From: "William F. Zachmann" 

> >      The Mind Has No Firewall.txt
> >          28 KB dekalb_blues  05/16/2003
>
> Could you email me (or post to binaries) this one? I really don't want to
> run the yahoo gauntlet to get it.
>
> Geo.

George,

Here it is:

http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/Parameters/98spring/thomas.htm

=====================================


THE MIND HAS NO FIREWALL

Timothy L. Thomas


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----


From Parameters,  U. S. Army War College Quarterly, Spring 1998, pp. 84-92.

Parameters is a refereed journal of ideas and issues, providing a forum for
the expression of mature professional thought on the art and science of
land warfare, joint and combined matters, national and international
security affairs, military strategy, military leadership and management,
military history, military ethics, and other topics of significant and
current interest to the US Army and Department of Defense. It serves as a
vehicle for continuing the education and professional development of USAWC
graduates and other senior military officers, as well as members of
government and academia concerned with national security affairs.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----


"It is completely clear that the state which is first to create such
weapons will achieve incomparable superiority." -- Major I.
Chernishev, Russian army[1]



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----


The human body, much like a computer, contains myriad data processors. They
include, but are not limited to, the chemical-electrical activity of the
brain, heart, and peripheral nervous system, the signals sent from the
cortex region of the brain to other parts of our body, the tiny hair cells
in the inner ear that process auditory signals, and the light-sensitive
retina and cornea of the eye that process visual activity.[2] We are on the
threshold of an era in which these data processors of the human body may be
manipulated or debilitated. Examples of unplanned attacks on the body's
data-processing capability are well-documented. Strobe lights have been
known to cause epileptic seizures. Not long ago in Japan, children watching
television cartoons were subjected to pulsating lights that caused seizures
in some and made others very sick.

Defending friendly and targeting adversary data-processing capabilities of
the body appears to be an area of weakness in the US approach to
information warfare theory, a theory oriented heavily toward systems
data-processing and designed to attain information dominance on the
battlefield. Or so it would appear from information in the open,
unclassified press. This US shortcoming may be a serious one, since the
capabilities to alter the data- processing systems of the body already
exist. A recent edition of U.S. News and World Report highlighted several
of these "wonder weapons" (acoustics, microwaves, lasers) and
noted that scientists are "searching the electromagnetic and sonic
spectrums for wavelengths that can affect human behavior."[3] A recent
Russian military article offered a slightly different slant to the problem,
declaring that "humanity stands on the brink of a psychotronic
war" with the mind and body as the focus. That article discussed
Russian and international attempts to control the psycho-physical condition
of man and his decisionmaking processes by the use of VHF-generators,
"noiseless cassettes," and other technologies.

An entirely new arsenal of weapons, based on devices designed to introduce
subliminal messages or to alter the body's psychological and
data-processing capabilities, might be used to incapacitate individuals.
These weapons aim to control or alter the psyche, or to attack the various
sensory and data-processing systems of the human organism. In both cases,
the goal is to confuse or destroy the signals that normally keep the body
in equilibrium.

This article examines energy-based weapons, psychotronic weapons, and other
developments designed to alter the ability of the human body to process
stimuli. One consequence of this assessment is that the way we commonly use
the term "information warfare" falls short when the individual
soldier, not his equipment, becomes the target of attack.

Information Warfare Theory and the Data-Processing Element of Humans

In the United States the common conception of information warfare focuses
primarily on the capabilities of hardware systems such as computers,
satellites, and military equipment which process data in its various forms.
According to Department of Defense Directive S-3600.1 of 9 December 1996,
information warfare is defined as "an information operation conducted
during time of crisis or conflict to achieve or promote specific objectives
over a specific adversary or adversaries." An information operation is
defined in the same directive as "actions taken to affect adversary
information and information systems while defending one's own information
and information systems." These "information systems" lie at
the heart of the modernization effort of the US armed forces and other
countries, and manifest themselves as hardware, software, communications
capabilities, and highly trained individuals. Recently, the US Army
conducted a mock battle that tested these systems under simulated combat
conditions.

US Army Field Manual 101-5-1, Operational Terms and Graphics (released 30
September 1997), defines information warfare as "actions taken to
achieve information superiority by affecting a hostile's information,
information based-processes, and information systems, while defending one's
own information, information processes, and information systems." The
same manual defines information operations as a "continuous military
operation within the military information environment that enables,
enhances, and protects friendly forces' ability to collect, process, and
act on information to achieve an advantage across the full range of
military operations. [Information operations include] interacting with the
Global Information Environment . . . and exploiting or denying an
adversary's information and decision capabilities."[4]

This "systems" approach to the study of information warfare
emphasizes the use of data, referred to as information, to penetrate an
adversary's physical defenses that protect data (information) in order to
obtain operational or strategic advantage. It has tended to ignore the role
of the human body as an information- or data-processor in this quest for
dominance except in those cases where an individual's logic or rational
thought may be upset via disinformation or deception. As a consequence
little attention is directed toward protecting the mind and body with a
firewall as we have done with hardware systems. Nor have any techniques for
doing so been prescribed. Yet the body is capable not only of being
deceived, manipulated, or misinformed but also shut down or destroyed--just
as any other data-processing system. The "data" the body receives
from external sources--such as electromagnetic, vortex, or acoustic energy
waves--or creates through its own electrical or chemical stimuli can be
manipulated or changed just as the data (information) in any hardware
system can be altered.

The only body-related information warfare element considered by the United
States is psychological operations (PSYOP). In Joint Publication 3-13.1,
for example, PSYOP is listed as one of the elements of command and control
warfare. The publication notes that "the ultimate target of
[information warfare] is the information dependent process, whether human
or automated . . . . Command and control warfare (C2W) is an application of
information warfare in military operations. . . . C2W is the integrated use
of PSYOP, military deception, operations security, electronic warfare and
physical destruction."[5]

One source defines information as a "nonaccidental signal used as an
input to a computer or communications system."[6] The human body is a
complex communication system constantly receiving nonaccidental and
accidental signal inputs, both external and internal. If the ultimate
target of information warfare is the information-dependent process,
"whether human or automated," then the definition in the joint
publication implies that human data-processing of internal and external
signals can clearly be considered an aspect of information warfare. Foreign
researchers have noted the link between humans as data processors and the
conduct of information warfare. While some study only the PSYOP link,
others go beyond it. As an example of the former, one recent Russian
article described offensive information warfare as designed to "use
the Internet channels for the purpose of organizing PSYOP as well as for
`early political warning' of threats to American interests."[7] The
author's assertion was based on the fact that "all mass media are used
for PSYOP . . . [and] today this must include the Internet." The
author asserted that the Pentagon wanted to use the Internet to
"reinforce psychological influences" during special operations
conducted outside of US borders to enlist sympathizers, who would
accomplish many of the tasks previously entrusted to special units of the
US armed forces.

Others, however, look beyond simple PSYOP ties to consider other aspects of
the body's data-processing capability. One of the principal open source
researchers on the relationship of information warfare to the body's
data-processing capability is Russian Dr. Victor Solntsev of the Baumann
Technical Institute in Moscow. Solntsev is a young, well-intentioned
researcher striving to point out to the world the potential dangers of the
computer operator interface. Supported by a network of institutes and
academies, Solntsev has produced some interesting concepts.[8] He insists
that man must be viewed as an open system instead of simply as an organism
or closed system. As an open system, man communicates with his environment
through information flows and communications media. One's physical
environment, whether through electromagnetic, gravitational, acoustic, or
other effects, can cause a change in the psycho-physiological condition of
an organism, in Solntsev's opinion. Change of this sort could directly
affect the mental state and consciousness of a computer operator. This
would not be electronic war or information warfare in the traditional
sense, but rather in a nontraditional and non-US sense. It might encompass,
for example, a computer modified to become a weapon by using its energy
output to emit acoustics that debilitate the operator. It also might
encompass, as indicated below, futuristic weapons aimed against man's
"open system."

Solntsev also examined the problem of "information noise," which
creates a dense shield between a person and external reality. This noise
may manifest itself in the form of signals, messages, images, or other
items of information. The main target of this noise would be the
consciousness of a person or a group of people. Behavior modification could
be one objective of information noise; another could be to upset an
individual's mental capacity to such an extent as to prevent reaction to
any stimulus. Solntsev concludes that all levels of a person's psyche
(subconscious, conscious, and "superconscious") are potential
targets for destabilization.

According to Solntsev, one computer virus capable of affecting a person's
psyche is Russian Virus 666. It manifests itself in every 25th frame of a
visual display, where it produces a combination of colors that allegedly
put computer operators into a trance. The subconscious perception of the
new pattern eventually results in arrhythmia of the heart. Other Russian
computer specialists, not just Solntsev, talk openly about this "25th
frame effect" and its ability to subtly manage a computer user's
perceptions. The purpose of this technique is to inject a thought into the
viewer's subconscious. It may remind some of the subliminal advertising
controversy in the United States in the late 1950s.

US Views on "Wonder Weapons": Altering the Data-Processing
Ability of the Body

What technologies have been examined by the United States that possess the
potential to disrupt the data-processing capabilities of the human
organism? The 7 July 1997 issue of U.S. News and World Report described
several of them designed, among other things, to vibrate the insides of
humans, stun or nauseate them, put them to sleep, heat them up, or knock
them down with a shock wave.[9] The technologies include dazzling lasers
that can force the pupils to close; acoustic or sonic frequencies that
cause the hair cells in the inner ear to vibrate and cause motion sickness,
vertigo, and nausea, or frequencies that resonate the internal organs
causing pain and spasms; and shock waves with the potential to knock down
humans or airplanes and which can be mixed with pepper spray or
chemicals.[10]

With modification, these technological applications can have many uses.
Acoustic weapons, for example, could be adapted for use as acoustic rifles
or as acoustic fields that, once established, might protect facilities,
assist in hostage rescues, control riots, or clear paths for convoys. These
waves, which can penetrate buildings, offer a host of opportunities for
military and law enforcement officials. Microwave weapons, by stimulating
the peripheral nervous system, can heat up the body, induce epileptic-like
seizures, or cause cardiac arrest. Low-frequency radiation affects the
electrical activity of the brain and can cause flu-like symptoms and
nausea. Other projects sought to induce or prevent sleep, or to affect the
signal from the motor cortex portion of the brain, overriding voluntary
muscle movements. The latter are referred to as pulse wave weapons, and the
Russian government has reportedly bought over 100,000 copies of the
"Black Widow" version of them.[11]

However, this view of "wonder weapons" was contested by someone
who should understand them. Brigadier General Larry Dodgen, Deputy
Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Policy and Missions, wrote a
letter to the editor about the "numerous inaccuracies" in the
U.S. News and World Report article that "misrepresent the Department
of Defense's views."[12] Dodgen's primary complaint seemed to have
been that the magazine misrepresented the use of these technologies and
their value to the armed forces. He also underscored the US intent to work
within the scope of any international treaty concerning their application,
as well as plans to abandon (or at least redesign) any weapon for which
countermeasures are known. One is left with the feeling, however, that
research in this area is intense. A concern not mentioned by Dodgen is that
other countries or non-state actors may not be bound by the same
constraints. It is hard to imagine someone with a greater desire than
terrorists to get their hands on these technologies.
"Psycho-terrorism" could be the next buzzword.

Russian Views on "Psychotronic War"

The term "psycho-terrorism" was coined by Russian writer N.
Anisimov of the Moscow Anti-Psychotronic Center. According to Anisimov,
psychotronic weapons are those that act to "take away a part of the
information which is stored in a man's brain. It is sent to a computer,
which reworks it to the level needed for those who need to control the man,
and the modified information is then reinserted into the brain." These
weapons are used against the mind to induce hallucinations, sickness,
mutations in human cells, "zombification," or even death.
Included in the arsenal are VHF generators, X-rays, ultrasound, and radio
waves. Russian army Major I. Chernishev, writing in the military journal
Orienteer in February 1997, asserted that "psy" weapons are under
development all over the globe. Specific types of weapons noted by
Chernishev (not all of which have prototypes) were:

A psychotronic generator, which produces a powerful electromagnetic
emanation capable of being sent through telephone lines, TV, radio
networks, supply pipes, and incandescent lamps. An autonomous generator, a
device that operates in the 10-150 Hertz band, which at the 10-20 Hertz
band forms an infrasonic oscillation that is destructive to all living
creatures. A nervous system generator, designed to paralyze the central
nervous systems of insects, which could have the same applicability to
humans. Ultrasound emanations, which one institute claims to have
developed. Devices using ultrasound emanations are supposedly capable of
carrying out bloodless internal operations without leaving a mark on the
skin. They can also, according to Chernishev, be used to kill. Noiseless
cassettes. Chernishev claims that the Japanese have developed the ability
to place infra-low frequency voice patterns over music, patterns that are
detected by the subconscious. Russians claim to be using similar
"bombardments" with computer programming to treat alcoholism or
smoking. The 25th-frame effect, alluded to above, a technique wherein each
25th frame of a movie reel or film footage contains a message that is
picked up by the subconscious. This technique, if it works, could possibly
be used to curb smoking and alcoholism, but it has wider, more sinister
applications if used on a TV audience or a computer operator.
Psychotropics, defined as medical preparations used to induce a trance,
euphoria, or depression. Referred to as "slow-acting mines," they
could be slipped into the food of a politician or into the water supply of
an entire city. Symptoms include headaches, noises, voices or commands in
the brain, dizziness, pain in the abdominal cavities, cardiac arrhythmia,
or even the destruction of the cardiovascular system. There is confirmation
from US researchers that this type of study is going on. Dr. Janet Morris,
coauthor of The Warrior's Edge, reportedly went to the Moscow Institute of
Psychocorrelations in 1991. There she was shown a technique pioneered by
the Russian Department of Psycho-Correction at Moscow Medical Academy in
which researchers electronically analyze the human mind in order to
influence it. They input subliminal command messages, using key words
transmitted in "white noise" or music. Using an infra-sound, very
low frequency transmission, the acoustic psycho-correction message is
transmitted via bone conduction.[13]

In summary, Chernishev noted that some of the militarily significant
aspects of the "psy" weaponry deserve closer research, including
the following nontraditional methods for disrupting the psyche of an
individual:

ESP research: determining the properties and condition of objects without
ever making contact with them and "reading" peoples' thoughts
Clairvoyance research: observing objects that are located just beyond the
world of the visible--used for intelligence purposes Telepathy research:
transmitting thoughts over a distance--used for covert operations
Telekinesis research: actions involving the manipulation of physical
objects using thought power, causing them to move or break apart--used
against command and control systems, or to disrupt the functioning of
weapons of mass destruction
Psychokinesis research: interfering with the thoughts of individuals, on
either the strategic or tactical level While many US scientists undoubtedly
question this research, it receives strong support in Moscow. The point to
underscore is that individuals in Russia (and other countries as well)
believe these means can be used to attack or steal from the data-processing
unit of the human body.

Solntsev's research, mentioned above, differs slightly from that of
Chernishev. For example, Solntsev is more interested in hardware
capabilities, specifically the study of the information-energy source
associated with the computer-operator interface. He stresses that if these
energy sources can be captured and integrated into the modern computer, the
result will be a network worth more than "a simple sum of its
components." Other researchers are studying high-frequency generators
(those designed to stun the psyche with high frequency waves such as
electromagnetic, acoustic, and gravitational); the manipulation or
reconstruction of someone's thinking through planned measures such as
reflexive control processes; the use of psychotronics, parapsychology,
bioenergy, bio fields, and psychoenergy;[14] and unspecified "special
operations" or anti-ESP training.

The last item is of particular interest. According to a Russian TV
broadcast, the strategic rocket forces have begun anti-ESP training to
ensure that no outside force can take over command and control functions of
the force. That is, they are trying to construct a firewall around the
heads of the operators.

Conclusions

At the end of July 1997, planners for Joint Warrior Interoperability
Demonstration '97 "focused on technologies that enhance real-time
collaborative planning in a multinational task force of the type used in
Bosnia and in Operation Desert Storm. The JWID '97 network, called the
Coalition Wide-Area Network (CWAN), is the first military network that
allows allied nations to participate as full and equal partners."[15]
The demonstration in effect was a trade fair for private companies to
demonstrate their goods; defense ministries got to decide where and how to
spend their money wiser, in many cases without incurring the cost of
prototypes. It is a good example of doing business better with less.
Technologies demonstrated included:[16]

Soldiers using laptop computers to drag cross-hairs over maps to call in airstrikes
Soldiers carrying beepers and mobile phones rather than guns Generals
tracking movements of every unit, counting the precise number of shells
fired around the globe, and inspecting real-time damage inflicted on an
enemy, all with multicolored graphics[17] Every account of this exercise
emphasized the ability of systems to process data and provide information
feedback via the power invested in their microprocessors. The ability to
affect or defend the data-processing capability of the human operators of
these systems was never mentioned during the exercise; it has received only
slight attention during countless exercises over the past several years.
The time has come to ask why we appear to be ignoring the operators of our
systems. Clearly the information operator, exposed before a vast array of
potentially immobilizing weapons, is the weak spot in any nation's military
assets. There are few international agreements protecting the individual
soldier, and these rely on the good will of the combatants. Some nations,
and terrorists of every stripe, don't care about such agreements.

This article has used the term data-processing to demonstrate its
importance to ascertaining what so-called information warfare and
information operations are all about. Data-processing is the action this
nation and others need to protect. Information is nothing more than the
output of this activity. As a result, the emphasis on information-related
warfare terminology ("information dominance," "information
carousel") that has proliferated for a decade does not seem to fit the
situation before us. In some cases the battle to affect or protect
data-processing elements pits one mechanical system against another. In
other cases, mechanical systems may be confronted by the human organism, or
vice versa, since humans can usually shut down any mechanical system with
the flip of a switch. In reality, the game is about protecting or affecting
signals, waves, and impulses that can influence the data-processing
elements of systems, computers, or people. We are potentially the biggest
victims of information warfare, because we have neglected to protect
ourselves.

Our obsession with a "system of systems," "information
dominance," and other such terminology is most likely a leading cause
of our neglect of the human factor in our theories of information warfare.
It is time to change our terminology and our conceptual paradigm. Our
terminology is confusing us and sending us in directions that deal
primarily with the hardware, software, and communications components of the
data-processing spectrum. We need to spend more time researching how to
protect the humans in our data management structures. Nothing in those
structures can be sustained if our operators have been debilitated by
potential adversaries or terrorists who--right now--may be designing the
means to disrupt the human component of our carefully constructed notion of
a system of systems.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----


NOTES

1. I. Chernishev, "Can Rulers Make `Zombies' and Control the
World?" Orienteer, February 1997, pp. 58-62.

2. Douglas Pasternak, "Wonder Weapons," U.S. News and World
Report, 7 July 1997, pp. 38-46.

3. Ibid., p. 38.

4. FM 101-5-1, Operational Terms and Graphics, 30 September 1997, p. 1-82.

5. Joint Pub 3-13.1, Joint Doctrine for Command and Control Warfare (C2W),
7 February 1996, p. v.

6. The American Heritage Dictionary (2d College Ed.; Boston: Houghton
Mifflin, 1982), p. 660, definition 4.

7. Denis Snezhnyy, "Cybernetic Battlefield & National
Security," Nezavisimoye Voyennoye Obozreniye, No. 10, 15-21 March
1997, p. 2.

8. Victor I. Solntsev, "Information War and Some Aspects of a Computer
Operator's Defense," talk given at an Infowar Conference in
Washington, D.C., September 1996, sponsored by the National Computer
Security Association. Information in this section is based on notes from
Dr. Solntsev's talk.

9. Pasternak, p. 40.

10. Ibid., pp. 40-46.

11. Ibid.

12. Larry Dodgen, "Nonlethal Weapons," U.S. News and World
Report, 4 August 1997, p. 5.

13. "Background on the Aviary," Nexus Magazine, downloaded from
the Internet on 13 July 1997 from www.execpc.com/vjentpr/nexusavi.html,
p.7.

14. Aleksandr Cherkasov, "The Front Where Shots Aren't Fired,"
Orienteer, May 1995, p. 45. This article was based on information in the
foreign and Russian press, according to the author, making it impossible to
pinpoint what his source was for this reference.

15. Bob Brewin, "DOD looks for IT `golden nuggets,'" Federal
Computer Week, 28 July 1997, p. 31, as taken from the Earlybird Supplement,
4 August 1997, p. B 17.

16. Oliver August, "Zap! Hard day at the office for NATO's laptop
warriors," The Times, 28 July 1997, as taken from the Earlybird
Supplement, 4 August 1997, p. B 16.

17. Ibid.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----


Lieutenant Colonel Timothy L. Thomas (USA Ret.) is an analyst at the
Foreign Military Studies Office, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. Recently he has
written extensively on the Russian view of information operations and on
current Russian military-political issues. During his military career he
served in the 82d Airborne Division and was the Department Head of Soviet
Military-Political Affairs at the US Army's Russian Institute in Garmisch,
Germany.



=====================================


"Geo."  wrote in message
news:3ec63d93$1{at}w3.nls.net...
wfz{at}NOcanopusresearchSPAM.com>
wrote in message
> news:3ec63b79{at}w3.nls.net...
>
> >      The Mind Has No Firewall.txt
> >          28 KB dekalb_blues  05/16/2003
>
> Could you email me (or post to binaries) this one? I really don't want to
> run the yahoo gauntlet to get it.
>
> Geo.
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4