 |
|
 |
KON4M 99
April 1999
Home
Page
Related
Links
Classified
Ads
What's
Hot!!!
Regular
Issues
Special
Issues
Beast
Of The Month
Robalini
The
Vault
Klearinghouse
John B. Alexander, Ph.D.
In response to the various comments, I am submitting this commentary on Military Abductions (MILABs). As with the first response, and contrary to assertions by Helmut Lammer, this commentary addresses only his MILABs, not all abduction cases. Interestingly, most of the respondents who have been whining on the Internet do not even address the question at hand. That is human, not alien, interventions.
It should be noted that Victoria was the sole author of the article titled What Would Freud Say? while I provided information about satellite systems. Contrary to the comments about the timing of the article, it was written in 1996, within a month of Lammer's first piece in the MUFON Journal. At that time it was sent to the editor, Dennis Stacy. In a phone conversation with him, Stacy stated there were more important issues to cover. He was subsequently relieved as the editor of that journal. From the April issue it is clear that MUFON has little interest in discussing both sides of this controversial non-UFO issue. Instead, they have chosen to become the champion of unsubstantiated, barely tangentially related nonsense.
While rejected by MUFON, Victoria's article has been circulated privately for the past three years. After a recent meeting in Laughlin, Nevada, and upon his request, Victoria sent the article to Peter Gersten, who posted it on CAUS. This actually provided a wider audience from that of the moribund MUFON, which has been in steady decline for several years. It is only through coincidence that the article came out in proximity to the nonsensical book being published by Lammer.
Again, Lammer has displayed both a lack of understanding of technical knowledge and the ability to competently analyze information. Unfortunately, he is not alone. This topic is quite important and is covered in some detail in my forthcoming book, Future War, Non-Lethal Weapons in Twenty-First-Century Warfare (St. Martin's Press, May 1999). However, given his current position in the Austrian Space Research Institute, this obvious lapse is very disconcerting.
While triangulation technologies have existed for some considerable time, the devices had a common characteristic. They were relatively large. Until very recently, they were certainly larger than could be surreptitiously subcutaneously hidden in a person's body. They would be too large to go undetected by X-ray or MRI examinations. By 1990, the state-of-the-art was a device about 11mm long and 2 mm in diameter. This was a passive transponder without an internal power source. While it could be read by external devices, they had to be very close, similar to readers that are currently used in stores. Greater distances can be achieved with higher power, or very narrow bandwidth. That means the device would have to be larger to house internal power or, once externally interrogated the information rate very low. It would also have to broadcast above the background noise at the designated frequency. Today, most of the miniaturized location technology is designed to work at a range of feet, not miles. The tradeoffs between, power, frequency, antenna systems, and size make the commonly accepted notion of MILABs highly implausible. Since it is claimed that these military abductions have been taking place for quite a period of time, it must be assumed that older technology was in use. It is noted that Lammer's response to Victoria's article posted by CAUS does not reference a source earlier than 1996. Yet he wants us to believe these nearly nanoscale, mystical capabilities have been available for decades. They have not.
Attempts to locate persons who are free to move about at substantial distances infer that the interception capability is quite mobile. Therefore, it would be logical to assume space-based systems, or airborne platforms, are involved. As previously noted, the space-based systems were not available when the incidents began. However, his article does mention that "MILAB victims are harassed by dark, unmarked helicopters" that are seen in the area. It seems incongruent that abductions must take place discretely, yet helicopters are sent to openly harass them.
Even if this mystical and unattained technology were available, the organizational aspects are illogical. If the three-car system proposed by Lammer were used by the offenders, the logic still fails. Assuming there are a minimum of two people per car, and we know that it takes five shifts to man any given position, we are led to assume that 30 people are assigned to continuously track each MILAB. Of course, that doesn't count supervisors and administrative personnel. Remember the helicopters. Where did they come from? Who flew them? Who conducted the medical tests? Who maintained these yet-to-be- identified bases? The list of involved personnel goes on and on. Since it is claimed that these illegal operations have been conducted for many years, and since military personnel rotate on a frequent basis, there would have to be thousands, if not tens of thousands, of people involved over time. Where are they? When you add up all of the people who say they are MILAB victims, the number of people involved in this operation would be non-trivial. At a time when military strength is cut to the bone, are we to believe this mission-without-purpose takes precedence over other critical functions? With all of the questionable projects that have been exposed, why have we not heard from one whistleblower about MILAB? The reason is because it does not exist, nor has it ever existed.
It must also be noted that not one implanted transmitter has been recovered. According to the MILAB theory proposed, location and extraction of such a device would be a simple matter. None of the "alien implant" work, such as that done by Roger Leir, has found anything remotely associated with a human designed transmitter. The systems described in Lammer's article for use in monitoring criminals are quite large when compared with some unknown subcutaneous version and are generally tracked by fixed sources. This is hardly what the "abductees" have described. Where are these devices?
Had such technology been available (and it was not), then the analogy between abductees and Qadaffi, Noriega, and Saddam Hussein would be apropos. None of these people rose to prominence out of nowhere. They were all identified on their ascendancy, and at a time when there was physical access to them. If available, triangulation transponders could have been implanted long before these foreign leaders became problematic.
How current is the analogy of MILABs versus critical national interests? On 31 March 1999 three American soldiers were captured near the Yugoslavian border in Macedonia. The incident is making news around the world. It is noted that their exact location at this time can not be determined. Are we to assume that some über-secret agency believed it was more important to use this highly advanced technology on unsuspecting civilians-who are of no special interest except to themselves and their friends-than in support of our national security. That logic is certainly seriously flawed.
Lammer's knowledge of "black programs" and how they function is equally lacking. His argument appears to be that if large amounts of money were available, some agency, or even a renegade subelement thereof, would choose to spend money on tracking innocent people. Here there are two key issues to address. First of all, just because a project is "black" doesn't mean there is no oversight. While fewer people have access to the program, in this day and age, dollars are watched quite closely in every project. His notion of the money available is off by at least an order of magnitude. Lammer states that SDI was funded at "tens of billions of US dollars." The reality is that at its zenith, SDI was a $5 billion dollar program and that has shrunk dramatically over the years. When I proposed a politically sensitive project to Lt. General Jim Abrahamson, then director of SDI, he turned me down. He stated that if he were caught funding that venture, Congress would assume SDI had too much money and would make severe cuts. In fact, SDI was cut $1 billion that year. What I had proposed was nowhere near as risky as illegally kidnapping civilians and physically assaulting them.
The second major problem in his thinking is that such a project makes no sense to anyone-except for a few conspiracy theorists. There is no logical purpose in tracking the people who make these claims. They do not appear to have any significant attributes that would make them worthy of special study.
There is no indication that they are extremely intelligent, nor is their physical prowess of note. No Nobel laureate or person of publicly acclaimed accomplishments has ever claimed to be a MILAB. It therefore remains a mystery as to why these relatively nondescript people are reportedly chosen to be unwilling MILAB participants.
There are, however, many well-known medical conditions that describe these signs and symptoms. These observed or perceived contentions maintain that some person, or group of persons, is after them are indeed found amongst 10 million persons per year who are seen by clinicians who include social workers, clinical psychologists, neurologists, general practitioners and other primary care practitioners, and sometime by psychiatrists. The vast majority of these persons (over 90%) function very well within activities of daily life. Outside of a narrow, highly circumscribed paranoid delusion, concern, or worry-that while not real-these delusions are not disabling. Most common are beliefs of other entities, voices, bedroom-related visions, and hypnagogic experiences. Often they are accompanied over time by exaggerated notions of self-importance. Clinical estimates are that over 100 million of these persons are alive today worldwide. They are found in all countries and all cultures. Generally speaking, the demography of these persons does not match that of a normal population. These observations are not new. They have been diagnosed, or more likely merely observed, for more than a century. It is a much more simplistic answer than the bizarre scenario being portrayed by Lammer and his supporters. Where is Occam when you need him?
The reason that no agency would engage in such a preposterous program is the potential for repercussions versus value added. We can find no value added by unauthorized, illegal monitoring of individuals who are self-proclaimed MILABs. After all, a volunteer program would net better results and at no risk. In this day and age, any agency caught conducting such outrageous experiments as has been postulated would risk both severe personal and organizational consequences. My educated guess is that the organization would be disbanded and individuals sent to jail. Again, a simple cost-benefit analysis completely destroys the logic of conducting such an illegal project.
Both Lammer and Wilson draw analogies between the MILAB victims and unwitting participants in prior unwise Government experiments. It cannot be denied that the system has been abused in the past and that individual's rights were violated. However, in each of the cases listed, a reason for the experiments could be made. In Tuskegee doctors wanted to determine how syphilis would progress if left untreated. Most, but not all, participants in MKULTRA were volunteers who signed statements to that effect. Forgotten in the clamor over those experiments is the grave concern that had been generated by our POWs, who showed signs of "brain washing," when they returned from North Korean camps. The radiation experiments also were conducted in a time of extreme anxiety about the effects of exposure and were based on the concerns for our very national survival. I am not making excuses or apologies for these experiments. However, in each case, the designers conducted a risk-benefits analysis and chose to proceed. The proposed MILAB projects fail that simple test of common sense. There is just no reason to conduct them. However, since there is no statute of limitations on kidnapping, I also highly recommend that any person who experiences an abduction at the hands of anyone, including purported government agents, report them to multiple law enforcement agencies. That will insure that no single agency can quash the report. While immediacy would be preferred, old cases also can be filed.
Surprisingly, Victoria has been attacked for both taking information out of context, and using quotes that are quite long. The intent of quotes was to show the words were accurate. The reason the quotes were extensive was to insure they placed the situation in context. Again, this is an example of internally inconsistent logic by the critics.
Finally, the MILAB concoction fails every known test of knowledge, proof, and common sense. Not one scintilla of concrete evidence exists to support the hypothesis. Lammer's arguments fail in technology, political science, military science, government, budget and finance, organizational sociology, and psychology/psychiatry. No one supporting the MILAB hypothesis can explain why critical resources, if they existed, would be employed for this nonsense, versus some issue of vital national importance. At the end of the day, all we are left with is abstruse, totally unsubstantiated conspiracy theory. But, that does sell well in some circles.
::: Armen Victorian's Response: John Alexander on MILABs :::
