The Pentagon's Ray Gun

David Martin Reports On A Non-Lethal Weapon Straight Out Of Buck Rogers

(CBS)  Days later, a three-star general wrote, "Having ADS…" (Active Denial System) "…in the field today would impact operations in a very critical way."

Sue Payton believes this gun would save "huge" numbers of lives in Iraq.

"Do you ever look at what’s happening in Iraq and say, 'We’ve gotta get this thing there faster,'?" Martin asks.

"Absolutely. Absolutely," she says.

But sending the ray gun to Iraq was, in the words of one Pentagon report, "not politically tenable."

Asked what "not politically tenable" means, Payton says, "Unfortunately we have had something called Abu Ghraib."

After pictures of abused Abu Ghraib prisoners surfaced there was no stomach for even the momentary pain of the ray gun. "You don’t ever, ever, ever want a system like this to be thought of as a torture weapon," Payton says.

But Sid Heal, a former Marine who has followed the ray gun's progress for nearly a decade, says the potential for abuse is not what's holding it up. It’s something else: cowardice.

"There's no other way of saying it. You could try to save people’s life with a non lethal weapon and fail and it’ll still be noble. But failing to try is cowardly. . . That is completely unacceptable," Heal explains.

Heal was once the Marine Corps' point man for non lethal weapons. He took them to Somalia in 1995 after America’s ill-fated attempt to relieve the famine there had degenerated into a shooting war.

"It's very difficult to make a case for a humanitarian operation if the only way you have of imposing your will is by killing the people you’re sent to protect," Heal says.

Heal has tried to teach Marines to use everything from sticky foam to lasers.

"A major came up to me and said that the Marine Corps wasn't overly thrilled with the whole non-lethal concept. And his idea was, is that the Marine Corps’ idea of force escalation went from M-16 to F-16. How many people we could kill and how fast we could do it."

The non-lethal weapons Heal works with at the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department today are no more advanced than what he had in Somalia 13 years ago.

Asked what his best stopper is, Heal says, "Sponge grenade. It’s accurate out to ranges that exceed any of our other stuff."

"You could easily get to 50 yards with this one," Heal explains. "And matter of fact, that’s the longest range right now, anywhere in the world… The stuff that we’re using in the field right now is very close range. That’s one of our biggest complaints."

[reply60min]

people, especially of a foreign occupier and killer, have a right to protest, throw stones or otherwise. just because it becomes a "hands off" weapon suitable for great abuse and torture makes it that more repugnant. no longer do we see telephone generators connected to shock, or body guards filed lunging with cattle prods, instead it the imperceptible trigger finger of the tazer gun is used for torture by the us military. this is just another device to silence the occupied, torture the masses from speaking by a foreign occupier which is not welcome in the country.

[reply60min]

the us military pulled it off the field and initiated a pr campaign to see if the public would buy it to which martin, hymes and the soldiers are the actors. not mentioned is the possible abuse to put down real protesters of an foreign occupied country that have a legitimate right to protest. not mentioned is the concern that it can cook any exposed flesh including the cornea. maybe when martin and hymes turn 70 and wonder about their cataracts or why they need lens implants they will think back on their part in the propaganda campaign. martin never challenged they system by wetting down the simple shield so the microwaves boiled THAT surface water molecules. they never mentioned how the same fire hose spray like seen against whaling protesters nullifies it''s effects at sea. they never showed how a swarm of people can run a "pattern" towards the single beam device.

[reply60min]

If you followed the foreign news sources you would know the us already experimented with the system in iraq and only brought it back for public "vindication" after the outcry of it''s experimental and abusive use. Reports of badly burned men examined by iraqi doctors who could find no physical gunshot or other means of death. at that time the system had no timer interlock and the iraqi people were likely used as guinea pigs of extreme calibration studies. search video archives and you will find the same of us experimentation of flame throwers on anesthetized tied down live pigs. similar archives will reveal telling soldiers to exit the bunkers and stand up to observe nuclear blasts, aerosol spread near san francisco, etc.

[viewersteve]

How foolish for your reporter to take the Pentagon''s claims of "harmless" seriously. Standing in front of the weapon as a "demonstration" of its harmlessness could very well cost him his life.

Radiation''s effects long-term effects are subtle but deadly. Only rigorous, long-term clinical studies done by objective researchers over years can verify that the weapon ray is harmless to humans. Anecdotal assertions by the Pentagon prove nothing.

Years from now, your reckless reporter and other Pentagon volunteers may experience high rates of various cancers. Their children may suffer high rates of birth defects.

A retrospective clinical study done by trained medical researchers may prove then that ray weapon was not, in fact, harmless. But by then, it will be too late.

At that point, CBS 60 minutes will have another good story: How reckless the Pentagon had been back in 2008, and how a few volunteers and a CBS reporter had allowed themselves to be duped, tragically.

It will be a good story unless, because of a groundswell of public support due to your drum-beating story on Sunday, the Pentagon deploys the ray weapon worldwide prematurely before proper health studies are done. Then, the story will be very different. It will be a tragedy of untold proportions both medically and politically.

[sousamm22]

This "ray gun" report was weak at best. The reporter missed asking the most obvious of questions--Is there any material that will reflect these high frequency waves? If such material exists then this weapon is useless. Since the question was not asked this report was useless.

[kirky01-2009]

As a Brit, I read and watched this article with interest. What struck me was the attempted humanity of the new weapon. It aims to disable without permanently injuring you - a novel idea for a state army. This is a crowd control device really, with fringe benefits for military applications when a military is involved in doing a Policemans job. The Cold War scenario is over and this is the future. As for a weapon of torture, has anyone been pistol whipped before? Shot in the leg? Knee? A comendable project imho.

Ian, London.

[change_b4_ss]

1. ONLY $13mm spent on the non-lethal version; odds that the $13 bill was spent on the one that really kills you?
2. Rules of engagement?? That sounds pretty hostile, CBS.
3. If we can''t discuss someone with "comparisons to Hitler" what do we do if we really think someone does look like Hitler? What did they do in Germany? Censorship and book burning....
4. How ''bout the choice of "hostile victims" for the ray gun? Now THAT image really sends a message, huh?
5. What happened to real investigative journalism? We could sure use some of that right now; my guess is that CBS''s own reporters would like to do some of that...how bout a story about what really happened with Rove and Siegelman for example, or their connections to organized crime/military in the South. Help, CBS...

[Latrocinor]

A terror weapon from Raytheon and CBS''''s David Martin leads the way in promoting it.

This weapon is a precurser to murder not a preventative.

I''''m reasonably sure that Raytheon or somebody else has made the torture version and it is in use by the CIA and others right now.

Posted by CBS_Oliver
.. .. ..

Only from the mind of CBS_Oliver

[fatherteresa]

My neighbours are using this weapon on us right now and have been using it for a number of years. They are torturing us continuously, not only us but other neighbours in the vicinity.

[impeach_w]

I am a republican not a liberal Democrat.

I do not want anything from Iraq except to understand why we are there in the first place and why we are there now.

After that is understood, I want those repsonsible to held accountable.

[cuamerica]

Too many of you bleeding hearts just don''t get it - There IS an enemy and they''ll use cowardly dishonorable tactics, like posing as peace protesters to get a chance to blow up as many people as possible.

The fact that its taken so long to approve this thing is proof that too many political hacks don''t want success in Iraq. I''d say to do one better and invent a gadget which remotely detonates these suicide bombers before they get close enough to hurt anyone.

[impeach_w]

From the Article:
The impulse to run the other way is so strong that anyone who keeps coming has to be considered a threat.

"It could be used to read someone''s mind, in effect, because you immediately know what someone''s intention is. If they continue to come at you, then you''re fairly sure they''re not a tourist. They''re probably a terrorist or an adversary who wants to do you harm," Payton explains.


I AGREE 100% - SHOOT AT THEM FIRST, DETERMINE THEIR THREAT LATER.

[impeach_w]

What if we told you the military has a weapon that can only be used on unarmed cililians?

Declare lethal war on anyone tring to set up or operate such a device in OUR country. You have the right and DUTY as an American to speak your mind and to defend yourself and other from Death or grave bodily injury and this IS capable of injuring and killing on a mass scale.!

The constitution states this better not ever be used by the military on cilvilians the US (except maybe on a military base).

PS. If you see this vehicle driving or parked, crash into it. Don''t shoot at the antenna as it''s made to take damage. Only the generator providing power to the device, it''s computer or the operator or the officer autorizing its use would be a weak point. Aim well.

[ruthshap]

I was appalled by the story on the latest weapon, a science fiction type ray gun that presumably will be used against protesters in Iraq and possibly against peaceful protesters here in the U.S. This weapon may not kill, but it is very painful and can blister and even burn some people. 60 Minutes interviewed military people, but why was there no interview with someone who could discuss the ethics of using such a weapon? Our media should be raising these tough questions, not merely going along with the flow. I expect better of 60 Minutes.

[cbs_oliver]

I''m with Scratch0058 on this summary - "Set phasers on ''''stupid''''!"

It makes most sense to fight armed enemies with lethal weapons and unarmed protesters with respectful leadership or, if violence develops, with methods like water cannons.

Weapons aimed at disabling large numbers of people will rightly be seen as vile.

David Martin and CBS should get some decent values and some backbone and stop pushing this thing for the military and Raytheon.

Even the idea of it makes enemies.

[twestheimer]

I thought the military was supposed to protect the freedom of this country. Are war protesters seen as an enemy? This shows the military''s attitude towards legitimate protests.
We have a problem! We spend more money on our military than the rest of the world COMBINED. Our priorities are no longer defensive or reasonable. Wake up America! Now you know why the government has to borrow money from the Chinese to fund the military industrial complex. Eisenhower was right!

[cbs_oliver]

A terror weapon from Raytheon and CBS''s David Martin leads the way in promoting it.

This weapon is a precurser to murder not a preventative.

I''m reasonably sure that Raytheon or somebody else has made the torture version and it is in use by the CIA and others right now.

[scratch0058]

"Set phasers on ''stupid''!"
Being a Marine, I would rather not face an enemy (whose intentions are deadly) with a inside-out microwave oven that gives him a warm feeling. Besides, that phased-array dish on top looks like one Hell of a target.

[brianbwb-2009]

"And as long as it''s been used properly, there''s no harm to your body."

Therein lies the problem, in the hands of a sadistic soldier, or later, a policeman, it won''t be used properly.

[juwboy]

What would you prefer if you were an innocent civilian in the path of an advancing army?

A few seconds of severe discomfort from this ray gun?

OR

A lingering death over several months of severe agony from conventional weapons after jagged shards of metal, moving at high velocity, have torn away considerable portions of your flesh and internal organs?

In fact, why is the kind of death I''ve just described considered as permissible in modern warfare while a quick death in a few minutes from Sarin is banned and so is an uncomfortable, but relatively quick death in a few days from an anthrax infection?