Air Force chief: Test weapons on US crowds

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Air Force chief: Test weapons on US crowds

Postby Rigorous Intuition » Tue Sep 12, 2006 9:29 pm

<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Just amazing, the rationale.</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Air Force chief: Test weapons on testy U.S. mobs</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br>POSTED: 7:56 p.m. EDT, September 12, 2006<br><br>WASHINGTON (AP) -- <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Nonlethal weapons such as high-power microwave devices should be used on American citizens in crowd-control situations before being used on the battlefield</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->, the Air Force secretary said Tuesday.<br><br>The object is basically public relations. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Domestic use would make it easier to avoid questions from others about possible safety considerations</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->, said Secretary Michael Wynne.<br><br>"If we're not willing to use it here against our fellow citizens, then we should not be willing to use it in a wartime situation," said Wynne. "(Because) if I hit somebody with a nonlethal weapon and they claim that it injured them in a way that was not intended, I think that I would be vilified in the world press."<br><br>The Air Force has paid for research into nonlethal weapons, but he said the service is unlikely to spend more money on development until injury problems are reviewed by medical experts and resolved.<br><br>Nonlethal weapons generally can weaken people if they are hit with the beam. Some of the weapons can emit short, intense energy pulses that also can be effective in disabling some electronic devices.<br><br>On another subject, Wynne said he expects to choose a new contractor for the next generation aerial refueling tankers by next summer. He said a draft request for bids will be put out next month, and there are two qualified bidders: the Boeing Co. and a team of Northrop Grumman Corp. and European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co., the majority owner of European jet maker Airbus SAS.<br><br>The contract is expected to be worth at least $20 billion (€15.75 billion).<br><br>Chicago, Illinois-based Boeing lost the tanker deal in 2004 amid revelations that it had hired a top Air Force acquisitions official who had given the company preferential treatment.<br><br>Wynne also said the Air Force, which is already chopping 40,000 active duty, civilian and reserves jobs, is now struggling to find new ways to slash about $1.8 billion (€1.4 billion) from its budget to cover costs from the latest round of base closings.<br><br>He said he can't cut more people, and it would not be wise to take funding from military programs that are needed to protect the country. But he said he also incurs resistance when he tries to save money on operations and maintenance by retiring aging aircraft.<br><br>"We're finding out that those are, unfortunately, prized possessions of some congressional districts," said Wynne, adding that the Air Force will have to "take some appetite suppressant pills." He said he has asked employees to look for efficiencies in their offices.<br><br>The base closings initially were expected to create savings by reducing Air Force infrastructure by 24 percent.<br><br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/09/12/usaf.weapons.ap/index.html">www.cnn.com</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> <p></p><i></i>
Rigorous Intuition
 
Posts: 1744
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 3:36 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Air Force chief: Test weapons on US crowds

Postby chiggerbit » Tue Sep 12, 2006 10:25 pm

Well, actually, I could see the logic in testing these new weapons on Congress, the administration, and all their families, say down to the fourth or fifth generation. <p></p><i></i>
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Air Force chief: Test weapons on US crowds

Postby * » Tue Sep 12, 2006 10:31 pm

<br><br> I have <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>always</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> assumed they would be usin' 'em on us . I guess now they have their plausible excuse. Funny they've never worried about bad public relations when dumping tris-treated pajamas, DDT and polio-causing vaccines on others...why start now?<br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
*
 
Posts: 315
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 9:48 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Air Force chief: Test weapons on US crowds

Postby chiggerbit » Tue Sep 12, 2006 10:41 pm

<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Funny they've never worried about bad public relations</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>Oh, I imagine just breaking the ice, to get people to accept the "test" use of these weapons on those dratted protestors that they got by with putting in fenced cages far from the site of the Bush political gatherings. <br><br>What have we come to that someone can think that they can get by with saying that? These same people need to remember that what goes around politically comes around politically. <br><br>Good quote for the quotes page. <p></p><i></i>
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Air Force chief: Test weapons on US crowds

Postby bvonahsen » Tue Sep 12, 2006 10:43 pm

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>If we're not willing to use it here against our fellow citizens, then we should not be willing to use it in a wartime situation.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>This sounds reasonable to me, that is, if they don't cause any permanent harm. We currently use teargas, I don't see much of a problem with loud directed acoustic devices (there is a question on wherther or not directed microaves are truely harmless. I suspect they are not.) When you have a riot, you have to have some means of crowd control.<br><br>What this really hangs on is it's use for political ends. I see that as completely different. The fear that these devices could be used to maintain power by an illegitimate party is real and valid. Don't get me wrong, I 'm not an advocate for these things, I think they are frightening. What I tend to do is to try to tease appart different ways of looking at things. I look at things first from one view, than another, then yet another. From the view of someone who's only concern is maintaining public order, I can see this as a welcome addition to their toolset. But from the view of a citizen worried they might find their way into the hands of a sociopathic polititian or political party, it frightens the bejeezus out of me. <p></p><i></i>
bvonahsen
 

Re: Air Force chief: Test weapons on US crowds

Postby chiggerbit » Tue Sep 12, 2006 10:48 pm

bvon, either you must be in a different country than the US or you must not be old enough to remember Vietnam. "Riot" is a relative term. And it's not like they don't have enough "riot control weapons" available to them now. This is beyond Kent State. This is scary, very scary. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=chiggerbit@rigorousintuition>chiggerbit</A> at: 9/12/06 9:14 pm<br></i>
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Air Force chief: Test weapons on US crowds

Postby dqueue » Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:16 pm

It has been <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0904-05.htm">alleged</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> that Israel used such weapons in Gaza... also <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=MAN20060807&articleId=2918">mentioned in August</a><!--EZCODE LINK END-->... <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
dqueue
 
Posts: 432
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 5:02 pm
Location: DC
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Air Force chief: Test weapons on US crowds

Postby bvonahsen » Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:37 pm

I live in the US, Minneapolis, MN to be exact.<br><br>"This is scary, very scary."<br><br>I agree, and I said so above.<br><br>"It has been alleged that Israel used such weapons in Gaza"<br><br>Not crowd control devices, more like chemical lasers or other weapons like phosphorous that burn and kill. Being bombarded with a really, really loud amplified speaker is not the same as getting burned to a crisp by a laser.<br><br>I made it clear above that I am very concerned about such devices being put to illegitimate uses. I am just saying that from the point of view of someone who is responsible for keeping public order, they would see these as helpfull.<br><br>I <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>don't</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> believe that violent protest is legitimate or effective. There are always better ways, ways that actually work. Ghandi and King were successful, the SDS was not. <p></p><i></i>
bvonahsen
 

Re: Air Force chief: Test weapons on US crowds

Postby chiggerbit » Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:53 pm

And Kent State was......? <p></p><i></i>
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Air Force chief: Test weapons on US crowds

Postby chiggerbit » Wed Sep 13, 2006 12:02 am

bvon, I don't think you have a good understanding of what perverts we are dealing with in this administration. Their definition of "riot" is not going to come anywhere close to matching what you think it should be. BEWARE! Remember, if we are not "with" him, then we are "against" him. Bush thinks of dissent as "riot" Got it? This is dangerous slippery slope thinking. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=chiggerbit@rigorousintuition>chiggerbit</A> at: 9/12/06 10:07 pm<br></i>
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Air Force chief: Test weapons on US crowds

Postby bvonahsen » Wed Sep 13, 2006 12:06 am

Kent State was a police action and a deliberate act on the part of the authorities. So that would place it in my "sociopathic politicians" category.<br><br>On the other hand, if the police at Kent State had used some of the things being discussed here, there would be a few more people alive today wouldn't there? That's kind of the point. Not every person in a position of authority is an evil overlord lusting for blood. They are human beings who actually care about other human beings. Their job is to maintain order and they don't want to have to kill to do so. They are not the ones I really worry about. It's the Cheney's and Rumsfeld's in this world I fear. <p></p><i></i>
bvonahsen
 

Re: Air Force chief: Test weapons on US crowds

Postby chiggerbit » Wed Sep 13, 2006 12:09 am

<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>there would be a few more people alive today wouldn't there?</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> <br><br>Well, how do we know, if it hasn't been tested before? Are you willing to be a guinea pig, or willing to subject your children or grandchildren to such experimentation? <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=chiggerbit@rigorousintuition>chiggerbit</A> at: 9/12/06 10:11 pm<br></i>
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Air Force chief: Test weapons on US crowds

Postby chiggerbit » Wed Sep 13, 2006 12:18 am

<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Not every person in a position of authority is an evil overlord lusting for blood.</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>It doesn't take "every" person in authority to misuse something like this. Just the ones in the right positions of authority. The rest will follow, for right or for wrong. Think about this. <p></p><i></i>
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Air Force chief: Test weapons on US crowds

Postby chiggerbit » Wed Sep 13, 2006 12:22 am

Please, consider the Stanley Milgram experiments before you decide that this kind of experimentation is acceptable:<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment">en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i></i>
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Air Force chief: Test weapons on US crowds

Postby bvonahsen » Wed Sep 13, 2006 12:37 am

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Please, consider the Stanley Milgram experiments before you decide that this kind of experimentation is acceptable:<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>I never said that nor did I imply that it was acceptable. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Do not</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> put words into my mouth or try to have me say what I have not said. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Do</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> read what I actually wrote, I thought I was pretty clear. This is fairly common on the internet you know. People read one thing, but in their minds they hear something quite different and then respond to that instead. I have some ideas why but that would be off topic. Or maybe we on Zeta Reticuli just think differently?<br><br><!--EZCODE EMOTICON START ;) --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <br><br>BTW, active denial systems <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>have</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> been tested on people. Most likely volunteers. The question is, as always, can you trust the pentagon to be honest about the risks these things pose to people? I doubt it. <p></p><i></i>
bvonahsen
 

Next

Return to The "War on Terror"

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests