Advertisement
Home arrow 9-11 and Fake Terror arrow Articles arrow 9/11 and The Hutchison Effect - Handling the Truth
9/11 and The Hutchison Effect - Handling the Truth PDF Print E-mail

Some people have now observed that the 9/11 Truth Movement is being directed and controlled, in order that only a certain amount information is revealed – at a certain time, and in a certain way. I first began to understand how this seemed to be happening during the break up of the original Scholars for 9/11 Truth Group in about Feb 2007. More recently, I feel I have, with the help of others, been able to document another significant instance of the attempted control of 9-11 related information. In completing this documentation, I have been somewhat concerned that I may be accused of some type of “ad hominem attack” against those whose statements and actions I am documenting. I feel somewhat similar about writing this article, for the same reasons. Weighed against this, I feel that certain truths need to be told in order that people have a chance to understand how the mechanics of the control of information related to 9/11 - and the energy cover up – are operating. In short, I have now come the conclusion that, when trying to get to the truth, the history, behaviour and psychology of those presenting or discussing evidence has to be carefully considered.

 

In this article, I will present evidence concerning the latest attempts to cover up one of the “central secrets” of the 9/11 Black Operation. That secret, I strongly contend, is this: free energy technology, related to Hutchison Effect technology was used to destroy the majority of the WTC complex. “Free Energy” technology is a “catch all” term to describe a kind of technology that can be used to "get out more energy than you put in" (i.e. you apparently get the energy for free). Mainstream science rejects this idea on its face, because it is said it breaks the laws of thermodynamics. (When looked at from a different perspective, however, this seems to be incorrect – it is known the energy is real, but assumed it is too difficult to construct technology to use or extract it to do “useful work”.) Cold fusion is one example where many, many experiments show a small input energy can result, in certain circumstances, in a large energy output. (See www.lenr-canr.org)

 

Some of the effects observed in John Hutchison’s experiments are apparently the result of an output of very high energy levels, and yet his input energy is small – only a few kilowatts at maximum. (This is the energy required to operate a kettle to boil water).

 

In December 2007, Dr. Judy Wood posted her study of the very striking similarity of experimental characteristics of the “Hutchison Effect” to a number of pieces of evidence at the WTC. Dr. Wood and I were given an opportunity to discuss this issue on Ambrose Lane’s “We Ourselves” show in January 2008 and on our second appearance, John Hutchison joined the discussion. Following this radio show appearance, two of the people associated with the 911 Scholars group –Prof Jim Fetzer (the founder) and Ace Baker (not a listed member of the Scholars group, but a regular guest on Fetzer’s radio show) - when challenged, began to behave differently towards Dr. Wood and I– at least in relation to the “Hutchison Effect” study. I attempted to document this “change in behaviour” in the articles linked above. Following the actions of Baker and Fetzer, I asked that my name be deleted from the 911 Scholars list.

 

In the articles linked above, I documented the very strong reaction of Fetzer and Baker – they both (essentially) agreed that John Hutchison was a fraud – and in saying this, ignored and considerable amount of evidence which suggested, beyond reasonable doubt, that John Hutchison’s work was valid.

 

It is interesting to note that there was an apparent “change in strategy” by Fetzer - sometime in February 2008 – from apparent support of Dr. Wood’s study to his support of Baker’s pernicious debunking tactics.

 

“Good Cop?”

 

On Feb 5th 2008, Jim Fetzer sent Dr. Wood an e-mail which had come from one of his contacts which included these paragraphs. This contact was enthusing about Dr. Wood’s research:

 

 

I've been meaning to write to you on a number of issues, not least your collaboration with my dear friend, Dr. _________, which I was instrumental in bringing about and for which he is very grateful.  In particular for "having opened their minds to the work of Judy Wood, Morgan Reynolds as well as your own".

 

…and

 

  Hi ______,  You've been right about Judy Wood, I have been studying the website  and I had to update mine, this is of such importance that  I have c.e.r.n. people and international physicists on the edge of their  seats and today I will have a meeting with one of them.  We we might just nail the evidence soon.  Thanks!!!

 

(It should be noted that Jim Fetzer has not posted any of his own original 9/11 research in the way Dr. Wood has, though he has other research posted on the possible involvement of directed energy weapons in the death of Senator Paul Wellstone).

 

From reading these forwarded messages, it seemed that people at CERN were interested in Dr. Wood’s research. This seemed, on its face, like a very positive development – much of the research at CERN concerns Energy Phenomena of one type or another.

 

However, these messages were never followed up with anything more substantive and were therefore quickly forgotten about – especially once the Ace Baker “campaign” was underway.

 

The next few e-mail exchanges centred around Ace Baker’s fake video debunking attempt, but on 26th Feb 2008, Ace Baker announced he would be appearing on Jim Fetzer’s show. Dr. Wood thought this was rather an odd way to do things – that Fetzer was going to get someone else to talk about Dr. Wood’s research with Fetzer before Dr. Wood did. Dr. Wood therefore e-mailed Fetzer and several others in a small group to say this much. It was an especially odd way of doing things because Ace Baker, as it was known by this time, had already circulated a false story that he had bought equipment on e-bay to reproduce the effect, but he then he made and posted a fake video to apparently reproduce a very limited number of the effects seen in John Hutchison’s own work. Additionally, unlike Dr. Wood, Baker had no real relevant qualifications. Fetzer soon replied.

 

“This Doesn’t Look Right to Me…”

 

On Feb 27th 2008, Jim Fetzer sent Dr. Wood an e-mail expressing concern that she had notified several others of the group that she was being critical that Ace Baker would be going on Jim Fetzer’s show to discuss the Hutchison Effect:

 

Just between us, why didn't you send me a personal note when you noticed what you perceived to be a problem?  What's going on there?  I find that a bit odd.  And you and John already appeared with Morgan to discuss the H-effect, so what's the deal if Ace is doing something with it?  I admit I have been sicker than a dog with stomach flu and simply tried to solve what you took to be a problem, but if you couldn't come on Wednesday anyway and have already discussed it with Morgan, why is it such a big deal? No one holds your work is greater esteem than do I.  Give me a break, OK?

 

One point here is that John Hutchison had not yet appeared with Dr. Morgan Reynolds on the Dynamic Duo show – though he had planned to, it never happened. Why did Fetzer ask Judy to “give him a break”? Once the Ace Baker broadcast and associated blog entries were complete, it seemed quite clear that a full-scale debunking exercise was underway, and this therefore seemed to justify Dr. Wood’s earlier concern.

“Bad Cop”

 

On Mar 3rd 2008, shortly after Judy Wood and John Hutchison’s broadcast on the Dynamic Duo, Jim Fetzer sent another e-mail to Dr. Wood. The tone of this message was rather different to previous messages he had sent.

 

Just between us, if Judy were to back off her relations with Hutchinson, whom I consider to be a fraud, I think her standing can be salvaged.  Whether she is willing to do that, I have no idea.  But this is certainly an option that is available to her.  We all make mistakes and have misplaced enthusiasm.  But my opinion is that--absence physical explanations of the kind I asked of him at the time on the air--he is most unlikely to contribute to our/her success.

 

Here, Fetzer suggests Dr. Wood should not continue her association with John Hutchison. The reason given here is not based on any evidence - it is that Fetzer “considers John to be a fraud”. Fetzer specifies no particular evidence, merely that John could “not explain” his phenomenon. However, this statement by Fetzer is not 100% accurate – John did provide a basic explanation of his phenomenon during the broadcast, and it was thus:

 

OK. I don’t normally go into theories too much – I have my own personal theory that it’s affected on a subatomic level, but Rene Louis Vallee and Andrei Sakharov brought up some interesting reports, along with many others, on what happens here and we found that the RF fields are not the cause – or the electrostatics – it’s something that happens after that. They seem to join or [be] combined in space and time to cause a[n] other effect – which happens to be like a shielding of the gravity pull – basically the reverse of gravity – and you see things lift off. Things go in a translational motion as well as … if not, metals seem to start bending and twisting and pulling into different patterns and shapes. We also found it affects the background radiation, to quite an extent – where you get a couple of counts per minute.

 

John then names several scientists who have evaluated the phenomenon – and several of them have posted reports (see http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/JJ/JJAppendix1.html) If John Hutchison was a fraud, why did he agree to come on Fetzer’s radio show (no fee is paid), where he could, in theory, be exposed as a fraud?

 

Recently, part of the interview with Fetzer and Hutchison was transcribed for us by someone. One section makes particularly interesting reading:

 

Hutchison: Well, my education is -- I flunked my coloring book and blocks. I’m self-taught, and I’ve been involved in many applications in engineering and research and one of them happened to be in to Nicola Tesla, which I was able to replicate a lot of his experiments. And pushing it beyond the envelope there, we managed to cause levitation of objects and also the destruction of objects, as it’s called. And it gained interest in to the U.S. military back in 1983, which they did a lot of experiments and tests with it.

Fetzer: So you grew up in Canada?

 

Why does Fetzer ask about John’s upbringing rather than the interest of the US military in his experiments? At this point, Fetzer knew that US Defence Contractors such as SAIC and ARA were defendants in the Qui Tam Cases of Drs. Wood and Reynolds, so why doesn’t Fetzer have an interest in what John has to say about the Military’s work with John? (Fetzer does not discuss this at all in the rest of the programme.)


Fetzer Ignores Evidence

 

Again, as documented previously, Fetzer wilfully ignores the strong correspondence between the WTC evidence and fully documented effects seen in John Hutchison’s experiments – bent “horseshoe” beams, spontaneous cold fires, levitation, transmutation of materials and ongoing effects.

 

How can Fetzer threaten Dr. Judy Wood’s reputation? What gives him the right to do so? What gives him grounds for using this sort of language when Dr. Wood’s association with Fetzer is completely informal – she is not an employee, nor does Fetzer have any agreed method of working with her. Therefore, what on earth compels him to talk about “salvaging her reputation”? Can this e-mail can therefore be perceived as some kind of thinly-veiled threat?

 

Another peculiar aspect of the message is that, rather than starting a new message, or replying to one from Dr. Wood, Fetzer had forwarded an article from the Washington Post entitled The New Art of War. He also changed the subject line of the message. Why did he include this article in the message to Dr. Wood – which was also copied to Jerry Leaphart and Dr. Morgan Reynolds? Why did it include a very long list of recipients, to which the original forwarded message was sent (this list included Steven E Jones and others)?

 

The New Art of War article begins as follows:

 

If there were any doubts that the United States is preparing for war in space and cyberspace, testimony before the Strategic Forces Subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee last week would have wiped them away.

According to Gen. Kevin P. Chilton, head of U.S. Strategic Command, "our adversaries understand our dependence upon space-based capabilities, and we must be ready to detect, track, characterize, attribute, predict and respond to any threat to our space infrastructure."

Although space threats have received much attention in the past, it was the possibility of cyberspace warfare that was given new emphasis at the hearing.

 

Was Fetzer giving some “coded indication” that Dr. Wood exposing the truth about what destroyed the WTC is a "threat” to the US’s space infrastructure? Was he somehow indicating Dr. Wood’s exposure of this evidence could be treated as an act of “Cyber Terrorism”? Is it a possibility that Fetzer is actually “going along” with the unfolding agenda - for tighter global control of ordinary people, whilst at the same time pretending he is working to prevent its implementation?

 

Also, if Fetzer truly thinks Dr. Wood had something wrong in her “Hutchison Effect” study, why didn't he address this on his radio show, as he went through the “JJ” pages? (Fetzer raised no points of criticism during the broadcast). Before sending this message, Fetzer had no specific argument with anything  John Hutchison or Judy Wood had said –he merely thought “there was a possibility of fraud”. This is true with almost every controversial issue – and the only way to resolve it is by considering the widest possible range of pertinent evidence.

 

Questions and Speculations

 

I find the above developments of some concern, both for what they are, and the additional questions they raise.

 

It was puzzling to receive initial communications from CERN via Fetzer – apparently supportive of Dr. Wood’s new research – research that had been publicly discussed several weeks earlier. How does Fetzer know people at CERN? Why didn’t any of these people contact Dr. Wood directly? Why was the communication routed through Fetzer?

 

What then caused the switch to a tone which was more sinister, mentioning the idea that “Judy’s reputation can be salvaged” – even though no evidence had been presented to show that her study was somehow invalid?

 

Is it possible that “psychological tactics” were in use by Fetzer? Perhaps he hoped that Dr. Wood would be very enthusiastic about CERN’s apparent interest – and pursue this angle in preference to some other one (such as work on the Qui Tam cases).

 

One possibility is that CERN would not want any information relating to free energy technology to become widely known. They are large benefactors from energy related research:

 

CERN, with an annual budget of more than EURO 600 million and more than 6000 regular users working in 500 institutes in 50 different countries....

 

The Hutchison Effect and Cold Fusion hold the potential to produce limitless, cheap, free energy – with relatively simple equipment, compared to what is used at places like CERN. At CERN, however, things like “hot fusion” are (unsurprisingly) promoted within the organisation.

 

So they, too, like the Military Industrial Complex have a very strong vested interest in keeping all this information out of public view or “in the realm of the incredible”.

 

As Dr. Wood did not express any specific interest in the CERN contact, did Fetzer then change his strategy from “Good Cop” to “Bad Cop” hoping that she would react to a more threatening posture?

 

Please consider the evidence and draw your own conclusions.


 

E-mails

E-mail 1

From: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

To: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it , This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it , This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Cc: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Subject: Fwd: exciting developments!

X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.92/5698/Tue Feb  5 11:24:00 2008 on mxv2.d.umn.edu

X-Virus-Status: Clean

 

Content-Type: text/plain;

            DelSp="Yes";

            format="flowed"

Content-Disposition: inline

 

Or this one?

 

----- Forwarded message from -----

     Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 12:41:15 +0100

     From:

Reply-To:

  Subject: exciting developments!

       To: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

 

Hello Jim,

 

I've been meaning to write to you on a number of issues, not least your collaboration with my dear friend, Dr. _________, which I was instrumental in bringing about and for which he is very grateful.  In particular for "having opened their minds to the work of Judy Wood, Morgan Reynolds as well as your own".

 

He has written to me with a number of ideas about the possibility of organizing a meeting with you, Thierry Meyssan (who has been totally ostracized and has had to expatriate from France where his life was in danger) and other interested people ... perhaps in Geneva where I live! And now, in light of these developments (see emails below) the idea of Geneva would make a lot of sense!

 

Let me explain!  ______  is a well-connected and high-powered person who is entirely dedicated to 9/11 truth.  As you will see, also thanks to my constant advocacy, the Judy Wood "penny" has finally also dropped for him in a big way.

 

The physicists he is referring to are from CERN http://public.web.cern.ch/Public/Welcome.html, one of the biggest and most prestigious research centers in the world right here in Geneva. I'll be following these developments very closely since, should these people decide to go public, this might lead to a major breakthrough.  In the meantime, you may just wish to let Judy know that she is making "waves". In addition, I've created an association "Le 11 septembre en question" (9/11 in question which is a play on words) and we are organizing our first major event on February 28th with the screening of Oil, Smoke and Mirrors with Daniele Ganser and Marc Chesney (good job it's got an s in the middle!  we tease him about that all the time!) as speakers.  Daniele you already know, of course, and Marc you can find on patriotsquestion911.  See presentation attached but please make a discreet use of it since Daniele is still being very cautious!

 

 So, things are moving fast and should be swinging in the right direction.

 

All the best,

 

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From

To:

Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 9:44 AM

Subject: Re: ____ ( you were right) Judy Wood

 

Hi ____,

 

Hey ... this is such great news!  Thank you for having listened and for helping to draw attention to Judy's revolutionary findings! If the people you are talking about get hooked on this and are willing to speak out ... this might break into something really big. Please keep me posted on every single development. We have a new association "Le 11 septembre en question"; I'll be forwarding the promotional material for the 28th of February any day. Things are moving fast so let's get together asap ... also to discuss your new website.

Un abrazo,

___

 

Original Message ----- To: ______

     From: __________

Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 8:54 AM

Subject: ( you were right) Judy Wood

 

 

Hi ______,

You've been right about Judy Wood, I have been studying the website and I had to update mine, this is of such importance that I have c.e.r.n. people and international physicists on the edge of their seats and today I will have a meeting with one of them. We we might just nail the evidence soon. Thanks!!!

 

E-mail 2

-----Original Message-----

From: Judy Wood [mailto: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it ]

Sent: 27 February 2008 00:35

To: johnhutchison; This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it ; This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Cc: Morgan Reynolds; Ace Baker; Jerry Leaphart; Andrew Johnson; Russ Gerst; Steve Goodale

Subject: Re: Will be on Dynamic Duo Tomorrow

 

 

It's Thursday. This is the first I've learned that Fetzer is having Ace on to talk about the Hutchison Effect.  That's pretty weird.

 

I don't know what Fetzer is doing.  Why would he have Ace introduce someone else's work?  Why?

 

 

E-mail 3

Envelope-to: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 06:15:31 -0600

From: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

To: Judy Wood < This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it >

Cc: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Subject: Fwd: Re: Will be on Dynamic Duo Tomorrow

X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.92.1/6009/Wed Feb 27 05:24:23 2008 on mxv2.d.umn.edu

X-Virus-Status: Clean

 

Just between us, why didn't you send me a personal note when you noticed what you perceived to be a problem?  What's going on there?  I find that a bit odd.  And you and John already appeared with Morgan to discuss the H-effect, so what's the deal if Ace is doing something with it?  I admit I have been sicker than a dog with stomach flu and simply tried to solve what you took to be a problem, but if you couldn't come on Wednesday any- way and have already discussed it with Morgan, why is it such a big deal? No one holds your work is greater esteem than do I.  Give me a break, OK?

 

----- Forwarded message from This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it -----

     Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 05:46:43 -0600

     From: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Reply-To: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

  Subject: Re: Will be on Dynamic Duo Tomorrow

       To: Judy Wood < This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it >

       Cc: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

 

Yes, but I hadn't noticed the "H-effect" remark when I scanned it.  I had not imposed any limits on his scope of discussion in having him back.  You and John were on with Morgan recently, as I recall, so this isn't really the first introduction of his work in relation to yours.  I will have Ace on on Wednesday and you and John on Thursday, but I am interested in what Ace may have come up with.  I am fascinated to learn more about all this!

Quoting Judy Wood < This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it >:

 

 

Jim, Ace sent out an email to the rest of the folks on the list I added you to.

 

"Hi All, I'll be on Dynamic Duo with Jim Fetzer tomorrow 5-7 EST. I'll be discussing latest research including H Effect. Should be memorable."

 

It just seemed a bit weird to have Ace on, talking about this same topic, while his area of expertise is video fakery.  I've heard a lot of good things about his presentations on this topic.  He gets folks interested in thinking about things and that's really cool!

 

As a listener, I like to learn new things from those who know about things I don't know about.  Also, as a listener, I prefer to learn new and interesting things that motivate me to think about new things or old things in a new way.  "Debates" don't seem very useful; they consume a lot of energy and don't inspire the listener to learn and think.

 

 Tomorrow will not work for me. Let's keep it for Thursday, as planned.

 

Thanks!

 

 

 

 

E-mail 4

 

Envelope-to: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 21:15:14 -0600

From: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

To: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it , This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it , This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Cc: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Subject: Ace Baker, Judy Wood, and the Hutchison Effect

X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.92.1/6101/Mon Mar  3 20:15:23 2008 on mxv2.d.umn.edu

X-Virus-Status: Clean

 

Just between us, if Judy were to back off her relations with Hutchinson, whom I consider to be a fraud, I think her standing can be salvaged.  Whether she is willing to do that, I have no idea.  But this is certainly an option that is available to her.  We all make mistakes and have misplaced enthusiasm.  But my opinion is that--absence physical explanations of the kind I asked of him at the time on the air--he is most unlikely to contribute to our/her success.

 

----- Forwarded message from This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it -----

     Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 18:51:33 -0800 (PST)

     From: Kev Hall < This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it >

Reply-To: Kev Hall < This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it >

  Subject: THE NEW ART OF WAR: Space & Cyber - Walter Pincus, Wash. Post

       To: <very long list of recipients!!>

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/02/AR2008030202216.html

 

Washington Post

 

The New Art of War

 

By Walter Pincus Monday, March 3, 2008; A15

 

If there were any doubts that the United States is preparing for war in space and cyberspace, testimony before the Strategic Forces Subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee last week would have wiped them away.

 

According to Gen. Kevin P. Chilton, head of U.S. Strategic Command, "our adversaries understand our dependence upon space-based capabilities, and we must be ready to detect, track, characterize, attribute, predict and respond to any threat to our space infrastructure."

 

Although space threats have received much attention in the past, it was the possibility of cyberspace warfare that was given new emphasis at the hearing.

 

Chilton described cyberspace as an "emerging war-fighting domain." He said that "potential adversaries recognize the U.S. reliance on . . . [its] use and constantly probe our networks seeking competitive advantage," providing the reasons for developing defensive and offensive systems in this area.

 

U.S. cyberspace, in Pentagon terms called the Global Information Grid, serves as "a conduit that links human activity and facilitates the exchange of information," Chilton said.

 

Michael G. Vickers, assistant secretary of defense for special operations, low-intensity conflict and interdependent capabilities, who also testified, told the panel: "Threats to our computer networks are real and growing," and attacks and attempted intrusions come "on a daily basis."

 

Strategies and institutions have been created for the war to protect cyberspace. There is, for example, the classified 2006 National Military Strategy for Cyberspace Operations, which concludes that "offensive capabilities in cyberspace offer both the U.S. and our adversaries an opportunity to gain and maintain the initiative."

 

Strategic Command, working with Joint Chiefs of Staff personnel, is developing contingency plans and carrying out operations that protect the government's computer networks through detection and coordinated counterattacks against intruders. This often involves other Pentagon and interagency elements, according to Chilton.

 

Capabilities are being developed "to operate, defend, exploit and attack in cyberspace," he said.

 

Here are a few of the units that Chilton said have been enlisted to prepare for cyberspace battles:

 

** The Joint Task Force for Global Network Operations in Arlington directs operations and defense of the worldwide Defense cybernetwork in real time at strategic, operational and tactical levels. It is involved in fighting, intelligence gathering and conducting normal business.

 

** The Joint Functional Component Command for Network Warfare is led by the director of the National Security Agency at Fort Meade. This group manages the cooperative arrangements for defending national computer operations and for carrying out network warfare against adversaries. In an article on the command three years ago, Wired magazine reported: "It could best be described as the world's most formidable hacker posse. Ever."

 

** The Joint Information Operations Warfare Command, located at Lackland Air Force Base in Texas, integrates elements of electronic warfare, military deception, operations security and strategic communications to ensure that cyberspace is controlled and available to friendly forces for offensive and defensive uses.

 

When it came to space vulnerabilities, Chilton and Vickers both pushed for "prompt global strike" capability. That refers to an intercontinental ballistic missile with a conventional warhead or another type of delivery system that could reach anywhere in the world within an hour, programs that are being researched today.

 

The threat was described to the panel by Vickers, who said, "Our space capabilities face a wide range of threats such as radio frequency jamming, laser blinding and anti-satellite systems," including the "anti-satellite capability demonstrated by China last year."

 

Asked by Rep. Terry Everett (R-Ala.) what could be done if the Chinese continued to "dazzle" U.S. satellites with lasers, Vickers referred to that same type of prompt global strike concept.

 

"We believe we need that capability now," Vickers said. .. National security and intelligence reporter Walter Pincus pores over the speeches, reports, transcripts and other documents that flood Washington and every week uncovers the fine print that rarely makes headlines -- but should. If you have any items that fit the bill, please send them This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it = + =

..

Please support the urgent, heroic work of:

Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in

Space

http://Space4Peace.org

 

Peace + prayers,

Kevin Hall

Senior Researcher

http://Antiwar.com

..

= + =




*** PLEASE *** SHARE ON FACEBOOK ETC
Del.icio.us!Facebook!StumbleUpon!Free social bookmarking plugins and extensions for Joomla! websites! title=
 
< Prev   Next >