The Fox and the Hen House
(The US Navy and the Criminal Abuse of Power)

July 8, 2016
 

Below is an email that I would like to share with you regarding some experiences that I have had with the US Navy.
 

Email Sent to: helen.haase@navy.mil - July 7, 2016, 8:21 PM (public affairs office of the US Navy, San Diego, CA)

Re: Electromagnetic weapons technology being directed at civilian personnel unlawfully without their consent

Hello Helen,

This letter is in response to the telephone discussion that we had on July 7, 2016. Per your request, below is a summary of the complaint that I wish to file with the US Navy regarding the unlawful testing of electromagnetic weapons technology on civilians without their consent.

Background

I live in Niland, CA on private property near the Chocolate Mountain Aerial Gunnery Range. This area is used for ground and air training exercises as well as weapons testing by the US Navy and Marines.

Conventional weapons fire (machine guns and bombs) can be heard coming from Chocolate Mountain Aerial Gunnery Range on a fairly regular basis. However, this area is also being used for the testing of other technologies such as electromagnetic weaponry. This type of technology has a wide range of different applications such as radar and communications, as well as technologies that can be used to disable or destroy machinery and incapacitate or kill people.

Although such technologies are not well known to the general public, they are described quite well in both military literature and in the literature from military contractors. In addition, some forms of this technology, such as the Active Denial System, have made their way into the public arena through law enforcement use.

The Active Denial System is a directed electromagnetic energy weapon that is designed to only burn the top layer of skin of the person that it is directed at. However, this type of technology is also capable of penetrating much deeper into the human body and affecting such things as the internal organs, the brain, the eyes and other biological systems (depending on the power, frequency and modulation of the electromagnetic energy).

Some of these technologies such as the Active Denial System (and others) are specifically designed to generate heat (for weapons use), however, many others simply generate heat as a by-product of the frequency band that they are operating in (similar to how microwaves heat food).

The heating effect of electromagnetic energy was actually first studied in relation to the early radar systems. Today, many different technologies have evolved out of that early research. For example, the HAARP project (sponsored by the Navy, Air Force and DARPA) uses radio frequency energy to heat up the ionosphere for a variety of different applications.

In the past, many of the systems described above were very bulky and were limited to ground use. However, today they can easily be mounted on planes, helicopters, vehicles and in some cases can be carried by military personnel.   

My Experience

I have lived in Slab City (Niland) on and off for about the last eight years or so. Just for reference, I am a well educated college graduate. I don't drink, I don't smoke, I don't take any drugs (prescription or illegal) and I take good care of myself.

Not long after I arrived at Slab City, I began to notice that for no apparent reason my skin would suddenly become very hot. At the same time, I would experience a sense of nausea (a disoriented feeling), cognitive dysfunction (inability to concentrate), coordination problems and other issues. It was very strange in the way that this occurred. It would come on very strong, last for a while and then suddenly stop. Although I have always had a sensitivity to electromagnetic radiation, I had never experienced anything close to what I was experiencing at that time. And the only place that I was experiencing this effect was in Slab City.

At first the effect was somewhat mild and would only occur every so often. However, then it began to become much more intense and occur on a more regular basis. From my research, I know that the Navy is heavily invested in this technology. So at first, I thought what I was experiencing might just be a result of electromagnetic energy that was related to the operations and training exercises in the area. In other words, I thought that it was unintentional (perhaps a proximity issue) rather than something that was deliberate in nature.

However, it wasn't long after this that these experiences turned into what I would characterize as being direct attacks – very intense and focused energy being aimed directly at me. During one particularly intense attack, I stumbled away from my campsite and noticed that the farther away from it that I got, the less intense the effect was. This is something that I have noticed on multiple occasions from two different campsites in the area. The fact that the effect was so dramatically reduced as I walked away from my campsite made it very clear that the electromagnetic energy was being aimed directly at my campsite.

In 2011, I filed a complaint against the Navy with local law enforcement regarding these attacks. After I filed the report, I noticed that on several different occasions that vehicles from the base were parked in close proximity to my camper (facing it as if doing some type of surveillance). On one of these occasions I got out my camera and was going to take a photo of them, but they turned around and headed back towards the base before I could get the batteries in the camera and take the picture.

I understand that this technology spans a wide variety of different applications which can produce similar effects on the Human body and on biological systems. As such, I don't believe that all of these events are necessarily intentional in nature. But, as I have detailed above, some of them definitely are.

Is the Navy using the people here as lab rats for weapons testing? I hate to put it that bluntly to someone who may be reading this that has nothing to do with what is going on here. However, if you do a little research, you will see that there is actually a long list of officially documented incidents where the military has experimented on people without their knowledge or consent.  

So why don't I just move? This is my home right now and I don't have the resources to move anywhere else at this time. But that really isn't the point. I shouldn't have to move in order to avoid careless and illegal operations being carried out by the US Navy.

The harmful effects of this technology that are being unintentionally created need to be acknowledged and addressed. And the people that are illegally and intentionally using this technology against people without their consent need to be held accountable for their actions and prosecuted.

I want to make it clear that this is not some kind of blanket statement against the US Navy or the military in general. I know that there are many good and honorable people serving in both the US Navy and other branches of the military.

However, the practices which I have described above are not in any way honorable, moral, ethical or lawful. In fact, based on the way in which these technologies have affected my health and well being, they could easily be classified as attempted murder.

Perhaps that may sound like strong language if you are not familiar with this technology or have not personally experienced the effects of it. But it is accurate statement based on what this technology is capable of. When this technology is directed at a person on a continuous basis, it is in fact a form of torture.

The human body depends on electrical impulses to function correctly (the heart, the brain, the nervous system, motor functions, etc). All of these functions can be disrupted through the exposure to various types of electromagnetic energy. People that have weak hearts, nervous system disorders, compromised immune systems and other health issues are obviously going to be more susceptible to such exposure.

In my case, when this technology was directed at me on a continuous basis, it triggered a very serious blood clot in my leg which traveled to my lung and caused a pulmonary embolism. Had I died from that event, it would have been murder that was initiated by the Navy through the illegal and improper use of this technology.

So what is the bottom line? I want this to stop and I want the people that are responsible for these illegal practices to be held accountable for their actions. I have not given my consent to be some kind of test subject or collateral damage for the US Navy. However, if there is any ambiguity regarding my position on this matter (perhaps hidden in some type of legislation somewhere), let me plainly state it again – I do not consent to these practices.

This type of behavior not only encourages civilians to be odds with the military, but it also tarnishes the reputation of the US Navy and all of the good and honorable people that are serving in it.

I appreciate your help in resolving this matter. Please acknowledge the receipt of this email with a return email (pending its further review by the US Navy).

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Bob Reynolds

Responses from the Navy will be posted below.

Email Received From: helen.haase@navy.mil - July 8, 2016, 2:41 PM (public affairs office of the US Navy, San Diego, CA).

Hello Mr. Reynolds,

I have received your message and I think I understand the seriousness of your issue.  It will take me some time to find the proper folks to pass it along.  Right now I don’t know what department would actually be able to address this matter.

Thank you for understanding.

R,

Helen

(619) 532-1430

helen.haase@navy.mil

 

Email Sent to: helen.haase@navy.mil - July 12, 2016, 1:49 PM (public affairs office of the US Navy, San Diego, CA).

Hello Helen,

Thank you for your return email.

Based on my previous email and the events that I described, I'm sure that you understand the seriousness and urgency of this matter. Therefore, I don't think that it is unreasonable on my part to expect a timely response from an official in the Navy and what measures will be taken to address this matter. I understand that you have your own procedures to follow, however your email was rather vague with regards to an expected time frame.  

Can you please let me know whom the original email has been forwarded to (i.e. public affairs, your commanding officer, the base commander, JAG, etc) as well as a more concrete time frame in which I can expect a reply?

Please let your commanding officer know that I'm documenting all further incidents involving the improper and criminal use of this technology (with date, time and type of incident) which will be used as evidence in internal proceedings involving JAG and/or external litigation.

Sincerely,
Bob Reynolds

 

Email Sent to: helen.haase@navy.mil - July 14, 2016, 11:19 AM (public affairs office of the US Navy, San Diego, CA).

Cc: navighotlines@navy.mil (Navy Inspector General)

Dear Ms. Haase,

I received a voicemail yesterday July 12, 2016 at 3:12 PM from Chris at the Public Affairs Naval Air Facility in El Centro, CA. He stated in his message that you had contacted him to follow up on this matter. The El Centro office was actually the first place that I had contacted regarding this issue. I left a message for someone named Chris on July 7, 2016 at 9:54 AM (760-339-2519), however he did not return my call.

During our original telephone conversation on July 7, 2016, you stated that you wanted me to describe the situation in an email in order to have a paper trail. I think that this is a good idea. Due to the serious nature of this matter, I think that it is important that all communications are handled in writing so that there is no ambiguity or misunderstandings.

Regarding follow-up, I'm not sure that I have any confidence in the El Centro office which has already demonstrated an unwillingness to address this situation by not returning my initial phone call. One of the reasons that I contacted the US Navy in the first place is because I wanted them to have the opportunity to respond to this issue directly.

This situation has not only continued, but it has escalated. The taxes paid by myself and other American citizens are what pay the salaries of the men and women serving in the US Navy. They are also what funded the development and production of the technology that the Navy is supposed to be using to defend this country. I did not pay taxes to have the US Navy turn around and use that technology and weaponry against myself and other citizens of the United States.

Lets not use any euphemisms here. This technology has the ability to do great harm to and/or kill the people that it is directed at. And, as stated in the previous email sent July 7, 2016, when this technology is directed at a person on a continuous basis, it is torture in the same way that electro-shock, water boarding, sleep deprivation or drugging is torture.

I live far enough away from the base and the test range that there should be no issues involving spillover of electromagnetic radiation into this area. Therefore, the levels of electromagnetic radiation that I am experiencing must be considered to either be gross negligence on the part of the Navy or deliberate intent. And for the reasons detailed in the original email sent July 7, 2016, at least part of this is deliberate with intent to do harm.

This morning around 9:00 AM (7-14-16) Navy jets began making continuous runs overhead while beaming very intense levels of electromagnetic radiation towards the ground which resulted in disorientation, coordination problems, severe pressure in my ears, localized heat, headache and nausea. After the attack last week, I had an intense migraine headache, severe abdominal pain, nausea and insomnia for about four days.

Does the Navy not have anything better to do with their time? Has the US Navy declared war on the American people? It doesn't take a lot of courage to fly overhead in a multi-million dollar jet airplane that the American people bought for the Navy and beam intense electromagnetic energy at its citizens and make them ill. What does take courage, however, is to stand up and say I'm not going to do this anymore, it is wrong. Are there any pilots like that left in the US Navy?

This is domestic terrorism and illegal torture that is being directed at myself and other American Citizens by the US Military and the US Government. Wasn't the original intent of the US Constitution to have the government and the military serve the people, not to terrorize them?

How much money has been spent on combating terrorism during the last 15 years? How many lives have been lost on both sides? How many freedoms here in the US have been compromised in the pursuit of more security? How many regimes have been toppled in other countries in the pursuit of so-called freedom and democracy?

What does any of that mean when terrorism, torture and regimes (unaccountability) are allowed to exist right here in the United States and be carried out by agencies of the United States?

If my position was not clear before, I hope that it is now. Please forward this email to Chris for his review and response. I would also suggest that you forward it to your commanding officer and your legal department. This email has also been copied to the Office of the Navy Inspector General as well.

However, since this situation has both continued and has since escalated, it would appear that the local offices of the US Navy in California are either unequipped or unwilling to address this matter. Therefore, I will continue to pursue this matter though other channels of the US Navy as well as through the media, my political representatives and the legal system.

Sincerely,
Bob Reynolds

 

Email Received From: kristopher.haugh@navy.mil - July 15, 2016, 11:04 AM (public affairs office of the US Navy, El Centro, CA).

Dear Mr. Reynolds,

I appreciate the dialogue that you and Ms. Hasse have going with respect to this situation. My apologies in the delay responding to your phone call.

After checking with our Operations Department, I have determined that the devices you mentioned did not originate from here. However, the ranges you describe are used by a number of agencies. The ranges and their scheduling is not controlled by us.

It would be extremely helpful to us if you had photographs of the aircraft or pictures of the vehicles and the uniforms of those wearing them. These images would help us identify the range users.

Should you wish to discuss this further or have additional questions, my contact information is in my signature line.

Sincerely,
Kris

Kristopher K. Haugh
NAF El Centro PAO

 

Email Sent to: kristopher.haugh@navy.mil - July 15, 2016, 1:22 PM (public affairs office of the US Navy, El Centro, CA).

Cc: navighotlines@navy.mil (Navy Inspector General); helen.haase@navy.mil (public affairs office of the US Navy, San Diego, CA).

Dear Mr. Haugh,

Thank you for your return email. It would be helpful if you could please clarify the following information as it would help in the discussion moving forward:

1) What did you mean by "ranges"? In the previous emails, my reference was to the Chocolate Mountain Aerial Gunnery Range only.

2) Is there a military base located at the Chocolate Mountain Aerial Gunnery Range that is operated by the US Navy or Navy Seals or that is jointly operated by the US Navy or Navy Seals in cooperation with other agencies.

3) Do US Navy jets fly training missions here? What other agencies are using this area?

4) What do you mean by "devices". Please be specific. Are you saying that the US Navy is not carrying out any operations here involving technologies that emit electromagnetic radiation?

5) You said that after checking with your operations department, that the devices that I mentioned did not originate from here. Where is "here" -- El Centro, San Diego, the western region, the Navy in general?

Obtaining photographs of the jet fighters might be difficult due to their smaller size and the speed that they are traveling. The only equipment that I currently have is a small point and shoot camera with a limited zoom.

I am living a little further away from the range now so I don't see the vehicles traveling to and from that area any longer. However, previously, the vehicles consisted of two types: Standard military vehicles of varying types, often traveling in large convoys and unmarked late model "fleet" type vehicles consisting of all white full-size pickups and all white or all black SUV's.

Sincerely,

Bob Reynolds

 

Email Received From: kristopher.haugh@navy.mil - July 15, 2016, 3:09 PM (public affairs office of the US Navy, El Centro, CA).

Dear Mr. Reynolds,

I will use the same numbering system of the questions here in my answers:

1) There are multiple ranges in the area of NAF El Centro. The Chocolate Mountain Range Complex is the live ordnance range. We also have two ranges near NAF El Centro which is for inert weapons only.

2) There is a training facility out there owned by the Navy, but not controlled by NAF El Centro. I do not know if other agencies have infrastructure there.

3) Navy aircraft do use that area on occasion. Aircraft might originate from any of the several air stations on the West Coast. The US Marine Corps also use the range. I do not know specifically what other agencies have access to that area.

 4) Yes that is correct. Aircraft operating from NAF El Centro do not have anything outside of their normal radios and flight sensors that use electromagnetic radiation.

5) My apologies for the confusion. I am the PAO for NAF El Centro. My use of the word "here" was to designate this base, NAF El Centro.

I understand the limitations of your photographic equipment. However, if you do by chance manage a photo, we would be interested in seeing it as it may help us assist you further.

I hope this information was helpful.

Sincerely,

Kris

Kristopher K. Haugh
NAF El Centro PAO

 

Email Sent to: kristopher.haugh@navy.mil - July 16, 2016, 2:59 PM (public affairs office of the US Navy, El Centro, CA).

Cc: navighotlines@navy.mil (Navy Inspector General); helen.haase@navy.mil (public affairs office of the US Navy, San Diego, CA).

Dear Mr. Haugh,

In response to your previous answers, please see below (using the same numbering system):

1) Why bring other test ranges into the discussion? That only serves to confuse the issue instead of addressing it directly. I made it very clear in my email that this issue is specific to the Chocolate Mountain Aerial Gunnery Range.

2) If the Chocolate Mountain facility is not controlled by NAF El Centro and you do not know what other agencies have infrastructure there, then why was this matter directed to your office? If you truly wanted to be helpful in this matter, why not tell me who does control the facility and find out what other agencies might have infrastructure here?

3) This range is heavily used by military fighter aircraft (almost on a daily basis). Any local resident here would attest to that. As such, I find it hard to believe that a facility that is owned by the US Navy is only occasionally used by their aircraft. So who is using it?

Wouldn't the US Navy be interested in knowing who is using their facility, especially when it is being used in a criminal and unethical manner to illegally experiment on human beings without their consent? In addition, if the Chocolate Mountain Aerial Gunnery Range is a live munitions range, it makes me wonder why the vast majority sorties flown here do not involve live munitions? Has the definition of live munitions been expanded to include electromagnetic weaponry? It makes me think so, because the planes that fly over this area are definitely using, emitting and directing electromagnetic weapons technology on a regular basis.

Hopefully I have made it clear in my previous emails that the electromagnetic radiation that is being directed at this area and at the people living here far exceeds anything that could be produced by normal communications equipment.

I noticed that you chose your words very carefully in your responses. Just because there aren't any aircraft from NAF El Centro using high power electromagnetic weapons technology, that doesn't mean that it isn't aboard other aircraft originating from other areas. Again, it begs the question, if your aircraft at NAF El Centro are not using this technology, then why was I referred to your office?

4) Most of the military aircraft that arrive to the Chocolate Mountain Aerial Gunnery Range come from the coast (directly from the San Diego area). They also depart to the coast (directly towards San Diego). That would mean that they would most likely be coming from one of two places  -- The Coronado Navy Base or MCAS Miramar (Marine Corps Air Station). Why aren't you looking into this instead of telling me what NAF El Centro isn't doing?

5) Please see #4 above.

In your previous email you said that this range (Chocolate Mountain) was used by a number of different "agencies". However, the Chocolate Mountain Aerial Gunnery Range is listed as being both owned and under the direct jurisdiction of the US Navy and the US Marine Corps.

You also said that the range and its scheduling is not controlled by you. Then who is it controlled by? I gave you a specific time and date of when jets were flying overhead emitting and directing intense electromagnetic energy towards myself and the surrounding area. Why aren't you following up on this? Based on the fact that this is restricted airspace and the amount of use that it gets, the Navy would have to know who is using it and when, would they not? Or does the Navy just scramble their jets and hope that nobody else is using the area when they arrive? That is absurd.

If your office doesn't have access to this information, then why would you not contact the office that does? It's not that complicated. Instead, you place the burden on me to try and run outside and take a photo of a fast moving jet airplane entering into the area in the hopes that I will have a clear enough photograph to identify it when you could very easily accomplish the same identification by simply using the information that I gave you.

I don't have access to your base. It is a controlled and restricted area. Therefore, I cannot take photos of vehicles or personnel using the area. Local law enforcement said that they are not even allowed past the gate. Again, seeing as how the US Navy is the owner of this area, would they not have a record of who is using it?

As I said in my initial email, this technology spans a wide range of different applications. In other words, it is not just limited to aircraft-based systems. According to official military sources, electronic warfare (EW), may be defined in the following way:

--- Electronic warfare (EW) is any action involving the use of the electromagnetic spectrum or directed energy to control the spectrum, attack the enemy, or impede enemy assaults via the spectrum.

--- EW can be applied from air, sea, land and space by manned and unmanned systems, and can target humans, communications, radar and other assets.

--- EW is employed to support military operations involving various levels of detection, denial, deception, disruption, degradation and destruction.

Based on this information, any investigation into this matter must examine all potential sources of this technology, not just aircraft-based systems. And from my experience while living here, it is definitely not just limited to the jets flying over this area.

Since the US Navy owns the Chocolate Mountain facility and it is the branch of the military that is most invested in the development and the use of electromagnetic weapons technology, it makes sense that the US Navy is the one that is using it here.

I do not wish to play games. This is a very serious matter. I feel like your responses have been carefully measured as to appear to be helpful, but not really say anything of any real substance. In fact, your responses have been evasive and misleading.

You don't know me. I am just a person on the other side of this email. But what if this was happening to you, your wife, your children or a close friend? Would you want someone to play games with you? Or would you want there to be a serious investigation into this matter?

The core values of the Navy are stated as being Honor, Courage and Commitment? Does that not apply here as well?

Sincerely,

Bob Reynolds

___________________________________________________

The Government and the Military

For those who may not be familiar with my other posts, I thought that it might be a good idea to clarify what my view on the government and the military is:

I am not anti-government or anti-military.
I am anti-corruption and against systems, establishments, governments and militaries that operate blindly and grow uncontrollably like a cancer.
I am against freely giving our power and freewill away to politicians and order givers that turn around and use (abuse) that power to take away our freedoms and infringe on our personal sovereignty.
I am against giving our money (taxes) away to governments and militaries who turn around and use that money to line their own pockets and use (abuse) it for the purposes of subduing, controlling and subjugating the people that they are supposed to be representing.
I think that the government and the military can be beneficial to the people if:
1. They remain transparent and are accountable to the people.
2. They are of reasonable size and the majority of decision making remains on the local level.
3. The people rule themselves and think for themselves first, before looking to someone else to do it for them.

Governments by themselves are not evil. And militaries by themselves are not evil. It's how these institutions are used and abused by the people which make them up that leads to either good or evil. In other words, institutions that exist outside of ourselves can only become evil if the people within them are evil or they act in an evil manner by blindly following others that are evil. Evil exists primarily because people follow it and allow it to exist.