Forums

More high strangeness from The Shadow Gallery mail boxes...

http://marshallmasters.com/Archive/May2002/EMWARS3/emwars3.htm

<original Text>

Will US and Russia Use Soviet-Era
Tesla Weapons to Defeat Islamist
Terror Nukes?

YOWUSA.COM, May 31, 2002
Janice Manning

The Moscow Treaty of 2002 and Russia’s probationary acceptance into NATO is in response to the need to combat international terrorism. In the process, Russia and America are putting Cold War nuclear weapons in the “rear view mirror” as President Bush said in Moscow. Perhaps America and Russia have reached this mutual accord because the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) that kept the two nations from destroying the world is a nonstarter for third world nuclear powers like Pakistan, which publicly rejected a "no-first-use" nuclear policy.

But there is another possibility. America and Russia could be joining forces to create new weapons of mass destruction with many times the destructive force of nuclear weapons. Further these weapons will be suitable for first use, because they will not create the collateral global damage of nuclear fallout, which the victor and vanquished alike.

According to MEG inventor Tom Bearden, this new weapons of mass destruction explanation is more likely the case.

Bearden Makes the Case for EM Weapons

Lieutenant Colonel (retired) Tom Bearden spent the last several decades researching theories of electromagnetics with an eye toward developing useful technologies from his findings. He spent many of those years in U.S. Military Intelligence keeping track of Russian EM weaponization and has consequently concluded that nuclear weaponry as we know it today may be obsolete.

He contends that the Russians have known about electromagnetics, which they call energetics, for over 60 years. Further, he believes that they have perfected a system of electromagnetic (EM) weaponry that would nullify the effect of even the most destructive nuke.

In the May 6, 2002 YOWUSA article, MEG Inventor Tom Bearden: Did the Soviets Cause the Challenger Disaster?, a clear case was made for the possibility that Soviet EM weaponry caused what were previously thought to be tragic accidents in American history, such as the sinking of the submarine, U.S.S. Thresher and the explosion of the space shuttle, Challenger.

But times have changed since the Cold War, and the fact is that nations to do not embrace one another because they’ve finally listened to decades of beauty queens who have steadfastly worked for world peace. Rather, nations enter into relationships when said relationships offer substantial gains. Ergo, if Russia has perfected EM weaponry as Bearden suggests, how do they stand to benefit economically by sharing their Soviet-era Tesla EM weaponry technology with America?

Mistakes and Money

Has Russia has supplied nuclear technologies to possible rogue states who proclaim themselves as the enemies of America? Yes! Has America provided these same rogue states with nuclear technology as well? Yes!

Now these mistakes are coming back to haunt both nations. (Let’s not forget the fast-food politics of the Clinton era: Mr. China, would you like an order of egg roles with all those secret American nuclear secrets?)
The Washington Post, Saturday, May 25, 2002
Treaty Curbing Nuclear Arsenals Caps Polite but Strained Summit
Before arriving in Moscow on Thursday, administration officials emphasized the importance of persuading Russia to reconsider its support of a nuclear reactor project in Bushehr, Iran. At the news conference, Bush said Putin "gave me some assurances that I think will be very comforting for you to listen to."
But Putin responded with no such assurances, instead defending Russia's assistance to Iran as "exclusively" for purposes of developing energy, not weapons. "I'd like to point out also that the U.S. has taken a commitment upon themselves to build a similar nuclear power plant in North Korea," he said.
The strategic relationship agreement also calls for Russia and the United States to find ways to cooperate on the development of missile defenses -- until recently a stumbling block in relations. In addition to exchanging information about missile defense tests, the two said they would have more exchanges between defense and intelligence officials and explore programs for joint development of missile defenses.
"We have every reason to believe that America will go for a certain transparency in the building of their national missile defense, and go further, because they need cooperation from us," [Gen. Yuri] Baluyevsky said.

The mistakes of both America and Russia are haunting the leadership of both nations, and current events are pushing the need for a joint solution. A good case in point is the advanced ballistic missile program already underway in Iran.

Proliferation of Nuclear Weapon Delivery Systems

Before the Putin and Bush signed the treaty in Moscow, Iran test-fired one of its Shihab-3 missiles. The missile, fired on 26 May, Iran time, is reported to have a range of 1300 kilometers or about 800 miles, according to BBC News.

That means that a warhead launched aboard this vehicle has the potential of killing people nearly 1,000 miles away from the launch point. One of these missiles launched from Iran would be capable of killing people in Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and, of course, Israel. Furthermore, local nationals in any of these countries would not be the only ones at risk of losing their lives. American service members that have been sent to the area to assist in defending these countries would find themselves under the same risk.

The BBC reported that the Shihab-3 (a scaled-up version of the Soviet Scud, modeled on the North Korean No Dong ballistic missile) is the most advanced missile delivery system available to Iran today and that Iran is not seeking to develop a Shihab-4 or 5.

However according to DebkaFile, President Bush urged Putin to halt construction of the Iranian atomic reactor at Bushehr, because Iran is developing the Shihab-4 missile. This missile will have a 2,000KM range.

Keeping in mind that the distance between Tehran and Moscow is 2462KM (as the ballistic missile flies), it is curious that Bush’s attempts to dissuade Putin from continuing to help an Islamist theocracy develop its nuclear capabilities, fell upon deaf ears. In fact, Putin refused halt the building of the Bushehr facility. Instead, he told Bush that the Bushehr plant was to be used “exclusively for purposes of developing energy, not weapons.”

The important fact that neither report addressed was that both the Shihab-3 and 4 could be nuclear-capable, which means, of course, that Iran is counting on having the weapons-grade nuclear material available. From whom will they get it if they do not already have it on-site? They would, of course, obtain it from their more powerful allies.

If Iran were to become a nuclear state, Russia could easily find itself in a nuclear squeeze play between Iran and China, yet Putin expresses no such worries. Is Putin, a successful Cold War KGB agent being naïve? Or, is he being as clever as a fox by selling nuclear technology for cash he urgently needs today, because he already has a weapon system for tomorrow that can trump the threat of 3rd world nukes?

If he does, can Russia afford another arms race with America? Given that it will still take Russia several years to catch up the economic might of Portugal, the answer in no.

Likewise, can America afford another arms race? We’re saddled with a huge debt that evades our ability to reduce it as congress must once again take us back into deficient spending. In order to finance another Cold War arms race, will mean heavy taxation and increased public debt.

The bottom line is that another arms race between the superpowers will make the real necessities of life like power bras, frost-free refrigerators and gas guzzling SUVs more expensive and harder to find. Getting the people of both countries to willinginly down that road is a nonstrarter.

But, if Russia were to unilaterally develop its own EM warfare technology, America would be forced to spend it to death with another arms race.

Therefore it is in their mutual interest of Russia share their advanced weapons of mass destruction technologies so as to avoid another overkill arms race. So what is this technology?

Scotty, Energize the Defense Shield!

MEG inventor Tom Bearden feels that he has the answer and he has already demonstrated the potentially awesome offensive capability of EM weaponry. But would the defensive capability of such a weapon be system equally impressive? Bearden seems to think that it can be even more impressive.

The defense system he has envisioned could have come straight from George Lucas’ Star Wars series. He sees what he calls a “Tesla Shield,” a spherical or hemispherical EM field strong enough to kill anything with an electrical circuit that happens to pass through the outer shell of the field. He has documented many instances in which a spherical or a hemispherical Tesla Shield was spotted and reported to governmental agencies.

As shown in the image above, two scalar hemispheres are formed remotely and mathematically truncated. Then a third beam intersects and interferes with them, causing the Tesla Shield effect. The amount of power needed to generate this shield is enormous, but attainable, according to Bearden.

Such a shield would be completely capable of knocking out the electronics of any missile that happened to breach it. Furthermore, there would be no need to discriminate ahead of time between chaff, countermeasures and genuine warheads. The shield would kill them all.

Of course, in the case of nuclear weaponry, extra shielding would be needed. In this case, Bearden suggests concentrically nesting at least threeTesla Shields or directing Tesla Spheres into the path of the oncoming nuke.

Each time an object passes through the perimeter of a sphere or shield, the shield absorbs and scatters harmful radiation, then releases it in cooler, less harmful forms. The radiation is eventually reduced to RF (radio frequency) noise, otherwise known as “static.”

Any nation with the ability to form these shields instantly upon demand has nothing to fear from a nuclear exchange. The target nation will have instantly neutralized all incoming nukes before having to fire a shot in its own defense. Then, at its leisure, it would be able to deploy the offensive EM weaponry and wipe out its opponent. The opponent would never know what had hit while those within the shielded target area would remain safe.

Therefore, any nation on Earth that possesses this EM technology would know it has nothing to lose by sharing nuclear technology with other nations. If, on the other hand, another nation were to show interest in developing EM weapon technology, their adversaries that already possess it would rightly be concerned about its use, because there is as yet no way to counteract this type of an EM pulse.

Can This Really Work?

Could growing U.S. interest in EM technology have behind last year’s withdrawal by the U.S. from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972? It is entirely possible. Perhaps that is what weighs so heavily on the minds of leaders of the Russian government.

Given the present financial burden of its War on Terror, why should the U.S. divert time, money and manpower to developing its own EM technology when economic considerations and growing international terrorism are compelling Russia it to share its Soviet-era Tesla EM technology with America?

If both nations can indeed put their differences in the rear view mirror and agree to disagree on other lesser issues, the growing threat of nuclear warlike rogue and Islamist terror states can be contained. Best of all, for a fraction of what it would cost if a resumption of the arms race between the nuclear super powers were to happen.

To coin an old phrase, “Good fences make good neighbors,” and these new EM “fences” are for all intents and purposes, impenetrable according to Bearden. But, only if America and Russia are truly willing to tear down the lingering Cold War fences built of old prejudices and mistrusts.