Abstract
Alexander the Great died in Babylon in 323 BC. His death at age 32 followed a 2-week febrile illness. Speculated causes of death have included poisoning, assassination, and a number of infectious diseases. One incident, mentioned by Plutarch but not considered by previous investigators, may shed light on the cause of Alexander’s death. The incident, which occurred as he entered Babylon, involved a flock of ravens exhibiting unusual behavior and subsequently dying at his feet. The inexplicable behavior of ravens is reminiscent of avian illness and death weeks before the first human cases of West Nile virus infection were identified in the United States. We posit that Alexander may have died of West Nile encephalitis...
http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/9/12/03-0288_article.htm
Read the article and leave your thoughts in the comments below.
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Web Link Wednesday #3: No Main File Records
On November 20 of last year, I filed a FIOA request with the FBI. It stated, in part:
"Under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. subsection 552, I am requesting information or records on this Agency’s investigation of the West Nile virus outbreak of 1999 in the U.S., the possibility its existence in the Western Hemisphere may have been a biological attack (possibly originating from Iraq or Cuba)..."
This was not my first "unable to identify main file records" response, and I believe it won't be my last. According to Jason Leopold of Truthout, this course of action by the FBI is far from unique.
"Have you ever filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the FBI and received a written response from the agency stating that it could not locate records responsive to your request?
"Have you ever filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the FBI and received a written response from the agency stating that it could not locate records responsive to your request?
If so, there's a chance the FBI may have found some documents, but for unknown reasons, the agency's FOIA analysts determined it was not responsive and "blackballed" the file, crucial information the FBI withholds from a requester when it issues a "no records" response..."
Continued at http://www.truth-out.org/revealed-fbis-secretive-practice-blackballing-files/1326811421.
Read the article and leave your thoughts in the comments below.
Continued at http://www.truth-out.org/revealed-fbis-secretive-practice-blackballing-files/1326811421.
Read the article and leave your thoughts in the comments below.
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
History Highlights #3: Anti-Tank Dogs
The following is a very rough excerpt from the first iteration of my book draft. Since none of this material will appear in my current draft, I've decided to make it available here.
____________
The fascinating failure of Russia's early animal warfare program highlights the "anything goes" mentality of World War II-era weapons development.
The Revolutionary Military Council of the Republic, the supreme military authority of the Soviet Union, first approved the use of dogs for combat purposes on August 23, 1924. Order № 1089 established a special commission to oversee the dog training, as well as determine their relevance for further study. Moscow Oblast (or Podmoskovye) was selected as the home for a specialized dog training academy at the Central School of Small Arms and Tactical Training. The primary intent for the use of dogs was for combat assistance, supplies transport, message carriers, tracking, and removing injured soldiers from the battlefield via sled. Although various breeds were selected for training, German Sheppards were preferred due to their fearlessness, speed, strength, and perceived ease in training. In 1928 the school was restructured and renamed the Research Institute of Dog Handling, and by 1930 the program expanded to twelve training schools. Three of those facilities focused exclusively on training explosives-carrying dogs. The Red Army established the first official “tank destroyer” dog unit by 1935.
Several leading animal scientists were enlisted to help organize the wide-scale training program. In their first proposal, a dog was supposed to carry a bomb, strapped to its body, and reach a specific static target. Then the dog would release the bomb by pulling with its teeth a self-releasing belt and return to the operator. The bomb would then be detonated either by a timer or remote control, though the latter was too rare and expensive for that time. A group of dogs practiced for half a year, but even the smartest ones could not master the task. They performed well on a single target, but became confused after the target or location was changed and often returned to the operator with the bomb unreleased. Considering the proposed time-delay detonator, this might only kill the dog and its senders.
The final method was developed just prior to deployment in 1940. In the manner of pack animals, medium-sized dogs carried demolition charges on both sides of their backs. These charges were connected to a spindle, containing the igniter contact, fastened to the dog’s back. The dogs were trained to hide under approaching tanks. In doing so, the dog inadvertently brought the upright spindle, which was about 15 centimeters long, into contact with the belly of the tank and set off the charge. The dogs were also trained to advance on concrete-reinforced pillboxes, bunkers, armored covers, shelters, artillery positions, and ammunition and fuel storage facilities.
In response to Germany’s superior tank technology, all dog schools were converted to tank destroyer divisions. In desperate need of tank defense, the Central School hastily formed 10 fighter units. Three cadet battalions were sent to the front near Gomel, Bryansk, and the company created the 1st and 2nd Army units that fought at Moscow and at the Kalinin Front. During Germany’s autumn offensive in 1941 against Moscow, the Russians first deployed their mine dogs to impede incoming enemy tanks.
With the appearance of an enemy tank on the battlefield, the dog was released from the trench. As soon as it identified the target and demonstrated readiness to move towards it, the safety pin of the mine was extracted from the jacket. From this point on, the double-arm lever sensor was retained in the vertical position, rendering the mine in the firing position. Packed with 12.4 kg of TNT, the charge was sufficient enough to penetrate the less armored underside of most tanks.
In June of 1949, a series of reports were prepared by a committee of former German generals and general staff corps officers at the U.S. European Command Historical Division Interrogation Enclosure in Neustadt, Germany. Interviews were conducted with detainees in late 1947 and early 1948. According to one German officer’s report:
Several leading animal scientists were enlisted to help organize the wide-scale training program. In their first proposal, a dog was supposed to carry a bomb, strapped to its body, and reach a specific static target. Then the dog would release the bomb by pulling with its teeth a self-releasing belt and return to the operator. The bomb would then be detonated either by a timer or remote control, though the latter was too rare and expensive for that time. A group of dogs practiced for half a year, but even the smartest ones could not master the task. They performed well on a single target, but became confused after the target or location was changed and often returned to the operator with the bomb unreleased. Considering the proposed time-delay detonator, this might only kill the dog and its senders.
The final method was developed just prior to deployment in 1940. In the manner of pack animals, medium-sized dogs carried demolition charges on both sides of their backs. These charges were connected to a spindle, containing the igniter contact, fastened to the dog’s back. The dogs were trained to hide under approaching tanks. In doing so, the dog inadvertently brought the upright spindle, which was about 15 centimeters long, into contact with the belly of the tank and set off the charge. The dogs were also trained to advance on concrete-reinforced pillboxes, bunkers, armored covers, shelters, artillery positions, and ammunition and fuel storage facilities.
In response to Germany’s superior tank technology, all dog schools were converted to tank destroyer divisions. In desperate need of tank defense, the Central School hastily formed 10 fighter units. Three cadet battalions were sent to the front near Gomel, Bryansk, and the company created the 1st and 2nd Army units that fought at Moscow and at the Kalinin Front. During Germany’s autumn offensive in 1941 against Moscow, the Russians first deployed their mine dogs to impede incoming enemy tanks.
With the appearance of an enemy tank on the battlefield, the dog was released from the trench. As soon as it identified the target and demonstrated readiness to move towards it, the safety pin of the mine was extracted from the jacket. From this point on, the double-arm lever sensor was retained in the vertical position, rendering the mine in the firing position. Packed with 12.4 kg of TNT, the charge was sufficient enough to penetrate the less armored underside of most tanks.
In June of 1949, a series of reports were prepared by a committee of former German generals and general staff corps officers at the U.S. European Command Historical Division Interrogation Enclosure in Neustadt, Germany. Interviews were conducted with detainees in late 1947 and early 1948. According to one German officer’s report:
“An attack on our tanks by mine carrying dogs was, thanks to the alertness of our tank crew and infantry, rendered harmless by shooting the dogs.”
Another officer further explained the ineptitude of the Russian dog program, stating:
“News of this insidious improvisation caused some alarm in the panzer units and made them fire at all approaching dogs on sight. The author, who saw action before Moscow with his panzer division, has no knowledge of any case where a German tank was destroyed by a Russian mine dog. On the other hand, Russian prisoners of war reported that several mine dogs fleeing from the fire of German tanks sought protection underneath Russian tanks, which promptly blew up. One thing is certain: the specter of the mine dogs ceased just as abruptly as it had begun.”
Relatively early in their campaign, Russia’s Action Group acknowledged the futility of the anti-tank dog program. A handwritten summary report in October of 1941 by a Commander in the tank dog unit, observed:
1. Most of the dogs refuse to work immediately and [strived] to jump into the trench, exposing infantry ([causing] six accidents)
2. Nine dogs, after a brief run in the right direction, began to rush from side to side, frightened by the explosions and artillery shells, tried to hide in craters, pits, [and] climbed under the shelter… Others, due to the fact that they [attempted] to come back, had to [be destroyed by] small-arms fire.
3. Three dogs [were] killed [by] Nazis rifle fire and [taken] with them. Attempts to recapture the dead dogs had been made.
4. Supposedly four dogs exploded near the German tanks, but confirmation of the fact that they [had] disabled the tanks [we] do not have.
The Action Group cited in the conclusion of their report numerous causes for failure. Among those was the shortage of properly trained dogs and improper training methods. It was decided that further development of this method of warfare was feasible, but tangible results of subsequent attempts to use dogs as an anti-tank means were not studied.
Some in the Red Army reported unprecedented success of the anti-tank units. In March of 1942, Lt. Gen. Lelyushenko reported that the anti-tank dogs were an integral part of their defense during the German defeat at Moscow and the enemy tanks were on the run from the dog detachment. An Operational Summary from July of 1942 stated that an advance of 50 German tanks was met by the dog unit led by lieutenant Shantsev, resulting in seven tanks being set on fire. Furthermore, the 2nd Army reported in September of 1943 the destruction of 15 German tanks by anti-tank dogs during the battles near Belgorod. There is speculation that these reports may have been propaganda fabricated solely for continued support of anti-tank dog training program. After 1942, the use of anti-tank dogs by the Soviet Army rapidly declined, and the training schools were redirected to producing the more needed mine-seeking and delivery dogs. However, training of anti-tank dogs continued until June 1996.
Some in the Red Army reported unprecedented success of the anti-tank units. In March of 1942, Lt. Gen. Lelyushenko reported that the anti-tank dogs were an integral part of their defense during the German defeat at Moscow and the enemy tanks were on the run from the dog detachment. An Operational Summary from July of 1942 stated that an advance of 50 German tanks was met by the dog unit led by lieutenant Shantsev, resulting in seven tanks being set on fire. Furthermore, the 2nd Army reported in September of 1943 the destruction of 15 German tanks by anti-tank dogs during the battles near Belgorod. There is speculation that these reports may have been propaganda fabricated solely for continued support of anti-tank dog training program. After 1942, the use of anti-tank dogs by the Soviet Army rapidly declined, and the training schools were redirected to producing the more needed mine-seeking and delivery dogs. However, training of anti-tank dogs continued until June 1996.
____________
Next week:
Monday, January 23, 2012
Mailbag Monday #3: "We're Sorry, But it will Cost You"
n early November of last year
Page 2 goes on to explain that since they are processing a large number of FOIA requests, there are "unavoidable delays". This means that not only did I not receive a response in 20 days (as the FOIA requires), but there is no timeline as to when I can expect a response. I suppose this all seems fair ... since they didn't conduct an investigation and all...
Be sure to come back in a couple days for a related Web Link Wednesday.
Friday, January 20, 2012
Document Dump #2: Make (Gay) Love, Not War
This document actually got a little bit of press when it was released by the Sunshine Project (I believe it was in 2005) through a Freedom of Information Act request. In 1994 the Wright Laboratory in Ohio, a predecessor to today's United States Air Force Research Laboratory, produced a three-page proposal on a variety of possible nonlethal chemical weapons.
While the proposal includes a "halitosis bomb" and insect attractants, the real highlight is:
"One distasteful but completely non-lethal example would be strong aphrodisiacs, especially if the chemical also caused homosexual behaviour."
The project was budgeted for $7.5 million over 6 years. It remains unknown what results were achieved and if the project was ever cancelled.
Download (PDF, 1.19 MB)
As always, feel free to leave your thoughts on the subject in the comments or on the Facebook page.
Download (PDF, 1.19 MB)
As always, feel free to leave your thoughts on the subject in the comments or on the Facebook page.
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
History Highlights #2: "Operation Acoustic Kitty"
The following is a very rough excerpt from the first iteration of my book draft. Since none of this material will appear in my current draft, I've decided to make it available here.
____________
The CIA has never publicly confirmed or denied the Iranian allegations.
The Central Intelligence Agency's desire to develop remote-controlled covert eavesdropping critters continues... (read part one here).
It appears that as early as 1966, certain aspects of MKULTRA's animal espionage program were restructured. Similar to the doctrine of Subproject 94, the CIA sought to determine “the feasibility and practicality of the animal control, signaling, guidance, and location system”. According to Victor Marchetti, former special assistant to the Deputy Director of the CIA, "[t]he idea behind "Operation Acoustic Kitty" was to develop an audio device that could function despite extraneous noises.” Technical feasibility was demonstrated that year and operational feasibility was conducted in July of 1967. From September through December of 1967, the CIA analyzed the program goals and requirements. After concluding their initial analysis, the project received full funding that December.
The program’s initial objective was to get an animal to a remote point and back again. Cats and dogs were chosen for study since they are common in most parts of the world. Researchers cautioned, however, needs might dictate that "smaller or larger animals be investigated for other kinds of missions". Two areas determined to be in need of critical investigation were the development of guidance methods, as well as maximum range capability. Utilization of a radio frequency link was mandatory in the development of a guidance system. One proposal was the development of continuous and intermittent information inputs systems. By late 1967 a number of cats were undergoing training. No evidence exists supporting the implementation of canine studies, although it was again proposed that dogs could also be used in the same manner and may be easier to train.
A CIA report from July 1968 thoroughly outlines the cat training techniques, largely based on systems proposed by famed behaviorist B. F. Skinner. The Agency was interested in biological factors such as attention span, physical endurance, total range, and effect on different reinforcement schedules. The training protocol involved systematically increasing the complexity and skill level of the animal response under the conditions of an expanding and frequently changing environment. They conditioned the animals to search for targets and respond to the targets once they found them. Auditory cues were supplied to the animals to aid them in their search for targets. The auditory cues were a continuous signal when the animal was heading towards the proper target, a signal meaning turn to the left and a signal meaning turn right. These signals were used in different combination depending on the particular approach in training.
Although many details of "Operation Acoustic Kitty" remain classified to this day, Marchetti provided this insight in 1986: “They slit the cat open, put batteries in him, [and] wired him up. The tail was used as an antenna. They made a monstrosity. They tested him and tested him. They found he would walk off the job when he got hungry, so they put another wire in to override that. Finally, they’re ready. They took it out to a park bench and said “Listen to those two guys. Don’t listen to anything else – not the birds, no cat or dog – just those two guys!”... They put him out of the van, and a taxi comes and runs him over. There they were, sitting in the van with all those dials, and the cat was dead!” Marchetti also went on to state: “It was twenty five million dollars down the drain. Twenty five million dollars was a lot of money then.” Dr. Jeffrey Richelson, a senior fellow at the National Security Archive, said of the project, "I'm not sure for how long after the operation the cat would have survived even if it hadn't been run over."
Declared a complete failure, the Acoustic Kitty program was abruptly cancelled. An internal CIA memo acknowledged the hard work and dedication of the individuals involved:
"Our final examination of trained cats convinced us that the program would not lend itself in a practical sense to our highly specialized needs. The work on this problem over the years reflects great credit on the personnel that guided it, whose energy and imagination could be models for scientific pioneers."
However, some in the CIA believed the experiments should continue. On March 13, 1969, a memo titled "Animal Studies Projects" requested further funding for the following fiscal year:
"I understand that there are no funds programmed for R & D support of the trained animal program for FY 1970. I think a modest level of forward looking R & D activity designed to improve the guidance systems and operational versatility of various animals should be maintained. I, therefore, recommend that you approve such research effort[s] for FY 1970."
It remains unclear whether or not the funding was appropriated, but more recent reports indicate a possibility the Acoustic Kitty project lives on to this day in some capacity. In a July 2007 editorial for the Iranian newspaper Resalat, Saleh Eskandari wrote:
"A few weeks ago, 14 squirrels equipped with espionage systems of foreign intelligence services were captured by [Iranian] intelligence forces along the country's borders. These trained squirrels, each of which weighed just over 700 grams, were released on the borders of the country for intelligence and espionage purposes. According to the announcement made by Iranian intelligence officials, alert police officials caught these squirrels before they could carry out any task.
Fixing GPS devices, bugging instruments and advanced cameras in the bodies of trained animals like squirrels, mice, hamsters, etc, are among modern methods of collecting intelligence. Given the fast speed and the special physical features of these animals, they provide special capabilities for spying operations. Once the animals return to their place of origin, the intelligence gathered by them is then offloaded…"
Fixing GPS devices, bugging instruments and advanced cameras in the bodies of trained animals like squirrels, mice, hamsters, etc, are among modern methods of collecting intelligence. Given the fast speed and the special physical features of these animals, they provide special capabilities for spying operations. Once the animals return to their place of origin, the intelligence gathered by them is then offloaded…"
____________
Next week: Russia's Anti-Tank Dogs
Monday, January 16, 2012
Mailbag Monday #2: The FBI Would Like You to Know...
I posted this on my Facebook page a couple weeks ago and thought it would be appropriate to repost it here. This is the fact sheet the FBI includes in every Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request:
Friday, January 13, 2012
Document Dump #1: Weather Modification
While not directly related to my book research, I stumbled upon the following statement in a 1994 "Non Lethal Warfare Proposal" declassified and released by the Navy in 2008:
I did some further digging and found that the US Senate investigated the matter during Top Secret hearings in 1974.
Today's document is the United States Senate Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Oceans and International Environment of the Committee on Foreign Relations on the Need for an International Agreement Prohibiting the Use of Environmental and Geophysical Modification as Weapons of War and Briefing on Department of Defense Weather Modification Activity, January 25 and March 20, 1974.
Today's document is the United States Senate Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Oceans and International Environment of the Committee on Foreign Relations on the Need for an International Agreement Prohibiting the Use of Environmental and Geophysical Modification as Weapons of War and Briefing on Department of Defense Weather Modification Activity, January 25 and March 20, 1974.
Download (PDF, 813 KB)
And since this is the inaugural "Document Dump", I decided to make it a double shot. Here's the 1976 UN Weather Weapons Treaty (opened for signature at Geneva on 18 May 1977):
Download (PDF, 107 KB)
Although the treaty specifically outlined that "Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to engage in military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or injury to any other State Party", the following statement appears in a 1996 research paper for the Air Force, titled "Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025":
As always, feel free to leave your thoughts on the subject in the comments or on the Facebook page.
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Progress Bar #1: Hitting the Reset Button After Five Years
As mentioned in my inaugural post, I only recently decided to change the topic of my book. This was done out of necessity to refine the subject, as well as to assure I had enough research material to support an entire book.
So where do things stand in terms of actual progress?
What I don't have:
- A title. This isn't a big deal, as I still have a lot of work ahead of me. ("Operation Big Buzz" is the title of this blog, not the book. Even if I had a title established, the publisher can change it at their discretion.)
- A publisher. Publishing is something I'm trying to not think about so early in the game (although I do have two publishers that were interested in my original topic). And with multiple self-publishing options available in this day and age, this issue is not much of a concern for me.
- Documents detailing specific aspects of certain programs. This will always be an issue, as some of the documents I have requested continue to remain classified. Unfortunately, I don't see this changing any time soon.
What I do have:
- An outline. As of this post, my outline consists of ten chapters. The book begins with events taking place in the mid 1800s and concludes in the present day.
- One complete chapter (mostly). I jumped ahead to chapter 6 (dealing with the US Army's weaponizing of mosquitoes) because it is definitely the information I am most interested in.
- An editor. I am very grateful to have an individual willing to pour over my work and correct errors at no cost. Did I mention I'm very grateful?
- Enough research materials to type up the remaining chapters. Even if I can't obtain further declassified documents, I feel confident that the research material I have obtained should make for an interesting read.
What I am aiming for:
- A minimum of 300 pages (including photographs and illustrations)
- Mass market distribution. (Isn't every author?)
Well, that's where things stand for now. I will continue to post weekly progress reports up to publication. Feel free to share your comments, suggestions, words of encouragement, and overall positive vibes.
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Web Link Wednesday #1: Having Fun with H5N1
(CBS/AP) Scientists are worried that the government's unprecedented action to ask two top scientific journals to withhold details of upcoming bird flu studies might impede scientific progress.
The scientists fear a chill may be descending on their field, particularly related to key studies on how viruses that normally infect birds and pigs evolve to infect people. In the short term, it may also become harder to publish any work looking at this question if it relates to the dangerous H5N1 avian flu.
The panel of biosecurity experts that advised the government on its decision may also recommend that journals agree to a short-term moratorium on publishing research about what makes H5N1 viruses more transmissible...
Read the entire article and leave your thoughts in the comments below.
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
History Highlights #1: MKULTRA's Remote-Controlled Animals Studies
The following is a very rough excerpt from the first iteration of my book draft. Since none of this material will appear in my current draft, I've decided to make it available here.
During the Cold War, the Central Intelligence Agency sought to develop the capability to create remote-controlled vectors for covert eavesdropping, as well as object retrieval and "executive action type operations". Logic (and logistics) determined that animal testing was a safe starting point...
____________
At the height of the Cold War, conventional warfare became but a distant memory in the eyes of the intelligence communities. Motivated largely in response to alleged Soviet, Chinese, and North Korean uses of mind-control techniques on U.S. prisoners of war in Korea, the CIA desired technological capabilities on par with, if not superior to, its enemies. To develop these new technologies, the CIA’s Project Review Committee approved the Technical Service Staff (TSS) Research Program on June 6, 1952. Although the majority of the projects were of standard fare in the intelligence community, a small percentage was deemed ultra-sensitive. Since the nature of these contemplated projects required the utmost secrecy, it was requested that the Director of Central Intelligence, Allen Dulles, authorize a research budget for fiscal year 1953 without the establishment of formal contractual relations. This dedicated program would become known as Project MKULTRA. Relegated to the CIA’s Office of Scientific Intelligence Research Branch, Dr. Sidney Gottlieb was named director of MKULTRA on April 13, 1953.
From its inception, Project MKULTRA had two extremely sensitive research programs in mind. While one of those programs remains shrouded in mystery, the other concerned:
"Research to develop a capability in the covert use of biological and chemical materials. This area involves the production of various physiological conditions which could support present or future clandestine operations. Aside from the offensive potential, the development of a comprehensive capability in this field of covert chemical and biological warfare gives us a thorough knowledge of the enemy’s theoretical potential, thus enabling us to defend ourselves against a foe who might not be as restrained in the use of these techniques as we are."
Due to the massive undertaking of assembling multiple covert studies under the two proposed programs, MKULTRA became an “umbrella project” under which certain sensitive subprojects were funded. One area of investigation would have interesting implications: The development of inconspicuous vectors capable of deployment and retrieval of specific objects, as well as covert eavesdropping. As a result, MKULTRA Subproject No. 94 would propose:
"...to conduct investigations...of the action of localized neurological and physiological stimulants on the balance mechanisms in mammals and bird[s]. The sponsor will have full control of species of animals to be utilized together with methods and procedures to be followed in the researches.
Special investigations and evaluations will be conducted toward the application of selected elements of these techniques to man.
Pilot experiments will be performed under field conditions to permit the critical evaluation of methods and procedures. The parameters of effectiveness and the action of potential interfering phenomena will be determined."
Approved for development, Subproject No.94 was granted a one-year budget of $45,000 in May of 1959. The initial research phase had been completed earlier; having worked out techniques and brain locations for imparting specific stimulation which activates and maintains directional control of selected mammals. The feasibility of remote control of animal activities including speed and direction of movement had been demonstrated by limited laboratory and field trials with rats and burros by utilizing permanent miniaturized electrode implants in specific brain center areas. By September 1959 the project was expanded to include experimentation with dogs. The investigations were being directed towards refinement of techniques with the ultimate objective being to provide practical systems suitable for operational application. All personnel associated with the planning and monitoring of the program possessed Top Secret clearance.
MKULTRA Subproject 94 continued to receive funding annually until was terminated in November 1962. Very little is known about the scope of Subproject 94 since the Technical Services Division (TSD, formerly the Technical Service Staff) had pursued a philosophy of minimum documentation in keeping with the high sensitivity of some of the projects. According to J.S. Earman’s internal investigation of MKULTRA in 1963, “…some files were found to present a reasonably complete record, including most sensitive matters, while others with parallel objectives contained little or no data at all.” There were just two individuals in TSD who had full knowledge of program operations and most of that knowledge was unrecorded. However, prior to the discontinuation of Subproject 94, another subproject was established to continue in that general area of research.
In May of 1962, Project MKULTRA, Subproject No. 142 was awarded a one year budget of $7,500. The purpose of Subproject No. 142 was to investigate “possible delivery systems for BW/CW agents or for direct executive action type operations as distinguished from the eavesdropping application”. The term "executive action" was the CIA's euphemism for assassination. Again the CIA cautioned that “at some point in the work which would present security problems if this effort were to be handled in the usual way.” There would also be different approach to the testing conducted under the project:
"It is proposed to carry out certain biological studies involving selective brain stimulation of cold-blooded animals. In addition to the various theoretical reasons for such studies, it appears that certain practical guidance systems involving more detailed behavioral control of both positive and negative sorts may be possible than are presently attainable in the warm-blooded animals being investigated. It is also possible that these simpler systems can accomplish the same operational goals with far less critical demands on the electronic parts of the guidance and control system."
According to the final report for Subproject 142:
"An experimental study followed the extensive library review. Morphological and behavioral studies were made, and a competence was built up...especially in the behavioral area of the study. An essentially complete set of techniques has been perfected in this study, and will be used in the continuing work. The original objectives of the study have not been achieved, but the work will be continued until they are. Technical reports will be made as information generated, and opportunity permits."
It remains uncertain as to when Subproject 142 was terminated. According to the CIA, all MKULTRA projects ceased in 1963. As mentioned in the Subproject 142 report, investigations of warm-blooded animals persisted, but documentation of these investigations does not exist.
By the early 1970s, the CIA had growing concerns that the MKULTRA projects were gaining public, as well as Congressional, attention. As a result, CIA Director Richard Helms ordered the destruction of all MKULTRA files. On January 30, 1973 all MKULTRA files formerly held in the CIA’s Records Center were destroyed. One box of material relating to environmental sampling for BW and CW manufacturing activity was also destroyed in January 1973. Prior to his retirement in June 1973, MKULTRA director Dr. Gottlieb ordered his secretary to destroy approximately one safe drawer of papers relating to his involvement with the covert operation. No detailed explanation to the specifics of these documents has ever been provided. However, roughly 20,000 improperly stored documents relating to MKULTRA were located and preserved in 1977. Because most of the MKULTRA records were deliberately destroyed, it is impossible to have a complete understanding of the more than 150 individually funded research projects sponsored by MKULTRA and the related CIA programs.
However, there is evidence that at least some of these CIA-funded operations continued on …
____________
Continued in History Highlights #2: "Operation Acoustic Kitty"
Monday, January 9, 2012
Mailbag Monday #1: "Its YOUR Research, So YOU Do It!"
While I've compiled quite the collection of humorous, misleading, and/or downright confusing correspondence with government agencies, I felt it would be appropriate for the inaugural Mailbag Monday to actually be a letter I received today (which coincidentally happens to be a Monday).
While I do understand the position of the National Archives, it is yet another deterrent to my progress. An an independent researcher receiving zero funding for my endeavor, I just don't have the time or resources to pursue this in person.
While I do understand the position of the National Archives, it is yet another deterrent to my progress. An an independent researcher receiving zero funding for my endeavor, I just don't have the time or resources to pursue this in person.
Note: The original document doesn't include redactions. I found it necessary to remove both my home address (for the illusion of peace of mind) and a portion of one sentence that included some information I don't want to make public just yet.
Posting Schedule
The following is the posting schedule I will attempt to adhere to:
- Mailbag Monday: Any interesting correspondence I receive from government agencies, along with my response to any comments left on this blog or the Facebook page.
- History Highlights: Each Tuesday I'll spotlight some little-known project I've discovered through my research (that may or may not pertain to the topic of the book)
- Web Link Wednesday: Every Wednesday I will post a link to a news or technology website regarding something within the broad scope of my research
- Progress Bar: An update regarding the status of the book will be posted each Thursday
- Document Dump: Each Friday I will post a document from my collection (in .pdf format) originally obtained for my earlier research regarding the use of animals in war and espionage
I may, from time to time, post additional random information that does not fall into one of the above stated categories. Again, please feel free to comment on either this blog or the Facebook page. Your input will surely help to inspire and motivate me.
Thank You Dragonball Z (or How This All Began)
Here's a brief history of why I decided to write my first bit of nonfiction and what you can expect upon publication:
Yes, I have the popular Japanese cartoon Dragonball Z to thank for this endeavor. Back in 2001, the resurgence of anime (Japanese cartoons) in North America was enormous and the highlight of Cartoon Network's "Toonami" block was, as you probably guessed, Dragonball Z. I watched the show religiously, and my curiosity eventually led me to learn more about the English dub cast. A quick Google search led me to a Q&A conducted with Kyle Hebert (best known at that time as the narrator for Dragonball Z) on the show's official website. In the Q&A, Kyle posted his email address for fans to reach out to him. As a budding website designer, I decided to drop him a line and ask him if he'd like a website to streamline his fan interactions. By October, KyleHebert.com was launched. (Note: Although Kyle and I remain good friends, I haven't been involved with his website for some time now.) Kyle and I became friends quickly, and in 2002 my wife and I took our first trip to Texas to attend our first anime convention. (During this first trip, I got to audition for Funimation - the studio responsible for the English adaptation for Dragonball Z. While I completely blew the audition, I was offered a contract. I was also fortunate enough to have a number of voice over cameos between 2004 and 2006 in some of Funimation's popular titles.)
As my anime-related networking continued, I was contacted by the editor of the up-and-coming (and short-lived) Anime Play magazine. By early 2003 I was made a staff writer, and in 2004 I began freelancing for Wizard's Anime Insider and Beckett's Yu-Gi-Oh! Collector magazines. By April 2005, I was a staff writer for Beckett Anime (credited as Michael Davis for the majority of my submissions, as Funimation and Beckett didn't see eye to eye on certain things appearing in the magazine - and I was still technically under contract with Funimation). I also did some freelance work for Anime News Network's Protoculture Addicts in 2005.
It was about this time that I enrolled in college (14 years after graduating from high school) and really started to look at my writing critically. I began a series of articles for Beckett explaining the real life historical inspirations behind some of the plots in anime. Unfortunately, by early 2006 print media really started to decline - especially for the niche anime market. As the magazine titles began to disappear one by one, my desire to write only intensified. I knew I wanted to write about something from history - something I found interesting (because, after all, it had to at least hold my interest), and something involving the military. I decided on an epic, tentatively titled "Chicken-Powered Nuclear Bombs", that would chronicle the use of animals in war and espionage. With a goal and rough outline in place, I began a five year obsession with obtaining research materials.
Upon obtaining thousands of declassified government documents through countless Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, I had the dizzying realization that the topic I chose was just too broad. Some areas of my outline had ample material, while others were sparse. Complicating matters, much of the information I was requesting was (and is) still classified. In an effort to not lose motivation, I recently made the decision to narrow down my topic to one specific area: mosquitoes. Biological warfare, specifically utilizing insect vectors, has existed throughout history. Beginning during World War II and continuing throughout the Cold War, the United States actually spent millions of dollars perfecting mosquito weaponization. And although most countries no longer research bioligical warfare, its impact remains (West Nile virus?). Its been an incredibly interesting adventure thus far, and I hope you find some entertainment in my continuing efforts.
I would like to stress the fact that most of my book is composed directly from declassified government documents, US Senate and Congressional records, and other reputable sources (such as science and nature journals and other published academic works). It is not conspiracy theory, my opinions, or meant to come off as alarmist. Its American history.
This concludes my not-so-brief introduction to this blog. Fear not, as future posts will be more brief, as well as much more on topic. Feel free to leave your comments here or on the newly created Facebook page.
Yes, I have the popular Japanese cartoon Dragonball Z to thank for this endeavor. Back in 2001, the resurgence of anime (Japanese cartoons) in North America was enormous and the highlight of Cartoon Network's "Toonami" block was, as you probably guessed, Dragonball Z. I watched the show religiously, and my curiosity eventually led me to learn more about the English dub cast. A quick Google search led me to a Q&A conducted with Kyle Hebert (best known at that time as the narrator for Dragonball Z) on the show's official website. In the Q&A, Kyle posted his email address for fans to reach out to him. As a budding website designer, I decided to drop him a line and ask him if he'd like a website to streamline his fan interactions. By October, KyleHebert.com was launched. (Note: Although Kyle and I remain good friends, I haven't been involved with his website for some time now.) Kyle and I became friends quickly, and in 2002 my wife and I took our first trip to Texas to attend our first anime convention. (During this first trip, I got to audition for Funimation - the studio responsible for the English adaptation for Dragonball Z. While I completely blew the audition, I was offered a contract. I was also fortunate enough to have a number of voice over cameos between 2004 and 2006 in some of Funimation's popular titles.)
As my anime-related networking continued, I was contacted by the editor of the up-and-coming (and short-lived) Anime Play magazine. By early 2003 I was made a staff writer, and in 2004 I began freelancing for Wizard's Anime Insider and Beckett's Yu-Gi-Oh! Collector magazines. By April 2005, I was a staff writer for Beckett Anime (credited as Michael Davis for the majority of my submissions, as Funimation and Beckett didn't see eye to eye on certain things appearing in the magazine - and I was still technically under contract with Funimation). I also did some freelance work for Anime News Network's Protoculture Addicts in 2005.
It was about this time that I enrolled in college (14 years after graduating from high school) and really started to look at my writing critically. I began a series of articles for Beckett explaining the real life historical inspirations behind some of the plots in anime. Unfortunately, by early 2006 print media really started to decline - especially for the niche anime market. As the magazine titles began to disappear one by one, my desire to write only intensified. I knew I wanted to write about something from history - something I found interesting (because, after all, it had to at least hold my interest), and something involving the military. I decided on an epic, tentatively titled "Chicken-Powered Nuclear Bombs", that would chronicle the use of animals in war and espionage. With a goal and rough outline in place, I began a five year obsession with obtaining research materials.
Upon obtaining thousands of declassified government documents through countless Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, I had the dizzying realization that the topic I chose was just too broad. Some areas of my outline had ample material, while others were sparse. Complicating matters, much of the information I was requesting was (and is) still classified. In an effort to not lose motivation, I recently made the decision to narrow down my topic to one specific area: mosquitoes. Biological warfare, specifically utilizing insect vectors, has existed throughout history. Beginning during World War II and continuing throughout the Cold War, the United States actually spent millions of dollars perfecting mosquito weaponization. And although most countries no longer research bioligical warfare, its impact remains (West Nile virus?). Its been an incredibly interesting adventure thus far, and I hope you find some entertainment in my continuing efforts.
I would like to stress the fact that most of my book is composed directly from declassified government documents, US Senate and Congressional records, and other reputable sources (such as science and nature journals and other published academic works). It is not conspiracy theory, my opinions, or meant to come off as alarmist. Its American history.
This concludes my not-so-brief introduction to this blog. Fear not, as future posts will be more brief, as well as much more on topic. Feel free to leave your comments here or on the newly created Facebook page.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)