STAN J. CATERBONE and The DEPARTMENT of DEFENSE Documents and Evidence of Conspiracy To .... Saturday November 12, 2016

When Will I Get Whistlebower Protections, Mr. President Elect?
STATEMENT
Statement Date
January 1, 2010
Customer ID:
0021
Advanced Media Group

1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
Account of:
United States Department of Defense
Dr. Robert M. Gates
Secretary of Defense
1000 Defense Pentagon
Washington, DC 20301-1000
Date
Date Due
Reference
Description
01/1/2010
01/1/2010
23 Years of Service of unwitting experimentation

under U.S. Sponsored Mind Control
for the development and deployment
of U.S. Military weapons and systems
$100,000.00 per Year1
Amount
Balance
$2,300,000.00
See attached:
Federal Whistleblower and Targeted Individual of U.S Sponsored Mind Control
Executive Summary, September 13, 2009 With Ground Zero
See Supporting Documentation by Visiting:
1. Memo to Secretary Robert Gates of April 7, 2009

2. http://www.scribd.com/doc/24371616/Submission-to-U-S-Department-of-Defense-Website-Re-U-SSecretary-of-Defense-Robert-Gates-April-7-2009
3. ISC & Pakistan Missle Project Called Khyber-Pass

4. http://www.scribd.com/doc/24366542/ISC-and-the-Pakistan-Missle-Deals-of-1986-Called-The-Khyber-Pass5.
Project
CIA Torture Investigations EIT Program & SERE and U.S. Sponsored Mind Control by Stan J. Caterbone, October 2,
2009 Used as Exhibit in Human Rights Complaint to U.N. Council for Human Rights
6. http://www.scribd.com/doc/23900626/CIA-Torture-Investigations-EIT-Program-SERE-and-U-S-SponsoredMind-Control-by-Stan-Caterbone-October-2-2009
1 Fee for service does not include interest, penalties, or any damages to health and welfare of Stanley J. Caterbone.
STAN J. CATERBONE AND DOD
Page 1 of 389
Saturday November 12, 2016
CHAPTER
DIVIDER
Page 2 of 389

S.L.C.
O:\DAV\DAV07708.xml
AMENDMENT NO.llll
Calendar No.lll
Purpose: To strengthen the protections for employees of Department of Defense contractors from reprisal for disclosure of certain information.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES110th Cong., 1st Sess.
(no.) lllllll
To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2008 for military

activities of the Department of Defense, for military
construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel
strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes.
Referred to the Committee on llllllllll and

ordered to be printed
Ordered to lie on the table and to be printed
AMENDMENT intended to be proposed by Mrs. MCCASKILL
Viz:
1
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. ll. PROTECTION FOR CONTRACTOR EMPLOYEES
FROM REPRISAL FOR DISCLOSURE OF CER-
TAIN INFORMATION.
(a) INCREASED PROTECTION FROM REPRISAL.
6 Subsection (a) of section 2409 of title 10, United States

7 Code, is amended
Page 3 of 389
O:\DAV\DAV07708.xml

S.L.C.
2
1
(1) by striking disclosing to a Member of Con-
gress or an authorized official of an agency or the
Department of Justice and inserting disclosing to
a Member of Congress, a representative of a com-
mittee of Congress, an Inspector General, the Gov-
ernment Accountability Office, a Department of De-
fense employee responsible for contract oversight or
management, or an authorized official of an agency
or the Department of Justice, including in the case
10
of a disclosure made in the ordinary course of an
11
employees duties,; and
12
(2) by striking information relating to a sub-
13
stantial violation of law related to a contract and
14
inserting information that the employee reasonably
15
believes is evidence of gross mismanagement of a
16
Department of Defense contract, a gross waste of
17
Department of Defense funds, a substantial and spe-
18
cific danger to public health or safety, or a violation
19
of law related to a Department of Defense con-
20
tract.
21
(b) ACCELERATION OF SCHEDULE FOR DENYING RE-
22
LIEF OR
PROVIDING REMEDY.Subsection (c) of such
23 section is amended
24
(1) in paragraph (1)
Page 4 of 389

S.L.C.
O:\DAV\DAV07708.xml
3
1
(A) by inserting after (1) the following:
Not later than 90 days after receiving an In-
spector General report pursuant to subsection
(b), the head of the agency concerned shall de-
termine whether the contractor concerned has
subjected the complainant to a reprisal prohib-
ited under subsection (a).; and
(B) by adding at the end the following new
subparagraphs:
10
(D) In the event the disclosure relates to a
11
cost-plus contract, prohibit the contractor from re-
12
ceiving one or more award fee payments to which
13
the contractor would otherwise be eligible until such
14
time as the contractor takes the actions ordered by
15
the head of the agency pursuant to subparagraphs
16
(A) through (C).
17
(E) Take the reprisal into consideration in any
18
past performance evaluation of the contractor for
19
the purpose of a contract award.;
20
21
(2) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4); and
22
(3) by inserting after paragraph (2) the fol-
23
lowing new paragraph:
24
(3)(A) In the case of a disclosure that relates to a
25 contract covered under subsection (f), not later than 90
Page 5 of 389
O:\DAV\DAV07708.xml

S.L.C.
4
1 days after receipt of a written determination under para2 graph (1), a complainant who is aggrieved by the deter3 mination or by an action that the agency head has taken
4 or failed to take pursuant to such determination may
5 bring an action at law or equity for de novo review to seek
6 compensatory damages and other relief available under
7 this section in the appropriate district court of the United
8 States, which shall have jurisdiction over such an action
9 without regard to the amount in controversy. Such an ac10 tion shall, at the request of either party to the action, be
11 tried by the court with a jury.
12
(B) In the event that a determination by an agency
13 head pursuant to paragraph (1) has not been made within

14 15 months after a complaint is submitted under sub15 section (b), and such delay is not shown to be due to the
16 bad faith of the complainant, the complainant shall be
17 deemed to have exhausted the complainants administra18 tive remedies with respect to the complaint and may bring
19 an action at law or equity described under subparagraph
20 (A)..
21
(c) LEGAL BURDEN
OF
PROOF.Such section is fur-
22 ther amended
23
24
(1) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (g); and
Page 6 of 389

S.L.C.
O:\DAV\DAV07708.xml
5
1
(2) by inserting after subsection (d) the fol-
lowing new subsection:
(e) LEGAL BURDEN
OF
PROOF.The legal burdens
4 of proof specified in section 1221(e) of title 5 shall be con5 trolling for the purposes of any investigation conducted
6 by an inspector general, decision by the head of an agency,
7 or hearing to determine whether discrimination prohibited
8 under this section has occurred..
9
(d) REQUIREMENT
10 RIGHTS RELATED
TO
TO
NOTIFY EMPLOYEES
OF
PROTECTION FROM REPRISAL.
11 Such section, as amended by subsection (c), is further

12 amended by inserting after subsection (e) the following
13 new subsection:
14
(f) NOTICE
OF
RIGHTS RELATED
TO
PROTECTION
15 FROM REPRISAL.
16
(1) IN
GENERAL.Each
Department of De-
17
fense contract in excess of $5,000,000, other than a
18
contract for the purchase of commercial items, shall
19
include a clause requiring the contractor to ensure
20
that all employees of the contractor who are working
21
on Department of Defense contracts are notified
22
of
23
(A) their rights under this section;
24
(B) the fact that the restrictions imposed
25
by any employee contract, employee agreement,
Page 7 of 389

S.L.C.
O:\DAV\DAV07708.xml
6
1
or non-disclosure agreement may not supersede,
conflict with, or otherwise alter the employee
rights provided for under this section; and
(C) the telephone number for the whistle-
blower hotline of the Inspector General of the
Department of Defense.
(2) FORM
OF NOTICE.The
notice required by
paragraph (1) shall be made by posting the required
information at a prominent place in each workplace
10
where employees working on the contract regularly
11
work..
Page 8 of 389
CHAPTER
DIVIDER
Page 9 of 389
US District Court For The Eastern District of Pennsylvana
STAN J.
CATERBONE
AND
Property
of Advance
Media Group
DOD
Section 3189
False Claim
Act
When Will I Get Whistlebower Protections,
Mr.Federal
President
Elect?
Page
10 of
389
Page 2598
of 2953
Saturday November 12,

2016
10/19/2006
STAN J.
CATERBONE
AND
Property
of Advance
Media Group
DOD
Section 3189
Federal
False Claim
Act
Mr.
President
Elect?
Page
11 of
389
Page 2599
of 2953
Saturday November 10/19/2006

12, 2016
Property of Advance Media Group
Section 3189 Federal False Claim Act

Mr. President Elect?
Page
12 of 389
Page 2602 of 2953

2016
10/19/2006
STAN J.
CATERBONE
AND
Property
of Advance
Media Group
DOD
Section 3189
False Claim
Act
Mr.Federal
President
Elect?
Page
13 of
389
Page 2603
of 2953

2016
10/19/2006

Page
14 of 389
Page 2604 of 2953

2016
10/19/2006
STAN J.
CATERBONE
AND
Property
of Advance
Media Group
DOD
Section 3189
Federal
False Claim
Act
Mr.
President
Elect?
Page
15 of
389
Page 2605
of 2953
Saturday November 10/19/2006

12, 2016

Page 2615 of 2953
Page 16 of 389
10/19/2006
Property
Advance Media Group
STAN
J.ofCATERBONE
AND DOD

President
Elect?
Section 3189Mr.
Federal
False Claim
Act
Page 2616
of 2953
Page
17 of
389
Saturday November10/19/2006
12, 2016
Property
Advance Media Group
STAN
J. ofCATERBONE
AND DOD

President
Elect?
Section 3189Mr.
Federal
False Claim
Act
Page 2617
of 2953
Page
18 of
389
12, 2016
Property
Advance Media Group
STAN
J.ofCATERBONE
AND DOD

President
Elect?
Section 3189Mr.
Federal
False Claim
Act
Page 2618
of 2953
Page
19 of
389
12, 2016
Property
Advance Media Group
STAN
J. ofCATERBONE
AND DOD

President
Elect?
Section 3189Mr.
Federal
False Claim
Act
Page 2619
of 2953
Page
20 of
389
12, 2016

STAN
J. CATERBONE AND DOD

Page 2620 of 2953

Page
21 of 389
10/19/2006
Saturday November
12, 2016
Property
Advance Media Group
STAN
J.ofCATERBONE
AND DOD

President
Elect?
Section 3189Mr.
Federal
False Claim
Act
Page 2606
of 2953
Page
22 of
389
12, 2016
Property
Advance Media Group
STAN
J.ofCATERBONE
AND DOD

President
Elect?
Section 3189Mr.
Federal
False Claim
Act
Page 2607
of 2953
Page
23 of
389
12, 2016
Property
Advance Media Group
STAN
J.ofCATERBONE
AND DOD

President
Elect?
Section 3189Mr.
Federal
False Claim
Act
Page 2608
of 2953
Page
24 of
389
12, 2016
Property
Advance Media Group
STAN
J.ofCATERBONE
AND DOD

President
Elect?
Section 3189Mr.
Federal
False Claim
Act
Page 2609
of 2953
Page
25 of
389
12, 2016
PropertyJ.ofCATERBONE
Advance Media Group
STAN
AND DOD

President
Elect?
Section 3189Mr.
Federal
False Claim
Act
Page 2610
of 2953
Page
26 of
389
12, 2016
Property
Advance Media Group
STAN
J.ofCATERBONE
AND DOD

President
Elect?
Section 3189Mr.
Federal
False Claim
Act
Page 2611
of 2953
Page
27 of
389
12, 2016
PropertyJ.ofCATERBONE
Advance Media Group
STAN
AND DOD

President
Elect?
Section 3189Mr.
Federal
False Claim
Act
Page 2612
of 2953
Page
28 of
389
12, 2016
Property
Advance Media Group
STAN
J.ofCATERBONE
AND DOD

President
Elect?
Section 3189Mr.
Federal
False Claim
Act
Page 2613
of 2953
Page
29 of
389
12, 2016
Property
Advance Media Group
STAN
J.ofCATERBONE
AND DOD

President
Elect?
Section 3189Mr.
Federal
False Claim
Act
Page 2614
of 2953
Page
30 of
389
12, 2016
Property
Advance Media Group
STAN
J.ofCATERBONE
AND DOD

President
Elect?
Section 3189Mr.
Federal
False Claim
Act
Page 2600
of 2953
Page
31 of
389
12, 2016

Page 2601 of 2953
Page 32 of 389
10/19/2006
July 10,1990
QUALITY TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
This proposal will detail the technical approach and the quality assurance procedures
necessary for the end to end production of the Compact Disc-Read Only Memory (CD-ROM)
storage memory containing DMA Mapping, Charting, & Geodesy (MC&G) product data.
1.
Quality Control - Address the internal quality assurance/quality control

management plan for the end-to-end CD-ROM production (including any
subcontracted items) which will be used to satisfy the requirements in the
Statement of Work.
(SEE ATTACHMENT: FLOW CHART FOR CD-ROM QUALITY CONTROL)

The Defense Mapping Agency (DMA), U.S. Department of Defense, furnished
Mapping, Charting, & Geodesy (MC&G) data containing the logical CD-ROM
image, will be used to create the physical image in adherence to the Red and
Yellow Book specifications, and the ISO 9660 specifications. The data will be
inspected utilizing the Data Discrepancy reporting format, as described.Upon
completion of the mastering process, the stamper is subject to a Binary Data
Compare and the EDC/ECC Integrity Compare test for a 100% correlation. The
Binary Data Compares the data on a replica of the master stamper to the data on
the media used to create the master. If any one of the millions of bytes does not
compare, the master stamper is not approved.
Each master manufactured is also subjected to a 100% EDC/ECC integrity
comparison, adhering to Yellow Book standards. This test consists of reading
each data comparing it to the EDC/ECC data contained on the disc that was
calculated by the encoding system during the mastering process. If any of the
EDC/ECC data segments do not compare, other than 100% correlation, the master
stamper is not approved, and must be reprocessed.
The premastering and mastering production process is performed by Disc
Manufacturing, Inc. (DMI), formerly Disctronics, Inc. American Helix and DMI
have developed operating systems that result in a highly efficient production
process that allows for exceptional quality assurance standards through the
concentration of energies and resources in the front end and manufacturing
procedures respectively. The prescribed production systems have demonstrated
on time delivery of the end product to customers and uninterupted service during
even the shortest turn around deliveries. Production procedures have been
retrofitted to include the proprietary mastering equipment developed by DMI.
Page 33 of 389
This operational strategy has allowed American Helix to further the development
of its respective proprietary 3rd generationmonoline manufacturing module,
currently being adopted by Cincinnati Milicron, Inc. for resale to the CD industry
at large. This has also qaurunteed American Helix that its available resources
would not cause any comprimise to the quality during the premastering and
mastering process by utilizing DMI, which has in itself developed proven
technologies for the front end. This operating system has a demonstrated capacity
of over 100 CD manufacturing projects during any given month.
1. Qulity Control (Continued)
American Helix stampers are given a visual inspection upon arrival in Quality
Control. Once the protective Silitect coating is removed the stamper is checked for
any stains or residual film that may exist from the metal forming process. If the
data surface and backfinish are acceptable to proceed the stamper is loaded into a
Digital Intelligence Systems Corporation SP-2 Stamper Analyzer. The SP-2 is a
comprehensive computer test system that monitors Sony/Phillips Red Book data
parameters such as BLER (less than 50 errors per second, when averaged over a
10 second interval), BRST (less than 7 consecutive errors per second), UNCR
errors on a per second basis as well as 10 sec., total error count and average error
count of the entire stamper surface. I3 and I11 voltage measurments are taken (per
sec.) as well as drop out detection, Symmetry, Peak to Peak, Radial Noise, and
Crosstalk (on track). All measurments are monitored to be well within spec of
Sony/Phillips Red Book. A printout of this test is made and stored in the customer
file as well as on the SP-2 hard drive for future reference.
AUTOMATIC INSPECTION DEVICES SERIES 1000
The AID system utilized at American helix is the first stage of product inspection
in the primary process. The inspection system is automated by Convac I/O spindle
tables and Adept pick and place robotics for consistent and reliable performance.
After the discs store on racks for cooling of the polycarbonate they are then loaded
onto the input table of the AID system and the system is re-aligned for testing of
the new product. As the robot sets the discs one at a time onto the AID station
spindle the disc is rotated one full revolution and 3 test lamps referenced to the
AID software will either accept or reject the disc. The main function of the AID
system is to check the CD for any physical defects or errors that may have
occurred in the molding process. The system also checks for Birefringence, The
inner and outer Eccentricity (variations within +/- 50), Reflectivity level (not less
than 75%), and Warp level of the substrate. The 4 main reject areas on this system
are Surface Flaws, Pinholes and Missing Data (free of E22, two bit correctable,
and E32 errors), Dense Flaws, and Track Flaws, each having a separate and
different threshold (size and level) (not contain radial surface defects greater than
Page 34 of 389
300 micrometers and no tangential surface defects greater than 2 micrometers,

nor any other defects which cause 2 bit error correction (E22) in the second
decoder)for rejection. The AID system also tests the disc for skew. Since every
disc is inspected by the AID system and also visually inspected before being
packaged American Helix maintains a higher level of quality product to the
consumer.
COMPACT DISC COMPUTER AIDED TEST SYSTEM (CD-CATS)
CD CATS SA-2 is a widely used CD analysis system for practically every data
parameter stored on disc. American Helix samples the discs being molded at
intervals throughout the run (every 100 or every 200, depending on the size of the
job) The sampled disc are then checked on the CD CATS for a broad range of
potential errors before being given the ok to pass.
1. Qulity Control (Continued)

The three main areas of testing done by the CATS are Static Data, Vertical Data,
and Test Data each pertinent to a different spec section of Sony/Phillips. Included
in the Static Data is the Table of Contents and TBR (percentage of Block Errors in
the table of contents) The machine then scans for Start of Lead In Diameter, Start
of Program, Maximum Information Diameter, Scanning Velocity, Disc Track
Pitch, Eccentricity of tracks (within +-50), signal voltage in the Push-Pull circuitry,
and HF level crosstalk. The Cross Interleaved Reed Solomon (CIRC) is also
verified on the CD-CATS.
The Vertical Data is a maximum and minimum measurement of the vertical
deviation of the disc from the reference plane of the disc. Expressed in millimeters
and degrees this measurement allows the viewer to quickly see how the semiconductor laser beam is being reflected and read.
The third test section of the CATS is where error correction analysis, I3 and I11,
reflectivity, Symmetry (not less than 20), and Block Error Rate are monitored. In
the Test Data section the user can record errors as they appear in the 1st and 2nd
decoders correcting 1 bit, 2 bit, and 3 bit (or uncorrectable at the 2nd decoder)
errors. Any 3 bit errors in the 2nd decoder (or E32) are failed product as well as
any Block Error Rate with a maximum measurement of 150 even though standard
is 220/sec.
The molding technicians will make any possible changes to reduce or eliminate
Page 35 of 389
problems such as these at the beginning of the run.

The CD-Diagnostics software, a diagnostic program that we developed, will test
the seek performance and the read performance. The CD-Diagnostics was
developed to help users with the installation and maintenance of CD-ROM drives.
Sector counts will also be analyzed here.
At the time of recieving the DMA label film and art work for the printed materials
and the disc printing, the Manufacturing will inspect the respective materials for
completness and conformance to all required specifications as defined by DMA.
The inspectors will also verify the quality of materials needed to deliver the
respective results during the production processes. If the materials do not pass
inspection, the Customer Service Representative will notify DMA for consultation.
The required inserts and liners will be forwarded to WMG, Inc. after final
approval. WMG, Inc., has demonstrated abilities in both quality and on time
delivery of such materials, and specializes in the printing of CD materials.
Upon the delivery of the prescribe pamphlets and liners, the Manufacturing
Manager will again inspect the materials for final aproval as required by all
specifications and quality assurace standards.
During the printing process of the CD-ROM discs, the Manufacturing Manager
will again ispect the respective printing screens for conformity and quality
necessary to produce the required results as required by specifications and quality
assurance standards. If the screens do not meet these respective requirments, new
screens will be produced.
1. Quality Control (Continued)
During the printing process, 100% of all product will again be ispected at
magnified inspection stations for printing quality, and again for surface flaws on
the media itself. Only approved product will be forwarded for packaging and
shipping.
2.Sample Compact Disc Quality - Provide three (3) sample discs with will be evaluated
using the performance criteria found in section 2.3.2 of the Statement of Work
(Attachment (2) to the RFP .
SEE ENCLOSED SAMPLES:
PENTAGON MILDOCS DISC
LASERTEX - THE DEMO
AMP EADS DISC
3.Quality organization - Address staffing and lines of authority, degree of organizational
Page 36 of 389
freedom/authority, policy for producing a quality product the first time, and
monitoring the quality of product.
(SEE EXHIBIT II/ORGANIZATIONAL CHART)
The Director Of Optical Publishing, (POP) will have the responsibility of
managing the entire project for the end to end manufacturing of the CD-ROM
discs. The Quality Assurance Technicians will provided real time status during
the respective processes for the disc manufacturing. The Customer Service Rep
will provide the same with respect to the printing and packaging processes. The
Quality Assurance Technicians will drive the manufacturing process by directing
the premastering, mastering, mastering, primary and secondary processes. Only
upon approval and acceptance of the quality assurance tests and analysis, will
production proceed.
The Production Control Manager will direct the overall scheduling of the project
with specific regards to the primary and secondary processes. He will have the
responsibility of coordinating the efforts of all primary and secondary processing
personnel.
The Manufacturing Manager will assume the responsibility of the managing the
efforts of the secondary process and packaging efforts. The Manufacturing
Manager will bear ultimate responsibility for delivering a finished product
meeting any and all quality assurance standards with regards to coating, printing,
packaging, and physical characteristics.
American Helix approaches the quality issue of its products with a simple
philosophy, invest time, energies, and resources into reducing the risk of error. By
developing a quality assurance system that provides for the immediate testing
and analysis during frequent stages of production, American Helix is able to
produce higher yields that reduce inefficient production cycles.
2. Quality Organization (Continued)

The proprietary primary process module increases the production yield by its
fully automated line. The primary process production line is fully automated
with robotic systems. This reduces the amount of amount of risk normally
associated with the human elements with regards to cleanliness.
Page 37 of 389
Upon the receipt of the data tapes, the files are validated and inspected for
preparation of the premastering process.Upon the creation of the ISO 9660 files,
the original data files are validated for 100% accuracy. This will insure the
required quality needed for the production of the Stamper.
Upon the creation of the stamper, the quality assurance team will again inspect
the quality and specifications of the stamper, again to insure the integrity of both
the physical characteristics and the integrity of the information. The stamper is
first visually inspected for physical flaws ( See Quality Control for detailed
procedures). The Stamper is then analyzed with the Digital Intelligence Systems
Corporation SP-2 Stamper Analyzer. This validates the required specifications of
the Sony/Phillips Red Book Standards (See Quality Control For Details).
Upon the production of a CD-ROM from the Primary Process module, the disc is
inspected again both visually, and again analyzed by the AID System. The AID
System will analyze the disc for four main quality assurance categories:
Birefringence
Inner Reflectivity & Eccentricity
Outer Reflectivity & Eccentricity
Warp Level
There are 4 main Reject Parameters:
Pinholes
Missing Data
Dense Flaws
Track Flaws
Upon the validation of the first disc off of the primary process line, 100 % of all
discs will be tested on the AID system. After the printing of the label on the
Secondary process line, 100% of the discs will again be inspected under magnified
lighting stations for printing flaws, and again for physical flaws on the reflective
discs.
4.Demonstrated Performance to Fulfill Production of a Similar Nature - Address the
companies production background including years of experience and key
personnel and background by specialty; contracts for which similar work was
performed, and current production capability.
American Helix Technology Corporation was founded in 1987. The state-of-theart manufacturing facility was in operation in January of 1988. The facility was a
third generation injection molding process (Primary Process) engineered and
Page 38 of 389
design by David D. Dering.

4. Demonstrated Performance (Continued)
The Primary Process exhibits a unique monoline system. This state-of-the-art
production process yields a superior disc through its higher performance in
quality assurance and higher throughput or yield.
The facility is now currently processing over 70 different titles on a monthly basis.
This type of production demands superior organizational and administrative
performance as well as exceptional quality assurance standards and techniques.
The manufacturing facility has recently doubled its capacity and is currently
capable of producing over 3.5 million CD's annually. Plans are currently being
finalized to double the production capacity by year end which would result in the
capacity of over 7 million CD'S annually. These figures include end to end
production of CD AUDIO or CD-ROM discs.
Similar work was performed for the following organizations:
AMP, Inc.
COMMODORE Business Machines
Arthur Anderson & Company
National Institute of Standards & Technology
5.Understanding of the Required Production Efforts - Demonstrate your understanding
of the scope and extent of the requirement; access to CD-ROM standards
specifications and ability to keep them current; demonstrate understanding of
the functions required to create CD-ROMS from government furnished data;
and describe the physical systems and facilities required to accomplish the
requirements in the Statement of Work.
For a an illustration of the production processes that will utilized to accomplish
the Statement of Work see Exhibit A.
RECEIPT OF GOVERNMENT FURNISHED DATA & PRINTING
MATERIALS
Upon receipt of the Delivery Order and MC&G data, the media (9 Track Tape, 8
MM Cartridge, WORM, or Magneto Optical Cartridges) the project order will be
entered into the computer system. All corresponding project reports, and detailed
Page 39 of 389
information regarding the specifications of that particular order will be logged

into the system. This electronic database gives all departments throughout the
facility instantaneous access to all vital information. This information will contain
inventory management for all titles and all reorder titles. The current internal
reporting system will fulfill the DMA requirement for all and any inventory
reporting that is requested.
5. Understanding of Production (Continued)

The input data files will be inspected for errors/compatibility/conformance to the
standard, and/or the specifications /requirements of the Delivery Order.The data
files will then be prepared immediately for premastering. The DMA furnished
artwork
will
be
inspected
for
printing/finishing
errors
and
compatibility/conformance standards identified in the Delivery Order. All
discrepancies shall be reported to the DMA utilizing the Data Discrepancy
reporting format. The delivered artwork will immediately prepared to produce
the respective printing screens for the disc labels. The required artwork for the
inserts will also be prepared for printing. Upon acceptance of the proofs, the
inserts will be produced.
PREMASTERING/MASTERING
The TOPIX or Meridian Premastering System will be utilized to perform the
premastering and ISO 9660 imaging. After completion, the CD-ROM image will
be validated against the original data. Upon verification, the mastering process
will produce the metal stamper used for replication. The stamper will be verified
by the quality assurance department, as described in detail in subsection 1, and
prepared for the Primary Process, replication.
PRIMARY PROCESS
The Primary process equipment will be tooled and the stamper installed for
replication. After the clear disc is produced from the injection molding machine,
it will move to the metallization chamber by way of robotics. The clear disc will
be coated with a thin layer of platinum. The disc is then transferred by robotics to
the UV (Ultraviolet) light station, which cures and hardens the disc. After the
process is tweaked to its required performance, the CD-ROM will be inspected
and verified for the desired specifications. Upon approval, the primary process
will continue to produce the desired quantity.
Page 40 of 389
AIDS INSPECTION
After the discs are produced, 100% of all product will be inspected by the AID
System Analyzer.
Parameters will be measured against the specified
specifications, the Sony/Phillips Red Book, and Yellow Book Standards. See
Subsection 1. for detailed description. Upon acceptance, all master discs/stampers
and disc labeling stencils will be stored in the Stamper/Media vault (climate
controlled).
SECONDARY PROCESS
The approved CD-ROMS will then be prepared for the Secondary Process, or disc
printing. Using silk screen printing technology, the discs will be printed with the
respective label artwork. This state-of-the-art technology will allow up to 5 color
printing, and is also capable of process or picture printing.
SECONDARY PROCESS INSPECTION
After completion the CD-ROMS will be again be inspected. 100 % of all CDROMS will pass through an inspection station equipped with 200X power
magnifying devices. The CD-ROMS will be inspected for both Printing flaws, and
again for physical flaws on the reflective surface.
5. Understanding of Production (Continued)

Five CM&G CD-ROM discs shall be randomly selected and furnished to the DMA
for approval and acceptance as per all required specifications.
American Helix will provide written certification certifying that the discs meet or
exceed the specified performance criteria, including a 100% correlation of the
discs of a byte by byte comparison of the CM&G source data to the premaster and
the master.
PACKAGING & FULFILLMENT
All approved CD-ROMS will be prepared for packaging. The inserts will be
inserted into the jewel boxes in preparation for the packaging of the CD-ROM
discs. After completion of the packaging of the CD-ROMS, the jewel boxes will be
readied for shrink wrapping. An automated shrink wrapping machine will
automatically wrap and heat the jewel box for the desired results.
The jewel boxes will be transferred to the shipping department for packing,
labeling, and shipping.
Page 41 of 389
Upon completion of the contract or sooner as requested by the DMA, American

Helix return all MC&G property. American Helix will certify that the property is
returned in its original condition.
All master stamper discs/stampers, and stencils shall be stored in a clean, and
climate controlled storage vault during the archiving period. At the end of the
archiving period, American Helix will destroy and provide the required
certification as prescribed by the Federal emissions criteria, the DMA, and any
other applicable requirements.
Page 42 of 389
6. Technical Production Process - Describe your proposed process to include the task
including flow diagrams, total personnel by skill areas and skill level which
will be devoted to the production functions, description of required equipment
to be devoted to production functions, and viable contingency plan for
production backup.
Exhibit III,IV,& V illustrate flow diagrams for the 3 major production processes
required to satisfy the requirements of "SECTION C -DESCRIPTION /
SPECIFICATION / WORK STATEMENT" ATTACHMENT (2)". The enclosed
EXHIBIT II, describes the organizational chart and defines the personnel by skill
areas and skill level.
The following is a summary of the required equipment used in the production processes defined
and described above:
CINCINNATI MILICRON PRIMARY PROCESS MODULE
CONVAC METALIZER
ADEPT ROBOTICS SYSTEMS
DIGITAL INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS CORPORATION
ANALYZER
CD-CATS SA2 CD ANALYZER
AID SYSTEM ANALYZER
SONY DMR 4000
SONY RECORDER
DUBUIT 3000
NOVELL ETHERNET NETWORK
DISC MANUFACTURING, INC., (FACILITY)
OMI/TOPIX & MERIDIAN PREMASTERING SYSTEM
ZUMAS-XABITE/OMI BACKUP SYSTEMS
APLLE/MACII PLUS SSCI INTERFACE
DMI MASTERING SYSTEM
PHILLIPS UNIVERSAL MASTER GLASS SYSTEM
PLAYER ANALYZER
POLYFORM ELECTRO-FORMING PLATING SYSTEM
SP-2
STAMPER-
A viable contingency plan for production backup is predicated on the availability on 3 major
resources:
1. Raw Materials
2.Machinery & Equipment
3.Labor
Page 43 of 389
Raw Materials - American Helix purchases and stores quantities of raw materials
that exhibit not only economies of scale, but also provide the facility in full
production for at least 2 months without interruption.
Machinery & Equipment - The facility features duplicate primary process
equipment, and also secondary process equipment.
Labor - American Helix produces CD's 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. High
Industries, Inc., also supports American Helix with an unlimited labor market
throughout its temporary services company, High Employees.
MANAGEMENT: The management proposal shall include a description of the
management and administrative organization available to be established for the
supervision, and assurance of expeditious and economical performance of the effort
required under the proposed contract, including a sample work structure chart by job
classification and code.
The management proposal should include information concerning their experience
your firm has had in performance of Government contracts for similar requirements of
the variety and magnitude set forth in the RFP. This information should include data
as to the scope of work required under such contracts, the term of said contracts,
number and types of personnel furnished, the procuring agencies contracted with,
contract numbers, and other applicable information.
Further, it should address the factors listed below which are related to the evaluation
criteria set forth in Section M of the solicitation:
1.Management Plan - Address proposed plan to control production, posed manning
and span of control, past performance, plan to satisfy required storage facilities,
plan to implement production, plan to acquire additional personnel (if
required), and plan to maintain adequate supply of raw materials.
2.Management Organization - Depict organizational structure including a description
of each organizational component; address background experience of key
management personnel, and corporate mission statement.
The management and administrative organization is illustrated in EXHIBIT VI
"ORGANIZATIONAL CHART".
American Helix has recently been awarded a contract with the National Institute
of Standards and Technology for the premastering, mastering, and replication of
CD-ROMS. The contract extends for a period of one year.
Page 44 of 389
American Helix currently produces more than 75 CD manufacturing projects per

month. It has demonstrated its ability to provide on time delivery of its quick
turn production runs with a commitment for quality.
Its manufacturing facility contains over 20,000 square feet, and has an additional
20,000 square feet for expansion. It currently contains a 1,000 square foot tape and
master vault for client medium storage.
The following is the scope of responsibilities for the respective job classifications:
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY/RECEPTIONIST - Under the supervision of the
President/Vice President, the Executive Secretary/Receptionist will have the
responsibility of directing all telephone activity, and providing any clerical work
required by executive management, to include typing, FAX communications,
general office work, special projects, developing the executive calendar, travel
arrangements, filing, time card and employee benefits processing, American Helix
liaison to High Industries, and performing data entry as required.
2. Management Organization (Continued)

DIRECTOR OF OPTICAL PUBLISHING (DOP) - Under the direction of the President,
the DOP will be responsible for developing and growing the business activities of
the optical publishing business, including CD-ROM Premastering, Mastering, and
Replication; CD-ROM Project Development; Data Conversions; and Information
Technologies. The DOP will be responsible for coordinating, scheduling, and the
supervision of all activities. The POP will also be responsible for project
management duties of the respective activities. The DOP will coordinate all
transactions with Disc Manufacturing Inc., for the Mastering services required for
CD-ROM replication.
SALES COORDINATOR PROFESSIONAL AUDIO PRODUCTS - Working directly
with the Vice President and Director of Sales and Marketing, this position is
responsible for the daily administration of all sales, marketing and advertising
correspondence and maintenance of sales files. Also has the responsibility to
provide current and prospective customers with information.
DIRECTOR OF SALES/MARKETING/PROFESSIONAL AUDIO PRODUCTSWorking directly with the Vice President, this position is responsible for the daily
sale and marketing planning and maintenance of all in-house CD audio and
Page 45 of 389
cassette accounts.
QUALITY CONTROL TECHNICIAN (QTC) - Under the supervision of the Vice
President, the QCT is responsible for the daily quality inspection and Reporting
relative to American Helix products and services.
Specifically these
responsibilities include but are not limited to the testing, installation and
regularly scheduled maintenance of the "QC" lab and plant inspection material.
On a daily basis the QCT must track the timely arrival and assure the quality of incoming
client Master Tapes, CD-AUDIO & CD-ROM Stampers, and finished goods. In
conjunction with these daily responsibilities the QCT must alert the Vice
President, Director of Optical Publishing, and Production staff concerning
questionable product and source material quality.
PRODUCTION CONTROL MANAGER (PCM) - Under the supervision of the Vice
President, the PCM is responsible for efficient and accurate communication with
customers, the daily scheduling and expediting of production, and the shipping
and receiving of finished goods and materials.
CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE (CRS) - Under the supervision of the
Production Control Manager, the CSR is responsible for the efficient and accurate
processing of customer orders, from receipt of parts through shipment of
completed product.
ENGINEERING MANAGER (EM) - Under the direction of the President, the
Engineering Manager will be responsible of over-all Plant and Manufacturing
System Engineering. Prioruty responsibility being the efficient, cost effective,
operation, preventative maintenance, training, repair, product quality, and uptime management of the Primary Process.
SUPPORT SYSTEMS MANAGER (SSM) - Under the direction of the Engineering
Manager, the SSM will be responsible for the installation, start-up and
maintenance, of all utility systems in the facility, as well as the general set-up, and
maintenance of secondary equipment, and assist the EM with Primary Equipment
as needed, and the care of the interior of the physical plant.
PRIMARY PROCESS ENGINEER (PPE) - Under the direction of the Engineering
Manager, the Primary Process Engineer will be responsible for the daily up-time,
efficiency, and quality production of all American Helix Compact Discs produced
in the Primary Process.
Page 46 of 389
MANUFACTURING MANAGER (MM) - Under the direction of the President, the

Manufacturing Manager will be responsible for the over-all product quality, (as it
relates to secondary operations which include spin coating, printing and
packaging) timely manufacturing of product as outlined by the Master schedule,
technical processing and machine operations involved in the secondary
operations, as well as general plant safety, personnel, training, and customer
support functions as needed.
ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGER (AM) - Under the direction of the President, the
Administrative manager will be responsible for the communications between
American Helix and High Industries, Inc., in the areas of accounts payable,
accounts receivable, invoicing, credit and collections, purchasing, general finance,
pricing analysis, general analysis in assisting management in marketing and
manufacturing decisions, personnel and human resources issues that interface
with High Industries, Inc., assisting with the development and administration of
corporate policy internal the America Helix and as required with high Industries,
Inc., key role in the development of annual budgets, and general American Helix
management.
VICE PRESIDENT - Under the direction of the President, the Vice President will be
responsible for the daily sales and marketing activities, daily quality control
efforts, and the reproduction order processing. The Vice President will be
responsible for performance reports on the respective accountability activities.
QUALITY CONTROL/PREMASTERING TECHNICIAN
ORDER PROCESSING CLERK (OPC) - Under the supervision of the Production Control
Manager, the OPC will be responsible for the data entry, logging, and reporting of
all related information of new orders and reorders. The OPC will be responsible
for communicating with clients and customers concerning discrepancies in
information and insufficient reproduction materials.
SHIPPING & RECEIVING CLERK (SRC) - Under the supervision of the Production
Control Manager, the SRC will be responsible for the daily shipping and receiving
activities of the company. The SRC will be accountable for all customer products
that are received from the Packaging/Inspection stations. The SRC will also be
accountable for processing the receiving of customer printed materials.
Page 47 of 389

PRIMARY PROCESS TECHNICIAN (PPT) - Under the supervision of the Engineering
Manager, the PPT will be responsible for the daily operations of the primary
processes, injection molding, operations. These responsibilities include preparing
the stamper for production, supervising the injection molding operation,
metalizing operation, and the ultraviolet process.
AP/AR/CREDIT/PURCHASING CLERK (AACPC) - Under the supervision of the
Administrative Manager, the AACPC will be responsible for the processing of
Accounts Receivables, Accounts Payables, Credit and Collections, and
Purchasing. The AACPC will be also be the liaison with High Industries, Inc.,
accounting department.
INVOICING/SALES ORDERS (ISO) - Under the supervision of the Administrative
Manager, the ISO will be responsible for the processing of all Invoices and Sales
Orders. These responsibilities will include communicating with the Order
Processing department to verify and confirm all customer, production, and
shipping information as it relates to billing activities.
PRINTING TECHNICIAN - Under the supervision of the Manufacturing Manager, the
Printing Technician will be responsible for the daily operation of the Secondary
Process, Printing Process. The Printing Technician will be accountable for the
quality and performance of the process, as well as keeping to the Master Schedule.
SCREEN TECHNICIAN - Under the supervision of the Manufacturing Manager,
the Screen Technician will be responsible for the production of all printing screens
required for the Secondary Process. This will include quality control standards.
The Screen Technician will also be required for the production, maintenance, and
inventory of all inks and color substances.
PACKAGING SUPERVISOR - Under the supervision of the Manufacturing Manager,
Packaging Supervisor will be responsible for the daily activities of the Packaging
Inspectors. These responsibilities will include supervisory functions, scheduling
commitments, quality assurance standards, and inventory management of all
customer provided materials.
PACKAGING INSPECTORS - Under the supervision of the Packaging Supervisor and
the Manufacturing Manager, the Packaging Inspectors will be responsible for all
packaging requirements of CD products. The Packaging Inspectors will also be
responsible for the Secondary Process Inspection and Quality Assurance
Page 48 of 389
procedures.
BACKGROUND EXPERIENCE OF KEY PERSONNEL:
DAVID D. DERING, PRESIDENT - Accumulated more than 15 years experience as an
engineer in injection molding technology. Previously was director of operations
for MXL Industries, a manufacturer of custom optical lenses. In the past he
developed, designed and produced products for the Navy and Aerospace
industry. Designed and developed the injection molding module of the CD
manufacturing processes, and manufacturing facility at large.
Mr. Dering has a Patent Pending on the CD manufacturing process and is currently
finalizing agreements with Cincinnati Milicron to market the modules for the
industry at large.
JAMES BOYER, VICE PRESIDENT - Established himself as one of the leading audio
engineers over a career that spanned 20 years. Demonstrated an in depth
knowledge and expertise for audio and video engineering, production, and
recording. Produced the first commercially released CD-AUDIO, for Billy Joel.
Developed a list of Who's Who in contemporary music as clients for his
engineering and recording business.
Provides a diverse range of technical expertise in the development of multimedia
optical publishing projects, including CD-ROM multimedia.
AL THORNBURG, ENGINEERING MANAGER - Developed a strong background in
manufacturing and process engineering with DIGITAL AUDIO DISC
CORPORATION, a subsidiary of SONY. SONY was instrumental in developing
the CD technology. Contributes an in depth working knowledge of injection
molding equipment and processes used in the manufacturing environment of CDAUDIO and CD-ROM. Prior to working with SONY for 6 years, employed as a
manufacturing engineering specialist for RCA Corporation.
MIKE DILLINGHAM, PRODUCTION CONTROL MANAGER - Acquired 13 years of

experience in the distribution and production areas of the recording industry.
Prior to American Helix, managed the distribution and warehousing efforts of
ELECTROSOUND GROUP, INC., a national recording company. Mike also
served in similar capacities with ASR and POLYGRAM recording companies.
Page 49 of 389
JOE LIANTONIO, QUALITY CONTROL TECHNICIAN, SYSTEMS ANALYST Previously employed by FERRANTI DEFENSE SYSTEMS, INC., an International
Defense Contractor, as a systems engineer. Performed various engineering and
testing functions for hardware, software and integrated systems for radar and
tracking systems. Experienced technical writer with working knowledge of
military specifications.
Responsible for performing and analyzing post
production Acceptance Testing for final production approval for various
products.
DAVE SHIRK, QC/PREMASTERING TECHNICIAN - Previously was employed by
McCure Audio and Visual Recording Inc. serving in various production and
engineering capacities. Also contains a working experience of electronic
engineering. Experienced in analyzing and inspecting recorded media for
specifications and bench mark analysis for quality assurance standards.
BETH ELLER, MANUFACTURING ENGINEER - Employed in the in the injection
molding industry for the last 12 years. Developed systems for the finishing,
polishing, and coating technologies in injection molding applications. Beth is
responsible for the state-of-the-art printing processes employed for the CD disc
manufacturing.
GLEAN GALLANT, PRIMARY PROCESS TECHNICIAN - Performed various
engineering duties and responsibilities in the injection molding industry during
the last 10 years. Contributed to the design of the primary process module and
was instrumental in building the manufacturing systems for American Helix.
Provides an in depth expertise to the production and manufacturing equipment,
systems, and operations of the Primary Process.
STAN CATERBONE, DIRECTOR, OPTICAL PUBLISHING -Developed the CD-ROM
business for American Helix/Advanced Media Group, LTD.,.
Previous
background in computer technologies. Former founder and principal of a
Financial Services organization, FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT GROUP, LTD.,
raising over $80 million of capital per year. Designed and developed state-of-theart information technology systems for the company. Combines a developed
sense of entrepreneurial spirit with past education, training, and experience of
computer and information technologies.
TOM
BROWN,
OPTICAL
PUBLISHING
Page 50 of 389
SOFTWARE/SYSTEMS
ENGINEER
(RETAINED BY AMERICAN HELIX) - Developed over 50 CD-ROM projects

since 1987. Has been authoring commercial software over the past 8 years,
including projects with UNISYS and NATIONAL SEMICONDUCTOR. Was
manager of SHAPE OPTIMEDIA CD-ROM division.
Authored CDDIAGNOSTICS, a software program for installing and maintaining CD-ROM
drives.
MALCOM LANGLEY (ESSCOMP), SOFTWARE DEVELOPER Designed and developed a full text retrieval engine that is on the leading edge of
technology in relation to current performance standards. This engine was
developed to handle CD ROM size databases (670 megabytes or larger). The
philosophy behind the technology is simple, the data is compressed onto the CD
ROM disk and then it is decompressed in the PC's memory before displaying to
the screen.
Mr. Langley has been actively involved with computers since 1974, starting with
self-assembled (6800, 8080 and Z80 CPU) systems. He has also been involved with
electronics since his childhood, including 2 years with the Army Signal Corps
doing radio and teletype repair. As a hobbyist - amateur radio, TV repair, and
calibration laboratory.

Programmed the software and maintained the systems to do invoicing, accounts
receivable, general ledger and historical analysis for Association of Maryland
Pilots using proprietary Prodigy Systems software. The systems processed 4,000
to 8,000 ships annually and $8 to $14 million in revenue.
WAYNE LANDIS, SYSTEMS ENGINEER (ESSCOMP) - Over 7 years experience with
Naval supply and procurement Automated Data Processing (ADP) systems
design, implementation, operations and supervision. This position was in the
information center providing support to 435 end users with a 1.4 billion dollar
budget and over 72,000 contracts per year.
Developed a database and then produced 95,000 barcoded labels. Developed a
plan to backfit the procurement folders with the barcoded labels. Designed a
tracking and barcode wand update system, via 3270 input into the IBM 3090/600
mainframe computer. This system utilized mainframe FOCUS for data capture
and storage with nightly update of the Navy IDMS master database.
Page 51 of 389
Over 5 years on the BREAKOUT/COMPETITION ADVOCATE PROGRAM.

Developed the BREAKOUT HIT LIST. This list provides vendors with the parts
the Navy has procured over the last five years (with quantity and the last price
payed) divided by sole source or full competitive items.
Developed the Competition advocate picture catalog. This book provides a
picture of items that the government has problems finding vendors to produce.
(Some reasons are the specification are written in military jargon or the drawing is
not available.) The driving factor of the catalog is to find a vender to reverse
engineer the part.
Developed and implemented the BREAKOUT tracking system of the 10,000 items
reviewed yearly.
Worked with PARTMASTER (NSA) to develop CD-ROM application with
12,500,000 part number/military number cross reference. Any item is crossed and
displayed on the screen of an 8088 type PC in less than 6 seconds.
Beta test site for IBM 3363 WORM drive. This involved 9 months of optical disk
image storage and retrieval systems testing with 50% increase in data transfer
speed. Developed the Navy color picture database of parts.
Worked for Advanced Technology Inc. as a Senior System Analyst and ran the
Camp Hill satellite office. Provided support on the LM2500 Marine Gas Turbine
Project.
Developed a database to track all serial numbered gas turbines and which ship
they were installed on. This database was then used to schedule ECP and
overhaul schedules.
Bid four major RFP's on the BREAKOUT program each proposal had two teaming
partners.
CORPORATE MISSION STATEMENT - TO ESTABLISH AMERICAN HELIX
AS A HIGH QUALITY, FULL SERVICE, PRODUCTION FACILITY IN THE
COMPACT DISC MARKETPLACE.
TO PROVIDE VALUE ADDED SERVICES TO OUR CLIENTS BY MEANS OF
APPLICATION AND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING.
TO HELP FACILITATE THE GROWTH OF THE OPTICAL PUBLISHING
INDUSTRY BY PROVIDING SUPERIOR QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE
Page 52 of 389
PRODUCTS AND SERVICES, AT FAIR MARKET PRICES FOR THE

MARKETPLACE AT LARGE.
Page 53 of 389
CHAPTER
DIVIDER
Page 54 of 389
Page 55 of 389
DoD 5240.1-R, December 1982
Page 56 of 389
FOREWORD
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
2
FOREWORD
TABLE OF CONTENTS
REFERENCES
DEFINITIONS
CHAPTER 1 - PROCEDURE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS

C1.1.
C1.2.
C1.3.
C1.4.
C1.5.
13
APPLICABILITY AND SCOPE

SCOPE
INTERPRETATION
EXCEPTIONS TO POLICY
AMENDMENT
13
13
14
14
14
CHAPTER 2 - PROCEDURE 2. COLLECTION OF INFORMATION ABOUT

UNITED STATES PERSONS
15
C2.1. APPLICABILITY AND SCOPE

C2.2. EXPLANATION OF UNDEFINED TERMS
C2.3. TYPES OF INFORMATION THAT MAY BE COLLECTED ABOUT
C2.4. GENERAL CRITERIA GOVERNING THE MEANS USED TO COLLECT
INFORMATION ABOUT UNITED STATES PERSONS
C2.5. SPECIAL LIMITATION ON THE COLLECTION OF FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE
WITHIN THE UNITED STATES
CHAPTER 3 - PROCEDURE 3. RETENTION OF INFORMATION ABOUT
C3.1.
C3.2.
C3.3.
C3.4.
18
20
20
20
21
CHAPTER 4 - PROCEDURE 4. DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION ABOUT

22
22
22
23
18
20
APPLICABILITY
EXPLANATION OF UNDEFINED TERMS
CRITERIA FOR RETENTION
ACCESS AND RETENTION

C4.2. CRITERIA FOR DISSEMINATION
C4.3. OTHER DISSEMINATION
15
15
16
Page 57 of 389
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS, continued

Page
24
CHAPTER 5 - PROCEDURE 5. ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE

C5.1. PART 1. ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE IN THE UNITED STATES
FOR INTELLIGENCE PURPOSES
C5.2. PART 2. ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES
C5.3. PART 3. SIGNALS INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES
C5.4. PART 4. TECHNICAL SURVEILLANCE COUNTERMEASUSRES
C5.5. PART 5. DEVELOPING, TESTING AND CALIBRATION OF
ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT
C5.6. PART 6. TRAINING OF PERSONNEL IN THE OPERATION AND USE
OF ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS AND SURVEILLANCE EQUIPMENT
C5.7. PART 7. CONDUCT OF VULNERABILITY AND HEARABILITY SURVEYS
CHAPTER 6 - PROCEDURE 6. CONCEALED MONITORING
24
25
28
31
32
34
36
38

C6.3. PROCEDURES
38
38
39
CHAPTER 7 - PROCEDURE 7. PHYSICAL SEARCHES
41

C7.3. PROCEDURES
41
41
41
CHAPTER 8 - PROCEDURE 8. SEARCHES AND EXAMINATION OF MAIL

C8.1. APPLICABILITY
C8.3. PROCEDURES
CHAPTER 9 - PROCEDURE 9. PHYSICAL SURVEILLANCE
C9.1. APPLICABILITY
C9.3. PROCEDURES
Page 58 of 389
45
45
45
46
47
47
47
47
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS, continued

CHAPTER 10 - PROCEDURE 10. UNDISCLOSED PARTICIPATION IN ORGANIZATIONS
C10.1.
C10.2.
C10.3.
C10.4.
APPLICABILITY
EXPLANATION OF UNDEFINED TERMS
PROCEDURES FOR UNDISCLOSED PARTICIPATION
DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT
49
49
50
53
CHAPTER 11 - PROCEDURE 11. CONTRACTING FOR GOODS AND SERVICES

C11.1. APPLICABILITY
C11.2. PROCEDURES
C11.3. EFFECT OF NONCOMPLIANCE
54
54
54
55
CHAPTER 12 - PROCEDURE 12. PROVISION OF ASSISTANCE TO LAW

ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES
56
C12.2. PROCEDURES
56
56
CHAPTER 13 - PROCEDURE 13. EXPERIMENTATION ON HUMAN SUBJECTS

C13.3. PROCEDURES
CHAPTER 14 - PROCEDURE 14. EMPLOYEE CONDUCT
C14.2. PROCEDURES
58
58
58
58
60
60
60
CHAPTER 15 - PROCEDURE 15. IDENTIFYING, INVESTIGATING, AND

REPORTING QUESTIONABLE ACTIVITIES
C15.3. PROCEDURES
Page
49
Page 59 of 389
62
62
62
62
TABLE OF CONTENTS
REFERENCES
(a) Executive Order 12333, "United States Intelligence Activities," December 4, 1981
(b) Public Law 95-511, "Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978"
(c) DoD Directive 5200.29, "DoD Technical Surveillance Countermeasures (TSCM)
Survey Program," February 12, 1975
(d) Chapters 105 and 119 of title 18, United States Code
(e) Public Law 73-416, "Communications Act of 1934," Section 605
(f) Sections 801-840 of title 10, United States Code, "Uniform Code of Military
Justice"
(g) Agreement Between the Deputy Secretary of Defense and Attorney General, April 5,
1979
(h) Executive Order 12198, "Prescribing Amendments to the Manual for
Courts-Martial, United States, 1969," March 12, 1980
(i) DoD Directive 5525.5, "DoD Cooperation with Civilian Law Enforcement Officials,"
March 22, 1982
(j) DoD Directive 5000.11, "Data Elements and Data Codes Standardization Program,"
December 7, 1964
(k) DoD Directive 5000.19, "Policies for the Management and Control of Information
Requirements," March 12, 1976
Page 60 of 389
REFERENCES
DL1. DEFINITIONS
DL1.1.1. Administrative Purposes. Information is collected for "administrative
purposes" when it is necessary for the administration of the component concerned, but
is not collected directly in performance of the intelligence activities assigned such
component. Examples include information relating to the past performance of
potential contractors; information to enable such components to discharge their public
affairs and legislative duties, including the maintenance of correspondence files; the
maintenance of employee personnel and training records; and training materials or
documents produced at training facilities.
DL1.1.2. Available Publicly. Information that has been published or broadcast for
general public consumption, is available on request to a member of the general public,
could lawfully be seen or heard by any casual observer, or is made available at a meeting
open to the general public. In this context, the "general public" also means general
availability to persons in a military community even though the military community is
not open to the civilian general public.
DL1.1.3. Communications Security. Protective measures taken to deny
unauthorized persons information derived from telecommunications of the U.S.
Government related to national security and to ensure the authenticity of such
telecommunications.
DL1.1.4. Consent. The agreement by a person or organization to permit DoD
intelligence components to take particular actions that affect the person or
organization. Consent may be oral or written unless a specific form of consent is
required by a particular procedure. Consent may be implied if adequate notice is
provided that a particular action (such as entering a building) carries with it the
presumption of consent to an accompanying action (such as search of briefcases).
(Questions regarding what is adequate notice in particular circumstances should be
referred to the legal office responsible for advising the DoD intelligence component
concerned.)
DL1.1.5. Counterintelligence. Information gathered and activities conducted to
protect against espionage, other intelligence activities, sabotage, or assassinations
conducted for or on behalf of foreign powers, organizations, or persons, or international
terrorist activities, but not including personnel, physical, document, or communications
security programs.
Page 61 of 389
DEFINITIONS
DL1.1.6. Counterintelligence Investigation. Includes inquiries and other activities

undertaken to determine whether a particular United States person is acting for, or on
behalf of, a foreign power for purposes of conducting espionage and other intelligence
activities, sabotage, assassinations, international terrorist activities, and actions to
neutralize such acts.
DL1.1.7. DoD Component. Includes the Office of the Secretary of Defense, each
of the Military Departments, the Organization of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Unified
and Specified Commands, and the Defense Agencies.
DL1.1.8. DoD Intelligence Components. Include the following organizations:
DL1.1.8.1. The National Security Agency/Central Security Service.
DL1.1.8.2. The Defense Intelligence Agency.
DL1.1.8.3. The offices within the Department of Defense for the collection
of specialized national foreign intelligence through reconnaissance programs.
DL1.1.8.4. The Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence, Army General Staff.
DL1.1.8.5. The Office of Naval Intelligence.
DL1.1.8.6. The Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence, U. S. Air Force.
DL1.1.8.7. The Army Intelligence and Security Command.
DL1.1.8.8. The Naval Intelligence Command.
DL1.1.8.9. The Naval Security Group Command.
DL1.1.8.10. The Director of Intelligence, U.S. Marine Corps.
DL1.1.8.11. The Air Force Intelligence Service.
DL1.1.8.12. The Electronic Security Command, U.S. Air Force.
DL1.1.8.13. The counterintelligence elements of the Naval Investigative
Service.
DL1.1.8.14. The counterintelligence elements of the Air Force Office of
Special Investigations.
Page 62 of 389
DEFINITIONS
DL1.1.8.15. The 650th Military Intelligence Group, SHAPE.

DL1.1.8.16. Other organizations, staffs, and offices, when used for foreign
intelligence or counterintelligence activities to which part 2 of E.O. 12333 (reference
(a)), applies, provided that the heads of such organizations, staffs, and offices shall not
be considered as heads of DoD intelligence components for purposes of this
Regulation.
DL1.1.9. Electronic Surveillance. Acquisition of a nonpublic communication by
electronic means without the consent of a person who is a party to an electronic
communication or, in the case of a non-electronic communication, without the consent
of a person who is visibly present at the place of communication, but not including the
use of radio direction finding equipment solely to determine the location of a
transmitter. (Electronic surveillance within the United States is subject to the
definitions in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (reference (b)).)
DL1.1.10. Employee. A person employed by, assigned to, or acting for an agency
within the intelligence community, including contractors and persons otherwise acting at
the direction of such an agency.
DL1.1.11. Foreign Intelligence. Information relating to the capabilities, intentions,
and activities of foreign powers, organizations, or persons, but not including
counterintelligence except for information on international terrorist activities.
DL1.1.12. Foreign Power. Any foreign government (regardless of whether
recognized by the United States), foreign-based political party (or faction thereof),
foreign military force, foreign-based terrorist group, or any organization composed, in
major part, of any such entity or entities.
DL1.1.13. Intelligence Activities. Refers to all activities that DoD intelligence
components are authorized to undertake pursuant to Executive Order 12333 (reference
(a)).
DL1.1.14. Intelligence Community and an Agency of Or Within the Intelligence
Community. Refers to the following organizations:
DL1.1.14.1. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).
DL1.1.14.2. The National Security Agency (NSA).
DL1.1.14.3. The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA).
Page 63 of 389
DEFINITIONS
DL1.1.14.4. The Offices within the Department of Defense for the collection
of specialized national foreign intelligence through reconnaissance programs.
DL1.1.14.5. The Bureau of Intelligence and Research of the Department of
State.
DL1.1.14.6. The intelligence elements of the Army, the Navy, the Air Force
and the Marine Corps, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Department of the
Treasury, and the Department of Energy.
DL1.1.14.7. The staff elements of the Office of the Director of Central
Intelligence.
DL1.1.15. International Narcotics Activities. Refers to activities outside the
United States to produce, transfer or sell narcotics or other substances controlled in
accordance with Sections 811 and 812 of title 21, United States Code.
DL1.1.16. International Terrorist Activities. Activities undertaken by or in support
of terrorists or terrorist organizations that occur totally outside the United States, or
that transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are
accomplished, the persons they appear intended to coerce or intimidate, or the locale in
which the perpetrators operate or seek asylum.
DL1.1.17. Lawful Investigation. An investigation qualifies as a lawful investigation
if the subject of the investigation is within DoD investigative jurisdiction; if it is
conducted by a DoD Component that has authorization to conduct the particular type of
investigation concerned (for example, counterintelligence, personnel security, physical
security, communications security); and if the investigation is conducted in accordance
with applicable law and policy, including E.O. 12333 and this Regulation.
DL1.1.18. Personnel Security. Measures designed to insure that persons
employed, or being considered for employment, in sensitive positions of trust are
suitable for such employment with respect to loyalty, character, emotional stability, and
reliability and that such employment is clearly consistent with the interests of the
national security. It includes measures designed to ensure that persons granted access
to classified information remain suitable for such access and that access is consistent
with the interests of national security.
DL1.1.19. Personnel Security Investigation:
10
Page 64 of 389
DEFINITIONS
DL1.1.19.1. An inquiry into the activities of a person granted access to

intelligence or other classified information; or a person who is being considered for
access to intelligence or other classified information, including persons who are
granted or may be granted access to facilities of DoD intelligence components; or a
person to be assigned or retained in a position with sensitive duties.emsp; The
investigation is designed to develop information pertaining to the suitability, eligibility,
and trustworthiness of the individual with respect to loyalty, character, emotional
stability and reliability.
DL1.1.19.2. Inquiries and other activities directed against DoD employees or
members of a Military Service to determine the facts of possible voluntary or
involuntary compromise of classified information by them.
DL1.1.19.3. The collection of information about or from military personnel in
the course of tactical training exercises for security training purposes.
DL1.1.20. Physical Security. The physical measures taken to prevent unauthorized
access to, and prevent the damage or loss of, equipment, facilities, materiel and
documents; and measures undertaken to protect DoD personnel from physical threats to
their safety.
DL1.1.21. Physical Security Investigation. All inquiries, inspections, or surveys
of the effectiveness of controls and procedures designed to provide physical security;
and all inquiries and other actions undertaken to obtain information pertaining to
physical threats to DoD personnel or property.
DL1.1.22. Reasonable Belief. A reasonable belief arises when the facts and
circumstances are such that a reasonable person would hold the belief. Reasonable
belief must rest on facts and circumstances that can be articulated; "hunches" or
intuitions are not sufficient. Reasonable belief can be based on experience, training,
and knowledge in foreign intelligence or counterintelligence work applied to facts and
circumstances at hand, so that a trained and experienced "reasonable person" might hold a
reasonable belief sufficient to satisfy this criterion when someone unfamiliar with
foreign intelligence or counterintelligence work might not.
DL1.1.23. Signals Intelligence. A category of intelligence including
communications intelligence, electronic intelligence, and foreign instrumentation
signals intelligence, either individually or in combination.
DL1.1.24. United States. When used to describe a place, the term shall include
the territories under the sovereignty of the United States.
11
Page 65 of 389
DEFINITIONS
DL1.1.25. United States Person

DL1.1.25.1. The term "United States person" means:
DL1.1.25.1.1. A United States citizen;
DL1.1.25.1.2. An alien known by the DoD intelligence component
concerned to be a permanent resident alien;
DL1.1.25.1.3. An unincorporated association substantially composed of
United States citizens or permanent resident aliens;
DL1.1.25.1.4. A corporation incorporated in the United States, except for
a corporation directed and controlled by a foreign government or governments. A
corporation or corporate subsidiary incorporated abroad, even if partially or wholly
owned by a corporation incorporated in the United States, is not a United States person.
DL1.1.25.2. A person or organization outside the United States shall be
presumed not to be a United States person unless specific information to the contrary is
obtained. An alien in the United States shall be presumed not to be a United States
person unless specific information to the contrary is obtained.
DL1.1.25.3. A permanent resident alien is a foreign national lawfully admitted
into the United States for permanent residence.
12
Page 66 of 389
DEFINITIONS
C1. CHAPTER 1
PROCEDURE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
C1.1.1. These procedures apply only to "DoD intelligence components," as defined
in the Definitions Section. Procedures 2 through 4 provide the sole authority by which
such components may collect, retain and disseminate information concerning United
States persons. Procedures 5 through 10 set forth applicable guidance with respect to
the use of certain collection techniques to obtain information for foreign intelligence
and counterintelligence purposes. Authority to employ such techniques shall be limited
to that necessary to perform functions assigned the DoD intelligence component
concerned. Procedures 11 through 15 govern other aspects of DoD intelligence
activities, including the oversight of such activities.
C1.1.2. The functions of DoD intelligence components not specifically addressed
herein shall be carried out in accordance with applicable policy and procedure.
C1.1.3. These procedures do not apply to law enforcement activities, including
civil disturbance activities, that may be undertaken by DoD intelligence components.
When an investigation or inquiry undertaken pursuant to these procedures establishes
reasonable belief that a crime has been committed, the DoD intelligence component
concerned shall refer the matter to the appropriate law enforcement agency in
accordance with procedures 12 and 15 or, if the DoD intelligence component is
otherwise authorized to conduct law enforcement activities, shall continue such
investigation under appropriate law enforcement procedures.
C1.1.4. DoD intelligence components shall not request any person or entity to
undertake any activity forbidden by Executive Order 12333 (reference (a)).
C1.2. PURPOSE
The purpose of these procedures is to enable DoD intelligence components to carry out
effectively their authorized functions while ensuring their activities that affect U.S.
persons are carried out in a manner that protects the constitutional rights and privacy of
such persons.
13
Page 67 of 389
CHAPTER 1
C1.3. INTERPRETATION
C1.3.1. These procedures shall be interpreted in accordance with their stated
purpose.
C1.3.2. All defined terms appear in the Definitions Section. Additional terms, not
otherwise defined, are explained in the text of each procedure, as appropriate.
C1.3.3. All questions of interpretation shall be referred to the legal office
responsible for advising the DoD intelligence component concerned. Questions that
cannot be resolved in this manner shall be referred to the General Counsel of the
Military Department concerned, or, as appropriate, the General Counsel of the
Department of Defense for resolution.
C1.4. EXCEPTIONS TO POLICY
Requests for exception to the policies and procedures established herein shall be made
in writing to the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Policy), who shall obtain the
written approval of the Secretary of Defense and, if required, the Attorney General for
any such exception.
C1.5. AMENDMENT
Requests for amendment of these procedures shall be made to the Deputy Under
Secretary of Defense (Policy), who shall obtain the written approval of the Secretary of
Defense, and, if required, the Attorney General, for any such amendment.
14
Page 68 of 389
CHAPTER 1
C2. CHAPTER 2
PROCEDURE 2. COLLECTION OF
This procedure specifies the kinds of information about United States persons that may
be collected by DoD intelligence components and sets forth general criteria governing
the means used to collect such information. Additional limitations are imposed in
Procedures 5 through 10 on the use of specific collection techniques.
C2.2.1. Collection. Information shall be considered as "collected" only when it has
been received for use by an employee of a DoD intelligence component in the course of
his official duties. Thus, information volunteered to a DoD intelligence component by a
cooperating source would be "collected" under this procedure when an employee of such
component officially accepts, in some manner, such information for use within that
component. Data acquired by electronic means is "collected" only when it has been
processed into intelligible form.
C2.2.2. Cooperating sources means persons or organizations that knowingly and
voluntarily provide information to DoD intelligence components, or access to
information, at the request of such components or on their own initiative. These
include Government Agencies, law enforcement authorities, credit agencies, academic
institutions, employers, and foreign governments.
C2.2.3. Domestic activities refers to activities that take place within the United
States that do not involve a significant connection with a foreign power, organization, or
person.
C2.2.4. Overt means refers to methods of collection whereby the source of the
information being collected is advised, or is otherwise aware, that he is providing such
information to the Department of Defense or a component thereof.
15
Page 69 of 389
CHAPTER 2
C2.3. TYPES OF INFORMATION THAT MAY BE COLLECTED ABOUT UNITED

STATES PERSONS
Information that identifies a United States person may be collected by a DoD
intelligence component only if it is necessary to the conduct of a function assigned the
collecting component, and only if it falls within one of the following categories:
C2.3.1. Information Obtained With Consent. Information may be collected about a
United States person who consents to such collection.
C2.3.2. Publicly Available Information. Information may be collected about a
United States person if it is publicly available.
C2.3.3. Foreign Intelligence. Subject to the special limitation contained in section
C2.5., below, information may be collected about a United States person if the
information constitutes foreign intelligence, provided the intentional collection of
foreign intelligence about United States persons shall be limited to persons who are:
C2.3.3.1. Individuals reasonably believed to be officers or employees, or
otherwise acting for or on behalf, of a foreign power;
C2.3.3.2. An organization reasonably believed to be owned or controlled,
directly or indirectly, by a foreign power;
C2.3.3.3. Persons or organizations reasonably believed to be engaged or about
to engage, in international terrorist or international narcotics activities;
C2.3.3.4. Persons who are reasonably believed to be prisoners of war; missing
in action; or are the targets, the hostages, or victims of international terrorist
organizations; or
C2.3.3.5. Corporations or other commercial organizations believed to have
some relationship with foreign powers, organizations, or persons.
C2.3.4. Counterintelligence. Information may be collected about a United States
person if the information constitutes counterintelligence, provided the intentional
collection of counterintelligence about United States persons must be limited to:
C2.3.4.1. Persons who are reasonably believed to be engaged in, or about to
engage in, intelligence activities on behalf of a foreign power, or international terrorist
activities.
16
Page 70 of 389
CHAPTER 2
C2.3.4.2. Persons in contact with persons described in subparagraph C2.3.4.1.,

above, for the purpose of identifying such person and assessing their relationship with
persons described in subparagraph C2.3.4.1., above.
C2.3.5. Potential Sources of Assistance to Intelligence Activities. Information
may be collected about United States persons reasonably believed to be potential
sources of intelligence, or potential sources of assistance to intelligence activities, for
the purpose of assessing their suitability or credibility. This category does not include
investigations undertaken for personnel security purposes.
C2.3.6. Protection of Intelligence Sources and Methods. Information may be
collected about a United States person who has access to, had access to, or is otherwise
in possession of, information that reveals foreign intelligence and counterintelligence
sources or methods, when collection is reasonably believed necessary to protect against
the unauthorized disclosure of such information; provided that within the United States,
intentional collection of such information shall be limited to persons who are:
C2.3.6.1. Present and former DoD employees;
C2.3.6.2. Present or former employees of a present or former DoD
contractor; and
C2.3.6.3. Applicants for employment at the Department of Defense or at a
contractor of the Department of Defense.
C2.3.7. Physical Security. Information may be collected about a United States
person who is reasonably believed to threaten the physical security of DoD employees,
installations, operations, or official visitors. Information may also be collected in the
course of a lawful physical security investigation.
C2.3.8. Personnel Security. Information may be collected about a United States
person that arises out of a lawful personnel security investigation.
C2.3.9. Communications Security. Information may be collected about a United
States person that arises out of a lawful communications security investigation.
C2.3.10. Narcotics. Information may be collected about a United States person
who is reasonably believed to be engaged in international narcotics activities.
C2.3.11. Threats to Safety. Information may be collected about a United States
person when the information is needed to protect the safety of any person or
17
Page 71 of 389
CHAPTER 2
organization, including those who are targets, victims, or hostages of international

terrorist organizations.
C2.3.12. Overhead Reconnaissance. Information may be collected from overhead
reconnaissance not directed at specific United States persons.
C2.3.13. Administrative Purposes. Information may be collected about a United
States person that is necessary for administrative purposes.
C2.4. GENERAL CRITERIA GOVERNING THE MEANS USED TO COLLECT
C2.4.1. Means of Collection. DoD intelligence components are authorized to
collect information about United States persons by any lawful means, provided that all
such collection activities shall be carried out in accordance with E.O. 12333 (reference
(a)), and this Regulation, as appropriate.
C2.4.2. Least Intrusive Means. The collection of information about United States
persons shall be accomplished by the least intrusive means. In general, this means the
following:
C2.4.2.1. To the extent feasible, such information shall be collected from
publicly available information or with the consent of the person concerned;
C2.4.2.2. If collection from these sources is not feasible or sufficient, such
information may be collected from cooperating sources;
C2.4.2.3. If collection from cooperating sources is not feasible or sufficient,
such information may be collected, as appropriate, using other lawful investigative
techniques that do not require a judicial warrant or the approval of the Attorney
General; then
C2.4.2.4. If collection through use of these techniques is not feasible or
sufficient, approval for use of investigative techniques that do require a judicial warrant
or the approval of the Attorney General may be sought.
C2.5. SPECIAL LIMITATION ON THE COLLECTION OF FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE
WITHIN THE UNITED STATES
Within the United States, foreign intelligence concerning United States persons may be
collected only by overt means unless all the following conditions are met:
18
Page 72 of 389
CHAPTER 2
C2.5.1. The foreign intelligence sought is significant and collection is not

undertaken for the purpose of acquiring information concerning the domestic activities
of any United States person;
C2.5.2. Such foreign intelligence cannot be reasonably obtained by overt means;
C2.5.3. The collection of such foreign intelligence has been coordinated with the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI); and
C2.5.4. The use of other than overt means has been approved in writing by the head
of the DoD intelligence component concerned, or his single designee, as being
consistent with these procedures. A copy of any approval made pursuant to this section
shall be provided the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Policy).
19
Page 73 of 389
CHAPTER 2
C3. CHAPTER 3
PROCEDURE 3. RETENTION OF INFORMATION
ABOUT UNITED STATES PERSONS
C3.1. APPLICABILITY
This procedure governs the kinds of information about United States persons that may
knowingly be retained by a DoD intelligence component without the consent of the
person whom the information concerns. It does not apply when the information in
question is retained solely for administrative purposes or is required by law to be
maintained.
The term "retention," as used in this procedure, refers only to the maintenance of
information about United States persons that can be retrieved by reference to the
person's name or other identifying data.
C3.3. CRITERIA FOR RETENTION
C3.3.1. Retention of Information Collected Under Procedure 2. Information about
United States persons may be retained if it was collected pursuant to Procedure 2.
C3.3.2. Retention of Information Acquired Incidentally. Information about United
States persons collected incidentally to authorized collection may be retained if:
C3.3.2.1. Such information could have been collected intentionally under
Procedure 2;
C3.3.2.2. Such information is necessary to understand or assess foreign
intelligence or counterintelligence;
C3.3.2.3. The information is foreign intelligence or counterintelligence
collected from electronic surveillance conducted in compliance with this Regulation; or
C3.3.2.4. Such information is incidental to authorized collection and may
indicate involvement in activities that may violate Federal, State, local, or foreign law.
20
Page 74 of 389
CHAPTER 3
C3.3.3. Retention of Information Relating to Functions of Other DoD Components

or non-DoD Agencies. Information about United States persons that pertains solely to
the functions of other DoD Components or Agencies outside the Department of
Defense shall be retained only as necessary to transmit or deliver such information to
the appropriate recipients.
C3.3.4. Temporary Retention. Information about United States persons may be
retained temporarily, for a period not to exceed 90 days, solely for the purpose of
determining whether that information may be permanently retained under these
procedures.
C3.3.5. Retention of Other Information. Information about United States persons
other than that covered by paragraphs C3.3.1. through C3.3.4., above, shall be retained
only for purposes of reporting such collection for oversight purposes and for any
subsequent proceedings that may be necessary.
C3.4. ACCESS AND RETENTION
C3.4.1. Controls On Access to Retained Information. Access within a DoD
intelligence component to information about United States persons retained pursuant to
this procedure shall be limited to those with a need to know.
C3.4.2. Duration of Retention. Disposition of information about United States
Persons retained in the files of DoD intelligence components will comply with the
disposition schedules approved by the Archivist of the United States for the files or
records in which the information is retained.
C3.4.3. Information Acquired Prior to Effective Date. Information acquired prior
to the effective date of this procedure may be retained by DoD intelligence components
without being screened for compliance with this procedure or Executive Order 12333
(reference (a)), so long as retention was in compliance with applicable law and previous
Executive orders.
21
Page 75 of 389
CHAPTER 3
C4. CHAPTER 4
PROCEDURE 4. DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION
ABOUT UNITED STATES PERSONS
This procedure governs the kinds of information about United States persons that may
be disseminated, without their consent, outside the DoD intelligence component that
collected and retained the information. It does not apply to information collected
solely for administrative purposes; or disseminated pursuant to law; or pursuant to a
court order that otherwise imposes controls upon such dissemination.
C4.2. CRITERIA FOR DISSEMINATION
Except as provided in section C4.3., below, information about United States persons that
identifies those persons may be disseminated without the consent of those persons only
under the following conditions:
C4.2.1. The information was collected or retained or both under Procedures 2 and
3;
C4.2.2. The recipient is reasonably believed to have a need to receive such
information for the performance of a lawful governmental function, and is one of the
following:
C4.2.2.1. An employee of the Department of Defense, or an employee of a
contractor of the Department of Defense, and has a need for such information in the
course of his or her official duties;
C4.2.2.2. A law enforcement entity of Federal, State, or local government, and
the information may indicate involvement in activities that may violate laws that the
recipient is responsible to enforce;
C4.2.2.3. An Agency within the intelligence community; provided that within
the intelligence community, information other than information derived from signals
intelligence, may be disseminated to each appropriate Agency for the purpose of
allowing the recipient Agency to determine whether the information is relevant to its
responsibilities without such a determination being required of the disseminating DoD
intelligence component;
22
Page 76 of 389
CHAPTER 4
C4.2.2.4. An Agency of the Federal Government authorized to receive such

information in the performance of a lawful governmental function; or
C4.2.2.5. A foreign government, and dissemination is undertaken pursuant to an
agreement or other understanding with such government.
C4.3. OTHER DISSEMINATION
Any dissemination that does not conform to the conditions set forth in section C4.2.,
above, must be approved by the legal office responsible for advising the DoD
Component concerned after consultation with the Department of Justice and General
Counsel of the Department of Defense. Such approval shall be based on determination
that the proposed dissemination complies with applicable laws, Executive orders, and
regulations.
23
Page 77 of 389
CHAPTER 4
C5. CHAPTER 5
PROCEDURE 5. ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE
C5.1. PART 1: ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE IN THE UNITED STATES FOR
INTELLIGENCE PURPOSES
C5.1.1. Applicability. This part of Procedure 5 implements the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1979 (reference (b)), and applies to electronic
surveillance, as defined in that Act, conducted by DoD intelligence components within
the United States to collect "foreign intelligence information," as defined in that Act.
C5.1.2. General Rules
C5.1.2.1. Electronic Surveillance Pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act. A DoD intelligence component may conduct electronic surveillance
within the United States for foreign intelligence and counterintelligence purposes only
pursuant to an order issued by a judge of the court appointed pursuant to the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (reference (b)), or pursuant to a certification of
the Attorney General issued under the authority of Section 102(a) of the Act.
C5.1.2.2. Authority to Request Electronic Surveillance. Authority to approve
the submission of applications or requests for electronic surveillance under the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (reference (b)) shall be limited to the Secretary
of Defense, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, the Secretary or Under Secretary of a
Military Department, and the Director of the National Security Agency. Applications
for court orders will be made through the Attorney General after prior clearance by the
General Counsel, DoD. Requests for Attorney General certification shall be made only
after prior clearance by the General Counsel, DoD.
C5.1.2.3. Electronic Surveillance In Emergency Situations
C5.1.2.3.1. A DoD intelligence component may conduct electronic
surveillance within the United States in emergency situations under an approval from the
Attorney General in accordance with Section 105(e) of reference (b).
C5.1.2.3.2. The head of a DoD intelligence component may request that
the DoD General Counsel seek such authority directly from the Attorney General in an
emergency, if it is not feasible to submit such request through an official designated in
subparagraph C5.1.2.2., above, provided the appropriate official concerned shall be
advised of such requests as soon as possible thereafter.
24
Page 78 of 389
CHAPTER 5
C5.2. PART 2: ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES FOR

C5.2.1. Applicability. This part of Procedure 5 applies to electronic surveillance,
as defined in the Definitions Section, for foreign intelligence and counterintelligence
purposes directed against United States persons who are outside the United States, and
who, under the circumstances, have a reasonable expectation of privacy. It is intended
to be applied in conjunction with the regulation of electronic surveillance "within the
United States" under Part 1 and the regulation of "signals intelligence activities" under
Part 3 so that the intentional interception for foreign intelligence and
counterintelligence purposes of all wire or radio communications of persons within the
United States and against United States persons abroad where such persons enjoy a
reasonable expectation of privacy is covered by one of the three parts. In addition, this
part governs the use of electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance devices for foreign
intelligence and counterintelligence purposes against a United States person abroad in
circumstances where such person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. This part
does not apply to the electronic surveillance of communications of other than United
States persons abroad or the interception of the communications of United States
persons abroad that do not constitute electronic surveillance.
C5.2.2. Explanation of Undefined Terms
C5.2.2.1. Electronic surveillance is "directed against a United States person"
when the surveillance is intentionally targeted against or designed to intercept the
communications of that person. Electronic surveillance directed against persons who
are not United States persons that results in the incidental acquisition of the
communications of a United States person does not thereby become electronic
surveillance directed against a United States person.
C5.2.2.2. Electronic surveillance is "outside the United States" if the person
against whom the electronic surveillance is directed is physically outside the United
States, regardless of the location at which surveillance is conducted. For example, the
interception of communications that originate and terminate outside the United States
can be conducted from within the United States and still fall under this part rather than
Part 1.
C5.2.3. Procedures. Except as provided in paragraph C5.2.5., below, DoD
intelligence components may conduct electronic surveillance against a United States
person who is outside the United States for foreign intelligence and counterintelligence
purposes only if the surveillance is approved by the Attorney General. Requests for
25
Page 79 of 389
CHAPTER 5
approval will be forwarded to the Attorney General by an official designated in

subparagraph C5.2.5.1., below. Each request shall include:
C5.2.3.1. An identification or description of the target.
C5.2.3.2. A statement of the facts supporting a finding that:
C5.2.3.2.1. There is probable cause to believe the target of the electronic
surveillance is one of the following:
C5.2.3.2.1.1. A person who, for or on behalf of a foreign power is
engaged in clandestine intelligence activities (including covert activities intended to
affect the political or governmental process), sabotage, or international terrorist
activities, or activities in preparation for international terrorist activities; or who
conspires with, or knowingly aids and abets a person engaging in such activities;
C5.2.3.2.1.2. A person who is an officer or employee of a foreign
power;
C5.2.3.2.1.3. A person unlawfully acting for, or pursuant to the
direction of, a foreign power. The mere fact that a person's activities may benefit or
further the aims of a foreign power is not enough to bring that person under this
paragraph, absent evidence that the person is taking direction from, or acting in knowing
concert with, the foreign power;
C5.2.3.2.1.4. A corporation or other entity that is owned or
controlled directly or indirectly by a foreign power; or
C5.2.3.2.1.5. A person in contact with, or acting in collaboration with,
an intelligence or security service of a foreign power for the purpose of providing
access to information or material classified by the United States to which such person
has access.
C5.2.3.2.2. The electronic surveillance is necessary to obtain significant
foreign intelligence or counterintelligence.
C5.2.3.2.3. The significant foreign intelligence or counterintelligence
expected to be obtained from the electronic surveillance could not reasonably be
obtained by other less intrusive collection techniques.
C5.2.3.3. A description of the significant foreign intelligence or
counterintelligence expected to be obtained from the electronic surveillance.
26
Page 80 of 389
CHAPTER 5
C5.2.3.4. A description of the means by which the electronic surveillance will

be effected.
C5.2.3.5. If physical trespass is required to effect the surveillance, a
statement of facts supporting a finding that the means involve the least amount of
intrusion that will accomplish the objective.
C5.2.3.6. A statement of period of time, not to exceed 90 days, for which the
electronic surveillance is required.
C5.2.3.7. A description of the expected dissemination of the product of the
surveillance, including a description of the procedures that will govern the retention and
dissemination of communications of or concerning United States persons other than
those targeted, acquired incidental to such surveillance.
C5.2.4. Electronic Surveillance in Emergency Situations. Notwithstanding
paragraph C5.2.3., above, a DoD intelligence component may conduct surveillance
directed at a United States person who is outside the United States in emergency
situations under the following limitations:
C5.2.4.1. Officials designated in paragraph C5.2.5., below, may authorize
electronic surveillance directed at a United States person outside the United States in
emergency situations, when securing the prior approval of the Attorney General is not
practical because:
C5.2.4.1.1. The time required would cause failure or delay in obtaining
significant foreign intelligence or counterintelligence and such failure or delay would
result in substantial harm to the national security;
C5.2.4.1.2. A person's life or physical safety is reasonably believed to be
in immediate danger; or
C5.2.4.1.3. The physical security of a defense installation or Government
property is reasonably believed to be in immediate danger.
C5.2.4.2. Except for actions taken under subparagraph C5.2.4.1.2., above, any
official authorizing such emergency surveillance shall find that one of the criteria
contained in subparagraph C5.2.3.2.1., above, is met. Such officials shall notify the
DoD General Counsel promptly of any such surveillance, the reason for authorizing such
surveillance on an emergency basis, and the expected results.
27
Page 81 of 389
CHAPTER 5
C5.2.4.3. The Attorney General shall be notified by the General Counsel,

DoD, as soon as possible of the surveillance, the circumstances surrounding its
authorization, and the results thereof, and such other information as may be required to
authorize continuation of such surveillance.
C5.2.4.4. Electronic surveillance authorized pursuant to this section may not
continue longer than the time required for a decision by the Attorney General and in no
event longer than 72 hours.
C5.2.5. Officials Authorized to Request and Approve Electronic Surveillance
Outside the United States
C5.2.5.1. The following officials may request approval of electronic
surveillance outside the United States under paragraph C5.2.3., above, and approve
emergency surveillance under paragraph C5.2.4., above:
C5.2.5.1.1. The Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Defense.
C5.2.5.1.2. The Secretaries and Under Secretaries of the Military
Departments.
C5.2.5.1.3. The Director and Deputy Director of the National Security
Agency/Chief, Central Security Service.
C5.2.5.2. Authorization for emergency electronic surveillance under paragraph
C5.2.4., may also be granted by:
C5.2.5.2.1. Any general or flag officer at the overseas location in
question, having responsibility for either the subject of the surveillance, or
responsibility for the protection of the persons, installations, or property that is
endangered, or
C5.2.5.2.2. The Deputy Director for Operations, National Security
Agency.
C5.3. PART 3: SIGNALS INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES
C5.3.1. Applicability and Scope
C5.3.1.1. This procedure governs the conduct by the United States Signals
Intelligence System of signals intelligence activities that involve the collection,
28
Page 82 of 389
CHAPTER 5
retention, and dissemination of foreign communications and military tactical

communications. Such activities may incidentally involve the collection of information
concerning United States persons without their consent, or may involve communications
originated or intended for receipt in the United States, without the consent of a party
thereto.
C5.3.1.2. This part of Procedure 5 shall be supplemented by a classified
Annex promulgated by the Director, National Security Agency/Chief, Central Security
Service, which shall also be approved by the Attorney General. That regulation shall
provide that signals intelligence activities that constitute electronic surveillance, as
defined in Parts 1, and 2 of this procedure, will be authorized in accordance with those
parts. Any information collected incidentally about United States persons shall be
subjected to minimization procedures approved by the Attorney General.
C5.3.2.1. Communications concerning a United States person are those in
which the United States person is identified in the communication. A United States
person is identified when the person's name, unique title, address or other personal
identifier is revealed in the communication in the context of activities conducted by that
person or activities conducted by others and related to that person. A reference to a
product by brand name or manufacturer's name or the use of a name in a descriptive
sense, as, for example, "Monroe Doctrine," is not an identification of a United States
person.
C5.3.2.2. Interception means the acquisition by the United States Signals
Intelligence system through electronic means of a nonpublic communication to which it
is not an intended party, and the processing of the contents of that communication into
an intelligible form, but not including the display of signals on visual display devices
intended to permit the examination of the technical characteristics of the signals
without reference to the information content carried by the signals.
C5.3.2.3. Military tactical communications means United States and allied
military exercise communications within the United States and abroad necessary for the
production of simulated foreign intelligence and counterintelligence or to permit an
analysis of communications security.
C5.3.2.4. United States Person. For purposes of signals intelligence
activities only, the following guidelines will apply in determining whether a person is a
United States person:
29
Page 83 of 389
CHAPTER 5
C5.3.2.4.1. A person known to be currently in the United States will be

treated as a United States person unless the nature of the person's communications or
other available information concerning the person gives rise to a reasonable belief that
such person is not a United States citizen or permanent resident alien.
C5.3.2.4.2. A person known to be currently outside the United States, or
whose location is not known, will not be treated as a United States person unless the
nature of the person's communications or other available information concerning the
person give rise to a reasonable belief that such person is a United States citizen or
permanent resident alien.
C5.3.2.4.3. A person known to be an alien admitted for permanent
residence may be assumed to have lost status as a United States person if the person
leaves the United States and it is known that the person is not in compliance with the
administrative formalities provided by law that enable such persons to reenter the United
States without regard to the provisions of law that would otherwise restrict an alien's
entry into the United States. The failure to follow the statutory procedures provides a
reasonable basis to conclude that such alien has abandoned any intention of maintaining
status as a permanent resident alien.
C5.3.2.4.4. An unincorporated association whose headquarters are located
outside the United States may be presumed not to be a United States person unless the
collecting agency has information indicating that a substantial number of members are
citizens of the United States or aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence.
C5.3.2.5. United States Signals Intelligence System means the unified
organization for signals intelligence activities under the direction of the Director,
National Security Agency/Chief, Central Security Service, comprised of the National
Security Agency, the Central Security Service, the components of the Military Services
authorized to conduct signals intelligence and such other entities (other than the Federal
Bureau of Investigation) as are authorized by the National Security Council or the
Secretary of Defense to conduct signals intelligence. FBI activities are governed by
procedures promulgated by the Attorney General.
C5.3.3. Procedures
C5.3.3.1. Foreign Communications. The United States Signals Intelligence
System may collect, process, retain, and disseminate foreign communications that are
also communications of or concerning United States persons, but only in accordance
with the classified annex to this procedure.
30
Page 84 of 389
CHAPTER 5
C5.3.3.2. Military Tactical Communications. The United States Signals

Intelligence System may collect, process, retain, and disseminate military tactical
communications that are also communications of or concerning United States persons
but only in accordance with the classified annex to this procedure.
C5.3.3.2.1. Collection. Collection efforts will be conducted in the same
manner as in the case of signals intelligence for foreign intelligence purposes and must
be designed in such a manner as to avoid to the extent feasible the intercept of
communications not related to military exercises.
C5.3.3.2.2. Retention and Processing. Military tactical communications
may be retained and processed without deletion of references to United States persons
who are participants in, or are otherwise mentioned in exercise-related communications,
provided that the communications of United States persons not participating in the
exercise that are inadvertently intercepted during the exercise shall be destroyed as
soon as feasible.
C5.3.3.2.3. Dissemination. Dissemination of military tactical
communications and exercise reports or information files derived from such
communications shall be limited to those authorities and persons participating in or
conducting reviews and critiques of such exercise.
C5.4. PART 4: TECHNICAL SURVEILLANCE COUNTERMEASURES
C5.4.1. Applicability and Scope. This part of Procedure 5 applies to the use of
electronic equipment to determine the existence and capability of electronic
surveillance equipment being used by persons not authorized to conduct electronic
surveillance. It implements Section 105(f)(2) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act (reference (b)).
C5.4.2. Explanation of Undefined Terms. The term technical surveillance
countermeasures refers to activities authorized pursuant to DoD Directive 5200.29
(reference (c)), and, as used in this procedure, refers to the use of electronic
surveillance equipment, or electronic or mechanical devices, solely for determining the
existence and capability of electronic surveillance equipment being used by persons not
authorized to conduct electronic surveillance, or for determining the susceptibility of
electronic equipment to unlawful electronic surveillance.
31
Page 85 of 389
CHAPTER 5
C5.4.3. Procedures A DoD intelligence component may use technical surveillance

countermeasures that involve the incidental acquisition of the nonpublic
communications of United States persons without their consent, provided:
C5.4.3.1. The use of such countermeasures has been authorized or consented
to by the official in charge of the facility, organization, or installation where the
countermeasures are to be undertaken;
C5.4.3.2. The use of such countermeasures is limited in that necessary to
determine the existence and capability of such equipment; and
C5.4.3.3. Access to the content of communications acquired during the use of
countermeasures is limited to persons involved directly in conducting such measures,
and any content acquired is destroyed as soon as practical or upon completion of the
particular use. However, if the content is acquired within the United States, only
information that is necessary to protect against unauthorized electronic surveillance, or
to enforce Chapter 119 of title 18, United States Code (reference (d)) and Section 605
of the Communication Act of 1934 (reference (e)), may be retained and disseminated
only for these purposes. If acquired outside the United States, information that
indicates a violation of Federal law, including the Uniform Code of Military Justice
(reference (f)), or a clear and imminent threat to life or property, may also be
disseminated to appropriate law enforcement authorities. A record of the types of
communications and information subject to acquisition by the illegal electronic
surveillance equipment may be retained.
C5.5. PART 5: DEVELOPING, TESTING, AND CALIBRATION OF ELECTRONIC
EQUIPMENT
C5.5.1. Applicability This part of Procedure 5 applies to developing, testing, or
calibrating electronic equipment that can intercept or process communications and
non-communications signals. It also includes research and development that needs
electronic communications as a signal source.
C5.5.2. Procedures
C5.5.2.1. Signals Authorized for Use
C5.5.2.1.1. The following may be used without restriction:
C5.5.2.1.1.1. Laboratory-generated signals.
32
Page 86 of 389
CHAPTER 5
C5.5.2.1.1.2. Communications signals with the consent of the

communicator.
C5.5.2.1.1.3. Communications in the commercial or public service
broadcast bands.
C5.5.2.1.1.4. Communications transmitted between terminals located
outside of the United States not used by any known United States person.
C5.5.2.1.1.5. Non-communications signals (including telemetry, and
radar).
C5.5.2.1.2. Communications subject to lawful electronic surveillance
under the provisions of Parts 1, 2, or 3, of this procedure may be used subject to the
minimization procedures applicable to such surveillance.
C5.5.2.1.3. Any of the following may be used subject to the restrictions
of subparagraph C5.5.2.2., below.
C5.5.2.1.3.1. Communications over official Government
communications circuits with consent from an appropriate official of the controlling
agency.
C5.5.2.1.3.2. Communications in the citizens and amateur-radio
bands.
C5.5.2.1.4. Other signals may be used only when it is determined that it is
not practical to use the signals described above and it is not reasonable to obtain the
consent of persons incidentally subjected to the surveillance. The restrictions of
subparagraph C5.5.2.2., below, will apply in such cases. The Attorney General must
approve use of signals pursuant to this subsection for the purpose of development,
testing, or calibration when the period of use exceeds 90 days. When Attorney General
approval is required, the DoD intelligence component shall submit a test proposal to the
General Counsel, DoD, or the NSA General Counsel for transmission to the Attorney
General for approval. The test proposal shall state the requirement for a period beyond
90 days, the nature of the activity, the organization that will conduct the activity, and the
proposed disposition of any signals or communications acquired during the activity.
C5.5.2.2. Restrictions. For signals described in subparagraphs C5.5.2.1.3. and
C5.5.2.1.4., above, the following restrictions apply:
33
Page 87 of 389
CHAPTER 5
C5.5.2.2.1. The surveillance shall be limited in scope and duration to that

necessary for the purposes referred to in paragraph C5.5.1., above.
C5.5.2.2.2. No particular United States person shall be targeted
intentionally without consent.
C5.5.2.2.3. The content of any communication shall:
C5.5.2.2.3.1. Be retained only when actually needed for the purposes
referred to in paragraph C5.5.1., above;
C5.5.2.2.3.2. Be disseminated only to persons conducting the
activity; and
C5.5.2.2.3.3. Be destroyed immediately upon completion of the
activity.
C5.5.2.2.4. The technical parameters of a communication (such as
frequency, modulation, bearing, signal strength, and time of activity) may be retained and
used for the purposes outlined in paragraph C5.5.1., above, or for collection avoidance
purposes. Such parameters may be disseminated to other DoD intelligence components
and other entities authorized to conduct electronic surveillance or related development,
testing, and calibration of electronic equipment provided such dissemination and use are
limited to the purposes outlined in paragraph C5.5.1., or collection avoidance purposes.
No content of any communication may be retained or used other than as provided in
subparagraph C5.5.2.2.3., above.
C5.6. PART 6: TRAINING OF PERSONNEL IN THE OPERATION AND USE OF
ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS AND SURVEILLANCE EQUIPMENT
C5.6.1. Applicability. This part of Procedure 5 applies to the training of
personnel by DoD intelligence components in the operation and use of electronic
communications and surveillance equipment. It does not apply to the interception of
communications with the consent of one of the parties to the communication or to the
training of intelligence personnel by non-intelligence components.
C5.6.2. Procedures
C5.6.2.1. Training Guidance. The training of personnel by DoD intelligence
components in the operation and use of electronic communications and surveillance
34
Page 88 of 389
CHAPTER 5
equipment shall include guidance concerning the requirements and restrictions of the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (reference (b)), and E.O. 12333
(reference (a)), with respect to the unauthorized acquisition and use of the content of
communications of United States persons.
C5.6.2.2. Training Limitations
C5.6.2.2.1. Except as permitted by paragraph C5.6.2.2.2. and C5.6.2.2.3.,
below, the use of electronic communications and surveillance equipment for training
purposes is permitted, subject to the following limitations:
C5.6.2.2.1.1. To the maximum extent practical, use of such
equipment for training purposes shall be directed against communications that are
subject to lawful electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence and
counterintelligence purposes under Parts 1, 2, and 3 of this procedure.
C5.6.2.2.1.2. The contents of private communications of
non-consenting United States persons may not be acquired aurally unless the person is
an authorized target of electronic surveillance.
C5.6.2.2.1.3. The electronic surveillance will be limited in extent
and duration to that necessary to train personnel in the use of the equipment.
C5.6.2.2.2. Public broadcasts, distress signals, or official U.S.
Government communications may be monitored, provided that when Government
Agency communications are monitored, the consent of an appropriate official is
obtained.
C5.6.2.2.3. Minimal acquisition of information is permitted as required
for calibration purposes.
C5.6.2.3. Retention and Dissemination. Information collected during training
that involves communications described in subparagraph C5.6.2.2.1.1., above, shall be
retained and disseminated in accordance with minimization procedures applicable to that
electronic surveillance. Information collected during training that does not involve
communications described in subparagraph C5.6.2.2.1.1., above, or that is acquired
inadvertently, shall be destroyed as soon as practical or upon completion of the training
and may not be disseminated for any purpose. This limitation does not apply to distress
signals.
35
Page 89 of 389
CHAPTER 5
C5.7. PART 7: CONDUCT OF VULNERABILITY AND HEARABILITY SURVEYS

C5.7.1. Applicability and Scope This part of Procedure 5 applies to the conduct
of vulnerability surveys and hearability surveys by DoD intelligence components.
C5.7.2.1. The term vulnerability survey refers to the acquisition of radio
frequency propagation and its subsequent analysis to determine empirically the
vulnerability of the transmission media to interception by foreign intelligence services.
C5.7.2.2. The term hearability survey refers to monitoring radio
communications to determine whether a particular radio signal can be received at one
or more locations and, if reception is possible, to determine the hearability of reception
over time.
C5.7.3. Procedures
C5.7.3.1. Conduct of Vulnerability Surveys. Nonconsensual surveys may be
conducted to determine the potential vulnerability to intelligence services of a foreign
power of transmission facilities of communications common carriers, other private
commercial entities, and entities of the federal government, subject of the following
limitations:
C5.7.3.1.1. No vulnerability survey may be conducted without the prior
written approval of the Director, National Security Agency, or his designee.
C5.7.3.1.2. No transmission may be acquired aurally.
C5.7.3.1.3. No content of any transmission may be acquired by any means.
C5.7.3.1.4. No transmissions may be recorded.
C5.7.3.1.5. No report or log may identify any United States person or
entity except to the extent of identifying transmission facilities that are vulnerable to
surveillance by foreign powers. If the identities of the users of such facilities are not
identical with the identities of the owners of the facilities, the identity of such users
may be obtained but not from the content of the transmissions themselves, and may be
included in such report or log. Reports may be disseminated. Logs may be
disseminated only if required to verify results contained in reports.
36
Page 90 of 389
CHAPTER 5
C5.7.3.2. Conduct of Hearability Surveys. The Director, National Security

Agency, may conduct, or may authorize the conduct by other Agencies, of hearability
surveys of telecommunications that are transmitted in the United States.
C5.7.3.2.1. Collection. When practicable, consent will be secured from
the owner or user of the facility against which the hearability survey is to be conducted
prior to the commencement of the survey.
C5.7.3.2.2. Processing and Storage. Information collected during a
hearability survey must processed and stored as follows:
C5.7.3.2.2.1. The content of communications may not be recorded
or included in any report.
C5.7.3.2.2.2. No microwave transmission may be de-multiplexed or
demodulated for any purpose.
C5.7.3.2.2.3. No report or log may identify any person or entity
except to the extent of identifying the transmission facility that can be intercepted from
the intercept site. If the identities of the users of such facilities are not identical with
the identities of the owners of the facilities, and their identities are relevant to the
purpose for which the hearability survey has been conducted, the identity of such users
may be obtained provided such identities may not be obtained from the contents of the
transmissions themselves.
C5.7.3.2.3. Dissemination. Reports may be disseminated only within the
U.S. Government. Logs may not be disseminated unless required to verify results
contained in reports.
37
Page 91 of 389
CHAPTER 5
C6. CHAPTER 6
PROCEDURE 6. CONCEALED MONITORING
C6.1.1. This procedure applies to concealed monitoring only for foreign
intelligence and counterintelligence purposes conducted by a DoD intelligence
component within the United States or directed against a United States person who is
outside the United States where the subject of such monitoring does not have a
reasonable expectation of privacy, as explained in section 6.2., below, and no warrant
would be required if undertaken for law enforcement purposes.
C6.1.2. Concealed monitoring in the United States for foreign intelligence and
counterintelligence purposes where the subject of such monitoring has a reasonable
expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement purposes
shall be treated as "electronic surveillance within the United States" under Part 1 of
Procedure 5, and processed pursuant to that procedure.
C6.1.3. Concealed monitoring for foreign intelligence and counterintelligence
purposes of a United States person abroad where the subject of such monitoring has a
reasonable expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement
purposes shall be treated as "electronic surveillance outside the United States" under
Part 2 of Procedure 5, and processed pursuant to that procedure.
C6.1.4. Concealed monitoring for foreign intelligence and counterintelligence
purposes when the monitoring is a signals intelligence activity shall be conducted
pursuant to Part 3 of Procedure 5.
C6.2.1. Concealed monitoring means targeting by electronic, optical, or
mechanical devices a particular person or a group of persons without their consent in a
surreptitious and continuous manner. Monitoring is surreptitious when it is targeted in
a manner designed to keep the subject of the monitoring unaware of it. Monitoring is
continuous if it is conducted without interruption for a substantial period of time.
C6.2.2. Monitoring is within the United States if the monitoring device, or the
target of the monitoring, is located within the United States.
38
Page 92 of 389
CHAPTER 6
C6.2.3. Whether concealed monitoring is to occur where the subject has a

reasonable expectation of privacy is a determination that depends upon the
circumstances of a particular case, and shall be made only after consultation with the
legal office responsible for advising the DoD intelligence component concerned.
Reasonable expectation of privacy is the extent to which a reasonable person in the
particular circumstances involved is entitled to believe his or her actions are not
subject to monitoring by electronic, optical, or mechanical devices. For example, there
are ordinarily reasonable expectations of privacy in work spaces if a person's actions
and papers are not subject to ready observation by others under normal working
conditions. Conversely, a person walking out of his or her residence into a public
street ordinarily would not have a reasonable expectation that he or she is not being
observed or even photographed; however, such a person ordinarily would have an
expectation of privacy within his or her residence.
C6.3. PROCEDURES
C6.3.1. Limitations On Use of Concealed Monitoring. Use of concealed
monitoring under circumstances when the subject of such monitoring has no reasonable
expectation of privacy is subject to the following limitations:
C6.3.1.1. Within the United States, a DoD intelligence component may
conduct concealed monitoring only on an installation or facility owned or leased by the
Department of Defense or otherwise in the course of an investigation conducted
pursuant to the Agreement Between the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General
(reference (g)).
C6.3.1.2. Outside the United States, such monitoring may be conducted on
installations and facilities owned or leased by the Department of Defense. Monitoring
outside such facilities shall be conducted after coordination with appropriate host
country officials, if such coordination is required by the governing Status of Forces
Agreement, and with the Central Intelligence Agency.
C6.3.2. Required Determination. Concealed monitoring conducted under
paragraph C6.3.1., requires approval by an official designated in paragraph C6.3.3.,
below, based on a determination that such monitoring is necessary to the conduct of
assigned foreign intelligence or counterintelligence functions, and does not constitute
electronic surveillance under Parts 1 or 2 of Procedure 5.
C6.3.3. Officials Authorized to Approve Concealed Monitoring. Officials
authorized to approve concealed monitoring under this procedure include the Deputy
39
Page 93 of 389
CHAPTER 6
Under Secretary of Defense (Policy); the Director, Defense Intelligence Agency; the
Director, National Security Agency; the Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence,
Department of Army; the Director, Naval Intelligence; the Director of Intelligence, U.S.
Marine Corps; the Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence, U.S. Air Force; the
Commanding General, Army Intelligence and Security Command; the Director, Naval
Investigative Service; and the Commanding Officer, Air Force Office of Special
Investigations.
40
Page 94 of 389
CHAPTER 6
C7. CHAPTER 7
PROCEDURE 7. PHYSICAL SEARCHES
C7.1. APPLICABILITY
This procedure applies to nonconsensual physical searches of any person or property
within the United States and to physical searches of the person or property of a United
States person outside the United States by DoD intelligence components for foreign
intelligence or counterintelligence purposes. DoD intelligence components may
provide assistance to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other law enforcement
authorities in accordance with Procedure 12.
Physical search means any intrusion upon a person or a person's property or possessions
to obtain items of property or information. The term does not include examination of
areas that are in plain view and visible to the unaided eye if no physical trespass is
undertaken, and does not include examinations of abandoned property left in a public
place. The term also does not include any intrusion authorized as necessary to
accomplish lawful electronic surveillance conducted pursuant to Parts 1 and 2 of
Procedure 5.
C7.3. PROCEDURES
C7.3.1. Nonconsensual Physical Searches Within the United States
C7.3.1.1. Searches of Active Duty Military Personnel for Counterintelligence
Purposes. The counterintelligence elements of the Military Departments are
authorized to conduct nonconsensual physical searches in the United States for
counterintelligence purposes of the person or property of active duty military
personnel, when authorized by a military commander empowered to approve physical
searches for law enforcement purposes pursuant to rule 315(d) of the Manual for
Courts Martial, Executive Order 12198 (reference (h)), based upon a finding of
probable cause to believe such persons are acting as agents of foreign powers. For
purposes of this section, the term "agent of a foreign power" refers to an individual who
meets the criteria set forth in subparagraph C7.3.1.2., below.
41
Page 95 of 389
CHAPTER 7
C7.3.1.2. Other Nonconsensual Physical Searches. Except as permitted by

section C7.1., above, DoD intelligence components may not conduct nonconsensual
physical searches of persons and property within the United States for foreign
intelligence or counterintelligence purposes. DoD intelligence components may,
however, request the FBI to conduct such searches. All such requests, shall be in
writing; shall contain the information required in subparagraphs C7.3.2.2.1., through
C7.3.2.2.2.6., below; and be approved by an official designated in subparagraph
C7.3.2.2.2.3., below. A copy of each such request shall be furnished the General
Counsel, DoD.
C7.3.2. Nonconsensual Physical Searches Outside the United States
C7.3.2.1. Searches of Active Duty Military Personnel for Counterintelligence
Purposes. The counterintelligence elements of the Military Departments may conduct
nonconsensual physical searches of the person or property of active duty military
personnel outside the United States for counterintelligence purposes when authorized
by a military commander empowered to approve physical searches for law enforcement
purposes pursuant to rule 315(d) of the Manual for Courts Martial, Executive Order
12198 (reference (h)), based upon a finding of probable cause to believe such persons
are acting as agents of foreign powers. For purposes of this section, the term "agent of
a foreign power" refers to an individual who meets the criteria set forth in subparagraph
C7.3.2.2.2., below.
C7.3.2.2. Other Nonconsensual Physical Searches. DoD intelligence
components may conduct other nonconsensual physical searches for foreign
intelligence and counterintelligence purposes of the person or property of United States
persons outside the United States only pursuant to the approval of the Attorney
General. Requests for such approval will be forwarded by a senior official designated
in subparagraph C7.3.2.3., below, to the Attorney General and shall include:
C7.3.2.2.1. An identification of the person or description of the property
to be searched.
C7.3.2.2.2. A statement of facts supporting a finding that there is
probable cause to believe the subject of the search is:
42
Page 96 of 389
CHAPTER 7
C7.3.2.2.2.1. A person who, for or on behalf of a foreign power, is

engaged in clandestine intelligence activities (including covert activities intended to
affect the political or governmental process), sabotage, or international terrorist
activities, activities in preparation for international terrorist activities, or who conspires
with, or knowingly aids and abets a person engaging in such activities;
C7.3.2.2.2.2. A person who is an officer or employee of a foreign
power;
C7.3.2.2.2.3. A person unlawfully acting for, or pursuant to the
direction of, a foreign power. The mere fact that a person's activities may benefit or
further the aims of a foreign power does not justify a nonconsensual physical search
without evidence that the person is taking direction from, or acting in knowing concert
with, the foreign power;
C7.3.2.2.2.4. A corporation or other entity that is owned or
controlled directly or indirectly by a foreign power; or
C7.3.2.2.2.5. A person in contact with, or acting in collaboration with,
an intelligence or security service of a foreign power for the purpose of providing
access to information or material classified by the United States to which such person
has access.
C7.3.2.2.3. A statement of facts supporting a finding that the search is
necessary to obtain significant foreign intelligence or counterintelligence.
C7.3.2.2.4. A statement of facts supporting a finding that the significant
foreign intelligence or counterintelligence expected to be obtained could not be
obtained by less intrusive means.
C7.3.2.2.5. A description of the significant foreign intelligence or
counterintelligence expected to be obtained from the search.
C7.3.2.2.6. A description of the extent of the search and a statement of
facts supporting a finding that the search will involve the least amount of physical
intrusion that will accomplish the objective sought.
C7.3.2.2.7. A description of the expected dissemination of the product of
the search, including a description of the procedures that will govern the retention and
dissemination of information about United States persons acquired incidental to the
search.
43
Page 97 of 389
CHAPTER 7
C7.3.2.3. Requests for approval of nonconsensual physical searches under

subparagraph C7.3.2.2., must be made by:
C7.3.2.3.1. The Secretary or the Deputy Secretary of Defense;
C7.3.2.3.2. The Secretary or the Under Secretary of a Military
Department;
C7.3.2.3.3. The Director, National Security Agency; or
C7.3.2.3.4. The Director, Defense Intelligence Agency.
44
Page 98 of 389
CHAPTER 7
C8. CHAPTER 8
PROCEDURE 8. SEARCHES AND EXAMINATION OF MAIL
C8.1. APPLICABILITY
This procedure applies to the opening of mail in United States postal channels, and the
use of mail covers with respect to such mail, for foreign intelligence and
counterintelligence purposes. It also applies to the opening of mail to or from United
States persons where such activity is conducted outside the United States and such mail
is not in United States postal channels.
C8.2.1. Mail Within United States Postal Channels includes:
C8.2.1.1. Mail while in transit within, among, and between the United States,
its territories and possessions (including mail of foreign origin that is passed by a
foreign postal administration, to the United States Postal Service for forwarding to a
foreign postal administration under a postal treaty or convention, and mail temporarily in
the hands of the United States Customs Service or the Department of Agriculture),
Army-Air Force (APO) and Navy (FPO) post offices, and mail for delivery to the United
Nations, NY; and
C8.2.1.2. International mail enroute to an addressee in the United States or its
possessions after passage to United States Postal Service from a foreign postal
administration or enroute to an addressee abroad before passage to a foreign postal
administration. As a rule, mail shall be considered in such postal channels until the
moment it is delivered manually in the United States to the specific addressee named on
the envelope, or his authorized agent.
C8.2.2. To examine mail means to employ a mail cover with respect to such mail.
C8.2.3. Mail cover means the process by which a record is made of any data
appearing on the outside cover of any class of mail matter as permitted by law, other
than that necessary for the delivery of mail or administration of the Postal Service.
45
Page 99 of 389
CHAPTER 8
C8.3. PROCEDURES
C8.3.1. Searches of Mail Within United States Postal Channels
C8.3.1.1. Applicable postal regulations do not permit DoD intelligence
components to detain or open first-class mail within United States postal channels for
foreign intelligence and counterintelligence purposes, or to request such action by the
U.S. Postal Service.
C8.3.1.2. DoD intelligence components may request appropriate U.S. postal
authorities to inspect, or authorize the inspection, of the contents of second-, third-, or
fourth-class mail in United States postal channels, for such purposes, in accordance with
applicable postal regulations. Such components may also request appropriate U.S.
postal authorities to detain, or permit the detention of, mail that may become subject to
search under this section, in accordance with applicable postal regulations.
C8.3.2. Searches of Mail Outside United States Postal Channels
C8.3.2.1. DoD intelligence components are authorized to open mail to or
from a United States person that is found outside United States postal channels only
pursuant to the approval of the Attorney General. Requests for such approval shall be
treated as a request for a nonconsensual physical search under subparagraph C7.3.2.2.,
of Procedure 7.
C8.3.2.2. Heads of DoD intelligence components may authorize the opening
of mail outside U.S. postal channels when both the sender and intended recipient are
other than United States persons if such searches are otherwise lawful and consistent
with any Status of Forces Agreement that may be in effect.
C8.3.3. Mail Covers
C8.3.3.1. DoD intelligence components may request U.S. postal authorities to
examine mail in U.S. postal channels, for counterintelligence purposes, in accordance
with applicable postal regulations.
C8.3.3.2. DoD intelligence components may also request mail covers with
respect to mail to or from a United States person that is outside U.S. postal channels, in
accordance with appropriate law and procedure of the host government, and any Status of
Forces Agreement that may be effect.
46
Page 100 of 389
CHAPTER 8
C9. CHAPTER 9
PROCEDURE 9. PHYSICAL SURVEILLANCE
C9.1. APPLICABILITY
This procedure applies only to the physical surveillance of United States persons by
DoD intelligence components for foreign intelligence and counterintelligence
purposes. This procedure does not apply to physical surveillance conducted as part of a
training exercise when the subjects are participants in the exercise.
The term physical surveillance means a systematic and deliberate observation of a
person by any means on a continuing basis, or the acquisition of a nonpublic
communication by a person not a party thereto or visibly present thereat through any
means not involving electronic surveillance.
C9.3. PROCEDURES
C9.3.1. Criteria for Physical Surveillance In the United States. Within the United
States, DoD Intelligence components may conduct nonconsensual physical surveillances
for foreign intelligence and counterintelligence purposes against United States persons
who are present or former employees of the intelligence component concerned;
present or former contractors of such components or their present or former
employees; applicants for such employment or contracting; or military persons
employed by a non-intelligence element of a Military Service. Any physical
surveillance within the United States that occurs outside a DoD installation shall be
coordinated with the FBI and other law enforcement agencies, as may be appropriate.
C9.3.2. Criteria for Physical Surveillance Outside the United States. Outside the
United States, DoD Intelligence components may conduct nonconsensual physical
surveillance of United States persons in one of the categories identified in paragraph
C9.3.1., above. In addition, such components may conduct physical surveillance of
other United States persons in the course of a lawful foreign intelligence or
counterintelligence investigation, provided:
C9.3.2.1. Such surveillance is consistent with the laws and policy of the host
government and does not violate any Status of Forces Agreement that may be in effect;
47
Page 101 of 389
CHAPTER 9
C9.3.2.2. That physical surveillance of a United States person abroad to

collect foreign intelligence may be authorized only to obtain significant information that
cannot be obtained by other means.
C9.3.3. Required Approvals for Physical Surveillance
C9.3.3.1. Persons Within DoD Investigative Jurisdiction. Physical
surveillances within the United States or that involve United States persons within DoD
investigative jurisdiction overseas may be approved by the head of the DoD intelligence
component concerned or by designated senior officials of such components in
accordance with this procedure.
C9.3.3.2. Persons Outside DoD Investigative Jurisdiction. Outside the United
States, physical surveillances of United States persons who are not within the
investigative jurisdiction of the DoD intelligence component concerned will be
forwarded through appropriate channels to the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense
(Policy) for approval. Such requests shall indicate coordination with the Central
Intelligence Agency.
48
Page 102 of 389
CHAPTER 9
C10. CHAPTER 10
PROCEDURE 10. UNDISCLOSED PARTICIPATION IN ORGANIZATIONS
This procedure applies to participation by employees of DoD intelligence components
in any organization within the United States, or any organization outside the United
States that constitutes a United States person, when such participation is on behalf of
any entity of the intelligence community. These procedures do not apply to
participation in organizations for solely personal purposes.
C10.2.1. Domestic activities refers to activities that take place within the United
States that do not involve a significant connection with a foreign power, organization or
person.
C10.2.2. The term organization includes corporations and other commercial
organizations, academic institutions, clubs, professional societies, associations, and any
other group whose existence is formalized in some manner or otherwise functions on a
continuing basis.
C10.2.3. An organization within the United States means all organizations
physically located within the geographical boundaries of the United States whether or
not they constitute a United States persons. Thus, a branch, subsidiary, or office of an
organization within the United States, which is physically located outside the United
States, is not considered as an organization within the United States.
C10.2.4. Participation refers to any action undertaken within the structure or
framework of the organization involved. Such actions include serving as a
representative or agent of the organization; acquiring membership; attending meetings
not open to the public, including social functions for the organization as a whole;
carrying out the work or functions of the organization; and contributing funds to the
organization other than in payment for goods or services. Actions taken outside the
organizational framework, however, do not constitute participation. Thus, attendance at
meetings or social gatherings that involve organization members, but are not functions
or activities of the organization itself does not constitute participation.
49
Page 103 of 389
CHAPTER 10
C10.2.5. Participation is on behalf of an agency within the intelligence community

when an employee is tasked or requested to take action within an organization for the
benefit of such agency. Such employee may already be a member of the organization or
may be asked to join. Actions undertaken for the benefit of an intelligence agency
include collecting information, identifying potential sources or contacts, or establishing
and maintaining cover. If a cooperating source furnishes information to an intelligence
agency that he or she obtained by participation within an organization, but was not given
prior direction or tasking by the intelligence agency to collect such information, then
such participation was not on behalf of such agency.
C10.2.6. Participation is solely for personal purposes, if undertaken at the
initiative and expense of the employee for the employee's benefit.
C10.3. PROCEDURES FOR UNDISCLOSED PARTICIPATION
Except as permitted herein, employees of DoD intelligence components may participate
on behalf of such components in organizations within the United States, or in
organizations outside the United States that constitute United States persons, only if
their affiliation with the intelligence component concerned is disclosed to an
appropriate official of the organization in accordance with section C10.4., below.
Participation without such disclosure is permitted only if it is consistent with the
limitations set forth in paragraph C10.3.1., below, and has been approved in accordance
with paragraph C10.3.2., below.
C10.3.1. Limitations On Undisclosed Participation
C10.3.1.1. Lawful Purpose. No undisclosed participation shall be permitted
under this procedure unless it is essential to achieving a lawful foreign intelligence or
counterintelligence purpose within the assigned mission of the collecting DoD
intelligence component.
C10.3.1.2. Limitations On Use of Undisclosed Participation for Foreign
Intelligence Purposes Within the United States. Undisclosed participation may not be
authorized within the United States for the purpose of collecting foreign intelligence
from or about a United States person, nor to collect information necessary to assess
United States persons as potential sources of assistance to foreign intelligence
activities. This does not preclude the collection of information about such persons,
volunteered by cooperating sources participating in organizations to which such persons
belong, however, if otherwise permitted by Procedure 2.
50
Page 104 of 389
CHAPTER 10
C10.3.1.3. Duration of Participation. Authorization to participate under

subparagraphs C10.3.2.1., and C10.3.2.2., shall be limited to the period covered by such
participation, which shall be no longer than 12 months. Participation that lasts longer
than 12 months shall be re-approved by the appropriate official on an annual basis in
accordance with this procedure.
C10.3.1.4. Participation for the Purpose of Influencing the Activities of the
Organization or Its Members. No participation under this procedure shall be authorized
for the purpose of influencing the activities of the organization in question, or its
members, unless such participation is undertaken on behalf of the FBI in the course of a
lawful investigation, or the organization concerned is composed primarily of individuals
who are not United States persons and is reasonably believed to be acting on behalf of a
foreign power. Any DoD intelligence component that desires to undertake participation
for such purpose shall forward its request to the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense
(Policy) setting forth the relevant facts justifying such participation and explaining the
nature of its contemplated activity. Such participation may be approved by the
DUSD(P) with the concurrence of the General Counsel, DoD.
C10.3.2. Required Approvals
C10.3.2.1. Undisclosed Participation That May Be Approved Within the DoD
Intelligence Component. Undisclosed participation on behalf of a DoD intelligence
component may be authorized with such component under the following circumstances:
C10.3.2.1.1. Participation in meetings open to the public. For purposes
of this section, a seminar or conference sponsored by a professional organization that is
open to persons of a particular profession, whether or not they are members of the
organization itself or have received a special invitation, shall be considered a meeting
open to the public.
C10.3.2.1.2. Participation in organizations that permit other persons
acknowledged to the organization to be employees of the U.S. Government to
participate.
C10.3.2.1.3. Participation in educational or professional organizations
for the purpose of enhancing the professional skills, knowledge, or capabilities of
employees.
C10.3.2.1.4. Participation in seminars, forums, conferences, exhibitions,
trade fairs, workshops, symposiums, and similar types of meetings, sponsored by
organizations in which the employee is a member, has been invited to participate, or
51
Page 105 of 389
CHAPTER 10
when the sponsoring organization does not require disclosure of the participants'
employment affiliations, for the purpose of collecting significant foreign intelligence
that is generally made available to participants at such meetings, and does not involve
the domestic activities of the organization or its members.
C10.3.2.2. Participation That May Be Approved By Senior Intelligence
Officials. Undisclosed participation may be authorized by the Deputy Under Secretary
of Defense (Policy); the Director, Defense Intelligence Agency; the Assistant Chief of
Staff for Intelligence, Department of Army; the Commanding General, U.S. Army
Intelligence and Security Command; the Director of Naval Intelligence; the Director of
Intelligence, U.S. Marine Corps; the Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence, United States
Air Force; the Director, Naval Investigative Service; the Commanding Officer, Air Force
Office of Special Investigations; or their single designees, for the following purposes:
C10.3.2.2.1. To collect significant foreign intelligence outside the
United States, or from or about other than United States persons within the United
States, provided no information involving the domestic activities of the organization or
its members may be collected.
C10.3.2.2.2. For counterintelligence purposes, at the written request of
the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
C10.3.2.2.3. To collect significant counterintelligence about other than
United States persons, or about United States persons who are within the investigative
jurisdiction of the Department of Defense, provided any such participation that occurs
within the United States shall be coordinated with the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
C10.3.2.2.4. To collect information necessary to identify and assess
other than United States persons as potential sources of assistance for foreign
intelligence and counterintelligence activities.
C10.3.2.2.5. To collect information necessary to identify United States
persons as potential sources of assistance to foreign intelligence and
counterintelligence activities.
C10.3.2.2.6. To develop or maintain cover necessary for the security of
foreign intelligence or counterintelligence activities.
C10.3.2.2.7. Outside the United States, to assess United States persons as
potential sources of assistance to foreign intelligence and counterintelligence activities.
52
Page 106 of 389
CHAPTER 10
C10.4. DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT

C10.4.1. Disclosure of the intelligence affiliation of an employee of a DoD
intelligence component shall be made to an executive officer of the organization in
question, or to an official in charge of membership, attendance, or the records of the
organization concerned.
C10.4.2. Disclosure may be made by the DoD intelligence component involved, an
authorized DoD official, or by another component of the Intelligence Community that is
otherwise authorized to take such action on behalf of the DoD intelligence component
concerned.
53
Page 107 of 389
CHAPTER 10
C11. CHAPTER 11
PROCEDURE 11. CONTRACTING FOR GOODS AND SERVICES
This procedure applies to contracting or other arrangements with United States persons
for the procurement of goods and services by DoD intelligence components within the
United States. This procedure does not apply to contracting with government entities,
or to the enrollment of individual students in academic institutions. The latter situation
is governed by Procedure 10.
C11.2. PROCEDURES
C11.2.1. Contracts with Academic Institutions. DoD intelligence components may
enter into a contract for goods or services with an academic institution only if prior to
the making of the contract, the intelligence component has disclosed to appropriate
officials of the academic institution the fact of sponsorship by a DoD intelligence
component.
C11.2.2. Contracts with Commercial Organizations, Private Institutions, and
Individuals. Contracting by or for a DoD intelligence component with commercial
organizations, private institutions, or private individuals within the United States may be
done without revealing the sponsorship of the intelligence component if:
C11.2.2.1. The contract is for published material available to the general
public or for routine goods or services necessary for the support of approved activities,
such as credit cards, car rentals, travel, lodging, meals, rental of office space or
apartments, and other items incident to approved activities; or
C11.2.2.2. There is a written determination by the Secretary or the Under
Secretary of a Military Department, the Director of the National Security Agency, the
Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, or the Deputy Under Secretary of
Defense (Policy) that the sponsorship of a DoD intelligence component must be
concealed to protect the activities of the DoD intelligence component concerned.
54
Page 108 of 389
CHAPTER 11
C11.3. EFFECT OF NONCOMPLIANCE

No contract shall be void or voidable for failure to comply with this procedure.
55
Page 109 of 389
CHAPTER 11
C12. CHAPTER 12
PROCEDURE 12. PROVISION OF ASSISTANCE TO LAW ENFORCEMENT
AUTHORITIES
This procedure applies to the provision of assistance by DoD intelligence components
to law enforcement authorities. It incorporates the specific limitations on such
assistance contained in E.O. 12333 (reference (a)), together with the general limitations
and approval requirements of DoD Directive 5525.5 (reference (i)).
C12.2. PROCEDURES
C12.2.1. Cooperation with Law Enforcement Authorities. Consistent with the
limitations contained in DoD Directive 5525.5 (reference (i)), and paragraph C12.2.2.,
below, DoD intelligence components are authorized to cooperate with law enforcement
authorities for the purpose of:
C12.2.1.1. Investigating or preventing clandestine intelligence activities by
foreign powers, international narcotics activities, or international terrorist activities;
C12.2.1.2. Protecting DoD employees, information, property, and facilities;
and
C12.2.1.3. Preventing, detecting, or investigating other violations of law.
C12.2.2. Types of Permissible Assistance. DoD intelligence components may
provide the following types of assistance to law enforcement authorities:
C12.2.2.1. Incidentally acquired information reasonably believed to indicate a
violation of Federal law shall be provided in accordance with the procedures adopted
pursuant to section 1.7(a) of E.O. 12333 (reference (a));
C12.2.2.2. Incidentially acquired information reasonably believed to indicate a
violation of State, local, or foreign law may be provided in accordance with procedures
adopted by the Heads of DoD Components;
C12.2.2.3. Specialized equipment and facilities may be provided to Federal law
enforcement authorities, and, when lives are endangered, to State and local law
56
Page 110 of 389
CHAPTER 12
enforcement authorities, provided such assistance is consistent with, and has been
approved by an official authorized pursuant to, Enclosure 3 of DoD Directive 5525.5
(reference (i)); and
C12.2.2.4. Personnel who are employees of DoD intelligence components
may be assigned to assist Federal law enforcement authorities, and, when lives are
endangered, State and local law enforcement authorities, provided such use is consistent
with, and has been approved by an official authorized pursuant to, Enclosure 4 of DoD
Directive 5525.5 (reference (i)). Such official shall ensure that the General Counsel
of the providing DoD Component concurs in such use.
C12.2.2.5. Assistance may be rendered to law enforcement agencies and
security services of foreign governments or international organizations in accordance
with established policy and applicable Status of Forces Agreements; provided, that DoD
intelligence components may not request or participate in activities of such agencies
undertaken against United States persons that would not be permitted such components
under these procedures.
57
Page 111 of 389
CHAPTER 12
C13. CHAPTER 13
PROCEDURE 13. EXPERIMENTATION ON HUMAN SUBJECTS FOR
This procedure applies to experimentation on human subjects if such experimentation is
conducted by or on behalf of a DoD intelligence component. This procedure does not
apply to experimentation on animal subjects.
C13.2.1. Experimentation in this context means any research or testing activity
involving human subjects that may expose such subjects to the possibility of permanent
or temporary injury (including physical or psychological damage and damage to the
reputation of such persons) beyond the risks of injury to which such subjects are
ordinarily exposed in their daily lives.
C13.2.2. Experimentation is conducted on behalf of a DoD intelligence component
if it is conducted under contract to that component or to another DoD Component for
the benefit of the intelligence component or at the request of such a component
regardless of the existence of a contractual relationship.
C13.2.3. Human subjects in this context includes any person whether or not such
person is a United States person.
C13.3. PROCEDURES
C13.3.1. Experimentation on human subjects conducted by or on behalf of a DoD
intelligence component may be undertaken only with the informed consent of the
subject, in accordance with guidelines issued by the Department of Health and Human
Services, setting out conditions that safeguard the welfare of such subjects.
58
Page 112 of 389
CHAPTER 13
C13.3.2. DoD intelligence components may not engage in or contract for

experimentation on human subjects without approval of the Secretary or Deputy
Secretary of Defense, or the Secretary or Under Secretary of a Military Department, as
appropriate.
59
Page 113 of 389
CHAPTER 13
C14. CHAPTER 14
PROCEDURE 14. EMPLOYEE CONDUCT
This procedure sets forth the responsibilities of employees of DoD intelligence
components to conduct themselves in accordance with this Regulation and other
applicable policy. It also provides that DoD intelligence components shall ensure, as
appropriate, that these policies and guidelines are made known to their employees.
C14.2. PROCEDURES
C14.2.1. Employee Responsibilities. Employees shall conduct intelligence
activities only pursuant to, and in accordance with, Executive Order 12333 (reference
(a)) and this Regulation. In conducting such activities, employees shall not exceed the
authorities granted the employing DoD intelligence component by law; Executive order,
including E.O. 12333 (reference (a)), and applicable DoD Directives.
C14.2.2. Familiarity With Restrictions
C14.2.2.1. Each DoD intelligence component shall familiarize its personnel
with the provisions of E.O. 12333 (reference (a)), this Regulation, and any instructions
implementing this Regulation that apply to the operations and activities of such
component. At a minimum, such familiarization shall contain:
C14.2.2.1.1. Applicable portions of Procedures 1 through 4;
C14.2.2.1.2. A summary of other procedures that pertains to collection
techniques that are, or may be, employed by the DoD intelligence component
concerned; and
C14.2.2.1.3. A statement of individual employee reporting responsibility
under Procedure 15.
C14.2.2.2. The Assistant to the Secretary of Defense (Intelligence Oversight)
(ATSD(IQ)) and each Inspector General responsible for a DoD intelligence component
shall ensure, as part of their inspections, that procedures are in effect that will achieve
the objectives set forth in subparagraph C14.2.2.1., above.
60
Page 114 of 389
CHAPTER 14
C14.2.3. Responsibilities of the Heads of DoD Components. The Heads of DoD

Components that constitute, or contain, DoD intelligence components shall:
C14.2.3.1. Ensure that all proposals for intelligence activities that may be
unlawful, in whole or in part, or may be contrary to applicable Executive Branch or DoD
policy are referred to the General Counsel responsible for such component.
C14.2.3.2. Ensure that no adverse action is taken against any employee
because the employee reports activities pursuant to Procedure 15.
C14.2.3.3. Impose such sanctions as may be appropriate upon any employee
who violates the provisions of this Regulation or any instruction promulgated
thereunder.
C14.2.3.4. In any case involving serious or continuing breaches of security by
either DoD or non-DoD employees, recommend to the Secretary of Defense
appropriate investigative actions.
C14.2.3.5. Ensure that the General Counsel and Inspector General with
responsibility for the component, as well as the General Counsel, DoD, and the
ATSD(IO), have access to all information concerning the intelligence activities of that
component necessary to perform their oversight responsibilities.
C14.2.3.6. Ensure that employees cooperate fully with the Intelligence
Oversight Board and its representatives.
61
Page 115 of 389
CHAPTER 14
C15. CHAPTER 15
PROCEDURE 15. IDENTIFYING, INVESTIGATING, AND REPORTING
QUSTIONABLE ACTIVITIES
This procedure provides for the identification, investigation, and reporting of
questionable intelligence activities.
C15.2.1. The term "questionable activity," as used herein, refers to any conduct
that constitutes, or is related to, an intelligence activity that may violate the law, any
Executive order or Presidential directive, including E.O. 12333 (reference (a)), or
applicable DoD policy, including this Regulation.
C15.2.2. The terms "General Counsel"and "Inspector General," as used herein,
refer, unless otherwise specified, to any General Counsel or Inspector General with
responsibility for one or more DoD intelligence components. Unless otherwise
indicated, the term "Inspector General" shall also include the ATSD(IO).
C15.3. PROCEDURES
C15.3.1. Identification
C15.3.1.1. Each employee shall report any questionable activity to the
General Counsel or Inspector General for the DoD intelligence component concerned,
or to the General Counsel, DoD, or ATSD(IO).
C15.3.1.2. Inspectors General, as part of their inspection of DoD intelligence
components, and General Counsels, as part of their oversight responsibilities shall seek
to determine if such components are involved in any questionable activities. If such
activities have been or are being undertaken, the matter shall be investigated under
paragraph C15.3.2., below. If such activities have been undertaken, but were not
reported, the Inspector General shall also ascertain the reason for such failure and
recommend appropriate corrective action.
62
Page 116 of 389
CHAPTER 15
C15.3.1.3. Inspectors General, as part of their oversight responsibilities, shall,

as appropriate, ascertain whether any organizations, staffs, or offices within their
respective jurisdictions, but not otherwise specifically identified as DoD intelligence
components, are being used for foreign intelligence or counterintelligence purposes to
which Part 2 of E.O. 12333 (reference (a)), applies, and, if so, shall ensure the
activities of such components are in compliance with this Regulation and applicable
DoD policy.
C15.3.1.4. Inspectors General, as part of their inspection of DoD intelligence
components, shall ensure that procedures exist within such components for the
reporting of questionable activities, and that employees of such components are aware
of their responsibilities to report such activities.
C15.3.2. Investigation
C15.3.2.1. Each report of a questionable activity shall be investigated to the
extent necessary to determine the facts and assess whether the activity is legal and is
consistent with applicable policy.
C15.3.2.2. When appropriate, questionable activities reported to a General
Counsel shall be referred to the corresponding Inspector General for investigation, and
if reported to an Inspector General, shall be referred to the corresponding General
Counsel to determine whether the activity is legal and consistent with applicable
policy. Reports made to the DoD General Counsel or the ATSD(IO) may be referred,
after consultation between these officials, to the appropriate Inspector General and
General Counsel for investigation and evaluation.
C15.3.2.3. Investigations shall be conducted expeditiously. The officials
responsible for these investigations may, in accordance with established procedures,
obtain assistance from within the component concerned, or from other DoD
Components, when necessary, to complete such investigations in a timely manner.
C15.3.2.4. To complete such investigations, General Counsels and Inspectors
General shall have access to all relevant information regardless of classification or
compartmentation.
C15.3.3. Reports
C15.3.3.1. Each General Counsel and Inspector General shall report
immediately to the General Counsel, DoD, and the ATSD(IO) questionable activities of
a serious nature.
63
Page 117 of 389
CHAPTER 15
C15.3.3.2. Each General Counsel and Inspector General shall submit to the
ATSD(IO) a quarterly report describing those activities that come to their attention
during the quarter reasonably believed to be illegal or contrary to Executive order or
Presidential directive, or applicable DoD policy; and actions taken with respect to such
activities. The reports shall also include significant oversight activities undertaken
during the quarter and any suggestions for improvements in the oversight system.
Separate, joint, or consolidated reports may be submitted. These reports should be
prepared in accordance with DoD Directive 5000.11 (reference (j)).
C15.3.3.3. All reports made pursuant to subparagraphs C15.3.3.1., and
C15.3.3.2., above, which involve a possible violation of Federal criminal law shall be
considered by the General Counsel concerned in accordance with the procedures
adopted pursuant to section 1.7(a) of E.O. 12333 (reference (a)).
C15.3.3.4. The General Counsel, DoD, and the ATSD(IO) may review the
findings of other General Counsels and Inspectors General with respect to questionable
activities.
C15.3.3.5. The ATSD(IO) and the General Counsel, DoD, shall report in a
timely manner to the White House Intelligence Oversight Board all activities that come
to their attention that are reasonably believed to be illegal or contrary to Executive
order or Presidential directive. They will also advise appropriate officials of the
Office of the Secretary of Defense of such activities.
C15.3.3.6. These reporting requirements are exempt from format approval and
licensing in accordance with paragraph VII.G. of Enclosure 3 to DoD Directive 5000.19
(reference (k)).
64
Page 118 of 389
CHAPTER 15
CHAPTER
DIVIDER
Page 119 of 389
High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program - Wikipedia, the free e...
1 of 9
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Frequency_Active_Auroral_Research...
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Coordinates: 622330N 1450900W
HAARP is often confused with Project HARP, the High Altitude Research Project (a joint project of the
Pentagon and the Canadian Department of National Defense).
The High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program

(HAARP) is an investigation project jointly funded by the
United States Air Force, the United States Navy, the
University of Alaska, and the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency[1] (DARPA) which aims to "provide a
research facility to conduct pioneering experiments in
ionospheric phenomena... used to analyze basic ionospheric
properties and to assess the potential for developing
ionospheric enhancement technology for communications
and surveillance purposes."[2] Started in 1993, the project is
proposed to last for a period of twenty years. The system
was designed and built by Advanced Power Technologies
(APTI) and since 2003, by BAE Systems Inc.
The facility currently operates VHF and UHF radar, a
fluxgate magnetometer, a ionospheric digisonde, and an
induction magnetometer alongside the transmitter facilities.
High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program Research

Station
Established
Research Type
Director
Location
Website
1990-1993
Ionospheric
John Heckscher
Gakona, Alaska
http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/
1 The HAARP site

2 Management
3 Instrumentation and operation
3.1 Current facilities
4 Research at the HAARP
5 Objectives
6 HAARP controversy
6.1 Supporters
6.1.1 Power emitted
6.1.2 Open activities
6.1.3 Waste
6.2 Critics
6.2.1 Waste
6.2.2 Weapon
7 See also
Page 120 of 389
9/23/2009 3:01 PM
2 of 9
8 Notes and references

9 External links
The project site (622330N 1450903W) is north of Gakona, Alaska, just West of the Wrangell-Saint Elias
National Park. An environmental impact statement led to permission for an array of up to 180 antennas to be
erected. The HAARP has been constructed at the previous site of an over-the-horizon radar (OTH) installation.
A large structure, built to house the OTH now houses the HAARP control room, kitchen, and offices. Several
other small structures house various instruments.
The HAARP site has been constructed in three distinct phases (http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/phases.html)
.
The Developmental Prototype (DP) had 18 antenna elements, organized in three columns by six rows. It was
fed with a total of 360 kilowatts (kW) combined transmitter output power. The DP transmitted just enough
power for the most basic of ionospheric testing.
The Filled Developmental Prototype (FDP) had 48 antenna units arrayed in six columns by eight rows, with
960 kW of transmitter power. It was fairly comparable to other ionospheric heating facilities. This was used for
a number of successful scientific experiments and ionospheric exploration campaigns over the years.
The Final IRI (FIRI) will be the final build of the IRI. It has 180 antenna units, organized in 15 columns by 12
rows, yielding a theoretical maximum gain of 31 dB. A total of 3600 kW (3.6 MW) of transmitter power will
feed it. The total ERP (effective radiated power) will be 3,981 MW (96 dBW). As of March 2007, all the
antennas were in place, but the final quota of transmitters had not yet been installed, the final phase was
completed and the antenna array was undergoing testing aimed at fine-tuning its performance to comply with
safety requirements required by regulatory agencies.
The HAARP (http://www.darpa.mil/ucar/programs/haarp.htm) is currently being managed by the Tactical

Technology Office (http://www.darpa.mil/tto/) , which is one of the eight technical offices in DARPA
(http://www.darpa.mil/tto/) , the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.
The Ionospheric Research Instrument (IRI) is the primary instrument at HAARP, which is a high-frequency
(HF) transmitter system used to temporarily energize a portion the ionosphere. Study of this modified volume
yields important information for understanding natural ionospheric processes.
During active ionospheric research, the signal generated by the transmitter system is delivered to the antenna
array, transmitted in an upward direction, and is partially absorbed, at an altitude between 100 to 350 km
(depending on operating frequency), in a small volume a few hundred meters thick and a few tens of kilometers
in diameter over the site. The intensity of the HF signal in the ionosphere is less than 3 W/cm, tens of
thousands of times less than the Sun's natural electromagnetic radiation reaching the earth and hundreds of times
less than even the normal random variations in intensity of the Sun's natural ultraviolet (UV) energy which
Page 121 of 389
9/23/2009 3:01 PM
3 of 9
creates the ionosphere. The small effects that are produced, however, can be observed with the sensitive
scientific instruments installed at the HAARP facility and these observations can provide new information about
the dynamics of plasmas and new insight into the processes of solar-terrestrial interactions. [1]
(http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/tech.html)
Each antenna element[2] (http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/ant3.html) [3] (http://www.haarp.alaska.edu
/haarp/ant2.html) consists of a crossed dipole that can be polarized for linear, ordinary mode (O-mode), or
extraordinary mode (X-mode) transmission and reception. Each part of the two section crossed dipoles are
individually fed from a custom built transmitter, that has been specially designed with very low distortion. The
ERP of the IRI is limited by more than a factor of 10 at its lower operating frequencies. Much of this is due to
higher antenna losses and a less efficient antenna pattern.
HAARP can transmit between 2.8 and 10 MHz. This frequency range lies above the AM radio broadcast band
and well below Citizens' Band frequency allocations. The HAARP is licensed to transmit only in certain
segments of this frequency range, however. When the IRI is transmitting, the bandwidth of the transmitted
signal is 100 kHz or less. The IRI can transmit continuously (CW) or pulses as short as 100 microseconds (s).
CW transmission is generally used for ionospheric modification, while short pulses are frequently repeated, and
the IRI is used as a radar system. Researchers can run experiments that use both modes of transmission,
modifying the ionosphere for a predetermined amount of time, then measuring the decay of modification effects
with pulsed transmissions.
Current facilities
The United States has three ionospheric heating facilities: the HAARP, the HIPAS, near Fairbanks, Alaska, and
(currently offline for modifications) one at the Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico. The European Incoherent
Scatter (http://www.eiscat.se/about.html) Scientific Association (EISCAT) operates an ionospheric heating
facility, capable of transmitting over 1 GW [4] (http://www.kurasc.kyoto-u.ac.jp/s-ramp/abstract/s19.txt)
(1,000,000,000 watts) effective radiated power (ERP), near Troms in Norway. Russia has the Sura ionospheric
heating facility, in Vasilsursk near Nizhniy Novgorod, capable of transmitting 190 MW ERP.
A fluxgate magnetometer built by the University of Alaska Fairbanks Geophysical Institute is available to chart
variations in the Earth's magnetic field. Rapid and sharp changes may indicate a geomagnetic storm. A digisonde
provides ionospheric profiles, allowing scientists to choose appropriate frequencies for IRI operation. The
HAARP makes current and historic digisonde information available online. An induction magnetometer,
provided by the University of Tokyo, measures the changing geomagnetic field in the ULF (ultra low frequency)
range of 05 Hz.
Another site, operated by military sub-contractor under unknown arrangement between the US and Canadian
government, is located near Cape Race, Newfoundland, Canada, at N46 38.649' W53 9.010' There is minimal
or no grid power available at this site, so this may be a passive listening post for the transmissions emitted by
other HAARP sites.
HAARP's main goal is basic science research of the uppermost portion of the atmosphere, known as the
ionosphere. Essentially a transition between the atmosphere and the magnetosphere, the ionosphere is where the
atmosphere is thin enough that the sun's x-rays and UV rays can reach it, but thick enough that there are still
enough molecules present to absorb those rays. Consequently, the ionosphere consists of a rapid increase in
density of free electrons, beginning at ~70 km, reaching a peak at ~300 km, and then falling off again as the
Page 122 of 389
9/23/2009 3:01 PM
4 of 9
atmosphere disappears entirely by ~1000 km. Various aspects of HAARP can study all of the main layers of the
ionosphere.
The profile of the ionosphere, however, is highly variable, showing minute-to-minute changes, diurnal changes,
seasonal changes, and year-to-year changes. This becomes particularly complicated near the Earth's poles,
where a host of physical processes (like auroral lights) are unlocked by the fact that the alignment of the Earth's
magnetic field is nearly vertical.
On the other hand, the ionosphere is traditionally very difficult to measure. Balloons cannot reach it because the
air is too thin, but satellites cannot orbit there because the air is still too thick. Hence, most experiments on the
ionosphere give only small pieces of information. HAARP approaches the study of the ionosphere by following
in the footsteps of an ionospheric heater called EISCAT near Troms, Norway. There, they pioneered
exploration of the ionosphere by perturbing it with radio waves in the 2-10 MHz range, and studying how the
ionosphere reacts. HAARP performs the same functions but with more power, and a more flexible and agile HF
beam.
Some of the main scientific findings from HAARP include:
1. Generation of very low frequency radio waves by modulated heating of the auroral electrojet, useful
because generating VLF waves ordinarily requires gigantic antennas
2. Production of weak luminous glow (below what you can see with your eye, but measurable) from
absorption of HAARP's signal
3. Production of ultra low frequency waves in the 0.1 Hz range, which are next to impossible to produce any
other way
4. Generation of whistler-mode VLF signals which enter the magnetosphere, and propagate to the other
hemisphere, interacting with Van Allen radiation belt particles along the way
5. VLF remote sensing of the heated ionosphere
Research at the HAARP includes:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Ionospheric heating
Plasma line observations
Stimulated electron emission observations
Gyro-frequency heating research
Spread F observations
Airglow observations
Heating induced scintillation observations
VLF and ELF generation observations (http://www-star.stanford.edu/~vlf/publications/2008-03.pdf)
Radio observations of meteors
Polar mesospheric summer echoes: Polar mesospheric summer echoes (PMSE) have been studied using
the IRI as a powerful radar, as well as with the 28 MHz radar, and the two VHF radars at 49 MHz and
139 MHz. The presence of multiple radars spanning both HF and VHF bands allows scientists to make
comparative measurements that may someday lead to an understanding of the processes that form these
elusive phenomena.
11. Research on extraterrestrial HF radar echos: the Lunar Echo experiment (2008).[3][4]
12. Testing of SS-Spread Spectrum Transmitters 2009
The HAARP project aims to direct a 3.6 MW signal, in the 2.8-10 MHz region of the HF band, into the
Page 123 of 389
9/23/2009 3:01 PM
5 of 9
ionosphere. The signal may be pulsed or continuous wave. Then effects of the transmission and any recovery
period will be examined using associated instrumentation, including VHF and UHF radars, HF receivers, and
optical cameras. According to the HAARP team, this will advance the study of basic natural processes that
occur in the ionosphere under the natural but much stronger influence of solar interaction, as well as how the
natural ionosphere affects radio signals. This will enable scientists to develop techniques to mitigate these
effects in order to improve the reliability and/or performance of communication and navigation systems, which
would have a wide range of applications in both the civilian and military sectors.
The project is funded by the Office of Naval Research and jointly managed by the ONR and Air Force Research
Laboratory, with the principal involvement of the University of Alaska. Fourteen other universities and
educational institutions have been involved in the development of the project and its instruments, namely the
University of Alaska, Penn State University (ARL), Boston College, UCLA, Clemson University, Dartmouth
College, Cornell University, Johns Hopkins University, University of Maryland, College Park, University of
Massachusetts, MIT, Polytechnic Institute of New York University, Stanford University, and the University of
Tulsa. The project's specifications were developed by the universities, which are continuing to play a major role
in the design of future research efforts. There is both military and commercial interest in its outcome, as many
communications and navigation systems depend on signals being reflected from the ionosphere or passing
through the ionosphere to satellites. Thanks to the more penetrating properties of VLF and ELF, advancements
in underwater and underground research and applications are now possible. This may lead to improved methods
for submarine communication and the ability to remotely sense the mineral content of the terrestrial subsurface,
among other things.
The HAARP project offers annual open days to permit the general public to visit the facility, and makes a public
virtue of openness; according to the team, "there are no classified documents pertaining to the HAARP." Each
summer, the HAARP holds a summer-school for visiting students, including foreign nationals, giving them an
opportunity to do research with one of the world's foremost research instruments.
Supporters
Power emitted
The critics' views have been rejected by HAARP's defenders, who have pointed out that the amount of energy
at the project's disposal is minuscule compared to the colossal energies dumped into the atmosphere by solar
radiation and thunderstorms. A University of Alaska Fairbanks Geophysical Institute scientist has compared the
HAARP to an "immersion heater in the Yukon River."
Since the ionosphere is inherently a chaotically turbulent region, HAARP's defenders state any artificially
induced changes would be "swept clean" within seconds or minutes at the most. Ionospheric heating
experiments performed at the Arecibo Observatory's ionospheric heater and incoherent scatter radar have
shown that after periods of modification (up to an hour), the ionosphere returns to normal within about the same
period of time it had been heated.
For instance, HAARP generates 3.6 megawatts (MW) of power. 3.6 MW is considered a minuscule percentage
of the energy compared to all of the energy constantly injected into the Earth, and the ionosphere, by the sun.
Open activities
Page 124 of 389
9/23/2009 3:01 PM
6 of 9
Furthermore, supporters of HAARP argue that its activities have been, since its establishment, extremely open.
All activities are logged and publicly available. Scientists without security clearances, even foreign nationals, are
routinely allowed on site. The HAARP facility regularly hosts open houses, during which time any civilian may
tour the entire facility.
In addition, scientific results obtained with HAARP are routinely published in major research journals (such as
Geophysical Research Letters, or Journal of Geophysical Research), written both by university scientists (both
US and foreign) or by Department of Defense research lab scientists.
Waste
HAARP was constructed at the site of an obsolete over-the-horizon radar facility for reasons of cost reduction.
Critics
Waste
The cost of building the HAARP has exceeded the dollar-adjusted cost of similar facilities around the world.
Weapon
The objectives of the HAARP project became the subject of controversy in the mid-1990s, following claims that
the antennas could be used as a weapon. A small group of American physicists aired complaints in scientific
journals such as Physics and Society[5], charging that the HAARP could be seeking ways to destroy or disable
enemy spacecraft or disrupt communications over large portions of the planet. The physicist critics of the
HAARP have had little complaint about the project's current stage, but have expressed fears that it could in the
future be expanded into an experimental weapon, especially given that its funding comes from the Office of
Naval Research and the Air Force Research Laboratory.
These concerns were amplified by Bernard Eastlund, a physicist who developed some of the concepts behind
the HAARP in the 1980s and proposed using high-frequency radio waves to energize the ionosphere in order to
disable incoming missiles, thus "knocking out" out enemy satellite communications. The US military became
interested in the idea as an alternative to the laser-based Strategic Defense Initiative. However, Eastlund's ideas
were eventually dropped as SDI itself mutated into the more limited National Missile Defense of today. The
contractors selected to build HAARP have denied that any of Eastlund's patents were used in the development
of the project.
After the physicists raised early concerns, the controversy was stoked by local activism. In September 1995, a
book entitled Angels Don't Play This HAARP: Advances in Tesla Technology by the former teacher Nick
Begich, Jr., son of the late Congressman Nick Begich (D-AK) and brother of U.S. Senator Mark Begich (D-AK),
claimed that the project in its present stage could be used for "geophysical warfare."
HAARP has been referenced twice by the History Channel series That's Impossible, once in regards to its
supposed weather control capabilities and later for its claimed connection to mind control.
In August 2002, a critical mention of HAARP technology came from the State Duma (parliament) of Russia.
The Duma published a critical report on the HAARP written by the international affairs and defense
committees, signed by 90 deputies and presented to then President Vladimir Putin. The report claimed that "the
U.S. is creating new integral geophysical weapons that may influence the near-Earth medium with
high-frequency radio waves ... The significance of this qualitative leap could be compared to the transition
Page 125 of 389
9/23/2009 3:01 PM
7 of 9
from cold steel to firearms, or from conventional weapons to nuclear weapons. This new type of weapons
differs from previous types in that the near-Earth medium becomes at once an object of direct influence and
its component."However, given the timing of the Russian intervention, it is possible that it was related to a
controversy at the time concerning the US withdrawal in June 2002 from the Russian-American Anti-Ballistic
Missile Treaty. This high level concern is paralleled in the April 1997 statement by the U.S. Secretary of
Defense over the power of such electromagnetic weaponry. Russia owns and operates an ionospheric heater
system as powerful as the HAARP[6], called 'Sura,' which is located roughly 150 km from the city of Nizhny
Novgorod.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Ionosphere
Ionospheric reflection
Conspiracy theories
European Incoherent Scatter Scientific Association
HIPAS-HIgh Power Auroral Stimulation
Sura Ionospheric Heating Facility
SuperDARN
Poker Flat Research Range
Ionospheric Observatory, subsidiary of Kharkiv Polytechnical Institute, located near Zmiiv, Ukraine
(494037N 361732E) [5] (http://www.kpi.kharkiv.edu/iion/) [6] (http://tourist.kharkov.ua
/review_niceplaces/index.php?viewtopic=16)
Platteville, Colorado
Hansell, Clarence W., U.S. Patent 2,389,432 (http://www.google.com/patents?vid=2389432) ,
"Communication system by pulses through the Earth." 1945.
Tanner, R. L., U.S. Patent 3,215,937 (http://www.google.com/patents?vid=3215937) , "Extremely
low-frequency antenna." 1965.
Leydorf, G. F., U.S. Patent 3,278,937 (http://www.google.com/patents?vid=3278937) , "Antenna near
field coupling system." 1966.
Eastlund, Bernard J., U.S. Patent 4,686,605 (http://www.google.com/patents?vid=4686605) , "Method
and apparatus for altering a region in the earth's atmosphere, ionosphere, and/or magnetosphere."
1987.
Eastlund, Bernard J., U.S. Patent 5,038,664 (http://www.google.com/patents?vid=5038664) , "Method
for producing a shell of relativistic particles at an altitude above the earths surface." 1991.
1. ^ http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/factSheet.html
2. ^ http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/prpeis.html
3. ^ Reeve, W.D. (2008). "The Lunar Echo Experiment (Part 1)". Radio User 3 (8): 5658. ISSN 1748-8117
(http://worldcat.org/issn/1748-8117) .
4. ^ Reeve, W.D. (2008). "The Lunar Echo Experiment (Part 2)". Radio User 3 (9): 5657. ISSN 1748-8117
(http://worldcat.org/issn/1748-8117) .
5. ^ [THE IMPRUDENCE OF P
" RUDENT AVOIDANCE"; Physics and Society, Vol. 24, No. 3]
6. ^ USA and Russia supposedly develop secret meteorological weapons Pravda.Ru (http://english.pravda.ru
/science/19/94/379/16227_hurricanes.html)
Page 126 of 389
9/23/2009 3:01 PM
8 of 9
US Air Force, US Navy, University of Alaska, Raytheon

Corporation, BAE Systems/ Marconi Electronics (Tesla's
NY 'long-range weapon' financeer), General Dynamics
Robotics
"High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program
(http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/) ." haarp.Alaska.edu.
"About ELF (http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp
/elfindex.html) ." haarp.Alaska.edu, July 2, 1996.
(ELF Generation Using HAARP)
HAARP (http://www.darpa.mil/ucar/programs
/haarp.htm) from a Military Point Of View
From radio telescopes to electromagnetic weapons.
Russian researches (http://en.rian.ru/analysis
/20070511/65348455.html)
"Ionospheric Interaction Research References
(http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/imref.html) , by
U.S. Authors: 19801999." haarp.Alaska.edu, June
24, 1999.
"HAARP Cam (http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp
/cam.fcgi) ." haarp.Alaska.edu. (live HAARP
antenna array daylight pictures)
"HAARP (http://www.bariumblues.com
/haarp_executive_summary.htm) : HF Active
Auroral Research Program." Joint Services Program
Plans and Activities: Air Force, Geophysics
Laboratory; Navy, Office of Naval Research.
(Executive Summary)
"Raytheon Aircraft Company (Owner of HAARP
patents, and, NOAA-funded aerosol weather
modification/AESA radar weather weapons)
(http://www.raytheonaircraft.com/government
/multi_jets.shtml#main) "
"BAE Systems (program and apparatus-owner of the
HAARP facility, Railgun technology, electromagnetic
armor, and, a sub-corporation partner with Raytheon
via British Aerospace Corporation
(http://www.na.baesystems.com
/releasesDetail.cfm?a=477)
"General Dynamics Robotics (owned by Raytheon
Corp) military contractor/manufacturer of
Unmanned Autonomous Vehicles (UAV) aircraft
designed for "all-weather", computer-controlled
weapons defense progams (http://www.gdrs.com
/news/)
"Boeing, Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems, and
Raytheon to create B2B exchange for the aerospace
and defense industry, powered by Microsoft
(http://www.lockheedmartin.com
/wms/findPage.do?dsp=fec&ci=12498&rsbci=0&
fti=112&ti=0&sc=400) "
Other facilities and agencies
"Tesla's Wardenclyffe Tower 'Long Range Weapon'
research history, construction, utilization, association

w/ Marconi Company / GE, and future ionospheric
heater plans (http://uncletaz.com/library/scimath/tesla
/weapon.html) "
Hggstrm, Christian, "European Incoherent
SCATter's ionospheric Heating facility
(http://www.eiscat.se/heating/) including
Dynasonde." eiscat.se, 4 July 2003.
Zabotin, Nikolay, "Evidence for Precipitation of
Energetic Particles by Ionospheric Heating
Transmissions (http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/IONO
/Dynasonde/SpEatHeating.htm) ." noaa.gov,
December 7, 2004.
"Boeing, Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems, and
Raytheon to create B2B exchange for the aerospace
and defense industry, powered by Microsoft
(http://www.lockheedmartin.com
/wms/findPage.do?dsp=fec&ci=12498&rsbci=0&
fti=112&ti=0&sc=400) "
"The Weather Modification Operations and Research
Board (passed Oct.2005) in corporate cooperation
with BAE Systems (HAARP apparatus & facility
owner) and Raytheon Corporation (HAARP patent
owner) (http://commerce.senate.gov/public
/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&
PressRelease_Id=248556)
"the Weather Modification Operations and Research
Board on Wiki"
Information
"HAARP Completed! news compilation
(http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/05
/06/18214461.php) "
"President Bush's National Response Plan
(http://www.dhs.gov/xprepresp/committees
/editorial_0566.shtm) "
Demirkol, Characterization of the Modified and
Ambient Lower Ionosphere for HAARP using VLF
diagnostics (http://www-star.stanford.edu
/~vlf/HAARP/) ."leland.stanford.edu. (Impact of
HAARP on VLF signals, a 2% effect.)
Hagfors, T., "Early Ionospheric HF Modification
Work in Arecibo (http://www.eiscat.uit.no/heating
/abs7.html) ". Max Planck Institut fr Aeronomie,
Katlenburg-Lindau, Germany.
McQuerry, Shawn, "Platteville Heating Experiments
(http://grison.colorado.edu/pao-lower/History
/index.html) " References (http://grison.colorado.edu
/pao-lower/History/history_references.html) .
DLC, "VLF Group Science Background (http://wwwstar.stanford.edu/~vlf/Science/Science.html) ."
nova.stanford.edu, June 13, 1995. (VLF Tutorial)
Inan, U. S., and T. F. Bell, "Polar Aeronomy and
Radio Science (http://www-star.stanford.edu
Page 127 of 389
9/23/2009 3:01 PM
9 of 9
/~vlf/pars/pars.htm) (PARS)" STAR Laboratory,

Stanford University. [ULF/ELF/VLF PROJECT]
Inan, U. S., M. Golkowski, D. L. Carpenter, N.
Reddell, R. C. Moore, T. F. Bell, E. Paschal, P.
Kossey, E. Kennedy, and S. Z. Meth (2004),),
Multi-hop whisler-mode ELF/VLF signals and
triggered emissions excited by the HAARP HF
heater, Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, L24805,
doi:10.1029/2004GL021647 "[7] (http://wwwstar.stanford.edu/~vlf/publications/2004-06.pdf)
Satellite Image
Google maps satellite image of HAARP
(http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=62.39
%C2%B0+N,+145.15%C2%B0+W&
ll=62.389972,-145.149994&
spn=0.036835,0.171661&t=k)
Conspiracy
Russian Journal: HAARP Could Capsize Planet
(http://thought-criminal.org/article/node/1140) (08
January 2008)
Marshall D. Smith The Unauthorized History of
HAARP (http://www.brojon.org/frontpage
/bj1204.html) (27 June 2000)
Jerry E. Smith author personal website
(http://jerryesmith.com)
"HAARP: The Ultimate Weapon of the
Conspiracy." Adventures Unlimited Press,
1998. ISBN 0-932813-53-4
"HAARP Tremors Rock Earth Deep Beneath San
Andreas Fault (http://portland.indymedia.org
/en/2004/12/305741.shtml) ." Portland IMC.
Begich, Nick, and Jeane Manning, "The Military's
Pandora's Box (http://www.haarp.net/) ." haarp.net.
"To Understand HAARP: NWO's Scalar
Electromagnetics (http://portland.indymedia.org
/en/2005/01/307309.shtml) : secret 20th century

parallel tech path." Portland IMC. (This article is an
assemblage of scalar electromagnetics information
detailed by scientist Tom Bearden).
www.ethericwarriors.comto learn how to neutralize
HAARP facilities in your area.
Ikerjimenez.com (http://www.ikerjimenez.com
/conspiracion/haarp) Completo Dossier sobre
HAARP y otras transmisiones secretas.
Films, movies and art
"Owning the Weather
(http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/video_coverups.htm) " Discovery Channel, 2005
Documentary covers traditional and modern
forms of weather modification including a
segment on HAARP.
Digisonde home page (http://137.229.36.56/)
Current and archived magnetometer data
(http://137.229.36.30/cgi-bin/magnetometer
/gak-mag.cgi)
Induction Magnetometer data page
(http://137.229.36.30/cgi-bin/scmag/disp-scmag.cgi)
Induction Magentometer description page
(http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/magind.html)
GoogleEarth Searchbar: 6223'39.12"N 145
8'42.00"W
HAARP, Mr. Roger Hall (http://www.darpa.mil
/tto/programs/haarp.htm)
Technical Details, E.J. Kennedy, P. Rodriguez, and
C.A. Selcher (http://www.nrl.navy.mil
/content.php?P=04REVIEW106)
A few simulations (http://wwwppd.nrl.navy.mil
/whatsnew/haarp/)
Gakona: an art exhibition at Palais de Tokyo in Paris
exploring HAARP (http://www.palaisdetokyo.com
/gakona/index.html)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Frequency_Active_Auroral_Research_Program"

Categories: Weather modification | Plasma physics | Space plasmas | Buildings and structures in Alaska
This page was last modified on 18 September 2009 at 14:40.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may
apply. See Terms of Use for details.
Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Page 128 of 389
9/23/2009 3:01 PM
CHAPTER
DIVIDER
Page 129 of 389
1
1
Covert Harassment Conference

1-2 October 2015, Berlin, Germany
2
3
Mind Control:
4
5
DR. NICK BEGICH

A Brave New World together with HAARP The Update
DR. BEGICH:
Hello, and thank you for being
here and thank you to Peter and the rest of the team for
putting this together.
8
9
Everyone hears me okay, yes?

Okay.
In the back?
Good.
10
All right.
I want to give a little bit of
11
background in terms of my interest in these areas.
12
those that don't know my family story, it really goes
13
back quite a ways.
14
For
My father was in the United States Congress in
15
the early 1970s during the Nixon Administration.
16
lost in a plane with Hale Boggs.
17
remember this if you've got a little bit of gray hair.
18
Hale Boggs was our House majority leader at the time,
19
one of the most powerful people in the United States
20
Congress.
21
strong dislike for J. Edgar Hoover, because he basically
22
read everybody's mail, tapped everybody's phones,
23
including the United States Congress, and then,
24
essentially, blackmailed political leaders to follow
25
whatever script he laid out.
Some of you may
He was also a Warren Commissioner.
Page 130 of 389
He was
He had a
2
1
Boggs was a pretty outspoken individual.
At
the time -- it was just before the second election of
Richard Nixon -- Boggs came to Alaska to work on my
father's campaign, which would have been his second term
in the United States Congress.
Boggs, before they flew out on October 16th,
three weeks before the second election of Richard Nixon,
began to talk about this scandal brewing in Washington,
DC.
In fact, that very scandal, had it unfolded a
10
little bit differently -- for those that remember, the
11
planes disappeared.
12
Three weeks later, Nixon's elected for his
13
second term.
14
the Watergate scandal broke.
15
office.
16
moved up again.
17
Rockefeller then slid into the Vice President's slot.
18
And then one of the old Manson women from the Charles
19
Manson days tried to assassinate Ford, which would have
20
put Rockefeller in the White House.
21
It wasn't too much long after that that
Ford moved up.
Agnew was thrown out of
Then Nixon resigned.
Ford
For those that don't remember,
What would have otherwise happened, most
22
likely, the election would have taken place.
23
would have won.
24
out at the same time.
25
controlled the Congress.
Nixon
Agnew and Nixon would have been thrown

The Democrats would have
The Speaker of the House would
Page 131 of 389
3
1
have elevated to the Presidency.
have been in control.
happened and history tells us a lot about what really
happened there.
The Democrats would
But the opposite, of course,
Twenty years later there was a report, an
investigative report by a publication called "Roll Call"
in Washington, DC.
these various Congressional deaths.
crashes are kind of the hazard of political leadership,
10
That report was looking into all of

You know, plane
it seems like.
11
But in researching that, what they found in the
12
FBI files were a couple of telexes -- this goes before
13
FAX machines -- and telexes coming from California into
14
Washington, DC reported that two people had been found
15
at a crash site.
16
the FBI to determine whether they were credible.
17
follow-up telex came through saying, yes, they were.
18
That plane was never recovered.
19
officially; yet 20 years later, we find out, in fact,
20
there were.
21
Those sources were later looked at by

A
There were no survivors
So I know about conspiracies.
Conspiracies are
22
conversations that happen in a room like this when
23
there's a bunch of people standing on the outside who
24
might not agree with us.
25
the political life, even at the highest levels, things
But the reality is, even in
Page 132 of 389
4
1
happen.
Things happen that aren't easily explained.
Maybe a few decades go by before the truth is finally
revealed.
So I have a strong motivation foundationally in
terms of how I approach controversial issues.
do it with fear.
years.
is the absolute adversary for getting anything
accomplished on this planet.
I've been doing this work for over 20
Fear isn't part of the equation.
10
I don't
In fact, that
My interest in these areas started with HAARP.
11
And how many in this room do not know anything about
12
HAARP?
13
Okay.
Well, that's a lot better than it used
14
to be.
All right.
15
Twenty years of this work and the work of others have
16
kind of brought this into the public.
17
It used to be the other way around.
So the first image -- I'm going to use HAARP as
18
sort of the backdrop as I move into the mind control,
19
mind effects-related technology.
20
in my part of the world.
21
know if -- maybe I've come the farthest for this
22
presentation.
23
appreciate the opportunity to inform people about this
24
subject.
25
This is just an image
I come from Alaska.
I don't
But I appreciate being here and I
So HAARP is a large array, a field of antennas
Page 133 of 389
5
1
in Alaska, currently 180 antennas.
They're
approximately 20 meters tall.
which you can see, which is the very top of these
antennas.
concentrate radiofrequency energy into a relatively
small space.
They have a cross dipole,
And what these are designed to do is focus or
If you think about the energy of a flashlight,
for instance, or a torch, as they say here in Europe, I
shine that against the wall, the beam starts out small,
10
and then it broadens as you get further away from the
11
source.
12
The same is true with radiofrequency energy.
13
You can think about it as an inverted funnel starting
14
here at the transmitter and then spreading out and
15
getting thinner and thinner, less dense, which is why
16
the further you get away from radio broadcast antennas,
17
the weaker and weaker the signal.
18
With HAARP, the opposite occurs.
They have
19
figured out a way through what's called cyclotron
20
resonance, which would be focusing or concentrating the
21
energy.
22
like sort of a cork-screwing kind of motion that got
23
smaller and smaller as you move further and further away
24
from the transmitter.
25
So if you could visualize it, it would look
So it concentrates that energy or focuses that
Page 134 of 389
6
1
energy so you can manipulate it in various ways.
the HAARP array, which was originally designed by a
gentleman, Bernard Eastlund, who's now deceased, was
intended to do a number of things as a weapons
application.
half the current size of the transmitter in Alaska.
can see the field of antennas.
90 antennas in the array.
9
10
And so
This is the earlier version when it was

You
In this case there were
And here's another image as they expanded the

array to 180.
11
And another image showing the array.
Now, they also upgraded the technology pretty
12
substantially over the years.
13
efficient.
14
much bigger effects.
15
So it became much more
So with a much smaller system you create
So what does it do?
Essentially, it's sending
16
energy or focusing energy up into an area known as the
17
ionosphere, which in this image in miles -- I apologize
18
for that -- is approximately 37 miles to 620 miles out
19
into space.
20
Now, this is a highly energized area.
If you
21
think about radiofrequency signals or shortwave signals,
22
they would come from the earth, they'd bounce off of us,
23
and then bounce back down to the earth to transmit over
24
large distances.
25
The ionosphere also is an area that can be
Page 135 of 389
7
1
disturbed by solar radiation, radiation from the sun.
When it becomes destabilized, it interferes with
terrestrial communications of every kind.
So part of the idea in this technology was to
learn how to stabilize the ionosphere during these
periods or deliberately disrupt the ionosphere to
interfere with communications on a global basis.
8
9
Now, what caught my interest when I first

looked at this issue of HAARP was a very short article
10
in a publication, an Australian publication, that talked
11
about this big system in Alaska.
12
Now, I come from a family that's pretty
13
politically engaged.
14
Congress, my younger brother just finished a term in the
15
United States Senate.
16
politics a very long time.
17
Besides my dad being in the
My family's been involved in
Alaska is a very big region, but we're a really
18
small population; 700,000 people in our entire region.
19
And when you think about big projects, you know, you
20
think you know something about them.
21
Well, I'm reading about this project in my
22
state in a journal in Australia and I'm going, you know,
23
why doesn't anybody know about this?
24
25
And so I decided I would go in and look into

this issue independently.
And I did.
Page 136 of 389
I picked up maybe
8
1
30 articles and papers, design specifications, some
things, and with friends encouraging me to publish, I
published the first article that I had written on HAARP
back in 1994.
So it's been a very long time ago.
What also caught my interest was the idea that
they were primarily utilizing, in some applications,
extremely low frequency signals or ELFs.
signals that can be biologically active, can affect us
as human beings and in very specific ways.
10
These are
And in particular, certain applications of the
11
technology -- and this gives you sort of a graphic
12
illustration of the focus.
13
were given to me by the inventor, Bernard Eastlund,
14
prior to his passing.
15
publications and in some of our work.
16
kind of a graphic showing the radiofrequency from the
17
array, moving up into the ionosphere and focusing that
18
energy.
19
These view graphs, actually,
And we utilized them in our

So this gives you
His initial concept was to create a global
20
shield, to be able to utilize the natural magnetic field
21
lines that surround the earth, be able to punch energy
22
into this and then create this kind of global shielding
23
effect.
24
piercing that energy would be disrupted, like
25
satellites, intercontinental ballistic missiles,
And the idea was that any electronic device
Page 137 of 389
9
1
virtually any electronic device that ran into this field
of energy that was being amplified would be destroyed.
Now, one of the other interesting parts of
this -- and this kind of shows that, again, utilizing
one of Eastlund's graphics.
line and then you see this cork-screwing energy going
around it.
southern polar regions into the northern polar regions.
And, in this case, they actually couple -- actually
10
utilize the energy on the ground to couple with the
11
natural energy, and then coming from the north to the
12
south, create this cork-screwing effect, which
13
accelerates the electrons and then creates this global
14
shield.
15
So you can see like a field
That energy naturally is occurring from the
Now, that was his initial concept.
And as a
16
concept, it caught the attention of a number of people
17
and eventually got funding from the Congress, initially
18
at 30 million, and over the last few decades now over
19
almost 300 million, which in dollars is not a lot of
20
money, but when you consider, this is sort of the
21
pinnacle of billions of dollars spent in ionosphere
22
research over many decades.
23
What caught my attention in terms of the
24
technology of Eastlund -- I'm going to skip some of
25
these that are not so relevant -- was the idea that you
Page 138 of 389
10
1
could manipulate the ionosphere -- and I'll use this as
a better example.
you could punch or pulse energy into the ionosphere --
so think about this energy going up and, like, a hammer
ringing a bell.
ionosphere itself vibrates and then it begins to send a
signal in the ELF range.
signal going up, punching the ionosphere, the ionosphere
which is energized then acts as a broadcast antenna in
So one of the thoughts was that if
Every time it hits that ionosphere, the
So you have a high frequency
10
the sky bringing back an ELF signal to the earth, and in
11
this case covering an entire hemisphere.
12
Now, ELF signals, extremely low frequency
13
signals, are very long wavelengths.
14
earth and sea.
15
submarines, as an example, the depth, because short
16
wavelengths won't penetrate the earth and sea.
17
also used for what's called earth-penetrating
18
tomography, which in simple language or by analogy would
19
be like x-raying the earth or looking into the earth for
20
underground structures.
21
They penetrate the
They're utilized for communication with
They're
But one of the side effects of ELF is the
22
entrainment effect on the human mind.
23
signals will lock onto in what's called a frequency
24
following response.
25
techniques to create a frequency following response.
Because ELF
And you can use a lot of different
Page 139 of 389
11
1
You can use flickering light, you can use binaural beat,
which I'll explain in a few minutes.
electromagnetic fields such as this, or even the power
grid itself can be modulated in such a way to create a
signal that the human body will join with, will couple
with, and begin to follow.
of energy to accomplish this.
You can use
It doesn't take a great deal
This is the one that triggered my real interest
in HAARP, because this is the one that everybody kind of
10
ignored and said, oh.
11
well, if ELF has a biological effect, it's a side
12
effect.
13
phrase earlier today.
14
believe that it's an intended consequence.
15
intended to grade populations in very specific ways.
16
In fact, the HAARP planners said,
It's an unintended consequence.
We heard that
But I don't believe that.
It's
Now, this book was mentioned by my friend
17
earlier today, "Between Two Ages", by Zbigniew
18
Brzezinski.
19
written, actually, in 1973, when Brzezinski was at
20
Columbia University.
21
Security Adviser to President Carter.
22
the time that Kissinger and he and others were starting
23
to think about the Trilateral Commission organizing this
24
think tank, so to speak.
25
And why this is an important book, it was
This is before he became National
Now, find this book.
Page 140 of 389
This is around
I really encourage you to
12
1
find this book and read it, because it is not a
prediction of what will come with technology.
blueprint, in fact.
It's the
You can read this.
When I first read it -- he writes in a pretty
convoluted style.
English to understand.
read it because he predicted the economic changes that
took place, the political changes that took place in the
world over the last 40 years with a great deal of
10
accuracy.
11
prediction.
12
It's a little difficult even in

But I really encourage you to
And some will say it really wasn't the

It was the plan.
If you look within this text between Pages 54
13
and 56, you'll see a section that's dedicated to the
14
kind of technologies we're talking about today, a mind
15
control technology.
16
guy named J. F. Gordon MacDonald.
17
geophysicist at UCL.
18
chapter in a book and the chapter was called, "How to
19
Wreck Your Environment", which this is before Earth Day,
20
okay, so he could get away with that.
21
that book was actually published.
22
caught Zbigniew Brzezinski's attention was, he said, if
23
we could ever figure out how to electronically stroke
24
the ionosphere in just the right way, we could return a
25
signal to the earth that would influence the behavior of
And what Zbigniew referenced was a

And he was a
He wrote a book -- or, actually, a
Page 141 of 389
It was 1969 when
But what he said that
13
1
people over huge geographic areas.
Now, that's a pretty profound thing.
But we
didn't have a way to stroke the ionosphere in 1969.
we did by the 1990s.
fact, the HAARP system that can accomplish this.
But
And that was, in fact, and is, in
So the idea was -- and it was kind of, in a
gross sort of way, primitive, if you will, but what the
intention was, was that if you could pulse the
ionosphere, return this ELF signal to the earth, you
10
could agitate the population in very specific ways.
11
could make them passive, less aggressive, or the
12
opposite by just amplifying that signal.
13
explain a little bit of that as we go on.
You
And I'll
14
The other person that comes out in the last
15
presentations, Jose Delgado, and this book he wrote,
16
"Physical Control of the Mind:
17
Society".
18
images that you saw in just this short video clip of
19
Delgado's work, there is a good section in this text as
20
well showing that.
21
Toward a Psychocivilized
And this is, again, a 1960s book.
But in those days they used implants.
Those
They had
22
to physically put something in the brain.
23
Delgado originally did -- he was actually educated in
24
electrophysiology at the University of Madrid.
25
graduated in 1950.
And what Jose
He
Electrophysiology, as a degree
Page 142 of 389
14
1
field, thinking about it in 1950, now 65 years ago, most
people don't even realize that's an area of higher
education today, much less that far back.
One of my mentors, Raul Makayla (phonetic), he
actually graduated University of Madrid in 1958, and his
area of interest was, essentially, the same, biomagnetic
and electric fields, effects on human physiology, and he
spent his career studying that.
Delgado, at Yale University, he initially was
10
mapping the brain of primates and humans by stimulating
11
various portions of the brain to figure out what was
12
responsible for what kind of activity.
13
began to utilize the implants in those dramatic ways in
14
those film clips with the charging bull and he throws
15
the switch and the bull stops, to demonstrate that you
16
could take a creature from passive to highly aggressive
17
to passive to highly aggressive, just like flipping on
18
and off the lights in your living room.
19
And then he
What Delgado discovered by the mid-'80s is that
20
you didn't need any implants.
You just needed to
21
manipulate the energy itself.
And you didn't need a
22
great deal of energy.
23
Now, we've heard -- I forget the amount of
24
energy surrounding us now.
25
believe it was 18 zeros after the one that we heard
Was it a quintillion?
Page 143 of 389
15
1
earlier.
radiofrequency energy alone, it was 200 million times
more around us every day than nature created in 1994.
Back when I wrote the HAARP book in '94, just
Now, when you think about it, what did Delgado
discover?
of energy in the natural background noise of the earth
was sufficient to manipulate the behavior of human
beings if you could hit the right frequencies, if you
could hit those window frequencies that stimulated that
10
He discovered that one-fiftieth of the amount
kind of activity.
11
Now, if you think about this -- again, by
12
analogy, think about dialing through the radio stations
13
on a radio.
14
noise, the static, you get no clear signal.
15
you have resonance between the transmitter and the
16
receiver, then you get a nice, clear signal.
17
The same is true in our physiology.
18
you're looking at stimulating or affecting a specific
19
element in the body, molecules in the body, cell
20
structures or organ structures or even the human mind,
21
it's about manipulating the underlying energy.
22
In between the stations you get the white

But when
Whether
When you think about medical science in terms
23
of how the fork in the road is and how this kind of
24
applies to why don't we know more about this today,
25
well, there's lots of literature now.
Page 144 of 389
25,000 sources, I
16
1
think we heard quoted earlier today.
25,000 sources
talking about the energy interactions with the human
body.
That is a lot of information.
But what happened in medical science?
A lot of
people that went into life sciences, they were really
good in the chemistry, a little weak in the math, so
they went to life sciences.
better in the math, they went to physics.
upon a time, these two came together and we got
People who were a little

And then once
10
biophysics, which is really the root of real health
11
science.
12
you've got to get to the energetic interactions that
13
create chemical reactions that then manifest in the
14
body.
15
If you really want to get to the meat of it,
And that's what we kind of miss in so much of
16
our medicine.
17
opposed to an electromagnetic model.
18
to World War II, that fork in the road was being
19
explored pretty aggressively, the energetic models.
20
they were somehow lost in that shuffle and we ended up
21
with the pharmaceutical industry, and the results of
22
that, I think we can all not be quite so proud of.
23
We followed a pharmaceutical model as

In the '30s, prior
But
In terms of where the technology is going and
24
where a lot of the science is going, it will be
25
electromedicine that cures most of what we call
Page 145 of 389
17
1
incurable.
debilitates human consciousness itself.
It will also be that which enhances or
Now, Jose Delgado, when he figured out that you
didn't need implants, you just need to manipulate the
energy itself, this became kind of the essence of sort
of where everything went from there.
But I want to roll back a little bit, a little
bit back in time, and talk more about the evolution of
mind control as technology starting with the work at
10
Harvard University of a gentleman, Estabrook, who was
11
working in the Harvard hypnotherapy labs in the 1920s.
12
You can look Estabrook up.
13
of Congress and you'll see his list of publications, and
14
I recommend that you do that.
15
Look him up at the Library
What he decided was that you could create what
16
we would call today a Manchurian candidate.
17
take certain individuals, put them in a very, very deep
18
state of hypnosis and then over a period of time train
19
them so they would be like this super spy that you could
20
send into another country and they'd hang out for a year
21
or two, but if they got captured, they wouldn't really
22
remember any of their former self, and then when they
23
came back, in this case, into the United States, that we
24
would then give them the appropriate suggestions and
25
then extract the intelligence from them.
Page 146 of 389
You could
18
1
And this is what Estabrook was working on.
By
the 1930s, a lot of his work was being classified and he
continued to work in this field up through the 1960s.
His last book -- and I always like to read the last
thing someone writes, you know, because it tells you a
lot about, sort of, the conclusions and there are things
that you might discard bits and pieces as science
enlightens you and your experience enlightens you.
what he talked about in that last book were the
10
experiments he was involved in using LSD and other
11
hallucinogenics in mind control, which he actually
12
talked about in a favorable sense.
13
And
And for those of you that remember, the CIA was
14
heavily involved in this in the 1960s and, in fact, the
15
whole area pre-1960s going back even to the Korean War,
16
which is sort of my next mark on the timeline.
17
The Korean War, we had prisoners, patriotic
18
young Americans come back from war and they're handing
19
out Communist leaflets on street corners, and the term
20
or the phrase brainwashing came into being.
21
where it came from.
22
after the Korean War.
23
That's
It came from that series of events
The idea of being able to manipulate people's
24
behavior and change them so profoundly became of
25
interest to the predecessor of the Central Intelligence
Page 147 of 389
19
1
Agency and then later the Central Intelligence Agency.
And what they looked at were lots of different ways to
manipulate human behavior.
Now, when I was researching my first book with
Jeane Manning, "Angels Don't Play This HAARP", I was
looking for a good source document that would speak to
this, because you always read about this in secondary,
tertiary sources.
surplus book room, and I'm telling this guy that I know,
And so I'm in a book room, a big
10
I really need this source.
11
conversation, I reach unconsciously behind me into a box
12
and I pull out this book.
13
And as I'm having this
This is a really interesting one.
This is
14
actually a presidential report.
15
was commissioned at the time, 1975, to look at the
16
abuses of the CIA.
17
Committee reports, which were Congressional hearings
18
that took place in the early '70s to investigate the
19
abuses of the Central Intelligence Agency, the kind of
20
abuses that we read about today, because nothing really
21
changed.
22
This is a report that
Now, this came out of the Church
Supposedly, this was to change things.

Now, what's in this report?
The LSD
23
experiments were in this report.
24
Intelligence Agency was domestically infiltrating civil
25
rights groups, antiwar groups, people that, essentially,
Page 148 of 389
The idea the Central
20
1
opposed the government within the United States, which
was not part of their mandate, in fact, was illegal.
The fact that they were reading people's mail, utilizing
unwitting victims and experiments for mind control.
of this came out in this report in 1975.
CIA continues to do it even to this day.
All
And yet, the
Think about the kinds of activities that have
been reported pretty widely over the last few years,
whether it's digging through garbage to blackmail other
10
diplomats, which is something our Intelligence community
11
does, whether it's to send pallet loads of money into
12
countries like we did in Afghanistan to bribe officials
13
as a way of doing business, or whether it's to
14
assassinate people with drones, kidnap people and
15
torture them.
16
Now, most of us don't know people like this,
17
but this is the government that I unfortunately have
18
guiding my country right now.
19
criminals.
20
couldn't happen here.
21
It's a government of
Now, people want to talk about, oh, this
It has happened here.
It's happened for
22
decades in the United States.
23
President's Commission touches the very tip of that
24
iceberg.
25
This report by the
This is another document.
Page 149 of 389
This is -- this guy,
21
1
Captain Tyler, he later became a colonel and retired.
He was involved in pretty much the sort of esoteric side
of some of the government research.
chapter out of this book is called, "Low-Intensity
Conflict and Modern Technology".
Maxwell Air Force Base in 1984.
about a large -- a variety of technologies.
8
9
This book -- this
It was prepared by
And it was talking
But in this particular one, if you look at,

certainly, the subject lines, you have stimulation of ,
10
bones* generation, healing of fractures, treatment of
11
disease, healing of wounds.
12
modification in animals.
13
that are listed here were kind of under the mysterious
14
category.
15
happening in 1984.
16
You look at behavior
You know, some of these things
They couldn't really explain what was
But the idea was to stimulate research in these
17
fields.
18
started to flow into these areas.
19
that came out in the 1980s as a result of some of this
20
was the Radiofrequency Dosimetry Handbook.
21
big, thick handbook.
22
of Utah under contract to the United States Air Force to
23
determine the radiofrequency dosages that were required
24
to override every vital organ of the human body, whether
25
it be the heart, the liver, the lungs, the kidneys, just
So a number of things happened.
A lot of money
One of the reports
It was a
It was produced by the University
Page 150 of 389
22
1
sort of preempt their natural function to be able to do
it remotely.
And the idea was to take that leap of
technology and begin to apply it into weapon systems.
Mind control.
you will remember this one.
Yeah, 2002.
about the ethics of mind control.
it exist or doesn't it exist?
"The Economist".
Cover story.
Some of
This is 2002, I believe.
And what this cover story was about was

Not saying, hey, does
It's just saying it's
10
here right now.
11
we should advance this technology, whether we should
12
limit this technology.
13
credible publication.
14
story.
15
We really need to be debating whether
"The Economist" is certainly a

Not too much happened from this
This is -- unfortunately, it's not showing up.
16
November -- you can get this one on my website.
17
give you my website, because this is a very important
18
document.
19
human experiments.
20
in history, that's like tomorrow and yesterday, right?
21
It's, like, now.
22
mind control experiments and who has the authority to
23
approve them.
24
approve them is under secretaries of the Navy in the
25
case of Navy Intelligence or Naval research.
I'll
The Navy set up a new set of regulations for

It was approved in 2006.
You know,
And in this they specifically call out
And the persons with the authority to
Page 151 of 389
23
1
Now, it's not just CIA.
Naval Intelligence
does this work.
non-lethal weapons that this falls under.
has the electromagnetic directorate, which is working in
an area called controlled effects, which deal, again,
with mind control and physiological effects on human
beings.
"Technology Horizons".
issue.
10
The Marines have a section on

The Air Force
In fact, they publish a publication called

I believe it's the June 2004
You can look it up.
The cover story is on
controlled effects.
11
Now, what are controlled effects?
The first
12
effect is attacking hardware; you know, like equipment,
13
like machines, to be able to interfere with the flow of
14
electrons through circuits to disrupt those machines to
15
operate.
16
history, but using energy itself to manipulate hardware.
17
Not using bombs and bullets and the things of
The second sort of level of controlled effects
18
talked about in that article is the idea of manipulating
19
the software, the systems that run those systems, so
20
that you can disrupt the software, then you disrupt the
21
hardware, and things collapse.
22
And the third leg of controlled effects is the
23
human operator.
24
article produced by the electromagnetic director of the
25
Air Force is that we can target or create the illusion
And what they say in this particular
Page 152 of 389
24
1
of all of the senses in the human body; sight, sound,
touch, taste, to give people complete memory sets,
complete experiential sets that you wouldn't be able to
distinguish the synthetic from the real.
Now, think about that for a moment.
What does
that do to court testimony in 20 years if this becomes
the norm?
post-traumatic stress syndrome folks, people coming back
from warfare.
They're now talking about using this for
This just sort of cleans up the garbage
10
of the mind and gets rid of that stress.
11
think that's a great idea.
12
the biggest mistake we could ever make.
13
whatever those servicemen and women were engaged in --
14
what used to happen in warfare -- what happened in World
15
War II when everybody came back, they said, I don't ever
16
want to see my children in these things, I don't want to
17
see my grandchildren in these things.
18
put down, not amplified.
19
Some people
Personally, I think that's

Because
Wars need to be
When you take the human factor out of warfare
20
and it becomes like a videogame, then our willingness to
21
withdraw from direct conflict no longer happens.
22
And think about where our military science has
23
gone.
In fact, I want to mention another very important
24
publication.
25
in the early 1980s.
It was produced by the US Army War College

It's called the "Revolution of
Page 153 of 389
25
1
Military Affairs and Conflict Short of War".
particular paper was talking about revolution of
military affairs.
And this
What is that exactly?
This is a leap as important as the introduction
of gunpowder in the middle ages in Europe, as important
as atomic weapons in the last century.
they characterize it.
where we move from ordinance, from bullets, bombs,
things that rip tissue and tear things up, to
And that's how
And what this is is the leap
10
electromagnetic weapon systems that keep sort of the
11
hardware intact, but debilitate the human operator to
12
the point of being combat ineffective.
13
enhance the possibilities within our own combatants
14
while degrading the abilities of others.
15
Or conversely,
There's simple ways that you can achieve this.
16
You can introduce to the battlefield certain elemental
17
compounds that in small background amounts would not be
18
considered dangerous.
19
example.
20
body to maintain thyroid function.
21
much iodine, you'll get poisoned.
22
get sick.
23
Let me give you iodine as an
We all need a certain amount of iodine in the
So what can you do?
But if you have too

You'll die.
You'll
You can send a signal in
24
that resonates the very same signal strength and
25
frequency as iodine, you can send that signal in and the
Page 154 of 389
26
1
body will begin to react as if its gotten this massive
load of iodine and show all the symptoms of iodine
poisoning.
You check the thyroid; check the blood, it's
not there.
Mystery illness.
Something as simple as that for manipulating
large populations, not necessarily with their consent
and not necessarily with clear knowledge, and nothing
shows up in the background that would say why this
poison actually exists that would account for this.
10
simple way.
11
One of the other ways that this technology can
12
be exploited is really quite simple.
13
article produced by "Parameters", which is a military
14
publication.
15
the -- I believe it was the Fall 1998, but you can look
16
up the article name called, "The Mind has no Firewall".
17
It's a very important article.
18
about all the various ways in which you could introduce
19
mind effects or mind control technologies using modern
20
technology today.
21
written in a military journal called "Orienteer"
22
published in what is now Russia.
23
"Parameters".
There was an
You can look it up.
It's
This article talked
And the original article was actually
What's interesting about this is it said you
24
could use any electromagnetic carrier, whether it be
25
radio, TV, the Internet, now cell phones; but,
Page 155 of 389
27
1
essentially, any of these carriers, you can modulate a
signal on them that will manipulate behavior of segments
of the population.
And the Russians demonstrated this in a couple
of different ways.
There was a program.
It was called
"Undercurrents".
Canadian Public Broadcasting System.
did two really interesting stories that I got to
participate in.
It aired in the CBC, which is the

"Undercurrents"
One was on HAARP and the other was on
10
mind control.
And on the mind control story that they
11
did -- this was a very popular program in Canada at the
12
time and this particular segment was their highest rated
13
that they had ever run.
14
who were involved in the "Star Wars" initiative during
15
the Reagan Administration that couldn't talk about what
16
they did in the White House, but they could talk about
17
what they observed in Russia.
And they had folks that came in
18
And one of the things that they talked about
19
was the idea that you could -- you could create, sort
20
of, this white noise and on this white noise carry a
21
signal.
22
cake.
23
these little cakes?
24
of Europe as well.
And so they put out this message, bring us

And Russians at tea time, you know, they eat
25
I guess you do that in other parts
And so at the appointed time they began to
Page 156 of 389
28
1
broadcast this.
and on the street were bringing cake into the meeting
room without really knowing why they were doing it.
They just felt like doing it.
what they were programmed to do.
And workers from within that building
Now, this goes back.
Well, that was, in fact,
We're talking about
15-year-old technology.
And when you think about sort
of where did it go from there, in 2006, there were a
couple contracts left by DARPA, which does research for
10
the defense industry in the United States.
And DARPA
11
used to be run by a guy named Tony Tether.
Tony Tether
12
was a good friend of Ben Eastlund's.
13
Now, what they were doing then was, they had
14
left two contracts to the University of California for
15
what's called electronic telepathy.
16
telepathy.
17
a distance by analyzing the emanations coming from this
18
area, being able to analyze that and determine and
19
interpret what it is.
20
contract was to create complex signals to see if you
21
could transfer that array, so to speak, of signals into
22
another person's consciousness and whether they would
23
perceive the same images.
24
25
Okay.
Electronic
The idea of reading another person's mind at
And then the other half of the
Now, there was work done by Elizabeth Rauscher

and her late husband, Bill Van Bise, in this very same
Page 157 of 389
29
1
area.
In fact, I have a copy of their unpublished paper
where they actually built an electronic circuit where
they could take a person in one room and a person in
another room, attach this person to that circuit and
this person to that circuit, and then, you know, the
psychic card where they show the triangles, the squares
and the circles and the little squiggly lines, a hundred
percent accurate with nine test subjects who had never
experienced consciously in any way any sense of
10
extrasensory perceptions or psychic perceptions.
11
did it with hardware, transferring thoughts from one to
12
the other.
13
They
Now -- which tells me it's probably a little
14
more simple than what DARPA's doing.
15
Eastlund was doing work on HAARP and he was doing other
16
work for DARPA at the time and we had talked about him
17
in our first publication, and then actually after
18
publication became friends, and Ben Eastlund's attitude
19
was, you know, some things just shouldn't be done.
20
one of the things that he had been working on was
21
whether modification technologies, which he was at that
22
time and when we first met, making that technology
23
available to the military.
24
us and others, he decided there's certain technologies
25
that are not safe in the hands of military.
But when Ben
And
And after some dialogue with
Page 158 of 389
30
1
At one point along the course I began doing
quite a bit of work on this whole mind effects issue.
And I caught the attention of a woman, Dorothy Lay.
Now, Dorothy is one of the heirs to the Lay, as in
Frito-Lay and PepsiCo Corporation.
family.
specifically as it applied to victims.
So a very wealthy
Dorothy was very interested in this technology
And so she approached me at one point and asked
if I would become a member of her board of directors for
10
a non-profit that she was setting up to deal with these
11
kinds of technologies.
12
whether I should tell you the rest of this story, and I
13
think I will, because why not?
14
And I've got to think about
So I have this thing, intuition.
All of us
15
have it.
16
do today.
17
listen, because when I really think about it, it's never
18
been wrong.
19
about it.
20
start acting on it.
21
I used to not pay as much attention to it as I

When my intuition tells me something, I
Neither has yours, if you really think

Or maybe you don't think about it and just
So my intuition said -- and this was a very
22
difficult time for me in 2002.
23
betrayed by a very good friend, economically was
24
bankrupt in the middle of this work, because I started
25
this work in '94.
In 2002, I had been
Economically was being crushed.
Page 159 of 389
And
31
1
at that point I was deciding whether I was going to stay
in this work at all.
And I'm going through a bunch of my files and I
see this file and it's marked Lay.
person had contacted us needing some information and we
provided it.
way we operated is, I sold books.
bought my books.
And I remember this
And we never charge for that.
I mean, the
And people like you
And they allowed me to do this work.
I didn't write for grants where somebody could
10
manipulate me and control me and tell me what to say.
11
didn't go out and find some publisher that would edit
12
out my work.
13
book.
14
that work by buying that book.
15
two and a half million dollars and I spent that two and
16
a half million dollars over 20 years doing what I'm
17
doing right now.
I risked my own money.
I published my
And then I asked people to help me by supporting
18
A VOICE:
19
(Applause.)
20
DR. BEGICH:
And I tell you, I made
Thank you.
And the whole idea was just to
21
educate.
22
reason I didn't was because I felt that that was putting
23
the cart before the horse.
24
people that the technology is real, that this could
25
really happen to people and from that foundation, and
I didn't deal with victims.
Okay.
And the
We first need to educate
Page 160 of 389
32
1
that became the foundation of my work in this.
So Dorothy calls me on the phone and she says,
will you be on my board?
an hour.
on your board.
And I talked to her for about
At the end of the hour, I said, no, I can't be
She said, well, why not?
I said, because my intuition is telling me I
really can't be on your board.
And she goes, well, I deserve more than that.
10
I said, okay.
I don't know your board members,
11
I don't know who your board is, but something in here is
12
saying there's a problem there and I don't want to be
13
associated with them.
14
(Applause.)
15
DR. BEGICH:
16
I got the call back.
17
you have millions.
18
what they say they're doing.
19
being done and find out for yourself.
20
diligence again.
21
So it was a couple of months later

Because I told her also, I said,
You have the ability.
And she did.
Go see if it's really
back and she said, you were right.
23
me a number of ways.
24
just me now and my attorney.
Do your due
A couple months later she came
22
25
Go research
They were defrauding
I've cleared out my board.
It's
Will you be on my board?
Now, bear in mind, I'm in a pretty desperate
Page 161 of 389
33
1
situation economically.
At the time I have five
children at home.
have an economy that I've got to manage.
Dorothy, no, I can't be on your board.
I've got people to take care of.

And I tell
She says, well, why not?
I said, well, I need to meet you first in
person, eyeball to eyeball.
for three days.
foundation.
I said, we're going to talk
We're not going to talk about your
I want to know everything I'm ever going to
10
read about you and your family in the newspaper.
11
you to have the same knowledge level of me.
12
to know what your world view is before I join with you
13
in achieving that world view, because you have the means
14
and I have the willingness if that world view is shared.
15
So we spent a few days.
I want
And I want
We decided that I
16
could do this.
17
And we put together, as her major effort was, a
18
conference on mind effects.
19
public.
20
bring some key people together to have a conversation
21
that would be open and free.
22
And for four years I worked with her.
But it wasn't open to the
It was closed to the public.
And it was to
And one of those people I invited was Ben
23
Eastlund, who by then I'd gotten to know, had watched
24
what he had done in terms of his career.
25
connected with DARPA at the time.
Page 162 of 389
He was well
34
1
And I called him and I said, you know, Ben,
would you consider participating in this conference?
And he said, you know, if you had asked me this
seven or eight years ago, on a scale of one to ten, ten
being the relevance and importance of this, and one
being irrelevant and unimportant, I would have given
this a one or a two.
time I talk to Tony Tether or others at DARPA, nobody's
laughing about mind control anymore and it's a nine or a
10
He goes, but -- he goes, every
ten and, yes, I'll participate in your conference.
11
The next person I asked was Garth Nicolson.
12
Does that name ring any bells for anybody?
13
Nicolson was a full professor, I believe it was Texas
14
A&M.
15
thousand medical students.
16
whistle on Gulf War Syndrome and testified in our
17
Congress six times before his wife was fired as a
18
molecular biologist from Texas A&M.
19
they couldn't fire him.
20
him, because he was one of the first courageously enough
21
to step up to the plate and complain about what had been
22
happening in the Gulf War; we depleted uranium and some
23
of the other technologies that were being applied there.
He taught medical students.
24
25
Okay.
Garth
He taught over a
He was the guy that blew the
And he was tenured;
But they definitely harassed
Well, the best thing that ever happened to him

was he got out of the university system.
Page 163 of 389
He formed a
35
1
nonprofit to deal with chronic disease.
somebody that I watched maintain his course under really
difficult circumstances.
conference.
And he was
So he was invited to that
I invited the daughter of my mentor, Raul
Makayla.
one of the boards in Russia that regulates medical
applications of lasers.
Quite brilliant.
10
She's an electrophysiologist.
She serves on
She's an electrophysiologist.
We invited her.
We invited Rosalie Bertell.
11
remember Rosalie Bertell?
12
passed.
13
physicist, biologist.
14
doctoral students at Berkeley.
15
It's kind of an odd combination.
16
statistician to go in to Bhopal for the World Health
17
Organization after that huge chemical disaster.
18
was considered one of the top people in the world for
19
dealing with victims of radiological experiments,
20
including electromagnetic radiation.
21
some of our work and added to it and published a book on
22
the HAARP system and its effect on human beings on this
23
sort of broad scale.
24
been through some really difficult times as well, rose
25
out of her own ashes and maintained her ethical
Okay.
Does anyone
Also deceased now.
A few.
Rosalie's
She was a mathematician,
She taught higher mathematics to

She was also a nun.
She was the lead
But she
She actually took
So we had invited Rosalie, who had
Page 164 of 389
36
1
platform.
The other person we invited was Alexander
Kaivarainen.
Does anybody recognize that name?
He was
the former head of the USSR Academy of Science
Biophysics Department for ten years.
area that really gets into the meat of what we're
talking about here today.
believe, is deceased now also.
guys, you know, they're a lot older than me and they
And this is the
Now, what got -- Alex, I

You know, all these
10
keep dying of old age.
11
science at a young age watching a demonstration of the
12
paranormal, ESP, telepathy, these kinds of things in
13
Russia when he was a teenager.
14
caught his interest.
15
But Alex got his stimulation in
And it just really
When I met Alex, he was in his 60s and he was
16
the brightest top five physicists on the planet,
17
recognized by institutions around the world.
18
he had determined is that there were rational reasons
19
for why these things manifested.
20
this conference and actually presented a paper giving
21
the mathematics and the physics that lends itself to
22
these extrasensory possibilities, these things that the
23
military now calls anomalous human capabilities.
24
used to call it extrasensory perception or ESP, but now
25
they give it a new name because there's a lot of
Page 165 of 389
And what
So he was invited to
We
37
1
connotations with that that kind of get you discredited
in certain segments of the scientific community.
So I want to talk -- roll back again a little
bit -- I want to talk about binaural beat, which I had
mentioned earlier in this presentation.
around a little bit.
not even use these things, but I think people feel more
comfortable using them.
And I jump
It's kind of my style.
The binaural beat.
I used to
We can't hear these really,
10
really low frequency signals, because the human ear
11
doesn't quite work that way.
12
the human ear won't hear.
Below a certain frequency,
13
Now, a gentleman by the name of Robert Monroe
14
developed a method using binaural beat where you could
15
send in a signal within the range of human hearing, say,
16
at 15,000 Hertz or pulses per second or cycles per
17
second, coming in one ear at, say, 15,000, another
18
signal coming in the other ear at, say, 15,007.
19
the cranium they will cancel each other out and leave a
20
beat frequency of seven, the difference between the two.
21
15,000, 15,007.
22
seven pulses per second, which happens to be in the
23
upper Theta range, and this is where the brain then
24
drives to.
25
Within
The beat frequency becomes seven Hertz,
At the same time that that occurs, you get a
Page 166 of 389
38
1
hemispheric balance, a distribution of energy across
both hemispheres of the brain, the analytical side and
the creative side and working together.
actually how human beings are supposed to function.
This is how young children predominantly function, with
more of a balance between the hemispheres, where the
energy is more balanced.
8
9
This is
And then we educate them.
And with young girls, who we say are more

intuitive and have this other operation of the brain,
10
and young boys are more analytical, and now we kind of
11
treat everybody the same so we kind of dumb them all
12
down to the same level.
13
children and you look at where their brain activity is
14
and between 3 and, say, 5 or 6 years old, they have
15
this predominant brain frequencies or a lot of Theta
16
brain frequencies coming in and then some ELF and then
17
higher frequency ranges.
18
But when you look at young
Now, what is Theta?
Theta states if we're in a
19
Theta state, we're kind of like in that dream-like state
20
between awake and asleep where you're consciously aware
21
of your dreams.
22
good deal of their time.
23
as we call it, are so active.
24
don't pay attention to that, don't pay attention to
25
that.
That's where 3 to 5 year olds spend a

That's why their imaginations,
And we keep saying, oh,
This was our first attempt to shut down the
Page 167 of 389
39
1
intuitive combinations of the way the brain is actually
supposed to work.
In fact, for those who have a Christian
background, you know Jesus Christ himself said, look at
the little children, watch what they do.
think I heard somebody say something about this earlier,
little children come to the table kind of innocent with
a view of the world that's quite different than the rest
of ours.
You know, I
But the brain activity of children is unique
10
and we begin to take that out of them in the structure
11
of the way we educate.
12
So what Robert Monroe -- he was actually a
13
radio engineer.
14
had this really weird experience.
15
body experience, that he had that kind of threw him.
16
You know, it didn't make any sense to him.
17
began -- he also noticed that in the background there
18
was this kind of noise that he perceived.
19
He owned a bunch of radio stations.
He
It's an OBE, an outer
So he
So he began to experiment and he created this
20
technique for binaural beat.
21
series.
22
binaural beat.
23
those US patents from 1994, and this is showing the
24
brain before the activity, before turning on the
25
Hemi-Sync, and this is after, showing a more even
He developed a whole
In fact, he actually got US patents on a

This is an image taken out of one of
Page 168 of 389
40
1
distribution in a more rhythmic pattern in the
brainwaves as you see in the upper right-hand corner.
Let me roll back again so you can kind of see
the comparison.
activities happening all through the brain, and then a
coherent signal creating a hemispheric balance and an
optimization of brain potential.
8
9
Normal brain, kind of disorganized
So what did he do with this?
He developed a
whole series of things; audio input technology,
10
essentially, to manipulate behavior, but where you're in
11
control of that manipulation.
12
smoking, you get his CD on quit smoking.
13
brain in such a way, becomes compelling, very affective.
14
So you want to quit

It affects the
Sleep disorders can be addressed in this way.
15
They have someone be able to relax, meditation,
16
concentration, accelerated learning.
17
things can be done.
18
over the course of many, many, many, many years, and now
19
his daughter doing the work of working with thousands of
20
people to determine which signals actually created which
21
effects and then developing technology that they could
22
place in the hands of individuals to make the choice on
23
how to use it.
24
25
A whole array of
And they did this by working with,
Now, that's kind of an interesting way of

looking at technology.
It was my area of interest, in
Page 169 of 389
41
1
the beginning of all of this work, was not looking for
the dark side of all of this, but in the mid-'80s I got
very interested in light and sound stimulation of the
brain that capitalized on sound signals and flickering
light for brain entrainment.
the brain will follow that external signal or what's
called FFR, frequency following response.
little energy.
Entrain the brain where
So very
Let me roll back to Delgado again.
10
One-fiftieth of the amount of energy the earth creates
11
is sufficient to move your brain into very specific
12
states.
13
just another technique for altering brain activity that
14
might be beneficial, but you're in control of it, not
15
somebody else.
16
Dialing that radio up, if you will.
This is
I'm going to skip some of these just because
17
they're not so relevant.
18
images and let me just go back into the whole dialogue
19
of this, mind effects.
20
And I'm going to close the
When I think about sort of where do we go with
21
this conference, when we put that conference together
22
with the Lay Institute, our purpose was to put together
23
these really good thinkers to try and see if we could
24
create a synergy between them.
25
And when I first got interested in doing
Page 170 of 389
42
1
something actively in science, it wasn't about HAARP and
it wasn't about mind control.
would play -- and I was working in a government office
at the time, and it was -- my friend said, you make your
living with your left foot.
living, but the rest of my creativity could be engaged
elsewhere and me working in bureaucracy was really a bad
match.
The role that I thought I
Because I could make my
But the point was, my youngest son, when I was
10
getting really frustrated with my work, said, change
11
channels.
12
You know, I'm thinking about this, because I
13
had just given him this discussion about creativity was
14
like changing the channels on the TV set, right, and so
15
he's feeding it back, time to change the channels, Dad.
16
So I thought about it.
And what I decided I
17
would do is -- I read independently in science over 20
18
years.
19
say, one guy in one branch of science.
20
if this person could ever meet that person, you could
21
really see something happen.
I had read some really compelling things from,
22
I thought, boy,
And the first paper I actually ever presented
23
in science, I was 19 and it was at another obscure
24
conference that I ended up in on biorhythm research.
25
And my paper was contrasting at that time the Soviet
Page 171 of 389
43
1
method of research versus the US method.
method was compartmentalization, separate.
distill things down to the smallest subspecialty and
then push these people into a corner and let them do
this bit of the research.
other people over here and ten other groups over there
and fifteen groups over there, and somewhere all of this
stuff comes together and it gets really sloppy.
It's sloppy because there's a lot of repetition; it's
10
Now, the US
You know,
And then you've got nine
Okay.
very expensive.
11
Now, the Russians, Soviets at the time, they
12
didn't have the money for that kind of research, to
13
spread it out that way, and they used a very different
14
method.
15
fields, even though they didn't seem like they should
16
connect.
17
together to develop science.
18
at the exposures that we had seen earlier, what are the
19
regulatory exposures of electromagnetic fields, the
20
Russians in the '90s and the '80s were a thousand times
21
more stringent than they were in the US.
22
They took experts from all of these different
They put them in the same room to work
Well, why was it?
That's why when you look
Because they had actually
23
made the observations that we hadn't made and actually
24
connected the dots in a way to say, hey, this is
25
dangerous.
That doesn't mean they followed their own
Page 172 of 389
44
1
regulations, because they probably didn't.
whatever was expeditious there.
recognized the physiological responses to
electromagnetic fields and the fact that you could
manipulate it.
They did
But at least they
What was discovered by a guy named Allan Frey,
he was looking at microwaves, and he discovered that
there's this flickering effect, but it only occurred
when you pulse-modulated the signal.
And if you look
10
at -- I heard earlier, it's always scalars.
11
scalars.
12
fields as we think about them.
13
It's not vectors.
It's always
It's not electromagnetic
But if you look at the ones that affect human
14
psychology and physiology, if you look at those signals,
15
they have a very quick rise time and a very fast drop.
16
They're like the punch, like punching that ionosphere to
17
create the ELF.
18
modulations on these other carriers are meant to trigger
19
that effect by you entraining to that pulse, that
20
firing, or some submodulation being carried on a general
21
carrier.
22
It's like those signals.
Those
Now, if you remember the first Gulf War, the
23
first Bush War, and you remember how the Iraqi Army just
24
sort of gave up.
25
just like school children on their first fire drill
The fourth largest Army in the world
Page 173 of 389
45
1
throwing their hands up and surrendering, you know,
thousands of guys to a few dozen.
Now, I speculated on this.
What was that about?

And then it was
Scottish media that later reported on this and said it
was Project Solo, which was a project operated by the
United States.
flying over the country at the time and it was taking
and piggybacking the signal on the radio broadcast going
into the region that were broadcasting the Muslim music
10
And what we did is we had this C-130
and prayers.
11
So all these guys are in their bunkers
12
listening to their favorite radio station.
Unbeknownst
13
to them, the subsignals being played on that broadcast
14
created anxiety, high levels of anxiety and fear.
15
then you watched this Army just collapse under this.
16
And that was kind of the -- in my view, the
And
17
first test of could you really do this, could you do it
18
in this adversarial environment.
19
And one of my friends joked, hey, it's the
20
perfect Republican weapon, right?
21
hardware in place, but totally wipe out the population.
22
Zbigniew Brzezinski said, in between two ways,
23
it doesn't matter if it's Republicans or Conservatives.
24
They just use different rationale for accomplishing
25
their political ends.
You can keep all the
On the conservative side, the
Page 174 of 389
46
1
Neocon side, it might be the fascination with gadgetry
and new technology, as Zbigniew Brzezinski said, and on
the liberal side it might be the idea that we're doing
this for your own good.
And we've all heard that before.
The government is here, right?
The fact of the matter is, when you start
thinking about mind control technologies as a concept,
the idea that someone believes that they can interfere
with your free will, this is something that most
10
religions in the world say God won't even do.
11
think this is their appropriate direction in technology,
12
to interfere with the way consciousness flows.
13
Yet, men
Now, think about for a moment what are the
14
things that -- what is the easiest way to manipulate
15
consciousness?
16
Create an environment of anxiety and fear.
17
happens at that point is you cannot reach your higher
18
states of consciousness.
19
The easiest way, the simplest way.

Because what
If you look at Monroe, rhythmic patterns in the
20
Hemi-Sync as an example, higher states of consciousness
21
are associated with those rhythmic patterns within the
22
brain; not that incoherent scattering of death and
23
information and energy.
24
25
So if you create a certain environment of fear

and anxiety and you look at an EEG monitor and the brain
Page 175 of 389
47
1
activity of an individual, you see it's kind of
scattered in patterns.
higher emotions; love, compassion.
rhythmic patterns.
One person is experiencing

You begin to see
Another simple way of seeing is something that
you can actually measure.
Take two people that are in
love and they -- you know the saying, and I looked into
her eyes, right?
another individual and hold that gaze, you'll begin to
If you actually gaze into the eyes of
10
mirror each other's brain activity in a pretty unique
11
way.
12
long enough.
Two people's breathing begins to
13
synchronize.
Their energy fields begin to synchronize.
Your breathing will even synchronize if you do it
14
And at the same time, their awareness, their
15
intuitions elevate and their rhythmic patterns in the
16
brain can be seen.
17
fear -- think about the advertising you see on
18
television.
19
breath is, you know?
20
uncomfortable.
21
If you can create an environment of
It's all about how you smell, how your

It's all these things to make you
Think about the 6:00 news.
Now, we heard
22
someone talk about the 6:00 news and how that kind of
23
works.
24
people sit down in front of the television set.
25
already fatigued.
You come home from a hard day at work.
Most
They're
They begin to watch the television.
Page 176 of 389
48
1
And then their spouse hollers, it's time for dinner;
it's time for dinner.
right?
they're in a light trance-like state.
How many of you've been there,
Nobody's listening.
No one's hearing.
Because
Now, if you look in a dark room -- the
television is here -- look behind you at the white wall
and look at the flicker rate.
coherent signal within a certain range through the optic
nerves, your brain will lock onto that signal.
If that flicker rate is a
If you
10
monitor the brain activity at that time, you'll drop
11
into this highly-suggestive state and now you listen to
12
the advertising.
13
Now, every school of psychology teaches
14
frequency following response today and that you can
15
create these kinds of effects.
16
advertising?
17
advertising works so well.
18
convincing and compelling.
19
Would they apply in
Of course they would.
That's why
It works because it's
When you look at the 6:00 news, would somebody
20
utilize that in broadcasting the news of the latest
21
propaganda from whatever source it's coming from?
22
would speculate -- today I would speculate and say yes.
23
When you think about how simple it is to create
24
that agitation.
25
University who published a paper in 1995 talking about
There was a person at Valencia
Page 177 of 389
49
1
this whole concept.
could create a complex signal, broadcast it out over a
large area that just created the sense that something's
not right.
And what he said back then was you
Unease.
And then you go watch the 6:00 news and they
indict some specific ethnic group, maybe it's Muslims,
and then a certain amount of that anger gets diverted
that way.
decided on the laser edge of populations, on majorities,
Well, in a day where a lot of things are
10
this is a very, very powerful tool and one quite simple
11
tool to apply in the modern world.
12
When you think about news feeds today, how much
13
is really investigative reporting and how much of it is
14
just spitting out somebody's press release, right?
15
little investigative reporting today because it's
16
expensive, because it's not immediate, and when you look
17
at the news media today, it's almost immediate and most
18
of it is just meant to entertain.
19
inform.
20
Very
It's not meant to
You know, freedom of the press, it used to have
21
something to do with keeping an informed public so we
22
could make good decisions and we could govern as a
23
public.
24
Say whatever you want, say it however you want, but
25
nobody takes responsibility and we have the neutered
Today we debate the media as freedom of speech.
Page 178 of 389
50
1
neutral news.
come on.
And if you really believe it's neutral,
Everybody who assigns a story to a reporter
knows that reporter's biased.
It comes out in the news and what gets published and
what doesn't.
the news?
up.
But no one has really taken it on as a topic and
10
The editors have bias.
How many stories about mind control hit
Occasionally.
The economists might pick it
Somebody might pick up a little bit, a piece of it.
consistently pursued it.
11
Yet, when you think about modern technology and
12
the resolution -- now, we've been talking about things
13
that have happened in the past, and somebody even
14
mentioned this, MK-ULTRA is a program -- you've heard it
15
alluded to.
16
subprojects under it.
17
That was the CIA's program.
It had 144
Most of the records surrounding that were
18
shredded by a guy named Gottlieb, who was responsible
19
for that at the Central Intelligence Agency during the
20
Church Committee hearings.
21
truth back then.
22
this, has become increasingly refined as our technology
23
has advanced.
24
25
We never really got the
But the resolution, the ability to do
When you think about technological advances,

one of the things I read says that technology from the
Page 179 of 389
51
1
invention of the wheel to where we are today, it doubles
about every nine to ten months.
Invention of the wheel to where we are today, ten months
from now we're going to double that, and then we're
going to keep doing that.
Wow.
Think about it.
It used to be every five years in the 1980s,
and it kept shrinking as our computing power increased
and our ability to manipulate large amounts of data
increased.
10
Now, a super computer, think about a super
11
computer.
12
was doing this work, about 280 teraflops a second, which
13
at that time would be like six billion people on the
14
planet with hand calculators doing a calculation every
15
60 seconds for 60 hours to do what that super computer
16
could do in a second.
17
A super computer will do somewhere, when I
Well, the next evolution -- some think it's
18
already here -- are the quantum computers.
19
the quantum computer do?
20
will do what a super computer does in a trillion years.
21
It's back to this analogy of how much EMF do we have out
22
there.
23
What will
A quantum computer in one hour
Well, think about the same kind of
24
amplification and computing power.
25
as a concept.
You look at privacy
It doesn't exist in the world today,
Page 180 of 389
52
1
right?
Virtually everything about us is catalogued,
tracked, whether it's your GPS on your phone, whether
it's your phone conversations -- in the United States,
every piece of mail is photographed for who it went to
and who sent it.
When you think about your telecommunications,
your Internet connections, Google, AT&T, Verizon, all of
them have violated the very essence of what personal
privacy is all about.
10
Because today, in the 21st Century, we need a
11
revolution, an evolution of what privacy is all about.
12
Because you, experiencing the victimization of this
13
technology, are the pinnacle of the abuse.
14
is subject to abuse of personal privacy.
15
But everyone
You used to think about it, it would start and
16
end in our physical doorway in our home.
17
in your home compared to what is in data banks stored on
18
every single human being in this room.
19
It has nothing
Now, people say, oh, don't worry about it.
20
don't have the ability to collect.
21
resolution to look into it.
22
that resolution.
23
computing first will be able to hack through every
24
security code for every system on the planet within
25
hours.
We
We don't have the
Quantum computers will give
Whichever government finds quantum
They'll be able to predict with so much accuracy
Page 181 of 389
53
1
by collecting all that data and analyzing that data, it
will almost seem a spiritual event.
But it will only be accurate up to a certain
point.
And then there will be a little bit of a flaw.
And over time that flaw will amplify to where it's big
flaws.
guide our world, to guide our ideas, our philosophy, and
how we pursue the world.
But we'll rely increasingly on these systems to
The Internet.
What people think about that is
10
the world wide mind of the 21st Century.
11
Public Broadcasting System, did a special called "The
12
World Wide Mind".
13
I say within 20 years or even now -- maybe it already
14
exists now -- but within 20 years that you'll be able to
15
connect the physical minds of all of the people on the
16
planet in a world wide mind.
17
PBS, our
And they say within 100 years -- and
Now, that might appeal to some.
It doesn't
18
really appeal to me from the standpoint of technology.
19
I think we already have that on a certain level.
20
think we already are connected on a certain level.
21
belief systems limit our ability to access that level,
22
but I believe it's here.
23
I
Our
And I've seen enough demonstrations of it.
You
24
know, all those scientists I had in that room for that
25
mind effects conference, the part that really blew me
Page 182 of 389
54
1
away that I didn't expect was what they really centered
on was the idea -- and this was Rosalie Bertell, the nun
and physicist, and she said that the next leap is going
to be the leap where we realize or we recognize or we
remember our extrasensory perceptions, our anonymous
capabilities as human beings and that becomes the next
evolution of the human kind.
8
9
And what suppresses that is fear and anxiety,

because you cannot reach those cases of consciousness as
10
long as you're in fear and anxiety.
And anyone who
11
purports or is a victim of these technologies, do you
12
have anxiety, do you have fear?
13
you have the ability to reach those higher states of
14
consciousness in that condition?
15
not possible.
Of course you do.
Do
It's physiologically
16
So when you think about entire populations,
17
whether it's religion injecting fear or whether it's
18
government injecting fear or as my friend used to say,
19
you know, the king keeps you poor and the church keeps
20
you dumb, kind of was the early idea when you think
21
about how things evolved in Europe several hundred years
22
ago.
23
When you think about modern technology on the
24
backdrop of that concept, what's changed?
25
changed.
It's just the same deal.
Page 183 of 389
Nothing's
You know, 6,000 wars
55
1
in 4,000 years, most of them over religion; let me give
you a clue, God doesn't need any help killing anybody.
God can probably do it himself or herself.
The fact of the matter is, the idea that people
would just be evil on -- and I think I heard earlier
today that the psychopaths are in the minority.
believe they are.
people, they're out there, but they're not this mass.
Most people do things because they believe they're
I think really evil-to-the-core
10
right, and then they want to impose their rightness on
11
other people.
12
And this is kind of a mistake and then we end
13
up in this conflict between ideas without being fair and
14
recognizing people's right to disagree.
15
said earlier, certain things you can't say in Germany.
16
Certain things you can't say in a movie theater, too.
17
You know, you can't yell fire.
18
sense.
And I heard it
Now, it makes good
You don't want to yell fire in a movie theater.
19
Some would say what we're doing here is yelling
20
fire in a movie theater because we're letting people
21
know what we know, what we've concluded from a good deal
22
of research.
23
You know, my books are written, every page at
24
the bottom of each page are the footnotes.
25
find that distracting.
Some of you
Personally, I want to know where
Page 184 of 389
56
1
the information came from as I'm reading it, not a week
later as I'm contemplating it.
source.
I want to know the
And so in the publications that I've written,
1600 source documents, reviews out of a matrix of a
hundred thousand that we had available to us, more or
less.
have made it into four books on technology dealing with
mind effects, dealing with HAARP, dealing with personal
20,000 have made it into my archives and 1600
10
privacy issues.
11
the last four years.
12
A lot of the things go unreleased in
You can look at my publications from 1999 and
13
2000, and you'll see the same things, because the old
14
literature showed enough to come to those conclusions.
15
When I testified in the European Parliament in
16
the '90s, at their invitation -- and this was another --
17
a good side story for technology.
18
name of Thomas Spencer, he was from the UK, he was a
19
Parliamentarian at the time, and he was the Chairman of
20
the Environmental Subcommittee of the European
21
Parliament.
22
given him the book on HAARP and he was very interested
23
in this.
24
I flew to Brussels and spent a few days with him talking
25
about the issue and brought with me a couple feet of
A gentleman by the
And he had contacted me.
So we had a conversation.
Page 185 of 389
Somebody had
And at my expense,
57
1
unclassified documents for his research team to take a
look at.
What happened then is he moved in the European
Parliament -- he was a Conservative, by the way, and he
moved into a Foreign Affairs Chairman, a very powerful
position, an ideal position for dealing with the things
that we were dealing with at the time.
8
9
So we -- at his invitation, I came over to

testify in front of the group on security and
10
disarmament in the European Parliament on HAARP and on
11
non-lethal weapons, the kinds of things we've been
12
talking about today, the manipulation of human beings.
13
Now, they do it a lot differently than we do it
14
in the US.
In the US, when you have public hearings,
15
the public actually gets to come.
16
Parliament, the public meeting is you have to have an
17
invitation to come.
18
know, I hadn't really thought much about that.
In the European
So that's kind of different.
You
19
And they also -- they can also do things behind
20
closed doors, which, you know, we theoretically can't do
21
in the United States.
22
the public invited or the media invited.
23
You can't have a meeting without
So what happened the night before the hearing
24
is the Committee met with myself, one of the other
25
people testifying, and a member of the press and we
Page 186 of 389
58
1
spent five and a half hours in a non-official meeting to
talk about these issues, so that when we actually gave
our testimony the following day, they would have
formulated a set of questions to give us the opportunity
to follow along.
because then they at least had a good base of knowledge.
So it was a great way to do it,
Now, in that private meeting we demonstrated a
technology using infrasound where you could transfer
sound through electrodes attached to the skin where you
10
would perceive that proverbial voice in the head.
11
demonstrated that to the Parliamentarians in that closed
12
session.
13
We
And then we went into the hearing the following
14
day.
And it was Rosalie Bertell, which is where I met
15
her, testifying on our side.
16
the gentleman's name, but he was from a group called
17
GRIP in Brussels that does research on weapon systems
18
particularly and he had done his Master's thesis on
19
HAARP, and so he was there.
20
It was -- I can't remember
We had someone from the International Red Cross
21
that had done work on non-lethal weapons and was a
22
specialist in this particular area.
23
there.
24
25
And then I was
We each got 15 minutes to present.
And then I
got an hour of questions from the committee in the open
Page 187 of 389
59
1
hearing where I had the opportunity to talk about some
of these things.
been this incident in Japan where children watching a
cartoon that had a certain flicker rate had caused over
700 children to go to the hospital with epileptic
seizures.
a problem, right?
to go into the hospital.
And right around that time there had
Now, remember, non-ionizing radiation is not

A flicker of the TV caused 700 kids
Now, some say that was by design.
Some say
10
that was by accident.
11
for talking about non-ionizing radiation in the European
12
Parliament because they had all read that story.
13
fresh.
14
But it was a perfect illustration
It was
The other thing demonstrating infrasound,
15
something that had never been demonstrated, to my
16
knowledge, in that type of a meeting, to show that you
17
could actually transfer sound without necessarily
18
involving the ears.
19
Now, there's another technology that was
20
advanced by a guy named Woody Norris -- he won the
21
Lemelson Prize at MIT for this particular technology,
22
and I believe the year was 2004.
23
Norris -- and his was using acoustic heterodyne where he
24
could send in two signals from two different sources,
25
point them at an individual in the crowd, and they would
Page 188 of 389
You can look up Woody
60
1
hear this voice in their head and nobody else would hear
it.
Well, he won a half a million dollars for that
prize, organized a company called ATCO.
them up.
technology to the military for perimeter protection.
You know, where they could have these sort of alarm
systems so when the protestors got too close they'd hear
these warning signs that nobody else was hearing.
They're a public company.
10
You can look
And he sold that
Now, you think about that for a moment.
11
Imagine -- this is why the European Parliament got
12
interested, because we used this illustration.
13
imagine a national leader standing up in front of a
14
group and all of a sudden they hear voices in their head
15
that nobody else hears.
16
right?
17
what that technology can do.
18
demonstration.
That's the end of that guy,
I mean, he's out of there.
19
Now,
And that's exactly
And that was one
Now, some have said that you can pulse modulate
20
on a single beam and create the same effect or utilize
21
something like HAARP, not so much for voice in the head,
22
but for certainly changing emotional state of large
23
segments of the population.
24
25
When we looked at all of this, we even looked

back -- you know, where else could this have been used?
Page 189 of 389
61
1
And there was a device in Vietnam called the Lida
machine, L-i-d-a.
named Ross Adey, who is, unfortunately, also deceased.
Ross Adey was brilliant and was utilized by the
government, by private sector as an expert in these
kinds of areas.
A guy who researched this was a guy
Well, he was asked to look at -- this
particular device had been captured during the Vietnam
War.
It was a Russian device.
And it created the
10
entrainment effect using flickering light and sound.
11
And they used it for interrogating prisoners by putting
12
them into that, like, trance-like state and then
13
extracting intelligence from them.
14
1960s.
Now, that's the
Again, this is low resolution, low technology.
15
As computing powers increased, as our knowledge
16
in human physiology has increased, as our knowledge of
17
the electromagnetic nature of human beings has
18
increased, the ability to manipulate large segments of
19
the population comes easily achieved, either as a side
20
effect or unfortunate disaster of our technology.
21
You mentioned Swiss Re, Swiss Re Insurance.
22
Swiss Re Insurance wrote a paper on Electrosmog.
23
believe it was 2002.
24
industry then, don't insure electromagnetic field
25
effects because it will result in a bigger lawsuit than
And they said to the insurance
Page 190 of 389
62
1
Firestone on their tires or the smoking industry,
because the knowledge is here and now and nobody insures
that risk.
Lloyd's of London insures anything, but they
won't insure that risk.
Nobody does.
Because insurance
companies don't like to lose money.
that.
before cell phones were invented, the University of
Washington had investigated those very same frequencies
It's as simple as
And yet the telecom industry on cell phones --
10
on chick embryo studies and determined they were
11
harmful.
12
Cell phones didn't exist then.

Then cell phones come out and everything's safe
13
all of a sudden.
14
says, now, wait a minute, we did all this research.
15
This is a dangerous thing.
16
a powerful adversary.
17
That same guy that did that research
But the telecom industry is
So it went to the Congress.
18
There was a guy in Florida.
19
controversy.
20
said, we need a study.
21
pay for the study.
22
study.
23
You remember this.
Brain cancer.
It ended up in the Congress.
Big
Congress
So the industry says, oh, we'll
They spend 25 million dollars on the
I can't remember the guy's name who did it, but
24
he eventually published a book because his findings
25
were, hey, this is dangerous.
Page 191 of 389
All right.
He issues his
63
1
report.
they got the 25 million into his queue.
it all on these projects.
himself.
5
6
They figured, hey, they got him.
You know,
He got to spend
He got to make some money
Hey, he's our man.

Well, he wasn't.
This guy actually had some
integrity, and I apologize for not recalling his name.
A VOICE:
DR. BEGICH:
A VOICE:
10
George Carlo.
Which one is it?
George Carlo.
DR. BEGICH:
George Carlo, that's correct.
And
11
he wrote a book called, "Cell Phones", a very important
12
book.
13
And when it comes to children, one of his
14
observations was -- he had the simple observation of
15
damage to skulls.
16
five-year-old, 400 percent more energy transfers to the
17
skull into the brain than an adult.
18
twelve-year-old, approximately 200 percent.
19
You know, you have a four-year-old, a
Ten-year-old,
This is one of the main reasons why you don't
20
want children using cell phones or, even worse, the
21
portable phone in the home because it's even less
22
efficient with the battery and the energy with even more
23
leakage.
24
phone today where you actually pick it up and talk into
25
it.
And what do we do?
Try and find a hard line
You can't even find them anymore.
Page 192 of 389
They're almost
64
1
impossible to find.
When you look at what we have learned about
human physiology and the effects of electromagnetic
fields on the human physiology, it is the revolution in
science that will collapse the pharmacuetical industry
one day.
recognize that the pea in the soup of electromagnetic
radiation has been the cause and the root to most of the
chronic disease we see on the planet today.
10
And one day we're going to wake up and
When you combine that with that concept that I
11
used, that example of iodine, everyone has a little bit,
12
now you have these complex interactions, 5,000 new
13
chemicals are introduced or compounds introduced to the
14
public every year without really any serious studies,
15
and then you add this on top of it, and now you have a
16
very toxic world.
17
manipulation from the propaganda of World War II to the
18
downloading of that.
19
achieve?
20
personnel with a download.
Blap.
21
years' worth of education.
Now, let's go on.
22
And then you take the technology of
What does the military hope to
They want to be able to train military
And now here's the thing.
23
kind of education.
24
programming.
25
thinking involved.
There's your 12
Think about that
No critical thinking involved.
It's like writing to a disk.

Who controls that?
Page 193 of 389
Just
No critical
Curriculum
65
1
controls the way in which our society goes.
risk.
This is the
What about evidence in courtrooms when you can
create a synthetic memory or wipe one out?
that do to a Democratic Republic or a Democracy where
people have the power?
us as we become increasingly transparent to governmental
agencies and they become increasingly opaque.
What does
That power has been taken from
It is the opposite of what should be occurring.
10
There shouldn't be a camera in every household.
There
11
should be a camera in every government office.
12
the technology's there.
13
and look at what our employees are doing, right?
14
Wouldn't you like to be able to dial up your
15
Congressional office and see that conversation they're
16
having in real time?
17
that?
Because
We should be able to dial in
And why shouldn't we be able to do
What do they have to hide?
18
You know, you think about government and you
19
start saying that and, you know, the only people
20
protected from that kind of intrusion in the US are
21
federal employees.
22
protection than the average citizen within the country
23
that I live in.
24
25
They have a higher level of
For what?
And when you think about government, everyone

points to the politician.
I can tell you, most
Page 194 of 389
66
1
politicians are ignorant.
parties in the United States the preference is to have
people that are -- they look like the news announcer,
but they couldn't think their way out of a phone booth,
right?
they couldn't think their way out of one.
want people that are smart enough to look good, but not
smart enough to think on their own.
politician for political parties, because they can be
10
In fact, most political
We don't even have a phone booth anymore, but

Because they
That's the ideal
told what to do.
11
Look at how much money is being spent in
12
political outcomes.
Huge amounts of money.
Some people
13
have pointed and looked at, like, Australia to mandatory
14
voting.
Everybody votes now.
15
Worst possible thing that you could ever do.
16
And here's why:
17
pulls the lever?
18
maybe 20 percent of the population votes, but at least
19
they're informed.
20
When the population doesn't vote, who

Those that are informed, right?
So
They've educated themselves.
If you force people to vote to keep their
21
driver's license, their medical benefits, or whatever
22
social programs you've got running and you say, you will
23
vote, now who decides what they vote on?
24
buy the 30-second or one-minute ad on TV that influences
25
them.
Whoever can
The moment they walk into the booth, they go, ah,
Page 195 of 389
67
1
and pull the lever.
A very dangerous situation.
Now we have a dangerous situation.
Democracy is something that each of us have to
claim internally.
The change that people are looking
for in this group happens by a change in consciousness,
by us recognizing what we are as human beings,
recognizing the potential that we have.
know what these government programs yielded?
points to the fear side of the equation.
Because you
Everybody
But what they
10
really discovered was that every single soul, every
11
human being has this anomalous capability.
12
Now, imagine if we could awaken those
13
capabilities, could you hide anything?
14
people could literally look into the mind of another
15
person, that makes a politician pretty vulnerable,
16
wouldn't it?
17
I mean, if
That is the next evolution that I believe is
18
happening and it's the only evolution, the only
19
revolution that can change the way things are.
20
starts with human consciousness.
21
believe to be right and true and beginning to act on it.
22
Not from a foundation of fear, but a foundation of
23
confidence.
24
25
It
It starts with what we
You know, somebody asked me once, what do you

think about faith?
I said, faith is what you know to be
Page 196 of 389
68
1
right and true and you step into it on the idea that you
can achieve it.
You believe it.
So many people I've seen in this work, they
keep jumping into things beyond their belief.
don't believe they can achieve it.
and they fail, and they keep failing.
are doing good work otherwise step back, do what you can
do with confidence, do what you can do with knowledge,
don't wait for a group to form.
They try it anyway

And people who
The group's already
10
here.
It's called the human race.
11
to be right and true.
12
up, learn from it, and move forward.
13
They
Act on what you know
If you make a mistake, clean it
When you look across this room and you look at
14
all these folks with a little bit of gray hair, and
15
you've got the gray hair not by all of those great
16
things that happened in your life, but by the real
17
disasters that happened in your life.
18
think about bad news is a stimulation for good news.
19
You know, you
People ask me, you know your father's
20
disappearance, disappeared off the face of the earth,
21
that must have been a horrible thing.
22
the time.
23
life because it altered my course.
24
25
Yeah, it was at
I consider it the most important event in my
The worst things in our lives alter our course,

change our direction, activate that higher potential
Page 197 of 389
69
1
that cause us to rise out of the ashes of our apathy and
our defeats and stand on our feet again and move
forward.
The pain that people experience today is the
catalyst for the solutions tomorrow, whether we like it
or not, whether it's falling down as a two-year-old or
standing up as an adult.
our ethics, on the basis of our values, and we
reinvigorate and let go of the fear and recognize what
If we stand up on the basis of
10
we are as creative beings, we have the potential to make
11
change.
12
And with that, I'll open it to questions.
13
(Applause.)
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 198 of 389
CHAPTER
DIVIDER
Page 199 of 389
vaphblueblog
sugestion and conversation blog in middle tennessee or all over the us ect
Friday, December 7, 2007

darpa arm of the dod might want to read this is the goverment research agency the mad
scientist of the department of defence also known as
DARPA Military
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
Agency overview
Formed 1958
Employees 240
Annual Budget $3.2 billion
Agency Executive Anthony J. Tether, Director
Website
www.darpa.mil
The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is an agency of the United States Department of
Defense responsible for the development of new technology for use by the military. DARPA has been
responsible for funding the development of many technologies which have had a major impact on the world,
including computer networking, as well as NLS, which was both the first hypertext system, and an important
precursor to the contemporary ubiquitous graphical user interface.
Its original name was simply Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA), but it was renamed DARPA (for
Defense) on March 23, 1972, then back to ARPA on February 22, 1993, and then back to DARPA again on
March 11, 1996.
DARPA was established in 1958 in response to the Soviet launching of Sputnik in 1957, with the mission of
keeping the USA military technology ahead of its enemies. From DARPA's own introduction[1]:
DARPAs original mission, established in 1958, was to prevent technological surprise like the launch of
Sputnik, which signaled that the Soviets had beaten the U.S. into space. The mission statement has evolved over
time. Today, DARPAs mission is still to prevent technological surprise to the US, but also to create
technological surprise for our enemies.
DARPA is independent from other more conventional military R&D and reports directly to senior Department
of Defense management. DARPA has around 240 personnel (about 140 technical) directly managing a $3.2
billion budget. These figures are "on average" since DARPA focuses on short-term (two to four-year) projects
run by small, purpose-built teams.
Contents
[hide]
* 1 DARPA's mission
* 2 History
* 3 Current organization
* 4 ARPA and DARPA in fiction
Page 200 of 389
* 5 See also
* 6 References
* 7 External links
[edit] DARPA's mission
Again from DARPA's own introduction[1]:
DARPA is a Defense Agency with a unique role within DoD. DARPA is not tied to a specific operational
mission: DARPA supplies technological options for the entire Department, and is designed to be the
technological engine for transforming DoD.
Near-term needs and requirements generally drive the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force to focus on
those needs at the expense of major change. Consequently, a large organization like DoD needs a place like
DARPA whose only charter is radical innovation.
DARPA looks beyond todays known needs and requirements. As military historian John Chambers noted,
None of the most important weapons transforming warfare in the 20th century the airplane, tank, radar, jet
engine, helicopter, electronic computer, not even the atomic bomb owed its initial development to a doctrinal
requirement or request of the military.[2] None of them. And to this list, DARPA would add unmanned
systems, Global Positioning System (GPS) and Internet technologies.
DARPAs approach is to imagine what capabilities a military commander might want in the future and
accelerate those capabilities into being through technology demonstrations. These not only provide options to
the commander, but also change minds about what is technologically possible today.
[edit] History
DARPA was created as the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA), by Public Law 85-325 and
Department of Defense Directive 5105.41, in February 1958. Its creation was directly attributed to the
launching of Sputnik and to U.S. realization that the Soviet Union had developed the capacity to rapidly exploit
military technology. Additionally, the political and defense communities recognized the need for a high-level
Department of Defense organization to formulate and execute R&D projects that would expand the frontiers of
technology beyond the immediate and specific requirements of the Military Services and their laboratories. In
pursuit of this mission, DARPA has developed and transferred technology programs encompassing a wide
range of scientific disciplines which address the full spectrum of national security needs.
From 1958-1965, ARPA's emphasis centered on major national issues, including space, ballistic missile
defense, and nuclear test detection. In 1960, all of its civilian space programs were transferred to the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the military space programs to the individual Services. This
allowed DARPA to concentrate its efforts on the DEFENDER (defense against ballistic missiles), Project Vela
(nuclear test detection), and AGILE (counterinsurgency R&D) Programs, and to begin work on computer
processing, behavioral sciences, and materials sciences. The DEFENDER and AGILE Programs formed the
foundation of DARPA sensor, surveillance, and directed energy R&D, particularly in the study of radars,
infrared sensing, and x-ray/gamma ray detection.
In the late 1960s, with the transfer of these mature programs to the Services, ARPA redefined its role and
concentrated on a diverse set of relatively small, essentially exploratory research programs. The Agency was
renamed the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in 1972, and in the early 1970s, it
emphasized direct energy programs, information processing, and tactical technologies.
In the area of information processing, DARPA made great strides, initially through its support of the
Page 201 of 389
development of time-sharing (all modern operating systems rely on concepts invented for the Multics system,
developed by a cooperation between Bell Labs, General Electric and MIT, which DARPA supported by funding
Project MAC at MIT with an initial two-million-dollar grant), and later through the evolution of the ARPANET
(the first wide-area packet switching network), Packet Radio Network, Packet Satellite Network and ultimately,
the Internet and research in the artificial intelligence (AI) fields of speech recognition and signal processing.
DARPA also funded the development of the Douglas Engelbart's NLS computer system and the Aspen Movie
Map, which was probably the first hypermedia system and an important precursor of virtual reality.
The controversial Mansfield Amendment of 1973 expressly limited appropriations for defense research (through
ARPA/DARPA) to projects with direct military application. Some contend that the amendment devastated
American science, since ARPA/DARPA was a major funding source for basic science projects at the time; the
National Science Foundation never took up the slack as expected. But the resulting brain drain is also credited
with boosting the development of the fledgling personal computer industry. Many young computer scientists
fled from the universities to startups and private research labs like Xerox PARC.
From 1976-1981, DARPA's major thrusts were dominated by air, land, sea, and space technology, such as
follow-on forces attack with standoff weapons and associated Command, Control, and Communications;
tactical armor and anti-armor programs; infrared sensing for space-based surveillance; high-energy laser
technology for space-based missile defense; antisubmarine warfare; advanced cruise missiles; advanced aircraft;
and defense applications of advanced computing. These large-scale technological program demonstrations were
joined by integrated circuit research, which resulted in submicrometre electronic technology and electron
devices that evolved into the Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI) Program and the Congressionally mandated
charged particle beam program. Many of the successful programs were transitioned to the Services, such as the
foundation technologies in automatic target recognition, space based sensing, propulsion, and materials that
were transferred to the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization (SDIO), later known as the Ballistic Missile
Defense Organization (BMDO), now titled the Missile Defense Agency (MDA).
During the 1980s, the attention of the Agency was centered on information processing and aircraft-related
programs, including the National Aerospace Plane (NASP) or Hypersonic Research Program. The Strategic
Computing Program enabled DARPA to exploit advanced processing and networking technologies and to
rebuild and strengthen relationships with universities after the Vietnam War. In addition, DARPA began to
pursue new concepts for small, lightweight satellites (LIGHTSAT) and directed new programs regarding
defense manufacturing, submarine technology, and armor/anti-armor.
[edit] Current organization
DARPA has eight program offices, all of which report to DARPA director Dr. Anthony J. Tether. (Note that as
of July 2006 SPO and ATO have been merged into a single Strategic Technology Office (STO) that
complements the Tactical Technology Office (TTO) as one of the two "systems" offices.)
1. The Advanced Technology Office (ATO) researches, demonstrates, and develops high payoff projects in
maritime, communications, special operations, command and control, and information assurance and
survivability mission areas.
2. The Defense Sciences Office (DSO) vigorously pursues the most promising technologies within a broad
spectrum of the science and engineering research communities and develops those technologies into important,
radically new military capabilities.
3. The Information Processing Technology Office (IPTO) focuses on inventing the networking, computing, and
software technologies vital to ensuring DOD military superiority.
4. The Information Exploitation Office (IXO) develops sensor and information system technology and systems
with application to battle space awareness, targeting, command and control, and the supporting infrastructure
required to address land-based threats in a dynamic, closed-loop process. IXO leverages ongoing DARPA
efforts in sensors, sensor exploitation, information management, and command and control, and addresses
Page 202 of 389
systemic challenges associated with performing surface target interdiction in environments that require very
high combat identification confidence and an associated low likelihood for inadvertent collateral damage.
5. The Microsystems Technology Office (MTO) mission focuses on the heterogeneous microchip-scale
integration of electronics, photonics, and microelectromechanical systems (MEMS). Their high risk/high payoff
technology is aimed at solving the national level problems of protection from biological, chemical and
information attack and to provide operational dominance for mobile distributed command and control,
combined manned/unmanned warfare, and dynamic, adaptive military planning and execution.
6. The Special Projects Office (SPO) researches, develops, demonstrates, and transitions technologies focused
on addressing present and emerging national challenges. SPO investments range from the development of
enabling technologies to the demonstration of large prototype systems. SPO is developing technologies to
counter the emerging threat of underground facilities used for purposes ranging from command-and-control, to
weapons storage and staging, to the manufacture of weapons of mass destruction. SPO is also developing
significantly more cost-effective ways to counter proliferated, inexpensive cruise missiles, UAVs, and other
platforms used for weapon delivery, jamming, and surveillance. SPO is investing in novel space technologies
across the spectrum of space control applications including rapid access, space situational awareness,
counterspace, and persistent tactical grade sensing approaches including extremely large space apertures and
structures.
7. The Tactical Technology Office (TTO) engages in high-risk, high-payoff advanced military research,
emphasizing the "system" and "subsystem" approach to the development of aeronautic, space, and land systems
as well as embedded processors and control systems.
Tether refers to DARPA's work as the "far side" of technological research.[3]
[edit] ARPA and DARPA in fiction
ARPA/DARPA is well known as a high-tech government agency, and as such has many appearances in popular
fiction. Appearances can be classed into three forms. The first are more or less realistic references. Second are
references that attribute to ARPA an operational or political role, in addition to its high-tech responsibilities.
Finally are those that want a realistic government reference, but are not DARPA specific - any other agency
would do as well. These are numerous and not particularly notable.
Realistic references:
* The earliest mention of ARPA in fiction may well be in Tom Swift and the Visitor from Planet X[4],
published in 1961. A DARPA scientist is among those convened to help assess, and try to counter, an
unexpected technical threat to national security.
* DARPA and ARPA are brought into context in episodes of The West Wing. In one, a DARPA employee, Dr.
Max Milkman, discusses the difference between the two, and focuses on some of the organization's operations
and projects.
* In Executive Decision a fictitious DARPA project that has developed a plane that can link up with a 747 in
mid-air is used to board the hijacked plane.
References that show an operational or political role that DARPA does not possess, in addition to its real hightech responsibilities:
* DARPA is mentioned in the Matthew Reilly books Temple and Hell Island. In Temple, DARPA plays a role
in creating the super thermonuclear missile, the "Supernova". In Hell Island, DARPA is part of the villains
testing out a "super trooper" experiment.
* In James Rollins' books Sandstorm (2004), Map of Bones (2005) and Black Order (2006) some of the main
characters are part of a fictional organization called Sigma Force, a covert branch of DARPA, tasked with
safeguarding, acquiring, or neutralizing "technologies vital to U.S. security."
Page 203 of 389
[edit] See also

Military of the United States Portal
* Active Projects: Combat Zones That See, High Energy Liquid Laser Area Defense System, WolfPack,
FALCON, DARPA XG, X-37, Switchblade Unmanned Supersonic Bomber, Tissue Regeneration [1], DARPA
Grand Challenge (driverless car competition), System F6 (Fractionated Spacecraft demonstrator)
* Past Projects: AGILE, Aspen Movie Map, ARPANET, Boeing X-45, DAML, DEFENDER, High
Performance Knowledge Bases, History of the Internet, Hypersonic Research Program, LIGHTSAT, Multics,
NLS Computer System, Onion routing, Passive radar, Policy Analysis Market, Project MAC, RQ-1 Predator,
Project Vela, Sea Shadow, Strategic Computing Program, SURAN, Thinking Machines, POSSE
* Offices: Information Awareness Office
* People: Barry Boehm, Vint Cerf, Robert Fano, James Hendler, Bob Taylor, Bob Kahn, JCR Licklider, Robert
Sproull, John Poindexter, Douglas Engelbart, Anthony J. Tether, Anup K. Ghosh
* DARPA Grand Challenge http://www.darpa.mil/grandchallenge -Autonomous Vehicle race
* Category:Research projects
[edit] References
* This article was originally based on material from the Free On-line Dictionary of Computing, which is
licensed under the GFDL.
* Castell, Manuel The Network Society: A Cross-cultural Perspective Edward Elgar Publishing Limited,
Cheltenham UK 2004
1. ^ a b Bridging the Gap
2. ^ John Chambers, ed., The Oxford Companion to American Military History (New York: Oxford University
Press, 1999) p. 791.
3. ^ [DARPA Chief says: failure key to its far side strategy] August 07 2007
4. ^ Victor Appleton II, 1961. Tom Swift and the Visitor from Planet X, originally published by Grosset &
Dunlap of New York, now re-published by Project Gutenberg. ARPA is referred to on page 68.
[edit] External links
* DARPA - DARPA Home Page
* DARPA TransTac speech-to-speech translation project
* DARPA Technology Transition Lengthy presentation of DARPA technology successes
[hide]
vde
Agencies under the United States Department of Defense
Secretary of Defense
Deputy Secretary of Defense
Office of the Secretary of Defense Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee Office of Net Assessment
Pentagon Force Protection Agency Defense Criminal Investigative Service
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Missile Defense Agency Defense Contract Management
Agency Defense Logistics Agency Defense Threat Reduction Agency Office of Economic Adjustment
Defense Acquisition University Business Transformation Agency
Under Secretary of Defense for Policy
Defense Security Cooperation Agency Defense Prisoner of War/Missing Personnel Office
Page 204 of 389
Under Secretary of Defense Comptroller

Defense Contract Audit Agency Defense Finance and Accounting Service
Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness
Defense Commissary Agency Department of Defense Education Activity Department of Defense
Dependents Schools Department of Defense Domestic Dependent Elementary and Secondary Schools DoD
Human Resources Activity TRICARE Management Activity Uniformed Services University of the Health
Sciences Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute Office of the Chancellor for Education and
Professional Development
Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence
Counterintelligence Field Activity Defense Intelligence Agency Defense Security Service Defense
Information Systems Agency National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency National Reconnaissance Office
National Security Agency
Military Departments
United States Army seal Secretary of the Army United States Navy Seal Secretary of the Navy United States
Air Force seal Secretary of the Air Force
United States Army United States Navy United States Air Force United States Marine Corps
Joint Chiefs of Staff
Unified Combatant Command
United States Department of Defense Seal
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA"
Categories: United States Department of Defense agencies | Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
Posted by jvi at 8:45 PM
Labels: darpa dod department of defence
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Newer Post Older Post Home
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
2007 (218)
o December (31)
omaha shooting Gunman's suicide note, images relea...
DARPA seeks network firing ranges for cyber weapon...
darpa arm of the dod might want to read this is th...
personality test link cut and paste
Myers-Briggs Personality Typing - INFJ
Myers-Briggs Personality Typing - INTP
Groups banding together to stem gang violence
Page 205 of 389
DARPA Mission
http://www.darpa.gov/body/mission.html
DARPAs mission is to maintain the technological superiority of

the U.S. military and prevent technological surprise from
harming our national security by sponsoring revolutionary,
high-payoff research that bridges the gap between
fundamental discoveries and their military use.
Below are some documents that provide general information
about DARPA.
DARPA Overview DARPAs Strategic Plan (updated
February 2007) provides an overview of the agency and
its programs.
Statement - Directors statement to the Subcommittee
on Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and Capabilities of
the House Armed Services Committee, 3/21/07.
Transformation and Transition: DARPA's Role in Fostering
an Emerging Revolution in Military Affairs (reprinted with
permission)
Volume I - Overall Assessment (April 2003)
Volume II - Detailed Assessments (Nov. 2003)
Coin Log: List of recipients who have been awarded a
coin by the DARPA Director.
DARPA Over the Years
ARPA - DARPA, the history of the name
DARPA Technology Transition study is available
electronically. Published January 1997, the study
chronicles the process by which DARPA technologies and
concepts have transitioned into military capabilities for
U.S. forces. (1635k .pdf Format)
Last Updated: March 27, 2007
H o m e I Mission and Overview I D A R P A O f f i c e s I E m p l o y m e n t

Opportunities I
Doing Business with DARPA I News ReleasesI Budget Information I
Solicitations

1 of 1Advanced Media Group
Page 206 of 389

Page 1 of 21

9/5/2007
7:23 AM
09/06/2007
http://www.darpa.gov/body/overtheyears.html
When Will I Get Whistlebower
Protections, Mr. President Elect?
The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)

was established in 1958 as the first U.S. response to the
Soviet launching of Sputnik. Since that time DARPA's mission
has been to assure that the U.S. maintains a lead in
applying state-of-the-art technology for military capabilities
and to prevent technological surprise from her adversaries.
The DARPA organization was as unique as its role, reporting
directly to the Secretary of Defense and operating in
coordination with, but completely independent of, the
military research and development (R&D) establishment.
Strong support from the senior DoD management has
always been essential since DARPA was designed to be an
anathema to the conventional military and R&D structure
and, in fact, to be a deliberate counterpoint to traditional
thinking and approaches.
Some of the more important founding characteristics are
listed below. Over the years, DARPA has continued to
adhere to these founding principles:
Small and flexible;
Flat organization;
Substantial autonomy and freedom from bureaucratic
impediments;
Technical staff drawn from world-class scientists and
engineers with representation from industry,
universities, government laboratories and Federally
Funded Research and Development Centers;
Technical staff assigned for 3-5 years and rotated to
assure fresh thinking and perspectives;
Project based -- all efforts typically 3-5 years long
with strong focus on end-goals. Major technological
challenges may be addressed over much longer times
but only as a series of focused steps. The end of each
project is the end. It may be that another project is
started in the same technical area, perhaps with the
same program manager and, to the outside world, this
may be seen as a simple extension. For DARPA,
though, it is a conscious weighing of the current
opportunity and a completely fresh decision. The fact
of prior investment is irrelevant;
Necessary supporting personnel (technical,
contracting, administrative) are "hired" on a temporary

Page 207 of 389

Page 2 of 21

9/5/2007
7:29 AM
09/06/2007
basis to provide complete flexibility to get into and out
of an area without the problems of sustaining the
staff. This is by agreement with Defense or other
governmental organizations (military R&D groups,
National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
National Science Foundation, etc.) and from System
Engineering and Technical Assistance (SETA)
contractors;
Program Managers (the heart of DARPA) are selected
to be technically outstanding and entrepreneurial. The
best DARPA Program Managers have always been
freewheeling zealots in pursuit of their goals;
Management is focused on good stewardship of
taxpayer funds but imposes little else in terms of rules.
Management's job is to enable the Program Managers;
A complete acceptance of failure if the payoff of
success was high enough.
The Agency looks very similar today. The principal
exception is its reporting chain -- whereas initially DARPA
reported to the Secretary and Deputy Secretary, it later
came under the Under Secretary of Defense (Research and
Engineering) (current equivalent is Under Secretary of
Defense (Acquisition and Technology)) and more recently
under the Director for Defense Research and Engineering.
Other than the reporting chain, there have been only minor
changes in approach. Each Director recognized the wisdom
of the agency's historical approach and defended the
organization from outside influences that would constrain
its freedom and flexibility. In addition, the Department of
Defense's senior management, seeing the value of an agile,
forward-looking R&D group unconstrained by conventional
thinking and able to investigate ideas and approaches that
the traditional R&D community finds too outlandish or risky,
has consistently protected the independence of DARPA.
Failure to keep the bureaucracy at bay would have doomed
the value of DARPA and this has been consistently
recognized over the years.
The freedom to act quickly and decisively with high-quality
people has paid handsome dividends for DoD in terms of
revolutionary military capabilities.
Today, DARPA is an organization of 240 personnel
(approximately 140 of which are technical) directly
managing a budget of about $2 billion. A typical technical
project might be structured as follows:
$10-40 million over 4 years;
Single DARPA Program Manager with direct control of
the efforts and the funding;
A SETA contractor or contractors to support the

Page 208 of 389

Page 3 of 21

9/5/2007
7:29 AM
09/06/2007
Program Manager in his or her primary roles of

managing the efforts and representing the program
with Congress, the Office of the Secretary of Defense,
the military Services and/or involved Unified
Commander;
An Agent (furnishing from a fraction of a person to
several people) in a military R&D laboratory to provide
technical and contracting support (paid from program
funds to provide this support);
Five to 10 contractor organizations and two
universities executing tasks focused on a specific
aggregate goal.
Obviously, there are wide variations to this "typical" case.
Some projects are under $1 million and a few are in the
hundreds of millions of dollars. However, the management
paradigm is the same; the variation is in the amount and
type of "hired" assistance. Even in larger programs, the
emphasis is on small teams of the highest quality people.
Regardless of size, a single DARPA Program Manager is in
charge and must manage and represent the project
internally and externally.
DARPA's original operating philosophy has changed over the
years in only three ways -- its relationships with the
commercial marketplace, its business practices, and its
emphasis on joint systems.
First, the DoD has gone from dominating the market in
such areas as microelectronics, computing and network
communications, each of which was driven by DARPA in
past years, to the current situation where the DoD is able
to somewhat influence the directions of a
much-larger-than-DoD market. DARPA has played one of
the key roles in assuring that DoD's long-term interests are
served in this new situation.
Second, in the past decade, DARPA has pioneered
revolutionary R&D business practices reform. With the
support of the Congress and DoD senior management,
DARPA has led the way in adopting commercial practices
and innovative contracting arrangements. Congress
provided the authority for "Other Transactions" and
"Section 845" agreements to DARPA on an experimental
basis, and, because of DARPA's success, has now conveyed
the same authorities to the rest of DoD.
Third, since the Goldwater-Nicholls Act, DARPA has focused
considerable attention on solutions to joint-Service systems
and problems.
In summary, DARPA's ability to adapt rapidly to changing
environments and to seek and embrace opportunities in
both technology and in processes, while maintaining the
historically proven principles of the Agency, makes DARPA

Page 209 of 389

Page 4 of 21

9/5/2007
7:29 AM
09/06/2007
the crown jewel in Defense R&D and a unique R&D
organization in the world.
Last Updated: October 27, 2003
H o m e I Mission and Overview I DARPA Offices I Employment
Opportunities I
Doing Business with DARPA I News Releases I Budget Information I
Solicitations

Page 210 of 389

Page 5 of 21

9/5/2007
7:29 AM
09/06/2007
You may review article at: http://www.defensetech.org/archives/000427.html

HOW THE WAR WAS WIRED | Main | LESS LETHAL OPTIONS FOR
POLICING IRAQ
DARPA WANTS YOUR LIFE INDEXABLE AND SEARCHABLE
It's a memory aid! A robotic assistant! An epidemic detector! An all-seeing,
ultra-intrusive spying program!
The Pentagon is about to embark on a stunningly ambitious research project
designed to gather every conceivable bit of information about a person's life,
index it and make it searchable.
What national security experts and civil libertarians want to know is, why the
hell would the Defense Department want to do such a thing?
The embryonic LifeLog program would take every e-mail you've sent or
received, every picture you've taken, every web page you've surfed, every
phone call you've had, every TV show you've watched, every magazine
you've read, and dump it into a giant database.
All of this -- and more -- would be combined with a GPS transmitter, to keep
tabs on where you're go ing; audio -visual sensors, to capture all that you see
or say; and biomedical monitors, to keep track of your health.
This gigantic amalgamation of personal information could then be used to
"trace the 'threads' of an individual's life," to see exactly how a relationship
or events developed, according to a briefing from the Defense Advanced
Projects Research Agency, LifeLog's sponsor.
Someone with access to the database could "retrieve a specific thread of past
transactions, or recall an experience from a few seconds ago or from many
years earlier by using a search-engine interface."
On the surface, the project seems like the latest in a long line of DARPA's
"blue sky" research efforts, most of which never make it out of the lab. But
Steven Aftergood, a defense analyst with the Federation of American
Scientists, says he is worried.
With its controversial Total Information Awareness database project, DARPA
already is planning on tracking all of an individual's "transactional data" -like what we buy and who gets our e-mail.

Page 211 of 389

Page 6 of 21
09/06/2007
Aftergood said he believes LifeLog could go far beyond that, adding physical
information (like how we feel) and media data (like what we read) to this
transactional data.
"LifeLog has the potential to become something like 'TIA cubed,'" he said.
My Wired News article has details on the LifeLog program.
THERE'S MORE: The idea of committing everything in your life to a machine
is nearly sixty years old. In 1945, Vannevar Bush -- who headed the White
House's Office of Scientific Research and Development during World War II -published a landmark Atlantic Monthly article, "As We May Think." In it, he
describes a "memex" -- a "device in which an individual stores all his books,
records, and communications, and which is mechanized so that it may be
consulted with exceeding speed and flexibility."
Minicomputer visionary Gordon Bell, now working at Microsoft, sees his
"MyLifeBits" project as a fulfillment of Bush's vision.
There are other commercial and academic efforts to weave a life into
followable threads, including parallel processing prophet David Gelernter's
"Scopeware" and "Haystack," from MIT's David Karger.
AND MORE: LifeLog may eventually dwarf Total Information Awareness,
DARPA's ultra-invasive database effort. But "TIA" could wind up being pretty
damn large on its own, with 50 times more data than the Library of
Congress, according to the Associated Press.
AND MORE: Lovers of civil liberties, you now have nothing to fear.
Henceforth, the creepy "Total Information Awareness" program will be known
as "Terrorism Information Awareness."
Feel better?
AND MORE: DARPA's report to Congress on TIA is online here.
May 20, 2003 10:06 AM | Data Diving

Page 212 of 389

Page 7 of 21
09/06/2007
Vannevar Bush
http://www.ibiblio.org/pioneers/bush.html
Internet Pioneers
Vannevar Bush
Vannevar Bush was never
directly involved with the
creation or development of the
Internet. He died before the
creation of the World Wide Web.
Yet many consider Bush to be
the Godfather of our wired age
often making reference to his
1945 essay, "As We May Think."
In his article, Bush described a
theoretical machine he called a
"memex," which was to enhance
human memory by allowing the
user to store and retrieve
documents linked by associations. This associative linking
was very similar to what is known today as hypertext.
Indeed, Ted Nelson who later did pioneering work with
hypertext credited Bush as his main influence (Zachary,
399). Others, such as J.C.R. Licklider and Douglas
Engelbart have also paid homage to Bush.
Bush's innovative idea for automating human memory
was obviously important in the development digital age,
but even more important was his influence on the
institution of science in America. His work to create a
relationship between the government and the scientific
establishment during WWII changed the way scientific
research is carried on in the U.S. and fostered the
environment in which the Internet was later created.
Bush's Early Years
Bush was born on March 11, 1890, in Chelsea,
Massachusetts. He had two sisters. His father was a
Universalist minister. As a child, Bush was sickly and was
occasionally bedridden for long stretches of time. Still, he
was self-confident and sometimes got into fights with
other boys. He once said, "all of [my] recent ancestors
[before my father] were sea captains, and they have a
way of running things without any doubt. So it may have
been partly that, and partly my association with my
grandfather, who was a whaling skipper. That left me
Page 213 of 389

Page 8 of 21

9/5/2007
7:04 PM
09/06/2007
Vannevar Bush
with some inclination to run a show once I was in it."

(Zachary, 23).
Bush did well in school where he showed an aptitude for
math. When he graduated he went off to Tufts College to
study engineering. Half of his
expenses were paid by a
scholarship. He worked as a tutor
and aid in the math department to
pay the other half. Bush studied
earnestly and earned a master's
degree in the time it usually takes to
earn a bachelor's degree. His
academic success fueled his desire
to do things his way not depending
on others' rules. This trait would
become increasingly evident later in his life.
While at Tufts Bush enjoyed his first experience as an
inventor. His invention was a land surveying device he
called the profile tracer. It looked something like a
lawnmower. As it was pushed over land it automatically
calculated elevations and drew a crude map. It allowed
one man to do the work usually done by three. Bush
thought it would be commercially successful, but it never
caught on. He learned from this failure. He learned that to
become a real engineer he needed to learn more than
math and physics. He needed to learn how to effectively
deal with people.
After graduation from Tufts, Bush went to work for
General Electric testing electrical equipment. He was laid
off after a fire broke out in his plant. He then took a
position teaching math at Tufts' sister college-Clark
University in Massachusetts. That was in 1914. The next
year he decided to return to school himself. He was
offered a large fellowship of $1,50o to pursue his
doctorate under a professor named Arthur Webster.
Webster wanted Bush to devote his doctoral work to the
study of acoustics. Bush, who did not care to be told what
to do, declined the fellowship. Instead, he went to MIT
where he earned his doctorate in engineering in less than
a year ad then returned to Tufts as a assistant professor.
World War I
Bush had paid little attention to the war before the U.S.
entered into it in 1917, but then he wanted to aid the
effort. Other scientists also wanted to lend their services,
but the military and government mostly declined their
offers. In 1916, a group of interested scientists formed
Page 214 of 389

Page 9 of 21

9/5/2007
7:04 PM
09/06/2007
Vannevar Bush
the National Research Council (NRC). The council's main

purpose was to produce innovations in weaponry. One of
its main tasks was to improve submarine detection.
Bush had an idea for a device that would use magnetic
fields to detect submarines. In May 1917, he traveled to
Washington to meet with the director of the NRC. The
director liked Bush's idea and thought it was worth
pursuing. Bush convinced the director to let him handle
the research personally without interference. It was
important to Bush that he be in control of his project. His
device proved to be successful in testing, but Navy
officials, who generally viewed Bush as somewhat of a
maverick, did not deploy the device correctly and it
proved virtually useless in combat. Bush again learned
that a successful engineer also had to be a good politician.
Between the Wars
In 1919, Bush left Tufts and went to MIT's electrical
engineering department. By the 1930's Bush was working
on analog computers. These were large mechanical
devices that looked quite different than today's digital
machines. They actually used large gears and other
mechanical parts to solve equations. In 1931, he
completed the first differential analyzer-a machine that
was used to solve differential equations.
Bush's Differential Analyzer
Bush also
worked on
developing
machines
that would
automate
human
thinking.
Specialization in just about every field of academia was

creating a glut of information. Something was needed to
help sort through the growing store of accumulated
knowledge. In the 1930' s microfilm, which had been
around for nearly a century, was growing in popularity as
a storage device, especially among librarians. Bush, a
photography enthusiast, was quite interested in this
resurgent technology. He proposed to build a machine for
the FBI that could review 1,000 fingerprints a minute.
Page 215 of 389

Page 10 of 21

9/5/2007
7:04 PM
09/06/2007
Vannevar Bush
They turned him down. But he continued to pursue his

latest vision.
Bush called his device a rapid selector. It would be
housed in a desk and could store huge amounts of
information on microfilm. The user could rapidly select
documents which would then be projected on screen. In
the late 1930's, Bush oversaw the building of four rapid
selectors. They were plagued with technical problems
and hindered by the state of current technology, but he
was among the very first to attempt to build a personal
information processor, and these early experiences
provided a solid base for his landmark article, "As We
May Think."
In 1937, Bush became the president of the Carnegie

Institution. The institution spent $1.5 million annually on
research. The presidency of the institution came with a
lot of prestige. The president influenced the direction of
research in the U.S. and informally advised the
government on scientific matters.
World War II
The U.S. was not prepared for the second world war.
Little was spent on military research. The military
research that was done was done by military personnel
and often duplicated between the different branches. The
military looked down on engineers as little more than
salesmen. By 1940, Bush and other American scientists
felt that the country needed a new organization to
conduct military research. Scientists and the
government/military, as well as business would need to
cooperate in the event of American involvement in the
Page 216 of 389

Page 11 of 21

9/5/2007
7:04 PM
09/06/2007
Vannevar Bush
war.
On June 12, 1940, Bush met with President Roosevelt
and detailed his plan for mobilizing military research. He
proposed a new organization he called the National
Defense Research Committee (NDRC). The committee
would bring together government, military, business,
and scientific leaders to coordinate military research.
Roosevelt quickly agreed and thus the NDRC was
created. Bush was made chairman and given a direct line
to the White House. In mid-1941, The Office of Scientific
Research and Development was set up. The NDRC had
been funded by presidential emergency funds and was
often short on money. The OSRD was congressionally
funded. The NDRC was subsumed under the OSRD as its
chief operating unit. Bush became director of the OSRD.
The NDRC and then the OSRD were originally set up to
support and augment Army and Navy research, but by
the end of the war the OSRD was leading military
research. Many useful innovations resulted from OSRD
research and development including improvements in
radar, the proximity fuse, anti-submarine tactics, and
various secret devices for the OSS (the precursor of the
CIA). Bush was also very closely involved in the
Manhattan Project which developed the first atomic
bomb. Of course most of OSRD's work was top secret
during the war, but Bush as its leader became something
of a celebrity. Colliers magazine hailed him as the "man
who may win or lose the war" (Ratcliff, 1942).
Bush's work with the NDRC and OSRD definitely helped
the U.S. and its allies win the war. Bush also changed the
way basic scientific research was done in the U.S. He
proved that technology was key to winning a war and this
created a new respect for scientists. He institutionalized
the relationship between government, business, and the
scientific community. Paul Ceruzzi, curator of the
Smithsonian Institutions says, " Bush is responsible for
the whole architecture of government support for
science" (Ceruzzi in Zachary). It was this government
support of research that would later foster the creation of
the Internet.
The War Ends
By late 1944, Allied victory was inevitable. Bush began to
look to the future. He believed that after the war the
nation would still need permanent support for research.
In March 1945, Bush drafted an article entitled,
"Science-The Endless Frontier." He outlined the
Page 217 of 389

Page 12 of 21

9/5/2007
7:04 PM
09/06/2007
Vannevar Bush
importance of continued support for research. He called

for a National Research Foundation that "should develop
and promote a national policy for scientific research and
scientific education, should support basic research in
nonprofit organizations, should develop scientific talent in
American youth by means of scholarships and
fellowships, and should by contract and otherwise
support long -range research on military matters" (Bush,
28). His dreams for were never fully realized, but in 1950
the National Science Foundation (NSF) was created. The
NSF did not quite fulfill Bush's expectations. It was not as
powerful as his proposal called for. Nonetheless, the
marriage between science and government was secured.
"As We May Think"
In 1945, Bush also published an article in the Atlantic
Monthly called, "As We May Think." He had written
earlier drafts of this article years before he actually
published it. His main purpose in writing the article was
to influence "thinking regarding science in the modern
world" and to "emphasize the opportunity for the
application of science in a field which is largely neglected
by science" (Bush in Nyce & Kahn, 81). That field was the
automation or augmentation of human thought.
In the article he describes a theoretical machine called a
"memex." It was an obvious extension of Bush's earlier
work with the rapid selector. The memex was also to be
a storage and retrieval device using microfilm. It would
consist of a desk with viewing screens, a keyboard,
selection buttons and levers, and microfilm storage.
Information stored on the microfilm could be retrieved
rapidly and projected on a screen. The machine was to
extend the powers of human memory and association.
Just as the human mind forms memories through
associations, the user of the memex would be able to
make links between documents. Bush called these
associative trails and offered this example in his article:
"The owner of the memex let us say, is interested in
the origin and properties of the bow and arrow.
Specifically he is studying why the short Turkish bow
was apparently superior to the English long bow in
the skirmishes of the Crusades. He has dozens of
possibly pertinent books and articles in his memex.
First he runs through an encyclopedia, finds an
interesting but sketchy article, leaves it projected.
Next, in a history, he finds another pertinent item, and
ties the two together. Thus he goes, building a trail of
Page 218 of 389

Page 13 of 21

9/5/2007
7:04 PM
09/06/2007
Vannevar Bush
many items. Occasionally he inserts a comment of his

own, either linking it into the main trail or joining it by
a side trail to a particular item. When it becomes
evident that the elastic properties of available materials
had a great deal to do with the bow, he branches off
on a side trail which takes him through textbooks on
elasticity and physical constants. He inserts a page of
longhand analysis of his own. Thus he builds a trail of
his interest through the maze of materials available to
him." (Bush, 15).
This system is remarkably similar to modern hypertext.
In fact, Ted Nelson, who coined the term "hypertext" in
the 1960's, acknowledges his debt to Bush. "Bush was
right," says Nelson (Nelson in Nyce and Kahn, 245).
Vannevar Bush died on June 30, 1974, years before the
Internet became widely popular or the World Wide Web
even existed. With the growing popularity of the Internet
many now look back through its history and see Bush as a
visionary. Even when Bush was alive he seemed to
always be looking toward the future, or perhaps he saw
the present a little differently than most othershe was
fond of saying, "It is earlier than we think" (Zachary,
408).
For Further Reading

Endless Frontier: Vannevar Bush, Engineer of the American
Century
From Memex to Hypertext: Vannevar Bush and the Mind's
Machine
Home| Vannevar Bush | J.C.R. Licklider | Larry Roberts | Paul

Baran |
Bob Metcalfe | Doug Engelbart | Vint Cerf | Ted Nelson | Tim
Berners-Lee |
Marc Andreesen | Epilogue | References |

Page 219 of 389

Page 14 of 21

9/5/2007
7:04 PM
09/06/2007
Information Exploitation Office
http://dtsn.darpa.mil/ixo/programs.asp
Enter Search
Active Programs
Affordable Adaptive Conformal ESA Radar (AACER)
Camouflaged Long Endurance Nano Sensors (CLENS)
Close Combat Lethal Recon (CCLR)
Conflict Modeling, Planning, and Outcomes Experimentation - COMPOEX
Exploitation of 3-D Data (E3D)
Fast Connectivity for Coalition Agents Program (Fast C2AP)
FOPEN Reconnaissance, Surveillance, Tracking and Engagement Radar (FORESTER)
Heterogeneous Urban RSTA Team (HURT)
Jigsaw
Joint Air/Ground operations: Unified, Adaptive Replanning (JAGUAR)
Multispectral Adaptive Networked Tatical Imaging System (MANTIS)
NetTrack
Networked Embedded Systems Technology (NEST)
Persistent Operational Surface Surveillance and Engagement (POSSE)
Predictive Analysis for Naval Deployment Activities (PANDA)
Quint Networking Technology (QNT)
Real-Time Adversarial Intelligence & Decision Making (RAID)
Standoff Precision ID in 3-D (SPI-3D)
Tactical Targeting Network Technology (TTNT)
Urban Reasoning and Geospatial Exploitation Technology (URGENT)
Urban Scape
Vehicle and Dismount Exploitation Radar (VADER)
Video Verification of Identity (VIVID)

Page 220 of 389

Page 15 of 21

9/5/2007
7:35 AM
09/06/2007
Information Exploitation Office
http://dtsn.darpa.mil/ixo/programs.asp
Archived Programs
Active Templates
Adaptive and Reflective Middleware Systems (ARMS)
Advanced ISR Management (AIM)
Advanced Tactical Targeting Technology (AT3)
Affordable Moving Surface Target Engagement (AMSTE)
Autonomous Negotiating Teams (ANTS)
Command Post of the Future (CPOF) - Reassigned to ATO on March 17, 2005
Counter Camouflage Concealment and Deception
DARPA Agent Mark Up Language (DAML)
Dynamic Tactical Targeting: Tactical Exercises and System Test (DTT:TEST)
EyeBall
High Resolution Rotocraft Radar (HRR)
Mixed Initiative Control of Automa-teams (MICA)
Multicell and Dismounted Command and Control (M&D C2)
National Tactical Exploitation to Counter Enemy Air Defenses (NTEX)
Network Centric Logistics (NCL)
Program Composition for Embedded Systems (PCES)
Sensing and Patrolling Enablers Yielding Enhanced SASO (SPEYES)
Software Enabled Control (SEC)
Tactical Sensors - Unattended Ground Sensors (UGS)
Ultralog (Ultralog)
Wide-Area All-Terrain Change Indication Technologies (WATCH-IT)

Page 221 of 389

Page 16 of 21

9/5/2007
7:35 AM
09/06/2007
DARPA Information Processing Technology Office
I P T O H o m e P a g e >> P r o g r a m s
http://www.darpa.gov/ipto/programs/pal/index.htm
>>
Personalized Assistant that Learns (PAL)
Personalized Assistant that Learns (PAL)

Mission:
Dr. David Gunning

Overview
Mission
Vision
Goals
Background
The mission of the PAL program is to radically improve the way

computers support humans by enabling systems that are cognitive,
i.e., computer systems that can reason, learn from experience, be told
what to do, explain what they are doing, reflect on their experience, and
respond robustly to surprise. More specifically, PAL will develop a series
of prototype cognitive systems that can act as an assistant for
commanders and staff. Successful completion of this program will
usher in a new era of computational support for a broad range of human
activity.
Supplemental
Solicitations
PAL Video
P l e a s e r e a d o u r Privacy And Security Notice

C o m m e n t s , q u e s t i o n s a b o u t t h e w e b s i t e ? E - M a i l : Webmaster

Page 222 of 389

Page 17 of 21

9/5/2007
7:32 AM
09/06/2007
Defense Sciences Office - Programs (A-Z)
When Will I Get Whistlebowerhttp://www.darpa.gov/dso/programsexp.htm

Home >
Programs (A-Z)
Close All Programs
Choose a letter below to navigate the index. Click on a program name to view detailed program information.
Click Close All Programs to return to the alphabetical guide.
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
A
Accelerated Insertion of Materials (D-3D)
Accelerated Learning
Accelerated Manufacture of Pharmaceuticals
Advanced Armor
Applications of Molecular Electronics
back to top
B
Biological Sensory Structure Emulation
Bio-Magnetic Interfacing Concepts
Bio-molecular Motors
Bio-Optic Synthetic Systems
back to top
C
Compact Directional Neutron Source
Competence Assessment and Alarms for Teams (DARCAAT)
Control of Protein Conformations
back to top
D
Disruptive Manufacturing
DARPA Initiative in Titanium
Deep Bleeder Acoustic Coagulation
Direct Thermal to Electric Conversion
Discovery and Exploitation of Structure in Algorithms

Page 223 of 389

Page 18 of 21

9/5/2007
7:31 AM
09/06/2007

back to top
E
Engineered Bio-Molecular Nano-Devices/Systems
Evaporative Cooling Turbine Blades
back to top
F
Femtosecond Adaptive Spectroscopy Techniques for Remote Agent Detection
Focus Areas in Theoretical Mathematics
Fundamental Laws of Biology
back to top
G
Geospatial Representation and Analysis
Guided BEC Interferometry
back to top
H
High-Performance, Corrosion-Resistant Materials
Human-Assisted Neural Devices
Hyperspectral Radiography Sources
back to top
I
Improving Warfighter Information Intake Under Stress (AugCog)
Integrated Sensing and Processing
Intelligent Multi-modal Volume Angio Computed Tomography
Intestinal Fortitude
back to top
J
Jet Blast Deflector
back to top
K
L
Long-Term Storage of Blood Products
LSTAT-lite

Page 224 of 389

Page 19 of 21

9/5/2007
7:31 AM
09/06/2007

back to top
M
Materials Systems for Autonomous Structural Tailoring
Mathematical Time Reversal
Micro Power Sources
Mobile Integrated Sustainable Energy Recovery
Multifunctional Surface Systems
back to top
N
Nano Air Vehicle
Nano-Composite Optical Ceramic
Naval Advanced Amorphous Coatings
Negative Index Materials
Neovision
Neurotechnology for Intelligence Analysts
Next Generation Super Carbon Fiber
back to top
O
Optical Lattice Emulator
back to top
P
Peak Soldier Performance
PowerSwim
Precision Inertial Navigation Systems
Predicting Health and Disease
Predicting Real Optimized Materials
Preventing Sleep Deprivation
Preventing Violent Explosive Neurologic Trauma
Prognosis
Protein Design Processes
back to top
Q
R
Rapid Vaccine Assessment

Page 225 of 389

Page 20 of 21

9/5/2007
7:31 AM
09/06/2007

RealWorld
Restorative Injury Repair
Reversible Barriers
Revolutionizing Prosthetics
Robust Portable Power
Robust Uncertainty Management
back to top
S
Self Decontaminating Surfaces
Sensor Topology for Minimal Planning
Slowing, Storing and Processing Light
Small Uninhabited Air Vehicle Engine
Sonofusion
Stealthy Sensors
Stochastic and Perturbation Methods in PDE Systems
Structural Amorphous Metals
Superconducting Hybrid Power Electronics
Surviving Blood Loss
back to top
T
Tactical Underwater Navigation
Topological Data Analysis
Training Superiority (DARWARS)
Trauma Pod
back to top
U
Ultra-broadband Optical Arbitrary Waveform Generation
Unmanned Underwater Vehicle Power Initiative
back to top
V
back to top
W
Wasp
Waveforms for Active Sensing

Page 226 of 389

Page 21 of 21

9/5/2007
7:31 AM
09/06/2007
CHAPTER
DIVIDER
Page 227 of 389

ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP
Page 228 of 389

Page 1 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 229 of 389

Page 2 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 230 of 389

Page 3 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 231 of 389

Page 4 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 232 of 389

Page 5 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 233 of 389

Page 6 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 234 of 389

Page 7 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 235 of 389

Page 8 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 236 of 389

Page 9 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 237 of 389

Page 10 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 238 of 389

Page 11 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 239 of 389

Page 12 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 240 of 389

Page 13 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 241 of 389

Page 14 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 242 of 389

Page 15 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 243 of 389

Page 16 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 244 of 389

Page 17 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 245 of 389

Page 18 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 246 of 389

Page 19 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 247 of 389

Page 20 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 248 of 389

Page 21 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 249 of 389

Page 22 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 250 of 389

Page 23 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 251 of 389

Page 24 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 252 of 389

Page 25 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 253 of 389

Page 26 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 254 of 389

Page 27 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 255 of 389

Page 28 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 256 of 389

Page 29 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 257 of 389

Page 30 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 258 of 389

Page 31 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 259 of 389

Page 32 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 260 of 389

Page 33 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 261 of 389

Page 34 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 262 of 389

Page 35 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 263 of 389

Page 36 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 264 of 389

Page 37 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 265 of 389

Page 38 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 266 of 389

Page 39 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 267 of 389

Page 40 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 268 of 389

Page 41 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 269 of 389

Page 42 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 270 of 389

Page 43 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 271 of 389

Page 44 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 272 of 389

Page 45 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 273 of 389

Page 46 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 274 of 389

Page 47 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 275 of 389

Page 48 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 276 of 389

Page 49 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 277 of 389

Page 50 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 278 of 389

Page 51 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 279 of 389

Page 52 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 280 of 389

Page 53 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 281 of 389

Page 54 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 282 of 389

Page 55 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 283 of 389

Page 56 of 57
04.29.2007

Page 284 of 389

Page 57 of 57
04.29.2007
CHAPTER
DIVIDER
Page 285 of 389
Stan J. Caterbone
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
scaterbone@live.com
717-669-2163
October 10, 2015
Federal Whistleblower
and
Targeted Individual (Victim)
of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control
Executive Summary
Updated on October 10, 2015
I remain,
Stan J. Caterbone
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL: Stan J. Caterbone, Pro Se Litigant, and the Advanced Media
Group are victims of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control and has been engaged in litigation in both
Federal and State courts seeking financial remedies and a resolution of his Civil Liberties and
his Constitutional Rights. In 1987 Stan J. Caterbone, while managing the financial firm the he
founded, Financial Management Group, Ltd., Stan J. Caterbone became a Federal Whistleblower
when, as a shareholder, he claimed fraud and misconduct within the international arms dealer
and local start-up International Signal & Control, Plc., Some 4 years later ISC was indicted and
plead guilty to the 3rd largest fraud in U.S. history, some $1 Billion and selling arms to Irag via
South Africa. In June of 2015 Stan J. Caterbone became the Movant in the U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case No. 5:14-cv-02559-PD for the Habeus Corpus
Petition of Lisa Michelle Lambert. The case is now before the U.S. Third Circuit Court of
Appeals, Case No. 15-3400.
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
286
11
11
10
11
11
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
111
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP, LTD.,
&
STAN J. CATERBONE
Federal Whistleblower (Federal False Claims Act Violation in 1987 re ISC)
Targeted Individual of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control
and Directed Energy Devices and Weapons
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
copyright 2009
Ya know what, I am beginning to analyze this War on Terror and am having difficulty understanding
it all. To me the most effective fundamental fight against Extreme Terrorism is to reduce the motive; or the
Hatred Against America. No one seems to talk about that subject. How do we reduce that Hatred Towards
America and the West?
See, from my perspective, my situation is very disturbing. I mean we have the United States Torturing Me, a
U.S. Citizen for no good or valid reason. I have warned EVERYONE about using my situation to feed this
HATRED towards America.
Low and behold a week or so ago I have had several Muslims sign up as Followers to my
www.scribd.com/amgroup01 online webspace, which I use to post documents. The following being the most
prominent IKWAN Scope, "The Largest Muslim Brotherhood's Scope on the Web":
http://ikhwanscope.net/main/
There have also been several Muslim individuals who signed up as followers around the same time, a week
or so ago. They have also signed up as followers on my www.twitter.com/StanCaterbone webspace.
You must understand, I am a VERY Patriotic Person and live a very patriotic life - I believe in the
U.S. Constitution and Our Founding Father's vision for America; I support Our Military and our
Troops; I believe in the Rule of Law; I am a Practicing Catholic, and have been my whole life; I
Believe in the TRUTH; I believe in Right v. Wrong; Good v. Evil; and finally I believe in God. What
do you believe in?
Posted on the Yahoo Fulton Bank Stock Message Board, January 7, 2010
Date Updated:
October 10, 2015
Date Completed:
Date Initiated:
July 28, 2009

July 8, 2009
Stan J. Caterbone
scaterbone@live.com
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
287
12
12
11
12
12
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
212
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
UDATE OF SEPTEMBER 27, 2015

In 2015 Stan J. Caterbone and Advanced Media Group had to again return to local,
state, and federal courts. Again the obstruction of due process, the local gang stalking, torture,
trespass, thefts, and the like began in earnest.
From the fabricated Petition for Involuntary
Psychiatric Commitment of April 2010 by Detective Clark Bearinger, until January of 2015, Stan J.
Caterbone and Advanced Media Group had been in seclusion and in a state of rehabilitation and
rest due to the forced medication by Fairmount Behavioral Hospital and Dr. Silvia Gratz.
The
psychotropic drugs reduce your motor skills and put you in an extreme state of confusion.
By
the
end
of
the
summer
of
2010
every
social
media
site,
including
the
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com website was taken off-line due to the intimidation and

coercion by Detective Clark Bearinger.
In May Stan J. Caterbone had again endured the Attacks and Torture from the
employees of the Lancaster County Courthouse, and the Lancaster County Government Building.
Then soon after the Residents of Lancaster County engaged in a massive Organized Stalking
Campaign. In addition an extreme Computer Hacking Campaign was initiated and executed in
an effort to again SILENCE Stan J. Caterbone and Advanced Media Group.
And Again, the
Lancaster City Police Department took the lead role. As usual Stan J. Caterbone summoned state
and federal authorities for help and assistance, including direct communications with the White
House, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office and
Kathleen Kane, The Pennsylvania State Police, the Pennsylvania General Assembly, several U.S.
Congressmen, and of course the Lancaster County District Attorney's Office.
Since August 1,
2015 the Geek Squad had performed diagnostics and repairs six (6) times due to computer
hacking. On at least 2 occasions the entire hard drive had to be wiped clean and restored.
On June 23, 2015 Stan J. Caterbone was named MOVANT in the 2014 Habeus
Corpus Petition by Lisa Michelle Lambert, Case No. 14:02559 in the U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania after filing an Amicus on the case. Judge Paul
Diamond was presiding since it's filing in 2014. However, the Petition was not able to
be granted and the case was stalled on jurisdictional law based on new and compelling
evidence, or lack there of.
The Amicus was filed to cure that deficiency with direct
witness corroboration to the Prosecutorial Misconduct and Innocence of Lisa Michelle

Lambert.
In fact a working theory was filed that suggested that the East Lampeter
Police Department engaged in a strategy of Entrapment that lead to the unfortunate

murder in 1991. This, would of course, allow a wrongful death claim to be filed by the
Show family. The case is now before the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, Case No. 153400. There are three (3) questions that the Third Circuit may rule on; whether to free
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
288
13
13
12
13
13
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
313
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

Lisa Michelle Lambert, or grant her her Habeus Corpus, and whether to grant Summary
Judgment to Stan J. Caterbone in all civil actions in both state and federal courts.
Two weeks later, on July 9, 2015, Detective Clark Bearinger filed another fabricated
Petition for Involuntary Psychiatric Commitment. And again Stan J. Caterbone endured 7 days in
the Fairmount Behavioral Hospital in Philadelphia.
However, this time there was
no
MANDATORY Treatment Program Ordered by the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas.
So Stan J. Caterbone continued filing in the courts for assistance and resolution. In August, in a
desperate attempt to stop the local torture campaign, another Emergency Injunction was filed in
the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas. On August 6, 2015 Stan J. Caterbone went so far
as to undertake a Professional Polygraph Test administered by Bonnie Lee of Polygraph Solutions
of West Chester, Pennsylvania. The test ended up being 4 grueling hours of torture and a scam of
$600.00.
On July 9th , 2015 a Private Criminal Complaint was filed against Detective Clark Bearinger,
Officer Williams, Officer Binderup, and 2 unidentified patrolman.
The Complaint contained
allegations of torture and abuse at every moment of contact.
The Lancaster City Police
Department were so desperate for retaliation from the Amicus filing in the Lisa Michelle Lambert
case, that they actually broke the door in of 1250 Fremont Street in order to execute the
fabricated 302 petition. The Complaint was denied by the Lancaster County District Attorney on
August 8th . The Complaint is now under a Petition for Review by the Lancaster County Court of
Common Pleas.
On August 17, 2015 another Emergency Injunction for Relief was filed in the Lancaster
County Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 15-06985. The Injunction was heard by Judge Jeffrey
Wright, who dismissed it as frivolous. An appeal, MD 1561, is pending in the Superior Court of
Pennsylvania.
In addition, by September 26, 2015 Stan J. Caterbone had been granted Electronic Filing
Privileges in the local, state, and federal courts. This should alleviate the fraud and abuses of the
U.S. Postal Service and the computer hackers.
In 2015 Stan J. Caterbone identifies a trend that suggests that the Lancaster County
community-at-large was subject to either community targeting or community hypnosis.
The
community targeting theory is supported by experts Jullianne McKinney, Cheryl Welsh, and Dr.
John Hall. The community hypnosis theory is supported by direct personal relationships with the
Amazing Kreskin, Samuel P. Caterbone and Stan J. Caterbone.
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
289
14
14
13
14
14
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
414
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

In September of 2015 Stan J. Caterbone begins to digitize a library of approximately 45
audio cassette tapes from his father, Samuel P. Caterbone. The tapes range in date from 1971 to
1996. The tapes prove an identical targeting campaign against both Samuel P. Caterbone and
Stan J. Caterbone.
In addition the tapes confirm that Steven P. Caterbone, brother of Stan J.
Caterbone, was most likely a target dating back to the early 1960's. In addition, the death of
Samuel P. Caterbone on July 20, 2001 was confirmed to be that of murder, not natural causes.
In the early 1990's Dr. Phillip Caterbone, brother, had been solicited by the National
Institute of Health, or NIH in Washington, D.C., for a fellowship to research and catalog a study to
find a genetic marker for depression in the CATERBONE family.
Phil interviewed all living
descendants and relatives of my father, Samuel P. Caterbone, Jr., and took blood samples. I am
alleging that this was a deliberate act to continue the cover story of mental illness to distract and
provide plausible deniability for any linkage to U.S. Sponsored Mind Control.
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
290
15
15
14
15
15
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
515
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
HISTORY
In 1987 Stan J. Caterbone went public with allegations of fraud within International Signal
and Control, or ISC as they were commonly referred.
After discussions with ISC and United
Chem Con officials (an ISC/James Guerin straw company), and as a shareholder of record since
1983 of ISC, Stan J. Caterbone had a meeting with an ISC executive on June 23, 1987, which
resulted in a 22 year legal odyssey. The discussions involved a joint venture with his company,
Financial Management Group, Ltd., or FMG, Ltd., but ended in disclosure of his recent public
allegations of fraud. Four years later, ISC founder and chairman James Guerin, and other officials
and companies pleaded guilty to a $1 Billion Dollar Fraud and export violations including the
selling of arms through South Africa to Iraq and Sadaam Hussein.
However, money, power,
influence and public corruption had been used to cover-up the activities and Federal False Claims
Act violations of Stan J. Caterbone for the next eighteen years. There ensued a total blockade of
all United States Courts for all redress and remedy available in accordance with federal, state, and
local laws.
This included recovery of his business interests; intellectual property; real estate;
personal and business real property; his unblemished and impressive reputation; and his most
valuable asset - the ability to produce income. This might be legally referred to as the Right-ToWork under federal statutes.
Notwithstanding, Stan J. Caterbone has never made a bad
investment or developed a business that did not make a profit over the next 22 years.
This
includes two real estate properties that were illegally seized through foreclosure proceedings.
Since 1987 Stan J. Caterbone has been a prisoner and enemy of the state.
ISC was a
Department of Defense (DOD) Contractor and a partner with United States Intelligence Agencies
since it's beginings in the early 1970's. One of it's first contracts was Project X with the National
Security Agency or NSA of Ft. Meade, Maryland.
In summary, the following are facts and part of the public record regarding
SIGNAL & CONTROL OR ISC:
INTERNATIONAL
Once the third (3rd) largest employer in the County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, with
over 5,000 employees.
James Guerin, founder and CEO was once the largest philanthropist to charitable
organizations in the County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania.
The ISC/Ferranti Scandal was the third (3) largest white-collar fraud within the United
States as of 1992.
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
291
16
16
15
16
16
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
616
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
The following are some of the public officials and politicians associated with ISC:
George H.W. Bush, former U.S. President, and Director of the Central Intelligence
Agency (CIA).
Robert Gates, former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and current
Secretary of Defense.
Bobby Ray Inman, former Board of Directors if ISC, former Director of the NSA, and
currently associated and directly involved with Mind Control Research organizations.
Alexander Haig, former U.S. Secretary of State, and ISC lobbyist and Board of
Directors?
Joseph McDade, former Pennsylvania House of Representative and Chair of the

Appropriations Committee who was later investigated for the United Chem Con
scandal.
Carlos Cardoen/Cardoen Industries, a joint venture partner with ISC and arms
merchant for the cluster bomb who eventually sold to Iraq and other Middle Eastern
Countries under U.S. sanctions.
ISC was credited with the design of the cluster bomb, and has patents filed in the U.S.
Patent Office.
In 1987 ISC completed the merger with the 3rd largest defense contractor of Great
Britain, Ferranti International; who paid $1 billion dollars for ISC and all of it's
subsidiaries.
ABC News/Financial Times aired 3 episodes on ABC Nightline with Ted Koppel
regarding the ISC/CIA defense weapons; technologies; and cluster bombs to Iraq
story and lead into the allegations that then nominee for the Director of CIA Robert
Gates was involved with ISC and the selling of arms to Iraq.
ABC News 20/20 aired a story on the ISC/CIA efforts to sell cluster bombs to Saadam
Hussein and Iraq on February 1, 1991 days after the start of the Persian Gulf War I,
with the initial bombing raid destroying a cluster bomb factory built in Iraq by
Carlos Cardoen.
On July 1st and 2nd of 1987 Stan J. Caterbone solicited the legal counsel of Lancaster
Attorney Joseph Roda for counsel regarding, FMG, Ltd., International Signal &
Control (ISC); Commonwealth Bank, etc., and was billed for his services. Joseph
Roda did absolutely nothing but refute Stan J. Caterbone's claims and would not
believe him.
In Clark v. Guerin (CI-1990-0074 Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas),

Lancaster Attorney Joseph Roda represented William Clark, ISC's in-house legal
counsel, and never mentioned any conflict to Stan J. Caterbone in 1987.
In Clark v. Guerin (CI-1990-0074 Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas), James

Guerin deposited $1.75 million dollars into an escrow account at Fulton Bank,
Lancaster, County.
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
292
17
17
16
17
17
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
717
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

Christopher Underhill of Harman, Underhill & Brubaker, represented James
Guerin. In 2005 Christopher Underhill represented the Manheim Township Police
Department (05-cv-2288 U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania) CATERBONE v. Lancaster County Prison, et. al.,.

Philadelphia Attorney Joseph Tate represented James Guerin and ISC, and in 2007
Joseph Tate represented Scooter Libby during his federal prosecution by U.S.
Special Prosecutor Fitzpatrick.
THE MANIFEST OF A COVER-UP

Not only did the allegations of fraud within ISC have to be silenced at a time when merger
negotiations were ongoing with Ferranti, but all of the fraud; extortion; public corruption;
burglaries; civil rights violations; anti-trust and intellectual property right violations; lender
liability torts; false arrests; false imprisonments; as well as other civil and criminal activities had
to be covered up and buried in bureaucratic red tape.
uncovered and discovered to this day.
Information and findings are still being
Contrary to popular belief, up until 1996 a grand jury
investigation into ISC was still ongoing. It is not known whether it has closed or not. All of these
activates constitute a RICO crime due to the pattern and organization of the perpetrators. The
pattern and source of the activities can be traced back to 1987, with subgroups changing over
time, but still engaging in the same practices. The following plan of action was followed in order
to perpetrate the cover-up:
Totally discredit Stan(ley) J. Caterbone and any and all allegations in every way
possible.
Fabricate a history of mental illness.

Fabricate a criminal record.
Attach his character and honesty with rumors and propaganda.
Extort and maintain his net worth to $ zero or load him with debts.
Keep him out of any profession and or occupation when and where possible.
Totally isolate him and disenfranchise him from his friends, colleagues, and family
into a life of solitaire.
Somehow persuade the community of Lancaster County to buy into this plan of
action through money, favors, etc.,
Always keep attorneys and anyone remotely involved with the legal community
away at times when efforts for justice are pursued.
When attempts to enter the U.S. legal system arise, isolate, harass, and extort
any monies and/or possessions of value.
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
293
18
18
17
18
18
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
818
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
Change the history of events and the truth.

THE COURTS AND THE UNITED STATES LEGAL SYSTEM
For 18 years, (from 1987 until 2005) it has always been fairly easy to keep these issues
from court dockets and judges.
During these years Stan J. Caterbone had solicited at least
twenty attorneys, some from large firms with national recognition in their respective fields of
specialties. Attorneys from New York City to Santa Barbara and San Diego California were visited
and consulted as well as a group of ex FBI agents who specialized in white collar crime that are
now globally recognized. However, the money and influence of persons and entities that wanted
these issues silence always prevailed. The issues were so complex and convoluted, and involved
such high profile politicians and U.S. agencies, it was far easier to state that there was no case, or
their were no claims that would result in remedy or redress. Between the Republican Party and
the Department of Defense, the CIA and the NSA, there was not an attorney that could not be
influenced. The obstruction of justice and due process in this case is most likely unprecedented in
nature and in malice.
However in 2005 that all changed when Stan J. Caterbone appeared as a pro se litigant
representing himself, without any counsel, in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania in CATERBONE v. The Lancaster County Prison, et. al., or case no. 05-cv2288.
This case is still not settled and has been withdrawn by plaintiff Stan J.
Caterbone in October of 2008 after a successful ruling in the U.S. Third Circuit Court of
Appeals (07-4474) in September of 2008. The case will be continued upon the security
of evidence and the cease and desist of obstruction of justice and due process. On May
16, 2005 at the Federal Courthouse in Philadelphia, Stan J. Caterbone filed the case under seal.
One week later in the United States Bankruptcy Court for Eastern Pennsylvania in Reading,
Pennsylvania, again appearing as pro se, Stan J. Caterbone filed a petition for protection under
the Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Code, in case no. 05-23059.
These acts of entering the United States legal system with these issues triggered yet
another round of attempts to keep these cases from the courts and judges - Organized Stalking
with Directed Energy Devices and Weapons, built on a foundation of mental telepathy or total
Mind Control.
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
294
19
19
18
19
19
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
919
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
REMOTE VIEWING; ORGANIZED STALKING; DIRECTED ENERGY DEVICES AND

WEAPONS.
Organized stalking and harassment began in 1987 following the public allegations of fraud
within ISC. This organized stalking and harassment was enough to drive an ordinary person to
suicide. As far back as the late 1980's Stan J. Caterbone knew that his mind was being read, or
"remotely viewed". This was verified and confirmed when information only known to him, and
never written, spoken, or typed, was repeated by others. In 1998, while soliciting the counsel of
Philadelphia attorney Christina Rainville, (Rainville represented Lisa Michelle Lambert in the Laurie
Show murder case), someone introduced the term remote viewing through an email. That was
the last time it was an issue until 2005. The term was researched, but that was the extent of the
topic.
Remote Viewers may have attempted to connect in a more direct and continuous way
without success.
In 2005 the U.S. sponsored mind control turned into an all-out assault of mental
telepathy; synthetic telepathy; and pain and torture through the use of directed energy devices
and weapons that usually fire a low frequency electromagnetic energy at the targeted victim.
This assault was no coincidence in that it began simultaneously with the filing of the federal action
in U.S. District Court, or CATERBONE v. Lancaster County Prison, et. al., or 05-cv-2288.
This
assault began after the handlers remotely trained Stan J. Caterbone with mental telepathy. The
main difference opposed to most other victims of this technology is that Stan J. Caterbone is
connected 24/7 with a person who declares that she is Interscope recording artist Sheryl Crow of
Kennett Missouri. Stan J. Caterbone has spent 3 years trying to validate and confirm this person
without success. Most U.S. intelligence agencies refuse to cooperate, and the Federal Bureau of
Investigation and the U.S. Attorney's Office refuse to comment.
See attached documents for
more information.
In 2006 or the beginning of 2007 Stan J. Caterbone began his extensive research into
mental telepathy; mind control technologies; remote viewing; and the CIA mind control program
labeled MK ULTRA and it's subprograms.
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
295
20
20
19
20
20
20
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
10
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
FAMILY HISTORY
If you listen to the propaganda machine and the community of Lancaster County,
Pennsylvania, including professionals, the family history of Stan J. Caterbone goes something like
the following:
Father, Samuel Caterbone, Jr., Schizophrenic who ran out on his family
because of nervous breakdowns while trying to run a small dry cleaning
business.
He traveled the world looking for the Blessed Mother Mary and
Space Aliens. He ended up living in government subsidized housing broke

and with a severe mental illness.
Brother, Samuel A. Caterbone, suffered from the very same illness has his
father, Schizophrenia, who finally killed himself trying to live in California.
Brother, Thomas W. Caterbone, suffered from the very same mental illness as
his brother, Stan J., Bipolar Mood Disorder, who ran a lawn business and
finally committed suicide at an early age.
Stan J. Caterbone, suffered from Bipolar Mood Disorder, or Manic Depression and
had a nervous breakdown in 1987 trying to compete in the financial services
industry. When he has his nervous breakdowns, he always threatens to sue
everyone in court and is deeply paranoid in thinking the whole world is
against him. He always spends all of his money during his fits of mania and
has delusions about his success as a businessman.
The Family History was formulated back in the 1960's when Samuel Caterbone, Jr.,
father of Stan J. Caterbone, became engaged in a black budget mind control program that began
during his service in the United States Navy as a radioman and air gunner.
Samuel Caterbone,
Jr., was most likely a direct product of MK ULTRA or one of it's subprograms. His brother, Samuel
A. Caterbone, was most likely part of the LSD experiments of MK ULTRA. Stan J. Caterbone is
most likely part of a program sponsored by the Department of Defense Agencies, such as DARPA
or the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). The facts of Stan J. Caterbone's intimate discussions
with both his father and brother over the years before they died, the totality of documents that
were preserved in their estate, including service records; letters; official court papers; high school
documents; and the like - all will prove that they were in fact part of MK ULTRA or one of it's
subprograms.
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
296
21
21
20
21
21
21
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
11
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

The following are the facts and the real record of the family history:
Samuel P. Caterbone, Jr., (Father) served in the Navy from 1943 to 1946 and
graduated with honors from Air Gunners School in Jacksonville, Florida. He was an exceptional
student/athlete while attending Lancaster Catholic High School, participating in the band as well
as sports. He was also his senior class secretary/treasurer. After the Navy, he went on to build a
successful dry cleaning business, which he is credited with inventing a filtration system for the
solvents.
He also developed a very good investment in real estate along the Manheim Pike,
owning several properties. By his own writings and from his personal accounts to me, he was
definitely a remote viewer or data miner for some U.S. Agency with telepathic abilities.
His
viewing is documented to have begun back in the early 1970's. He also suffered from organized
stalking, and was considered an enemy and prisoner of the state. Back in the 1960's, he was a
world traveler, this is documented by his passports. Samuel P. Caterbone, Jr., may have been a
covert carrier for someone in intelligence. Samuel P. Caterbone, Jr., had his mental health history
laced with electro shock therapy. Electro Shock Therapy Experiments is another subprogram of
MK ULTRA. In addition, and especially disturbing is his criminal record with the Lancaster City
Police Department and the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas.
In 1973 Samuel P.
Caterbone, Jr. was convicted of forging a 2 checks from the Caterbone Cleaners, Inc., checking
account.
The one check to Joe the Motorists Store at the Manor Shopping Center was never
entered into evidence, it was for a total of $70.00. The other check was made out to Lancaster
Attorney James Coho for $200.00 with "divorce proceedings" written in the memo. This was his
only criminal record. Samuel P. Caterbone, Jr., was sentenced to one year probation by President
Judge William Johnstone.
However, on August 29, 1973 after nine months, Judge Johnstone
wrote an ORDER releasing him from probation and ordering him to "leave the vicinity of the
County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania". The President Judge of Lancaster County Court of Common
Pleas literally threw my father out of Lancaster County for forging 2 checks from his own
corporation. In 1987 I was arrested for stealing my own files from my own company, Financial
Management Group, Ltd., You can research the life of Candy Jones and Kate O'Brien to learn more
on this topic. Samuel Caterbone, Jr., has left enough writings and documentation to know that his
life fits the model for targeted individuals, complete with economic ruin, isolation, disenfranchised
from family and friends, and of course a fabricated mental illness history. You can view most of
his record online.
On or about May 18, 2001 Samuel P. Caterbone Jr., finally received an
inheritance from his mother's (Mary Caterbone) estate.
The check was for some $70,000.00.
The estate was probated in November of 2000. Some two weeks later, on Memorial Day Weekend
of 2001, he had called me to come to New York City to help care for him.
He was in perfect
health until this time. In a matter of six (6) weeks he had succumbed to lung cancer. As per
Julianne McKinney,
former intelligence officer for the U.S. Army and victim activist of U.S.
Sponsored Mind Control, the weapons are lethal enough to kill and the one thing that I worry
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
297
22
22
21
22
22
22
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
12
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

about is that of dying of cancer (paraphrase). There is no doubt now that my father's death was
a murder, not natural.
Samuel A. Caterbone, (Brother) served in the United States Air Force in 1968 to 1970.
In 1991, Stan J. Caterbone accused the United States Government of using his brother, Samuel
A. Caterbone for part of the LSD experiments on mind control, or MK ULTRA. A notarized letter of
October 23, 1991 was sent certified mail to the California Attorney General on the subject matter,
with a return letter from the California Attorney General on January 14, 1992.
By his own
admission before his death, Samuel A. Caterbone disclosed to Stan J. Caterbone of the "bad LSD"
trips while in the Air Force. Since his death of December 25, 1984, Stan J. Caterbone and others
questioned the classification of suicide, and made allegations of foul play that was ultimately
responsible for his death. Finally in a meeting in Santa Barbara, California with the Santa Barbara
Public Guardian's Office, an office admitted that the death was more likely due to foul plan than
suicide.
Samuel A. Caterbone was also an exceptional student and athlete while attending
Lancaster Catholic High School.
After playing varsity football as a sophomore, he had an
unfortunate accident while deer hunting the following November.
While in the woods in
Bellefonte, Pennsylvania, his hunting pants caught fire trying to stay warm.
It left him in the
Lancaster General Hospital for months, going through painful skin grafts and isolation.
hunting accident interrupted his athletic career and scared his legs for life.
The
The Schizophrenia
diagnosis was a combination of LSD flashbacks and organized stalking and harassment.
Thomas P. Caterbone, (Brother) had an unfortunate transaction at Fulton Bank that set
a course of action that resulted in a suicide. Although diagnosed with Bipolar Disease and Manic
Depression -- embezzled and extorted monies were most likely the reason for his suicide in 1996.
Fulton Bank was involved in a fraud that took $72,000 from a real estate settlement closing and
lead to his total financial ruin and collapse in June of 1995. The funds were never recovered and
Fulton Bank is a defendant for a wrongful death claim in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania in CATERBONE v. Lancaster County Prison, et. al., 05-cv-2288.
FULTON BANK triggered a severe and lethal death blow to Thomas P. Caterbone, and as of this
day has refused to acknowledge any wrongdoing or remorse. Thomas P. Caterbone was also an
exceptional athlete. Playing for Lancaster Catholic High School, Franklin and Marshall College, the
Harrisburg Patriots, and even the Philadelphia Eagles. Tom also coached football at J.P. McCaskey
and Franklin and Marshall College.
Thomas P. Caterbone had a very successful lawn and
landscaping business before joining forces with John DePatto of United Financial Services and
selling residential mortgages.
John DePatto was the former head of Parent Bank, owned by
James Guerin and ISC. Parent Bank, owned by ISC also foreclosed on 2323 New Danville Pike,
Conestoga, Pennsylvania in 1988, which was owned by Stan J. Caterbone. Thousands of dollars
of equity was extorted in the process, despite still being short sold for a profit to Mr. Keith
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
298
23
23
22
23
23
23
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
13
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

Kirchner, an executive of Lancaster Newspapers and former graduate of Lancaster Catholic High
School.
Stan J. Caterbone is a remote viewer (at least one way in), is telepathic, and a
federal whistleblower with an exceptional entrepreneurial record in spite of all of his adversaries
and their assaults. In spite of the U.S. Sponsored mind control and torture, he has endured and
will prevail. Legally, Stan J. Caterbone has been able to preserve his claims, and progress his
legal challenges and claims through both the federal and state court system appearing pro se,
without the aid or expense of additional legal counsel. Some of his claims and briefs will most
likely be landmark decisions in years to come. Stan J. Caterbone was a 2-Sport MVP at Lancaster
Catholic High School, in both football and track. Stan J. Caterbone never received less than a B
grade in his four years of high school and had an 87+ average. Stan J. Caterbone excelled in
computer technologies, taking his first full term course in 1975, while in high school and
continuing into college at Millersville University, graduating with a degree in business
administration in 1980.
Stan J. Caterbone excelled profoundly at building his companies, first
beginning with Financial Management Group, Ltd., then working with Tony Bongiovi of Power
Station Studios and the "Digital Movie"; then building Advanced Media Group, Ltd..
Over the
years, despite the illegal seizures and foreclosures, Stan J. Caterbone has amassed a portfolio of
impressive real estate deals that have always paid off in profits, no matter how or when they
were sold.
The same was true of his businesses.
Financial Management Group, Ltd., was a
$20,000 dollar investment in 1986 and was still sold for approximately $100,000 two years later,
despite the false arrests and the extortion of most of it's real value and equity.
The mental health history and the criminal records were completely fabricated, and a
close review and investigation into the actual court records and hospital records can prove that in
very short fashion.
There are TWO (2) ways to quickly dispute the Mental Health History and
Record:
One - Review the word "Delusional; delusions; etc.,;
every instance of the word
used by mental health professionals, and the false reports by friends and family were associated
with facts, and matters of the official record, the complete opposite of the meaning of the word
"delusional". And they still exist to this very day.
Two - Review the 3 Fabricated Suicide Allegations of the following dates: August
10(?), 1987 at Burdette Tomlin Hospital (Cape May County New Jersey); February 18th(?), 2005
by Kerry Egan and the Southern Regional Police Department; and July 19, 2009 for the 302
Commitment by the Lancaster City Police Department at Lancaster General Hospital.
The Criminal Record is very similar, since 1987 Stanley J. Caterbone has had 31 false
arrests; formal charges and convictions dismissed prior to court proceedings or won on summary
appeals in the County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania; most of which Stan J. Caterbone appearing as
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
299
24
24
23
24
24
24
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
14
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

pro se (representing himself). These have resulted in civil complaints filed in 2008 in CATERBONE
v. The County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania.
THE PUBLIC RECORD

The Public Record is comprised of court filings and exhibits in U.S. Federal Courts;
Pennsylvania State Courts; and the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas. In all some 40,000
pages of documents are now filed and electronically scanned or microfilmed in prothonotary
offices. In addition in both the U.S. Federal Courts and the Lancaster County Court of Common
Pleas there are more than 11 hours of audio recordings; some 3,000 scanned images; and
several video broadcasts of the ISC News broadcasts all stored on a CD-ROM and filed as an
exhibit to some of the law suits filed by Stan J. Caterbone and Advanced Media Group, as
plaintiffs. Stan J. Caterbone has over 100 court docket sheet numbers in federal, state, and local
courts.
There are also Pennsylvania Unemployment Compensation records; Department of Welfare

and Lancaster County Assistance Office records; Local Real Estate Tax records; Lancaster County
Tax Assessment records; Social Security Administration Benefits records; Lancaster Catholic High
School transcripts; Millersville University transcripts; all for Stan J. Caterbone, in addition to his
court filings.
For Samuel A. Caterbone, my brother, there are United States Air Force service
records; Lancaster Catholic High School transcripts; Millersville University transcripts; Social
Security Administration records; Santa Barbara County Guardian and Public Defender records;
and papers and documents persevered from his estate.
For Samuel P. Caterbone, my father, there are United States Naval records, Lancaster
Catholic High School transcripts; Social Security Administration records; Lancaster County
Assistance Office records; Local Real Estate Tax records; Lancaster County Tax Assessment
records; Samuel Caterbone Cleaners, Inc., corporate records; Real Estate Deeds and Mortgages;
Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas civil and criminal records; and of course papers and
documents persevered from his estate
PUBLIC WEBSITE ADDRESSES OF INTEREST:

www.freedomffchs.com
https://www.scribd.com
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
300
25
25
24
25
25
25
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
15
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED FOR REVIEW

** It is important to note that as of this writing, Remote Viewing has recently
been commercialized by corporate America, and certain Fortune 500 companies are
using Remote Viewers as consultants for trend analysis and market forecasts. This is
often the evolution of most technologies born out of the U.S. Department of Defense.
Top Secret experiments and the resulting technological advancements can stay
secretive for so long.
This has recently been used in a NBC story of the Television
drama "Medium" this last season.
On July 9, 2008 I had recorded an AM radio live
broadcast on WHAN Coast to Coast with a guest that was one of the leading Physicist
turned Remote Viewer and expert that testified to this same notion.
Dated: July 28, 2009

Stan J. Caterbone
scaterbone@live.com
The following are no longer in service:
www.advancedmediagroup.wordpress.com
www.scribd.com/amgroup01
www.facebook.com/scaterbone
www.twitter.com/StanCaterbone
www.mcvictimsworld.ning.com/profile/StanJCaterbone
http://www.youtube.com/advancedmediagroup
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
301
26
26
25
26
26
26
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
16
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

September 7, 2009
Stan J. Caterbone
Advance Media Group
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, Pennsylvania 17603
Derrick Robinson
Freedom From Covert Harassment and Surveillance
P.O. Box 9022
Cincinnati, Ohio 45209
Phone 1-800-571-5618
Fax 1-866-433-4170
email: info@freedomfchs.com
Re: Is County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania Ground Zero for Organized Stalking and
Covert Surveillance?
Derrick,
My pleasure. Derrick, I was trying to get group rates at our new Lancaster Convention Center
Marriot Hotel last week, just as a little fact finding mission. I have a theory that I would like to
send your way. I thought it would be very fruitful to bring some TI's together for a conference,
unless you think the exposure would be harmful.
I believe that they try new models for harassment; organized stalking and surveillance on me
here in Lancaster. Remember, Lancaster is now one of the most "Watched Communities" in the
country. "With those cameras, the Safety Coalition will operate and monitor 165 cameras across
Lancaster City making Lancaster the most watched city of its size in the nation." See article
attached, Watching you: City to add 105 more cameras.
I believe that Lancaster may be ground zero for some of the models of organized stalking and
harassment that we TI's experience and wanted to get some reaction from Lancaster. Some
history on the Lancaster Convention Center. Dale High of High Industries is the lead partner in our
new convention center/hotel. It is first class all the way. Now in the late 1980's I was a joint
venture partner with Dale High in American Helix Technology Company/Advanced Media Group.
American Helix was a cd manufacturer and I and my company Advanced Media Group was the
CD-ROM division of American Helix. I was one of a handful of CD-ROM manufacturers in the
domestic United States back then. Also in 2005 I filed a civil action against the lead hotel, the
Eden Resort Inn, for trying to block the development and building of the Hotel/Convention Center,
see
attached.
Now, some history about Lancaster and the intelligence community. Back in the 1980's there were
several defense contractors located in Lancaster, the main being International Signal & Control,
which I, of course, blew the whistle on a billion dollar fraud and arms to Iraq.
Click here for an overview of ISC.
Click here to see the Lancaster Newspapers Archives regarding International Signal & Control, or
ISC.
Click here to view the live video of the WGAL-TV News Broadcast of October 31, 1991 the evening
of the ISC indictments. The U.S. Department of Justice and other U.S. Agencies held a Press
Conference in the Philadelphia Federal Courthouse to announce the indictments and $ Billion
Dollar Fraud.
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
302
27
27
26
27
27
27
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
17
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

Click here for Part 2 of the WGAL-TV 8 Broadcast.
Now politically, Lancaster is and has always been predominately Republican. Lancaster is one of
the oldest cities in the country and our courthouse was one of the first in this country. Lancaster
has one of the oldest fraternities of the Masons. Lancaster and the George W.Bush administration
has a close and very "interesting relationship". George H. Bush had a very close relationship with
ISC, and of course the NSA and CIA all had a very "close" relationship with International Signal &
Control, or ISC. The following are some transcripts for Ted Koppel and ABC News Nightline
regarding ISC and Arms to Iraq and the intelligence community. The transcripts are contained in
my Amicus for Case No. 2006-cv-2160 filed in the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division.
Now, Robert Gates, presently the Secretary of the United States Defense Department, and his
relationship to Lancaster. First of all, the attached video is the authentic transcript of Robert
Gates' confirmation hearing in September of 1991 for the Director of the Central Intelligence
Agency (CIA). If you fast forward to approximately 9:00:00 you will see the back and forth
questions from Senator Murkowski to Robert Gates regarding the allegations by several members
of the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence regarding his alleged involvement with ISC
and the Arms deals with Carlos Cardoen and the shipping of cluster bombs through South Africa
and on to Iraq. Of course, he denied all of the allegations.
Robert Gates also has relatives that live in Lancaster County, if fact he attended a wedding here a
few months ago, on May 3, 2009 at St. John Neuman Catholic Church in Manhiem Township,
Lancaster County. His wife has a niece that lives in Manheim Township.
Now, I'll give you the ABC News Nightline May 23, 1991 excerpt regarding ISC and the NSA,
National Security Agency:
"It all started legally, if covertly, back in 1974. That's when the National Security Agency, a supersecret U.S. Intelligence unit asked ISC to help complete project X, a chain of electronic listening
posts based at South Africa's Simonstown Naval Station. South Africa was using these posts to
follow Soviet submarine traffic off of the Cape of Good Hope. To ensure secrecy, ISC and the NSA
made sure shipments could not be tracked back to them. They created a company called Gamma
Systems Associates. In fact, this company was nothing more than a post office box at John F.
Kennedy Airport. Gamma was a cut-out. ... But this sanctioned covert operation was stopped in
1977 when President Carter, a strong opponent of South Africa's apartheid regime, told U.S. firms
to stop any military-related business with Pretoria. But ISC continue shipping electronics, some
civilian, some military, to South Africa. The in the early 1980's, South Africa began to intensify its
efforts at ballistic missile development. For ISC, that was a golden opportunity because on of its
top executives was a man named Clyde Ivey, an American electronics expert who has been the
father of South Africa's missile program. Ivey had extraordinary contacts in the nations defense
structure. Begining in 1984, federal investigators say, senior ISC exeutives, including Ivey, began
regular contacts with CIA officials." You can read the rest. The entire transcript of the May 23,
1991 ABC News/Nightline broadcast.
Now remember, George H. Bush was director of CIA. "He served in this role for 357 days, from
January 30, 1976 to January 20, 1977.[22] The CIA had been rocked by a series of revelations,
including those based on investigations by Senator Frank Church's Committee regarding illegal
and unauthorized activities by the CIA, and Bush was credited with helping to restore the
agency's morale.[23] In his capacity as DCI, Bush gave national security briefings to Jimmy
Carter both as a Presidential candidate and as President-elect, and discussed the possibility of
remaining in that position in a Carter administration[24] but it was not to be," according to
Wikipedia.
Now, lets get to Bobby Ray Inman, former Navy, Director of the National Security Agency (NSA),
former Director of International Signal & Control (ISC), and currently part of the Mind Control
industry. The following appears on the Welcome page of my website:
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
303
28
28
27
28
28
28
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
18
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

"S.A.I.C. involvement in 1993 American Para psychological Association meeting arrangements, via
their 'Cognitive Sciences Laboratory'. Science Applications International Corporation is a big time
defense contractor, has held the largest number of research contracts of any defense contractor.
Bobby Ray Inman (ISC Board of Directors) is on its board of directors, among others."
by John Porter, CIA Program on Mind Control copyright 1996. In 1994, after Bobby Ray Inman
requested to be withdrawn from consideration as Bill Clinton's first Defense Secretary, his critics
speculated that the decision was motivated by a desire to conceal his links to ISC. Inman was a
member of the so-called "shadow board" of the company which was allegedly either negligent or
approved the exports." by Wikipedia on International Signal and Control, (ISC).
Now, lets list the former Navy personnel:
George H. Bush, former President of the United States, former Director of CIA.
James Guerin, President and Founder of International Signal & Control.
Bobby Ray Inman, former Director of the National Security Agency (NSA) and Director of
International Signal & Control, (ISC).
My father, Samuel P. Cateronne, Jr.
His father, Samuel J. Caterbone, Sr.
George Noory, of Coast to Coast Radio (just anecdotal, nothing assumed or alleged).
George W. Bush flew with the Navy.
James Cross
I will Finish later and add more.
Next we get to Jim Guerin's attorney back in 1989 through at least 1992. His name was Joseph
Tate, of Philadelpha. This link will take you to a document regarding Joseph Tate, James Guerin
and Joseph Roda, Esq., of Lancaster, my former attorney who said I fabricated everything back in
1987. The document contains a letter of September 12, 2005 from Special Prosecutor Patrick
Fitzgerald regarding Scooter Libby, Former Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff. the letter
involves Scooter Libby's Grand Jury Indictment for leaking Covert CIA Operative Valerie Plame
and eventually outing her.
Now in Austin Texas in July of 2005 I was detained by 2 Agents from The Defense Intelligence
Agency. I was merely visiting a Military Museum, that had old and vintage helicopters and
airplanes. near where my brother, Dr. Phillip Caterbone lived. I was visiting on my way to
California. While inside the museum 2 Agents from the Department of Defense Defense
Intelligence Agency escorted me outside to my Honda Oddesey and interrogated me making me
confirm that I was visiting and staying with my brother. They caused a problem for my brother's
Medical Practice by shaking up one of his secretaries. The reviewed my court documents for
CATERBONE v. Lancaster County Prison, et. al., Case No. 2005-cv-0288 filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The demanded that I stay off all military bases
before releasing me.
In 2006 I was telepathic with an older NSA executive on many occasions who wanted to meet me
at the Clipper Stadium who told me he wanted to rent a facility in Lancaster for a training
exercise. I told him to to and see Dale High and the High Group for space at the Greenfield
Industrial Park. He said he was retiring and that our discussions were keeping him a few weeks
longer than expected. We had intimate discussions of my history and the Chesapeake Bay Area.
We also discussed Sheryl Crow, and he told me his wife was a fan. I turned him on to her new
album, Wildflower, and he said she liked it. We had to disengage because he was being harassed
by other telepathic assailants.
My former secretary (Susan Bare) at Pflumm Contractors, Inc., where I was controller and was
hired to rescue the company from near bankruptcy in 1993, told me that her husband, Ross Bare,
who grew up just some 10 or so doors from me, worked for the NSA. She disclosed this soon
after I hired her in 1994 or 1995.
I will finish later and add to this allegation. This is a work-in-progress.
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
304
29
29
28
29
29
29
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
19
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
Stan J. Caterbone
scaterbone@live.com
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
305
30
30
29
30
30
30
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
20
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
AFFIDAVIT
BE IT ACKNOWLEDGED, that Stanley J. Caterbone, Financial Management Group, Ltd.,
FMG Advisory, and and all affiliates, Pro Financial Group, Ltd., Advanced Media Group, Advanced
Media Group, Ltd., Global Entertainment Group, Ltd., Power Productions I, Radio Science
Laboratories, Ltd., of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, the undersigned deponent, being of legal
age, does hereby depose and say under oath as follows:
I am now convinced that the situation surrounding my litigation and all factors attributed
to my financial and professional demise bore out of the fact that my Father, Samuel P. Caterbone
was a victim of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control, in the truest sense of the words.
The
whistleblowing activities of 1987 either were a coincidence or I was set up in the very beginning
by Pennsylvania State Senator Gibson Armstrong (former stock broker) in 1983 when he solicited
me to purchase the ISC stock. The preceding would have been the perfect cover story for my
demise; that I was involved in a fraud. Following this analysis would lead one to conclude that
the collateral damage from the activities of my financial ruin always left my fellow businesses in
financial ruin, for example Robert Kauffman and Michael Hartlett, partners, and the shareholders
and affiliated professionals of Financial Management Group, Ltd., Tony Bongiovi and Power Station
Studios, Jim and Lynn Cross as Cross Microwave Consultants, Dave Dering, Scott Robertson, and
James Boyer as American Helix/High Industries, Ralph Mazzochi and Gallo Rosa Restaurant;
Pflumm Contractors, Inc., Mike Caterbone's AIM Wholesaler's Business, Dr. Phillip Caterbone, D.O.
And associated Primary Care Practices of Austin, Texas, Sam Lombardo and Ralph Mazzochi as
S.N. Lombardo Associates for Lancaster Avenue Project, Sheryl Crow Singer Songwriter, my
immediate family, friends, and relatives.
Following this analysis would lead one to concur that the legal and financial remedies
would only be reconciled by the above named parties enjoining my civil litigation. This AFFIDAVIT
is to be considered a legal and binding document to accomplish that remedy.
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
306
31
31
21
30
31
31
31
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
41
50
51
389
51
51
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Saturday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
October
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
10,
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2016
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
307
32
32
31
32
32
32
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2016
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
308
33
33
32
33
33
33
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2016
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
309
34
34
33
34
34
34
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2016
scaterbone@live.com
Stan J. Caterbone
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
ILLEGAL NO TRESPASS NOTICES AGAINST

STAN J. CATERBONE AND ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP
Violations of Public Accommodations Law re Discrimination
and Anti-Trust Violations with False Statements to Authorities
July 16, 2016
Work-In-Progress
Community Stalking and Organized Libel/Slander Campaign Strategy Issue a few every
year to support false arrests; false imprisonment; fabricated mental illness history. In addition to
isolate by prohibiting entrance to major entertainment venues with good live music. Prohibit from
defending against the lies and slander in public to a minimum. Also, destroy history of strong
Christian values and church attendance on a weekly basis by keeping away from church. The
Millersville University Graduate Studies No Trespass Notice was accommodated by the denial of
entitled benefits of LETA Job Training Education Course of the Paralegal program at HACC during
the same time period.
1. David Pflumm Properties by David Pflumm Served by State Constable in June of

2005, original not signed by David Pflumm
2. Eden Resort Inn, by Drew Anthon, Owner Sent via 1st Class Mail in 2005.
3. Barley Snyder, LLC Lancaster Office, by Shawn Long, Esq., Attorney representing
Fulton Bank in 2006 Sent via 1st Class Mail
4. Lancaster Newspapers, Inc., by Steve Weaver, Manager in 2006, No Notice,
Corraborated by Jack Buckwalter, Chairman and CEO and George Warner, Atty with Barley
Snyder, LLC, No Formal Notice, allowed to reenter in 2015.
5. Ruby Tuesday, Manor Shopping Center, Lancaster, by Manager and Lancaster City
Police in 2006, No Formal Notice, allowed to reenter in 2015.
6. Alley Kat Restaurant and Bar, Lancaster by Bartender Ms. Santinello, Brett Stabley,
and Lancaster City Police, No formal Notice in 2006
7. Village Nightclub, Lancaster by George in 2008, No Formal Notice
8. Marion Court Restaurant, Lancaster, by Security Personnel, corroborated by Michael
Geesey, in 2008, No Formal Notice, allowed to enter in 2015.
9. Valentinos Cafe, Lancaster, by Jeanine, Bartender,in 2008, corroborated by John
Valentino, Owner, No Formal Notice
10. Brunswick Hotel, Lancaster, by Staff Employees, in 2008, No Formal Notice
11. Lancaster County Library and Duke Street Business Center, by Executive Director in
March of 2009, by 1st Class Mail
12. Anne Bailey's Restaurant and Bar, Lancaster, by Manager in 2009, No Formal Notice
13. Millersville University Graduate Studies and Millersville University, Millersville, by
Lori Austin, Judicial Affairs, via Certified Mail in June of 2009.
Page 310 of 389
14. TGIF Friday's, Lancaster, by Manager, in January of 2010, No Formal Notice

15. Lucky Dog Restaurant and Bar, Lancaster, by Robert Donnelly, in January of 2010, No
Formal Notice
16. Saint Mary's Catholic Church, Lancaster, by Don Spica, Usher and Lancaster City Police
Department in Feb of 2010, No Formal Notice
17. O'Halloran's Bar, Lancaster, March 25, 2010 by Male Staff Employee. No Formal Notice.
18. Fulton Bank, Fulton Financial Corporation, March 26, 2010 by Susan Follmer, Security
Officer.
19.Lancaster General Hospital, Gary S. Gehman, MD, May 25, 2010, for recording Dr. Brian
Sullivan of Abbeyville Family Health re U.S. Sponsored Mind Control and posting on my
Wordpress Blog.
20.Tobias Frog Restaurant and Bar, August 8, 2015 by Owner of Establishment, reason
was for complaining of harassment and stalking.
21. Millersville University, July 9, 2015, served notice by Millersville University Police
Chief Pete Anders, for negotiating a civil rights complaint with Assistant to the President,
Debra Hoeckler
22.Village Nightclub, July of 20015, by George..........., Owner, tried to enter several times,
with no reason and no written notice.
23.Lucky Dog Bar, August of 2015, met Abby and Keagan Pflumm outside, went inside and
was told by bartender to leave and not come back.
24.Barley Snyder, LLC Lancaster Office, receptionist Ms. Woods refused to let me
communicate with Attorney George Werner, who in 2011 entered appearance in 05-2288
for Fulton Bank in U.S. District Court.
25.Wennerstrom Property Management Company, June 2015, went to complain
regarding harassment, threats, etc., at 1252 Fremont Street and told to leave building.
26.Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board, Northwest Office Building, November 23, 2015,
Harrisburg, PA, Delivered COMPLAINT re Bars and Restaurants in Lancaster engaged in
Discrimination, Stalking, Harassment, Assaults, etc., Would not allow access to Legal
Counsel, and female who took complaint would not provide ID.
27.Southeast Medical Facilities and Brightside Church Office, February 2016, Would not
issue pain medication and filed a Private Criminal Complaint with the Lancaster County
District Attorney, no opinion as of yet.
28.Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office in Strawberry Square, Harrisburg, PA I
arbitrarily received a phone call while delivering a CD-ROM to PA Attorney General Kathleen
Kane re CORRUPTION OF JUDICIAL, LAW ENFORCEMENT, AND POLITICIANS of
Pennsylvania.
29.U.S. Federal Facilities per the National Security Agency Interrogation of March 9, 2016
at the NSA Headquarters in Ft. Meade, Maryland. Handcuffed and Interrogated for over an
hour and finally let go and told not to continue on to Washington, D.C. And said I was no
longer permitted to visit any U.S. Federal Facilities.
30.Lancaster Newspapers In June of 2016 I arbitrarily received an email the day I was
supposed to participate in a town meeting at LNP and warned me that I was banned and
had been for years although in the year before I had meetings with editors regarding my
MOVANT standing in the Lisa Michelle Lambert case.
31. TELLUS360, May of 2016, I went to enter on a weekend night and the doorman told me
I could not enter that night without any explanation or reason.
32.Yorgos Restaurant and Bar, The owner, Mrs. Arbitrarily barred me during the month of
March, right before the false imprisonment at the NSA in Ft. Meade, Maryland
33.Annie Baily's Irish Pub, A bartender arbitrarily barred me in July, then they allowed me
in then again a so called Manager banned me again. I recorded the last incident.
34.Altana Club, Bar, and Meeting Space On Thursday, July 14, 2016 Scott, the bartender
arbitrarily banned me, which again I recorded.
35.The Press Room Bar and Restaurant A bartender arbitrarily barred me, then again on
Thursday July 14, 2016 another bartender banned me, which again I recorded.
Page 311 of 389
All of the above use the tactics of threats and harassment in order to invoke and provoke a
response worthy of arrest or involuntary psychiatric commitment. When the strategy fails they
resort in illegal verbal no trespass notices by low level employees. In the summer of 2015 a
Lancaster City Police Officer, while parked at the Sunnoco convenience store on the corner of West
Orange and Prince Street informed me that the establishments were required to provide written
notice, or they could not be enforced.
Downtown Lancaster Establishment's that have been endorsing and engaging in
WHOLESALE STALKING, HARASSMENT, AND COLLUSION TO PHYSICAL THREATS OF
VIOLENCE ON A REGULAR BASIS, 2005 to present:
Yorgos Restaurant and Bar

Mariott Bar at Penn Square
Annie Baily's Irish Pub
TELLIUS 360 Irish Pub, Nightclub, and now computer lab
Altana Club, Bar, and Meeting Space
Cigar Bar
O'Hallorans Bar and Restaurant
Lancaster Dispensing Company
The Press Room Bar and Restaurant
The Federal Taphouse
Lancaster City Police Department Headquarters
Dated: March 18, 2016
Page 312 of 389
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
313
37
37
36
37
37
37
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
27
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
314
38
38
37
38
38
38
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
28
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
315
39
39
38
39
39
39
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
29
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
! "
"
$% &
!
" #
%
"&#
(
'
!
(
,
"
"
")
"
""
-
)
!
! "
!
'
%
" !
"
!
)
+
!
" *
"
"
,
,
,
*
%
*
(
%
!
/"0
1
1 ,
"
"
4
!
"
"
!
!
#
.
.
&,,0
%
1 ,
2"3
!
)
** ! "
&,,..$/
&,,
%
&,,
%
&
, "
"
00
"
!,
"
6
7
7 , !
&,,-
8,
:
(
$;$
"2
! " ,
, ,
** !
;
5
$
!
&,,@
,
.
&<;=
>
1
9
,
&,,=
$
,
>
A
1 B3
.+
&,,=
1 B3
2
>
%
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
316
40
40
39
40
40
40
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
30
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
<
1
1
* "
!
"
C#
"$
"
<
*
&, ,
24
#9
; "
&,,@(&,,= A
3
24
5
!
%
&,,0 4
! %3
"
"
!
&,,
%
!
4
'
5
4
D
%
%
"
""
,! "
0 =
0 =9
9
00&9 00
:
9
&,,-
&, , $
!
%
!
D
%
%
=
F
!
))
+
/4
),
"
0 =
/
$
G
3
%
00
3
3
"
%#
$
$
&, ,
&,,4
!- "
.
&,,@
,
*
&,,<
E
&,,
-) !
/ 4
24
/
$
D
&, ,
D
$
&,,-
&,,0
%
D
!
D
D %
7F !
>
!
D
$
A
8F
$
%
;
D
.
%
&,,3
E
$
*
00=; 00
$
5
! 7
0 =
00
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
317
41
41
40
41
41
41
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
31
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
)
A
24
$;$
00
(F
&
%
B
5
00 9
" * <
00=( 00 9
:#
> ) "" ""

$
;3
#, " !
&,,-
"
"
"
0 =
&, ,
/
.
$
B
3
3
=
0 =
) "
.
&,,1
0 =
24
" "
3
"
&,,@
" E
""
B
$
<
&,,1
.
&,,-
,-(&&
2
=
@,
"
&,
3
&,,!
&,,@
&,,@
0 =
@, 1
&,,@
9
!
@,
#" !,
0 =
" "1 ,
"
"*
":
" E
F
&,,-
!
B
/
!
"
00=( 00 9
B
:
9
$
'
.
&,,1
9
0 =
&, ,
/
.
00 9
/
&,,9
&,
( "
!
.
00
$
!
&, ,
F
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
3
7
8
!
&,,
&, ,
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
318
42
42
41
42
42
42
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
32
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
&
, * "
&&
*#
"
&:
;!
&<
:
%
$
&, ,
$
&,,-
!-
,
5
%
"
>
$
$
< !-
24
? "
;
>
&,,0
B
&,,%
(
$
&, ,
&-
A
.+ $
&@
! :
&,,$
: , *
&, ,
* @
&,,@
"
E
3
&,,
"
&,,0
7 "!
7 "
0 =
*
&=
) "
":
)"
&,,@
"
&
&0
!
< ")
+
9 &,,@
:
9
&, ,
&,,
00
:,
!6
"
"
" .
9 &,,0
0 = "&#
, *
&,,@
/
" F
0 =
;A
0 =
F
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
0 =
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
319
43
43
42
43
43
43
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
33
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

!
3
"
$
+
$
.
0 =
I $
!
0 =
.
$
"2
'
+$;F
D
"$
&,;&,
3
A
00
'
$ 24
"1E1# $
K
E
A
00&
>
L
F
F
B
F
+
0=,K
A
$
$
1
+
>
1
$
>
B
!
3
F
1
00
) % 3
&,,-
!
>
! A !
00,K
1 B3
>
F
F
& 1
F
8
! 4
'
A
! 4
A
0=,K
F
00,K
0 ,K
0<,K
3
/
>
%
&,,
) %$
D 1
"
$
0 <9 F
0@,K
0@,K
$
2!
A? D!B
#
*
$
7
+
00
D 18
.
E
$
M 1
00= E
0 =
%
0 ,K
$
0 =
M
00
!
&,,9
(
9
!
1
,-(
$ !2B+EF2
(&&
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
320
44
44
43
44
44
44
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
34
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
") !
"
7!
N
.
!
5
F
(
(
5
G
*
A'
, ?
*
? 1
!,
A
(
> "
!, '!
,
B
A
" " * #" !, " "
$C
* #" !, D
73
8
* 7
,
"
"
&
"
#
.
"
#(
5
7
9
'
5
%
7A
8 !
8 !
'
!
7D .2
O
% 8
'
7
'
(
(
%
%
4
K
K
M %
%
K
'
7E
(
8
"
%
'
%(
(
(
4
;
(
7
7
87
(
(
8
8
- 7 > !,
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
321
45
45
44
45
45
45
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
35
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

!
* , "
!
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
.
.
&
B
B
B
B
B
@
E
@
E
&. @
DD
@
. DD
"
@
& DD
@
. DD
@
& DD
@
$ DD
@
DD
@
E
DD
@
EB& DD
@
EB DD
@
& B DD
@
DD
@
& DD
@
DD
@
& DD
@
DD
B@
)
B@
DD
!
"
)
*
!
")
1
3
1
))
1"
)
)
, "
*"
"
, "
!
*
"
")
"
7
"!
"
*
!
*
")
!
6, "
1
5
)
>
' "
*
, "
1 ,!
, "
)
!
"
"
!
!
1
"": !
1 , 1
"": !
"
1
"": !
!
"
! * !
)
*
"E
DD
")
E DD
%
,
!
!"
, "
"
"
"
1 ,"
DD
*)
PPPPPPP "
>7
%#
'?
Stan J. Caterbone
# PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
"
Stan J. Caterbone
# PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
"
June 19, 2015

PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
Pennsylvania
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
$
Lancaster
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
19
PPPPPPP
15
June
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
&,PP
Stan J. Caterbone - I was a notary from '94-'98

PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
F
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
SJC
I
.
I
&, ,
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
322
46
46
45
46
46
46
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
36
of
41
Don't Know When
24
$
$
Q &, , "!
I
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
THE ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
323
47
47
46
47
47
47
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
37
of
41
Page 35 of 41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
06/10/2007
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
THE ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
324
48
48
47
48
48
48
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
38
of
41
Page 36 of 41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
06/10/2007
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
325
49
49
48
49
49
49
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
39
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
326
50
50
49
50
50
50
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
40
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
327
51
51
50
51
51
51
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Page
41
of
41
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

scaterbone@live.com
https://www.scribd.com/stan5j.5caterbone
Stan J. Caterbone
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
(717)669-2163
PRESS RELEASE
Saturday, July 4, 2015
Lancaster, Pennsylvania, Advanced Media Group and Stan J. Caterbone Proposed ORGANIZED
STALKING AND DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS HARASSMENT BILL to Pennsylvania House of
Representative Mike Sturla (Lancaster, Pennsylvania) and City of Lancaster Mayor Richard Gray.
The draft legislation is the work of Missouri House of Representative Jim Guest, who has been
working on helping victims of these horrendous crimes for years. The bill will provide protections to
individuals who are being harassed, stalked, harmed by surveillance, and assaulted; as well as
protections to keep individuals from becoming human research subjects, tortured, and killed by
electronic frequency devices, directed energy devices, implants, and directed energy weapons.
Stan J. Caterbone has been a victim of organized stalking since 1987 and a victim of electronic and
direct energy weapons since 2005. He has also been telepathic since 2005. Stan J. Caterbone will
help introduce measures that also pertain to remote viewing; mental telepathy and synthetic
telepathy in more detail. Personal accounts of his pain and torture are also filed in various United
States federal and state courts.
We are urging you to contact your local representatives and support our efforts to pass this
legislation. Below you will find the listings of Pennsylvania State Representatives.
For More Information Please Contact Us At: scaterbone@live.com and visit our library of
documents at https://www.scribd.com/stan5j.5caterbone
_________________________________________________
The draft of the legislation can be found on the following page:
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
328
222
1of
2of
2
of
of
of
151
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2016
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
329
111of
1of
1
of
of
of
51
51
of
51
389
51
51
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
17, 2016
15,
12,
2015
Capitol Office
State Capitol
Jefferson City Mo.
573-751-0246
District Office
Second Street
King City Mo.
660-535-6664
May 21, 2009

To Whom It May Concern,
This letter is to ask for your help for the many constituents in our country who are being affected unjustly
by electronic weapons torture and covert harassment groups. Serious privacy rights violation and physical
injuries have been caused by the activities of these groups and their use of so-called non-lethal weapons on
men, women, and even children.
I am asking you to play a role in helping these victims and also stopping the massive movement in the use
of Veri-chip and RFID technologies in tracking Americans.
Long before Veri-chip was known we were testing these devices on Americans, many without their
knowledge or consent.
There are new revelations of the cancer risk besides the privacy and human rights problems with the use of
Veri-chip and RF signals.
I am asking for your help in stopping these abuses and aiding those already affected.
Sincerely,
Rep. Jim Guest
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
330
444
3of
4of
4
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2016
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
331
333
2of
3of
3
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2016
Organized Stalking and Directed Energy Devices and Weapons Bill
Section 1. Short Title This bill may be cited as the Organized Stalking and Directed Energy Devices and Weapons
Bill
Section 2. Findings and Purpose
A) Findings
1) The constitution guarantees the right of the people to be secure in their person. The Declaration
of Independence asserts as self-evident that all men have certain inalienable rights and that among
these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
2) As Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis wrote in 1928, the framers of the Constitution sought
"to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions, and their sensations." It is for
this reason that they established, as against the government, the right to be let alone as "the most
comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men.
3) The first principle of the Nuremberg Code states that with respect to human research, the
voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. The Nuremberg Code further
asserts that such consent must be competent, informed, and comprehending.
4)There are current regulations implementing the obligations of the United States to adhere to
Article 3 of the United Nations Convention Against Torture and other Forms of Cruel, Inhumane or
Degrading Treatment including all terms that are Subject to any reservations, understandings,
declarations, and provisions contained in the United States Senate resolution of ratification of the
Convention.
B) Purpose
To establish regulations and penalties for those who use any type of electronic frequency devices,
directed energy devices, implants, surveillance technology, and directed energy weapon to
purposefully cause any of the following: stalking, harassing, mental or physical harm, injury,
harmful surveillance, torture, diseases, and death to any United States citizen.
Section 3. Organized Stalking
If two or more persons willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follow or willfully and maliciously
harass another person and who make a credible threat with the intent to place that person in
reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of his or her immediate family, they are guilty of
the crime of organized stalking, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one
year, or by not more than one thousand dollars ($ 1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment,
or by imprisonment in a federal prison.
If two or more persons violate subdivision (a) when there is a temporary restraining order,
injunction, or any other court order in effect prohibiting the behavior described in subdivision (a)
against the same party, they shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three,
or four years.
For the purposes of this section, "harass" means engages in a knowing and willful course of
conduct directed at a specific person that seriously alarms, annoys, torments, or terrorizes the
person, or damages his personal property or possessions and that serves no legitimate purpose. *
**
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
332
555
4of
5of
5
of
of
of
251
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2016

For the purposes of this section, "course of conduct" means two or more acts occurring over a
period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose. Constitutionally protected
activity is not included within the meaning of "course of conduct."
For the purposes of this section, "credible threat" means a verbal or written threat, including that
performed through the use of an electronic communication device, or a threat implied by a pattern
of conduct or a combination of verbal, written, or electronically communicated statements and
conduct, made with the intent to place the person that is the target of the threat in reasonable fear
for his or her safety or the safety of his or her family, or personal property or possessions and
made with the apparent ability to carry out the threat so as to cause the person who is the target
of the threat to reasonably fear for his or her safety or the safety of his or her family or personal
property or possessions. It is not necessary to prove that the defendant had the intent to actually
carry out the threat. The present incarceration of a person making the threat shall not be a bar to
prosecution under this section. Constitutionally protected activity is not included within the
meaning of "credible threat."
For purposes of this section, the term "electronic communication device" includes, but is not limited
to, telephones, cellular phones, computers, video recorders, fax machines, pagers or synthetic
telepathy devices.
The sentencing court also shall consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from any
contact with the victim, that may be valid for up to 10 years, as determined by the court. It is the
intent of the Legislature that the length of any restraining order be based upon the seriousness of
the facts before the court, the probability of future violations, and the safety of the victim and his
or her immediate family.
For purposes of this section, "immediate family" means any spouse, parent, child, any person
related by consanguinity or affinity within the second degree, or any other person who regularly
resides in the household, or who, within the prior six months, regularly resided in the household.
Section 4. Punishment for threats
Any person or persons who willfully threatens to commit a crime which will result in death or great
bodily injury to another person, with the specific intent that the statement, made verbally, in
writing, or by means of an electronic communication device, is to be taken as a threat, even if
there is no intent of actually carrying it out, which, on its face and under the circumstances in
which it is made, is so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to convey to the
person threatened, a gravity of purpose and an immediate prospect of execution of the threat, and
thereby causes that person reasonably to be in sustained fear for his or her own safety or for his or
her immediate family's safety, shall be punished by imprisonment in a federal prison not to exceed
one year..
For the purposes of this section, "immediate family" means any spouse, whether by marriage or
not, parent, child, any person related by consanguinity or affinity within the second degree, or any
other person who regularly resides in the household, or who, within the prior six months, regularly
resided in the household.
"Electronic communication device" includes, but is not limited to, telephones, cellular telephones,
computers, video recorders, fax machines, pagers or synthetic telepathy devices
Obscene, threatening or annoying communication
(a) Every person or persons who, with intent to annoy, telephones or makes constant contact by
means of an electronic communication device with another and addresses to or about the other
person any obscene language or addresses to the other person any threat to inflict injury to the
person or any member of his or her family, or any property or personal possessions is guilty of a
misdemeanor. Nothing in this subdivision shall apply to telephone calls or electronic contacts made
in good faith.
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
333
666
5of
6of
6
of
of
of
351
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2016

(b) Every person or persons who makes repeated telephone calls or makes repeated contact by
means of an electronic communication device with intent to annoy another person at his or her
residence, is, whether or not conversation ensues from making the telephone call or electronic
contact, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Nothing in this subdivision shall apply to telephone calls or
electronic contacts made in good faith.
(c)
Every person or persons who makes repeated telephone calls or makes repeated contact by
means of an electronic communication device with the intent to annoy another person at his or her
place of work is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than one thousand
dollars ($ 1,000), or by imprisonment in a federal prison for not more than one year, or by both
that fine and imprisonment. Nothing in this subdivision shall apply to telephone calls or electronic
contacts made in good faith. This subdivision applies only if one or both of the following
circumstances exist:
(1) There is a temporary restraining order, an injunction, or any other court order, or any
combination of these court orders, in effect prohibiting the behavior described in this section.
(2) The person or persons makes repeated telephone calls or makes repeated contact by means of
an electronic communication device with the intent to annoy another person at his or her place of
work, totaling more than 10 times in a 24-hour period, whether or not conversation ensues from
making the telephone call or electronic contact, and the repeated telephone calls or electronic
contacts are made to the workplace of an adult or fully emancipated minor who is a spouse, former
spouse, cohabitant, former cohabitant, or person with whom the person has a child or has had a
dating or engagement relationship or is having a dating or engagement relationship.
(d) Any offense committed by use of a telephone may be deemed to have been committed where
the telephone call or calls were made or received. Any offense committed by use of an electronic
communication device or medium, including the Internet, may be deemed to have been committed
when the electronic communication or communications were originally sent or first viewed by the
recipient.
(e) Subdivision (a), (b), or (c) is violated when the person acting with intent to annoy makes a
telephone call requesting a return call and performs the acts prohibited under subdivision (a), (b),
or (c) upon receiving the return call.
(f) If probation is granted, or the execution or imposition of sentence is suspended, for any person
or persons convicted under this section, the court may order as a condition of probation that the
person participate in counseling.
(g) For purposes of this section, the term "electronic communication device" includes, but is not
limited to, telephones, cellular phones, computers, video recorders, fax machines, pagers or
synthetic telepathy devices.
Section 5. Assault and battery with an electronic or directed energy weapon

Any person or persons who in the course of organized stalking and harassment, commits an assault
upon the person of another with an unauthorized directed energy weapon shall be punished by
imprisonment in a federal prison for two, three, or four years or by a fine not exceeding ten
thousand dollars ($10,000).
For the purposes of this section the term directed energy weapon is defined as any device that
directs a source of energy (including molecular or atomic energy, subatomic particle beams,
electromagnetic radiation, plasma, or extremely low frequency (ELF) or ultra low frequency (ULF)
energy radiation) against a person or any other unacknowledged or as yet undeveloped means of
inflicting death or injury; or damaging or destroying, a person (or the biological life, bodily health,
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
334
777
6of
7of
7
of
of
of
451
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2016

mental health, or physical and economic well-being of a person via land-based, sea-based, or
space-based systems using radiation, electromagnetic, psychotronic, sonic, laser, or other energies
directed at individual persons or targeted populations for the purpose of information war, mood
management, or mind control of such persons or populations; or by expelling chemical or biological
agents in the vicinity of a person.
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
335
888
7of
8of
8
of
of
of
551
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2016
Richmond council passes resolution

supporting ban on space-based
weapons
May 20, 2015

FacebookTwitterMore
9 comments
The Richmond City Council passed a resolution Tuesday supporting a ban on space-based
weapons after a lengthy discussion over whether individuals are being psychologically
and physically harmed by exotic government-patented attacks from high in the sky.
Councilmember Jovanka Beckles, a member of the Richmond Progressive Alliance (RPA),
introduced the resolution, saying it begins to address concerns of a Richmond resident
who claims shes been targeted by remote transmission from space-based weaponry.
Others claiming to have suffered physical and psychological attacks traveled from around
the country to speak at Tuesdays council meeting. One speaker claimed to have been
zapped multiple times right before his testimony at council.
The resolution supports the Space Preservation Act and Space Preservation Treaty
permanently banning space-based weapons, even though the legislation first introduced
by Rep. Dennis Kucinich in 2001 has never gained traction in Congress. It appears that
Richmond is the first municipality in the U.S. to take up this lofty issue in more than a
decade. In 2002, the City of Berkeley passed a similar resolution supporting the ban.
Conspiracy theorists believe the resolution is a step toward ensuring secret weaponry
such as chemtrails, which are trails left in the sky by high-flying aircraft that supposedly
emit a chemical or biological agent, can no longer target unwitting citizens. For RPA
members on the council, the resolution is also an anti-war initiative.
RPA members on council, Gayle McLaughlin and Eduardo Martinez, also voted in favor of
the resolution. Vice Mayor Jael Myrick and Councilmember Nat Bates were the final two
yes votes, although Bates claimed he was confused by the discussion.
Im going to support the resolution for the simple reason that we have voted on a lot of
Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
336
999
8of
9of
9
of
of
of
851
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2016
dumb ideas, Bates said.

Mayor Tom Butt voted no, saying he believes the conspiracy theory behind space-based
weapons is above the heads of city leaders and has taken time away from more pressing
city matters such as the budget deficit, potholes, and crime. Butt has complained in the
past about the RPA attempting to hijack council sessions to push a radical agenda
regardless of whether the issues are important to Richmond residents.
The mayor also pointed to a signed 1967 treaty banning the militarization of space.
The other dissenting vote came from Councilmember Vinay Pimple, who pointed out that
supporting a limitation on the ability of the U.S. to defend against attacks from longrange missiles might not be wise.
Pimple disputed what he called knee-jerk reactions from RPA members who depicted
President Ronald Reagans proposed space-based anti-missile program of 1983, known as
the Star Wars initiative, as inherently evil. The Cold War initiative was intended to
defend against USSR missiles during the Cold War and was shelved not for the projects
moral ambiguity but its perceived effectiveness, Pimple said.
The idea behind Star Wars, Pimple said, is you can knock out someones weapons long
before they enter your air space. The U.S. used Patriot missiles to knock out Iraqi Scuds
targeting Israel and Saudi Arabia, he added.
RPA members, however, argued that this issue is not just about war but about the
individuals in the U.S. who believe governments are using futuristic weapons in space for
the purpose of inflicting pain and mind control. Martinez argued that they may very well
be telling the truth. He recalled a science fiction novel he wrote a paper on during college
that predicted truths 20 years in advance.
Its easy for me to see that things which are wrong can happen because we have the
wrong mindset, Martinez said.
Myrick said he supported the resolution because he doesnt support war.
The weaponization of spaceis something I think is extremely immoral and we should
not be as a nation engaging in, Myrick said. Maybe some wars are unavoidable, that
may be true. But whatever we can do to get our country away from that mindset..thats
why I support this resolution.
Amy Lee Anderson, a targeted individual who brought the matter to Beckles attention,
was thankful that the council took up the issue.
No where in the United States, no targeted individual can get this support, Anderson
said. We just needed one person, one city. Because of that, you all our heroes. We are
dying within because the technology is so sophisticated. Its hard for someone who has
no experience to fathom it, its so sophisticated.
Related posts:
1. Richmond councilmember pushes city resolution banning exotic space-based

weapons
2. Dirty bomb drill in Richmond alarms conspiracy theorists, including Alex Jones
Comments
1. Cmon Richmond Standard.your bias is showing!

Advanced
Stan
STAN
Stan
J.J.Caterbone
J.CATERBONE
Medi
Media
Caterbone
Group
Grop
Group
Executive
Executive
Press
AND
PressSummary
Executive
Release
DOD
Release
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
337
10
10
10
910
10
of
of
of
9of
51
51
of
50
51
389
51
51
Tuesday,
Saturday
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
November
March
December
15,
March
2016
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
17, 2015
15,
12,
2016
CHAPTER
DIVIDER
Page 338 of 389
Stan J. Caterbone
Freedom From Covert Harassment & Surveillance,

Registered in Pennsylvania
1250 Fremont Street

Lancaster, PA 17603
www.amgglobalentetainmentgroup.com
scaterbone@live.com
717-669-2163
April 20, 2016
Stan J. Caterbone/Advanced Media Group Biography

Present - Advanced Media Group, President, Owner, and Founder.
In 1987 I became a federal whistleblower for the case of local defense contractor International Signal
and Control, or ISC. ISC was a black ops program for the NSA and CIA that was convicted in 1992 for
an elaborate scheme to arm Iraq and other Middle Eastern countries with a broad array of weapons,
most notably cluster bombs. It was the third larges fraud in U.S. History at that time. I have been a
victim of organized stalking since 1987 and a victim of electronic and direct energy weapons since 2005.
I had also been telepathic since 2005. In 2005 the U.S. Sponsored Mind Control turned into an all-out
assault of mental telepathy; synthetic telepathy; hacking of all electronic devices; vandilism and thefts
of personal property, extortions, intellectual property violations, obstruction of justice; violations of due
process; thefts and modifications of court documents; and pain and torture through the use of directed
energy devices and weapons that usually fire a low frequency electromagnetic energy at the targeted
victim. This assault was no coincidence in that it began simultaneously with the filing of the federal
action in U.S. District Court, or CATERBONE v. Lancaster County Prison, et. al., or 05-cv-2288. This
assault began after the handlers remotely trained/sychronized Stan J. Caterbone with mental telepathy.
The main difference opposed to most other victims of this technology is that I am connected 24/7 with
the same person who declares telepathically she is a known celebrity. Over the course of 10 years I
have been telepathic with at least 20 known persons and have spent 10 years trying to validate and
confirm their identities without success. Most U.S. intelligence agencies refuse to cooperate, and the
Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Attorney's Office refuse to comment and act on the
numerous formal complaints that are filed in their respective offices. Most complaints are focused on
the routine victimization's of a targeted individual including but not limited to stalking, harassment,
threats, vandalism, thefts, extortion, burglaries, false imprisonments, fabricated mental health warrants
or involuntary commitments, pain and torture to the body, and most often the cause of obstruction of
justice is the computer hacking.
I have a very sophisticated and authentic library of evidence of the use of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control
technologies on my father and brother that dates back to the 1940's while my father was in the U.S.
Navy after he graduated with honors from Air Gunners School in Florida, including an affidavit motorized
and authenticated by my father in 1996. My brother served in the U.S. Air force and was victim to LSD
experiments of the infamous MKULTRA program in the late 1960's.
In 2015 I filed an amicus curie on behalf of Lisa Michelle Lambert who was convicted in 1992 of the
murder of Laurie Show, both of Lancaster, Pennsylvania. I currently am in litigation in the U.S. Third
Circuit Court of Appeals and in February of 2016 Lisa Michelle Lambert published her book titled
Corruption in Lancaster County My Story, which is available in bookstores and on Amazon.com. I
am in frequent contact with her co-author, Dave Brown of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Stan J.J.Caterbone/Advanced
STAN
CATERBONE AND Media
DOD Group BiographyPage
Page
339
1 of 6389
Saturday
Wednesday,
November
April 12,
20, 2016
In 2009 I Proposed an ORGANIZED STALKING AND DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS HARASSMENT BILL
to Pennsylvania House of Representative Mike Sturla (Lancaster, Pennsylvania) and City of Lancaster
Mayor Richard Gray in 2009. The draft legislation is the work of Missouri House of Representative Jim
Guest, who has been working on helping victims of these horrendous crimes for years. The bill will
provide protections to individuals who are being harassed, stalked, harmed by surveillance, and
assaulted; as well as protections to keep individuals from becoming human research subjects, tortured,
and killed by electronic frequency devices, directed energy devices, implants, and directed energy
weapons. I again reintroduced the bill to the Pennsylvania General Assembly in 2015 and frequented
the Pennsylvania Capitol trying to find support and a sponsor; which I still do to this day.
In 2006 I began his role as an Activist Shareholder for Fulton Financial, which is listed as "FULT" on the
NASDAQ stock exchange. As a founder of Financial Management Group, Ltd., a full service financial firm,
Stan J. Caterbone has drawn upon the success in developing the strategic vision for his company and
the experience gained in directing the legal affairs and public offering efforts in dealing with Fulton
Financial. I have been in recent discussions with the Fulton Financial Board of Directors with regards to
various complaints dealing with such issues as the Resource Bank acquisition and the subprime failures.
I believe that Fulton Financial needs management to become more aggressive in it's strategic planning
and the performance it expects from it's management team in order to increase shareholder value.
Expanding the footprint of the regional bank has not yielded an increase to the bottom line that is
consistent with the expectations of shareholders. Lancaster County has seen several local banking
institutions acquired by larger regional banks, thus increasing the competition Fulton Financial will see in
it's local marketplace as well as in it's regional footprint.
In 2005 I, as a Pro Se Litigant filed several civil actions as Plaintiffs that are in current litigation in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States Third District
Court of Appeals, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, The Pennsylvania Superior Court, the
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, The Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania.
These litigations include violations of intellectual property rights, anti-trust violations, and interference
of contracts relating to several business interests. Central to this litigation is the Digital Movie, Digital
Technologies, Financial Management Group, Ltd,/FMG Advisory, Ltd., and its affiliated businesses along
with a Federal False Claims Act or Federal Whistleblowers Act regarding the firm of International Signal
and Control, Plc., (ISC) the $1Billion Dollar Fraud and the Export violations of selling arms to South
Africa and Iraq. This litigation dates back to 1987. Stan J. Caterbone was a shareholder of ISC, and was
solicited by ISC executives for professional services. The Federal False Claims Act is currently part of
RICO Civil Complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and the
Third Circuit Court of Appeals, as docket no. 05-2288.
In 2005 Advanced Media Group/Project Hope filed a Civil Action in the Court of Common Pleas of
Lancaster County against Drew Anthon and the Eden Resort Inn for their attempts to withhold the
Tourism Tax and Hotel Tax that supports the Downtown Lancaster Convention Center & Marriot. We also
proposed an alternative plan to move the Convention Center to the Hotel Brunswick and Lancaster
Square to all of the major stakeholders. The Lancaster County Convention Center is finally under
construction with a March 2009 Opening date.
In 2005 I was selected to attend the Clinton Global Initiative in New York City after submission of
an essay with and application. I received the invitation from Bruce R. Lindsey, Chief Executive Officer of
the William J. Clinton Foundation.
In 2005 I began our philanthropic endeavors by spending our energies and working with such
organizations as; ONE.org, Livestrong.org, WoundedWarriors.org, The Clinton Global Initiative,
Lancaster Convention Center Authority, Lancaster Chamber of Commerce, Toms Project Hope, People to
People International, GlobalWarming.org, Contact Lancaster/24 Hour Suicide Hotline, Schreiber Pediatric
Center, and numerous others.
STAN
CATERBONE AND Media
Page
340
2 of 6389
Saturday
Wednesday,
November
April 12,
20, 2016
In 2004 I embarked on our past endeavors in the music and entertainment industries with an emphasis
on assisting for the fair and equitable distribution of artists rights and royalties in the fight against
electronic piracy. We have attempted to assist in developing new business models to address the
convergence of physical and electronic mediums; as it displaces royalties and revenues for those
creating, promoting, and delivering a range of entertainment content via wireless networks.
In 2000 to 2002 I developed an array of marketing and communication tools for wholesalers of the
AIM Investment Group and managed several communication programs for several of the company
wholesalers throughout the United States and Costa Rica. We also began a Day Trading project that
lasted until 2004 with success.
In 1999 I developed a comprehensive business plan to develop the former Sprecher Brewery, known as
the Excelsior Building on E. King Street, in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. This plan was developed in
conjunction with the Comprehensive Economic Development Plan for the Revitalization of Downtown
Lancaster and the Downtown Lancaster Convention Center for the former Watt & Shand building.
In 1999 I contributed to the debate, research, and implementation of strategies to counter the effects
of the global Y2K threat to the worlds computer technologies. I attended the U.S. Sponsored Y2K
symposium and Conference in Washington, D.C. hosted by the Senate Y2K Subcommittee and Senator
William Bennett.
In 1998 I had began to administer the charity giving of Toms Project Hope, a non-profit organization
promoting education and awareness for mental illness and suicide prevention. We had provided funding
for the Mental Health Alliance of Lancaster County, Contact Lancaster (The 24/7 Suicide Prevention
Hotline), The Schreiber Pediatric Center, and other charitable organizations and faith based charities.
The video "Numbers Don't Lie" have been distributed to schools, non profit organizations, faith based
initiatives, and municipalities to provide educational support for the prevention of suicide and to bring
awareness to mental illness problems.
In 1996 I had done consulting for companies under KAL, Inc., during the time that I was controller of
Pflumm Contractors, Inc., I was retained by Gallo Rosso Restaurant and Bar to computerized their
accounting and records management from top to bottom. I had also provided consulting for the
computerization of accounting and payroll for Lancaster Container, Inc., of Washington Boro. I was
retained to evaluate and develop an action plan to migrate the Informations Technologies of the Jay
Group, formally of Ronks, PA, now relocated to a new $26 Million Dollar headquarters located in West
Hempfield Township of Lancaster County. The Jay Group had been using IBM mainframe technologies
hosted by the AS 400 computer and server. I was consulting on the merits of migrating to a PC based
real time networking system throughout the entire organization. Currently the Jay Group employees
some 500 employees with revenues in excess of $50 Million Dollars per year.
In 1993 I was retained by Pflumm Contractors, Inc., as controller, and was responsible for saving the
company from a potential bankruptcy. At that time, due to several unpaid contracts, the company was
facing extreme pressure from lenders and the bonding insurance company. We were responsible for
implementing computerized accounting, accounting and contract policies and procedures, human
resource policies and procedures, marketing strategies, performance measurement reporting, and
negotiate for the payment of unpaid contracts. The bonding company was especially problematic, since
it was the lifeline to continue work and bidding for public contracts. The Bank of Lancaster County
demanded a complete accounting of the operations in order to stave off a default on the notes and loans
it was holding. We essentially revamped the entire operation. Within 3 years, the company realized an
increase in profits of 3 to 4 times its previous years, and record revenues.
STAN
CATERBONE AND Media
Page
341
3 of 6389
Saturday
Wednesday,
November
April 12,
20, 2016
In 1991 I was elected to People to People International and the Citizen Ambassador Program, which
was founded by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1956. The program was founded to To give
specialists from throughout the world greater opportunities to work together and effectively
communicate with peers, The Citizen Ambassador program administers face-to-face scientific, technical,
and professional exchanges throughout the world. In 1961, under President John F. Kennedy, the State
Department established a non-profit private foundation to administer the program. We were scheduled
to tour the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe to discuss printing and publishing technologies with
scientists and technicians around the world.
In 1990 I had worked on developing voice recognition systems for the governments technology think
tank - NIST (National Institute for Standards & Technology). I co-authored the article Escaping the Unix
Tar Pit with a scientist from NIST that was published in the magazine DISC, then one of the leading
publications for the CD-ROM industry. Today, most all call centers deploy that technology whenever you
call an 800 number, and voice recognition is prevalent in all types of applications involving
telecommunications.
In 1989 I had founded Advanced Media Group, Ltd., and was one of only 5 or 6 U.S. domestic
companies that had the capability to manufacture CD-ROM's. We did business with commercial
companies, government agencies, educational institutions, and foreign companies. I performed services
and contracts for the Department of Defense, NASA, National Institution of Standards & Technology
(NIST), Department of Defense, The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), and the
Defense Mapping Agency, Central Intelligence Agency, (CIA), IBM, Microsoft, AMP, Commodore
Computers, American Bankers Bond Buyers, and a host of others. I also was working with R.R,
Donnelly's Geo Systems, which was developing various interactive mapping technologies, which is now a
major asset of Map Quest. Map Quest is the premier provider of mapping software and applications for
the internet and is often used in delivering maps and directions for Fortune 500 companies. We had
arranged for High Industries to sell American Helix, the manufacturer of compact discs, to R.R. Donnelly.
We had brokered a deal and the executives from Donnellys Chicago headquarters flew to Lancaster to
discuss the deal and perform due diligence of the manufacturing facility located in the Greenfield
Industrial Park.
In 1987 Power Station Studios of New York and Tony Bongiovi retained me as executive producer
of a motion picture project. The theatrical and video release was to be delivered in a digital format; the
first of its kind. We had originated the marketing for the technology, and created the concept for the
Power Station Digital Movie System (PSDMS), which would follow the copyright and marketing formula
of the DOLBY technology trademark.
We had also created and developed marketing and patent research for the development and
commercialization of equipment that we intended to manufacture and market to the recording industry
featuring the digital technology. Sidel, Gonda, Goldhammer, and Abbot, P.C. of Philadelphia was the lead
patent law firm that We had retained for the project. Power Station Studios was the brainchild of Tony
Bongiovi, a leading engineering genius discovered by Motown when he was 15. Tony and Power Station
Studios was one of the leading recording studios in the country, and were responsible for developing Bon
Jovi, a cousin. Power Station Studios clients included; Bruce Springsteen, Diana Ross, Cyndi Lauper,
Talking Heads, Madonna, The Ramones, Steve Winwood, and many others. Tony and Power Station
Studios had produced the original Sound Track for the original Star Wars motion picture. It was
released for distribution and was the number one Sound Track recording of its time.
Tony Bongiovi was also active in working and researching different aerospace technologies. * We had
developed and authored a Joint Venture Proposal for SONY to partner with us in delivering the Digital
Movie and its related technologies to the marketplace. The venture was to include the commercialization
of technologies, which Tony Bongiovi had developed for the recording industry simultaneously with the
release of the Digital Movie.
STAN
CATERBONE AND Media
Page
342
4 of 6389
Saturday
Wednesday,
November
April 12,
20, 2016
I also created the concept for the PSDMS trademark, which was to be the Trademark logo for the
technology, similar to the DOLBY sound systems trademark. The acronyms stand for the Power Station
Digital Movie System. Today, DVD is the mainstay for delivering digital movies on a portable medium, a
compact disc.
In 1987 I had a created and developed FMG Mortgage Banking, a company that was funded by a major
banking firm in Houston Texas. We had the capability to finance projects from $3 to $100 million dollars.
Our terms and rates were so attractive that we had quickly received solicitations from developers across
the country. We were also very attractive to companies that wanted to raise capital that include both
debt and equity. Through my company, FMG, we could raise equity funding through private placements,
and debt funding through FMG Mortgage Banking. We were retained by Gamillion Studios of Hollywood,
California to secure financing of their postproduction Film Studio that was looking to relocate to North
Carolina. We had secured refinancing packages for Norris Boyd of and the Olde Hickory and were in the
midst of replacing the current loan that was with Commonwealth National Bank. We had meetings and
discussions with Drew Anton of the Eden Resort, for refinancing a portion of his debt portfolio. We were
quickly seeking commitments for real estate deals from New York to California. We also had a number of
other prominent local developers seeking our competitive funding, including Owen Kugal, High
Industries, and the Marty Sponougle a partner of The Fisher Group (owner of the Rt. 30 Outlets). We
were constantly told that our financing packages were more competitive than local institutions.
In 1986 I had founded Financial Management Group, Ltd (FMG); a large financial services organization
comprised of a variety of professionals operating in one location. We had developed a stock purchase
program for where everyone had the opportunity for equity ownership in the new firm. FMG had
financial planners, investment managers, accountants, attorneys, realtors, liability insurance services,
tax preparers, and estate planners operating out of our corporate headquarters in Lancaster. In one
year, we had 24 people on staff, had approximately 12 offices in Pennsylvania, and
several satellite offices in other states. We had in excess of $50 million under management, and our
advisors were generating almost $4 million of commissions, which did not include the fees from the
other professionals. We had acquired our own Broker Dealer firm and were valued at about $3 to $4
million.
In 1985 I developed the Easter Regional Free Agent Camp, the first Free Agent Camp for the
Professional Football industry; which was videotaped for distribution to the teams scouting departments.
(See Washington Post page article of March 24, 1985) Current camps were dependant on the team
scouts to travel from state to state looking for recruits. We had developed a strategy of video taping the
camp and the distributing a copy, free of charge to the teams, to all of the scouting departments for
teams in all three leagues FL, CFL and WFL. My brother was signed at that camp by the Ottawa
Roughriders of the CFL, and went on to be a leading receiver while J.C. Watts was one of the leagues
most prominent quarterbacks. My brother also played 2 years with the Miami Dolphins while Dan Marino
was starting quarterback. We were a Certified Agent for the National Football League Players
Association. Gene Upshaw, the President of the NFLPA had given me some helpful hints for my camp,
while we were at a Conference for agents of the NFL. The Washington Post wrote a full-page article
about our camp and associated it with other camps that were questionable about their practices.
Actually, that was the very reason for our camp. We had attended many other camps around the
country that were not very well organized and attracted few if any scouts. We had about 60 participants,
with one player coming from as far away as Hawaii. We held the camp at Lancaster Catholic, with a
professional production company filming the entire camp, while I did the editing and produced the video.
The well respected and widely acclaimed professional football scout, Gil Brandt, of the Dallas Cowboys,
had given me support for my camp during some conversations We had with him and said he looked
forward to reviewing the tapes for any hopeful recruits.
STAN
CATERBONE AND Media
Page
343
5 of 6389
Saturday
Wednesday,
November
April 12,
20, 2016
In 1985 I was elected Vice President of the Central Pennsylvania Chapter of the International
Association of Financial Planners, and helped build that chapter by increasing membership 3to 4 times.
We had personally retained the nationally acclaimed and nationally syndicated Financial Planner, Ms.
Alexandria Armstrong of Washington D.C.; to host a major fundraiser. More than 150 professionals
attended the dinner event that was held at the Eden Resort & Conference Center. Ms. Armstrong
discussed financial planning and how all of the professions needed to work together in order to be most
effective for their clients. We attracted a wide variety of professionals including; brokers, lawyers,
accountants, realtors, tax specialists, estate planners, bankers, and investment advisors. Today, it has
become evident that financial planning was the way of the future. In 1986 executives approached us
from Blue Ball National Bank to help them develop a Financial Planning department within their bank.
In 1984 I had helped to develop strategic planning for Sandy Weill, former President of Citi Group (the
largest banking entity in the U.S). We were one of several associates asked to help advise on the future
of Financial Planning and how it would impact the brokerage and the investment industry at large. Mr.
Weil was performing due diligence for the merger of American Express and IDS (Investors Diversified
Services). We were at that time a national leader in the company in delivering Fee Based Financial
Planning Services, which was a new concept in the investment community and mainstream investors.
That concept is now widely held by most investment advisers.
Stan J. Caterbone, Pro Se Litigant
Freedom From Covert Harassment & Surveillance,
Registered in Pennsylvania
1250 Fremont Street

Lancaster, PA 17603
scaterbone@live.com
717-669-2163
ACTIVE COURT CASES

J.C. No. 03-16-90005 Office of the Circuit Executive, United States Third Circuit Court of
Appeals - COMPLAINT OF JUDICIALMISCONDUCT OR DISABILITY re 15-3400 and 16-1149
U.S.C.A. Third Circuit Court of Appeals Case No. 16-1149;15-3400; 16-1001; 07-4474
U.S. District Court Eastern District of PA Case No. 15-03984; 14-02559; 05-2288; 06-4650
Superior Court of Pennsylvania Case No. 1561 MDA 2015; 1519 MDA 2015
Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas Case No. 08-13373; 15-10167; 06-03349, CI-06-03401
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for The Eastern District of Pennsylvania Case No. 16-10157
STAN
CATERBONE AND Media
Page
344
6 of 6389
Saturday
Wednesday,
November
April 12,
20, 2016
CHAPTER
DIVIDER
Page 345 of 389
Stan J. Caterbone
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
scaterbone@live.com
717-669-2163
Change.org Petition by Stan J. Caterbone
and Advanced Media Group
March 17, 2016
When will the United States of America Settle with Targeted Individuals?
The United States would provide $100,000 per year for documented Targeted
Individuals, payable in the form of an annuity with survivor benefits.
The United States would provide a $10 Million Lump Sum for Suspicious or Accidental
Death.
The United States would provide Medical Benefits for life.
The United States would provide an extra layer of security by law enforcement for persons,
property, identity, and cybersecurity of targeted individuals.
The United States newly formed U.S. Task Force for Targeted Individuals would take a
random sampling of 200 Targeted Individuals Cases Including Affidavits and
Documentation. They would then develop a baseline for evidence and required
documentation.
Settlement is fair considering the following case law:
Erin Andrews Awarded $55 Million in Peephole Video Lawsuit
1. Andrews sought $75 million from the owner of the Nashville Marriott at Vanderbilt
University, where she was staying in 2008 when the incident occurred, and Michael
David Barrett, the stalker who booked hotel rooms next to her in Nashville and
Columbus, Ohio, and secretly recorded (via a peephole) and released videos of her
naked. Barrett, whom the jury found to be 51% at fault, has to pay more than $28
million. Nashville Marriott owner West End Hotel Partners and former operator Windsor
Capital Group, which were found to be 49% at fault, have to pay more than $26
million.
This is my story Advanced Media Group and Stan J. Caterbone are Targeted and Victims of U.S.
Sponsored Mind Control Experimentation Programs. We have been engaged in
RECLAMATION; (assets; real estate; personal and business real property; intellectual property;
and business interests) LITIGATION; and RESEARCH since 2005 in federal and state courts. All
activities are for the purpose of restoring Advanced Media Group and all affiliated companies and
Stan J. Caterbone to WHOLE.
Stan J. Caterbone was recently accepted into the Graduate Studies and Research Program at
Millersville University in April of 2009 where a more formal research approach to mind control and
MKULTRA programs will be studied. Other studies will be considered in the areas of law; finance;
computer science; and philosophy.
Stan J. Caterbone and Advanced Media Group are not able to continue it's litigation until it's
security needs are satisfied and it's computer/electronic property is returned and/or replaced.
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
346
111of
of
of
of113
389
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
Stan J. Caterbone and the Advanced Media Group have been slandered, defamed, and publicly
discredited since 1987 due to going public (Whistle Blower) with allegations of misconduct and
fraud within International Signal & Control, Plc. of Lancaster, Pa. (ISC pleaded guilty to selling
arms to Iraq via South Africa and a $1 Billion Fraud in 1992). Unfortunately we are forced to
defend our reputation and the truth without the aid of law enforcement and the media, which
would normally prosecute and expose public corruption. We utilize our communications to thwart
further libelous and malicious attacks on our person, our property, and our business. We continue
our fight for justice through the Courts, and some communications are a means of protecting our
rights to continue our pursuit of justice. Advanced Media Group is also a member of the media.
Reply if you wish to be removed from our Contact List. How long can Lancaster County and
Lancaster City hide me and Continue to Cover-Up my Whistle Blowing of the ISC Scandel?
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
347
222of
of
of
of113
389
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
Stan J. Caterbone
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
scaterbone@live.com
717-669-2163
January 22, 2016

Re: Good Old Boys Network and the Kathleen Kane Coup
I have been the victim of a widespread civil and criminal conspiracy that dates back to
1987, made up of the very same actors that Kathleen Kane is up against, the "good old boys". In
1987 I blew the whistle on a local company, International Signal & Control, or ISC, that was
indicted for selling arms and weapons to Iraq via South Africa with the aid and support of the CIA
and the NSA. It was the 3rd largest white collar crime at that time, valued at $1 Billion Dollars. I
was the victim of a widespread wholesale cover-up through an elaborate slander campaign that
included 29 false arrests, multiple false imprisonments, and a fabricated mental illness record that
to this day is still resonating.
Kathleen Kane must be commended for her courage and her determination for taking on
this culture of arrogance and total disregard for the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law that they
so emphatically espouse to uphold. They believe and conduct their affairs in a manner that
suggests they are above the law and we, the Pennsylvania taxpayers, are beneath the law. The
sad fact that it reaches into the judiciary and law enforcement agencies is undeniably the most
outrageous and deplorable truth to this scandal. Case in point, until yesterday I was the
APPELLANT in a case before the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals that involves the Habeus
Corpus for convicted and imprisoned Lisa Michelle Lambert. A murder case in the early 1990's
that was made famous when in 1997 U.S. District Judge Stewart Dalzell found her actually
innocent due to "one of the worst cases of prosecutorial misconduct in the English speaking
language" and released her from prison. The case drew nationwide attention when then
Pennsylvania Attorney General, then Mike Fischer, enlisted the help of 9 other state attorney
generals to curtail the reach of the federal bench in state matters concerning Habeus Corpus
cases. To make matters worst, 38,000 Lancastrians signed petitions to remove the Honorable
Stewart Dalzell from the federal bench.
Mike Fisher and company won and Lisa Michelle Lambert was back in prison within 9
months while the case went back to the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas. The Honorable
Judge Lawrence Stengel held a bench hearing where she was again found guilty and sentenced to
life in prison. The case was covered by the LA Times in a multi-part Sunday series, A&E producer
Bill Curtis did a 48 Hours special, and Lifetime Movies made it into a prime time movie.
This year, these "Good Old Boys" made it so difficult for me to litigate my efforts to free
Lisa Michelle Lambert, that I had to dismiss my appeal and effectively withdraw as her MOVANT
and Advocate. I was trying to persuade the courts that my own demise was the result of the same
type of wholesale prosecutorial misconduct by some of the very same principals that Lisa Michelle
Lambert fell victim to. My efforts were so distasteful to the powers to be that her court appointed
attorney threatened me with criminal prosecution for no other reason than I might actually be
successful in helping her win the Habeus Corpus she filed in May of 2014. I allege the U.S. District
Judge was trying in vain to invalidate and derail my own federal court cases that seek to restore
me to whole from a life of ruin, misery, torture, and financial collapse.
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
348
333of
of
of
of113
389
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
For the record, I founded a financial firm in the 1980's that reached 5 states and raised
some 90 million dollars in a matter of 9 months. In the late 1980's and early 1990's I was one of
5 domestic companies that had the capabilities of manufacturing CDROM's that included a client
list that reached across the globe and included government agencies and fortune 500 companies.
And in 1987, myself and a genius recording engineer named Tony Bongiovi and his famous
recording studio, Power Station Studios of New York, were developing and producing the first
"digital movie". The intellectual property rights and the RICO statutes that apply to my legal
claims in federal courts were too much for the "Good Old Boys" to handle.
_____________/S/___________
ACTIVE COURT CASES
U.S.C.A. Third Circuit Court of Appeals Case No. 16-1149;15-3400; 16-1001; 07-4474
U.S. District Court Eastern District of PA Case No. 15-03984; 14-02559; 05-2288; 06-4650
Superior Court of Pennsylvania Case No. 1561 MDA 2015; 1519 MDA 2015
Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas Case No. 08-13373; 15-10167; 06-03349
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
349
444of
of
of
of113
389
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
AFFIDAVIT

Affiant
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
Telephone: 717-826-5354
State of Pennsylvania
County of Lancaster
My current legal name is,Stan J Caterbone and my current address is, 1250 Fremont Street,
Lancaster, PA
17603 . I am presently 57 years of age, and my current address of residence is
same as before. I, the Affiant submits and writes these statements of and on my own free will
and on behalf of myself, Stan J. Caterbone.
I, the Affiant states that I have been tortured by U.S. Sponsored Mind Control technologies; and
have experienced the following;
burns, directed high levels of energy being subjected to my
body, private parts, heart, head, spine, joints, etc. I the Affiant states that I have been attacked
by (individuals, police, military, and intelligence agents, etc.) I the Affiant states that I have made
formal police reports to: Lancaster City Police, Manheim Township Police, Southern
Regional Police, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Attorney Office, Pennsylvania
Attorney Office, Lancaster County District Attorney, Lancaster City Mayor and Office, I
have contacted the Pennsylvania Attorney General, Joe Pitts Office, Mike Sturla' Office,
Senator Arlen Specter, and Bob Casey and former senator Edward Kennedy; Brian
Cutler, and Ryan Aument, and countless other members of the Pennsylvania General Assembly,
and receive no support, just involuntary psychiatric commitments, and the endorsement and the
support for my perpetrators to continue the assaults.
I the Affiant have been arrested, forcibly placed in a mental hospital, physically harmed, assaulted
by countless officials, military, and civilians. I the Affiant states that my life has been ruined as I
am no longer employable, I am workplace mobbed, my work is being damaged, my family is
being threatened, etc.
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
350
555of
of
of
of113
389
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
I am or have become a victim of (torture, attacks, assaults, harassment, sexual abuse, police
abuse, government funded technology abuse, etc., and am now aware that these technologies are
being funded by the United States government with most of these technologies being developed
for war are also now being tested and evaluated per Department of Defense Directive 5240.1-r
Procedure 13 Human Experimentation (on U.S. Persons and others) for Intelligence Purposes.
As a human being and with Human Rights I have not given approval for the use or abuse of my
body in any form to anyone or to any entity within or outside of the United States government to
include any corporation, researcher, scientist, military agency or anyone affiliated within or
outside of any agency, corporation or individual that has resulted in the harms that my body, life,
property, career and or finances have endured. To further state that military training documents
such
as
the
Department
of
Defense
Joint
https://www.aclu.org/files/dronefoia/dod/drone_dod_jp3_60.pdf;
Targeting
DOD
Joint
Publication
Targeting
of
Individual and Groups that involves the United States Joint Chiefs of Command and the United
States (HHS) Health and Human Services involvement, an agency that oversee the medical
records of every citizen along with citizens who are being used illegally for testing and evaluation
of war technologies;
I the Affiant of this Affidavit do object to such treatment and abuse of my body and life. In
addition to the above noted military training documents that is resulting in the harm to myself
and to millions of citizens of this country I do as well object to the Department of Defense
Directive 5240.1-r Procedure 13 that has resulted in the destruction of my health as will where
this document has existed for decades with no oversight yet it still exists as a published and
available document resulting in harm to myself and millions of citizens. The chapter 13 reads as
follows:
C13. CHAPTER 13 PROCEDURE 13. EXPERIMENTATION ON HUMAN SUBJECTS FOR
C13.1. APPLICABILITY This procedure applies to experimentation on human subjects if such
experimentation is conducted by or on behalf of a DoD intelligence component. This procedure
does not apply to experimentation on animal subjects.
C13.2.1. Experimentation in this context
means any research or testing activity involving human subjects that may expose such subjects
to the possibility of permanent or temporary injury (including physical or psychological damage
and damage to the reputation of such persons) beyond the risks of injury to which such subjects
are ordinarily exposed in their daily lives.
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
351
666of
of
of
of113
389
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
C13.2.2. Experimentation is conducted on behalf of a DoD intelligence component if it is

conducted under contract to that component or to another DoD Component for the benefit of the
intelligence component or at the request of such a component regardless of the existence of a
contractual relationship.
C13.2.3. Human subjects in this context includes any person whether or not such person is a
United States person.
C13.3. PROCEDURES C13.3.1. Experimentation on human subjects
conducted by or on behalf of a DoD intelligence component may be undertaken only with the
informed consent of the subject, in accordance with guidelines issued by the Department of
Health and Human Services, setting out conditions that safeguard the welfare of such subjects.
DoD 5240.1-R, December 1982 58
I hereby state that the information above is true, to the best of my knowledge. I also confirm that
the information here is both accurate and complete, and relevant information has not been
omitted. (1) For an individual acting in his or her own right I set forth my signature:
Stan (ley) J. Caterbone Affiant Signed________________________________, Affiant

Stan J. Caterbone, State of Pennsylvania, County of Lancaster, City of Lancaster,
On
this, _________day of ______________, 20____, before me a notary public, the

undersigned (print name) _______________________________________, personally
appeared before me, known to me (by satisfactorily proven identification and affixed
signature) ______________________________ to be the person whose name is
subscribed to this document, and acknowledged that he or she executed the same for
the purposes therein contained. In witness hereof, I hereunto set my hand and official
seal.____________________________________
Notary Public ___________________________ My Commission Expires on
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
352
777of
of
of
of113
389
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
KEISLING: Palace coup: what the Kathleen Kane prosecution is really ...
1 of 4
http://newslanc.com/2015/12/09/keisling-palace-coup-what-the-kathleen...
December 9, 2015
Letters to the Editor, News and Commentary
Breaking: Kanes staff has approved one of two contracts needed to hire a special prosecutor to
investigate the porno email scandal
by Bill Keisling
Have Republicans in the top levels of Pennsylvania government and courts engineered a takeover of the
Democratic-controlled state attorney generals office?
Has this high-level palace coup taken place under everyones noses?
Are the criminal charges brought by Republican officials against AG
Kane, her subsequent law license suspension, and efforts by the state
senate to remove her from office all simply a ruse meant to distract
voters from what is really going on: an attempt by Republicans to control
policy in the attorney generals office, and throughout state government,
without having won an election?
Recent developments in all three branches of Pennsylvania government
make these reasonable questions.
Several weeks ago, on November 18, four high-level staffers from the
AGs office testified before the state senate committee exploring AG
Kanes removal from office that theyve been running nearly all the
offices legal functions since Kane could no longer practice law.
Kathleen Kane
First Deputy Attorney General Bruce Beemer, and three executive
deputy attorneys general Robert Mulle, James Donahue, and Lawrence Cherba testified they have
effectively taken control of the elective attorney generals office following Kanes unprecedented law
license suspension.
First Deputy AG Beemer is a holdover from the days when Republican Attorney General Tom Corbett ran
the office, before Kanes election in 2012.
When she came into office Kane probably thought Beemer was a nice guy, and a competent and
experienced career prosecutors, who should be kept around.
But did Attorney General Kane make a mistake not having her own loyalists in these top positions?
Several weeks back, Beemer and the other three made a splash at the senate impeachment committee
when they spoke about the importance of the many criminal cases the office was responsible for handling.
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
353
888of
of
of
of113
389
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
3/22/2016 2:11 AM
2 of 4
But criminal cases prosecuted by the AGs office

are, from a public policy perspective, small
potatoes.
The state AGs office is a johnny-come-lately in
criminal prosecutions. Before the office became
an elective one in 1980, the AGs office seldom if
ever prosecuted criminals. (Criminal
prosecutions, before 1980, were referred to local
DAs.)
For centuries, the most important job of the
Pennsylvania attorney general has been to issue
Four guys running the AG's office: who voted for them?
opinions on the legality or constitutionality of state actions or programs.

Opinions issued by the Attorney General can and do concern the nuts and bolts of how state agencies are
run from the legality of programs, to who is hired, to how paper clips are bought, to the treatment and
execution of prisoners.
Legal opinions of the attorney general carry the full force of law, until and unless a court overturns them.
Beemer and his three associates, testifying before the state senate, played down these important
constitutional responsibilities. These days, Beemer said, the AGs office rarely if ever issues important
opinions on government or inter-agency matters.
Two recent and important issues demanding high-level decisions in the AGs office clearly demonstrate
this is not true.
The first issue is a constitutional matter: the state senate is set to vote on whether to hold a hearing to
remove Kane from office, bypassing the constitutional impeachment process. Its the historic role of the
attorney generals office to intervene on questions of the legality of removing an official from office.
The second issue is a personnel, or contract, matter: The contract for Kanes choice of the special
prosecutor to investigate the court pornography email scandal must be reviewed and approved by her
office.
AG Kane selected Douglas Gansler, a former Maryland attorney general, and his Washington DC-based
law firm, to review the hundreds of thousands of emails Kane found on her office servers.
But contracts hiring Gansler and his firm must be approved and signed by the attorney generals office
staff.
The responsibility to review and approve Ganslers contract fell to one of the four AG office employees
who testified several weeks ago before the state senate panel to remove Kane: Robert Mulle, the
executive deputy attorney general of the civil law division.
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
354
999of
of
of
of113
389
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
3/22/2016 2:11 AM
3 of 4
Two employment contracts, one involving Gansler and the other his firm, landed on Deputy AG Mulles
desk last week. Mulle evidentially at first objected to the form and content of the special prosecutor
agreements.
Kanes spokesman, Chuck Ardo, tells me, (Deputy AG) Mulle was able to work with Kane to massage the
first of the two contracts, about the firm.
That first contract has been signed, Ardo says. But Ganslers personal contract has yet to be approved, or
signed.
They are still working on Ganslers contract, Ardo says. But she certainly got the first part approved.
Needless to say, the last thing state Republicans want is an unfettered special prosecutor looking into
hundreds of thousands of correspondence found on the AGs email servers.
Likewise, the attorney generals office must soon respond to the senates demand for a hearing to remove
Kane from office.
Those running Kanes office apparently dont seem to be in any hurry, or think its their job, to weigh in on
the constitutionality of the senates proposed action.
But, it should go without saying, if a Democrat-controlled senate were to try removing a Republican
attorney general in this matter, the court papers already would be flying.
Likewise, if the porno email scandal involved mostly Democrats, instead of mostly Republican prosecutors
and judges, a special prosecutor would likely already be on the job.
So Kane finds herself having difficulties directing her own staff to work on these two important matters.
Three million Pennsylvania voters elected Kane. Voters didnt elect her staff members.
Making matters worse, should Attorney General Kane rightfully attempt to fire Republican loyalists for
failure to do their jobs, or insubordination, they will no doubt beat a trail to the Republican prosecutors and
judges in Montgomery County, claiming Kane is retaliating against them. GOP prosecutors would then
likely seek more criminal charges against her.
Not only average citizens, and voters, should take note of all this. Gov. Tom Wolf should take a long look
at whats going on in the AGs office.
Faced with large Republican majorities in the legislature, Gov. Wolf likely must soon turn to governing by
executive decree.
Those executive decrees will be subject to the approval of the attorney generals office.
Should Kane be removed from office, the GOP senate sooner or later must approve Gov. Wolfs
appointment of an attorney general to replace Kane.
Until then, Beemer and the three others will be running the office of attorney general.
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
355
10
10
10of
of
of
of389
113
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
3/22/2016 2:11 AM
KEISLING: Senate unwittingly exposes darkest chapter in state legislati...
1 of 12
http://newslanc.com/2015/12/23/keisling-senate-unwittingly-exposes-dar...
December 23, 2015
Featured, Keisling on Pennsylvania Politics, News and Commentary
Senate invokes constitutional provision against AG Kathleen Kane tied to era of eugenics, forced
sterilizations, and the Holocaust
by Bill Keisling
The Pennsylvania Senate, carelessly hoping to remove state Attorney General Kathleen Kane from office,
has unwittingly invoked an obscure and long-forgotten clause in the state constitution thats rooted in
some of the darkest days in the commonwealths history.
The constitutional provisions, called Direct Address or Direct Removal, were added to the state
constitution in 1874 to remove judges and other office holders.
The removal provisions are firmly tied to that historical periods growing infatuation with identifying mental
defectives, eugenics, forced sterilizations, and what eventually would lead to the Holocaust of World War
II.
These forgotten provisions, remaining today like a shrunken appendix in Article VI Section 7 of the
Pennsylvania constitution, were used only twice before in the states history, with varying and
controversial results: in 1885 and 1891.
Century-old legislative records make clear that the provisions were meant to identify and remove judges
and state office holders with mental or physical infirmities, and occasions not rising to impeachable
offenses.
For example, in the 1885 case, which involved the removal from the bench of Pittsburgh Judge John
Kirkpatrick, who evidently suffered a stroke, the legislature was told:
There can be no doubt, but that the provisions of the Constitution for the removal of judges, on address
of two thirds of both House of the Legislature, was intended to apply to cases where a judge had become
incapable of discharging the duties of his office, from either bodily or mental infirmity. So, if the mind
and memory of a judge should become imbecile from old age or other cause (although not amounting to
lunacy) and that should be satisfactorily proved, it would be the imperative duty of the Legislature to ask
his removal.
Problem was, in the late 1800s and early 1900s, medical science had yet to understand the causes or
treatments of brain disorders, mental illness, or hereditary diseases.
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
356
11
11
11of
of
of
of389
113
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
3/22/2016 2:11 AM
2 of 12
The start of the Neo- Darwinian era in Pennsylvania
To understand the purpose and intent of these 1874 constitutional

provisions, todays Pennsylvanians must bear in mind the times and
motivations in which they were added to the constitution.
In 1874, in the Victorian era, the public was grappling with the
implications of what was by far the greatest scientific insight of the
age: the publication, fifteen years earlier, of Charles Darwins book
On the Origin of Species, and his follow-up 1871 book, The Descent
of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex.
Darwins two books, its fair to say, upended not only science, but
also medicine, religion, society, and how people thought of
themselves, and their origins, and the order of things.
Charles Darwin as monkey in the 1870s
Darwins work was every bit as disruptive in the nineteenth century as

Einsteins work would be in the twentieth. Perhaps even more so.
By the 1870s, young, forward thinking members of society, and Pennsylvania lawmakers, would find
themselves grappling with the implications of Darwinian evolution.
Even so, no one, including Darwin himself, much understood the genetic or cellular mechanisms at work
behind evolution and natural selection.
It would be another quarter century before Friar Gregor Mendels lost and ignored work on the science of
genetics would be rediscovered, around 1900; and it wouldnt be until much later, in the 1950s, that
James Watson, Francis Frick and Rosalind Franklin would identify the structure of DNA in the double
helix.
Until then, in the 1860s onward, a growing movement, led by Darwins half-cousin, statistician Francis
Galton, would put forward the pseudo-scientific theory of eugenics to explain all sorts of societal and
personal ills, and supposed solutions.
Galton wrote that just as physical traits were inherited, so were mental abilities. He argued that heredity
must henceforth be guided by conscious decisions, so that the less fit not overrun the more fit.
In Galtons view, social institutions such as welfare and insane asylums were allowing inferior humans to
survive and reproduce at levels faster than the more superior humans in respectable society, and if
corrections were not soon taken, society would be awash with inferiors,' Wikipedia tells us.
Its hard to overstate the impact all this had on Pennsylvania. In Pennsylvania, the eugenics movement
grew like wildfire in the last decades of the 19th century.
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
357
12
12
12of
of
of
of389
113
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
3/22/2016 2:11 AM
3 of 12
Eugenicists, imagining that human

problems could be viewed as problems
of selection and breeding, proposed all
sorts of outlandish and cruel solutions
for supposed societal ills.
To address these problems,
eugenicists in Pennsylvania, a hotbed
of the pseudo-science, would come to
advocate the forced sterilizations of
prostitutes, those with mental
conditions, prisoners and others.
The belief was that if society could
identify defects like feeble-
Charles Darwin in 1880 and his cousin eugenicist Francis Galton
mindedness, imbecility, idiocy, lunacy, or loose sexual morals, society could, and should, take action and
intervene.
Society could benefit by sterilizing or otherwise neutralizing the carriers of the problem, a concerned
public was told.
All this sounded reasonable, scientific, and even forward-thinking in 1872 and 73, when the attendees of
Pennsylvanias constitutional convention voted to include provisions for removing judges and office
holders for reasons of incompetency and other loosely defined mental and physical infirmities.
At the time, these ideas were in the air and the Zeitgesit and held increasing sway in Pennsylvania, and
elsewhere. This was simply the thinking of the day.
Eugenics code words, alienists, and the law
The Pennsylvania press at the time was literally awash in this dangerous eugenics nonsense, which often
played in to, and gave validation to, the worst sort of stereotypes and political pressures.
For example, an article appearing on the top of page one in the June 10, 1885 Philadelphia Inquirer, only
a few months after Judge Kirkpatricks removal from the bench, titled Pauperism and Crime, addresses
the evil of poor immigrants.
From the census of 1880 it was found that the proportion of the insane in the United States was one
native born to every 662 native born citizens, and one to every 254 citizens of foreign birth, the
Inquirer reports.
The implications were clear: foreigners bred insanity; and insanity, whatever that was, was two or three
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
358
13
13
13of
of
of
of389
113
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
3/22/2016 2:11 AM
4 of 12
times more prevalent in foreigners than in native-born Americans. Stop the presses!
The Inquirer article is steeped in what can only be called eugenicist sentiment and code words. These
sentiments and code words attempted to address and change laws.
On the surface, the problem, the Inquirer relates in its 1885 article on insanity and immigrants, involved
federal immigration legislation that must be changed.
The (1882 immigration) act was defective, the Inquirer relates, first, in that its execution depended
entirely upon local officials influenced by political and local considerations; second, that examinations (of
immigrants) were generally hurried and superficial, and so could not effectively weed out the insane from
entering our borders.
Beneath the surface, we understand today, there were deeper problems with this argument.
For one example, what was the clinical definition of insanity?
Literally, for most of the 1800s, there was none.
Emil Kraepelin, a founder of modern psychiatry, wouldnt publish the first edition of his book Compendium
of Psychiatry until 1883; hed argue in Compendium that psychiatry was a branch of medical science,
governed by observation and experimentation, like other sciences. Hed go on to classify disorders such
as manic depression, and what would come to be known as schizophrenia. What made mental disorders
recognizable, he argued, were not particular symptoms, which often could be shared by various disorders,
but by a pattern of symptoms and how they evolve over time. Kraepelin referred to his classification of
disorders as clinical, as opposed to what he called traditional symptomatic classifications. Before
Kraepelin, there was no clinical psychiatry, or clinical definitions of disorders as we know them today.
Likewise, Kraepelins contemporary, Sigmund Freud, founder of psychoanalysis, wouldnt begin his study
of nervous disorders until the mid-1880s.
The word psychiatrie, though coined in 1808 by German physician Johann Christian Reil from the ancient
Greek, meaning medical treatment of the soul, wasnt widely used in the nineteenth century.
Those who worked with the insane in this period werent called psychiatrists.
They were called alienists, because they dealt with those whose mental problems made them alien to
polite society, and outsiders.
These alienists, who had little or no scientific knowledge of mental conditions, would preside at the first
hearing under the states 1874 constitution to remove from office Judge john Kirkpatrick in Pittsburgh.
Most shocking of all, today in the twenty-first century, the Pennsylvania Senate proposes to apply these
nineteenth century alienist and eugenicists ideas to Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane.
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
359
14
14
14of
of
of
of389
113
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
3/22/2016 2:11 AM
5 of 12
Piggybacking on Progressivism
In his book, Three Generations, No Imbeciles: Eugenics, the Supreme Court and Buck v. Bell (Johns
Hopkins, 2008) historian and attorney Paul Lombardo explains how the leaders behind the Eugenics
Movement in the late 19th century cleverly latched on to other social movements of the day, like the
anti-prostitution Purity Movement, the Hygiene Movement, the Temperance Movement, and, perhaps
most importantly, the potent Progressive Movement, led by a new generation of American politicians, like
Wisconsins Robert La Follette, and Pennsylvanias own Democratic Gov. Robert Pattison.
The Purity Crusade of the nineteenth century fed into the

social hygiene movement of the twentieth, Lombardo
writes.
A eugenic program could address goals of both the Purity

Crusade and the social hygiene movement, Lombardo
explains. While not discarding the rhetoric of sexual
moralism they adopted from purity crusaders, many

eugenicists began to repeat arguments from social
hygienists that emphasized scientifically-based expertise as
a pragmatic foundation for legal reform. This shift was
entirely consistent with the even larger social movement
that was a key underpinning of eugenic activities:
Author, lawyer and historian Paul Lombardo
Progressivism.
Progressivism had many faces. Not so much a unified movement as a set of ideas pointing the way to
reform, it arose in the last years in the nineteenth century and for nearly thirty years had an impact on
U.S. political and social institutions. One trend that emerged under the banner of Progressivism was the
desire to apply principles of efficiency to the management of government and to delegate the control of
social welfare programs to a professionally trained class of experts.
Eugenicists, with their goal of identifying mental or physical defectives, offered Progressives a course of
action: removing undesirables and their traits from society and, eventually, forced castration and
sterilization.
These actions would not only cleanse society, eugenicists promised. They would ease the burden on
taxpayers who would no longer have to pay for the care and lodging of these defectives and their
progeny in mental asylums, jail cells or, in some cases, public offices.
Lunacy laws, and removing state officials with mental defects from office
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
360
15
15
15of
of
of
of389
113
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
3/22/2016 2:11 AM
6 of 12
In cases of mentally infirm judges and other office holders, society wouldnt be burdened, or their
government offices slowed, if they were removed. Or so Pennsylvania lawmakers hoped in the 1870s.
Hence, they wrote the constitutional provisions with which Attorney General Kathleen Kane today is
threatened.
With all this in mind, Pennsylvanias Direct Address removal provisions of 1874, and their legal
terminology, become understandable.
I spoke by telephone with author Paul Lombardo, a professor of law at Georgia State University.
There were three categories of laws in the nineteenth century related to all this, Prof. Lombardo tells me,
which can generally be defined as commitment laws.
The first were guardianship laws, dating to Colonial times, which primarily involved property rights.
Guardianship laws took away your personal responsibilities and you became a non-person, Lombardo
tells me. This, of course, he adds, simply didnt apply to large swatches of children, women or slaves in
the nineteenth century, who had no property rights.
The second involved criminal laws, such as insanity laws, which removed ones criminal responsibilities
from the commission of a crime.
The third, and this sounds like what youre talking about now in Pennsylvania, were the Lunacy Laws,
Lombardo says. They declare you unable to care for yourself and take away your rights. You lose your
legal personhood.
Take, for example, the paragraph mentioned above that was read to the legislature in 1885 in the removal
of Pittsburghs Judge Kirkpatrick from the bench. Kirkpatrick evidently suffered a stroke, and lost his ability
to speak and think clearly.
The sentence read to the legislature: If the mind and memory of a judge should become imbecile from
old age or other cause (although not amounting to lunacy) and that should be satisfactorily proved, it
would be the imperative duty of the Legislature to ask his removal.
The operative words here were imbecile and lunacy.
Whats the difference? we might ask today.
In the nineteenth century, lunacy was a general condition that imparted the legal definition of insanity,
Lombardo explains.
Imbecility, or idiocy, on the other hand, to the eugenicist, were specific mental deficiencies that could be
measured and ranked.
To the nineteenth century eugenicists way of thinking, one could be an idiot, or an imbecile, even a
moron, but that didnt necessarily make you a lunatic, or a victim of lunacy, or insanity.
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
361
16
16
16of
of
of
of389
113
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
3/22/2016 2:11 AM
7 of 12
Profound idiot
A eugenicist, then, as we see in the 1885 case of the removal of Pittsburgh Judge Kirkpatrick, set out to
identify, categorize and rank the supposed differences between an idiot, an imbecile, a moron, and the
unfortunate feebleminded.
These days, of course, all this seems like splitting hairs, doesnt it?
The plight of the feebleminded ranked alongside epilepsy as a topic of special interest to professionals
working in Americas (nineteenth century) institutions, Lombardo writes in Three Generations.
According to Massachusetts physician Walter Fernald, those defined as feeble minded endured all
manner of congenital defect, ranging from the simply backward boy or girl but little below the normal
standard of intelligence to the profound idiot, a helpless, speechless, disgusting burden, with every
degree of deficiency between these extremes. Fernald noted the distinction between idiocy and imbecility
(imbeciles had slightly higher intellectual capacity) and concluded the term feebleminded was a less
harsh expression, and satisfactorily covers the whole ground. Worries about heredity feeblemindedness
fed into concerns about sexual misconduct.

The emergence of feeblemindedness as a topic of public concern signaled a changing role for
physicians, educators, and social workers who had ministered to the less fortunate class,' Lombardo
continues. Feeblemindedness also opened clear avenues of activity for a professional class of
reformers that could guide government policy in a Progressive direction.

To identify the feeble minded, what commonly happened, Lombardo tells me, is that a set of doctors or
other alienists from a local asylum would be appointed to examine a person to supposedly measure and
categorize his or her supposed mental deficiencies, defects, or illnesses.
Often these professional alienists, in the nineteenth century, had little more practical experience or
scientific knowledge than a horse doctor, and often much less.
PAs direct removal provisions, Judge Kirkpatrick, and feeblemindedness
All this becomes necessary to our understanding of the 1874 Direct Address provisions that todays
legislators want to apply to Attorney General Kathleen Kane.
Sure enough, in the 1885 Pennsylvania legislative record of the Investigation into the Condition of the
Hon. Judge John M. Kirkpatrick, with a view to his removal, as the report favoring the judges direct
removal was called, members of the state Senate and House committee and their lawyers investigating
Judge Kirkpatrick requested that three doctors from Pittsburghs Dixmont State Hospital for the Insane
examine the sick judge, who was incapacitated, after all, not by insanity, but a stroke.
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
362
17
17
17of
of
of
of389
113
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
3/22/2016 2:11 AM
8 of 12
We are not here for the purpose of prosecuting a case against Judge Kirkpatrick or anyone else,
attorney C.F. McKenna tells the committee, but for the purpose of securing, as far as possible, a fair
investigation of his physical and mental condition. And, with that purpose in view, (we) will call as
witnesses three medical gentlemen of character and repute in their profession. We will ask this court this
morning to designate these three gentlemen: Dr. Hutchinson, who has been connected with Dixmont for
seven or eight years, and has made a special study of the treatment of the insane; Dr. C. C. Wylie, who,
for a long period, was the acting superintendent of Dixmont Insane Hospital; and Dr. Samuel Ayres, a
physician of this city who has served some years in the hospitals for the insane and devoted much study
to their treatment, be designated by this committee as a committee of physicians to visit Judge Kirkpatrick
at his home and make report in connection with their and other expert testimony to be given here this
afternoon.
This was a classic move from the eugenicists playbook: appoint a team of professional experts to
examine one with a defect.
It would turn out that only one of these doctors from Dixmont, H. A. Hutchinson, a relatively young alienist,
would be allowed to examine Judge Kirkpatrick.
I think the judge is suffering from peretic dementia loss of mind, Dr. Hutchinson told the legislative
committee. He seems to be suffering from that; he seems to have lost his mind.
But Dr. Hutchinson, not surprisingly, was incorrect.
Today, peretic dementia, also known as general paralysis of the insane, or GPI, is associated with the
late-stage syphilis, and not a stroke. But Dr. Hutchinson couldnt have known that in 1885.
GPI was originally considered to be a type of madness due to a dissolute character, when it was first
identified in the eighteenth century, until the cause-effect connection with syphilis was discovered in the
late 1880s, Wikipedia tells us. That would be a few years after Judge Kirkpatricks legislative
examination. Subsequently, the discovery of penicillin and its use in the treatment of syphilis rendered
paresis both curable and even avoidable.

Dr. Hutchinson explained that he had arrived at his diagnosis by taking Judge Kirkpatricks pulse,
examining his skin, and speaking with the judge for fifteen minutes.
Couldnt mental trouble like this be cured by proper diet and sleep? the doctor was asked.
Dr. Hutchinson said he had his doubts.
Perhaps Judge Kirkpatrick merely had softening of the brain, whatever that was, another suggested.
I have cases under my care down at the hospital exactly like Judge Kirkpatricks, the doctor advises.
The doctor uses the eugenicists hot-button code word, feeble:
Judge Kirkpatrick, looked to me like a very broken-down man, Dr. Hutchinson tells the committee. He
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
363
18
18
18of
of
of
of389
113
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
3/22/2016 2:11 AM
9 of 12
seemed feeble, and he looks weak. I asked him to walk for me, and we walked with a tottering movement,
like a very old man a very decrepit man and he is not inclined to talk very much, and what he does
say is not altogether what he would say were he in health, I think. He cannot express himself intelligently
altogether.
In fact, the word feeble appears repeatedly throughout Judge Kirkpatricks 1885 legislative Direct
Address record.
He was feeble, Kirkpatricks supervisor, Pittsburgh President Judge Thomas Ewing, tells the legislature,
and so on.
They were politely asking whether Judge Kirkpatrick had grown feeble minded.
Shortly after this legislative investigation, Judge Kirkpatrick would be removed from the bench by the
legislature, with the approval of then-Gov. Robert Pattison.
Governors Pattison and Pennypacker
As I say, the Direct Address removal provisions in the Pennsylvania constitution would be attempted only
twice to remove office holders: in Judge Kirkpatricks 1885 case; and six years later, in 1891, when Gov.
Pattison failed to remove the state treasurer and auditor general from office.
It should be noted that both of these attempts at Direct Address constitutional removal were undertaken
with the blessing or involvement of Gov. Robert Pattison, of Philadelphia.
To understand both of these Direct
Address actions then, we have to
understand a thing or two about Gov.
Pattison.
Robert Pattison was the only Democrat to
hold the governors office in the 70 years
between the Civil War and the Great
Depression.
Pattison was first elected governor in
1882 at age 31, and remains the
youngest man to serve as governor in
Pennsylvania history, and one of the
youngest in U.S. history. (Only a boy of
Pennsylvania Governors Robert Pattison and Samuel Pennypacker
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
364
19
19
19of
of
of
of389
113
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
3/22/2016 2:11 AM
10 of 12
ten at the start of the Civil War, Pattison was able to escape the common charge hurled at Democrats that
they were Southern sympathizers during the war.)
Gov. Pattison in many ways was Pennsylvanias Teddy Roosevelt. Young, brash, hard charging, critical of
the Trusts and machine politicians, and forward looking, Gov. Pattison embraced the Direct Address
provisions in the state constitution of 1874 to identify, categorize, and remove mentally and physically
infirm officials from office.
Gov. Pattison successfully oversaw Judge Kirkpatricks Direct Address removal in 1885, and thereafter
named Kirkpatricks replacement to the Pittsburgh bench.
Robert Pattison went on to serve two non-consecutive terms as governor, winning reelection in 1890.
In 1891, at the start of his second term, Gov. Pattison attempted to again use the Direct Address
provisions to remove two political enemies, the Republican treasurer and the auditor general, for alleged
financial chicanery.
But this time the Republican-dominated legislature refused to go along.
The Senate acquitted the treasurer and the auditor general; Gov. Pattison was told he had no jurisdiction
to remove office holders using a constitutional provision meant for the removal of the mentally or
physically infirm.
Pattison would leave the governors office in 1895. Still relatively young, he would be encouraged to run
for higher offices. He ran for president in 1896, but lost the Democratic nomination to William Jennings
Bryan. (We should probably remember that Bryan went on to serve as counsel in the 1925 Scopes
monkey trial, the capstone of his career, in which he sought to prevent the teaching of evolution.)
In 1902, Pattison sought this third non-consecutive term as
governor of Pennsylvania.
This time Samuel Pennypacker, a Republican judge and
historian, soundly defeated him. Pennypacker was an affable
man with a rounded temperament and circumspect nature,
and a great sense of humor.
Pattison would die in 1904, from stress of his last campaign
for governor, The New York Times would report.
But thats not the end of the story.
Clarence Darrow, a famous Chicago lawyer, and

William Jennings Bryan, defender of
Fundamentalism, have a friendly chat in a
Eugenics reaches high mark in Pennsylvania and

elsewhere
courtroom during the Scopes evolution trial. Darrow

defended John T. Scopes, a biology teacher, who
decided to test the new Tennessee law banning the
teaching of evolution. Bryan took the stand for the
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
365
20
20
20of
of
of
of389
113
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
3/22/2016 2:11 AM
11 of 12
While Gov. Robert Pattisons career rose and fell, the

eugenics movement continued to grow in Pennsylvania, and
elsewhere.
prosecution as a bible expert. The trial in 1925

ended in conviction of Scopes. ca. 1925 Dayton,
Tennessee, USA
Pennsylvania hosted the first known sterilization (castration) in a public institution in 1889 or 1892,
reports the University of Vermont.
In all, at least 270 sterilizations would be performed in Pennsylvania between 1889 or 1892 and 1931, all
without the benefit of law, reports the university.
There was only one location where sterilizations were performed: the Pennsylvania Training School for
Feeble-Minded Children at Elwyn was the location of all 270 sterilizations, the University of Vermont
notes. It is the second oldest care facility for the mentally disabled in the United States, founded in 1852
as the Pennsylvania Training School for Idiotic and Feeble-Minded Children. It was actually opened in
Germantown, Pennsylvania, in 1854 and moved to Elwyn in 1857. The building complex is currently in
use as a service provider for the mentally retarded. The website for the institute, which is now known
simply as Elwyn, no longer makes any mention of sterilization or the eugenics movement.
Todays Elwyn institution then has this in common with todays Pennsylvania Senate: neither makes
mention of their long and dark association with eugenics, and forced sterilization.
In the 1890, a Kansas physician castrated 58 children in his Winfield, Kansas, Institution for Feeble
minded Children.
Shortly thereafter, a physician asexualized 26 patients at an epilepsy asylum in Massachusetts.
In Pennsylvania in 1892, Dr. Isaac Kerlin operated not only to curb an epileptic tendency in the patient
but also to remove her inordinate desires which (were) an offense to the community, Lombardo writes.
He challenged the states to take the lead in legalizing surgery for the relief and cure of radical depravity.
All this became a slippery and dangerous slope, embarked upon in the 1860s and 70s with the best of
intentions. By imaging we can do Gods work, we often do the devils work instead.
Within a decade, in the 1910s, eugenicists would suggest sterilization, and worse, as a solution to the
Negro problem.
Not long thereafter, Adolf Hitler and his Third Reich would incorporate these very eugenic policies, once
endorsed wholeheartedly by Pennsylvania lawmakers, into his Final Solution for Jews, gypsies,
homosexuals, and others who were deemed defective, undesirable, or degenerate. Tens of millions of
people would die.
Back in Pennsylvania, where all this tragedy had taken legal root in the 1874 constitution, and other laws,
eugenicists continued to hold great sway in to the early 1900s.
Teams of men were kept gainfully employed in the field by the eugenicists, traveling this and other states
to find and categorize entire towns and hamlets inhabited by generations of idiots, imbeciles, drunkards
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
366
21
21
21of
of
of
of389
113
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
3/22/2016 2:11 AM
12 of 12
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
367
22
22
22of
of
of
of389
113
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
3/22/2016 2:11 AM
The Steinmans should pack their LNP bags and move on | Newslanc.com
1 of 1
http://newslanc.com/2015/11/15/the-steinmans-should-pack-their-lnp-ba...
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J.of
CATERBONE
Stan
of Stan
JJ.Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
AND re
DOD
reState-of-Affairs
Current
re State-of-Affairs
State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
Page
Page
368
23
23
23of
of
of
of389
113
23
27
23
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
3/22/2016 2:13 AM
About Us | Newslanc.com
1 of 4
http://newslanc.com/about/
NewsLanc.com is an e-zine focused on the important issues facing Lancaster city and county. Our
mission is to provide an alternative source of coverage and comment from the Lancaster and statewide
media. We provide news without spin, editorials without vested interests and personal attacks, and solicit
vigorous discussions from the public.
If you have any questions, tips, or suggestions, please write to us at by clicking on this link.
Robert Edwin Field, Editor and Publisher

Graduate of University of California Berkeley, BA 59 with a major in economics.
Builder and longtime operator of apartment complexes and hotels (http://themanorgroup.com).
Partners with son Richard who develops planned communities in Eastern Europe.
Executive producer for award winning motion pictures Liquid Sky (1983), Diamond Men (2001), the
documentary Stalins Wife (2005), and Perestroika (2009).
Finance chair of Arlen Specters successful 1980 statewide senatorial campaign.
Co-founder with Melvin R. Allen of Project Forward Leap, for over twenty years providing five weeks of
educational overnight summer camp plus year-round academic support for about 300 inner city kids each
year.
Co-founder with Kevin B. Zeese of Common Sense for Drug Policy. See interview.
Founder of Lancaster and Harrisburg Harm Reduction Projects. (Syringe exchanges)
Co-sponsor (2002 2005) of a state and federally approved experimental Lancaster Prototype
Methadone Program that permitted local prescription fulfillment and medical care for stable patients
outside of a Methadone clinic.
Prime mover in the successful deregulation of the sale of syringes in Pennsylvania.
Originator and sponsor of a CARE program providing approximately three hundred small (approximately
300 books each) community libraries throughout Afghanistan and Guatemala.
Director of the American House Foundation which provides ongoing food aid to thousands of children in
Hungary.
Publisher of The Budapest Beacon.
Project Manager for the tragically aborted renovation and expansion of the Lancaster Public Library.
Founder of RealReporting.org / NewsLanc.com
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
of Stan J. Caterbone
AND DOD
re State-of-Affairs Page
Page
Page
369
24
24of
of
of389
113
27
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
3/22/2016 2:19 AM
2 of 4
Recipient of the Crystal Stair award from the Sociology Department of the University of Pennsylvania.
Although living in Lancaster for over 40 years, Field only turned his political activism to local issues as he
became aware of the misrepresentations and crony capitalism taking place pertaining to the Convention
Center Project. (See mission statement.)
Field can be reached via email by clicking this link.
Kevin Zeese has been a political activist since graduating from George Washington Law School in 1980.
He works on peace, economic justice, criminal law reform and reviving American democracy.
As Executive Director of the Campaign for Fresh Air & Clean Politics he directs its key projects including
Voters for Peace (www.VotersForPeace.US), Prosperity Agenda (www.ProsperityAgenda.US), Come
Home America (www.ComeHomeAmerica.US) and True Vote (www.TrueVote.US). He also serves as
president of Common Sense for Drug Policy (www.csdp.org).
He has been active in independent and third party political campaigns including for state legislative offices
in Maryland, governor of California and U.S. president, where he served as press secretary and
spokesperson for Ralph Nader in 2004. He ran for the U.S. Senate in 2006 and was the only person ever
nominated by the Green Party, Libertarian Party and Populist Party.
Bill Keisling is author of more than a dozen books of fiction and nonfiction. His essays, investigative
writings, and short stories have appeared in diverse magazines and journals including The North
American Review, Rolling Stone, and The Progressive magazines. He was awarded a National
Endowment for the Arts fellowship for his novel The Meltdown. The introduction to his first nonfiction
book, Three Mile Island: Turning Point, was written by R. Buckminster Fuller.
Keisling grew up in close proximity to the Pennsylvania governors office, and the Pennsylvania Office of
Attorney General. He has published several books on corruption in Pennsylvania government and the
attorney generals office, including The Sins of Our Fathers, We All Fall Down, and The Midnight Ride of
Jonathan Luna.
He is also the writer and editor of Yardbird.com.
Slava Tsukerman was born in Moscow, Soviet Union.

Best known as the director/writer/producer of a cult classic Liquid Sky, Slava Tsukerman has directed
internationally 43 films of different genres. He has received 13 awards from many international film
festivals.
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
AND DOD
Page
Page
370
25
25of
of
of389
113
27
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
3/22/2016 2:19 AM
3 of 4
Tsukerman made his debut at the age of 21, as the director/writer/producer of I Believe in Spring. This first
independently made fiction short in the Soviet Union history, won First Prize in the Moscow Amateur Film
Festival, was awarded in the Film Festival in Montreal and was successfully released nationally.
Tsukermans films Great Bells, The Heat in Cold Numbers, Professor Alexandrovs Discovery, Vaudeville
On Vaudeville won the highest awards in the Soviet film industry. His documentary Once Upon a Time
There Were Russians in Jerusalem, produced by Israeli Television, was a first prize winner at the Tenth
Hollywood Festival of World Television.
More recently Tsukerman wrote and director the critically acclaimed documentary Stalins Wife and the
motion picture Perestroika which received highly favorable reviews on the West Coast and elsewhere
but was later slammed by a young reviewer for the New York Times.
Columnist Richard H. Miller is a self-employed business person, life-long Western Pennsylvanian and has
been a self styled political junkie for 45 years.
He was elected chair of Mercer County Democratic Committee in 1970 at age 28 and has followed
Governors administrations closely ever since. Miller says he struggles to direct his columns to moderate
Republicans and ultra-liberal Democrats. Both groups need to get more in the mainstream of their
respective Parties or convince more of their fellow party members to think like they do.
A former Mayor of Greenville in Mercer County and president or chair of a dozen other governmental and
community organizations, he preaches that everyone owes public service in exchange for the benefits
they enjoy living where they do.
1949-1953 Cornell University, Ithaca NY BA Zoology

1953-1957 New York Medical College NY, NY MD
1957-58: Internship San Francisco Gen Hosp UC Service
1958-59: Military Svc US Army Dispensary Ft Bliss Texas
1959-63: General Surgery Residency Wm Beaumont Gen Hosp, El Paso TX
Sept 1964; Certified American Board of Surgery
1963-67:US Army Hosp Camp Zama Japan Ch/Surgery, Ch Professional Svcs
extensive experience with management of casualties from Vietnam 1965-67
1967-69: Residency Thoracic & CV surgery Letterman General Hosp San Francisco
1969 Certified Board of Thoracic Surgery
19671-1994 Private Practice Thoracic Surgery San Francisco/San Mateo CA
American College of Surgeons
Western Thoracic Surgical Society
From 1995-Became active in Drug Policy Reform; DPFoundation; edited Drug News Weekly
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
AND DOD
Page
Page
371
26
26of
of
of389
113
27
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
3/22/2016 2:19 AM
4 of 4
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
AND DOD
Page
Page
372
27
27of
of
of389
113
27
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
3/22/2016 2:19 AM
1987 NOTES OF MEETING WITH ISC EXECUTIVE LARRY RESCH ON JUNE 23, 1987
DATE:
JUNE 23, 1987 10:00 am
PLACE:
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT GROUP, LTD 1755 OREGON PIKE LANCASTER, PA 17601
SUBJECT:
SCHEDULED MEETING OF STAN CATERBONE, LARRY RESCH, AND CARL JACOBSON OF

UNITED CHEM CON (COVERT ISC EXECUTIVE)
Upon the arrival of Mr. Larry Resch, Stan Caterbone net him in the lobby of FMG, Ltd., at
which time Larry Resell said "Carl Jacobson could not attend, we had to suddenly fly Mm
out of the country early this mourning.
The meeting was started with the subject of the financial difficulties of United Chem Con
and possible alternatives. Larry Resch specifically addressed the possibility of moving the
operations of United Chem Con to another facility, with specific regards to the Renevo
Plant, Larry Resch specifically addressed the financing capabilities of Stan Caterbone, along
with possible management opportunities.
Larry Resch also gave financial statements and documents to Stan Caterbone for the latest
fiscal year for United Chem Con.
Stan Caterbone went on to allege that United Chem Con had embezzled some $15,000,000
from the United States Government for contracts that contained improprieties.
Stan Caterbone also alleged improprieties of International Signal & Control and James
Guerin, with specific regards to its role in the United Chen Con, and its business activities
as related to government contracts.
Stan Caterbone noted that he, as a legal shareholder of International Signal & Control was
concerned about improper business activities.
Larry Resch was taken by surprise by all of the above.
Stan Caterbone became quite upset by the evasiveness and the lack of specifics with
regards to Larry Resch's conversation.
In efforts to thwart any further communication from James Guerin, United Chem Con, or
International Signal & Control, Stan Caterbone demanded a retainer fee of $10,000 before
anyone contacted him again.
It should be noted that it was quite evident that Larry Resch was merely acting as a
messenger for James Guerin and or others, and Stan Caterbone has continued a relationship
with Larry Resch that was not reflective of any improper activities or misconduct.
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
AND DOD
Page373
28 of
of 389
113
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
RECORDED TRANSCRIPT WITH THE PENNSYLVANIA

SECURITIES COMMISSION
"JAMES GUERIN AND ISC OPERATIONS"
SEPTEMBER 29, 1987
Subject: Recorded excerpts from a recorded transcript between Stanley J.

Caterbone and Howard Eisler, Agent of the Pennsylvania State Securities
Commission.
This transcript was recorded with the approval of ail present parties.
Date of Conference: September 29th 1987
Place of Conference: 2323 New Danville Pike Conestoga, PA
Relationship to James Guerin: ISC Shareholder
Debtor to Parent Federal Savings and Loan
The following transcripts represent a few of the convections recorded during the
17512
meeting.
[DEFENSE ATTORNEY ROBERT BEYERS] Chem Con is the big local minority-held
corporation that was doing a lot of Defense contracts-it was associated with ISC. They
went under last spring, beginning of the summer, and there was a lot of criminal
allegations made, none of them substantiated.
[STAN CATERBONE] And I was connected with that. They sent a board member hi to
see me a week before this happened. Why. I don't know.
[STAN CATERBONE] "Jim Christian owned it - now I hear rumors that I was tied to
ISC and I am dose to several people in that organization. Why they sent someone in to
California to see me, I don't know. They wont answer me." "they wanted me to talk to
a guy from D.C, New York, a guy from the Caribbean. I don't know what the hell is
going on."
[DEFENSE ATTORNEY ROBERT BEYERS] "the supposition was - I don't know how
true it was a front for ISC."
[STAN CATERBONE] "It was, I'll tell you why. Because when Chem Con was
started, back to their inception, you look at ISC's books. They didn't have any
money. Well, the first thing Chem Con did was they went and got all that free money
from the government and you look where that money went. I bet I know where it
went, 'this guy named Guerin, James Guerin, And I know that they were setting
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
AND DOD
Page374
29 of
of 389
113
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
contracts back. He runs ISC and he also has his fingers pretty deeply into Chem Con.
He's the one who started Chem Con, Guerin is the one who started it."
[BILL JOHNSON, CLIENT OF STAN CATERBONE] Wasn't there some allegations
about a tie to Wedtech?" (Defense Contractor of New York)
[STAN CATERBONE] "You bet they were tied, you'd better believe they were tied
with Wedtech. The same guys in Wedtech were involved with ISC and Chem Con.
ISC is sold over the London Exchange. (I bought my shares from Gib Armstrong) I
owned a thousand shares. I sold it when things started to hit the
. Now they just
did a multibillion dollar merger with a company in London.. They probably think this
is going to cover their tracks. "What they did was, they fronted all that money and
started the contracts, went bankrupt, and now the government is stuck for
$18,000,000. I know right now in this town's viewpoint, I stole money, I am insane,
and I am a lunatic. I tell you I will not condemn Jim Christian until he tells to my face
what happened. I was framed and set up. I don't know maybe Jim Christian doesn't
have the money. Maybe Guerin has ft or somebody else.
[HOWARD EISLER, AGENT PA SECURITIES COMMISSION] The items in the
column (newspaper column) is the reporting of your somehow somebody associated
with - oh, someone associated
[STAN CATERBONE] in your District Office?
[HOWARD EISLER, AGENT PA SECURITIES COMMISSION] Yea. of course you
were also one of the principals in the - I still am the minor one - yes, the Financial
Management Group - there is about 50 names I am dealing with here and they are all
very similar so I have to be Financial Management Group Ltd. filed for 202B
exemption. Now all the security sold in PA had to be registered. Some securities are
exempt but you have to apply the detention type of thing. It is a registration, not a
registration that
so the 203D exemption was filed for.
Of course we have added
the security statement - explanation of where the money is going to be spent, how it is
going to be run, who runs the corporation and all that sort of thing.
Now under the
umbrella of this Financial Management Group there is a whole (now I am repeating

what is in the 203D which I spent some time Friday reading) - there is about 15, 14-1
guess under that there is about 5 other corporations, which are going to be insurance
agency, an investment advising agency, a group - now a lot of these things

have not come about.
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
AND DOD
Page375
30 of
of 389
113
[STAN CATERBONE] Well we simplified it.
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
[HOWARD EISLER, AGENT PA SECURITIES COMMISSION] What do you mean

simplified it?
[STAN CATERBONE] They are operating but because of the accounting procedures
they would have been a nightmare with all those subs. So, they are operating the only
one that's separate distinction is the RIA (Registered Investment Advisor).
Everything else is operating under Financial Management Group Limited.

[HOWARD EISLER, AGENT PA SECURITIES COMMISSION] So these other
corporations have not really come into being.

[STAN CATERBONE] Technically, legally, no.
[HOWARD EISLER, AGENT PA SECURITIES COMMISSION] I seen also; I guess
there is an application for an investment advisor.

Securities or dealing with
Now, if you are selling
_. Now that came in under your name
[STAN CATERBONE] at that time I was President

[HOWARD EISLER, AGENT PA SECURITIES COMMISSION] but now there is
another application in that is being acted on now by somebody else.

[STAN CATERBONE] There is? I don't know who. Is that for the advisor?
[HOWARD EISLER, AGENT PA SECURITIES COMMISSION] Yes, the Registered
investment advisor.
[STAN CATERBONE] Do your current records in Harrisburg indicate that he

is still an executive with FMG?
Yes, because this offering memorandum was
given back last March I think, - last August - when I initially did it.
[HOWARD EISLER, AGENT PA SECURITIES COMMISSION] Oh, no, pardon me.
We are talking about two different things.
You are talking about your
application for the investment advisor.

[STAN CATERBONE] No, I am talking about FMG - the offering memorandum
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
of Stan
J. Caterbone
AND
re State-of-Affairs
Page
Page376
31 of
of 389
113
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
was
done
last DOD
August
because that's
when
I started raising the
money.
August
of 1986 is when I did the initial filing for the offering memorandum - the 144
Reg D. Coming up this October is the 203D, 15 months
after conception. Alright, yea. There is a report that is due a
year after - Right,
that's what is coming up - to explain how much money was
raised and where it was
spent with the idea then of protecting investors. The idea of the
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
AND DOD
Page377
32 of
of 389
113
your are
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
limited to like 35 investors.
You can't sell to 105 - you are limited. What the
state
does is comes in and says, how are you going to raise the money in your
offering
memorandum. Then a year after it is raised, or a year after
_ they
come in
and say, now what did you do with the money. You raised 4 hundred and
some odd thousand, now how did you spend it? Now that has not been
filed yet. It is due, in fact I think it is overdue. It is due October 20. I
got the letter right here. They just sent me the letter. You guys just
sent me the letter, I have it right here.
I have nothing to do with that end of it. I just came, well whenever I called
you
______ I didn't get a hold of you the next day; it was the following day
which was
Friday that we made contact.
Our Idea in coming here was to let you ask whatever questions you had in
terms of the investigation. Of my limited knowledge of the type of securities
these guys deal with and securities in general, the things that came to
interest me was the fact that there
arc stock certificates in here in force with names on them that ____ , that
there
are with the annual report, his name is forged by someone else. This
gentleman has some involvement with the original group and the President
suggested that he make false reports to the bonding company so that he can
get money back. They are the three things that stuck out to me as a
regular criminal attorney, that I thought you might be interest in because,
but like I say, we are here to have you ask questions of anything that you
might.
O.K., this offering then - when Financial Management Group limited applied
for their 203D, I get the idea they were going to raise four hundred and
some odd thousand dollars. At that time, they listed Bob Kauffman at
60,000 shares and you and Hartlett 40,000 a piece. So, Kauff man at this
point is the main factor? Or, when 1 was talking to you, it was really your
idea that put this whole thing together. I put it all together. I brought him
up from Atlanta to be president because I have a lot of business interests
and I didn't want to be tied down to the day-to-day operation. Plus, I
never had any management experience. Most of my work was consulting,
business
deals,
this
and that, so
I actually
Atlanta
to 12,
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
of
Stan J. Caterbone
AND
DOD
re State-of-Affairs
Page
Page
378
33 of
of 389
113brought him up from
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March
22, 2016
be president And, Hartlett - is he a complete local person. He's local. We

all started together in IDS back in 1982. That's your connection with
Kauffman, you know him through IDS? He's the one that got me started in
business. I am the one who took him to FSC, that was our broker/dealer
and
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
AND DOD
Page379
34 of
of 389
113
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
AND DOD
Page380
35 of
of 389
113
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
ABC News Nightline - September 12, 1991

[Ted Koppel] incidentally the function of the senior review panel is to advise one man, the
director of central intelligence. And at least part of the period in question there was an acting
director of the CIA Robert Gates. Well attempt to pull some of these threads together when we
come back.
Commercial Break
[Ted Koppel] When all is said and done, why should your or your representatives in Congress
care, eventually after all President Bush spoke and acted against Sadaam Hussein more forcefully
than anyone could have expected.
[Former President George H. Bush Speech] Were dealing with Hitler revisited, a
totalitarianism, a brutality, that is neglect and unprecedented in modern times.
[Vidoe-Gary Milhollin, Director, The Wisconsin Project] The more we gave Sadaam, the
more dangerous he got. And ultimately we had to go to war to destroy what we sold him.
[Ted Koppel] But its not a question of holding the Bush or Reagan Administrations to account
for having made mistakes with regards to their policies toward Iraq The issue is how those
policies were implemented.
As we reported over the past few months, The Atlanta Branch of an Italian Bank, BNL, was able to
funnel $Billions, some of it in U.S. Credits to Iraqs Military Procurement
Network.
The U.S.
Government knew, and turned a blind eye. Sophisticated Military Technology was illegally
transferred from a major U.S. company in Lancaster, Pennsylvania (International Signal & Control),
to South Africa,
and Chile, and from there onto Iraq.
The Iraqi borne designer of a chemicals
weapons plant in Lybia, set up shop in Florida, producing and shipping to Iraq chemical weapon
components.
The CIA, FBI, and other U.S. agencies were made aware of the operation and did
nothing to prevent it.

During the 1980s and into the 90s senior officials of both the Bush and Reagan Administration
encouraged the privatization of foreign policy, certainly towards Iran and Iraq. The policy may have
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
AND DOD
Page381
36 of
of 389
113
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
had merit - but there werent willing or in some instances werent successful in fighting it out in
Capital Hill so they found other ways. They made a mockery of the Export Control System, and
they found ways of encouraging foreign governments to do what our laws prohibited. They even
knew or if not were guilty of the grossest incompetence that U. S. companies were collaborating
with foreign Arms merchants in the illegal transfer of American Technology that helped Sadaam
Hussein build is formidable arsenal.
This week, the CIA again told ABC News Nightline that our allegations over the past few months
regarding covert operations to supply Iraq with U.S. Arms and weapons technologies simply were
not true.
The CIAs Inspector General said a statement from the Agency [On Screen] - Has found to factual
support whatsoever for such an operation or for the involvement of Mr. Gates.
[Ted Koppel] At least one member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Bill Bradley of New
Jersey, feels that there may be reason to doubt both those claims, and hell raise the issues next
week during the Gates Confirmation Hearings, next week.
The CIA also told us that its Inspector General has found no evidence of any off-thebooks illegal activity.
But the CIA concedes, off-the-books activities, are not
documented. Precisely so that deniability can be preserved.

One thing is undeniable, this gun sight video of a stealth fighter bomber from the 32nd
Tactical
Fighter Wing, last February attacking a bomb factory, on the outskirts of Bagdad U.S. Technology
in the air, destroying U.S. Technology on the Ground. The factory was built by Carlos Cardoen.
For all of us here at ABC News, Good night.
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
AND DOD
Page382
37 of
of 389
113
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
ABC News Nightline - July 1991

[Ted Koppel] Carlos Cardoens role in shipping arms to Iraq has been known for years.
His
connection with Robert Gates has not. By the mid 1980s Cardoen was the largest private supplier
of weapons to Iraq. In all he has believed to ship a half billion dollars worth of arms and advanced
technologies to Bagdad.
At a factory 500 miles north of Santiago, Cardoen produced tens of
thousands of bombs and other equipment, absolutely essentially to Iraq during its eight year war
with Iran.
The material would be loaded aboard regular Iraqi airway flights flown from Santiago to Bagdad.
Cardoen did not simply ship weapons, he set up entire factories capable of producing bombs and
other explosives the components would be shipped from all over the world and then assembled in
Iraq. One of those factories turned out Cluster Bombs.
As we first reported on the 24th of May, much of the sophisticated military technology that Cardoen
was shipping to Iraq came from the United States.
This company in sleepy Lancaster,
Pennsylvania, is believed to be the source for some of the Cluster Bomb technology. But there was
more.
Nasser Bedouin is also an arms dealer. He acted as a middleman between Carlos Cardoen
and Iraq.
[Nasser Bedouin on Video] I am aware of Carlos Cardoen getting some type of technology
from the air fuel bomb from the United States. I believe Iraq has a viable fuel air explosive.
[Ted Koppel] These explosives are designed to explode just above ground level like miniature
atomic bombs, literally sucking all available oxygen out of the air. It is clear that Carlos Cardoens
special relationship with the United States was not known by all Departments. When the Commerce
Department inquired about that relationship in early 1987, it received a cable from the U.S.
Ambassador to Chile saying although Cardoen is involved with the sale of armaments, and he has
made his fortune from it, he is considered to be a responsible recipient of U.S. products. In fact by
1987, the covert relationship between the CIA and Cardoen was already well established.
In 1983 the Reagan Administration had become alarmed at how poorly the Iraqi military was doing
against Iran. A decision was made at the highest level of Government to begin helping Iraq.
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
AND DOD
Page383
38 of
of 389
113
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
Indeed ABC News has learned only today, that around that time, in 1983 Ronald Reagan issued a
highly classified Presidential Finding stating that it was important to the National Interests that
arms and technical assistance be covertly funneled to Iraq and with the help of the CIA. More on
the significance of that Presidential Finding in a moment.
What it unleashed was a flood of US help to Iraq. A former CIA operative who was involved in the
program has told us of a series of covert operations, in which loads of 727s were flown into Iraq.
On one such mission in 1987 our source tells us he accompanied a planeload of Soviet built one
hundred twenty-two missiles.
The Soviet equipment was shipped because it would be compatible
with what the Iraqis already had. By 1987, there was at least one such flight a week into Bagdad.
Our former CIA source recalls bringing in $100 dollar bills in a bowling bag, they would also carry
whiskey, cartons of cigarettes and copies of Penthouse magazines to speed up the unloading
process, which usually took place at night.
Once the White House has authorized the Covert
Assistance Program to Iraq, the CIA took over. In effect the former CIA operative told us the covert
operation amounted to here is what we want you to do, and we really dont want to know too much
about how you do it.
Our source tells us that he has at least one meeting in 1986 in Florida between Robert Gates and
Carlos Cardoen, the Chilean Arms Dealer. Other sources have told us of other such meetings. Here
in the United States and in Europe.
Which brings us to an unsolicited statement that was
telephoned in to Nightline from the Central Intelligence Agency almost a month ago on June 17th.
Allegations, the statement read that Robert Gates facilitated illegal shipments to Iraq during the
1980s are totally without basis. Since we had never requested a statement of Mr. Gates, we didnt
know quite what to make of it at the time. But then today we learned of that Presidential Finding,
authorizing the Covert shipment of arms to Iraq.
It would be true then that Robert Gates did not facilitate illegal shipments to Iraq, under the
Presidential Finding, the shipments would have been quite legal.
But during this last set of
confirmation hearings, back in 1987, Robert Gates assured the Senate Confirmation Committee that
he would always keep the Committee current on ongoing covert operations.
Indeed the CIA is
supposed to provide the Intelligence Committee with quarterly reports. According to well-informed
sources on the Committee it has had no briefings on the Covert arms pipeline to Iraq.
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
AND DOD
Page384
39 of
of 389
113
That, said
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
one Senator on the Committee would be a total breach of trust. What would it do to the Gates
Nomination? I asked. It would probably be enough said the Senator, to derail the Nomination.
Again, an excerpt from Mr. Gates Testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee in 1987:
[Robert Gates 1987 on video] If you cannot have a system in which you can have some
confidence between A the branches of government, and confidence between the senior officials of
the Government, A that they abide by the rules, and B that they will deal with one another
honestly, then I think the system begins to collapse.
[Ted Koppel] Late this evening, the Whitehouse communicated its response to the charges
contained in this report, the Whole story is unfounded.
There were never any sales; covert or
overt to Iraq or Iran through a third country. And Mr. Gates never met with Carlos Cardoen.
Well be back with more, in a moment.
[Ted Koppel] For the viewers, this is Alan Freidman, New York Correspondent for the Financial
Times of London, and a member of the team investigating Robert Gates. Alan Id like to begin by
repeating a statement, and let me put my specs on for a moment, the White House. This story is
unfounded and there were never any sales covert or overt to Iraq or Iran through a third country.
And Mr. Gates never met with Carlos Cardoen.
Ah, ah a fairly carefully drafted statement one would think.
[Alan Friedman, New York Correspondent for the Financial Times of London] Yes Ted, I
think that is right, I would agree with the statement that there were never any sales Iraq through a
third party.
Indeed what we found was that some of the cluster bomb technology and fuel air
technology was given smuggled down to Chile, for use that were used and made and shipped on
through to Iraq.
In terms of the um statement by the White House that there were never any
meetings between Mr. Gates and Mr. Cardoen, we have a number of sources, some of them
personally involved in these operations, one of them who was personally and physically an eye
witness present at a meeting, in Florida, with Mr. Gates and Mr. Cardoen in 1986. And who was
told my Mr. Gates, about other meetings that he had with Mr. Cardoen.
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
AND DOD
Page385
40 of
of 389
113
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
[Ted Koppel] Now Congressman Gejdenson, I realized that we sort of unleashed an awful lot of
material on you today, but to what degree does this fit in with those thousands of documents that
you subpoenaed with the information that you have?
[House Representative Sam Gejdenson of the House Foreign Affairs Committee] Well we
just got the documents after a several month battle with the Administration to pry them loose and
it took the vote of a subpoena by the subcommittee to start the flow of those documents, but its
certainly consistent with the information that we got with Committee staffs with some of those
people that said they were at those meetings, ah as well.
I think that the important thing to
remember here is that the United States in 1982 under the Reagan Administration took Iraq off the
terrorist list at a time when some of the worst terrorist of the world were being harbored by
Saddam Hussein, and we suddenly changed our policy and continued to keep Iraq off the terrorist
list, enabling the export of dual use, ah items that can be used for dual use from the United States
to Iraq, as well as these sales that went indirectly to Iraq.
So, all through a time when they were harboring terrorists, and they killed 5,000 Kurds in 1988,
and as recent as six days before the invasion of Kuwait, when I and several members of Congress,
tried to stop the subsidy of grain sales to Iraq, the Bush Administration continued to impose any
sanctions against Iraq.
[Ted Koppel] Well of course theres a huge difference between grain sales and the shipment of
entire plants for the building of a cluster bomb factory.
[House Representative Sam Gejdenson of the House Foreign Affairs Committee] Except
for what I think you find is that a pattern by both the Bush and Reagan Administrations to trying to
assist Saddam Hussein.
What we found at one Hearing was a document from the State
Department, ah that said that the United States was ready to sell weapons to Iraq as long as they
were for the personal protection of Saddam Hussein. A policy that ignored all the outrages, a policy
that ignored I think the intent of the Congress and the American People. And that the allegations
that weve gotten from a number of sources seem to be consistent with that. The United States did
everything it could under the Reagan and Bush Administrations to assist Saddam Hussein.
[Ted Koppel] Alan, I know that one of the things that we discovered in our investigations was
and Id like you to elaborate on it a little bit was that frequently there was Federal Agencies, Law
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
AND DOD
Page386
41 of
of 389
113
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
Enforcement Agencies that was trying to uncover what was going on we found that they were
stymied at every turn. Can you talk about a that a little bit?.
[Alan Friedman, New York Correspondent for the Financial Times of London] Yes I think
that if we look back at other discoveries that we made, you can say that when we found ISC, the
company in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, that was, that had cluster bomb technology, shipped down to
Chile that was part of this covert operation for Iraq, we found that the CIA had detailed knowledge
over a period of 4 years of all sorts of shipments from ISC to South Africa, some of which were
later trans shipped to Iraq, we found that Federal Law Enforcement Officers and Agencies were
unable to do anything about it because they just werent told. Likewise, we were just told of the
case that the man that built the Rapta Chemical Weapons plant in Libya, who ah, even though the
CIA were tracking him very carefully here in the United States, was allowed to build a chemical
weapons plant here in Florida, and shipped dangerous cyanide with the help of CIA Contract
Shippers to Iraq.
All of these things were going on and the investigators seem unable to do
anything about any of these things. We seem to have part of the Government trying to investigate,
and part of the Government trying to ship.
[Ted Koppel] Congressman Gejdenson Id like to get your reaction to that and see if your
experiences have been similar in some of the findings that ah or some of the conclusions that you
have reached, but well take a break first and be back in just a moment.
[House Representative Sam Gejdenson of the House Foreign Affairs Committee] Well we
saw it ah from across all of the agencies. We had Dennis Kloskey who was then in charge of export
licensing at Commerce testify before our committee in April that he suggested to Mr. Gates and
others that ah meetings at White House to stop the export of dangerous technologies to Iraq. The
following day ah Mr. Kloskey resigned from the Government. We were told by Mr. Kloskey that the
White House, the people in that room representing the President argued for a policy that assisted
Saddam Hussein in getting dual use technologies. We had Congressman Rose who I know has been
on your show testifying about the grain sales being tied up with funding weapons to Iraq as well.
So across the government, this thing went on. Its hard to believe that somebody like Mr. Gates in
his position didnt know about it.
[Ted Koppel] We are suggesting a lot more that he knew about it. Were suggesting that he was
actively involved in it let me just pass on a little information that we have gathered today, having to
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
AND DOD
Page387
42 of
of 389
113
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
do with the Confirmation Hearings and was told earlier this afternoon. Alan Fryers, Senior Officer
with the CIA and Clair George are not likely to be testifying voluntarily, indeed Alan Fryers said he
will not be testifying before the Senate Intelligence Committee. The White House, as we have all
heard throughout the day is putting on some pressure to get those Hearings underway before the
August recess, August 2nd, of course, the Senate goes into recess. Ah, and there are indications
now that a week from Monday, indeed the Hearings will begin, Mr. Gates will be asked to testify at
that time, but Ive been also told that there is no way that the Hearing will no way be completed
before the August recess. And that Mr. Gates will be told that he will be recalled again after other
witnesses have testified, after the August recess. So these Hearing now, are destined to go into
September.
[House Representative Sam Gejdenson of the House Foreign Affairs Committee] I think that is
terribly important, because we have to what we have to remember here, unlike other appointees of
the President, what the head of the CIA does is not transparent. If youre the Secretary of Housing,
like Jack Kemp is, and I disagree with one of his programs, not only do I know about it, but the
average citizen knows about what Jack Kemps doing. Sometimes you agree with it and sometimes
you disagree with him.
In the case of the Director of the CIA, as is clear from repeated
experiences, often times even the people in Congress were suppose to know about these activities
are not informed. This has to do with National Security the standard ought not be somebody that
can get by the Hearing process with White House pressure. The White House ought to be with us
on this one, we ought to make sure that we have someone fully discloses what is going on to the
appropriate committees and to Congress. Not someone involved in Iran Contra and not someone
who hasnt told the entire truth. And not someone who is in question about these activities. This
has to be a definitive decision by the Congress, that this individual will come clean with the
Congress and fulfill not just the letter of the law, but the spirit of the law.
[Ted Koppel] Alright, let me just interrupt here for a moment, because were down to our last
minute and a half or so, Alan, it is inevitable in this kind of investigation that you run into a lot of
sleazy characters and I just want to get from you for our audience some sense of how much of the
information that we have compiled here comes from the sleazy characters and how much comes
from the few that we can really rely upon?
[Alan Friedman, New York Correspondent for the Financial Times of London] I think, ah
Ted the important thing to remember here is that we have had all kinds of allegations for the last
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
AND DOD
Page388
43 of
of 389
113
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016
three months when our team has interviewed dozens of people, weve been acidulously cross
checking and weve waited to go ahead with this story until weve had very credible witnesses.
Those who were documented CIA operatives and those who were physically with Mr. Gates during
those meetings, and we asked some of them why would Mr. Gates take the risk and go out and
meet with Mr. Cardoen and get directly involved and get his hands dirty in these operations,
especially as he was deputy director of the CIA at the time himself. We were told that he went out
because he wanted to give his improtore in order to make sure the job got done. Weve talked to a
number of top people and cross checked.
[Ted Koppel] Alright, Alan Friedman thank you very much, Congressman Gejdenson, thank you
very much, Ill be back in a moment.
AFFIDAVIT
STAN
J. CATERBONE
AND DOD
Page389
44 of
of 389
113
Saturday
Tuesday,
November
March 12,
22, 2016

STAN J. CATERBONE and The DEPARTMENT of DEFENSE Documents and Evidence of Conspiracy To .... Saturday November 12, 2016

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

STAN J. CATERBONE and The DEPARTMENT of DEFENSE Documents and Evidence of Conspiracy To .... Saturday November 12, 2016

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

When Will I Get Whistlebower Protections, Mr. President Elect?

Advanced Media Group

23 Years of Service of unwitting experimentation

1. Memo to Secretary Robert Gates of April 7, 2009

3. ISC & Pakistan Missle Project Called Khyber-Pass

STAN J. CATERBONE AND DOD

Saturday November 12, 2016

When Will I Get Whistlebower Protections, Mr. President Elect?

STAN J. CATERBONE AND DOD

Saturday November 12, 2016

When Will I Get Whistlebower Protections, Mr. President Elect?

To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2008 for military

Referred to the Committee on llllllllll and

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. ll. PROTECTION FOR CONTRACTOR EMPLOYEES

FROM REPRISAL FOR DISCLOSURE OF CER-

(a) INCREASED PROTECTION FROM REPRISAL.

6 Subsection (a) of section 2409 of title 10, United States

STAN J. CATERBONE AND DOD

Saturday November 12, 2016

When Will I Get Whistlebower Protections, Mr. President Elect?

(1) by striking disclosing to a Member of Con-

gress or an authorized official of an agency or the

Department of Justice and inserting disclosing to

a Member of Congress, a representative of a com-

mittee of Congress, an Inspector General, the Gov-

ernment Accountability Office, a Department of De-

fense employee responsible for contract oversight or

management, or an authorized official of an agency

or the Department of Justice, including in the case

of a disclosure made in the ordinary course of an

employees duties,; and

(2) by striking information relating to a sub-

stantial violation of law related to a contract and

inserting information that the employee reasonably

believes is evidence of gross mismanagement of a

Department of Defense contract, a gross waste of

Department of Defense funds, a substantial and spe-

cific danger to public health or safety, or a violation

of law related to a Department of Defense con-

(b) ACCELERATION OF SCHEDULE FOR DENYING RE-

PROVIDING REMEDY.Subsection (c) of such

STAN J. CATERBONE AND DOD

(1) in paragraph (1)

Saturday November 12, 2016

When Will I Get Whistlebower Protections, Mr. President Elect?

(A) by inserting after (1) the following:

Not later than 90 days after receiving an In-

spector General report pursuant to subsection

(b), the head of the agency concerned shall de-

termine whether the contractor concerned has

subjected the complainant to a reprisal prohib-

ited under subsection (a).; and

(B) by adding at the end the following new

(D) In the event the disclosure relates to a

cost-plus contract, prohibit the contractor from re-

ceiving one or more award fee payments to which

the contractor would otherwise be eligible until such

time as the contractor takes the actions ordered by

the head of the agency pursuant to subparagraphs

(A) through (C).

(E) Take the reprisal into consideration in any

past performance evaluation of the contractor for