Richard Lloyd Jones: They've been put forward as the causes of all manner of mayhem in modern folklore and even radio and TV shows and movies. The shadow people that have been summoned from the beyond through black magic practices and that terrorize us while we conduct our daily lives. It's too much for our program to delve into the supernatural occurrences of the shadow people. But the real life men in the shadows?
Let's go. I'm Richard Lloyd Jones and today on Thinking with Somebody Else's Head, part one of Playing the Harp. An investigation into one of the U.S. Government's black budget projects that has very dire ramifications for humanity and planet Earth. The black budget, what is that? Michael E. Sala from the Center for Global Peace at American University in Washington, D.C. Has written extensively about this.
He talks about how the CIA has the unique legal ability among all U.S. Government departments and agencies to generate funds through appropriations of other federal government agencies and other sources without regard to any provisions of law and without regard to the intent behind congressional appropriations. Every year, billions of dollars of congressional appropriations are diverted from their congressionally sanctioned purposes to the CIA and the Department of Defense-based intelligence agencies without knowledge of the public and with the collusion of congressional leaders.
The covert world of black programs acts with virtual impunity, overseen and regulated by itself, funding itself through secret slush funds, and is free of the limitations that come from congressional oversight, proper auditing procedures, and public scrutiny. That's what he says. The CIA black budget, he projects, is annually in the vicinity of $1.1 trillion. Dollars. The Department of Defense legal budget, $664 billion.
So it's even higher than that. Now, these are figures, statistics. And one thing we should know about stats is that they can be used in any way you want to use them. But one thing is clear. There are gobs of dollars floating around that appear to be outside any congressional oversight. And that should make us pause. Because that money is being used by men and women in the shadows to do all sorts of stuff.
And I don't have much confidence that these enormous sums are in the hands of people with good intentions or even competence. If the disaster of BP's Gulf of Mexico oil spill is anything to go by, any illusions of corporate or government competence should be dashed forever. Brazilian psychoanalyst and social neuroscientist Norberto Keppe has written about this extensively over the past 50 years.
And today, more than ever, we'd be wise to take heed of what he says. And let me warn you, what he says is not for the faint of heart. But let me stress that Keppe follows scientific principles in his analysis. He's the world's foremost expert on the human psyche. His conclusions arrived at after 50 years of research and clinical experience. He has seen the attitudes he describes in his over 30 books in action.
In his 17th book, a book I consider of incredible relevance today, Liberation of the People, written prophetically 24 years ago, Keppe provides an incisive analysis of the pathology of power. The book tells it like it is. Listen, quote, End of quote. Well, is it possible to have peace on earth with such aggression? Keppe's inevitable conclusions show us the inverted psyche we all have and how those in power have more serious imbalance and even sickness.
So his book is a must-read for any who are still laboring under the impression that those in power have good intentions for we the people. They don't, and they keep many of their projects and processes in the shadows. Keppe's book is available to all. You could just write me rich at richjonesvoice.com if you're interested, and I'll tell you how to get a copy.
He's had to publish it independently. The powerful who control the media and publishing industry do not want his landmark discoveries getting out through traditional means. One of the very dangerous projects being kept in the shadows is the HAARP project, and today my colleague Susan Berkley begins a two-part series into this scary and secret program. Susan? Well, hello, everybody.
Susan Berkley: I'm Susan Berkley, and I'm here with Dr.
Nick Begich, who's a noted researcher on harp technology and mind control. And he's co-author with his wife, Sheila Begich Slade, of Angels Don't Play This Harp, Advances in Tesla Technology. And he's also the author of Earth Rising, The Revolution Toward a Thousand Years of Peace, and his latest book, Earth Rising to the Betrayal of Science, Society, and the Soul with the late James Roderick.
Actually, his latest work is Controlling the Human Mind, the Technologies of Political Control or Tools for Peak Performance. Did I get that right, Nick? Is that your latest book?
Nick Begich: Absolutely, that is. And we put that out just a couple years ago. And probably the most important thing that we've reported on thus far, I think, is certainly that book.
Susan: A Mind Control. We're going to get into that in this interview as well.
And we're doing this interview, because I'm down here in Brazil, actually, with my friend Rich Jones in his studio, where he produces the podcast, Thinking with Somebody Else's Head, which goes worldwide through iTunes. And this forum that we're doing is about correcting a lot of, it was based on the work of actually Dr. Norberto Keppe down here in Brazil, at the Institute for Analytical Trilogy, where it's all about the concept of inversion.
And so, of course, your work with mind control and HAARP is going to fit in perfectly. So let's start out with a definition of HAARP. So can you tell us a little bit about it, what HAARP stands for and what it is?
Nick: Okay. HAARP is the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Project based here in Alaska. And it was originally a joint effort of the Air Force and Navy.
It then moved over to DARPA in 2003. DARPA does primarily research for the various branches, the military and the intelligence agencies for the benefit of applications. And so HARP is a field of antennas. Right now, there's 180 antennas, each of them 180 feet tall or approximately, excuse me, about 72 feet tall. So what is that, um, 20 meters more or less? Uh, these um antennas then broadcast or focus radio frequency energy into a relatively tight uh pattern.
Uh, much different than when you think about radio frequency, if you ever think about it at all. Uh, normally comes off and it would look like sort of a funneling effect with the small end at the transmitter and the wide end out into space somewhere.
In this case the opposite kind of effect occurs. It focuses the energy. By analogy, it would be similar to what a laser does with light, HAARP does with radio frequency energy. And then by manipulating that energy on the ground, you can couple with various parts of our environment, including the magnetic field lines that surround the Earth or the ionosphere itself, which is a layer that begins about 30 miles outside of the Earth's surface, extending for several hundreds of kilometers beyond that.
But this is an energized area that is involved a lot with our terrestrial ability to communicate the character and condition of the ionosphere is important. And so on the one hand, it's a research instrument to figure out what we can learn about the ionosphere and the magnetic field lines. And on the other end, it is a instrument intended to test a number of theories for weapons applications.
Now,
Susan: you say there's 180 antenna. Are they all in Alaska or are they around the world?
Nick: No, this is a single location. These are laid out in a grid pattern. There are other arrays around the world. There's a system across Europe, across Canada. The Chinese have their own. The Russians have developed their own technologies in this area. But this phased array field has 180 antennas in this single field.
And then when they broadcast the energy, it creates a cyclotron resonance, which would be kind of like a corkscrewing motion, if you could visualize this, getting tighter and tighter the higher you got, and then being able to pulse modulate that signal in such a way as to cause, for instance, the ionosphere to begin to vibrate in resonance and harmony with that signal on the ground.
So you can create things like earth penetrating tomography, which in simple language would be by analogy, again, like X-raying the earth or looking into the earth several kilometers deep for underground nuclear facilities, tunnels, mines, or even mineral and oil and gas deposits can be identified in this way. The other thing that happens in that application in particular is it's creating through the pulse an ELF, an extremely low frequency signal, which can affect the human organism profoundly in the right frequency ranges, but also are used for other things.
Things like communication with submarines at depth, because you need a very long wavelength to do that. And those are just a few of the applications that come into play with HAARP. Now,
Susan: is this thing pulsing all the time, or do they turn it on and off?
Nick: It's used periodically in what they call campaigns, where they're out testing the theoretical models against the practical applications in the environment.
So those campaigns may go from a few days to several weeks where the device is on intermittently but for extended periods during those test cycles. The thing that is misunderstood about HAARP is firstly it's not the only transmitter so other transmitters can be broadcasting on their own schedules and most likely are. But this one in particular was the largest of its kind ever built to the specifications of bernard eastland who was the original inventor. So you know it's a it's a very different kind of technology and it has a number of uses that are pretty intriguing from military perspective.
I'm just thinking about the ones we've already covered. The other things that it can do, over the horizon radar, being able to with the assistance of satellite-based technologies determining which objects from cruise missile heights, very low elevations, to intercontinental ballistic missile heights, being able to detect those incoming objects and determine which ones are carrying nuclear payloads, is one of the capabilities of this technology.
And then additionally, creating an electromagnetic pulse, a surge of energy sufficient to knock out the avionics or the things that control the ability of those craft to fly. So they essentially overrides their circuits and causes them to crash. The places where it gets more controversial is the ability to manipulate weather patterns using the HAARP system and technologies like it. And then the other, of course, is the ability to override human emotional states in such a way as to manipulate human behavior over very large areas.
Susan: Yeah, and this is the part, I mean, it's extremely scary because does the public know when this thing is being deployed? And you mentioned earlier that it can actually, these waves can penetrate the human body, not to mention animals on Earth as well. I mean, what kinds of
Nick: effects have you seen from this? Well, you know, this is the difficulty is when you look at the technology that's being applied, it's in a very, very remote place in Alaska.
And when I say remote, within hundreds of miles, there's a couple thousand people at most within that area. And so you can't get the kind of statistical modeling that you would like to have that would make sense. And that's one of the reasons that these kinds of projects can get located away from big population groups. What we do know is the baseline research, which tells us what these kinds of signals within these ranges do to the human body.
And so whenever they're operating within those ranges, if they traverse those window frequencies, those triggering frequencies, that's where you get this what's called a frequency following response, where biologically we lock on to that external signal, begin to mirror it. And for emotional states, you can actually measure that by looking at the EEG of brain activity of a normal person. You can see a shift in that EEG activity as you activate these kinds of technologies.
And so that becomes the challenge of all of this is, first of all, independent monitoring, and secondly is prohibition against those window frequencies that cause a biological response. And we took this up years ago, in fact, in 1999 in hearings in 97 and 98 in the European Parliament and actually got resolutions that addressed this issue and actually brought it into the European Parliament for debate.
And it eventually made it into a resolution signed by the European Parliament where those issues were addressed and in a way that, you know, at least got them in resolution form and later translated into scientific studies. And that process is ongoing in Europe as they address these various technologies.
Susan: What about in the United States? And is there any kind of oversight of this?
You
Nick: know, the oversight is limited to the EIS process, and those are required whenever you have a significant project of any kind. You have wetlands issues and air and water quality issues where they're affected. What isn't well regulated is the effect of RF or radio frequency energy on living organisms. And the restrictions that exist today are based on models put together decades ago that are no longer applicable.
And the regulations to revise them in the U.S. Is a significant task because, as an example, in the former Soviet Union, their regulations were 1,000 times more stringent than ours for electromagnetic energy exposures generally, because they recognized biological effects at very, very low power densities, non-ionizing levels of energy, which in the U.S. Through the regulatory agencies at least are not yet recognized.
In the science of biophysics, they're well understood and recognized, but they have not translated into regulation.
Susan: So when this thing is turned on, you said that there's a resonance with the human body. I mean, is this with everybody on the planet or just people within a certain proximity?
Nick: Over a hemisphere, and so a pretty large geographic area. In fact, you can go back to the work of J.F.
Gordon MacDonald when he was at UCLA and was a science advisor to Lyndon Johnson. He had actually written about this and he determined that if you could ever electronically stroke the ionosphere in just the right way, you could return a signal that would manipulate the behavior of those in contact with the signal. This was amplified in a book by Zbigniew Brzezinski written in the early 1970s called Between Two Ages.
It was when Brzezinski was at Columbia University before he became National Security Advisor to Jimmy Carter, and he was essentially talking about the same technology. Today, we have that technology in systems like HAARP. It's not the only technology that can deliver on that promise, but it's certainly one of them. It doesn't affect, and interestingly enough, most of the literature says that these kinds of massive systems wouldn't affect everyone, but would affect probably, and the numbers they use are like 70% of the population.
I don't know what they base that on, but when you think of near and far field effects of electromagnetic fields, if you're, for instance, surrounded in the near field close to you by a signal that your body is locked into or locked onto, these weak external signals will tend to just be ignored. And I think that's probably the reason there's some ratio there of why it doesn't affect all people in the same way.
But there's many ways to deliver that technology. HAARP is sort of the big-scale, massive delivery system if you wanted to blanket a hemisphere. But if you wanted something more targeted, you could use any electromagnetic carrier, radio broadcasts, the power grid, television, broadcast cable TV, where you could even target specific accounts if you chose to. But these other technologies can carry signals that can interfere with human brain performance or create this frequency-following response, this FFR that the brain then locks onto these signals, whether it's flickering light from the screen of a television or computer screen or whether it be a modulation on the power grid or some other modulation through other carriers.
Susan: So if somebody wanted to manipulate this, what would they be doing with this?
Nick: Well, that's the big question. Persinger at Laurentian University at one point suggested something as simple as, "If you wanted to sway public opinion, you could create a sense of dis-ease or discomfort in the general population, and then something as simple as a news broadcast where people are being told that some group or some individual is responsible for all their ills, a certain amount of that energy would flow that direction, I guess, is the way they look at it."
But that kind of manipulation, keeping people in a constant state of agitation, actually has a profound effect on our ability to reach higher states of consciousness. Most people don't really think too much about this, but if you maintain an environment of anxiety or low-level fear or just this sense of dis-ease, you're not able to reach higher states of awareness or consciousness. Your brain will not fall into those slower rhythmic states that are necessary for alpha or theta ranges where some of those more interesting things can occur.
You're preempted from reaching those states of awareness. So when you look at it pragmatically, these things that create agitation of the population really work against humanity on many levels, not just the obvious biological levels.
Susan: Well, for sure. But I mean, who is doing this and why would they be doing this? Well,
Nick: it's primarily, you know, government research that has funded most of this kind of activity.
In fact, there's a couple of articles that I could point to, but one of the more profound was one published by the U.S. Army War College quarterly, Perimeters Back, and I believe it was 98. The article is called The Mind Has No Firewalls, and they talk about sort of how that technology evolves in terms of what it can do, and the things that we've already covered are pretty well documented there.
But the other things that show up at the U.S. Army War College is another document that was called Revolutionary Military Affairs. In conflict short of war, which talked about these technologies in the context of constitutional law and just basic human rights. I mean, the idea of overriding people's mental functions or doing things that interfere with an aircraft and cause it to crash.
I suppose if you're in a war scenario, that might be permitted, but it ought to be discussed at least in terms of a technology before it's applied. And that's where we've been on this issue from the very beginning is we're talking about a new advance in technologies, the military recognizes this and at the same time recognize that it flies in the face of constitutional law.
And so in the Revolutionary Military Affairs and Conflicts Short of War, what they suggest is that, one, that the Constitution doesn't apply outside of the continental United States. And this was written in 1989. That theory of law was applied by the Bush administration for extraordinary rendition and other constitutional violations, in most of our view, when they took place outside the United States.
So they used that theory. But the other thing they said in this document that was really important is that "the only way that people would look the other way on their civil liberties as it related to new technologies that would advance these kinds of ideas forward is in an environment of fear where the Constitution is sort of laid aside in exchange for the sense of safety and security, neither of which is a good outcome."
You don't get safety and security number one and you don't uphold the constitution number two and the way it's it's played out in the u.s. As they continue to advance these technologies, even until going so far as in the latest navy protocol on human experiments, which was approved in 2006, it's posted on our website, and what it says on page nine is that "the undersecretary of the Navy can still approve, and they use these words, mind control experiments, unquote, on both cooperating and unwitting victims," has been the pattern in the United States.
And this is a problem that has existed and has been investigated by the Congress through the church committees in the early 1970s, looking at CIA programs in this area. But these programs have continued to advance in a very profound way given the state of neuroscience today. And open documents from DARPA and other governmental agencies clearly show the direction of the science. Requests for proposals, RFPs issued by the Air Force and other defense agencies requesting proposals areas clearly show the direction.
And a lot of that, again, we posted on our website for people to look at under the mind effect section. And I'd encourage of folks to do that.
Susan: So you're saying that this equipment is being used sporadically with no warning and has the potential to do incredible damage to people and to control their minds. I mean, is that really what you're saying here?
That this is just out there being used with no oversight by the military for whatever reason they might see?
Nick: Well, they consider, in fact, they've said it. One of their planners on CBC TV was quoted in film saying, you know, These effects are side effects from their perspective. They're not important. The earth-penetrating tomography application, which happens to overlap the same frequency bandwidth, is their area of interest.
And when you look at the same agency, the Air Force at that time and the Navy at that time, and there are open projects in this area, it leads you to another conclusion. The thing about it is, it's not, I would agree that it's not a primary objective of the program, the mind effects area. It is these other areas that are driving the funding.
I'd agree with that, but that doesn't remove the fact that these other uses are either side effects, as they acknowledge, or deliberate effects, depending on the intent of the operator.
Susan: So you said that these HAARP devices have the ability to kind of plug into the Earth's energy field, like acupuncture. Can you explain a little bit more about how that works?
Nick: Yeah. Actually, in one instance, in the instance in particular, is for coupling with the magnetic field lines, as an example.
And in that case, the energy is sent up, the gravitational lines act as field guides or wave guides that allow the energy then to flow. The natural energy is flowing from the South Pole to the North Pole, intersecting the poles, and at that point you get an energized interaction where you get the auroras in the North. What happens is, by pumping the energy in, they can use that magnetic field line to send energy back down. And if you could visualize it, it would be like a corkscrewing motion of energy, like a spring out of a ballpoint pen wrapped around the magnetic field line heading the opposite direction, heading to the South.
And what that would allow you to do is accelerate electrons in such a way as to create a field of energy around the Earth. So that if an intercontinental ballistic missile, as an example, were passing through it, or a satellite were passing through it, it would completely blow out their circuits and cause those craft to crash or malfunction. And it was viewed as a global shield in the case of a nuclear attack.
That was one of the original ideas. So that's just one application of Dr. Eastland's when he originated this concept of a HAARP array. The other areas that pop out in his research that were pretty interesting, and he and I had some good discussions about this prior to his death, were the idea that you could create chemical reactions in the upper atmosphere. For instance, for replenishing ozone or for knocking out specific pollutants.
Are interesting concepts that certainly are worth exploring in this day and age. And unfortunately, they're not on the high priority list of military planners.
Susan: Let's talk a little bit about also the ability to cause earthquakes. Now, we've had several horrible major ones lately. What's your take on whether or not HAARP technology has something to do with that?
Nick: Well, let me quote the former Secretary of Defense William Cohen.
And this was in an article, actually a conference on April 28, 1997, and he was speaking at the, it was a keynote address he had made on a conference on terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, followed by a Department of Defense news briefing. And he said, and I quote, others are engaging even the ecotype of terrorism, whereby they can alter climate, set off earthquakes and volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves, unquote.
Now, that's when he was Secretary of Defense, and he made that statement, attributing that technology to terrorist states using electromagnetic waves to trigger these kinds of events. The research shows that, you know, we can create geophysical events by the manipulation of either gravitational waves or by ELF transmissions perhaps into fault zones, triggering the release of energy that might be pent up there.
That kind of concept is what William Cullen was speaking about and has been associated with some of the issues with HAARP, particularly by researchers looking at the ground-penetrating tomography applications. And the thought there is you hit certain resonant frequencies that you might, in fact, trigger a release of greater amounts of energy that are stored up in fault systems within the Earth, causing them to fracture or fault.
And the idea here is, well, maybe we could do that deliberately as a weapons application. In fact, there's a treaty that we signed back in 1997 where we agreed not to use geophysical manipulation as a weapon of war along with 70 other countries. Rumsfeld, while he was in the position he was in, was pushing hard for the abandonment of that treaty based on new technologies that allowed for environmental manipulation.
And, you know, given what we know about him today, it's pretty obvious, you know, what kind of a covert war you could wage by triggering earthquakes or famines or tidal waves. You know, you essentially get invited in to clean up the mess rather than being in a situation of open and acknowledged warfare. And you have plausible deniability for the kinds of damage that you could only create with major, major war efforts otherwise.
So there's a lot of interest on the part of military in this area. And that treaty, incidentally, like all treaties, exempt domestic use. So you get to experiment in these areas domestically under those treaties without restriction. There have been assertions by some that the earthquake in Haiti and some of these other recent quakes were triggered by man, and it's certainly possible, but there's no independent monitoring that I've heard of that would indicate definitively that that's the case.
Susan: Now, what about the weather? The
Nick: problem is, at that same time when nature's sort of reaching its thresholds and demonstrating it the way it does, we are experimenting with technologies that throw another straw on that camel's back, so to speak. And that's where the risk is. I think we're experimenting in this area. In fact, in the area of climate and weather modification, Ben Eastland had made some huge advances in the last few years of his life.
He had determined that you could create weather modification with 1,600 times less energy than you originally thought was needed. What that means is the facilities that exist in the world today can create weather changes either by, again, an accidental side effect, not recognizing what they're doing, or a deliberate effect, that they know what they're doing. And Eastland's view of it was weather modification was such a sensitive subject that A, it shouldn't be pursued by the military in a vacuum, and B, it needed to be, if done at all, and that's using his words, it needed to be done in the open light of day with multidisciplinary approaches, understanding what exactly we were going to experiment with.
Because experimenting with the environment isn't our own private purview of some research lab and some military think tank. It belongs to every living soul on this planet, and whoever dialogues in that direction needs to do so in the open light of day. And that's what's not happening with these very technologies that William Cohen is talking about in 1997. Now, 13 years ago, the fact is we need that open discussion, we need restriction, we need independent and verifiable monitoring which can be achieved easily.
Because to create these kinds of effects, you use coherent rhythmic signals that are easily picked out among nature's background noise, if you will. But again, it requires, first of all, the knowledge of the existence of the technology and then the right international instruments to push forward monitoring. Weather modification or environmental manipulation for good reason was restricted in 1977. But having all of these years of additional knowledge and research built, that needs to be revisited, you know, in the environment of the 21st
Richard: century.
Agreed, dr baggage, although society has been organized to put people under the dominion of the powerful and their agenda, Keppe's proposals in Analytical Trilogy can change that. This is a very powerful body of work, rich at richjonesvoice.com if you'd like to know more. This is Thinking with Somebody Else's Head. I'm Richard Lloyd Jones. Part 2 of Playing the Harp, coming soon.
