Introducing "The Ray Gun" - or...How To Heat Your Buns on the Run

http://the-new-american-republic.blogspot.com/2010/08/pain-ray-in-california-prison-amounts.html~
This is a "recently" developed weapon designed to burn you up inside without causing burn marks. Supposedly it will not "harm" anyone, but it will make people (like a crowd of protesters and other innocent civilians) turn and run.

It's called "The Silent Guardian," an almost innocuous-sounding name that sounds more like some household product you might buy at a local hardware store. But not so innocent. This is a serious piece of weaponry. Who made this delightful toy?

Raytheon.

Here's how they describe it:

"The Silent Guardian™ protection system is a revolutionary less-than-lethal directed energy application that employs millimetre wave technology to repel individuals or crowds without causing injury. The system provides a zone of protection that saves lives, protects assets and minimises collateral damage. Silent Guardian produces precise effects at longer ranges than current less-than-lethal systems and provides real-time ability to establish intent and de-escalate aggression. Various commercial and military applications include law enforcement, checkpoint security, facility protection, force protection and peacekeeping missions. The system is available now and ready for action."

"Ready for action." Sounds like the new GI Joe toy in stock. Be the first on your block, and so on...

For you tekkies who love details, you can go here to read Raytheon's pdf product guide. (Scroll down to check out the "demo riot control" pictures in the brochure.)

Here is a video of it in action from "60 Minutes," with reporter David Martin as the guinea pig.



Is this real?       Definitely.
Is he faking?     Probably not.
Is it harmful?     Probably (though it is claimed that it is not).
Is this actually being used somewhere?   Yes.
Check out the following links:

• Microwaving Iraq - (Rense dot com)
• Military Ray gun to be Tested on Inmates
• Ray Guns Real: Army Betting Big on Laser Weapons
• "Pain Ray" in California Prison...Torture of US Prisoners
• Introduction to H.A.A.R.P.
• H.A.A.R.P.

And coming soon to a theater (of war) near you...
"Man-made Lightning" blaster guns - Laser Induced Plasma Channel™ (LIPC) technology, courtesy of Arizona-based company Ionatron. $10 million worth of product to be developed for the US Navy. And yes... the gun will be just like it sounds. Tazer from further away, without all the messy wires. Which I guess makes it a "Phazer." (Can I get sued for using that word?)
(Probably not. I misspelled it.)
You've seen it in Star Trek and many other sci-fi shows and films. It was only a matter of time before we'd see it in the flesh...er...
Poor choice of word. Sorry.


Welcome to the 21st century...
~

The New American Republic: Ron Paul Calls for Audit of US Gold Reserves

The New American Republic: Ron Paul Calls for Audit of US Gold Reserves
~

Once again, Ron Paul (U.S. Rep. R-Tex) is talking common sense about the economy and how to fix it, and as usual, Washington, and especially the Federal Reserve, is not listening.

For years Ron Paul has been one of the few sane voices crying in the wilderness of US Politics, re-iterating the warnings of Presidents George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, and John Kennedy (among others) about the insidious dangers of having a US central bank that is above the law, as the Federal Reserve is, and how the Fed's policies have caused inflation, depression, and a 96% downward spiral of the US dollar ever since the Fed's creation in 1913.

BTW, in case you didn't know, the Federal Reserve Bank is NOT federal. Never has been. It is a private corporation.

(See this video: The Money Masters - How International Bankers Gained Control of America. It is long, over three hours, but it is a most informative view of the history of the Fed. There are many good ones out there. Tune in to them. Knowledge is power. Be informed!)
~

UPDATE on "U.S. Incursion of Costa Rica..."

~
The U.S. Incursion of Costa Rica (and, in time, other places...

August 17, 2010

An excerpt from Op Ed News - GOVERNMENT ASSISTED BP IN COVERING UP EFFECTS OF SPILL - Aug, 10, 2010

"According to the "European Union Times" NATO ordered the U.S. to ship 7,000 Marines to Costa Rica over fear the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico fractures the zone lying between North America and the Caribbean Plates..."
(original Op Ed story here)

(The awkward grammar in that sentence is not mine. I believe the author meant: "...over fear the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico might fracture the zone..." )

No matter. The point is clear, that 7000 U.S. troops were sent to Costa Rica on the chance that they might be needed to stem the further flow of oil, in case of an ocean floor fracture presumably. They are there now, or some of them. According to one report, it would take several months to deploy all 7000 troops and equipment.

It is as good a guess as any as to why they were sent, but I have my doubts that it is to safeguard the isthmus against oil contamination. It's a nice excuse, but if the Army did not step in to help in the Gulf over these last few months, I don't think they are in Costa Rica to help the oil spill there. Besides, according to BP, there is no more oil spill. The well is capped and everything is fine. The oil is gone, like magic! So what do we need 7000 troops in Costa Rica for? There is no oil to clean up or prevent from spilling into the Pacific.

Therefore they must be there for another reason.

I guess as long as they're down there they might as well see if they can help out the deplorable drug situation in Columbia. Or was it Venezuela? No, wait. Venezuela is oil. Columbia is drugs. No, wait. Columbia used to be drugs. Or is it still? Is it oil or is it drugs? Darn, now I'm getting them confused.

Well, maybe they could at least pick up some litter while they are there.

(See my original post here.)

~

UpDate on Update - August 18, 2010

Here's an interesting coincidence, taking place in Costa Rica:

One death, more cases (5,000) of dengue in Costa Rica
fluetrackers.com ^ | August 15, 2010 | Ara

Posted on Tuesday, August 17, 2010 10:32:27 AM by MamaDearest
08.15.2010 16:55:53 / Xinhua Costa Rica reported an alarming increase of 5,000 cases of dengue during the last week, confirms today the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social (CCSS).

According to official data, this Central American nation went from accounting for 16 200 people affected until last week to register at this time a total of 21,200 infected.

The authorities acknowledged their concern, as the number of people affected this time than the statistics from previous years and could continue to increase with the arrival of the rainy season.

In Costa Rica circulating types 1, 2 and 3 of the dengue virus, transmitted by the aedes aegypti mosquito, whose bite produces a high fever, bone pain and loss of body fluids without treatment can result in death....

(Read whole story here.)

(Read more about Dengue Fever on Wikipedia here.)

So what else could those 7000 Marines be doing in Costa Rica besides cleaning up the beaches and looking for drug traffickers and oil leaks?

I must confess, for the moment I am stumped.
~

t r u t h o u t | Uncovering the Lies That Are Sinking the Oil

t r u t h o u t | Uncovering the Lies That Are Sinking the Oil

What's REALLY Going on in the Gulf of Mexico? Read Dahr Jamail's story in Truthout.
~

Petraeus: Progress in Afghanistan will take time - KIVITV.COM | Boise. News, Breaking News, Weather and Sports-

Petraeus: Progress in Afghanistan will take time - KIVITV.COM | Boise. News, Breaking News, Weather and Sports-

According to General Propaganda….

General David Petraeus made some revealing statements in the above article about why we are really in Afghanistan. Joe-Biden-kind-of-statements that make you slap your forehead and say “Dohh!”

"We're here so that Afghanistan does not once again become a sanctuary for transnational extremists - (eg. like the U.S. military/industrial complex?) - the way it was when al-Qaida planned the 9/11 attacks in the Kandahar area," Petraeus said in an interview taped in Kabul, the Afghan capital.

Petraeus did not, to my knowledge, reveal in which cave the 911 attacks were planned and carried out.

According to GP (Petraeus):
If the U.S. loses (in Afghanistan), there would likely be a bloody civil war followed by a takeover by extremists.

(In other words, the same thing that is happening now with the U.S. there.) 

However, if the U.S. “succeeds” and Afghanistan “stabilizes” – basically an oxymoron - the country could become the region's new "Silk Road" with the potential to extract trillions of dollars worth of minerals, he (GP) said.

But the goal is not to turn Afghanistan into an industrialized democracy, he (GP) said.

No, we would not want to do that. That would ruin everything. Think of how easily Bin Laden could hide in an industrialized democracy.

Petraeus said arresting al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden remains a primary goal.
(See related Bin Laden story on Save My Brain HERE)

What a relief to know that we haven’t forgotten the primary goal. Find Bin Laden.

So…Let me get this straight: After 911, we invaded Afghanistan. We have been in Afghanistan for nine years, not to ignore Iraq, and GP is saying that our primary goal is still to find Osama Bin Laden.

Meanwhile, according to the article, lawmakers are beginning to question whether Afghanistan can be won.

Beginning?!...After nine years?!!…

Do you feel insulted or stupid reading his statement? I have to admit I do, as stupid or insulted as watching a drug commercial on TV.

- If we “succeed” – not sure what that means –
- Afghanistan becomes a “Silk Road” – not sure what that means –
- (Marco Polo comes to mind) –
- and the U.S. has the potential to extract trillions of dollars worth of “minerals” – not sure what that means, but it sounds much too heavy to hide in a suitcase at an airport -

Strange there’s no mention of justice or freedom, at least not in the referenced article above. Or payback for 911 if we “succeed.” Is success the same as victory? GP does not say. He does not mention packing up and exiting Afghanistan and leaving trillions of dollars of “minerals” behind. He doesn’t even mention leaving if we “find” Bin Laden…

Wait a minute…

Here comes the revelation. The Joe-Biden-slap-to-the- forehead moment.

You know what I think?

Now I don't want to upset General Petraeus by saying this because I know he must be a smart man. After all, he's put an awful lot of thought into his theories about finding Bin Laden and why we're in Afghanistan. But here's what I think...

I think the search for Bin Laden...now get this...has been replaced by the search for the trillions of dollars worth of minerals. You think?

Of course I could be wrong. Maybe, if we fail to find Bin Laden, the trillions of dollars worth of minerals might still make the trip to Afghanistan - and the nine years - worth the effort. GP seems to think so.

What can we learn from all of this? - not sure what that means.

How’s this? In today’s modern world, if the U.S. military moves in, they are there to stay. Period. They are not there to settle a dispute and then leave. Let us understand that right now. The U.S. is not leaving Iraq or Afghanistan, or any other pond it dips its toe into in the Middle East (not sure what that means).

Why would they? After all, there are sooo many fascinating minerals to collect.

Not sure what that means -
~

Petraeus: Capturing bin Laden still a primary goal

Oh Brother! Dept.

http://www.kivitv.com/Global/story.asp?S=12981766

Be warned!! Bin Laden is still out there!

So says General David Petraeus, the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan. If he says so, it must be true. Why would an army general lie if it wasn’t true?

Like Che Guevara and Elvis Presley’s ghost, Bin Laden will never die. He still roams through the tortuous "extremely remote" Pakistan or Afghanistan mountain trails with his cane in one hand, dragging his dialysis machine behind him with the other (bad kidneys, remember?). His AK 47 strapped to his shoulder.

I thought being on a dialysis machine was basically a death sentence, but apparently one can live for twenty years or more as long as you flush your kidneys regularly. Good to know. 

BTW, Here’s a picture of a dialysis machine below.

I never knew these machines were so portable.

I imagine the generators required to run these machines in the rugged caves and mountains of Afghanistan must be super silent.
~

Obama mortgages the Gulf of Mexico to BP :: www.uruknet.info :: informazione dal medio oriente :: information from middle east :: [vs-5]

Obama mortgages the Gulf of Mexico to BP :: www.uruknet.info :: informazione dal medio oriente :: information from middle east :: [vs-5]

BP and Obama, sitting in a tree...

Once again, the truth is out there, and the facts are there, hidden in plain sight for all to see - or overlook - as the case may be.

In the case of BP OIL & the Gulf of Mexico, BP wins.

Notice I did not say BP OIL vs. the USA. There was never a contest of BP vs. the USA. The people yes, the government, no. In fact, BP and the U.S. are now bigger pals than ever before. Now they are officially partners. The U.S. is now in the drilling business. BP has proved there is lots of oil in the Gulf, and now the U.S. wants in on the action.

It is now officially okay for one of the largest oil corporations in the world to mess up one of the largest bodies of tropical waters, killing indigenous species and ruining the environment for years…and get away scot-free, with a slap on the wrist. A “token” slap at that.

BP is now "required," over the next three years, to pay 20 billion dollars incrementally into a “disaster fund,” which on the surface sounds like a fair thing to do. However, this amount, which sounds like a lot, is hugely disproportionate to the crimes originally committed, the lives lost, and the crimes that continue in the back rooms. On top of that, how can we put a price on the environmental damage created by a spill of this unprecedented size? What is the price of all of the marine life killed? The beaches forever tarnished? The businesses destroyed? The 11 workers who died and the anguish spilled into the lives of their families? (there has been little media reporting about them)

Money seems to be the only bottom line here - as usual.

20 billion? Suddenly, it does not sound like that much to me now. Cash is now practically non-existent in the world, and “money” is mainly virtual. Where’s the money coming from? Where’s the lesson learned if all BP has to do is sit down in discussion with the likes of Obama and his #1 handler, Rahm Emmanuel, and a few lawyers and bankers and punch in some agreed-upon numbers in a computer? So-called "money" never even changes hands. Who's giving the money? Who's receiving it?

Who benefits?

What’s more, the disaster fund (notice they are not calling it a fine, fee, or any kind of reprimanding words, not that it would matter) is tied in with BP’s continual Gulf work and profits. After this big mess, shouldn’t someone responsible be thrown in jail, or hung? Run out of town? At the very least, shouldn’t BP be out of a job instead of allowing BP to continue on with business-as-usual? At the very least, BP should not be allowed within 1000 miles of the Gulf or any water.

But it’s not going to happen. Because BP and U.S. are pals now. Partners.

Even the Wall Street Journal has raised its eyebrows:
“Tying the disaster fund directly to Gulf oil revenue has obvious political advantages for the company, because it could make the administration and BP partners of sorts in developing the Gulf.” WSJ Here.

Patrick Martin’s article in Uruknet sums up the BP / U.S. “bed-mates” situation neatly:

“Such a move (tying the fund directly to Gulf oil revenue) would coincide with the purposes of the Obama administration, whose main concern, since the Deepwater Horizon disaster began with an explosion that killed 11 oil-rig workers April 20, has been to preserve the profitability and viability of BP. The White House never considered commandeering the assets of the corporate criminal, instead allowing BP to retain control of the disaster site through a series of failed attempts to shut down the oil leak. It has persistently downplayed the possibility of prosecution of any executives from BP or its partners in the well.”

Ongoing with this ugly, brazen, not-so-back-room deal is the ongoing speculation, and in some cases, visible proof, that BP never capped the problem well, and that it is still spewing oil. So much Corexit has dispersed the oil sufficiently to send it to the sea bottom, lending the illusion that all the oil has “gone away”, since the ocean, at least in pictures, looks much cleaner. (However, dead fish are still washing up in the gulf, and on shores as far away, apparently, as New Jersey. Coincidence? Go Here. )

In addition, It is known that BP had two wells going. Well #1 ran into problems, and so they abandoned it and started Well #2, the scene of the explosion. It is speculated that BP is using closed-down Well #1 to impersonate “capped” Well #2. There are many stories on this on the internet. Here is one link.

When in doubt, spread conspiracy and confusion. Disinformation and diversion. Distracting attention through somewhat related, yet bogus media stories, or sometimes completely unrelated stories like the tragedy of Lindsay Lohan in jail. This is the way the dark side works to stay out of the light. When this happens, as it seems to more often, you can be sure something else is going on that is hidden.

“In politics there are no accidents,” Franklin Delano Roosevelt once (allegedly) said. “If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.”
~

Russia moving ahead with Iran nuclear reactor - CNN.com

Russia moving ahead with Iran nuclear reactor - CNN.com

What’s Wrong With This Picture?? Dept:

Iran Goes Nuclear

For years the western world, led by the United States, and middle eastern world, led by Israel, have been pointing fingers at Iran to stop their nuclear reactor program for fear that Iran plans to develop a nuclear weapon, and as soon as it is out of the oven, to hurl it at (take your pick) Israel or the United States. Therefore, according to the U.S. and Israel, sanctions must be placed on Iran to halt this monstrous plot.

There have been many news stories about this, but what is commonly and inconspicuously absent from most of them is that Russia has been helping Iran all along in plain sight. The same Russia that was the U.S. cold war enemy in the 60s. The same Russia that has a stockpile of nuclear weapons of its own.

Here is an interesting quote from the above article:
“…Russia's state-sponsored nuclear corporation has been under contract for several years to help Iran build the Bushehr reactor site.”
“…The United States has urged Russia to wait (to begin producing energy within 6 months), saying more evidence is needed that Iran doesn't plan to use the site to make weapons.”

Make weapons? What has Russia been doing all these years along with the other nuclear countries? Making chopped liver?

What evidence? What evidence could possibly satisfy the U.S. other than Iran dismantling, or relinquishing total control of the program?

The U.S. has “urged” Russia to wait. Why isn’t the U.S. screaming for Russia to STOP helping Iran?

If the U.S. felt that strongly about it years ago, why wasn’t the U.S. (& Israel) all over Russia about helping Iran in the first place? Instead, they are firmly “urging” Russia to wait.

Of course these are rhetorical questions at this point. I already know the answers and you probably do too. These questions will never be answered.

We live in a world in which there are no more real, sensible laws, only corporate-style protocols that are continually amended for convenience or particular situations. Whatever best serves the situation and increases leverage.

The world we live in is no longer real. Instead it is virtual. Like the Terminator it is a machine covered with human skin.
~