U.S. 207 (1986).
     111 Id. at 207.
     112 Id. at 209.
     113 Id. at 207.
     114 Id. at 212–14. 1646 OHIO STATE LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 65: 1627
    was knowingly exposed to the public.115 As Katz taught, “[w]hat a person knowingly exposes to the
public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection.” 116
    In Florida v. Riley117 the Court extended Ciraolo to helicopters, which allow for lower-altitude
surveillance.118 As was the case in Ciraolo, the defendant in Riley took precautions to prevent his
greenhouse, which was within the curtilage of his home, from ground-level observation.119 However, an
officer in a helicopter circling above was, with a naked eye, “able to see through the openings in the roof
and one or more of the open sides of the greenhouse” and determined that marijuana was being grown
inside.120 A warrant was obtained based on these observations, and, sure enough, the greenhouse
contained marijuana plants.121 The Court, applying the “plain view” doctrine, found that “Riley could not
reasonably have expected that his greenhouse was protected from public or official observation from a
helicopter” flying in navigable airspace because such flights were routine in that day and age.122
    Riley represents the willingness of the Court to accept the validity of flyovers of constitutionally
protected areas. The defendant had gone to great lengths to prevent observation of his greenhouse. The
Court noted that:

    Two sides of the greenhouse were enclosed. The other two sides were not enclosed but the contents of the
    greenhouse were obscured from view from surrounding property by trees, shrubs, and the mobile home.
    The greenhouse was covered by corrugated roofing panels, some translucent and some opaque. At the time
    relevant to this case, two of the panels, amounting to approximately 10% of

    115 Id. at 214–15. Considering the results-based articulation of the Katz test, a better conclusion would be that the
    growth in air traffic influenced societal expectations of privacy. See Simmons, supra note 93, at 1335. Before air
    travel, a backyard shielded from ground level would be considered a protected, private area; however, air travel
    has changed society and its expectations of privacy.

    116 389 U.S.    347, 351 (1967).

    117 488 U.S.    445 (1989).

    118 Id.   at 450–51.

    119 450 (“Riley no doubt intended and expected that his greenhouse would not be open to public inspection,
    and the precautions he took protected against ground-level observation.”).

    120 Id.   at 448.

    121 Id.   at 448–49.

    122 Id. at 450–51. In Riley, the Court looked at the method of surveillance utilized by law enforcement rather
    than focusing on information gathered by the flyover. Professor Simmons unhappily agrees that, “[t]hroughout
    various applications of the Katz test, the method of surveillance continues to survive as a factor in determining
    whether or not a defendant had a reasonable expectation of privacy.” Simmons, supra note 93, at 1315. 2004]
    the roof area were missing. A wire fence surrounded the mobile home and the greenhouse; and the property
    was posted with a ‘DO NOT ENTER’ sign.123

Yet, the Court concluded that “[b]ecause the sides and roof of his greenhouse were left partially open,
however, what was growing in the greenhouse was subject to viewing from the air” and, therefore, the
defendant “could not reasonably have expected the contents of his greenhouse to be immune from
examination by an officer seated in a fixed-wing aircraft . . . .”124 Based on the tremendous effort that the
defendant took to protect the privacy of his greenhouse, the very narrow window for observation, and the
great lengths that the officer took to gain a vantage point 125—the officer had to employ a helicopter to
circle 400 feet overhead—the Court could have found that the “plain view” doctrine did not apply and
that it was reasonable for an individual, and society, to expect that the objects in his greenhouse would
remain free from visual observation, even from the sky. Yet, simply because two panels in the greenhouse
roof were missing, the Court found that society was not willing to respect the defendant’s privacy
     The Court expanded the permissibility of flyovers by law enforcement to commercial areas that
would be constitutionally protected from physical invasion in Dow Chemical Co. v. United States.126 Dow
had taken extensive steps to conceal from ground-level view all manufacturing equipment at its facility in
Midland, Michigan.127 However, the company did not attempt to conceal all equipment from aerial
views.128 The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), without a warrant, contracted a commercial aerial
photographer using mapping cameras to take photographs of the facility from navigable airspace to
investigate regulatory violations. 129 The Court recognized that “[a]ny actual physical entry by the EPA
into any enclosed area would raise significantly different questions, because ‘[t]he businessman, like the
occupant of a residence, has a constitutional right to go about his business free from unreasonable official
entries upon his
    123 Riley, 488 U.S. at 448.
    124 Id. at 450.
    125 One of the requirements    of the “plain view” doctrine is that the observation be made from a lawful vantage point.
See infra note 134 and accompanying text. In Riley and Ciraolo, the Court found that the aircraft were flying in
accordance with FAA regulations. But, other courts have found that when an officer takes steps to artificially improve a
vantage point beyond what was readily available to the public can turn visual observations into a “search.” See State v.
Bobic, 996 P.2d 610, 616 (Wash. 2000). Presumably, this is because society is still willing to respect the privacy of areas
that are not easily viewed by the general public.
     126 476 U.S. 227 (1986).
     127 Id. at 229. Dow maintained an elaborate security around the perimeter. It also investigated any low-level flights
over the facility. Id.
     128 Id.
     129 Id. 1648 OHIO STATE LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 65: 1627
    private commercial property.’”130 Still, Justice Burger, for the majority, wrote, in response to an
argument that the commercial complex was similar to the “‘curtilage’ of a dwelling,” that “such an
industrial complex is more comparable to an open field and as such it is open to the view and observation
of persons in aircraft lawfully in the public airspace.”131
    Although Burger draws a distinction between the curtilage surrounding a home and a business
complex,132 the clear result of Dow is that visual observations made during flyovers of commercial or
residential properties are not “searches” under the Fourth Amendment. The application of the “plain view”
doctrine to this age of flight has led to the realization that there can be no reasonable expectation of
privacy in an area visually observable by the public from an aircraft in lawful airspace, even when
individuals go to great lengths to protect its view from ground-level.
    Applying the “open fields” and “plain view” doctrines, the location of the surveillance target
observed by a spy satellite will not give rise to Fourth Amendment protections, at least where the target,
activity, or property is visually observable from an aircraft. Further, under the “open fields” doctrine,
there can never be a reasonable expectation of privacy to an “open field” or activities conducted within.
Thus, utilization of satellite technology to conduct surveillance over “open fields” seems per se
    130 Id. at 237 (internal citations omitted).
    131 Dow, 476 U.S. at 239.
    132 Although this distinction might have    been made to distinguish acceptance of the enhanced photography used in
Dow from the naked eye observation made in Riley and Ciraolo, it has become irrelevant in interpretations of the case
because the Court failed to build on the point. Rather, the opinion has been taken to generally mean that “[t]he mere fact
that human vision is enhanced somewhat, at least to the degree here, does not give rise to constitutional problems.” Id. at
238. This quote is cited in respect to areas that are clearly not “open fields.” See, e.g., Kitzmiller v. State, 548 A.2d 140,
143 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1988) (holding “the enhanced vision concept [from Dow] applies also, we think, to residential
      133 The holding in Dow is in conflict with this statement. The Court in Dow stated that the complex was similar to an
“open field,” but then recognized that the law did offer some protections to the facility, such as protection against
warrantless physical searches. See Dow, 476 U.S. at 237 (“Any actual physical entry by EPA into any enclosed area would
raise significantly different questions, because ‘[t]he businessman, like the occupant of a residence, has a constitutional
right to go about his business free from unreasonable official entries upon his private commercial property.’”) (internal
citations omitted). An “open field” is not an area protected by the Fourth Amendment. See Oliver v. United States, 466
U.S. 170, 176 (1984) (finding “open fields” are not persons, houses, places, or effects as covered by the Fourth
Amendment). This seems to be an anomaly. Logically, because a “search” of an “open field” can never occur, spy satellite
operators should be free to utilize all technological capabilities, including infrared sensors and all magnification
capabilities, over “open fields.” 2004] SATELLITE SURVEILLANCE 1649
                          2. Is Space Too Far Away? A Navigable Airspace Requirement

     Under the “plain view” doctrine, observations by law enforcement must be made from a lawful
vantage point.134 For aerial surveillance, the Court has required that the observations be made from
“public navigable airspace.”135 As the Court in Riley announced, “[w]e would have a different case if
flying [a helicopter] at that altitude had been contrary to law or regulation.” 136 In Ciraolo, Justice Burger
equated public navigable airspace to public thoroughfares, concluding that, like a public road, public
navigable airspace was a lawful, public vantage point from which law enforcement officers do not have to
shield their eyes.137 Dow affirmed that position, noting that the facility was “open to the view and
observation of persons in aircraft lawfully in the public airspace . . . .”138
     Justice O’Connor, in her concurrence in Riley, and the four dissenters, minimized the majority’s
heavy reliance on compliance with FAA regulations, refusing to believe that these “expectations of
privacy ‘society is prepared to recognize as “reasonable”’ simply mirror the FAA’s safety concerns.” 139
To be consistent with Katz, O’Connor argued, there must be evidence that the public travels “with
sufficient regularity” at such altitudes that the individual can be said to have known his backyard was in
public view.140 Therefore, if flights overhead are common, an individual knows he is susceptible to aerial
surveillance, and there can be no reasonable expectation of privacy for “what a person knowingly exposes
to the public.”141
Fifteen years after Riley, air travel has expanded, and most areas in the United States are not immune
from planes or helicopters flying routinely overhead. 142 Even using O’Connor’s stricter requirement,
which is more faithful to the Katz test, that flights over areas be made with sufficient regularity, it would
be hard to
134 An  officer might have lawful access to a vantage point either because it is open to the general public or, in places not
open to the general public, because he has been given permission to enter that location. See, e.g., California v. Ciraolo, 476
U.S. 207, 213 (1986) (officer’s observations were made from a public vantage point where he had a right to be); State v.
Bobic, 996 P.2d 610, 616 (Wash. 2000) (finding detective lawfully obtained vantage point because the property manager
had given him permission to enter).
135 See Ciraolo, 476 U.S. at 207.
136 Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445, 451 (1989).
137 See Ciraolo, 476 U.S. at 213.
138 Dow, 476 U.S. at 239.
139 Riley, 488 U.S. at 453.
140 Id. at 454.
141 Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 351 (1967).
142 There were approximately nine million aircraft departures for the U.S. airline industry every year and 612 million
paying passengers on U.S. airliners in 2003. Press Release, United States Census Bureau, Facts for Features (Dec. 3, 2003),               1650
    argue that society recognizes a reasonable expectation of privacy from observations made from
    Spy satellites are in outer space. Even though they are not in public navigable airspace, there is
nothing unlawful about spy satellites operating in space, assuming that they have the proper licensing if
private and U.S. based.143 Additionally, all types of satellites pass over all parts of the U.S. with sufficient
regularity, so an individual’s expectation of privacy argument based on the rareness of satellite passes
overhead will not hold weight. The difficulties in applying the distinctions between lawful and unlawful
satellite orbits, and navigable airspace and outer space, that one would expect from the Court, illustrate
the shortcomings of such an application. Instead, applying a results-based analysis, it is apparent that spy
satellites do not run afoul of the seemingly strict public navigable airspace requirement simply because, as
opposed to using airplanes or helicopters, law enforcement uses satellites.
    The Court has recognized that the use of technology to gather information that could have been
obtained by other, lawful surveillance methods does not constitute a “search” simply because advanced
technology was employed. In United States v. Knotts,144 the Supreme Court held that the monitoring of
beeper145 signals did not invade the individual’s reasonable expectation of privacy and, therefore, was not
a “search” under the Fourth Amendment. But more important for the issue of spy satellites was the
Court’s utilization of the results-based Katz test.
    Believing that the suspect was purchasing chemicals used to manufacture illegal narcotics, law
enforcement officers, with the permission of the seller, placed a beeper inside one of the chemical
containers to be purchased by the suspect. 146 When the suspect took control of the container, officers
followed the car using both visual surveillance and a monitor that received the signals sent by the
beeper.147 While following the vehicle with the container, officers were forced to end visual surveillance
because the driver, another suspect, began
    143 For a discussion of the impact that satellites have on national and territorial sovereignty, see Adeno Addis, The
Thin State in Thick Globalism: Sovereignty in the Information Age, 37 VAND. J. TRANSNAT’L L. 1, 33–38 (2004).
    144 460 U.S. 276, 285 (1983). Some states have found that the use of beepers constitutes a “search” under state
constitutions and requires a warrant. See State v. Campbell, 759 P.2d 1040, 1049 (Or. 1988).
    145 A beeper is a small battery-powered device that can be installed in a vehicle or in an object and that emits radio
signals that can be picked up by law enforcement conducting surveillance. They aid law enforcement in tracking the
movements of individuals or objects. Knotts, 460 U.S. at 277.
    146 Id. at 277–78.
    147 Id. at 278. 2004] SATELLITE SURVEILLANCE 1651
    making evasive maneuvers.148 The officers on the ground eventually lost the beeper signal as well.149
About an hour later, the signal was picked up by a monitor in a helicopter, and the approximate location
of the container, which was now stationary, was determined to be inside a cabin. 150 Based on further
visual surveillance and the beeper location, officers obtained a search warrant and uncovered a
clandestine drug laboratory.151
    At trial, the defendants sought to suppress the evidence based on the warrantless monitoring of the
beeper. The Court equated the use of a beeper to conduct surveillance “to the following of an automobile
on public streets and highways.”152 And, under the “open fields” doctrine, “[a] person traveling in an
automobile on public thoroughfares has no reasonable expectation of privacy in his movements from one
place to another.”153 But, importantly, the Court admitted that “because of the failure of the visual
surveillance, the beeper enabled the law enforcement officials in this case to ascertain the ultimate resting
place of [the container] when they would not have been able to do so had they relied solely on their naked
eyes.”154 Still, the Court allowed the monitoring because “scientific enhancement of this sort raises no
constitutional issues which visual surveillance would not also raise.”155 Because the beeper did not give
officers any more information than they could have obtained from visual surveillance, it was presumably
    The Court made clear that the method of surveillance was irrelevant. 156 Acknowledging a results-
based test, the Court stated that “Knotts . . . undoubtedly had the traditional expectation of privacy within
a dwelling place insofar as the cabin was concerned.”157 However, there was no reasonable expectation of
     148 Id. (The container was transferred to a different vehicle at one point, which was driven by a     different individual).
     149 Id.
     150 Id.
     151 Knotts, 460 U.S. at 279.
     152 Id. at 281.
     153 Id. The Court recognized that a person has a reduced expectation of privacy in a motor              vehicle because of its
function and capacity for public scrutiny. Id. The Court also found that there was no expectation of privacy against the
visual observation of the vehicles on private property nor movement of the container in “open fields.” Id. at 282.
     154 Id. at 285.
     155 Id. The Court recognized that visual surveillance along the traveled route of the car or from lands adjoining Knotts’
premises would have sufficed to reveal all the facts made available by the beeper to the police.
     156 Id. at 282. (stating that “[t]he fact that the officers in this case relied not only on visual surveillance, but on the use
of the beeper to signal the presence of Petschen’s automobile to the police receiver, does not alter the situation.”).
     157 Knotts, 460 U.S. at 282; see also United States v. Karo, 468 U.S. 705, 715–16 (1984) (finding use of a beeper to
track the movements of objects within a residence unconstitutional). 1652 OHIO STATE LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 65:
    privacy to movements on a public highway or in “open fields.” For example, Professor Simmons
hypothesizes that “the government could have attached a video camera to the container to show where it
was being taken—as long as the agents stopped monitoring the camera once it was taken into a private
    Observations conducted from aircraft in public navigable airspace do not trigger the Fourth
Amendment because increased air travel has influenced and changed societal expectations of privacy—
simply, there can be no reasonable expectation of privacy that one will not be observed from above. So
long as spy satellites are not collecting any information that would not be available to police from some
other legal surveillance method, most relevant here is the use of aircraft, the warrantless use of spy
satellites will not implicate the Fourth Amendment. 159

                      3. United States v. Kyllo: Intimate Details and Advanced Technology

    In Riley, the majority noted that “no intimate details connected with the use of the home or curtilage
were observed” during the helicopter flyover. 160 In Dow, the Court commented that the photographs taken
of the facility were “not so revealing of intimate details as to raise constitutional concerns.”161 The
concept of “intimate details,” a proposition that closely relates to the pre-Katz property-based analysis, is
made clear in a footnote in Ciraolo: “[T]hose intimate associations, objects or activities otherwise
imperceptible to police or fellow citizens [without a physical intrusion].”162 Law enforcement may not use
advanced technology to observe activities or individuals in areas protected by the Fourth Amendment that
would otherwise be unobservable without a physical intrusion, at least where the advanced technology is
“not in general public use.”163 In other words, advanced technology may only reveal information for
which there is no societal expectation of privacy.
    Kyllo v. United States164 represents a clear example of an advanced technology that triggers Fourth
Amendment protections because it reveals
    158 Simmons, supra note 93, at 1347.
    159 Professor Simmons accurately captures         the absurdity of a rule that was dependent on the method of surveillance:
“when the government observes our backyard, do we really care if they are doing it undetectably and legally from a
satellite miles in the air or blatantly and illegally from a helicopter hovering ten feet above us?” Id. at 1324.
     160 Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445, 452 (1989).
     161 Dow Chemical Co. v. United States, 476 U.S. 227, 238 (1986). The Court, in upholding the enhanced aerial
photography, did find “it important that this is not an area immediately adjacent to a private home, where privacy
expectations are most heightened.” Id. at 237 n.4.
     162 California v. Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207, 215 n.3 (1986).
     163 Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27, 40 (2001).
     164 533 U.S. 27 (2001). 2004] SATELLITE SURVEILLANCE 1653
     intimate details. In Kyllo, law enforcement used a thermal imaging device to detect indoor marijuana
cultivation.165 The scan of Danny Kyllo’s home was consistent with a marijuana growing operation. 166
Based on tips from informants, extremely high utility bills, and the thermal image scan, a judge issued a
search warrant and officers discovered Kyllo’s marijuana growing operation while executing the
     Justice Scalia, for the Court, recognized that a visual observation of a house that is in plain view is
“no ‘search’ at all.”168 Scalia, applying the Katz test, then found that there is an inherent expectation of
privacy of the interior of a home that is per se reasonable. 169 A thermal imager, Scalia pointed out,
revealed intimate details about the interior of a home, even though it was only how warm, or relatively
warm, Kyllo was heating his residence. 170 “In the home,” Scalia wrote, “all details are intimate details,
because the entire area is held safe from prying government eyes.”171 The use of thermal imaging to scan
a home constituted a “search” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment because it allowed law
     165 Id. at 29. A thermal imaging device operates somewhat like a video camera showing heat images in a gray-scale;
the hotter the image, the closer the shade of gray is to white. Id. at 29–30. Marijuana cultivation requires high-intensity
lamps that emit large amounts of heat, and it was, prior to Kyllo, standard practice for law enforcement to scan homes
upon receiving tips that marijuana is being grown inside. Prior to Kyllo, both federal and state courts were divided on the
issue of whether a thermal imaging scan constituted a Fourth Amendment “search.” Some courts held that thermal imagers
do not constitute a “search” because a defendant does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the heat that is
vented from the home—this was known as the heat waste doctrine and analogized to the Supreme Court’s holding in
California v. Greenwood, 486 U.S. 35 (1988), that a homeowner does not have an expectation of privacy in garbage left
for pickup on the street curb. Id. at 50. Others, still focusing on the heat waste, analogized thermal imagers to canine sniffs
that were not “searches.” Still other courts focused on the information collected about the interior of the home rather than
the heat waste. See Amy Miller, Note, Kyllo v. United States: New Law Enforcement Technologies and the Fourth
Amendment, 51 U. KAN. L. REV. 181, 185–90 (2002).
     166 The roof over his garage was substantially warmer than neighboring homes and relatively hot compared to the rest
of his home. Kyllo, 533 U.S. at 30.
     167 Id.
     168 Id. at 32.
     169 Id. at 34 (“While it may be difficult to refine Katz when the search of areas such as telephone booths, automobiles,
or even the curtilage and uncovered portions of residences is at issue, in the case of the search of the interior of homes . . .
there is a ready criterion, with roots deep in the common law, of the minimal expectation of privacy that exists, and that is
acknowledged to be reasonable.”).
     170 Id. at 38. Scalia rejected the Government’s argument that the thermal imaging was constitutional because it did
not reveal any details of private activities occurring in private areas. See id. at 37–38.
     171 Id. at 37. Courts in general have recognized that homes have heightened protection from governmental intrusion.
See, e.g., Morgan v. State, 95 P.3d 802, 807 (Wyo. 2004) (“A person’s home is sacrosanct in Fourth Amendment
jurisprudence.”). 1654 OHIO STATE LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 65: 1627
    enforcement to obtain information regarding “the interior of the home that could not otherwise have
been obtained without physical intrusion . . . .”172
    Recognizing Kyllo as a definitive return to the results-based Katz analysis—as opposed to a test that
focused highly on the method of surveillance—ensuing lower court decisions highlighted the importance
that advanced technology reveal intimate details or information or activities not in the plain view of the
public, to trigger Fourth Amendment protections. In United States v. Johnson,173 the Ninth Circuit held
that a warrantless thermal image scan of a barn-like structure did not constitute a “search” under the
meaning of the Fourth Amendment.174 The court stated that “Kyllo applies only to a home,”175 and there
was no evidence that items associated with a home were in the barn or that the barn was lived in by the
    In Rodriguez v. State,177 law enforcement used a drug-dog sniff of the defendant’s front door to detect
narcotics.178 Prior to Kyllo, canine sniffs that occurred in a public place were generally not considered a
Fourth Amendment “search” by the Supreme Court. 179 However, the defendant in Rodriguez attempted to
extend Kyllo to cover canine sniffs of the exterior of residences, a subject that the Supreme Court has not
addressed, by arguing that a drug-dog sniff was an investigatory technique that allowed law enforcement
to obtain information that could be discovered only by a physical search of the home. 180 The Texas
appellate court held that canine sniffs did not reveal intimate details of the interior of the home; rather, the
sniff only detected the presence or absence of contraband items. 181 Because the sniff did “not reveal legal
information about the interior of a home, [it was] not a search for Fourth Amendment purposes.” 182
    172 Kyllo, 533 U.S. at 34.
    173 42 Fed. Appx. 959 (9th Cir. Aug. 5, 2002).
    174 Id. at 962.
    175 Id.
    176 Id. The court recognized that the structure       was not a home. An argument could be made that the barn-like
structure was covered under the “open fields” doctrine. However, the Supreme Court has assumed arguendo that a search
occurs if an officer, while in an open field, enters a structure and observes activities that are not visible from the outside.
See United States v. Dunn, 480 U.S. 294, 303 (1987).
     177 106 S.W.3d 224 (Tex. App. 2003), cert. denied, 124 S.Ct. 1432 (2004).
     178 Id. at 228.
     179 See, e.g., United States v. Place, 462 U.S. 696, 707 (1983). Importantly, Place only considered canine sniffs in
public places.
     180 Rodriguez, 106 S.W.3d at 228.
     181 See id.
     182 Id. at 229. The Texas court also found that the defendant did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy outside
his home where the dog sniffed because the area was accessible, viewable, and used as the main entrance to the house by
the public. Id. at 228. Additionally, the 2004] SATELLITE SURVEILLANCE 1655
     court’s basis for finding that no legal details were revealed stemmed from the fact that there can be “no legitimate
expectation or interest in ‘privately’ possessing an illegal narcotic.” Id. at 229.
     The Court in Kyllo “made clear that the type of technology employed by the government was
irrelevant”183 under the Katz test, instead focusing on the information or activities observed and whether
the defendant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the information or activities. But, it is still
necessary to look at the type of technology to determine what information the technology reveals.
     Spy satellites potentially have optical, thermal, radar, and infrared capabilities. Because optical
images, such as photographs or observations made under normal light, normally do not reveal “intimate
details,” but rather information or activities in plain view of the public, utilizing satellite technology for
these purposes does not constitute a Fourth Amendment “search.”184 But a spy satellite’s thermal imaging,
radar, and infrared sensors call for more of a case-by-case analysis. Clearly, from Kyllo, law enforcement
may not use a satellite for a thermal image scan of a home, but it could be used to scan a structure such as
a barn. In sum, there should be no barrier to the use of spy satellites simply because they are an advanced
technology so long as the results yielded do not provide intimate details.

                         4. Is Satellite Technology Generally Available to the Public?
    In Kyllo, Justice Scalia believed he was adopting a rule that took “account of more sophisticated
[imaging] systems that are already in use or in development.”185 The rule of Kyllo holds that where “the
Government uses a device that is not in general public use, to explore details of the home that would
      183 Simmons, supra note 93, at 1346. Many courts have made a distinction between “sense-enhancing” and “sense-
replacing” technology, the latter meaning that the information could never be revealed to a human using existing, natural
senses. Professor Simmons argues this distinction has no legal significance because it focuses on the method of the search,
rather than the results of the search. Id. at 1344–45. See also 1 WAYNE R. LAFAVE, SEARCH AND SEIZURE: A TREATISE ON
THE FOURTH AMENDMENT § 2.2(d) (3d ed. 1996 & Supp. 2004) (“The basic point, as it was put in one of the few pre-Kyllo
cases finding use of a thermal imager to constitute a search, is that ‘Katz looked not to the tools employed by the
government nor to the phenomena measured by those tools but to the object of the government’s efforts.’”) (internal
citation omitted).
      184 There could be instances where use of technology that enhances vision, such as binoculars, would trigger privacy
interests. However, the individual must have manifested a reasonable expectation of privacy from vision-enhanced
observation. See People v. Oynes, 920 P.2d 880, 882–83 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996). But see also On Lee v. U.S., 343 U.S. 747,
754 (1952) (remarking in dicta that “[t]he use of bifocals, field glasses or the telescope to magnify the object of the witness’
vision is not a forbidden search or seizure”).
      185 Kyllo, 533 U.S. at 36. Scalia took note that a Department of Justice program was developing technology that
would allow law enforcement the ability to “see” through walls. Id. at 36 n.3. 1656 OHIO STATE LAW JOURNAL [Vol.
65: 1627
    previously have been unknowable without physical intrusion, the surveillance is a ‘search’ and
presumptively unreasonable without a warrant.”186
    Scalia, however, has been criticized for qualifying this rule by creating the general public use
exception.187 First, the exception has been seen to weaken the rule. 188 Second, the language of the
exception implicates a methods-based interpretation of the Katz test.189
    A literal reading of Kyllo allows police to employ advanced surveillance technologies so long as they
are in general public use. But what constitutes general public use? If you can purchase a thermal imager
on eBay, does that suffice to meet the exception?190 What if the advanced technology can be purchased at
Wal-Mart?191 Some courts have followed this interpretation.192 If you believe this is what the Supreme
Court meant, then the fact that satellite images can be purchased by the click of a button on the Internet
might meet a
    186 Id. at 40.
    187 Professor   LaFave proposes that perhaps the Court did not assert that “there is a ‘general public use’ exception, but
only that its search conclusion applies ‘at least’ when the technology is not in public use. That cautious language, therefore,
might be taken merely as an indication that the Court has left the ‘general public use’ situation for another day . . . .”
LAFAVE, supra note 183, at § 2.2(d).
     188 The dissenters in Kyllo argued that “this criterion is somewhat perverse because it seems likely that the threat to
privacy will grow, rather than recede, as the use of intrusive equipment becomes more readily available.” Kyllo, 533 U.S.
at 47 (Stevens, J., dissenting); see also Adam W. Brill, Note, Kyllo v. United States: Is the Court’s Bright-line Rule on
Thermal Imaging Written in Disappearing Ink?, 56 ARK. L. REV. 431, 431–32 (2003) (arguing that the Court weakened its
bright-line rule against use of advanced technologies by law enforcement by defining them in terms of general public use).
     189 Simmons, supra note 93, at 1320 (“Unfortunately, the Court also included a poorly phrased methods-based caveat
to the test, adding ‘at least where (as here) the technology in question is not in general public use.’”).
     190 A search on eBay on February 9, 2004 using the term “thermal imager” yielded a result for a used thermal imager.
See The dissenters in Kyllo argued that thermal imagers are available to the public, and over 10,000
units had been manufactured. See 533 U.S. at 47 n.5 (Stevens, J. dissenting).
     191 A search on Wal-Mart’s website on February 26, 2004 using the term “night vision” yielded several different
models of Night Owl night vision devices, beginning at $99.96. See
     192 See People v. Katz, 2001 WL 1012114, at *2 n.4 (Mich. Ct. App. Sept. 4, 2001) (“Kyllo did not address the use by
police of night vision binoculars to obtain visual images (as opposed to invisible heat levels). Such devices are sold at
retail and may very well be ‘in general public use’ such that their use by police would not be considered an illegal search
by the Kyllo majority.”); see also Quin M. Sorenson, Comment, Losing a Plain View of Katz: The Loss of a Reasonable
Expectation of Privacy Under the Readily Available Standard, 107 DICK. L. REV. 179, 180 (2002) (arguing that the Kyllo
general public use exception or, as Sorenson refers to it, the “readily available” standard allows police to employ
technology “as soon as a sufficient percentage of the public owns a device”). 2004] SATELLITE SURVEILLANCE 1657
     literal interpretation of the exception. 193 As the New York Times wrote in 1997, “[c]ommercial spy
satellites are about to let anyone with a credit card peer down from the heavens into the compounds of
dictators or the backyards of neighbors with high fences.”194 Under this “readily available” interpretation,
spy satellite technology may be in general public use—spy satellite imagers are readily available for
purchase by the general public.
     On the other hand, the language of the so-called methods-focused exception fits nicely into the
results-based interpretation of the Katz analysis. Professor Simmons argues that the Court meant to
convey “that if a technology becomes so widespread and commonplace that it changes societal
expectations of privacy, its use is no longer considered a ‘search.’”195 The logic of this proposition stems
from Katz: “[I]f the information is exposed to the public, gathering of that information is not a search and
the Fourth Amendment does not apply.”196 When advanced technology is available to society and society
has used it to render once-private realms public, then surveillance of those once-private realms, regardless
of the technology, does not constitute a “search.”197
This interpretation illustrates that the Court has not rid itself of the Katz analysis and departed from
precedent.198 Rather, the “plain view” doctrine and expectation of privacy analyses have always been
dependent on technology—for example, Riley and Ciraolo were dependent on air travel becoming an
everyday norm—to determine what was in plain view and when individuals had a reasonable expectation
of privacy.
     The use of spy satellites by law enforcement is not per se a Fourth Amendment search simply because
it may not meet readily available interpretation of the general public use language. A court must focus on
the information and activities observed by the satellites rather than the technology itself—while still
taking into account how technology has changed societal expectations of privacy. Any other interpretation
would lead to absurd results; for example, law enforcement in a helicopter would be able to use
binoculars to look down onto an individual’s backyard, but would not be able to use a spy satellite to get
the same information.
    193 Archived satellite imagery is available for sale on the Internet. See
    194 William J. Broad, Private Ventures Hope for Profits on Spy Satellites, N.Y. TIMES, Feb. 10, 1997, at A1.
    195 Simmons, supra note 93, at 1334. Professor Simmons further argues that “[c]ourts can—and should—consider
how technology has changed society.” Id. at 1335.
     196 Raymond Shih Ray Ku, The Founders’ Privacy: The Fourth Amendment and the Power of Technological
Surveillance, 86 MINN. L. REV. 1325, 1346 (2002).
     197 See Simmons, supra note 93, at 1335. Professor Simmons worries that courts will continue to focus on changes in
technology rather than how technology changes society. Id.
     198 Some commentators believe that Kyllo was a departure from precedent. See Sorenson, supra note 192, at 180.
1658 OHIO STATE LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 65: 1627
    In sum, the focus on the constitutional inquiry should be on the information gathered rather than the
technology employed. Using this analysis, the use of spy satellites by law enforcement to conduct
surveillance is constitutional so long as the information or activities could be observed through other legal
surveillance methods.

                               IV. CALLING FOR A NEW STANDARD: A SATELLITE RULE

     The following are apparent: first, growing spy satellite resources will provide law enforcement with
the opportunity to use the technology; second, spy satellites are so technologically advanced that their
capabilities cannot be duplicated by any other, single surveillance method; and, third, there are no
significant legal barriers, other than a prohibition against thermal image scans of homes, to the use of spy
satellite technology by law enforcement that arise from federal law. Thus, the logical question is: Should
the use of spy satellites by law enforcement be regulated?
     The American Bar Association created the Task Force on Technology and Law Enforcement in 1995
to develop guidelines for policymakers, judges, and police departments on the use of technology in
physical surveillance.199 The Task Force emphasized that, although most rules governing searches have
come from the courts, they are not the sole source of law: “A variety of entities, including the courts,
legislatures, executive officials, prosecutors, the defense bar, law enforcement agencies, and the public,
have a responsibility in assessing how best to regulate the use of technologically-assisted physical
surveillance.”200 The ABA Task Force concluded that law enforcement use of technologically-assisted
physical surveillance “may need to be regulated.”201
     Recognizing that law enforcement surveillance methods are becoming dependent on technology,
many commentators have called for a new judicial standard to be created for advanced technology, such
as thermal imaging and
ASSISTED PHYSICAL SURVEILLANCE 1 (1999). Physical surveillance is the observation of an individual and his activities (as
compared to electronic surveillance such as wiretapping).
     200 Id. at 44.
201 Id. at 11. The Task Force distinguished between surveillances methods:
[A] satellite or device that can penetrate visually through walls enhances one’s senses to a much greater extent than most devices
because it can ‘see’ things that the police would never be able to see with the naked eye from an outside vantage point.
Conversely, when an enhancement device is used simply to ‘confirm’ something already seen by the naked eye (e.g., use of
binoculars to confirm an inadvertent sighting), its use is less likely to be seen as a search, even if the surveillance is of the home.
     Id. at 33. 2004] SATELLITE SURVEILLANCE 1659
    high-powered satellite imagery cameras. 202 For example, David Sullivan calls for a “Technologically-
Advanced Device Standard.”203 However, even this analysis, in practice, would not restrict the use of spy
satellites beyond the restrictions imposed by current constitutional jurisprudence. 204
    Additionally, any rule directed at advanced technology would have to be super-specific, or might
otherwise be too vague, having little impact and causing confusion. 205 An effective rule would require the
court, legislature, or administrative agency creating the rule to identify a specific type of technology.
Some state courts have addressed advanced technology with such an approach. In State v. Jackson, the
Supreme Court of Washington found that the state constitution requires a warrant to be obtained for the
use of GPS tracking devices on an individual’s vehicle.206 The court pronounced that the “citizens of this
State have a right to be free from the type of governmental intrusion that occurs when a GPS device is
attached to a citizen’s vehicle, regardless of reduced privacy expectations due to advances in
     202 See, e.g., David A. Sullivan, Note, A Bright Line in the Sky? Toward a New Fourth Amendment Search Standard
for Advancing Surveillance Technology, 44 ARIZ. L. REV. 967, 987–88 (2002).
     203 This standard only applies to advanced technology, which provides any information including visual detail that
was completely unavailable to aided human senses from the observation point, as opposed to low-tech devices, which only
provide more detail of what is already observable, not unavailable detail. Id. at 987–89. Sullivan’s standard calls for the
following analytical framework: first, did the observer use a technologically-advanced device to perform the surveillance;
second, did the observer gather information that was unavailable to unaided human senses without physical intrusion into
the area under observation; and, third, did the individual have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Id. at 989.
     204 The second question in Sullivan’s framework depends on whether the information gathered was unavailable
without physical intrusion. If the information could be collected without physical intrusion, then it is not a “search” in the
constitutional sense. Id. Therefore, this is current constitutional jurisprudence and does not place any additional
restrictions on the use of technology by law enforcement in surveillance operations. As stated before, optical capabilities,
parallel aerial surveillance, and thermal imaging capabilities obviously fall under Kyllo.
     205 See Christopher Slobogin, Technologically-Assisted Physical Surveillance: The American Bar Association’s
Tentative Draft Standards, 10 HARV. J.L. & TECH. 383, 426 (1997) (discussing the ABA Task Force’s debate over
“whether law is best encapsulated in general or specific terms”). Detailed rules have difficulty adapting to technological
developments and can be inadvertently violated by law enforcement, leading to litigation and obstacles to law enforcement.
Vague guidelines, on the other hand, would not give clear guidance. The ABA task force decided to structure the standards
around functional categories of technology to mitigate the consequences of failing to identify a particular technology. Id.
     206 76 P.3d 217, 223–24 (Wash. 2003). A GPS tracking device gives law enforcement the ability to track precise
movements of a vehicle without following the vehicle twenty-four hours a day over a long period of time. The movements
are electronically stored in the device until an officer returns to the vehicle and retrieves the GPS data.
     207 Id. at 224. 1660 OHIO STATE LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 65: 1627
     The Washington Supreme Court focused on the method of the surveillance rather than the character
of the information gathered.208 Is the logical solution to impose a judicial warrant requirement on
“satellite and other technologically-enhanced surveillance methods”?209 Such a federal court-imposed
requirement would run afoul of the Katz test and the Fourth Amendment, which focus not on the method
of surveillance and technology employed but the information or activities observed. Such a drastic change
in jurisprudence would be burdensome and would wreak havoc in the legal system. Lower courts would
undoubtedly be split as to what technology required a warrant and what did not, thus forcing the U.S.
Supreme Court to spend its time evaluating every specific type of advanced technology.
     If society’s privacy concerns, as the Washington Supreme Court hinted, lie not within the specific
information collected, but the ability to collect this information with ease, then a proper response to the
use of satellite imagery and other advanced technology might be to impose restrictions. 210 However,
requiring a warrant based on probable cause to use spy satellites potentially ties the hands of law
enforcement. A more appropriate solution to protect against the misuse of this clandestine surveillance
technology is a regulatory framework, short of the warrant requirement, that balances privacy concerns
and legitimate law enforcement needs.
     A regulatory framework controlling the warrantless use of spy satellites should incorporate the
following principles:
     1. The utilization of spy satellites should be reserved only for instances where an alternative method
of surveillance is unavailable, unworkable, or inefficient on a cost or resource basis.
     2. All uses of spy satellites by a law enforcement agency should be approved by a designated official.
At the state level, the attorney general, or her designee, should approve such requests. At the federal level,
the director of the law enforcement agency, or her designee, or the U.S. Attorney for the jurisdiction, or
     208 Id. (“[There is] a difference between the kind of uninterrupted 24-hour a day surveillance possible through the use
of a GPS device, which does not depend upon whether an officer could in fact have maintained visual contact over the
tracking period . . . .”). But see United States v. McIver, 186 F.3d 1119, 1125 (9th Cir. 1999) (rejecting the notion that
visual observation of defendants in forested area “became unconstitutional merely because law enforcement chose to use a
more cost-effective ‘mechanical eye’ to continue the surveillance”).
     209 Krysten C. Kelly, Note, Warrantless Satellite Surveillance: Will Our 4th Amendment Privacy Rights Be Lost in
Space?, 13 J. MARSHALL J. COMPUTER & INFO. L. 729, 760 (1995). Ms. Kelly argues that by “requiring a warrant for both
satellite and technological surveillance, the government would preserve the inherent right of privacy while maintaining the
use of an extremely helpful method of surveillance.” Id. at 761.
     210 Concerns about around-the-clock surveillance have also been aired in response to a movement by many cities and
towns to install video surveillance cameras on city streets. See Thomas Everly, Big Brother Only Wants to Protect Us,
BALT. SUN, Feb. 7, 1996, at 15A (arguing that constant video surveillance will cause stress and alter behavior). 2004]
     her designee, should approve such requests. However, where exigent circumstances exist, law
enforcement should be able to use spy satellites without such approval.
     3. Where resolution of spy satellite imagery becomes so detailed as to depict individuals on the
ground, law enforcement should be conducting investigations of specific crimes or the planning of
specific crimes, as opposed to around-the-clock or random surveillance. Thus, law enforcement must be
able to articulate specific facts for their belief that the target of the spy satellite has committed a crime or
is planning to commit a crime prior to the use of spy satellites.
     4. In a misdemeanor or civil enforcement action, in which a spy satellite has been used without prior
approval or the existence of exigent circumstances, the evidence offered by satellite imagery should be
excluded from use by the prosecution at trial. In a felony action, however, the remedy for violating the
satellite rule should be in tort because such evidence may be necessary to make sure that serious crimes
do not go unpunished.
     A regulatory scheme based on these goals should be welcomed by the law enforcement community
because it is consistent with the predominant law enforcement strategy known as community-policing and
protects law enforcement’s finite resources. The goals recognize that law enforcement budgets never
seem to be large enough, and expenditures on spy satellite technology, therefore, should be reserved only
for those instances where another surveillance method would be inefficient or satellites are the only
method that will serve legitimate law enforcement needs. 211 Additionally, law enforcement dependence
on spy satellites to investigate and prevent crime would be inconsistent with the community-policing
framework.212 Law enforcement, with finite resources,
     211 The ABA Task Force noted that “[w]hen surveillance can be carried out by gadgets rather than people, and when
the gadgets are mass produced at increasingly lower costs, then economics may no longer serve as a sufficient restraint.”
ABA, supra note 199 at 24. However, an advanced KH-11 spy satellite costs over one billion dollars to build, not
including launching and operating costs. See Covault, Iraqi Threats, supra note 27, at 23. The New York City Police
Department (“NYPD”) has an annual budget of 3.3 billion dollars. Michael Weissenstein, Budgets Tightening, Police
Departments Turn to Private Money (July 20, 2003), at (last visited Oct. 10,
2004). Operating a police aircraft may only cost a few hundred dollars an hour. For example, the Columbus, Ohio Police
Department’s helicopter section operates seven helicopters, and has patrols in the air sixteen hours a day with an annual
operating budget of 1.75 million dollars. See Dean Narciso, Choppers Put Columbus a Cut Above, THE COLUMBUS
DISPATCH, Oct. 13, 2002, at A1. But see Lisa J. Stelle, Comment, The View from on High: Satellite Remote Sensing
Technology and the Fourth Amendment, 6 HIGH TECH. L.J. 317, 333 (1991) (arguing that “budget-conscious law
enforcement agencies will note that since satellites have already proved their usefulness in monitoring overseas drug
production, training them upon subjects in the United States may result in costs savings by replacing costly aerial sweeps”).
     212 In the 1990s, President Bill Clinton facilitated a shift in policing strategies from three R’s policing (rapid response,
random patrols, and reactive investigation) to community-policing, an approach that puts more officers in direct contact
with communities by using foot 1662 OHIO STATE LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 65: 1627
    would essentially have to exchange beat officers for spy satellite resources, a move that might shift an
entire policing strategy and realize an Orwellian society.
     patrols and substations and redirects the mission from reactive crime investigating to proactive community problem
solving. See Richard Lacayo, Law and Order, TIME, Jan. 15, 1996, at 48–54. President Clinton pledged 100,000 additional
police officers on America’s streets in his State of the Union Address on January 24, 1994. That same year, the
Department of Justice established the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (“COPS”) to administer police-
hiring grants and to expand community-policing programs. By 1999, 64% of local police departments serving 85% of all
residents engaged in community-policing. Tracey L. Meares, Praying for Community Policing, 90 CAL. L. REV. 1593,
1596–97 (2002).
     The Supreme Court’s formalistic doctrine that what an individual exposes to the public is not
protected by the Fourth Amendment can allow law enforcement to monitor individuals outside of the
home twenty-four hours a day.213 The thought that every move and moment outside of the home is
monitored by the government is frightening; therefore, the government’s surveillance power should be
restricted by a regulatory framework. A satellite rule would address the issue before it reached the courts,
protecting established Katz doctrine and preventing privacy invasions that might occur before the Court
has the opportunity to address the issue.
     Requiring law enforcement to justify the use of spy satellites where the imagery will depict
individuals on the ground—in other words, where an individual’s identity could be determined from the
satellite imagery—addresses the Orwellian fear without restricting law enforcement’s ability to
investigate and prevent crime to an unreasonable degree. The fear is not that individuals will be observed
outside the home, but that individuals will be observed twenty-four hours a day. A regulatory framework
that includes an approval process and requires a justification for the use of spy satellites to observe the
activities of individuals sufficiently protects against such needless governmental intrusion into daily lives.

                                                   V. CONCLUSION

    The surveillance capabilities of spy satellites are astonishing, and their numbers and coverage will
increase in the future as the commercial industry grows and the government launches the Future Imagery
Architecture. With the increased coordination between the military, intelligence agencies, and law
enforcement agencies in the post 9-11 scramble for more surveillance power within U.S. borders, and the
historical showing that law enforcement has embraced technology to increase its surveillance capabilities,
spy satellites will inevitably be utilized by law enforcement on a widespread basis. But because
technology is irrelevant to the interpretation of Fourth Amendment protections based on the Katz test, spy
satellites can operate freely twenty-four hours a day,
    213 See   Shih Ray Ku, supra note 196, at 1348. 2004] SATELLITE SURVEILLANCE 1663
    covertly overhead, monitoring an individual’s movements and activities outside the home. 214 This
frightening reality should be addressed by a regulatory framework that requires law enforcement to
provide a reasonable justification whenever satellite imagery has the ability to identify individuals and
provide information about their daily lives. Establishing such a satellite rule balances privacy interests
and the legitimate needs of law enforcement.
214 It isclear that spy satellites could not be used to obtain information about the interior of a home or an individual’s
activities or movements within a home without a warrant. See Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27, 40 (2001).

To top