Jim Fetzer: The Strange Death of Paul Wellstone

David G. Healy · September 17, 2005

That Colby is a slick one. He will deny the obvious and twist the truth, ignore evidence and assail character until no one will have the courage to speak up or search for the truth! It is a method tried and true. It is a method that worked for Hitler and it works for Bush just as well.
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...indpost&p=39724

Jim - My response to this should be to tell you to perform a biologically impossible act. You complain that I "assail character" and in the next sentence you compare me to Hitler*! This is especially unconscionable considering you should know that I'm Jewish from our participation in the Yahoo Forum and that you repeatedly cite Bollyn a Holocaust 'revisionist' who has close ties to various neo-Nazi's as a reliable source.

It's ironic that the person who complains the most about others 'assailing character' and nasty posts is the worst offender. Cite ONE example of where I have intimidated others "until no one will have the courage to speak up or search for the truth!". Wasn't it you who attacked Pat and Steve? Isn't it you who keeps on implying that anyone who agrees with me is being "taken in" "gullible", "a sap" or "a dupe"**?

To quote Joseph Welsh from the Army-McCarthy hearings "Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"

*Comparing me to Bush as bad enough

** He used those words just in the post I'm quoting, anyone who has been following this thread will have seen various examples of this

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

CUTE, but no banana!

--PLONK--

Evan Burton · September 17, 2005

After reading the accident investigation report, I can only concur with its findings.
The aircraft was high on approach, and had to lose a lot of height to get back on the correct descent profile. When they found themselves off the radial and at low airspeed, they should have called a missed approach and gone around again. Instead, they pushed a bad approach and it killed them.

This situation has happened before, and it will most likely happen again.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Now, there are assertions made by Mr Fetzer I'd like to comment on.

He said:

[There was no distress call, even though the plane--whose passengers included

a US Senator, his wife and daughter, and three aides--was going down in a

remote, swampy area where the rapid arrival of first responders might make

the difference between life and death. There were two pilots. He is committing

a fallacy of equivocation by playing with words. That the copilot, who had handled

most of the communications, did not send a distress call suggests he sent no call

because communications were disabled and he was unable to send out a call.]

It is also just as feasible that no call was made because the crew were in a high workload situation, pushing a bad approach, and did not realise the situation they were in. There is nothing to suggest that the comms were in any way inoperative.

[This is a nice example of "spinning" by trying to turn vice into virtue. Since

the plane was in distress, the pilots would be expected to "power up" and get out

of trouble, which is exactly what happened during the NTSB's own simulations.

They were unable to bring the plane down, even when it was flown abnormally

slowly. They were not landing. The field was miles to the north from where they

were. This remark displays either massive ignorance or deliberate deception.]

I think the ignorance is on your part here. The simulation demonstrated that it would have been possible for the aircraft to climb out and conduct a missed approach; there was sufficient power available from the engines. The fact that the engines were still in Flight Idle shows the crew did NOT attempt to apply power - another indication that they did not have SA.

"... the weather was fine..."

It was not. The AWOS was reporting scattered at 400, overcast at 700 (AGL). With a field elevation of 1378 ft, this means it was overcast at about 2080 ft AMSL. The MDA was 1840 ft AMSL - a difference of a little over 200 ft. That's about 10 seconds to get visual with the field and transition from the instruments to a visual approach before reaching MDA and having to conduct a missed approach. Factor in the fact it was scattered at about 1780 ft AMSL (400 AGL + FE), altimeter tolerance of +/- 50 ft, and an increased rate of descent to maintain profile, and they may have been breaking out at minimas. That is NOT fine weather. That is marginal - at best - and is further confirmed that the pilots planned an alternate, and the ATCO asked about intentions after a missed approach.

"...Richard Healing, a member of the NTSB team that wrote the report, admitted that they had no idea what caused the crash and were merely speculating..."

Was that a direct quote? I think he may have phrased it differently although, in some regards, it is correct. There was no physical evidence to indicate that the aircraft should not have been able to make an approach and land safely. Because there was no CDR / CVR, they have no record of what occurred in the cockpit apart from the radio transmissions. With nothing to positively identify what caused the crash, they have to look at the known facts and develop a most likely hypothesis as to why the accident occurred.

Edited September 17, 2005 by Evan Burton

Evan Burton · September 17, 2005

...the latest being evidence that GPS data may have been manipulated to bring the plane into the "kill zone"...

You voice this opinion several times.

1. The aircraft was flying a VOR approach, not a GPS approach. I don't have a GPS approach plate for EVM, so I don't know if they followed similar paths and may have been set up as a backup. In any case, if the pilots noticed a discepancy between the VOR and GPS approaches, they should have immediatly conducted a missed approach, climbed to a safe altitude in a holding pattern, and investigated what was happening.

2. Please explain HOW the GPS was being 'manipulated'.

Len Colby · September 18, 2005

I am in contact a US Airways Boeing pilot who has been flying professionally for 30 years. I'm trying to rope him in to join this thread. I didn't him take long to figure Fetzer out! Here's what he had to say:

"Len,

I started through the thread, but gave up rather quickly. The final "trump card" of the conspiracy theorists seems to always be something that can't be proven or disproven ... Because it can't be disproven, it becomes a "fact" in their arsenal. Any facts to the contrary, if everything else fails, can be dismissed as part of a plot by "sinister forces" deflect blame - inconvenient facts are part of a cover-up (or the sinister forces made it look like an accident in the Wellstone case). Of course, the "sinister forces" always do such a great job of hiding their actions that the real facts of the case in question become further proof that their hand was at work.

Needless to say that pilots - even the best - make mistakes. Airplanes maintained by the best mechanics still break. The perfect human who doesn't make mistakes hasn't been born yet and imperfect humans haven't figured out how to make a complex machine that never fails. So accidents happen. That said, trying to convince someone who believes a conspiracy exists that one doesn't is a futile effort for they are not swayed by rational arguments. And rational arguments are really all one has in cases like Wellstone's, since no one will ever really know exactly what happened in that airplane in the seconds and minutes just before the crash.

Conspiracy theorists seem to always demand a level of proof that normally doesn't and can't exist from those arguing the other side, but are never capable of offering anything approaching proof that their claims are correct. The mere act of believing their own theory is proof enough that they're right, and anyone who disagrees without irrefutable proof is brushed aside.

Consequently, I doubt there's anything you can say or information that you can provide that will convince those who believe otherwise that Wellstone's accident was just that - an accident. Unless, of course, you can come up with a video of the final minutes of what happened inside that plane. (On second thought, that would probably just be further evidence that "sinister forces" had engineered the crash - why else would there exist that video...)"

Len Colby · September 18, 2005

Jim,

You have yet to provide us with the following.

1] Links to reliable articles that say that EM beam weapons capable of doing what you claim exist. We have been asking for this since the Yahoo forum.

1 - 3 links would be a good number rather than swamping us with moutains of trash. Including a few select quotes would be helpful. Remember the articles have to say that WORKING EM beam weapons ALREADY exist.

2] Explain how the "troika" could have expected killing Wellstone to have increased Coleman's chances of winning when it should of had the opposite effect. Coleman won because of the funeral/rally and how it was perceived by the state's independent voters - this was widely reported in the Minnesota and national press.

3] Evidence that FBI agents from MINNEAPOLIS were at the site before 1pm.

Len

Josiah Thompson · September 18, 2005

How nice of you to join this thread, Mr. Burton. When Professor Fetzer first started replying on the Yahoo Forum, Colonel Rees joined the Yahoo Forum and quickly deflated the Professor. At that time, Professor Fetzer was making various claims about "the Eveleth tower." Colonel Rees pointed out that "Eveleth didn't have a tower." Now you perform a similar function. The Professor makes various claims having to do with a GPS approach. You then point out that the evidence indicates that the Wellstone plane was making a VOR approach.

As soon as anyone with any real aviation knowledge and experience looks at Fetzer's claims, they crash and burn. The Professor, of course, has vast experience in the aviation field. Recall that he told us that "I piloted a jet." Well, it turns out that this was a bit of an exaggeration on his part. By "piloting a jet," what he really meant was that a Navy jet pilot took him up for a short spin while Fetzer was at NROTC summer camp during college some forty years ago! Fetzer may have even... for a few seconds... have actually put his hand on the stick!

He presents such a huge target that many would just give the old blowhard a free pass. But then he starts his vitriol in which anyone who disagrees with him is labeled "an agent of disinformation" or "cognitively impaired" or "massively ignorant." That inspires folks like Len or me or Craig to give him a full blast.

Thanks for coming aboard! I can't wait to see how Fetzer will label you.

Edited September 18, 2005 by Josiah Thompson

Pat Speer · September 19, 2005

2] Explain how the "troika" could have expected killing Wellstone to have increased Coleman's chances of winning when it should of had the opposite effect. Coleman won because of the funeral/rally and how it was perceived by the state's independent voters - this was widely reported in the Minnesota and national press.
Len

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Len, without taking a stand on whether or not Wellstone was killed by a conspiracy, I believe this argument weakens your case. Should someone have wanted to kill Wellstone and make it look like an accident, waiting until after he was elected would have drawn too much attention and made it all too obvious to the American people. Do you think the murder of Bobby Kennedy before he received the nomination makes it less likely he was killed by a conspiracy??? Seriously... Just as Bobby's winning the California primary made him look unstoppable, Wellstone was on very solid ground to win his election, enough that someone might want to have killed him before it would be impossible to make it look like an accident.

As for the public's response to the funeral, I've read enough to know that the poor behavior by some of Wellstone's friends was blown way out of proportion by the supposedly left-wing media. There's no reason to believe Karl Rove and his pals were not in some way responsible for the spin created. Should you think the man incapable of such behavior, you should remember that Nixon (whom he idolized) was concerned that the killings at Kent State would make him look bad, and, as per Haldeman, immediately began trying to spin the incident so that the victims and the anti-war movement would look responsible for the deaths. Think about it.

Your arguments with Fetzer are far more solid when you stick to the possibility of pilot error than when you try to make the case that no one would try to kill Wellstone before the election. This gives the appearance you are trying to show the undecided, including myself, that Wellstone being murdered is unthinkable. Many of us on this Forum have read enough about the Kennedyassassination and the CIA to know that nothing is "unthinkable." People hate. People lust for power. People kill. People use whatever technology they have at their disposal to kill. If Fetzer is able to show that these rays exist, will you then admit his theory is possible? It seems just as he may be pre-dispositioned to believe in conspiracies you and your pilot friend may be pre-disposioned not to believe in them, even though a five-minute course in history will show they exist. While he may be guilty of misrepresenting evidence, you may be guilty of lying to yourself. As I admitted earlier, I'm intrigued by those who devote an inordinate amount of energy to show that conspiracies DON'T exist. Is it really truth you're after? To prove me wrong, please list some conspiracy theories you believe have some merit.

Edited September 19, 2005 by Pat Speer

September 19, 2005

http://spinspace.com/biophysics/haarp.htm

Project HAARP: The Pentagon's provocative plan to superheat the earth's ionosphere

The HAARP phased-array transmitter zaps the earth's ionosphere with

high-frequency radio waves. The lame online game Majestic saps lonely beta males

of their money and personal dignity.

In an Arctic compound 200 miles east of Anchorage, Alaska, the Pentagon has

erected a powerful transmitter designed to beam more than a gigawatt of energy

into the upper reaches of the atmosphere. Known as Project HAARP (High-frequency

Active Auroral Research Program), the $30 million experiment involves the

world's largest "ionospheric heater," a prototype device designed to zap the

skies hundreds of miles above the earth with high-frequency radio waves.

Why irradiate the charged particles of the ionosphere (which when energized by

natural processes make up the lovely and famous phenomenon known as the Northern

Lights)? According to the U.S. Navy and Air Force, co-sponsors of the project,

"to observe the complex natural variations of Alaska's ionosphere." That, says

the Pentagon, and also to develop new forms of communications and surveillance

technologies that will enable the military to send signals to nuclear submarines

and to peer deep underground.

60 Greatest Conspiracies first reported on HAARP more than a year ago. Since

then, inquiring Internauts have blamed the peculiar project for everything from

UFO activity to major power outages in the Western United States, to, most

recently, the downing of TWA Flight 800. (The Pentagon maintains that the HAARP

array has been inactive since late last year.) Some have dubbed it the

"Pentagon's doomsday death ray." Though many of these theories are, well,

creatively amplified, an assortment of more grounded critics--environmentalists,

Native Americans and Alaskan citizens among them--argue that the military does

indeed have Strangelovian plans for this unusual hardware, applications ranging

from "Star Wars" missile defense schemes to weather modification plots and

perhaps even mind control experiments.

The HAARP complex is situated within a 23-acre lot in a relatively isolated

region near the town of Gakona. When the final phase of the project is completed

in 1997, the military will have erected 180 towers, 72 feet in height, forming a

"high-power, high frequency phased array radio transmitter" capable of beaming

in the 2.5-10 megahertz frequency range, at more than 3 gigawatts of power (3

billion watts).

HAARP

Hyperlinks Warm, Fuzzy HAARP

The U.S. Navy's soothing, feel-good PR Web site devoted to HAARP reassures us

that the project is entirely benign.

Angels Don't Play This HAARP

Excerpts from the book that posits a connection between the work of suppressed

scientist Nikola Tesla and Project HAARP.

Alternative HAARP Page

Overview of facts and speculation swirling around the Gakona, Alaska, project.

The Eastlund-ARCO Patent

Outlines Eastlund's vision for a HAARP-like project drawing upon the inspiration

of Nikola Tesla.

Tesla

A brief biography of the enigmatic scientist.

According to the Navy and Air Force, HAARP "will be used to introduce a small,

known amount of energy into a specific ionospheric layer" anywhere from several

miles to several tens of miles in radius. Not surprisingly, Navy and Air Force

PR (posted on the official HAARP World Wide Web Internet site, an effort to

combat the bad press the project has generated), downplays both the

environmental impacts of the project and purported offensive uses of the technology.

However, a series of patents owned by the defense contractor managing the HAARP

project suggests that the Pentagon might indeed have more ambitious designs. In

fact, one of those patents was classified by the Navy for several years during

the 1980s. The key document in the bunch is U.S. Patent number 4,686,605,

considered by HAARP critics to be the "smoking raygun," so to speak. Held by

ARCO Power Technologies, Inc. (APTI), the ARCO subsidiary contracted to build

HAARP, this patent describes an ionospheric heater very similar to the HAARP

heater invented by Bernard J. Eastlund, a Texas physicist. In the

patent--subsequently published on the Internet by foes of HAARP--Eastlund

describes a fantastic offensive and defensive weapon that would do any

megalomaniacal James Bond super villain proud.

According to the patent, Eastlund's invention would heat plumes of charged

particles in the ionosphere, making it possible to, for starters, selectively

"disrupt microwave transmissions of satellites" and "cause interference with or

even total disruption of communications over a large portion of the earth." But

like his hopped up ions, Eastlund was just warming up. Per the patent text, the

physicist's "method and apparatus for altering a region in the earth's

atmosphere" would also:

* "cause confusion of or interference with or even complete disruption of

guidance systems employed by even the most sophisticated of airplanes and missiles";

* "not only... interfere with third-party communications, but [also] take

advantage of one or more such beams to carry out a communications network at the

same time. Put another way, what is used to disrupt another's communications can

be employed by one knowledgeable of this invention as a communications network

at the same time";

* "pick up communication signals of others for intelligence purposes";

* facilitate "missile or aircraft destruction, deflection, or confusion" by

lifting large regions of the atmosphere "to an unexpectedly high altitude so

that missiles encounter unexpected and unplanned drag forces with resultant

destruction or deflection of same."

If Eastlund's brainchild sounds like a recipe for that onetime Cold War panacea,

the Strategic Defense Initiative (AKA "Star Wars"), it's probably no

coincidence. The APTI/Eastlund patent was filed during the final days of the

Reagan administration, when plans for high-tech missile defense systems were

still all the rage. But Eastlund's blue-sky vision went far beyond the usual

Star Wars prescriptions of the day and suggested even more unusual uses for his

patented ionospheric heater.

"Weather modification," the patent states, "is possible by... altering upper

atmospheric wind patterns or altering solar absorption patterns by constructing

one or more plumes of particles which will act as a lens or focusing device." As

a result, an artificially heated could focus a "vast amount of sunlight on

selected portions of the earth."

HAARP officials deny any link to Eastlund's patents or plans. But several key

details suggest otherwise. For starters, APTI, holder of the Eastlund patents,

continues to manage the HAARP project. During the summer of 1994, ARCO sold APTI

to E-Systems, a defense contractor known for counter-surveillance projects.

E-Systems, in turn, is currently owned by Raytheon, one of the world's largest

defense contractors and maker of the SCUD-busting Patriot missile. All of which

suggests that more than just simple atmospheric science is going on in the HAARP

compound.

What's more, one of the APTI/Eastlund patents singles out Alaska as the ideal

site for a high-frequency ionospheric heater because "magnetic field lines...

which extend to desirable altitudes for this invention, intersect the earth in

Alaska." APTI also rates Alaska as an ideal location given its close proximity

to an ample source of fuel to power the project: the vast reserves of natural

gas in the North Slope region--reserves owned by APTI parent company ARCO.

Eastlund also contradicts the official military line. He told National Public

Radio that a secret military project to develop his work was launched during the

late 1980s. And in the May/June 1994 issue of Microwave News, Eastlund suggested

that "The HAARP project obviously looks a lot like the first step" toward the

designs outlined in his patents.

Eastlund's patent really trips into conspiratorial territory in its "References

Cited" section. Two of the sources documented by Eastlund are New York Times

articles from 1915 and 1940 profiling Nikola Tesla, a giant in the annals of

Conspiratorial History. Tesla, a brilliant inventor and contemporary of Edison,

developed hundreds of patents during his lifetime, and is often credited with

developing radio before Marconi, among a host of other firsts. Of course,

mainstream science has never fully acknowledged Tesla's contributions, and his

later pronouncements (he vowed that he had developed a technology that could

split the earth asunder) have left him straddling that familiar historical

territory where genius meets crackpot. Not surprisingly, fringe science and

conspiracy theory have made Tesla something of a patron saint. Whenever, talk

radio buzz or Internet discussion turns to alleged government experiments to

cause earthquakes or modify weather, references to government-suppressed "Tesla

Technology" are sure to follow.

Of course, mainstream science has never fully acknowledged Tesla's

contributions, and his later pronouncements (he vowed that he had developed a

technology that could split the earth asunder) have left him straddling that

familiar historical territory where genius meets crackpot. Not surprisingly,

fringe science and conspiracy theory have made Tesla something of a patron

saint. Whenever, talk radio buzz or Internet discussion turns to alleged

government experiments to cause earthquakes or modify weather, references to

government-suppressed "Tesla Technology" are sure to follow.

Judging from the APTI patent, Tesla was a major inspiration for Eastlund

ionospheric heater. The first New York Times article, dated September 22, 1940,

reports that Tesla, then 84 years old, "stands ready to divulge to the United

States Government the secret of his 'teleforce,' with which, he said, airplane

motors would be melted at a distance of 250 miles, so that an invisible Chinese

Wall of Defense would be built around the country." Quoting Tesla, the Times

story continues: "This new type of force, Mr. Tesla said, would operate through

a beam one hundred-millionth of a square centimeter in diameter, and could be

generated from a special plant that would cost no more than $2,000,000 and would

take only about three months to construct."

The second New York Times story, dated December 8, 1915, describes one of

Tesla's more well-known patents, a transmitter that would "project electrical

energy in any amount to any distance and apply it for innumerable purposes, both

in war and peace."

The similarity of Tesla's ideas to Eastlund's invention are remarkable, and by

extension the overlap between Tesla and HAARP technology is downright

intriguing. Apparently, APTI and the Pentagon are taking Eastlund's--and by

extension, Tesla's--ideas seriously.

Eastlund seems to agree. As he told one journalist/conspiracy pathfinder: "HAARP

is the perfect first step towards a plan like mine. ...The government will say

it isn't so, but if it quacks like a duck and it looks like a duck, there's a

good chance it is a duck."

2] Explain how the "troika" could have expected killing Wellstone to have increased Coleman's chances of winning when it should of had the opposite effect. Coleman won because of the funeral/rally and how it was perceived by the state's independent voters - this was widely reported in the Minnesota and national press.
Len

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Len, without taking a stand on whether or not Wellstone was killed by a conspiracy, I believe this argument weakens your case. Should someone have wanted to kill Wellstone and make it look like an accident, waiting until after he was elected would have drawn too much attention and made it all too obvious to the American people. Do you think the murder of Bobby Kennedy before he received the nomination makes it less likely he was killed by a conspiracy??? Seriously... Just as Bobby's winning the California primary made him look unstoppable, Wellstone was on very solid ground to win his election, enough that someone might want to have killed him before it would be impossible to make it look like an accident.

As for the public's response to the funeral, I've read enough to know that the poor behavior by some of Wellstone's friends was blown way out of proportion by the supposedly left-wing media. There's no reason to believe Karl Rove and his pals were not in some way responsible for the spin created. Should you think the man incapable of such behavior, you should remember that Nixon (whom he idolized) was concerned that the killings at Kent State would make him look bad, and, as per Haldeman, immediately began trying to spin the incident so that the victims and the anti-war movement would look responsible for the deaths. Think about it.

Your arguments with Fetzer are far more solid when you stick to the possibility of pilot error than when you try to make the case that no one would try to kill Wellstone before the election. This gives the appearance you are trying to show the undecided, including myself, that Wellstone being murdered is unthinkable. Many of us on this Forum have read enough about the Kennedyassassination and the CIA to know that nothing is "unthinkable." People hate. People lust for power. People kill. People use whatever technology they have at their disposal to kill. If Fetzer is able to show that these rays exist, will you then admit his theory is possible? It seems just as he may be pre-dispositioned to believe in conspiracies you and your pilot friend may be pre-disposioned not to believe in them, even though a five-minute course in history will show they exist. While he may be guilty of misrepresenting evidence, you may be guilty of lying to yourself. As I admitted earlier, I'm intrigued by those who devote an inordinate amount of energy to show that conspiracies DON'T exist. Is it really truth you're after? To prove me wrong, please list some conspiracy theories you believe have some merit.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

September 19, 2005

http://www.baytoday.ca/content/news/print.asp?c=6657

Hurtubise says invention sees through walls-BayToday.ca exclusive

By Phil Novak

BayToday.ca

Sunday, January 16, 2005

Photo by Bill Tremblay, Special to BayToday.ca.

Troy Hurtubise has done the seemingly impossible with his newest invention and

defied all known rules of physics, he says.

The Angel Light—Hurtubise claims the concept came to him in a recurring

dream—can reportedly see through walls, as if there was no barrier at all.

That’s not all, though.

So impressed

Hurtubise, 41, said the device detects stealth technology.

And he’s done the tests to prove it, with the covert help of scientists at the

famed Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Hurtubise said.

If that’s not enough, Hurtubise also said the French government sent

representatives to North Bay to witness a demonstration of the Angel Light.

Hurtubise said the reps were so impressed with the eight-foot long device they

paid him $40,000 in cash to put the finishing touches on it.

New universe

The French, Hurtubise adds, have also agreed to pay him a “substantial” amount

of money for the technology if it passes rigorous tests in France.

“They couldn’t believe what they saw,” Hurtubise told BayToday.ca.

“One of them told me it was as if I’d discovered a new universe.”

Gary Dryfoos, a consultant and former long-time instructor at MIT, said "there's

a Nobel Prize" for Hurtubise if the Angel Light really performs as described.

"There are laws of physics waiting to be written for what he's talking about,"

Dryfoos said.

The French aren't the only ones interested in Hurtubise's innovations.

BayToday.ca has obtained documentation confirming that the former head of Saudi

counter-intelligence, who asked that his name not be used, has been in regular

contact with Hurtubise regarding the Angel Light, fire paste, and the Light

Infantry Military Blast Cushions (LIMBC).

Ultra-wideband technology

While Hurtubise’s claims appear, on the surface, to strain credulity, he has now

placed himself miles ahead in the quest by high-tech companies to invent

something that will do the same thing.

Motorola Inc. for example, has set its sights on emerging technology that could

allow first responders and Special Forces to see through building walls, the

Washington Technology Web site reports.

Camero Inc. an Israeli firm founded by technology and intelligence veterans,

received $5 million from Motorola and other investors to develop portable

imaging radar that uses ultra-wideband technology to create a 3-D picture of

objects that are concealed by walls or other barriers.

Plasma light

Three units make up the Angel Light.

The main unit, which Hurtubise calls the centrifuge, contains the Angel Light’s

brains and includes black, white, red and fluorescent light sources, as well as

seven industrial lasers.

The second unit, or the deflector grid, contains a large circle of optical

glass, a microwave unit and plasma intermixed with carbon dioxide.

The third unit contains eight plasma light rods, CO2 charges, industrial

magnets, 108 mirrors, eight ionization cells industrial lights, and other

components Hurtubise chooses to remain tight-lipped about.

Just a dream

Hurtubise said the Angel Light has cost $30,000 to build—he sold percentages of

his other innovations to finance it—as well as 800 to 900 hours of his time.

He credits his subconscious with the idea.

“I had a dream about a year and a half ago as I do for most of my innovations,

just a dream, and I saw it, saw the whole casing and everything, and I saw what

it could do,” Hurtubise said.

“I had the same dream about that three times and by the third time I had it in

my head and I started to build it.”

Through the wall

Troy dreamed the Angel Light would be able to see through walls with window-like

efficiency, and then built it with no blueprints, drawings or schematics.

“I turned it on—that was well over a year ago—and it worked and it was really

awesome.”

Hurtubise said he could see into the garage behind his lab wall, and read the

licence plate on his wife's car and even see the salt on it.

"I almost broke my knuckles three or four times, because it was almost like you

could step through the wall," Hurtubise said.

"You could be fooled into believing that you could actually walk through the

wall and go touch the car."

Across the border

Hurtubise called his MIT contacts with news of what he’d done.

“They told me that I was playing with electromagnetism,” Hurtubise said.

The conversation ultimately led to the discovery of the Angel Light’s other

startling properties.

Hurtubise said “somebody from MIT” shipped him an eight-inch by eight-inch piece

of panelling from the latest Comanche helicopter, which was built using

radar-resistant stealth technology.

“It’s amazing what you can get across the border on a Greyhound bus,” Hurtubise

said.

Pick it up

Hurtubise was instructed to set up an outdoor track, which he did on First

Nations land.

He attached the panel piece to a remote control car that went down the track.

Hurtubise then aimed the Angel Light at the panel and turned on a radar gun.

“I was able to pick it up the panel on the radar gun,” he said.

Stopped working

But a strange thing happened to the car, once it was hit by the Angel Light

beam: it stopped working.

Hurtubise returned to his lab and began testing the Angel Light on other

electronic items including portable radios, TVs and a microwave over.

“They all stopped working,” Hurtubise said.

He duly reported this to his MIT contacts.

"They said 'Troy, this is unbelievable.'"

To the ground

Hurtubise purchase a remote-control plane for $1,800 and took it and the Angel

Light to a flying field on the way to Powassan.

He directed the Angel Light beam toward the sky and started the plane flying.

"On the first loop it came around, passed through the beam of light and fell

right to the ground,” Hurtubise said.

Peeled it back

Hurtubise continued testing the light on other materials and discovered it could

also see through other metals including steel, tin, titanium and, unlike

Superman, lead.

As well the beam also penetrated ceramic and wood.

The Hurtubise put his hand in the light beam.

“I could see my blood vessels, muscles, everything, like I’d taken an Exacto

knife, cut into my skin and peeled it back,” Hurtubise said.

Bad stuff

Soon after, Hurtubise discovered the Angel Light had devilish side-effects.

He lost feeling in the finger of the exposed hand and began suffering an overall

malaise.

“MIT told me every time I turned it on there must have been splash-back hitting

me,” Hurtubise said.

A test on a tank of goldfish was even more disturbing.

“I turned the beam on it and within minutes all the goldfish died,” Hurtubise said.

“That’s when I realized there was a Hyde effect, as in Jekyll and Hyde, and I

dismantled the whole thing.”

Walked on water

He didn’t reassemble it until the French called him after seeing a Discovery

Channel program about the LIMBC.

Hurtubise believes the Hyde effect can be taken out, but by others who have far

more expertise than him.

In the meantime Hurtubise believes that after 17 years inventing, his ship may

finally have come in with France.

"My brother told me the only way I'd be able to sell any of my innovations is by

walking on water," Hurtubise said.

"Well, I think I've just walked on water."

View Photo Gallery for this Story

September 19, 2005

Maximum pain is aim of new US weapon

05 March 2005

New Scientist

David Hambling

http://www.newscientist.com/channel/mech-tech/mg18524894.500

THE US military is funding development of a weapon that delivers a bout of

excruciating pain from up to 2 kilometres away. Intended for use against

rioters, it is meant to leave victims unharmed. But pain researchers are furious

that

work aimed at controlling pain has been used to develop a weapon. And they

fear that the technology will be used for torture.

"I am deeply concerned about the ethical aspects of this research," says

Andrew Rice, a consultant in pain medicine at Chelsea and Westminster Hospital in

London. "Even if the use of temporary severe pain can be justified as a

restraining measure, which I do not believe it can, the long-term physical and

psychological effects are unknown."

The research came to light in documents unearthed by the Sunshine Project, an

organisation based in Texas and in Hamburg, Germany, that exposes biological

weapons research. The papers were released under the US's Freedom of

Information Act.

One document, a research contract between the Office of Naval Research and t

he University of Florida in Gainsville, is entitled "Sensory consequences of

electromagnetic pulses emitted by laser induced plasmas". It concerns so-called

Pulsed Energy Projectiles (PEPs), which fire a laser pulse that generates a

burst of expanding plasma when it hits something solid, like a person (New

Scientist, 12 October 2002, p 42). The weapon, destined for use in 2007, could

literally knock rioters off their feet.

According to a 2003 review of non-lethal weapons by the US Naval Studies

Board, which advises the navy and marine corps, PEPs produced "pain and temporary

paralysis" in tests on animals. This appears to be the result of an

electromagnetic pulse produced by the expanding plasma which triggers impulses

in nerve

cells. The new study, which runs until July and will be carried out with

researchers at the University of Central Florida in Orlando, aims to optimise this

effect. The idea is to work out how to generate a pulse which triggers pain

neurons without damaging tissue.

The contract, heavily censored before release, asks researchers to look for

"optimal pulse parameters to evoke peak nociceptor activation" - in other

words, cause the maximum pain possible. Studies on cells grown in the lab will

identify how much pain can be inflicted on someone before causing injury or death.

New Scientist contacted two researchers working on the project. Martin

Richardson, a laser expert at the University of Central Florida, refused to comment.

Brian Cooper, an expert in dental pain at the University of Florida,

distanced himself from the work, saying "I don't have anything interesting to

convey.

I was just providing some background for the group." His name appears on a

public list of the university's research projects next to the $500,000-plus grant.

John Wood of University College London, an expert in how the brain perceives

pain, says the researchers involved in the project should face censure. "It

could be used for torture," he says, "the [researchers] must be aware of this."

Amanda Williams, a clinical psychologist at University College London, fears

that victims risk long-term harm. "Persistent pain can result from a range of

supposedly non-destructive stimuli which nevertheless change the functioning

of the nervous system," she says. She is concerned that studies of cultured

cells will fall short of demonstrating a safe level for a plasma burst. "They

cannot tell us about the pain and psychological consequences of such a painful

experience."

http://www.baytoday.ca/content/news/print.asp?c=6657
Hurtubise says invention sees through walls-BayToday.ca exclusive

By Phil Novak

BayToday.ca

Sunday, January 16, 2005

Photo by Bill Tremblay, Special to BayToday.ca.

Troy Hurtubise has done the seemingly impossible with his newest invention and

defied all known rules of physics, he says.

The Angel Light—Hurtubise claims the concept came to him in a recurring

dream—can reportedly see through walls, as if there was no barrier at all.

That’s not all, though.

So impressed

Hurtubise, 41, said the device detects stealth technology.

And he’s done the tests to prove it, with the covert help of scientists at the

famed Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Hurtubise said.

If that’s not enough, Hurtubise also said the French government sent

representatives to North Bay to witness a demonstration of the Angel Light.

Hurtubise said the reps were so impressed with the eight-foot long device they

paid him $40,000 in cash to put the finishing touches on it.

New universe

The French, Hurtubise adds, have also agreed to pay him a “substantial” amount

of money for the technology if it passes rigorous tests in France.

“They couldn’t believe what they saw,” Hurtubise told BayToday.ca.

“One of them told me it was as if I’d discovered a new universe.”

Gary Dryfoos, a consultant and former long-time instructor at MIT, said "there's

a Nobel Prize" for Hurtubise if the Angel Light really performs as described.

"There are laws of physics waiting to be written for what he's talking about,"

Dryfoos said.

The French aren't the only ones interested in Hurtubise's innovations.

BayToday.ca has obtained documentation confirming that the former head of Saudi

counter-intelligence, who asked that his name not be used, has been in regular

contact with Hurtubise regarding the Angel Light, fire paste, and the Light

Infantry Military Blast Cushions (LIMBC).

Ultra-wideband technology

While Hurtubise’s claims appear, on the surface, to strain credulity, he has now

placed himself miles ahead in the quest by high-tech companies to invent

something that will do the same thing.

Motorola Inc. for example, has set its sights on emerging technology that could

allow first responders and Special Forces to see through building walls, the

Washington Technology Web site reports.

Camero Inc. an Israeli firm founded by technology and intelligence veterans,

received $5 million from Motorola and other investors to develop portable

imaging radar that uses ultra-wideband technology to create a 3-D picture of

objects that are concealed by walls or other barriers.

Plasma light

Three units make up the Angel Light.

The main unit, which Hurtubise calls the centrifuge, contains the Angel Light’s

brains and includes black, white, red and fluorescent light sources, as well as

seven industrial lasers.

The second unit, or the deflector grid, contains a large circle of optical

glass, a microwave unit and plasma intermixed with carbon dioxide.

The third unit contains eight plasma light rods, CO2 charges, industrial

magnets, 108 mirrors, eight ionization cells industrial lights, and other

components Hurtubise chooses to remain tight-lipped about.

Just a dream

Hurtubise said the Angel Light has cost $30,000 to build—he sold percentages of

his other innovations to finance it—as well as 800 to 900 hours of his time.

He credits his subconscious with the idea.

“I had a dream about a year and a half ago as I do for most of my innovations,

just a dream, and I saw it, saw the whole casing and everything, and I saw what

it could do,” Hurtubise said.

“I had the same dream about that three times and by the third time I had it in

my head and I started to build it.”

Through the wall

Troy dreamed the Angel Light would be able to see through walls with window-like

efficiency, and then built it with no blueprints, drawings or schematics.

“I turned it on—that was well over a year ago—and it worked and it was really

awesome.”

Hurtubise said he could see into the garage behind his lab wall, and read the

licence plate on his wife's car and even see the salt on it.

"I almost broke my knuckles three or four times, because it was almost like you

could step through the wall," Hurtubise said.

"You could be fooled into believing that you could actually walk through the

wall and go touch the car."

Across the border

Hurtubise called his MIT contacts with news of what he’d done.

“They told me that I was playing with electromagnetism,” Hurtubise said.

The conversation ultimately led to the discovery of the Angel Light’s other

startling properties.

Hurtubise said “somebody from MIT” shipped him an eight-inch by eight-inch piece

of panelling from the latest Comanche helicopter, which was built using

radar-resistant stealth technology.

“It’s amazing what you can get across the border on a Greyhound bus,” Hurtubise

said.

Pick it up

Hurtubise was instructed to set up an outdoor track, which he did on First

Nations land.

He attached the panel piece to a remote control car that went down the track.

Hurtubise then aimed the Angel Light at the panel and turned on a radar gun.

“I was able to pick it up the panel on the radar gun,” he said.

Stopped working

But a strange thing happened to the car, once it was hit by the Angel Light

beam: it stopped working.

Hurtubise returned to his lab and began testing the Angel Light on other

electronic items including portable radios, TVs and a microwave over.

“They all stopped working,” Hurtubise said.

He duly reported this to his MIT contacts.

"They said 'Troy, this is unbelievable.'"

To the ground

Hurtubise purchase a remote-control plane for $1,800 and took it and the Angel

Light to a flying field on the way to Powassan.

He directed the Angel Light beam toward the sky and started the plane flying.

"On the first loop it came around, passed through the beam of light and fell

right to the ground,” Hurtubise said.

Peeled it back

Hurtubise continued testing the light on other materials and discovered it could

also see through other metals including steel, tin, titanium and, unlike

Superman, lead.

As well the beam also penetrated ceramic and wood.

The Hurtubise put his hand in the light beam.

“I could see my blood vessels, muscles, everything, like I’d taken an Exacto

knife, cut into my skin and peeled it back,” Hurtubise said.

Bad stuff

Soon after, Hurtubise discovered the Angel Light had devilish side-effects.

He lost feeling in the finger of the exposed hand and began suffering an overall

malaise.

“MIT told me every time I turned it on there must have been splash-back hitting

me,” Hurtubise said.

A test on a tank of goldfish was even more disturbing.

“I turned the beam on it and within minutes all the goldfish died,” Hurtubise said.

“That’s when I realized there was a Hyde effect, as in Jekyll and Hyde, and I

dismantled the whole thing.”

Walked on water

He didn’t reassemble it until the French called him after seeing a Discovery

Channel program about the LIMBC.

Hurtubise believes the Hyde effect can be taken out, but by others who have far

more expertise than him.

In the meantime Hurtubise believes that after 17 years inventing, his ship may

finally have come in with France.

"My brother told me the only way I'd be able to sell any of my innovations is by

walking on water," Hurtubise said.

"Well, I think I've just walked on water."

View Photo Gallery for this Story

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

September 19, 2005

Is This What Killed Sen. Paul Wellstone's Plane?

by DAVID A. FULGHUM

http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cf...8&contentid=652

Directed-energy technology is ready to be used as weaponry and, in a mature

state, one device carried by an unmanned aircraft could attack each of 100

targets with 1,000 pulses of energy in a single sortie, says a former director

of the U.S. Air Force's high-power microwave program.

"Except for the standard rifle, gun, knife or grenade, virtually all military

equipment contains some electronics" that are vulnerable to a large pulse of

energy, wrote Air Force Col. Eileen M. Walling.

"Military commanders are in a state of virtually total dependence on radios,

telephones, satellite communications, computers and faxes for communication with

military units."

Other targets include artillery targeting devices, guidance and control on

precision munitions, and even locomotive engines. She also suggests HPM could be

used to protect U.S. satellites and attack those of a foe without creating

clouds of debris that could damage other spacecraft.

Having spent most of her career working on directed-energy technology issues,

she wrote a research paper on what she considers an underrated weapons technology.

http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cf...ntid=652&page=2

Is This What Killed Sen. Paul Wellstone's Plane? (continued)

by DAVID A. FULGHUM

Entitled "High Power Microwaves: Strategic and Operational Implications for

Warfare," it was published by the Air University's center for strategy and

technology in early 2000.

Walling is now a division chief in Air Force Materiel Command at

Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio.

"The projected maximum capability for a microwave [armed] UCAV is approximately

100,000 pulses of microwave energy (or shots) per mission," Walling wrote. "If

one assumes 1,000 pulses per target, it is conceivable that a microwave UCAV

could attack on the order of 100 targets per mission. In addition, a microwave

system could be used to protect the UCAV from enemy missiles [even] if the enemy

has the ability to detect low-observable aircraft."

HPM also affects a larger area than a bomb, but without harming physical

structures or people. A 1-ton bomb creates damage in a radius of about 120 ft.

"The footprint of a microwave munition is at least 100 times greater than that

of a conventional munition," the report states. That may be a bloated number if

applied to developmental weapons currently available for use against Iraq,

according to other U.S. officials. They usually describe effects in terms of a

few thousand feet or less. In fact, the primary stumbling block for

directed-energy weapons is achieving sufficient range and power levels to be

effective.

U.S. MILITARY RESEARCH laboratories have demonstrated HPM effects ranging from

upsetting to destroying the electronics within military and commercial systems,

Walling noted. The paper's conclusion, made more than two years ago, is that

"high-power microwave technology is ready for the transition to active weapons

in the U.S. military."

Both Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and the chief of U.S. Air Forces,

Europe, Gen. Gregory Martin, have said publicly that unspecified new

developmental weapons technology could be used in an attack on Iraq.

Facilities that manufacture, store or dispense chemical, biological and nuclear

weapons are a "target set" particularly earmarked for energy weapons, according

to statements made this summer and fall by U.S. aerospace industry officials.

Conventional attacks could leave plumes of lethal agents adrift.

HPM devices have great potential both as offensive and defensive weapons,

Walling said. She cited a 1998 Air Force survey--"Directed-Energy Applications

for Tactical Airborne Combat"--that found the top four priorities were for

microwave weapons (instead of lasers) in the areas of precision-guided

munitions, large aircraft self-protection shields, small aircraft

self-protection shields and as weapons for unmanned combat air vehicles. As a

munition, some developmental systems are believed to be ready for combat in

Iraq. Boeing plans to build an HPM weapon into the Block 30 version of its X-45

UCAV.

These weapons also could be built into a pod for carriage on a helicopter or

packaged as artillery shells, scatterable mines and 1-ton bombs, the report

said. As a defensive system, it contends HPM devices could ward off infrared-

and radar-guided missiles. A phased-array antenna allows for rapid retargeting.

The report quickly ticks off the advantages of HPM weapons: They don't rely on

exact knowledge of the enemy system. They leave persisting effects in enemy

targets that may take weeks to find and repair. Even if enemy systems are turned

off, they are still affected. And to counter HPM, the entire system must be

hardened, which is a very expensive process.

An energy pulse can get into an enemy system by the "front door," which means

its own antenna, dome or other sensor opening; or through the "back door," which

includes cracks, seams, trailing wires, metal conduits of seals.

Once inside, the emissions can destroy or disrupt integrated circuits, circuit

cards and relay switches. The system's own electronic circuitry transmits the

pulse, and resulting damage, even deeper into the system.

In the microwave technical community, the ability to scale or increase the

effects is often described as "dial a hurt," Walling said.

Results depend on the distance between the HPM weapon and the target, the

vulnerability of the target, the power generated, and the characteristics of the

microwave emission including frequency, burst rate and pulse duration. A rough

scale describes four levels of effects:

* Deny, which involves electronic upset or jamming. It might cause malfunctions

within relay and processing circuits.

* Degrade, which involves locking up a system or limiting its capabilities

enough to require rebooting. It can include signal override or turning power on

and off at irregular intervals.

* Damage, which includes permanent effects that "latch up" a system. This can

mean damage to components, circuit cards or mother boards, as wells as weeks to

diagnose and repair the problems. Because microwaves can enter through multiple

entry points, it is likely numerous circuits and components will be damaged.

* Destroy, which means catastrophic and permanent injury to the system,

requiring total replacement.

ANTENNA TECHNOLOGY is crucial for HPM weapons. Field of view for the

phased-array emitter is expected to vary from several to tens of degrees. The

multi-element design allows it to be built conformally into a pod or UCAV.

Because it doesn't require precise aiming, there are far fewer stringent

pointing and tracking requirements, Walling said. The microwaves' cone could

offer a means to attack multiple targets at once; for example, all of the

equipment in an antiaircraft missile site.

The range of HPM weapons has always been a concern. Tests have shown effects at

tens to "more than" hundreds of feet. Walling seemed more optimistic. "With

current technology, the range for a tactical microwave weapon could be in the

tens of kilometers, and future advances . . . should permit the development of

even longer ranges," the report said.

Other advantages cited for HPM weapons are that they would be immune to the

weather and could produce multiple shots on a single mission. However, the

report also alludes to single-shot designs. These latter seem to address

concerns that side and back lobes from the generation of an HPM pulse could

affect the carrying aircraft's own electronics.

Power levels for HPM weapons are increasing. The report said one microwave

source weighing less that 45 lb. radiated 1 gigawatt of power within a few

nanoseconds. A 400-lb. system radiated 20 gigawatts. The report noted that

Hoover Dam generates 2 gigawatts per day. The HPM weapon would draw power from

the air vehicle's engines, which would let it make a number of attacks during a

mission.

USAF Acknowledges Beam Weapon Readiness

By David A. Fulghum/Aviation Week & Space Technology 04-Oct-2002

September 19, 2005

>

>Kirk Otteson, Director of Operations at Aviation Charter, was asked by the

>NTSB about the type of autopilot installed in the Wellstone plane. His

>response (image below) told the NTSB something they did not want to know:

>the Senator's plane was a special version of the King Air, originally

>designated a C100, which was fitted with upgraded avionics, autopilot and

>engines.

>

>This is buried in Attachment 1-43 to the Operational Factors Group report,

>which was not in the initial release of NTSB documents. The document can

>be viewed here:

>

>http://assassinationscience.com/n41be/ntsbcd/253070.pdf

>

>This fact was not mentioned anywhere else in the NTSB's reports. It is

>supported by the fact that the Wellstone plane's serial number was one of

>the last in the series, and also by the fact that it was sold to a number

>of "prestige" clients during its operational life.

>

. . .

>

>In other interviews, the NTSB try to make the case that the GPS would not

>have been used for an instrument landing. However, it would make sense

>that, if the instruments were giving confusing readings, the pilots would

>have been justified in checking the GPS as a backup.

>

. . .

>

>If any of you can verify this GPS blackout with other pilots, let me know

>asap. Also note that GPS is used for many other things as well, so others

>may be able to comment. If the satellites went down for a short time, it

>would affect a huge area. However, if it was just local jamming, then it

>would be localised to the area.

>

>If true, this would add to the "melted cloud pocket" around Eveleth at the

>time of the accident, and the other evidence (phones/garage doors) as

>evidence of some sort of electromagnetic foul play.

>

In response to this email from John Costella, Ph.D., I confirmed with the

pilot, his chief pilot, and the owner of his charter company the experience

I have reported previously. There does not appear to have been a global

satellite problem, which supports the inference that the manipulation of the

GPS data was a local phenomenon (still covering several states). Certainly,

no solar flare interference would be expected to have such systematic and

regular effects, where the intensity and direction of the deviation is in the

same direction and of similar magnitude--and at essentially the same time!

A very weak post that Colby recruited suggests that the weather was poor

and the pilots preoccupied with their efforts to control the plane. But the

weather was not bad (ceiling at 500-1000 feet with visibility 3-5 miles and

not only no snow or freezing rain but not even any rain). This guy does

not appear to be up-to-speed, since even the NTSB cleared the weather of

having caused the crash. Moreover, he ignores that there were two pilots,

where the co-pilot had been handling most of the communications. If he is

a pilot, then he should know that they can't both be trying to control the

aircraft, lest they work against each other. In a situation where it would

be of the highest priority that first responders make it to the crash scene

rapidly (with a US Senator, his wife and daughter, as well as three aides

aboard), it would be highly probable that a distress call would have been

made, if the communications equipment was still functioning. Similarly,

if this guy is a pilot, he should have acknowledged that it was very odd

they did not respond to the loud stall warning alarm, which should have

told them they were threatening to stall and allowed them ample time to

respond, if the stall warning system was still functioning. The simulations

with a weaker engine and at slower speeds are devastating to the NTSB's

conclusions, because they demonstrate that they had no evidence at all

to support their inference to a stall, nor any explanation as to why this

plane was on the wrong bearing (268 vice 276), yet proceeding as if it

were on the right bearing, which is readily explainable if they were going

by their GPS when the data was being manipulated, with spill over effects

that affected the pilot and co-pilot heading into the Waukengan Airport!

No other explanation comes close to accounting for what is known about

this crash than than they were led into the "kill zone" and taken down.

More on Costella's observations about the "melted cloud packet" is in

our co-authored piece, "The NTSB Failed Wellstone", links given above.

Of course, I anticipate the usual barrage of garbage posts from Lamson,

Colby, and Thompson. But I am glad to read occasional "enlightened"

posts from Pat Speer, David Healy, and other members of the forum.

Is This What Killed Sen. Paul Wellstone's Plane?
by DAVID A. FULGHUM

http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cf...8&contentid=652

Directed-energy technology is ready to be used as weaponry and, in a mature

state, one device carried by an unmanned aircraft could attack each of 100

targets with 1,000 pulses of energy in a single sortie, says a former director

of the U.S. Air Force's high-power microwave program.

"Except for the standard rifle, gun, knife or grenade, virtually all military

equipment contains some electronics" that are vulnerable to a large pulse of

energy, wrote Air Force Col. Eileen M. Walling.

"Military commanders are in a state of virtually total dependence on radios,

telephones, satellite communications, computers and faxes for communication with

military units."

Other targets include artillery targeting devices, guidance and control on

precision munitions, and even locomotive engines. She also suggests HPM could be

used to protect U.S. satellites and attack those of a foe without creating

clouds of debris that could damage other spacecraft.

Having spent most of her career working on directed-energy technology issues,

she wrote a research paper on what she considers an underrated weapons technology.

http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cf...ntid=652&page=2

Is This What Killed Sen. Paul Wellstone's Plane? (continued)

by DAVID A. FULGHUM

Entitled "High Power Microwaves: Strategic and Operational Implications for

Warfare," it was published by the Air University's center for strategy and

technology in early 2000.

Walling is now a division chief in Air Force Materiel Command at

Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio.

"The projected maximum capability for a microwave [armed] UCAV is approximately

100,000 pulses of microwave energy (or shots) per mission," Walling wrote. "If

one assumes 1,000 pulses per target, it is conceivable that a microwave UCAV

could attack on the order of 100 targets per mission. In addition, a microwave

system could be used to protect the UCAV from enemy missiles [even] if the enemy

has the ability to detect low-observable aircraft."

HPM also affects a larger area than a bomb, but without harming physical

structures or people. A 1-ton bomb creates damage in a radius of about 120 ft.

"The footprint of a microwave munition is at least 100 times greater than that

of a conventional munition," the report states. That may be a bloated number if

applied to developmental weapons currently available for use against Iraq,

according to other U.S. officials. They usually describe effects in terms of a

few thousand feet or less. In fact, the primary stumbling block for

directed-energy weapons is achieving sufficient range and power levels to be

effective.

U.S. MILITARY RESEARCH laboratories have demonstrated HPM effects ranging from

upsetting to destroying the electronics within military and commercial systems,

Walling noted. The paper's conclusion, made more than two years ago, is that

"high-power microwave technology is ready for the transition to active weapons

in the U.S. military."

Both Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and the chief of U.S. Air Forces,

Europe, Gen. Gregory Martin, have said publicly that unspecified new

developmental weapons technology could be used in an attack on Iraq.

Facilities that manufacture, store or dispense chemical, biological and nuclear

weapons are a "target set" particularly earmarked for energy weapons, according

to statements made this summer and fall by U.S. aerospace industry officials.

Conventional attacks could leave plumes of lethal agents adrift.

HPM devices have great potential both as offensive and defensive weapons,

Walling said. She cited a 1998 Air Force survey--"Directed-Energy Applications

for Tactical Airborne Combat"--that found the top four priorities were for

microwave weapons (instead of lasers) in the areas of precision-guided

munitions, large aircraft self-protection shields, small aircraft

self-protection shields and as weapons for unmanned combat air vehicles. As a

munition, some developmental systems are believed to be ready for combat in

Iraq. Boeing plans to build an HPM weapon into the Block 30 version of its X-45

UCAV.

These weapons also could be built into a pod for carriage on a helicopter or

packaged as artillery shells, scatterable mines and 1-ton bombs, the report

said. As a defensive system, it contends HPM devices could ward off infrared-

and radar-guided missiles. A phased-array antenna allows for rapid retargeting.

The report quickly ticks off the advantages of HPM weapons: They don't rely on

exact knowledge of the enemy system. They leave persisting effects in enemy

targets that may take weeks to find and repair. Even if enemy systems are turned

off, they are still affected. And to counter HPM, the entire system must be

hardened, which is a very expensive process.

An energy pulse can get into an enemy system by the "front door," which means

its own antenna, dome or other sensor opening; or through the "back door," which

includes cracks, seams, trailing wires, metal conduits of seals.

Once inside, the emissions can destroy or disrupt integrated circuits, circuit

cards and relay switches. The system's own electronic circuitry transmits the

pulse, and resulting damage, even deeper into the system.

In the microwave technical community, the ability to scale or increase the

effects is often described as "dial a hurt," Walling said.

Results depend on the distance between the HPM weapon and the target, the

vulnerability of the target, the power generated, and the characteristics of the

microwave emission including frequency, burst rate and pulse duration. A rough

scale describes four levels of effects:

* Deny, which involves electronic upset or jamming. It might cause malfunctions

within relay and processing circuits.

* Degrade, which involves locking up a system or limiting its capabilities

enough to require rebooting. It can include signal override or turning power on

and off at irregular intervals.

* Damage, which includes permanent effects that "latch up" a system. This can

mean damage to components, circuit cards or mother boards, as wells as weeks to

diagnose and repair the problems. Because microwaves can enter through multiple

entry points, it is likely numerous circuits and components will be damaged.

* Destroy, which means catastrophic and permanent injury to the system,

requiring total replacement.

ANTENNA TECHNOLOGY is crucial for HPM weapons. Field of view for the

phased-array emitter is expected to vary from several to tens of degrees. The

multi-element design allows it to be built conformally into a pod or UCAV.

Because it doesn't require precise aiming, there are far fewer stringent

pointing and tracking requirements, Walling said. The microwaves' cone could

offer a means to attack multiple targets at once; for example, all of the

equipment in an antiaircraft missile site.

The range of HPM weapons has always been a concern. Tests have shown effects at

tens to "more than" hundreds of feet. Walling seemed more optimistic. "With

current technology, the range for a tactical microwave weapon could be in the

tens of kilometers, and future advances . . . should permit the development of

even longer ranges," the report said.

Other advantages cited for HPM weapons are that they would be immune to the

weather and could produce multiple shots on a single mission. However, the

report also alludes to single-shot designs. These latter seem to address

concerns that side and back lobes from the generation of an HPM pulse could

affect the carrying aircraft's own electronics.

Power levels for HPM weapons are increasing. The report said one microwave

source weighing less that 45 lb. radiated 1 gigawatt of power within a few

nanoseconds. A 400-lb. system radiated 20 gigawatts. The report noted that

Hoover Dam generates 2 gigawatts per day. The HPM weapon would draw power from

the air vehicle's engines, which would let it make a number of attacks during a

mission.

USAF Acknowledges Beam Weapon Readiness

By David A. Fulghum/Aviation Week & Space Technology 04-Oct-2002

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Edited September 19, 2005 by James H. Fetzer

Evan Burton · September 19, 2005

2] Explain how the "troika" could have expected killing Wellstone to have increased Coleman's chances of winning when it should of had the opposite effect. Coleman won because of the funeral/rally and how it was perceived by the state's independent voters - this was widely reported in the Minnesota and national press.
Len

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Len, without taking a stand on whether or not Wellstone was killed by a conspiracy, I believe this argument weakens your case. Should someone have wanted to kill Wellstone and make it look like an accident, waiting until after he was elected would have drawn too much attention and made it all too obvious to the American people. Do you think the murder of Bobby Kennedy before he received the nomination makes it less likely he was killed by a conspiracy??? Seriously... Just as Bobby's winning the California primary made him look unstoppable, Wellstone was on very solid ground to win his election, enough that someone might want to have killed him before it would be impossible to make it look like an accident.

As for the public's response to the funeral, I've read enough to know that the poor behavior by some of Wellstone's friends was blown way out of proportion by the supposedly left-wing media. There's no reason to believe Karl Rove and his pals were not in some way responsible for the spin created. Should you think the man incapable of such behavior, you should remember that Nixon (whom he idolized) was concerned that the killings at Kent State would make him look bad, and, as per Haldeman, immediately began trying to spin the incident so that the victims and the anti-war movement would look responsible for the deaths. Think about it.

Your arguments with Fetzer are far more solid when you stick to the possibility of pilot error than when you try to make the case that no one would try to kill Wellstone before the election. This gives the appearance you are trying to show the undecided, including myself, that Wellstone being murdered is unthinkable. Many of us on this Forum have read enough about the Kennedyassassination and the CIA to know that nothing is "unthinkable." People hate. People lust for power. People kill. People use whatever technology they have at their disposal to kill. If Fetzer is able to show that these rays exist, will you then admit his theory is possible? It seems just as he may be pre-dispositioned to believe in conspiracies you and your pilot friend may be pre-disposioned not to believe in them, even though a five-minute course in history will show they exist. While he may be guilty of misrepresenting evidence, you may be guilty of lying to yourself. As I admitted earlier, I'm intrigued by those who devote an inordinate amount of energy to show that conspiracies DON'T exist. Is it really truth you're after? To prove me wrong, please list some conspiracy theories you believe have some merit.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm with Pat on this.

There is no way to either prove or disprove that some parties may have wanted Wellstone dead.

That being said, there is absolutely no evidence that the crash was anything other than pilot error.

September 19, 2005

With this post, Evan Burton proves that he has no serious commitment to the

truth in the Wellstone case, since we devote more than a chapter to laying out

the evidence that the White House wanted to get rid of him. I am appalled at

the level of ignorance displayed by some members of this forum, which does

not seem to inhibit them from making assertions that are not only false but

even provably false. I suggest Burton exercise just a modicum of effort to

ascertain whether or not his suggestion is even remotely reasonable, which

it is not. Egad! This guy really doesn't know even the basics about this case.

2] Explain how the "troika" could have expected killing Wellstone to have increased Coleman's chances of winning when it should of had the opposite effect. Coleman won because of the funeral/rally and how it was perceived by the state's independent voters - this was widely reported in the Minnesota and national press.
Len

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Len, without taking a stand on whether or not Wellstone was killed by a conspiracy, I believe this argument weakens your case. Should someone have wanted to kill Wellstone and make it look like an accident, waiting until after he was elected would have drawn too much attention and made it all too obvious to the American people. Do you think the murder of Bobby Kennedy before he received the nomination makes it less likely he was killed by a conspiracy??? Seriously... Just as Bobby's winning the California primary made him look unstoppable, Wellstone was on very solid ground to win his election, enough that someone might want to have killed him before it would be impossible to make it look like an accident.

As for the public's response to the funeral, I've read enough to know that the poor behavior by some of Wellstone's friends was blown way out of proportion by the supposedly left-wing media. There's no reason to believe Karl Rove and his pals were not in some way responsible for the spin created. Should you think the man incapable of such behavior, you should remember that Nixon (whom he idolized) was concerned that the killings at Kent State would make him look bad, and, as per Haldeman, immediately began trying to spin the incident so that the victims and the anti-war movement would look responsible for the deaths. Think about it.

Your arguments with Fetzer are far more solid when you stick to the possibility of pilot error than when you try to make the case that no one would try to kill Wellstone before the election. This gives the appearance you are trying to show the undecided, including myself, that Wellstone being murdered is unthinkable. Many of us on this Forum have read enough about the Kennedyassassination and the CIA to know that nothing is "unthinkable." People hate. People lust for power. People kill. People use whatever technology they have at their disposal to kill. If Fetzer is able to show that these rays exist, will you then admit his theory is possible? It seems just as he may be pre-dispositioned to believe in conspiracies you and your pilot friend may be pre-disposioned not to believe in them, even though a five-minute course in history will show they exist. While he may be guilty of misrepresenting evidence, you may be guilty of lying to yourself. As I admitted earlier, I'm intrigued by those who devote an inordinate amount of energy to show that conspiracies DON'T exist. Is it really truth you're after? To prove me wrong, please list some conspiracy theories you believe have some merit.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm with Pat on this.

There is no way to either prove or disprove that some parties may have wanted Wellstone dead.

That being said, there is absolutely no evidence that the crash was anything other than pilot error.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

September 19, 2005

Here's an example that displays Burton's massive ignorance about this case.

Sunday, September 18, 2005

Published on Tuesday, April 24, 2001 in the Madison Capital Times

Bush Fears Tenacious, Popular Wellstone

by John Nichols

ST. PAUL — U.S. Sen. Paul Wellstone had just finished rousing a crowd of 2,000 trade unionists, farmers, environmentalists and students with a fiery condemnation of George W. Bush’s free trade policies, and now he had a problem. He couldn’t get down the steps of the Minnesota State Capitol here to join the march protesting Bush’s Free Trade Area of the Americas scheme.

Wellstone is just too popular with his constituents. He couldn’t move in the face of a steady stream of men in Teamsters jackets, farm wives holding newborns, green-haired college kids and Catholic priests approaching to offer variations on the words of a steelworker who told Wellstone, "I am so damn proud to be able to say you’re my senator."

Most of them also asked a question: "How come Bush hates you so much?"

Let there be no doubt as to the identity of George W. Bush’s least favorite Democratic U.S. senator. It’s Wellstone, the rabble-rousing Progressive who represents not just Minnesota but what remains of the fighting populist spirit of the Upper Midwest.

Elected in 1990 following a grass-roots campaign in which he toured the state on a beat-up school bus, Wellstone was the No. 1 target in 1996 for Republicans who thought the senator had doomed himself with a lonely vote against punitive "welfare reform" legislation. He won re-election with ease that year, proving to both the Republicans and to their whimpering Democratic allies that bashing the poor might not be nearly so smart a political move as Dick Morris thought.

As Wellstone prepares to seek a third term next year, it would be reasonable to assume that he might finally be in for some smooth political sailing. But reasonableness doesn’t figure into the calculations of the Bush White House, where the president himself, Vice President Dick Cheney and political commissar Karl Rove practice the politics of vengeance.

The Bushies despise Wellstone, who unlike most Senate Democrats has been fighting spirited battles against the new administration’s policies on everything from the environment to the tax cuts for the rich to military aid for the "Plan Colombia" drug war boondoggle. Other Democratic senators who face re-election contests in 2002 are, according to polls, more vulnerable than Wellstone. But the Bush camp has been focusing highest-level attention on "Plan Wellstone" — its project to silence progressive opposition.

Last Tuesday as Minnesota House Majority Leader Tim Pawlenty was just hours away from announcing his intention to mount a Republican challenge to Wellstone, he got an urgent call from Rove asking him to step aside for Bush’s preferred candidate, St. Paul Mayor Norm Coleman.

Then, on Wednesday morning, with just 90 minutes to go before his planned announcement, Pawlenty was driving his kids home from a dental appointment. The car phone rang, and Pawlenty found himself talking to Cheney. The vice president told Pawlenty that Bush did not want Coleman — a party-switching former Democrat who chaired the losing Bush presidential campaign in Minnesota — to face a difficult primary contest from a credible Republican.

Pawlenty finally "agreed" to step aside.

Minnesota is not the only state where the Bush camp is seeking to pick senators. But the level of involvement in the Wellstone race is remarkable. Coleman dropped a planned gubernatorial bid after two White House pressure sessions with Bush. And now that Coleman is leaning toward a Senate race, Bush, Cheney and Rove are pulling out all the stops to make sure they are in charge of the anti-Wellstone effort.

Even Pawlenty, as he was proclaiming himself a "team player," admitted that "it makes you wonder about the process and the integrity of the process."

What does Wellstone say? "I think the way to oppose George W. Bush is to stand up to him, to speak out when his policies are wrong, to put holds on bad legislation he’s promoting. Obviously, that’s not the sort of opposition Bush and Cheney approve of. The nice thing is that, even if they can dictate the Republican nominee, the people of Minnesota still get to choose their senator."

###

Printer Friendly Version E-Mail This Article

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Common Dreams NewsCenter

A non-profit news service providing breaking news & views for the progressive community.

www.commondreams.org

With this post, Evan Burton proves that he has no serious commitment to the

truth in the Wellstone case, since we devote more than a chapter to laying out

the evidence that the White House wanted to get rid of him. I am appalled at

the level of ignorance displayed by some members of this forum, which does

not seem to inhibit them from making assertions that are not only false but

even provably false. I suggest Burton exercise just a modicum of effort to

ascertain whether or not his suggestion is even remotely reasonable, which

it is not. Egad! This guy really doesn't know even the basics about this case.

Jim Fetzer: The Strange Death of Paul Wellstone

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

Announcements