Abu Ghraib

None of the torture that supposedly happened at Abu Ghraib prison happened. All of the media coverage, and all of the pictures are a lie, and if the United States government cannot do a better job than they did of realizing that was true then we do not have a country anymore.

All of the torture that I describe as happening to me, did really happen. No one can imagine that someone can be tortured by remote control, but here is a quote by an expert on electromagnetic weapons. In case you do not know it our souls/minds are electromagnetic

“Electromagnetic weapons operate at the speed of light; they can kill, torture and enslave; but the public are largely unaware that they exist because these weapons operate by stealth and leave no physical evidence . Electromagnetic weapons have been tested on human beings since 1926. By widely dispersing the involunjtary human test-subjects, and vehemently attacking their credibility, with telephones that are not systems, it has been possible for the United States, Russia and Germany to proceed with these experiments unhindered or criticisms , let alone opposition”

Prior to the remote torture, and even during Temple of the Screaming Electron, I was a victim of torture for the last 18 years of my life, including using timing of me falling asleep to slam doors in the YMCA (called Central Parkway Tower) for 4 of the 8 years I lived there. The so called security guard that had access to a closed circuit TV system with monitors on every floor participated.

Prior to that, and here is the person, even though no one will accept it, I was tortured using a note our mom left behind while she was in critical condition in a Ft Lauderdale hospital in 1962. One of the three people that became a part of our family used a note given to him by my biological brother because he thought I was a participatant rather than a “target” of the person that used feathers and bruises to torture me night and day, using the words our mom had written on the note to wake me up for school. The trouble was he woke me up at midnight and forced me to put my clothes on saying it was time to go to school. The only thing that would have stopped him is if I killed “he” He is also responsible for “don’t stop, stop” a mind control instruction to run my brother over with a car in 1963

I have also been the victim of remote torture, and I do mean torture in the electromagnetic sense, that is using our souls/minds to torture a human being. There was a site on the internet, and I think it is still there, even though it is not reachable by the methods that most people, including myself have available to them. Someone that really knows how the internet is run, and may have even created most of what the internet is today, can use things like creating special ways of entering IP addresses so a site cannot be reached in the normal way. The site is, and I was able to reach about 7 or 8 years ago just typing in http://www.totse.org On the site there was about 160 pages, in book format, on how to torture by mind and brain torture. I printed out several pages from the site with a dial up internet connection that I had, and then the site was not reachable anymore. I also opened a FOIA case with the NSA, and included one of the pages directly from the site, in the FOIA case. When they initially accepted the case for review, all of the pages were marked with numbers that the NSA uses. It is, I guess, a better system than most, because of the security built into their computer system. We, the public, it seems do not have any checks and balances in place for organizations like the NSA. While I would hope that organizations like the NSA live up to even a higher standard that most people, the reality is that we are all human. pand yet when it was concluded by the NSA the case was not related to their organization because it dealt with telephone calls being “harvested” like Neil did to our household in the 1950’s. And because the telephone calls were only related to the geographic area of the United States then the NSA was not responsible in any way.

But, when the documents were sent back to me, the one or two pages that were printed directly off http://totse.org were missing. At that time they only sent a letter saying the case was closed, and would not say what happened to the pages that to this day, I have and have proof of the numbering system they use. Not only that but, my so called step sister was sent exactly the same pages that I sent to the NSA, and when I requested that the pages I sent her be sent back she purposely did not include 20 pages that was printed off the internet by an article written by Col. Tom Bearden about EM weapons. I think Pam had been introduced to Col. Tom Bearden along time ago, but she won’t say to this day.

All of the following article from one of the most respected sources on the internet, relating to any torture that happened at Abu Ghraib, is a lie. All of naked guys being tortured, with leather masks over their faces, come on, can’t anyone tell that they were staged.

Does anyone understand what the hoods that look very similar to witches hats are really about? If you really knew, and understood what the cone shaped hats are about you would realize that the only one that counts is the one I found on the internet with a child, me, as the target.

In my opinion the person that staged all of the following pictures is a sadomasochist. If you are not familiar with the term it is someone that gets sexual pleasure from torturing themselves. But, as someone is, I was tortured as though I were them, because they cannot admit that they derive pleasure from torturing themselves. They cannot admit it because they cannot look inside themselves, and because they cannot stand themselves. In case you cannot tell the people that are really the homo’s or to use a word that is used on the street, that is faggot, the people that appear to everyone as normal, but are the type of people that in put in jails or prisons will be the people that will swear that the only reason they are having sex with other prisoners is because there are no girls there. But, in fact, it is hiding what they really are. They have all of the girl friends on the outside to keep up appearances, but in fact, just like the Nazi party did, are the most macho faggots on this planet, and that includes a former marine corp purple heart winner

Treatment of prisoners

Death of Manadel al-Jamadi

Main article: Manadel al-Jamadi

The prisoner Manadel al-Jamadi died in Abu Ghraib prison after being interrogated and tortured by a CIA officer and a private contractor. The torture included physical violence and strappado hanging, whereby the victim is hung from the wrists with the hands tied behind the back. His death has been labeled a homicide by the US military,[8] but neither of the two men who caused his death have been charged. The private contractor was granted qualified immunity.

Reports of prisoner rape

Major General Antonio Taguba has stated that there is photographic evidence of rape being carried out at Abu Ghraib. An Abu Ghraib detainee told investigators he heard an Iraqi teenage boy screaming and saw an Army translator having sex with him while a female soldier took pictures. The alleged rapist was identified by a witness as an American-Egyptian who worked as a translator, and who is now the subject of a civil court case in the US.

Another photo shows an American soldier apparently raping a female prisoner. Other photos show sexual assaults on prisoners with objects including a truncheon, wire and a phosphorescent tube, and a female prisoner having her clothing forcibly removed to expose her breasts. Taguba has supported President Obama’s decision not to release the photos, stating, “These pictures show torture, abuse, rape and every indecency.”

In other alleged cases, female inmates were said to be raped by soldiers. In one reported case, senior US officials admitted rape had taken place at Abu Ghraib.

Media coverage

US media initially showed little interest when the US military first reported abuse. On January 16, 2004, United States Central Command informed the media that an official investigation had begun involving abuse and humiliation of Iraqi detainees by a group of US soldiers. On February 24, it was reported that 17 soldiers had been suspended. The military announced again, on March 21, 2004, that the first charges had been filed against six soldiers.

60 Minutes II broadcast and aftermath

Lynndie England pointing to a naked prisoner being forced to masturbate in front of his captors

It was not until late April 2004 that U.S. television news-magazine 60 Minutes II broadcast a story on the abuse. The story included photographs depicting the abuse of prisoners.

The news segment had been delayed by two weeks at the request of the Department of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Richard Myers. In the CBS report, Dan Rather interviewed then-deputy director of Coalition operations in Iraq Brig. Gen Mark Kimmitt who said:

The first thing I’d say is we’re appalled as well. These are our fellow soldiers. These are the people we work with every day, and they represent us. They wear the same uniform as us, and they let their fellow soldiers down […] Our soldiers could be taken prisoner as well. And we expect our soldiers to be treated well by the adversary, by the enemy. And if we can’t hold ourselves up as an example of how to treat people with dignity and respect […] We can’t ask that other nations do that to our soldiers as well. […] So what would I tell the people of Iraq? This is wrong. This is reprehensible. But this is not representative of the 150,000 soldiers that are over here […] I’d say the same thing to the American people … Don’t judge your army based on the actions of a few.

—Gen Mark Kimmitt,

At the same time, Kimmitt said: “I’d like to sit here and say that these are the only prisoner abuse cases that we’re aware of, but we know that there have been some other ones since we’ve been here in Iraq.”

Former Marine Lt. Col. Bill Cowan was also interviewed, stating: “We went into Iraq to stop things like this from happening, and indeed, here they are happening under our tutelage.”

Rather interviewed Army Reserve Staff Sgt. Chip Frederick, a participant in the abuse, whose civilian job was as a corrections officer at a Virginia prison. Frederick stated, “We had no support, no training whatsoever. And I kept asking my chain of command for certain things … like rules and regulations”, says Frederick. “And it just wasn’t happening.” Frederick’s video diary, sent home from Iraq, provided some of the images used in the story.

Sgt. Ivan Frederick sitting on an Iraqi detainee between two stretchers

In the diary are listed detailed, dated entries that chronicle abuse and names, for example,

They stressed him out so bad that the man died. The next day the medics came in and put his body on a stretcher, placed a fake I.V. in his arm [to suggest he died under medical care] and took him away. This OGA (other governmental agency) [prisoner] was never processed and therefore never had a number.

Ivan Frederick

and, “MI (Military Intelligence) has been present and witnessed such activity. MI has encouraged and told us great job [and] that they were now getting positive results and information.” The CBS report did not explain who had taken the photographs showed to viewers, nor was it explained how CBS had come by them. They were not released to CBS by the specialists interviewed, nor was any member of the US armed forces charged with supplying these photographs to the media.

Hersh New Yorker article

A May 2004 article by Seymour M. Hersh in The New Yorker magazine explored the abuses in detail, and used as its source a copy of the Taguba report.

The New Yorker, under the direction of editor David Remnick, posted a report on its website by Hersh, along with a number of graphic and disturbing images of the torture taken by U.S. military prison guards with digital cameras. The article, entitled “Torture at Abu Ghraib”, was followed in the next two weeks by two more articles on the same subject, “Chain of Command” and “The Gray Zone”, also by Mr. Hersh.

It was only after CBS learned that The New Yorker planned to publish the pictures in its next issue that they went ahead with their report on April 28.

Seymour Hersh‘s undercover sources claimed that an interrogation program called “Copper Green” was an official and systemic misuse of coercive methods which, although deemed “successful” during the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, would be heavily criticized in intelligence circles as an improper application to the context of fighting citizen-“insurgents” in Iraq. This theory, and the existence of “Copper Green” itself, has been denied by The Pentagon.

Hersh has a history of exposing war crimes. His investigative journalism is largely credited with bringing the American public’s attention to the 1968 My Lai Massacre during the Vietnam War.

More evidence of torture

According to Donald Rumsfeld, many more pictures and videotapes of the abuse at Abu Ghraib exist. Photos and videos were revealed by the Pentagon to lawmakers in a private viewing on May 12, 2004. Lawmakers disagreed over whether the additional photos were worse than those already released, with Senator Ron Wyden saying the new pictures were “significantly worse than anything that I had anticipated […] Take the worst case and multiply it several times over.” while Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher said the pictures were “not dramatically different”. It was speculated that they depict dogs snarling at cowering prisoners, women forced to expose their breasts, hooded prisoners being forced to masturbate, and violent sexual acts.

A Department of Defense official said that most of the additional photos were pornography involving only US soldiers, and that most did not show abuse of prisoners.

United States soldier Spc. Graner appears to be punching, or pretending to punch, handcuffed Iraqi prisoners

The New York Times, in a report on January 12, 2005, reported testimony suggesting that the following events had taken place at Abu Ghraib:

  • Urinating on detainees
  • Jumping on detainee’s leg (a limb already wounded by gunfire) with such force that it could not thereafter heal properly
  • Continuing by pounding detainee’s wounded leg with collapsible metal baton
  • Pouring phosphoric acid on detainees
  • Sodomization of detainees with a baton
  • Tying ropes to the detainees’ legs or penises and dragging them across the floor.

SPC England and SPC Graner posing behind a pyramid of naked Iraqi prisoners, giving the “thumbs up” sign

In her video diary, a prison guard said that prisoners were shot for minor misbehavior, and claimed to have had venomous snakes bite prisoners, sometimes resulting in their deaths. By her own admission, that guard was “in trouble” for having thrown rocks at the detainees. Hashem Muhsen, one of the naked men in the human pyramid photo, said they were also made to crawl around the floor naked and that U.S. soldiers rode them like donkeys. After being released in January 2004, Muhsen became an Iraqi police officer.

It was discovered that one prisoner, Manadel al-Jamadi, died as a result of abuse, a death that was ruled a homicide by the military.

One detainee claimed he was sodomized. The Taguba Report found the claim (“Sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick”) to be credible.

Quotations from a prisoner

They said we will make you wish to die and it will not happen […] They stripped me naked. One of them told me he would rape me. He drew a picture of a woman to my back and made me stand in shameful position holding my buttocks.

—Ameen Saeed Al-Sheik, detainee No. 151362,

‘Do you pray to Allah?’ one asked. I said yes. They said, ‘[Expletive] you. And [expletive] him.’ One of them said, ‘You are not getting out of here health[y], you are getting out of here handicapped. And he said to me, ‘Are you married?’ I said, ‘Yes.’ They said, ‘If your wife saw you like this, she will be disappointed.’ One of them said, ‘But if I saw her now she would not be disappointed now because I would rape her.’ ” […] “They ordered me to thank Jesus that I’m alive.” […] “I said to him, ‘I believe in Allah.’ So he said, ‘But I believe in torture and I will torture you.’

—Ameen Saeed Al-Sheik,

In an appearance on May 2 during a Face the Nation interview, Chairman Myers said that he had not yet seen the Taguba report, although the report was then nearly a month old.

In the documentary film Ghosts of Abu Ghraib (2007), former US Justice Department counsel John Yoo said that although he does not think the Geneva Conventions covered the prisoners at Abu Ghraib, he believes the soldiers and their commanding officers felt the interrogation techniques used fell within the Geneva Conventions.

A 2008 report[29] by the Wild River Review followed the detainees’ search for justice.

Reactions

Iraqi response

AsiaNews.it reported that Yahia Said, an Iraqi fellow at the London School of Economics, said:

[T]he reception [of abuse news from Abu Ghraib] was surprisingly low-key in Iraq. Part of the reason was that rumours and tall stories, as well as true stories, about abuse, mass rape, and torture in the jails and in coalition custody have been going round for a long time. So compared to what people have been talking about here the pictures are quite benign. There’s nothing unexpected. In fact what most people are asking is: why did they come up now? People in Iraq are always suspecting that there’s some scheming going on, some agenda in releasing the pictures at this particular point.

—Yahia Said,

CNN reporter Ben Wedeman reported that Iraqi reaction to President Bush’s apology for the Abu Ghraib abuses was “mixed”. Specifically, he said:

Some people react[ed] positively, saying that he’s come out, he’s dealing frankly and openly with the problem and that he has said that those involved in the abuse will be punished. On the other hand, there are many others who says it simply isn’t enough, that they – many people noted that there was not a frank apology from the president for this incident. And, in fact, I have a Baghdad newspaper with me right now from – it’s called “Dar-es-Salaam.” That’s from the Islam Iraqi Islamic Party. It says that an apology is not enough for the torture of – yes, the torture of Iraqi prisoners.

—Ben Wedeman,

Response of US government officials

US President George W. Bush claimed the acts were in no way indicative of normal or acceptable practices in the United States Army.

Vice-president Dick Cheney‘s office played a central role in eliminating limits on coercion in US custody, commissioning and defending legal opinions that the Bush administration later portrayed as the initiatives of lower-ranking officials.[32] The Geneva Convention, which has been ratified by the US and is therefore the law of the land, is explicit and categorical in banning torture, the use of “violence,” “cruel treatment” or “humiliating and degrading treatment” against a detainee “at any time and in any place whatsoever.” The War Crimes Act of 1996 made any grave breach of those restrictions a U.S. felony.

On May 7, 2004, United States Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld made the following statements before the Senate Armed Services Committee:

These events occurred on my watch. As secretary of defense, I am accountable for them. I take full responsibility. It is my obligation to evaluate what happened, to make sure those who have committed wrongdoing are brought to justice, and to make changes as needed to see that it doesn’t happen again. I feel terrible about what happened to these Iraqi detainees. They are human beings. They were in U.S. custody. Our country had an obligation to treat them right. We didn’t do that. That was wrong. To those Iraqis who were mistreated by members of U.S. armed forces, I offer my deepest apology. It was un-American. And it was inconsistent with the values of our nation.

Donald Rumsfeld,

He also was quoted:

We’re functioning in a – with peacetime restraints, with legal requirements in a wartime situation, in the information age, where people are running around with digital cameras and taking these unbelievable photographs and then passing them off, against the law, to the media, to our surprise, when they had not even arrived in the Pentagon.

Donald Rumsfeld,

Following Rumsfeld’s testimony, several Senators responded:

Senator Lindsey Graham: “The American public needs to understand we’re talking about rape and murder here. “It was pretty disgusting, not what you’d expect from Americans”, said Senator Norm Coleman. “I don’t know how the hell these people got into our army”, said Colorado Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell.[38]

Senator James Inhofe, a Republican member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services, felt that the events did not deserve moral outrage: “I’m probably not the only one up at this table that is more outraged by the outrage than we are by the treatment […] [They] are not there for traffic violations. […] If they’re in cell block 1A or 1B, these prisoners – they’re murderers, they’re terrorists, they’re insurgents. […] Many of them probably have American blood on their hands. And here we’re so concerned about the treatment of those individuals.”

Defense Secretary Rumsfeld stated, “What has been charged so far is abuse, which I believe technically is different from torture. I’m not going to address the ‘torture’ word.”

On May 26, 2004, Al Gore gave a sharply critical speech on the Iraq crisis and the George W. Bush administration. In the speech, Gore called for the resignations of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, Director of Central Intelligence Agency George Tenet, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith, and Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Stephen A. Cambone, for encouraging policies that led to the abuse of Iraqi prisoners and fanned hatred of Americans abroad. Gore also called the Bush administration’s Iraq war plan “incompetent” and called George W. Bush the most dishonest president since Richard Nixon. Gore commented; “In Iraq, what happened at that prison, it is now clear, is not the result of random acts of a few bad apples. It was the natural consequence of the Bush Administration policy.”

Criticism of Rumsfeld grew during the ensuing scandal. Democratic senators John Kerry, Joe Biden and Jon Corzine called for Rumsfeld to resign. Their call for Rumsfeld’s resignation was joined by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, George Miller, Tom Harkin, and the Congressional Black Caucus.[citation needed] John McCain said that he had “no confidence” in the Secretary of Defense, his fellow Republican senator Trent Lott said that he was “not a fan of Secretary Rumsfeld.”

Media

The Economist calls for Secretary Rumsfeld’s resignation

Several periodicals, such as The New York Times and The Boston Globe also called for Rumsfeld’s resignation. The cover of The Economist, which had backed President Bush in the 2000 election, carried a photo of the abuse with the words “Resign, Rumsfeld.” Perhaps most notably, The Army Times claimed that Rumsfeld’s role in the scandal “amount(ed) to professional negligence”, wrote “shame… on the chairman (of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) and secretary (of defense)”, and insinuated that Rumsfeld was a “moron.”

This photograph released in 2006 shows several naked Iraqis in hoods, of whom one has the words “I’m a rapeist” (sic) written on his hip.

Right-wing US radio host Rush Limbaugh, on the other hand, contended that: “This is no different than what happens at the Skull and Bones initiation and we’re going to ruin people’s lives over it and we’re going to hamper our military effort, and then we are going to really hammer them because they had a good time. You know, these people are being fired at every day. I’m talking about people having a good time, these people, you ever heard of emotional release? You ever heard of emotional release?”[46][47][48] Politically conservative talk show host, Michael Savage, said concerning Abu Ghraib: “Instead of putting joysticks, I would have liked to have seen dynamite put in their orifices“, and that “we need more of the humiliation tactics, not less.” He repeatedly referred to Abu Ghraib prison as “Grab-an-Arab” prison.

World

The   torture? A more serious blow to the United States than September 11, 2001 attacks.   Except that the blow was not inflicted by terrorists but by Americans against   themselves.Archbishop Giovanni   Lajolo, foreign minister of the Vatican.

From a legal declaration by Ronald Schlicher of the US State Department: “The Bahraini English-language Daily Tribune wrote on May 5, 2004, ‘The blood-boiling pictures will make more people inside and outside Iraq determined to carry out attacks against the Americans and British.’ The Qatari Arabic-language Al-Watan predicted on May 3, 2004 that because of the images, ‘The Iraqis now feel very angry and that will cause revenge to restore the humiliated dignity.'”

On May 10, 2004, swastika-covered posters of Abu Ghraib abuse photographs were attached to British and Indian graves at the Commonwealth military cemetery in Gaza City. Thirty-two graves of soldiers killed in World War I were desecrated or destroyed.

In November 2008 Lord Bingham, the former UK Law Lord, describing the treatment of Iraqi detainees in Abu Ghraib, said: “Particularly disturbing to proponents of the rule of law is the cynical lack of concern for international legality among some top officials in the Bush administration.”

In August 2010, the release of Israel Defense Forces photos with Palestinian prisoners, some dead, has brought the treatment and abuse at Abu Ghraib back into the media discussion. The entrance of new media into such investigations has grown, as pictures are increasingly posted on Facebook and YouTube.

Purported retaliation

On May 11, 2004, a video was released of the beheading of Nick Berg, a US civilian who went to Iraq seeking work repairing antennas. The CIA claims the video was the work of an Islamist militant group headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, whom they claim is also the speaker in the video. The executioners in the video claim the beheading was in response to the abuse in the Abu Ghraib prison.[citation needed]

Courts-martial, non-judicial punishment, and administrative reprimands

Naval Consolidated Brig, Miramar, where England and Harman served their sentences

Eleven soldiers have been convicted of various charges relating to the incidents, all including dereliction of duty—most receiving relatively minor sentences. Three other soldiers have either been cleared of charges or were not charged. No one has been convicted for murders of detainees.

  • Colonel Thomas Pappas was relieved of his command on May 13, 2005, after receiving non-judicial punishment on May 9, 2005, for two instances of dereliction, including that of allowing dogs to be present during interrogations. He was fined $8000 under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (non-judicial punishment). He also received a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) which effectively ended his military career.
  • Lieutenant Colonel Steven L. Jordan became the highest ranking officer to have charges brought against him in connection with the Abu Ghraib abuse on April 29, 2006.[55] Prior to his trial, eight of twelve charges against him were dismissed, two of the most serious after Major General George Fay admitted that he did not read Jordan his rights before interviewing him in reference to the abuses that had taken place. On August 28, 2007, Jordan was acquitted of all charges related to prisoner mistreatment and received a reprimand for disobeying an order not to discuss a 2004 investigation into the allegations.
  • Specialist Charles Graner was found guilty on January 14, 2005 of conspiracy to maltreat detainees, failing to protect detainees from abuse, cruelty, and maltreatment, as well as charges of assault, indecency, adultery, and obstruction of justice. On January 15, 2005, he was sentenced to 10 years in prison, dishonorable discharge and reduction in rank to private Graner was paroled from the US military’s Fort Leavenworth prison on August 6, 2011 after serving six-and-a-half years.
  • Staff Sergeant Ivan Frederick pled guilty on October 20, 2004 to conspiracy, dereliction of duty, maltreatment of detainees, assault and committing an indecent act in exchange for other charges being dropped. His abuses included forcing three prisoners to masturbate. He also punched one prisoner so hard in the chest that he needed resuscitation. He was sentenced to eight years in prison, forfeiture of pay, a dishonorable discharge and a reduction in rank to private.
  • Sergeant Javal Davis pled guilty February 4, 2005 to dereliction of duty, making false official statements and battery. He was sentenced to six months in prison, a reduction in rank to private, and a bad conduct discharge.
  • Specialist Jeremy Sivits was sentenced on May 19, 2004 by a special court-martial to the maximum one-year sentence, in addition to a bad conduct discharge and a reduction of rank to private, upon his plea of guilty.
  • Specialist Armin Cruz was sentenced on September 11, 2004 to eight months confinement, reduction in rank to private and a bad conduct discharge in exchange for his testimony against other soldiers.
  • Specialist Sabrina Harman was sentenced on May 17, 2005 to six months in prison and a bad conduct discharge after being convicted on six of the seven counts. She had faced a maximum sentence of five years. Harman served her sentence at Naval Consolidated Brig, Miramar.
  • Specialist Megan Ambuhl was convicted on October 30, 2004, of dereliction of duty and sentenced to reduction in rank to private and loss of a half-month’s pay.
  • Private First Class Lynndie England was convicted on September 26, 2005, of one count of conspiracy, four counts of maltreating detainees and one count of committing an indecent act. She was acquitted on a second conspiracy count. England had faced a maximum sentence of ten years. She was sentenced on September 27, 2005, to three years confinement, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, reduction to Private (E-1) and received a dishonorable discharge. England had served her sentence at Naval Consolidated Brig, Miramar.
  • Sergeant Santos Cardona was convicted of dereliction of duty and aggravated assault, the equivalent of a felony in the US civilian justice system. He served 90 days of hard labor at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. He was then transferred to a new unit where he trained Iraqi police. Cardona was unable to re-enlist due to the conviction, and left the army in 2007. In 2009, he was killed in action while working as a government contractor in Afghanistan.
  • Specialist Roman Krol pled guilty on February 1, 2005 to conspiracy and maltreatment of detainees at Abu Ghraib. He was sentenced to ten months confinement, reduction in rank to private, and a bad conduct discharge.
  • Specialist Israel Rivera, who was present during abuse on October 25, was under investigation but was never charged and testified against other soldiers.
  • Sergeant Michael Smith was found guilty on March 21, 2006 of two counts of prisoner maltreatment, one count of simple assault, one count of conspiracy to maltreat, one count of dereliction of duty and a final charge of an indecent act, and sentenced to 179 days in prison, a fine of $2,250, a demotion to private, and a bad conduct discharge.

Related personnel

Brig. General Janis Karpinski, commanding officer at the prison, was demoted to colonel on May 5, 2005, which also effectively ends her chances for future career advancement. In a BBC interview, Janis Karpinski said she is being made a scapegoat, and that the top U.S. commander for Iraq, Gen Ricardo Sanchez, should be asked what he knew about the abuse, as according to her, he said that prisoners are “like dogs”. However, a spokesman for Geoffrey Miller, who commanded the Guantanamo prison and later commanded all detention operations, including Abu Ghraib, called Karpinski’s allegations “categorically false”, and said no directive to treat detainees “like dogs” was made at either Guantanamo or Abu Ghraib.

Donald Rumsfeld stated in February 2005 that he had, as a result of the Abu Ghraib scandal, twice made an offer to President George W. Bush to resign the office of Secretary of Defense, and that both offers were declined.

Jay Bybee, the author of the Justice Department memo defining torture as activity producing pain equivalent to the pain experienced during death and organ failure, was nominated by President Bush to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, where he began service in 2003.

Michael Chertoff, who as head of the Justice Department’s criminal division advised the Central Intelligence Agency on the outer limits of legality in coercive interrogation sessions, was selected by President Bush to fill the cabinet-level vacancy at Secretary of Homeland Security created by the departure of Tom Ridge.

Captain Carolyn Wood was head of the 519th Military Intelligence Battalion from Fort Bragg. In August 2002, nine interrogation techniques not approved by military doctrine or included in Army field manuals were added after Chris Mackey and his team turned over the detention unit in Bagram to the 519th Military Intelligence Battalion. Chris Mackey had trained with Wood before she got her command at Bagram. He says that while he was “gravely disappointed” when he found out about her changes to the interrogation rules, he understands what might have been going on. “After she took over, the stakes got very high,” he says. “We went from losing three or four soldiers a month to scores of them. She must have been under a tremendous amount of pressure.””But there was horrible incompetence at the leadership and oversight level. People were aware of what we were doing because we were open. [The prison] was practically a Disney ride, with lots of higher-ups and officials coming through. But the common response we got was, Aren’t you kind of babying them?”

Two inmates in December 2002 were tortured and beaten to death in cells down the hall from her office. “Hung by their arms from the ceiling and beaten so severely that, according to a report by Army investigators later leaked to the Baltimore Sun, their legs would have needed to be amputated had they lived. The Army’s Criminal Investigation command launched an inquiry, but few people outside Afghanistan took notice.”[73] “In August, a former Bagram interrogator told a Knight Ridder journalist that at the time of the two deaths screams and moans could easily be heard from interrogation rooms at Bagram, and that Wood must have been aware of the abuse, as the interrogation rooms were near her office. In any case, by virtue of her position, CPT. Wood should have been aware that abuse was taking place. We are concerned that, as at Abu Ghraib, the U.S. government appears more interested in blaming abuses on low-level personnel than in investigating the role of commanding officers and civilian officials.” When she transferred to Abu Ghraib in August 2003, Wood is reported to have “posted her own list of ‘interrogation rules of engagement, which were inconsistent with those later issued for Iraq by the top American commander, Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, according to Congressional officials. The Geneva Convention didn’t apply to Woods methods of interrogation. The Fay-Jones report states “The JIDC October 2003 SOP (Standard operational procedure), likewise created by CPT. Wood, was remarkably similar to the Bagram (Afghanistan) Collection Point SOP. Prior to deployment to Iraq, CPT. Wood’s unit (A/519 MI BN) allegedly conducted the abusive interrogation practices in Bagram resulting in a Criminal Investigation Command (CID) homicide investigation … from December 2002, interrogators in Afghanistan were removing clothing, isolating people for long periods of time, using stress positions, exploiting fear of dogs and implementing sleep and light deprivation. Interrogators in Iraq, already familiar with the practice of some of these new ideas, implemented them even prior to any policy guidance from CJTF-7. (Combined Joint Task Force Seven headed by LTG Ricardo S. Sanchez) These practices were accepted as SOP by newly arrived interrogators. Some of the CJTF-7 ICRPs neither effectively addressed these practices, nor curtailed their use.” “At Abu Ghraib, interrogation operations were also plagued by a lack of an organizational chain of command presence and by a lack of proper actions to establish standards and training by the senior leaders present” In both prison facilities the officers who carried out the abuses were under the command of CPT. Wood and she has never been held accountable.

The Final Report of the Independent Panel to Review DoD Detention Operations did specifically absolve senior U.S. military and political leadership from direct culpability:

“The Panel finds no evidence that organizations above the 800th MP brigade or the 205th MI Brigade-level were directly involved in the incidents at Abu Ghraib.” In fact, BG Karpinski’s immediate operational supervisor and LTG Sanchez’ deputy, Major General Walter Wojdakowski was subsequently appointed as Chief of the US Army Infantry School at Fort Benning. COL Pappas’s boss, MG Barbara Fast was subsequently appointed as Chief of the US Army Intelligence Center at Fort Huachuca. Pappas and Karpinski were relieved of command but Wojdakowski and Fast became the Chiefs of their respective branches. The senior lawyer for LTG Sanchez and his legal representative on the Detainee Release Boards along with BN Karpinski and MG Fast, COL Marc Warren has since been selected for promotion to Brigadier General.

US government policy on interrogations and torture

Specialist Charles Graner poses over Manadel al-Jamadi‘s corpse.

Reaction from the Bush administration characterized the Abu Ghraib torture scandal as an isolated incident uncharacteristic of US actions in Iraq; this view is widely disputed, notably in Arab countries, but also by organizations such as the International Red Cross, which had been making representations about abuse of prisoners for more than a year. A former military intelligence officer with experience at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib alleges (see external link – “Cooks and drivers …”) a systematic failure caused by a combination of inexperienced troops arresting innocent Iraqis, who are then interrogated by inexperienced interrogators determined to break these apparent hard cases. The US military’s interrogation techniques and treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib are consistent with its treatment of noncombatants in past conflicts, including the Phoenix Program during the Vietnam War and its training of military personnel of US allies at the School of the Americas.

International law

The United States has ratified the UN’s Convention Against Torture and the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions. The Bush Administration took the position that, in the words of Alberto R. Gonzales, counsel to the President: “Both the United States and Iraq are parties to the Geneva Conventions. The United States recognizes that these treaties are binding in the war for the ‘liberation of Iraq'”. According to Human Rights Watch:

Al-Qaeda detainees would likely not be accorded POW status, but the Conventions still provide explicit protections to all persons held in an international armed conflict, even if they are not entitled to POW status. Such protections include the right to be free from coercive interrogation, to receive a fair trial if charged with a criminal offense, and, in the case of detained civilians, to be able to appeal periodically the security rationale for continued detention.

The Convention Against Torture defines torture in the following terms:

Any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him … information or a confession, punishing him for an act he … has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him.

United Nations Convention Against Torture, (Article 1)

The International Committee of the Red Cross concluded in its confidential February 2004 report to the Coalition Forces that its investigations had documented “serious violations of International Humanitarian Law relating to the conditions of treatment of the persons deprived of their liberty held by the CF in Iraq. In particular, it establishes that persons deprived of their liberty face the risk of being subjected to a process of physical and psychological coercion, in some cases tantamount to torture, in the early stages of the internment process.” The main violations which were described in the ICRC report included:

  • Brutality against protected persons upon capture and initial custody, sometimes causing death or serious injury.
  • Absence of notification of arrest of persons deprived of their liberty to their families causing distress among persons deprived of their liberty and their families.
  • Physical or psychological coercion during interrogation to secure information.
  • Prolonged solitary confinement in cells devoid of daylight.
  • Excessive and disproportionate use of force against persons deprived of their liberty resulting in death or injury during their period of internment.

Some legal experts have said that the United States could be obligated to try some of its soldiers for war crimes.[83] Under the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions, prisoners of war and civilians detained in a war may not be treated in a degrading manner, and violation of that section is a “grave breach”. In a November 5, 2003 report on prisons in Iraq, the Army’s provost marshal, Maj. Gen. Donald J. Ryder, stated that the conditions under which prisoners were held sometimes violated the Geneva Conventions.[citation needed]

Also, legal analysts point to the fact that Alberto Gonzales and others argued that detainees should be considered “unlawful combatants” and as such not protected by the Geneva Conventions in multiple memoranda, known today as the “torture memos,” regarding these perceived legal gray areas.[84] Gonzales’ observed at the time that denying coverage under the Geneva Conventions “substantially reduces the threat of domestic criminal prosecution under the War Crimes Act” suggesting, at the least, an awareness by those involved in crafting policies in this area that US officials are involved in acts that could be seen to be war crimes.[85][86][87][88] The US Supreme Court challenged the practice of ignoring the Geneva Conventions in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, in which it ruled that Common Article Three of the Geneva Conventions applies to all detainees in the War on Terror and that the Military Tribunals used to try these suspects were in violation of US and international law.

The Military Commissions Act of 2006 is seen as an amnesty law for crimes committed in the War on Terror by retroactively rewriting the War Crimes Act and by abolishing habeas corpus, effectively making it impossible for detainees to challenge crimes committed against them. Because of this on November 14, 2006, legal proceedings invoking universal jurisdiction were started in Germany against Donald Rumsfeld, Alberto Gonzales, John Yoo, George Tenet and others for their alleged involvement of prisoner abuse under the command responsibility. However, on April 27, 2007, the German federal prosecutor announced the government would not pursue charges against Rumsfeld and the 11 other U.S. officials, stating the accusations did not apply to German law, in part because there was insufficient evidence that the alleged acts occurred on German soil, nor did the accused live in Germany.

Some of the accused soldiers’ families or attorneys have already made clear an intention to argue that the practices at Abu Ghraib were directed by higher-ranking military officers or by the Central Intelligence Agency.[citation needed] Under the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal, this “defense of superior orders” is not a defense for war crimes, although it might influence a sentencing authority to lessen the penalty. Under U.S. law, the War Crimes Act of 1996 makes it a federal crime to violate certain provisions of the Geneva Conventions. The Act punishes any American, military or civilian, who commits a “grave breach” of the Geneva Conventions. A grave breach, as defined by the Geneva Conventions, includes the deliberate “killing, torture or inhuman treatment” of detainees. Violations of the War Crimes Act that result in death carry the death penalty.

Executive Order

On December 21, 2004, the American Civil Liberties Union released copies of FBI internal memos they had obtained under the Freedom of Information Act concerning alleged torture and abuse at Guantanamo Bay, in Afghanistan and in Iraq. One memo dated May 22, 2004 was from someone whose name was blanked out but was described in the memo as “On Scene Commander – Baghdad”. He referred explicitly to an Executive Order that sanctioned the use of extraordinary interrogation tactics by U.S. military personnel. The methods explicitly mentioned as being sanctioned are sleep deprivation, hooding prisoners, playing loud music, removing all detainees’ clothing, forcing them to stand in so-called “stress positions”, and the use of dogs. The author also claimed that the Pentagon had limited use of the techniques by requiring specific authorization from the chain of command. The author identifies “physical beatings, sexual humiliation or touching” as being outside the Executive Order. This was the first internal evidence since the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse affair became public in April 2004 that forms of coercion of captives had been mandated by the President of the United States.

Details

Death certificates repeatedly stated that prisoners had died “during sleep”, and of “natural reasons”. Iraqi doctors were not allowed to investigate even when death certificates were obviously forged. No reports of investigations against U.S. military doctors who forged death certificates have been reported.[citation needed]

On May 7, 2004, International Committee of the Red Cross Operations Director Pierre Krähenbühl stated that the ICRC’s inspection visits to Coalition detention centers in Iraq did “not allow us to conclude that what we were dealing with … were isolated acts of individual members of coalition forces. What we have described is a pattern and a broad system.” He went on to say that some of the incidents they had observed were “tantamount to torture”.

U.S. and UK armed forces are jointly trained in so-called resistance to interrogation (R2I) techniques. These R2I techniques are taught ostensibly to help soldiers cope with or resist torture by the enemy. On May 8, 2004, The Guardian reported that, according to a former British special forces officer, the acts committed by the Abu Ghraib Prison military personnel resemble the techniques used in R2I training. Also related are pride-and-ego down techniques to make captives more willing to cooperate.

The same report states that:

The U.S. commander in charge of military jails in Iraq, Major General Geoffrey Miller, has confirmed that a battery of 50-odd special “coercive techniques” can be used against enemy detainees. The general, who previously ran the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, said his main role was to extract as much intelligence as possible.

The Guardian

Most accept the particular acts committed at the prison leading to the initial broadcast report were unauthorized, but as has been shown, they were not isolated incidents. These or similar incidents of torture and humiliation were routine, systemic and widespread, had been occurring for over a year, and some of them were official policy.

Alfred W. McCoy history professor and author of a book on torture in the Philippine armed forces, has noted similarities in the abusive treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib and the techniques described in the CIA’s 1963 “KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation” manual and asserts that what he calls “the CIA’s no-touch torture methods” have been in continuous use by the CIA and U.S. military intelligence since that time.

A May 25, 2004 article by Hersh in The New Yorker suggests a connection between the Abu Ghraib incidents and a chain of decisions and events set into play by high administration officials following the 9/11 attacks, specifically to a “special access” or “black ops” program known as Copper Green. According to Hersh, officials concerned with extracting intelligence information from terrorists stretched the bounds of interrogation to or beyond the extreme legal limits. Subsequently, methods which were originally intended to be used only on high value Taliban and Al-Qaeda “enemy combatants” came to be improperly used on Iraqi prisoners. The Department of Defense immediately characterized Hersh’s report as “outlandish, conspiratorial, and filled with error and anonymous conjecture”.

Ricardo Sanchez

Documents obtained by The Washington Post and the ACLU show that the senior U.S. military officer in Iraq Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez authorized the use of military dogs, temperature extremes, reversed sleep patterns and sensory deprivation as interrogation methods in Abu Ghraib. Also a November 2004 report by Brig Gen Richard Formica found that many troops at the Abu Ghraib prison were only following orders based on a memo from Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, and that “[she] didn’t find cruel and malicious criminals that are out there looking for detainees to abuse.” “Gen Sanchez authorised interrogation techniques that were in clear violation of the Geneva Conventions and the army’s own standards”, ACLU lawyer Amrit Singh said in the union’s statement. In an interview for her hometown newspaper The Signal, Gen. Karpinski claimed to have seen unreleased documents from Rumsfeld that authorized these tactics for Iraqi prisoners. Both Sanchez and Rumsfeld have denied authorization.

Ongoing news

In September 2005, U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein ordered the release of new Abu Ghraib torture photos.

In December 2005, John Pace, human rights chief for the United Nations Assistance Mission in Iraq (UNAMI), criticized the US military’s practice of holding prisoners in Iraq in its own facilities such as Abu Ghraib prison. In an interview with Reuters, Pace claimed that Abu Ghraib was not mandated by UN Resolution 1546, according to which the US government has claimed a legal mandate permitting its ongoing occupation of Iraq, including holding prisoners at Abu Ghraib. Pace said,

All except those held by the Ministry of Justice are, technically speaking, held against the law because the Ministry of Justice is the only authority that is empowered by law to detain, to hold anybody in prison. Essentially none of these people have any real recourse to protection and therefore we speak … of a total breakdown in the protection of the individual in this country.

—John Pace

On March 29, 2006, the government agreed to drop all appeals and release the new set of photographs.[113]

Allegedly Rumsfeld-approved abuses

In November 2006, the former US Army Brigadier General Janis Karpinski, in-charge of Abu Ghraib prison until early 2004, told Spain’s El País newspaper she had seen a letter apparently signed by Donald Rumsfeld which allowed civilian contractors to use techniques such as sleep deprivation during interrogation. “The methods consisted of making prisoners stand for long periods, sleep deprivation … playing music at full volume, having to sit in uncomfortably … Rumsfeld authorized these specific techniques.” He said that this was contrary to the Geneva Convention and quoted the same “Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind”. According to Karpinski, the handwritten signature was above his printed name and in the same handwriting in the margin was written: “Make sure this is accomplished”. There have been no comments from either the Pentagon or US Army spokespeople in Iraq on Karpinski’s accusations.

Previously unreleased photographs

In February 2006, previously unreleased photos and videos were broadcast by SBS, an Australian television network, on its Dateline programme. According to initial reports, the Bush administration is attempting to prevent release of the images in the US, arguing that their publication could provoke antagonism towards them. According to BBC World News, the photographs were probably taken around the same time as the previously released photographs, and include some of the same prisoners and convicted soldiers from the earlier images. These newly released photographs depict prisoners crawling on the floor naked, being forced to perform sexual acts, and being covered in feces. Some images also show homicide and corpses, some shot in the head and some with slit throats. BBC World News stated that one of the prisoners, who was reportedly mentally unstable, was considered by prison guards as a ‘pet’ for torture.

The UN expressed hope that the pictures would be investigated immediately but the Pentagon stated that the images “have been previously investigated as part of the Abu Ghraib investigation.”

Five of the newly released pictures can be seen on the ElMundo webpage. SBS claims not to have published the most shocking pictures due to the degree of their depravity, an example being the sodomy photo.

On March 15, 2006, Salon.com published the most extensive documentation of the abuse. The source who gave the CID material to Salon magazine is familiar with the CID investigation.

The DVD containing the material includes a June 6, 2004, CID investigation report written by Special Agent Seigmund. That report includes the following summary of the material: “A review of all the computer media submitted to this office revealed a total of 1,325 images of suspected detainee abuse, 93 video files of suspected detainee abuse, 660 images of adult pornography, 546 images of suspected dead Iraqi detainees, 29 images of soldiers in simulated sexual acts, 20 images of a soldier with a Swastika drawn between his eyes, 37 images of Military Working dogs being used in abuse of detainees and 125 images of questionable acts.”

On May 28, 2009, more alleged pictures were available to the public. Some pictures have surfaced by Australian SBS tv.

2011 grand jury investigation

In June 2011, the Justice Department announced it was opening a grand jury investigation into CIA torture which killed a prisoner.

Torture Central: E-mails from Abu Ghraib

On October 29, 2007, the memoir of a soldier stationed in Abu Ghraib, Iraq during 2005/2006 was published. Torture Central chronicled many events previously unreported in the news media, including torture that continued at Abu Ghraib over a year after the abuse photos were published.

Later developments

In 2009, an additional 21 color photographs surfaced, showing prisoners in Afghanistan and Iraq being abused by their U.S. captors. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said, “[T]he government had long argued that the abuse at Abu Ghraib was isolated and was an aberration. The new photos would show that the abuse was more widespread.” President Barack Obama initially indicated he would not fight the release of the photographs, but “reversed course in May and authorized an appeal to the high court.” “The Obama administration believe[d] giving the imminent grant of authority over the release of such pictures to the defense secretary would short-circuit a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union under the Freedom of Information Act.” On Oct 10, 2009 the US “Congress [was] set to allow the Pentagon to keep new pictures … from the public”[126]

On February 3, 2010, David A. Larson, an elected official in California who has a relationship with government contract personnel, made disclosures to the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), Office of the Inspector General (OIG) alleging that under the Bush Administration, prisoners detained at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, and undisclosed “black sites” were being used as involuntary research subjects for human biomedical experimentation, behavior modification research, and drug-testosterone delivery in a manner similar to past CIA Project MKULTRA activities investigated in 1977 by Senators Kennedy and Inuoye. The allegation supports information contained in a International Red Cross report relative to the expanded role of CIA medical personnel in torture and interrogation.

In 2010, the last of the prisons were turned over to the Iraqi government to run. An Associated Press article said

Despite Abu Ghraib- or perhaps because of reforms in its wake- prisoners have more recently said they receive far better treatment in American custody than in Iraqi jails.

In September 2010 Amnesty International warned in a report titled New Order, Same Abuses; Unlawful Detentions and Torture in Iraq that up to 30,000 prisoners, including many veterans of the US detention system, remain detained without rights in Iraq and are frequently tortured or abused. Furthermore, it describes a detention system that has not evolved since Saddam Hussein‘s regime, in which human rights abuses were endemic with arbitrary arrests and secret detention common and a lack of accountability throughout the security forces. Amnesty’s Middle East and North Africa director, Malcolm Smart went on to say that “Iraq’s security forces have been responsible for systematically violating detainees’ rights and they have been permitted. US authorities, whose own record on detainees’ rights has been so poor, have now handed over thousands of people detained by US forces to face this catalogue of illegality, violence and abuse, abdicating any responsibility for their human rights.”

On October 22, 2010 nearly 400,000 secret United States army field reports and war logs, detailing torture, summary executions and war crimes, were passed on to the British paper, the Guardian and several other international media organisations through the whistleblowing website WikiLeaks. Among others, the logs detail how US authorities failed to investigate hundreds of reports of abuse, torture, rape and even murder by Iraqi police and soldiers, whose conduct appears to be systematic and normally unpunished and that US troops abused prisoners for years even after the Abu Ghraib scandal

On June 27, 2011 the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal of lawsuits from a group of 250 Iraqis who wanted to sue the two contractors CACI International Inc. and Titan Corp. (now a subsidiary of Communications) over claims of abuse by interrogators and translators at the prison. The suits had been dismissed by the lower courts on the grounds that the companies held a derivative sovereign

 

 

HIGH TECH LYNCHING AND TORTURE: AMERICA’S

 

DOMESTIC ABU-GHRAIB

Jonas Holmes

June 20, 2007

The Neurophone was developed by Patrick Flanaghan in 1958. At the time, the young genius was only 14 years old. Young Flanaghan was a sharp one. At the age of 11 he designed a missile detection system that was purchased by the Department of Defense.

The Neurophone is a device that allows sounds, such as voice and music, to be picked up anywhere on the human body and converted to electrical impulses, propagated along the skin and finally transferred to the brain. These sound conversions occurred while bypassing the entire hearing mechanism, ears and all.

It turns out that the Neurophone bypassed the 8th cranial nerve and transmitted acoustics directly to the brain. LIFE magazine named Patrick Flanaghan one of the top ten US scientists when he was just 17 years old. Patrick’s Neurophone was finally given a patent after it helped a deaf man at the Patent office hear for the first time in 15 years.

Helping the deaf is onE of the more positive utilizations of this technological wonder. Unfortunately, as we have realized in these times of moral decay, there are much more insidious capabilities that The Neurophone provides to the evil minded. There is an excellent website at http://crashrecovery.org/rendon/neurophone.pdf that addresses these issues. The following are a few examples that I have acquired from this informative site.

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

Contact:

Mr Paul Baird Fax(Primary): +612 4733 3249 Fax(Alternate): +612 8838 2333 Ph: +612 9635 0752

p.baird@surveillanceissues.com

http://www.surveillanceissues.com/

CATEGORIES OF SURVEILLANCE/HARASSMENT TECHNOLOGIES (Source – US Congress Office of Technology Assessment) Electronic Eavesdropping Technology

Neurophones and similar (more advanced) technologies – Satellite or ground based. These can deliver aural harassment via microwaves or lasers aimed at the target.

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 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.

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 20 BILLION bits/sec each. 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. 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 neurophone.

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

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: