22.03.2014 Author: Gordon Duff

The Ethics of “Doomsday” Tech

PSETAC15Several new “deniable” technologies some with both military and civilian applications have become available, essentially since 1960. In every case, key scientific technologies, many with “game changing” applications in areas such as health or economic development; have gone “dark.”

We will take a more detailed look at one of these technologies, one capable of “inducement.” We can safely assume all communications can be overheard. Many even suspect their thoughts are monitored.

“Inducement” raises the bar, the theoretical ability to implant images, feelings, memories or “beliefs” through use of targetable hyperspectral media. Where such media becomes hyperspatial, we begin breaking new ground in theoretical physics, “new ground” that may not be so “new” after all. In many cases, “non-existent” technologies have been used to devastating effect under “deception and cover” operations to maintain deniability.

The issues aren’t simply death rays and genetically modified bioweapons, though such things are very real and, not only exist but have been used. It goes further.

We enter a grey area, there has been no meaningful discussion of ethics and weapon use since government began cloaking themselves in hypocritical deniability. “Good” tech is suppressed, “bad” tech is secretly used and warfare in general, an accepted pastime as part of the “human condition” continues unabated though, from a technical standpoint at least, great changes should have occurred.


It is believed that Pope Innocent II, at the Second Council of the Lateran in 1139 banned the use of the crossbow as a designated “weapon of mass destruction.”

The idea of applying ethical concepts on the deployment of weapons of war wasn’t new then and was codified, to a degree in such more recent attempts as the Geneva Protocol on the use of poison gas in 1925, a modification and addition to the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907.

Today approaching such questions effectively has become impossible.

Scientific advances in physics along with medical discoveries, mapping not only DNA but the human brain, have made startling new methodologies not only possible but long deployed.

You see, were the crossbow to have been introduced today, its presence would have been characterized “conspiracy theory” and all discussions of a ban would have been tabled forever.


In 1957, Dr. Mark Mills, Dr. Ernest Lawrence and Edward Teller approached President Eisenhower telling him they were capable of building large scale thermonuclear weapons with virtually no dangerous radiation.

Their assumptions were based on hard data from a highly secret test held at Eniwetok Atoll in 1956. Information on that test has not been made public until now.

Secret congressional briefings were held and a second test, the results of which were to be released to the public, was scheduled.

The test, called Operation Hardtack/Pinon was called off after Dr. Mills was killed at the test site in a freak accident. No reason for failing to reschedule the test was ever given.

When the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), currently tasked with inspection Iran’s nuclear enrichment program, began asking about “laser initiators” that they said could be used to “trigger” fusion based nuclear weapons, we entered one of those “dark” areas.

The IAEA was citing that lasers are used to produce petawatt –picosecond pulses directed at deuterium tritium fuel pellets or with more difficulty, proton-Boron 11. The latter reaction produces no radiation and is said to be capable of powering inter-stellar travel.

The same initiators when directed at plutonium in the presence of DT (deuterium/tritium) are capable of producing nuclear explosions with no residual radiation whatsoever.

This is decades old science describing weapons that if they weren’t built, could easily have and, to the best of our knowledge were. If they were built, and we have every reason to believe this, and if they were used, and we have even more reason to believe this as well, their use would have been, not just denied but never even considered.

Yet, any source of laser powered fusion or aneutronic plasma power is capable of both low cost immeasurable power output or, through purpose or accident, cataclysmic containment failures capable of massive and idiosyncratic destructive effects.

The ethical considerations here encompass several issues. By creating a deniable destructive capability, disasters such as earth quakes or terror attacks could be carried out with utter impunity.

darpaConversely, that groups such as DARPA have long suppressed critical research in these areas, our most effective form of “green energy” to date has been kept out of the public domain, one that is scalable, allowing for decentralization of power generation, considered by many nations a threat to political control.

To a similar and, in some cases equal extent, particle weapons, weather control systems, DNA specific biological and chemical WMDs are far more advanced in “dark programs” than the public imagines. In many of those cases, the advancements promoted under weaponization programs could be applied to fight cancer or promote economic wellbeing.

Not all news is bad. High speed neutron emitters developed for defense systems will, very soon, move medical diagnostics forward decades. Million dollar medical scanners, infamous for impoverishing poor insurance company executives, will be replaced by pocket size devices with a hundred times the resolution, able to spot, not only tumors but cells capable of “going astray.”

Systems based on advances since 2005 by 4 major US universities would allow airline passengers to be scanned hundreds at a time. The terrorists could be picked out and the rest could have their diseases diagnosed and treatment options offered. This might be a new twist for the NSA or TSA (Transportation Safety Administration), actually doing something not only effective but useful as well.

Of the potentially most intrusive and threatening of all new technologies is the subset of psychological warfare tied to medical advancements in brain mapping that allow for “inducement.” Publicly, “Psyop” specialists admit to using varying radio frequencies including those in the microwave spectrum to cause or “induce” feelings of discomfort (pain) or confusion.

On a broader scale, these efforts fall under the intelligence subset of MASINT, (measurement and signature intelligence), a shadowy collection of poorly defined capabilities that would often be categorized as “occult” or “extrasensory.”

On the US side, everything stemmed from Vietnam. The government was confronted with a series of challenges, tall trees in Vietnam to see under, people who fought back when bullied, unwilling to give their “hearts and minds” to the purveyors of “democracy.”

At home, a similar problem, a population unwilling to follow an eternal war, cynical, aware, awake, distrustful and a military increasingly of the same mien.

The “tree” thing was easy. The US developed herbicides loaded with carcinogens, not only killing the trees but poisoning generations of Vietnamese as well and killing off as many as 200,000 of our own war veterans to boot. The economics of this is elegant and far from accidental.

At home, more draconian solutions were devised. America was well on her way to controlled news and soon to be on an inexorable path to a medieval feudal economy. The scale of redistribution of wealth toward the top and the toppling standard of living in the United States is unprecedented and equally unspoken of.

What else isn’t spoken of is the use of a wide collection of “MASINT” based technologies. MASINT at current levels of “dark technology” can and does represent direct interaction with the human brain.

MASINT is an offshoot of ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance), the “eyes and ears” of any military operation. At the battle of Gettysburg in 1863, General Lee was blinded when his ISR capability, in this case, General Jeb Stuart’s cavalry, had failed to provided needed intelligence.

American and world history changed over this one miscalculation.

Today, ISR is a mixture of capabilities, advanced radars that see underground, wide spectrum sensors that can detect molecular signatures along with biometric indicators. By “biometric,” we mean identifying individuals from “platform based sensors,” satellites, drones, Skyships or aerostats.

The issue of ISR, different “platforms” with sensors, cameras, communications interception and jamming equipment, all connected to “command and control” became the methodology of the “electronic battlefield.”


The “dark” parallel of ISR systems, capabilities known only to a few, understood by fewer, are those that can be characterized as “inducement” or “thought control.” You can fly over a battlefield, take, for instance, Fallujah, the scene of devastating battles during the US occupation of Iraq. Where thousands died, nearly a third of a city destroyed, thousand more subjected to radiation exposure, what is clear is that this is a battle that never should have been fought against an enemy with nothing to gain.

In modern warfare, so often asymmetrical and urban, the ability to control a population using intrusive electromagnetic techniques bordering on the “occult” could be seen one of two ways, a horrific violation of human rights or as an alternative to slaughter and destruction.

There has and will never be an accounting for US actions in Fallujah, the “right or wrong’ of the war or even the evidence of radiation exposure discovered by Dr. Chris Busby in his research there.

This is where battlefield morality is unclear. There are never questions about the right or wrong of a war, not if the victor also controls the historical narrative.

What does count is that the dead are still dead.

Where the questions lie today is in the moral narrative. Is winning a battle through use of intrusive and even sinister technology better or worse than the destruction of human lives, an economy and social infrastructure.

In the larger picture, do “less harmful” nuclear weapons make them more likely to be used and will “easy win” mind control weapons drive “easy wars” as well?

Will moral accountability decrease as war moves into the realm of what was once science fiction?

Gordon Duff is a Marine combat veteran of the Vietnam War that has worked on veterans and POW issues for decades and consulted with governments challenged by security issues. He’s a senior editor and chairman of the board of Veterans Today, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.

Please select digest to download: