It is not a far step from manipulating a person's emotional state to influ-
encing bodily functions.  Indeed, much of the literature on documenting
microwave effects on biological systems deals with precisely this phenom-
enon.  In fact, studies of the physical effects of microwave exposure
(including radio frequencies) generally preceeded studies of mental effects.

A meeting sponsored by Defense & Foreign Affairs and the International 
Strategic Studies Association was held in Washington DC in 1983.  High-level
officials from many countries met for this conference.   They discussed
psychological strategies related to government and policymaking.  A summary
of the agenda reads:  "The group will be discussing the essence of future
policymaking, for it msut be increasingly clear to all that the most effec-
tive tool of government and strategy is the mind...  If it's any consolation
to the weapons-oriented among defense policymakers, the new technologies of
communications -- satellites, television, radio, and mind-control
beams -- are 'systems' which are more tangible than the more
philosophically  based psychological strategies and operations.

[Eleanor White's comment:  Anyone know where to get a copy?]

"But we should make no mistake; it will be the 'psychologically based' 
systems which determine the world's fate in coming years:  the condition of
the minds of populations and leaders.  And we should not ignore the fact
that the USSR [this was in 1983] is working on electronic systems to
'beam' messages directly into the brain.  What good, then, are conventional
systems if these types of weapons are not countered?  And, on a more basic
level, what good is a weapon system if public opinion or political con-
straints prohibit its deployment?" [13]

It is obvious that they found the answer to that last question.  If the 
public does not know about a weapon system, it cannot prohibit its deploy-
ment.  This is the situtation that applies to mind-control technology.

MIND CONTROL AGAINST 'POTENTIAL' ENEMIES

The US military is aware that certain actions or procedures may not be
acceptable to the American public.  Metz and Kievit express these concerns
in their paper, "The Revolution in Military Affairs and Short Conflict War."
[14]  "The use of new technology may also run counter to basic American
values.  Information age -- and in particular, information warfare  -- 
technologies cause concerns about privacy...  American values also make the
use of directed-energy weapons ... morally difficult, perhaps unacceptable.
The advantage of directed-energy weapons over conventional ones is
deniability.

"Against whom is such deniability aimed? ... deniability
must be aimed at the American people."

                                -81-