Directed Energy Weapons Used On American Citizens in Tests

The Intel Hub
Shepard Ambellas & Joe Joseph 
January 29, 2012 

Listen to the exclusive podcast that accompanies this article here.


Factions within the U.S. Government’s Military Industrial Complex have been, and indeed are testing Directed Energy Weapons, along with chemical, nuclear and biological agents on the civilian populace.

In fact, U.S. law, approved by Congress, allows chemical and biological testing on the populace. (see PUBLIC LAW 105–85—NOV. 18, 1997 111 STAT. 1915)


The Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues is composed of 13 members and was established in November of 2009 by way of Executive Order 13521 which was issued by President Barrack H. Obama.
According to the PCSBI official government website;

“The Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues (PCSBI) advises the President on bioethical issues that may emerge from advances in biomedicine and related areas of science and technology.

The Commission works with the goal of identifying and promoting policies and practices that ensure scientific research, health care delivery, and technological innovation are conducted in an ethically responsible manner.”

The documentation provided on the PCBSI website concludes that the commission has engaged in various studies over time, one of which was the Dec 15, 2011 study entitled — Moral Science: Protecting Participants in Human Subjects Research.

The opening statement in Moral Science: Protecting Participants in Human Subjects Research reads like a mad scientists diary stating;

The Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues today issued its report concerning federally-sponsored research involving human volunteers, concluding that current rules and regulations provide adequate safeguards to mitigate risk.
In its report, “Moral Science: Protecting Participants in Human Subjects Research,” the Commission also recommended 14 changes to current practices to better protect research subjects, and called on the federal government to improve its tracking of research programs supported with taxpayer dollars.

The statement goes on to openly admit that the U.S. Government spread bio-agents (STD’s) to Guatemalans in the mid 40′s stating;

President Obama requested that the Commission undertake an assessment of research standards following the October 2010 revelation that the U.S. Public Health Service supported unethical research in Guatemala from 1946 to 1948 that involved intentionally exposing thousands of Guatemalans to sexually transmitted diseases without their consent.

The President gave the Bioethics Commission two assignments: to oversee a thorough fact-finding investigation into the specifics of the studies (released September 13, 2011); and to assure that current rules for research participants protect people from harm or unethical treatment, domestically as well as internationally.

The statement goes on to highlight the Key Findings:

In the report’s central finding, the Commission found that the “U.S. system provides substantial protections for the health, rights, and welfare of research subjects.” 

Evidence has now been brought to light that over 55,000 human testing projects (with numerous people per project) took place during the year 2010;

In assessing the current regulations that protect human subjects, the Commission learned that there is no central source with information about the overall size, scope, and cost of the government’s research involving human subjects.
The Commission requested information from 18 individual agencies that conduct most federal human subjects research, but discovered that many federal offices could not provide basic data about the research they support.
The Pentagon, for example, required more than seven months to prepare information on specific studies supported by the Department of Defense.

In its report, the Commission found that the federal government supported more than 55,000 projects involving human subjects around the globe in Fiscal Year 2010, mostly in health-related research, but also in other fields such as education, engineering and social science.

The PCSBI sounds great to the average person nearly skimming the surface pages of the government website.

However, a closer look reveals that the commission has possibly been put in place to aid in a massive cover-up of what is really taking place right in front of our  eyes on a daily basis, congress has approved it, and apparently it’s legal.

The deliberate poisoning and desicration of humanity through a multi-tiered militarized program commonly referred to as geoengineering or chemtrail operations, and large scale testing of direct energy weapons on the American people is just a small dose of what the diabolic globalists have planned for you and your family.

A massive cover-up achieved by diverting the attention back to older “openly admitted” topics such as the Guatimalan STD’s continues while the powers that be spray the American populace like roaches with toxins —  congress is aware of it, and there is even a budget tracing back to the top of the ladder, the President of the United States (POTUS). In essence, it’s one of the oldest tricks in the book.

These aerosol spraying campaigns can be used to modify and control the weather, and aid in advanced manipulation the weather derivatives market through practices utilized by criminally ran corporations such as Enron.

Peter Kirby (The Intel Hub) has covered this in the January 12, 2012 article entitled, The Chemtrail Business

The PCSBI official website gives a brief history of bioethics commissions dating back to the early 70′s stating;

The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research (1974-78) is generally viewed as the first national bioethics commission.

Established as part of the 1974 National Research Act, the National Commission is best known for the Belmont Report. It identified fundamental principles for research involving human volunteers and was the basis of subsequent federal regulation in this area.

The Presidential Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research (1978-83), also established by Congress, produced reports on foregoing life-sustaining treatment and access to health care, among other topics.

Its 1981 report Defining Death was the basis of the Uniform Determination of Death Act, a model law that was enacted by most U.S. states.

The Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments (1994-95) was created by President Bill Clinton to investigate human radiation experiments conducted from 1944 -1974 as well as radiation intentionally released into the environment for research purposes. The committee considered the ethical and scientific standards for evaluating these events and provided recommendations aimed at ensuring that similar events could not be repeated.

If thats not enough, check out the Meeting 4 transcript, where a U.S. citizen reports she has been involved in direct energy weapons testing as an unwilling participant.

A transcript excerpt from Meeting 4, Session 10 states;

MS. MARSHALL:
Good afternoon. My name is Connie Marshall. I am a former mayoral candidate from Louisville, Kentucky. I have never been involved in any criminal activity. I found a document in my bank account that said problem with Kentucky government. Check federal government paperwork in file before releasing information to anyone.

I am an eight year victim survivor of assaults by directed energy weapons. The torture I have experienced consists of body overheating, body extremely cold, seizures, heart pain, earaches, itching behind eyes, burning behind eyes, swelling, headaches, involuntary movement of my limbs, exhaustion, speeding and heart racing, hair coming out by the handfuls as if I have had chemotherapy, mind paralysis, being hypnotized or being placed in a trance-type state, being tracked by a drone or satellite, controlled dreams, sleep deprivation, V2K which is voice to skull, projected sound, extreme muscle spasms and extreme muscle cramps; being made to fall down; blue circles around the pupils of my eyes and I am here and you can look at them if you like; low frequency noises in my home; high frequency noises in my home; sexual stimulation.
Numerous electrical appliances in my home are destroyed; four computers, two fax machines, seven telephones, four CD players, VCR, DVD players, the electrical igniter switch on my furnace, washer and dryer, air conditioner.

Also my car radio, CD player and engine were destroyed. I am watched in my home 24 hours a day and followed around everywhere I go, though I do not have a criminal history.

When I ran for Mayor of my town, I was also attacked at debates and forums. My website is www.justiceforallcitizens.com. Thank you. And I would like to leave you with these flyers as well. Thank you.

DR. GUTMANN:
Thank you.

To fall into the mindset and character of the people selected for the committee we must take a closer look at some of the top members connections.

Amy Gutman Chair of the PCSBI stated in a commission meeting;

“Good morning, and I’m Amy Gutmann. I’m president of the University of Pennsylvania and I’m chair of the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues. On behalf of myself and my vice chair, Jim Wagner, who is president of Emory University, I’d like to say welcome to everybody and welcome to day one of our second public meeting.

I’d also like to note the presence of our designated federal officer, our newly appointed commission executive director, Valerie Bonham. Valerie, we’re happy to have you as executive director, not the least because you make this meeting official but you also do many other things to help us move forward.”

Amy goes on to talk about morality;

“I don’t know how many of your experts in synthetic biology are already here and sitting behind me. With all due respect to the extraordinary work now being done in synthetic biology, synthetic biology joins what is likely a never-ending stream of rapidly developing areas of science that raise challenging societal issues. 
One of the most important things that your commission could do would be to put forward a general framework for the moral and policy assessment not only of synthetic biology but of emerging technologies more broadly.”

Sadly these militarized weapons are now being tested regularly on American citizens as noted above. It has been openly admitted by Barrack Obama in documents that the U.S. has released weaponized versions of STD’s onto the Guatemalan populace in the 1940′s, showing the character and true colors of the people at the helm of our once great nation.

RECON REQUEST:
If anyone is in the area and can attend and videotape this meeting contact us at: contacts@theintelhub.com

The Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues will conduct its eighth meeting in February. At this meeting, the Commission will discuss issues of privacy and access related to human genome sequence data.

The Commission will also be discussing neuroscience and related ethical issues.
DATES:

The meeting will take place February 2, 2012 from 9 a.m. to approximately 5:15 p.m. and on February 3, 2012 from 9 a.m. to approximately 12 p.m. ADDRESSES: Millberry Union, University of California, San Francisco, 500 Parnassus Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94143, (415) 476–2019.

The Merger of Military, Law Enforcement and Public Safety

America's Judge Dredd Moment
By JOHN STANTON

According to the US Department of Justice, “Defending national security from both internal and external threats remains the [Department’s] highest priority. National security threats are constantly evolving and adapting, requiring additional resources to address new critical areas. Increasing global access to technological advancements results in new vulnerabilities that must be addressed…. technological and human capital [is needed] to detect, disrupt, and deter threats to our national security.” The DOJ’s FY 2012 Budget requested a total of $128.6 million and 170 positions in program increases that provide essential technological and human capital to detect, disrupt, and deter threats to our national security.

Wait! Isn’t that the Pentagon’s gig?

Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta expressed this view on the new national security planning and operating environment. “In the post-September 11th era, there have been significant benefits due to increased unity of effort and interagency cooperation. Civilian-military collaboration has improved, and our military commanders expect to operate in a coordinated and joint, multi-service environment. Diplomats, development experts, intelligence analysts, and law enforcement must work together in today’s complex operations.”

Does Panetta mean all levels of law enforcement in the USA?

According to the National Military Strategy of the United States, 2011, “There are no more vital interests than the security of the American people, our territory, and our way of life… Military power complements economic development, governance, and rule of law – the true bedrocks of counterterrorism efforts…We will defend the homeland and play a critical role in supporting homeland security…”

Isn’t the rule of law determined and enforced by civilians? Doesn’t he mean supports rather than “complements”?

The Department of Justice describes law enforcement as “the prevention, detection, and investigation of crime and the apprehension and detention of individuals suspected of law violation.”

Not Civil, Not Military: Judge Dredd

The fact is the uniformed services of the USA are not the premier caretakers of the American people’s security or freedom. That is myth. National security has become a team effort and it’s time to recognize that. The USA has gone completely paramilitary in every aspect of its local-state-national-international life. America has transmogrified into the movie character Judge Dredd played by Sly Stallone.

But what happens to a democratic republic, say the USA, when military and civilian law enforcement/public safety functions merge and become indistinguishable?

No one has a definitive answer to that question.

Most say that the civil-military divide is clear cut, a Rubicon that will never be crossed by the executive branch, the military, the defense industrial base and its many civilian employees, and uncritical supporters in the US Congress.

Admiral Mullen, outgoing Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that civilian rule in the USA will be maintained at all costs. In fact, in his National Military Strategy of the USA, emphasis is placed again and again on the matter of civilian control of the military.

That’s good, of course, but why the reminder now in 2011? After all, Americans know that the US Constitution makes the military subordinate to civilians.

And yet determining who is in charge/responsible for the nation’s security, public safety and law enforcement has become more difficult over the last decade. In fact, the US military and US law enforcement operate with the same end game in mind: preempt, deter, neutralize, and remediate. Or, in US COIN parlance-- clear, hold, and build (CHB). CHB applies to a drug infested neighborhood in Washington, DC, as it does in a community in Afghanistan.

The special operations units in the US military have much in common with their law enforcement/public safety counterparts. As far as the end game of an operation is concerned, SWAT and SEAL teams operate on similar kill-pacify chains and “jointness of operations”.

Perhaps it is time for a grand restructure of the national security machinery.

If it is to be the case that military and law enforcement/public safety operate under the same strategies, operations and tactics, should domestic and global law enforcement/public safety functions be placed under some sort of civil-military geographic combatant command based on legislation similar to the Goldwater-Nichols model?

Should the Pentagon, Department of Justice, Central Intelligence Agency, Department of State and Homeland Security, etc., be merged into some sort of National Security Department? Would centralization of the national security function alleviate interagency madness?

Can the President and Secretary of Defense continue to maintain direct control over the expanding national security machinery? This question speaks not to a military coup, but instead to how two human beings—and their Cold War era staffs—can make the best decisions for the USA in the face of waves of near instantaneous information/events that flood national security decision making centers? Should the role of the largely national security illiterate members of the US House and Senate be changed?

And who are the American people supposed to honor and salute—sometimes deify--each day? Is it the brave men and women of the US military stationed at an outpost in Afghanistan? The contractor who serves the food at CENTCOM HQ or the security contractor—from Peru, say—that guards a US State Department official? Is it the courageous Predator pilot sitting in an air conditioned trailer thousands of miles away from his/her target package? How about the uniformed “bean counters” in the Pentagon?

Or is it the law enforcement/public safety personnel in Detroit, Washington, DC, or Houston who should be thanked for their service? Or the FBI agent shot to death while serving an arrest warrant? How about the guards at a state prison who detect, deter and disrupt plans for an inmate rebellion?

According to the Pew Center, “Second only to Medicaid, corrections has become the fastest growing general fund expenditure in the United States. Two million three hundred thousand people in the U.S. are now in prison or jail—more than one in 100 adults. On any given day 7.3 million adults are under federal, state, or local correctional control (including those on probation, parole, and other forms of supervision)—one in 31 adults. In FY2008, the most recent year data are available, states spent an estimated $47 billion of general funds on corrections, an increase of 303 percent since 1988. They spent an additional $4 billion in special funds and bonds and $900 million in federal funds, bringing total corrections expenditures to nearly $52 billion.” And this excludes the scores of US military/intelligence clandestine prisons located around the globe.

It has all gotten very confusing.

Kill ‘em All or Lock ‘em All Up

Arguably, the security of the American people is primarily the responsibility of civilian law enforcement and public safety personnel. An F-16 pilot or SOF operator in Libya, Somalia, Mexico or Guatemala is of no consequence to Americans living in high crime areas who want to get to school or work without being murdered, raped, assaulted or robbed.

The latest uniformed crime statistics for the period January to December 2010 published by the Department of Justice show that:

•   14, 627 Americans were murdered; 
•   53, 481 were forcibly raped; 
• 442, 932 were robbed, and 
• 649, 650 were brutally assaulted. 

The Virginia Association of Police Chiefs reports that 56 law enforcement officers were “feloniously killed” in 2010.

The neighborhood fire station is more relevant to security in a local US community than a forward operating base or outpost in Afghanistan/Iraq. It’s a good thing too as the Department of Justice reports that there were 40,070 cases of arson from January to December 2010. That excludes the daily calls that firefighters must make to subdue other incendiary events. According to the US Fire Administration, “an estimated 103,000 multifamily residential building fires are reported each year and cause an estimated 390 deaths, 4,050 injuries, and $1.2 billion in property loss.” Over the first five months of 2011, 33 fire fighters lost their lives in the line-of-duty, according to the US Fire Administration.

The national security consciousness is preeminent now in the minds of Americans. Everything from seeds used to plant corn for Kellogg’s Corn Flakes to rare earth minerals are a matter of national security, of survival (agroterrorism). Americans have a dangerous disregard now for the sovereignty of other nations terminating-- 21st Century gang land style--any real or perceived enemy of the state.

The USA has planted the seeds of reprisal. American Homeland watch out!

There is only one other nation with a similar psyche as this and that is Israel. That nation provides a very useful comparative template, a sort of mirror in which to look. There is much to be admired about Israel and its people, but adopting their narrow security-minded view of the world is absolutely wrong for the USA. How has it come to pass that an Israeli official speaking before members of the US Congress receives more applause than the President of the United States of America delivering a State of the Union Address? Is there a clearer message of America’s move away from itself and its ideals?