Voice-To-Skull Deleted From US Army Center for Army Lessons Learned Website

Before you see below, see here, here, here, here and here for more classified technology:

See these articles too:

1. Army Yanks ‘Voice-To-Skull Devices’ Site
2. The Microwave Scream Inside Your Skull
3. Report: Nonlethal Weapons Could Target Brain, Mimic Schizophrenia
4. Where’s My Acoustic Bazooka?
5. A Voice Only You Can Hear: DARPA's Sonic Projector
6. The Other MEDUSA: A Microwave Sound Weapon

Voice-To-Skull

V2K

Deleted US Army Center for Army Lessons Learned (CALL) definition of voice-to-skull devices (mirrored at the Federation of American Scientists website, FAS.org at fas.org/sgp/othergov/dod/vts.html):

Source: http://call.army.mil/products/thesaur_e/00016275.htm

Prev Term: voice templates
Next Term: Voivodina

voice to skull devices

Definition/Scope:
Nonlethal weapon which includes (1) a neuro-electromagnetic device which uses microwave transmission of sound into the skull of persons or animals by way of pulse-modulated microwave radiation; and (2) a silent sound device which can transmit sound into the skull of person or animals. NOTE: The sound modulation may be voice or audio subliminal messages. One application of V2K is use as an electronic scarecrow to frighten birds in the vicinity of airports.

Acronym:
V2K

Broader Terms:
nonlethal weapons

Send your comments to: CALL Thesaurus

Last reviewd: 25 Mar 04

Note: CALL switched servers and changed it’s system a bit. The new version of the thesaurus, on the page for the letter V, no longer included voice-to-skull devices many months ago and also when I last checked (June 25, 2013).

After discovering the existence of this and similar technology and contacting various Inspectors General, the Department of Defense issued the following informational memos on the same day, May 17, 2012:

The first (1000.29) makes the DoD Inspector General’s office report case progress to the appointed “Civil Liberties officer” in civil rights cases (to avoid “duplication of effort” they say) who in turn reports into the normal chain of command. This undermines, perhaps completely eliminates the independence of the OIG and gives the appearance that the DoD is violating civil liberties and is fully aware of that fact.

The second (3200.19) defines nonlethal weapon damage (voice-to-skull devices are defined as NLWs as you can see from the Army’s own definition above) as having to be both physiological and permanent. In other words, temporary insanity from something like Sierra Nevada Corp.’s MEDUSA or permanent psychological damage due to their use would not, as the military now defines it, be recognized by them as “damage” due to the use of nonlethal weapons such as the subliminal use defined above.

They have created a situation where it is impossible to address use of these kinds of technologies on American citizens without the potential that the person or persons who approved their use being informed of the progress of the case and the legal block of not recognizing it as “damage” in any case.

The fact that it is highly likely that these devices, used in tandem with PSYOPs and drugs, can modify and even control behavior, should be reason enough to look into them, regulate them, and educate the public on their existence.

Power of all kinds oppose this because they prefer to control people and keeping information from them is key in that regard. Further, this technology combined with the methods necessary to make it more effective, prevents the will of the people from having significant effect on the course of the country. It may even obscure precisely what the will of the people truly is. The number of organizations utilizing this in covert ops is unknown but it appears that both public and private organizations do and that there are no checks and balances in place to abate that.