Ray Gun

[teddy]

rawstory discusses the ray gun and the wish to deploy this "safe" weapon against protesters and in Iraq.

What really disgusts me about this video, are two moments in the video. Firstly, that when testing the ray gun against fake protesters (military staff acting out the part) they wore anti-war t-shirts - as if to say that being anti-war is the kind of people that warrants ray-gun treatment. Then later in the video, they show a top pentagon lady receiving the ray-gun treatment - they reduce the dose for her of course, and as they fire it onto her, she is heard shouting "freedom" - which kind of gives the impression that the Pentagon are against freedom!

www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2008/060208_tests_raygun.htm

[Steve Gardner]

It makes me mad watching and listening to these people openly, brazenly, attacking freedom.

I couldn't agree with you more: microwaving opponents of the massacre in Iraq and shouting 'freedom' as she was about to be zapped by a pain-compliance device are clear messages - part of an obvious trend developing with respect to governments exercising control and stiffling any form of expression that doesn't parrot the their propaganda.

Unfortunately, it doesn't appear to be obvious to enough people yet.

By the way, I found a very interesting interview given to FrontPageMag by a guy called Dave Gaubatz. Not really sure what his credentials are nor whether his claims can be relied upon, but they 'ring true'.

Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Dave Gaubatz, the first Federal Agent (civilian) to enter Iraq in 2003. Currently the Director of the Mapping Shari'a project and owner of Wahhabi Counter-terrorism publications providing first-hand intelligence for law enforcement and CT professionals.


FP: Dave Gaubatz, welcome to Frontpage Interview.

Gaubatz: Thank you and again it is an honor.


FP: So tell us about the 'Active Denial' Program – the Ray Gun. What is it and what’s the issue? The Pentagon informed 60 Minutes (CBS) that the Ray Gun could not be used in Iraq . But your experience and evidence suggests that that is not true. What’s the story here?

Gaubatz: Before I discuss the Ray Gun issue I want to inform your readers that 60 Minutes (CBS) Producer Mary Walsh telephoned me last week to discuss my allegations pertaining to the false and very inaccurate report conducted by 60 Minutes. She asked for documentation to prove my knowledge of the system and why their report is false. I provided the documentation. She wrote back and wanted to know why the Pentagon had lied to her. I essentially informed Ms. Walsh that she should ask them since it has hurt the credibility of her and the 60 Minutes staff. Readers can view the documents on my site at www.kidsandterrorism.com.


FP: Ok. So tell us about the Ray Gun and what 60 Minutes did.

Gaubatz: It may be better to provide the 60 Minutes version of what it is, and its capability, and why the Pentagon informed Ms. Walsh the ‘Ray Gun’ could not be used in Iraq .

The following is from the CBS report. I have taken three of their first set of paragraphs and put the factual information under each of their statements. The readers will begin to see from my responses that the Ray Gun is exactly opposite from what 60 Minutes reported. Meaning- -The Ray Gun is a very lethal weapon and was designed to kill, not as a non-lethal weapon as described by 60 Minutes. The Ray Gun was designed at Kirtland AFB, NM, and had been tested there for many years prior to 2003. The weapon was operational in 2003 and should have been deployed to Iraq during the first month of the war. American lives could have been saved then. Now five years later the Pentagon is clearly attempting to cover up another error by using 60 Minutes as their voice piece to say the weapon is non-lethal and this is why it was not deployed. This major lapse in miscalculation is not a Republican nor Democratic problem, but a combination of both parties making mistakes. Below begins the CBS Report and my response:

(CBS) 1: What if we told you the Pentagon has a ray gun? And what if we told you it can stop a person in his tracks without killing or even injuring him? Well, it’s true. You can’t see it, you can't hear it, but as CBS News correspondent David Martin experienced first hand, you can feel it.

Gaubatz: The Pentagon has had an operational “Ray Gun” since early in 2003. The Ray Gun was designed to be a lethal weapon. It can kill, injury the person very badly, or just slightly depending on the setting of the mechanisms. if they want to show the ‘Ray gun’ to news media and some politicians who advocate non-lethal weapons, and are usually the same politicians who have advocated getting our troops out of Iraq months before they were even sent there, they bring in a journalist and ‘feed’ him/her the non-lethal story. Otherwise know as liberals who know less about the Ray Gun than they do basic fundamentals of war.

(CBS) 2: Pentagon officials call it a major breakthrough which could change the rules of war and save huge numbers of lives in Iraq. But it's still not there. That because in the middle of a war, the military just can't bring itself to trust a weapon that doesn't kill.

Gaubatz: The Pentagon officials have intentionally lied. Again the breakthrough was made in 2002/2003, at Kirtland AFB, NM. The Pentagon admits it could save huge numbers of lives in Iraq if only it were operational and a lethal weapon. The Pentagon official says this weapon can’t kill. This mystical Pentagon official purposely did not reveal his name, because he knows there are people like me who know the truth. The American public were simply lied to. The Ray Gun was designed at the AFRL/DE facility, Kirtland AFB, NM, was/is operational, and can kill.

From 2000 until I deployed to Saudi and subsequently Iraq in Jan 2003, I was the Special Agent in Charge for the protection of this technology. I was very surprised when I read the 60 Minutes article and then saw their report. This system required a Top Secret/SCI plus Security Clearance, just to get within a hundred yards of the building and adjacent field it was being tested and evaluated in. It bothered me the Government had spent millions and millions of dollars on this technology, and then released it. What wasn’t a surprise was the fact the Pentagons officials lied about the real intentions and capabilities of this weapon. AFRL/DE (Directed Energy) does not spend millions of dollars and have the worlds leading scientists develop a weapon that can only ‘hurt’ an enemy of war. The brightest scientist assigned to Kirtland AFB design weapons that are lethal (otherwise known as a weapon that can actually kill).

(CBS) 3: Col. Kirk Hymes, head of the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate, are in charge of the ray gun which is being tested at Moody Air Force Base in southern Georgia.

The targets at the base are people, military volunteers creating a scenario soldiers might encounter in Iraq, like angry protestors advancing on American troops, who have to choose between backing down or opening fire. Off in the distance, half a mile away, the operator of the ray gun has the crowd in his sights.

Unlike the soldiers on the ground, he has no qualms about firing away because his weapon won't injure anyone.

Gaubatz: Col Hymes was not in charge of the Ray Gun in 2003, nor several years prior to this. Director Bruce Simpson from Kirtland AFB, AFRL/DE was in charge of all DE technology, which included the Ray Gun. Col Kirk Hymes is a yes man. If higher Pentagon officials tell him to inform 60 Minutes the Ray Gun is a non-lethal weapon and was only recently operational, he is the man who will salute and say ‘Yes Sir’. After myself serving 20 plus years on active duty I can sometimes agree with Col Hymes.; unless it is an unlawful order that can put American troops in harms way and will lead many of them to unnecessary deaths. Then Col Hymes has a responsibility to put the security and best interest of the troops fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan first. To do otherwise means 4000 current troops’ deaths will double and then triple.

I believe the loved ones of the fallen soldiers would tell Col. Hymes to either tell the truth or retire from service.


FP: Ok, so let’s crystallize this: the Ray Gun has been reported by 60 Minutes and Pentagon officials as a non-lethal weapon. You're saying this is completely false?

Gaubatz: The Ray Gun was designed as a lethal weapon. During my conversation with Ms. Mary Walsh, she advised she was told by Pentagon officials the Ray Gun had been tested on animals. I was very surprised to hear this because Pentagon officials have just confirmed animals are used for testing of weapons such as the Ray Gun at Kirtland AFB. I coordinated the security when the truck loads of animals were being brought in during the middle of the night. Dead animals can’t speak, but if a goat or 500 pound cow can be killed almost instantly with the Ray Gun, then I believe most readers can safely assume a 175 pound man or woman could also die instantly from the intense heat.

The weapon could have been used in early 2003. Before I left for Iraq I had numerous meetings with AFRL/DE engineers and scientists. I knew the capabilities of the weapons. The scientists and their Directors asked me to test and evaluate the DE weapons at Kirtland AFB. I did this immediately after 11 Sep 2001. For several months, the weapons were operational and ready for use in Iraq .


FP: You were the Special Agent assigned from 2000-2003 to oversee the protection of this technology. Expand for us on your personal experience in -- and knowledge on -- this matter.

Gaubatz: I worked directly with the engineers, scientists, Security technology personnel, and the Director of AFRL/DE. During this time I received numerous awards from AFRL/DE pertaining to my knowledge of the DE weapons. It is well documented I protected this technology from getting into the hands of the Chinese, Iranians, and Russians who were daily ‘pinging’ our classified computer systems attempting to steal the technology.


FP: Then the Ray Gun could still save many American soldiers’ lives?

Gaubatz: This is my major concern. When I returned from Iraq in late 2003, I was requested to brief the AFRL/DE Director (Bruce Simpson). I informed Director Simpson the “Ray Gun” and “Boss Surveillance System” should immediately be deployed to Iraq . I provided the following examples for its operational use:

1st example: When a young soldier is at his guard post and he/she suspected a vehicle coming toward his gate is hostile and is not following commands, the soldier’s next step is to attempt to neutralize the suspected suicide bomber. The soldier aims his M-16 or 9mm at the vehicle and begins firing rounds. Sometimes this is enough, but more often than not the suicide bomber crashes into the gate and kills many innocent people. If a decision has been made to shoot at a vehicle suspected of carrying bombs, would it not protect our young soldier more if he could fire a laser shot from the Ray Gun at the suspect vehicle and its occupants? They would be stopped immediately and the only ones who would die would be the murderers attempting to kill one of our troops.

2nd example: When our soldiers are engaged in a firefight which often last hours and days, and results in many deaths from both sides, it would benefit our soldiers if we could use the Ray Gun. The Ray Gun can send a signal at least a football field in width from a long distance from the target and take out (kill) hundreds of enemies within a few seconds. Few if any American troops would need to die.

Many of the suicide attacks and firefights are in towns, cities, and residential, business areas. If the honest Iraqis knew we had a weapon that would kill everyone within a city block if an attack on American troops was made, the honest Iraqis would begin forcing the terrorists and their supporters out.


FP: So the Ray Gun is a PC problem right?

Gaubatz: Yes, the Ray Gun is a major political correctness problem. A weapon that can instantly kill entire battalions is not a weapon our politicians believe the American people could accept. If the Pentagon officials were to speak with a mother, father, wife, or other loved ones who died a very painful death by one of the terrorisst, they may disagree with the politicians. They may look the politician in the face and say, “every day my children ask where their father is and is he coming back, unfortunately I have to cry and tell them he will not be coming back.” This simply means PC comes first, and then the lives of our brave troops suffer. Possibly I have been wrong for my 48 years of life, with 23 plus being in Federal Service, but as an old Master Sergeant and then a civilian Federal Agent, I felt it was my responsibility to protect the people serving under me, even at the risk of my own life.


FP: Are there documents to legitimize your position?

Gaubatz: Yes, the Director of AFRL/DE personally wrote me a letter after I returned from Iraq. He thanked me for evaluating the DE weapons and providing the front line insight into the capabilities of the weapons use in Iraq. The AFRL/DE Director was Bruce Simspon (General Equivalent). He was a good man and leader. He wanted to use these weapons in Iraq, but people senior to even him prevented this valuable weapon from being deployed. In addition I received other U.S. Govt. awards pertaining to this issue. Several documents were provided to Ms. Mary Walsh.


FP: Why did 60 Minutes provide this information to the country without double checking it? They are putting our soldiers’ lives in greater danger, no?

Gaubatz: I want to believe Ms. Mary Walsh had good intentions and believed the information she was being provided was accurate. Ms. Walsh knows the 60 Minutes story is now false and Pentagon officials lied to her. The big question is rather: will 60 Minutes admit they made a huge mistake which continues to put our soldier’s lives in danger everyday. Each day that goes by and another soldier dies should weigh heavily on every member of 60 Minutes. Each mother who is handed a letter from a Pentagon official advising their son or daughter was killed in Iraq, should write a letter to Mary Walsh and ask her how she can continue not to reveal the truth.

I can sleep easy at night because I have always brought out the truth in regards to issues in Iraq. Can Mary Walsh, David Martin (60 Minutes), and the Pentagon officials?


FP: Dave Gaubatz, thank you for joining us.

Gaubatz: Thank you very much and as we are slowly finding out over the years, the truth will reveal itself eventually.

[teddy]

Stands to reason really, that if a ray-gun can be used to hurt somebody, then turn up the volume and it can be used to kill, so I have no reason to doubt the claims of this person.

[Steve Gardner]

I don't doubt the claims either, but they make a mockery of the premise that it hasn't been deployed in Iraq because it was non-lethal.

So what's the real reason? Perhaps because if it had been used for lethal compliance in Iraq, it would make it more difficult to turn it upon US citizens?