Sound Wave Part III

Twenty-First Century Politico-Military Force Matrix: Nonlethal technology, when coupled with traditional forms of lethal weaponry, allow for the application of short-term incapacitation, long-term incapacitation, and deadly force against the physical and mental/perceptual attributes of human targets and the hardware and software attributes of machine targets. This advanced form of politico-military force application can be expressed in a matrix. - Non-Lethal Weapons: Terms and References, Robert J. Bunker, USAF Institute for National Security Studies.

Non Lethal Weapons

The auditory pathways of the central nervous system in the foetus are already present and functioning by the 28th week of growth, with overall sensory development is completed by the 24th week. Despite this fact, we allow our medical practitioners to blast the baby with 100-130db of high frequency ultrasound in order to check it’s “well-being.” Well how’s that for a contradiction? The birthing process is traumatic enough, without adding to the burden prior to the event. The unborn foetus is unsurprisingly, highly sensitive and impressionable to vibrations and frequency bombardment and the benefits of ultrasound are very far from conclusive. And let’s just remember the above quote to understand just what this may mean for the developing baby. Although the understanding of whether high or low frequency is important, the central point is that they have effects. Remember from Soundwave Part I: “One burst of noise, as from a passing truck, is known to alter endocrine, neurological, and cardiovascular functions in many individuals;…”

 

Ultrasound or ultrasonography is a medical imaging technique that uses high frequency sound waves and their echoes. The technique is similar to the echolocation used by bats, whales and dolphins, as well as SONAR used by submarines. No studies have been done which prove the safety of ultrasound.  American Medical Association has not approved of the use of Ultrasound for confirming the sex of the baby, assessing gestational age, fetal size and growth, possibility for multiple pregnancy and fetal positioning. The AMA also recommends “against unnecessary exposure.”

Ultrasound is not audible to the human ear yet even though sounds outside the frequency range covered by dBA measurements this does not mean that physiological effects may eventuate, especially to such a sensitive area of foetal growth. High frequency sound waves impacting the foetus suspended in amniotic fluid would suggest that the very nature of its oscillatory disturbance is logically going to produce effects. And according to one midwifery website these effects are less than encouraging:  

 

 “With the exception of confirming the sex of the baby, all these pieces of information can be obtained with hands-on skills.  A fetoscope or stethoscope can detect the baby's heartbeat without the dangers of ultrasound. According to the World Health Organization and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services report, "It is not clear at this time whether ultrasound fetal monitoring is beneficial to the mother or fetus in terms of pregnancy outcome...If there is no generally acknowledged benefit to the monitoring, there is no reason to expose patients to increased cost and risk.  The question of benefit has not yet been resolved...and the potential for delayed effects has been virtually ignored…  
 
…Have you seen a woman with an extremely high voice break a glass by singing an extremely high pitched note?  That is an example of what just ONE relatively slow sound wave can do.  Ultrasound technology is based upon ultra high-frequency sound waves, which bombard the child in the womb at an extremely high rate of speed.  If one slow sound wave from a woman's voice can break a glass, what can super high frequency sound waves do to your child?  Ultrasound waves in laboratory experiments have been known to damage chromosomes, produce internal cellular heat which damages cells, retard the normal development of cells, and many other phenomenon.

 

What a great welcome to material existence: "Trust me, I’m a doctor and I’m also a sound engineer and testing a theory on your baby about which I know nothing about." And if pregnant mothers are working in an environment where there is noise pollution, which, for most lower income earners, this is more than a probability, then there is a further likelihood of damage to the unborn in ways that might not be so apparent, as well as the cumulative effect of stress and even cardio-vascular impairment.

One recent wide ranging paper analyzed various study data and came to the following conclusions:  

(1) exposure to excessive noise during pregnancy may result in high-frequency hearing loss in newborns, and may be associated with prematurity and intrauterine growth retardation, (2) exposure to noise in the NICU may result in cochlear damage, and (3) exposure to noise and other environmental factors in the NICU may disrupt the normal growth and development of premature infants. On the basis of these study results, noise-induced health effects on fetuses and newborns merit further study as clinical and public health concerns.

 

These high frequency sound blasts occur at crucial stages of the developmental process. It could be said that Ultrasonographic evaluations prevent serious problems from occurring or provide crucial information to the parents as the health of the foetus as well as signs of abnormalities.  I wonder how much of this practice is really necessary, as most information can be deduced from blood analysis and “hands-on skills” without any invasive procedures. But hey, it’s Hi-Tec and it gives you a pretty printout of little Bobby while he writhes in very possible discomfort. Is it not strange that many foetuses display considerable body movement that looks remarkably like agitation to me when undergoing ultrasound scanning? But then, we are conditioned to noise…from birth. Sound and noise seems to pervade every aspect of our lives, even under the guise of prevention and safety. Pregnant mothers should take note that every time they opt for the luxury of checking on their baby’s health and acquiescing to the “wisdom” of the medical establishment on this issue, they may be contributing to much more than a pretty visual picture of their recently (mal) formed family addition.   The few studies that have been carried out on ultrasound are extremely ominous.

 

The use of ultrasound screening for pregnant women is symbolic of just how little we understand the nature of sound and its powerful capabilities, though there are most certainly those who do. With virtually no studies carried out on the effects of exposure to high frequency sound waves, obviously secret and well-funded research is increasingly mirrored by independent companies and corporations, many of which have close ties to the US military. 

 

Take Mr. F. Joseph Pompei at the Media Lab at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who has developed a device called the “Audio Spotlight,” a disc-shaped loud speaker with a laser beam mounted in the centre. It uses ultrasound to direct a precise beam of sound – music in this case – to the listener, but turn the disc away and the sound all but disappears. He has ingeniously combined the beamlike nature of ultrasound with the qualities of audible sound.

 

Pompei is understandably excited at the commercial benefits for advertisers, marketers, and exhibitors where he believes they could have a “wonderful time.” In other words, more layers of targeted consumerism. Once again, our quest for silence is being eroded. Recall the nightmare propagandist movie Minority Report where advertising was personalized and the ad man was inside your head - literally.  However, Pompei is not the first, not by a long way.

As the spectre of an invasive consumerism continues unabated, utilising ever more sophisticated auditory assaults on our malleable senses, this begs the question as to how the military have been using such technology. The residues of research and technological “scraps” thrown into the consumerist trough inevitably lead back to the military industrial complex, where technology companies often have a double life, working as they do to line their pockets for the highest bidder. What does it matter if they are employed by the military or adapting their inventions to the local mall? 

Which brings us to the subject of “non-lethal” weapons which has got the US military and their corporations very excited indeed.

 

The Department of Defence in 1997 established the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate (JNLWD), with an annual budget of about $25 million, to research the possibility of producing an array of weapons that will harm, but not kill. The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) report released earlier this year, urged greater federal funding for non-lethal weapons research and evaluation. With a network of supporting universities, and entrepreneurs such as Pompei there is already a vast panopoly of “non-lethal” weapons with patents pending or currently in development.

 

We can find US Patent No.5973999 October 6 1999 detailing an advanced form of sonic cannon which “emits    repetitive sonic pulses capable of dispersing or incapacitating a biological target” and US patent No. 3557899 describing a parabolic reflector that “focuses and transmits a continuous sound at a frequency of 8 kilohertz (kHz) and 13 kHz.” and US Patent No. 4349898 discloses “a sonic weapon to destroy buildings and disable personal.” (I suspect this would be a severe disablement if the aforementioned personnel happen to be in the building at the time.) Vortex ring generators are also dotted about in relation to crowd control and other forms of non-lethal subjugation, and bear in mind that these are the ones that are unclassified. The fact that the patents accessible to the public are rather frightening in themselves, must give us pause to think regarding the true capabilities and advancement of such research. In actual fact this is simply a “public” display of clandestine research which has been continuing for many years prior to the JNLWD directorate.

The US and British military conducted high level research since the second world war, if not before. After all, the story of the Croation electrics inventor Nikoli Telsa suggests that his genius, like Einstein, was very quickly harnessed and subsumed into the Anglo-American military machine. It is also very likely that his achievements gave a huge boost to this line of information domination. (This has been intensified in accordance with the shadow government’s agenda, resulting in a veritable open market for sonic, electromagnetic, bio and psychotronic weaponry.

 

One particular company, American Technology Corporation (ATC) based in San Diego, seems to be riding high on the factional excitations of the US Army and Navy underpinned by the imperatives of the Bush Junta. In February 2003 the company cemented a five-year multimillion-dollar licensing agreement with General Dynamics. They have come up with something called the Directed Stick Radiator, and according to the National Academy of Sciences it “uses a high intensity acoustic pressure wave to disorient and disable targeted individuals up to 100 yards away.” It’s High intensity Directional Acoustics invention (HIDA) which in the words of its inventor Woody Norris "HIDA can instantaneously cause loss of equilibrium, vomiting, migraines -- really, we can pretty much pick our ailment." This form of weaponry will have the desired effect even if you happen to be deaf, where the bones in your ear/head will vibrate and self-destruct  irrespective of hearing capacity.  Nice.

The audio “spotlight” technique has obviously piqued the curiosity of police forces as well as the military:

 

Woody Norris, the CEO of American Technology Corporation and a pioneer in ultrasound technology, has developed a non-lethal acoustic weapon that stops people in their tracks."[For] most people," said Norris, "even if they plug their ears, it will produce the equivalent of an instant migraine. Some people, it will knock them on their knees."
 
The device emits so-called "sonic bullets" along a narrow, intense beam up to 145 decibels, 50 times the human threshold of pain. It usually doesn't take that much to stop someone, as we learned in a demonstration in the company parking lot. The acoustic "weapon," in the demonstration model, looks like a huge stereo speaker, except this one sports urban camouflage.
 
The operator chooses one of many annoying sounds in the computer — in this case, the high pitched wail of a baby, played backwards — and aims it at us. At 110 decibels, we were forced to walk out of the beam's path, our ears ringing. Had we stayed longer, Norris said our skulls would literally start to vibrate.

Police departments and the Pentagon are flocking to Norris' headquarters in San Diego to see this revolutionary technology for themselves. The problem with past attempts to make an acoustic weapon is that sound traveled in every direction, affecting the operator, as well. Norris' narrow ultrasound beam takes care of that problem, meaning police could use it to subdue suspects or quell riots, without hurting bystanders or the operator, because the sound is directional.  

 

In 2002 those clever boys at ATC also created another variation of the sound cannon for the Pentagon's "non-lethal" weapons programme. The unit directs painful or disturbing sounds towards a target using ultrasonic audio beams, and is said to be “capable of disorienting or incapacitating a person at up to 30m.”  And all for Homeland Security – at least for the protection of the elite from the American people when and if they smell a rat. “Terrorists” will no doubt be found within the civilian population to support their goals. Indeed, with the variety of options available for controlling any upsurge of democracy the military are spoilt for choice. Even those abroad, such as the Iraqi people will be used as suitable test experiments. The US army has already ordered the prototype of the non-lethal acoustic weapon which will be mounted on armoured cars and according to one Col. Peter Dotto: “…would  make it very uncomfortable for al Qaeda terrorists to stay in Afghan caves. They would have to come out, and they probably would come out with their hands over their ears so they would be very easy to subdue at that point."

Much like the American people which if they do decide to wake up they may be faced with the following and deemed enemies of the Homeland:

Huntington Beach-based Scientific Applications & Research Associates Inc. (SARA) has built a device that will make internal organs resonate: The effects can run from discomfort to damage or death. If used to protect an area, its beams would make intruders increasingly uncomfortable the closer they get. "We have built several prototypes," says Parviz Parhami, SARA's CEO. Such acoustic fences, he says, could be deployed today. He estimates that five to 10 years will be needed to develop acoustic rifles and other more exotic weapons, but adds, "I have heard people as optimistic as one to two years." The military also envisions acoustic fields being used to control riots or to clear paths for convoys.

SARA's acoustic devices have already been tested at the Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base, near the company's Huntington Beach office. And they were considered for Somalia. "We asked for acoustics," says one nonlethal weapons expert who was there. But the Department of Defense said, "No," since they were still untested. The Pentagon feared they could have caused permanent injury to pregnant women, the old, or the sick. Parhami sees acoustics "as just one more tool" for the military and law enforcement. "Like any tool, I suppose this can be abused," he says. "But like any tool, it can be used in a humane and ethical way."  

 

And how exactly will this ethical stance be arbitrated? By George W. Bush? The US army? Once again we must ask what is remotely ethical about developing such non-lethal weapons where internal organs can be made to “resonate” if necessary to the point of death. Which executive order and personal opinion will assign “probable cause” for acts of terrorism or subversion? Where and when is the line drawn between what is deemed a democratic right to disagree and a potential terrorist? The questions become particularly urgent when we consider the engendered paranoia of the political climate and the rapid degeneration of investigative reporting in the mainstream media which allows this technology to go largely unquestioned and unchallenged. Front page news it is not. It must therefore be assumed that these weapons will promote the agenda of the Neo-Cons and the puppet masters behind them. Crowd control becomes suppressing any form of dissent by high technological means, especially when people can be made to be compliant rather than dead. Indeed, the American people may already have been used as guinea pigs in this regard.  After all, deaths promote questions.

 

Back in 2002 prior to the invasion of Iraq, Scientists concerned by the proliferation of this research and possible implementation (which may well have occurred during in Baghdad since) warned the international community that the US “is developing a new generation of weapons that undermine and possibly violate international treaties on biological and chemical warfare.” The paradox of going to war and developing non-lethal weapons was not lost on them. Although the scientists concerns were focused primarily upon the double standards and hypocrisy of bio-chemical weaponry the same can be applied to acoustic technology. The justification that it is an essential part of their strategic defence programs is trotted out by Washington as yet another tired example of an administration attempting to dominate and re-shape the world in its own image. And if the US flouts international law then other “developing” countries will most certainly do the same. 

Malcolm Dando, professor of international security at the University of Bradford commented in a Guardian piece in 2002 regarding chemical weapons: "There is a revolution in life sciences which could be applied in a major way to warfare. It's an early example of the mess we may be creating." He added that Britain "is implicated as well", as the Pentagon's Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate has worked with British officers on its research… The US,…runs the very real danger of leading the world down a pathway that will greatly reduce the security of all."

 

And that seems to be one of the primary objectives of the Bush administration, guided by the military and the executive shadow government. 

 

A paper from 1996 entitled Non Lethal Weapons: Terms and References from the USAF Institute for National Security Studies in Colorado gives a comprehensive listing of non-lethal weapons including ethical, functional, operational, physiological, and theoretical explorations. It is a rather polite attempt to represent the relatively current state of non lethal warfare written by an editor and a panel of contributors that range from experienced high ranking military brass to CEO weapons systems directors. They seem to be eminently qualified to produce such a paper. 

In the foreward we read: “The contributors to this paper represent some of our country's “best and brightest” in the field of nonlethal weapons research, development, training and operational employment. Their combined expertise spans the early years of the development of nonlethal weapons from the Vietnam War era, including their employment in the Somali operation and in recent domestic law enforcement disturbances, to newer systems still in the process of being developed and field tested.” Their target audience are “individuals who deal with special operations, weapons procurement and sales, and military operations other than war.”  Their sponsors include “the National Security Policy Division, Nuclear and Counterproliferation Directorate, Headquarters US Air Force (USAF/XONP) and the Dean of the Faculty, US Air Force Academy. Our other current sponsors include: the Air Staff's Directorate for Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance.”  

However, it is in the following extract from the foreword that we see the creed of American hedgemony riven with the usual assumptions as to its international role.As ever, it is one of dominance and subjugation both within its internal boundaries and abroad:

 

It is the opinion of the editor (and most of the contributors to this paper) that when nonlethal weapons are ready for wide-scale application, this will signal a development as significant in magnitude as the emergence of gunpowder based firearms during the European Renaissance.
 
[…]

 Law enforcement agencies and Army national guard units relying upon traditional forms of politico-military force were ineffective in countering US domestic civil unrest. As similar types of conflict, now many magnitudes greater, seem to dominate international politics since the end of the Cold War, this type of weapon takes on increasing importance.
 
[…]
 
The US military will need to undertake significant organizational and doctrinal restructuring in order to exploit the potential of these new weapons. The most important near-term application of nonlethal technology appears to be in areas such as: operations in “failed states,” as a counter to the non-Western form of warfare that is emerging globally, as a defense against the specter of further terrorist assaults upon our homeland, and as a means of responding to civil unrest in many of our inner cities. Over the longer term, it is their fit with other nascent warfighting trends embodied in the revolution in political and military affairs (RPMA) that is of paramount significance. For example, nonlethal weapons could present new and potentially highly effective mechanisms for dealing with an advanced form of battlespace (i.e. cyberspace) and the criminally-based non-state soldier (i.e. terrorist, mercenary or "new-warrior class") as a challenger to the Western nation-state's domination of political violence.

In order to respond to these and other challenges, we must insure that our armed services retain the capability to dominate the battlefields of the 21st century. Our ability to use nonlethal weapons effectively will be a critical component of our future capabilities. It is toward improving our knowledge in that endeavor that this paper has been written.

 [Bold mine]

 

The author is clearly excited by the prospect of a mass production and utilization of said weaponry in all likelihood far in advance of the above list. He mentions:  “when non-lethal weapons are ready for wide-scale use…” rather than if, and is of “increasing importance.”

We are now into 2004 with military expenditure reaching extortionate levels and we can only assume that the urgency to retain this domination and global imperialism over “failed states” has hugely increased. We need only look back at the  manufactured events of 9/11 and the subsequent invasion of Iraq.

The editor describes in his disclaimer that  “Many of the weapon concepts… are merely proposals.” Yet he does not specify which. He goes on to say: “Except where specifically identified in official Department of Defense documents, none of the concepts in this paper should be interpreted to be funded R&D programs or operational weapon systems possessed by the Department of Defense.” Yet we know that most research into infrasound for example, is not even listed in Department of Defence documents yet powerful historical evidence suggests it is a well funded area of research and is highly classified. According to this military man, we should not “interpret” such a thing, even if that is very possibly the reality.

Once again, we see experienced military men seeing what they wish to see, where the dominance of the US is foremost in their minds. “The Western nation state’s dominance” was only ever a means to hold a democratic illusion at the cost of most of the world's population.  The religious zeal that permeates US military and the present administration’s lies underscores the danger of such lethal-weapons. They allow the oppressor to reduce freedoms by stealth and to use them as part of an overall strategy to implement this same unilateral whitewash. Give a trained killer an array of weapons and he will use the ones that prove the most effective appropriate to the context and given plan of action.

An edited sampling of acoustic weaponry follows. Notice that some of these dates are more than thirty years old.  What is certain is that this research did not stop but steadily increased to the present frenzy of expenditure. 

 

 

Acoustic Beam. High power, very low frequency beam emitted from weaponry under development. [or acoustic cannon]

Acoustic, Blast Wave, Projector. Energy generation from a pulsed laser that will project a hot, high pressure plasma in the air in front of a target. It creates a blast wave with variable but controlled effects on hardware and troops,

Acoustic Bullets: High power, very low frequency waves emitted from one to two meter antenna dishes. Results in blunt object trauma from waves generated in front of the target. Effects range from discomfort to death. A Russian device that can propel a 10-hertz sonic bullet the size of a baseball hundreds of yards is thought to exist. Proposed fixed site defense. Also known as sonic bullets,

Acoustic, Deference Tones. Devices which can project a voice or other sound to a particular location. The resulting sound can only be heard at that location.

Acoustic, Squawk Box. Crowd dispersal weapon field tested by the British Army in Ireland in 1973. This directional device emits two ultrasonic frequencies which when mixed in the human ear become intolerable. It produces giddiness, nausea or fainting. The beam is so small that is can be directed at specific individuals in a riot situation;

Acoustic, Teleshot. Cartridge projecting a powerful sonic device delivered by a 12-gauge shotgun. Experimental use in 1972.

Acoustic & Optical, Photic Driver. A crowd control device developed by a British company prior to 1973 which uses ultrasound and flashing infrared lights which penetrate closed human eyelids. Potential for epileptic fits because of the stroboscopic flashing effect. May have been employed by South African Police during interrogations.

Acoustic & Optical, Psycho-Correction. A technology invented by a Russian scientist that involves influencing subjects visually or aurally with imbedded subliminal messages.

Acoustic, Infrasound. Very low-frequency sound which can travel long distances and easily penetrate most buildings and vehicles. Transmission of long wavelength sound creates biophysical effects; nausea, loss of bowels, disorientation, vomiting, potential internal organ damage or death may occur. Superior to ultrasound because it is "in band" meaning that its does not lose its properties when it changes mediums such as from air to tissue. By 1972 an infrasound generator had been built in France which generated waves at 7 hertz. When activated it made the people in range sick for hours.

 

Other weapons mentioned include: Optical, Bucha Effect – “High intensity strobe lights which flash at near human brain wave frequency causing vertigo, disorientation, and vomiting.” Prophet Hologram – “The projection of the image of an ancient god over an enemy capitol whose public communications have been seized and used against it in a massive psychological operation.” Death Hologram – “used to scare a target individual to death. Example, a drug lord with a weak heart sees the ghost of his dead rival appearing at his bedside and dies of fright.” Soldiers-Forces Hologram – “The projection of soldier-force images which make an opponent think more allied forces exist than actually do, make an opponent believe that allied forces are located in a region where none actually exist, and/or provide false targets for his weapons to fire upon.” Electromagnetic, Radio Frequency [RF], Weapons Electromagnetic Pulse, Non-Nuclear [NNEMP], Weapons, Electromagnetic, High Power Microwave [HPM], [essentially - cooks your insides] Weapons Biotechnical Wetware – “Advanced technology devices which are surgically implanted into the body rather than worn. These devices can be used to enhance memory and the human senses, modify behavior or to locate allied troops.” Biotechnical Neuro-Implant – “Computer implants into the brain which allow for behavioral modification and control. Current research is experimental in nature and focuses on lab animals such as mice.” Biotechnical Genetic Alteration, Biotechnical Disease Organisms, Antiplant Agent, etc. etc.

 

Keep in mind the advances in the information age where mobiles, for example, have all but the kitchen sink contained within the LCD display. These are the gadgets to keep the sheeple permanently grazing and the net result of classified research that trickles down to the market and adapted to commercial applications. The REAL “creativity” is being funnelled into non-lethal weapons systems and in particular one form of low frequency acoustic manipulation which is mentioned in the final paragraph: Infrasound.

 

 

Notes

1 http://www.centreforunhinderedliving.org/ 
2 COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH, 1996 to 1997
3 "Newnham, J.P., Evans, S.F., Michael, C.A., Stanley, F.J., & Landau, L. I. (1993). Effects of Frequent Ultrasound During Pregnancy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.  The Lancet, 342(Oct.9), 887-891. A study of over 1400 women in Perth, Western Australia compared pregnant mothers who had ultrasound only once during gestation with mothers who had five monthly ultrasounds from 18 weeks to 38 weeks. They found significantly higher intrauterine growth restriction in the intensive ultrasound group. These mothers gave birth to lower weight babies. The researchers concluded that prenatal ultrasound imaging and Doppler flow exams should be restricted to clinically necessary situations. This recommendation comes at a time when ultrasound during prenatal visits has become increasingly popular and serves as a kind of entertainment feature of office check-up visits. Campbell, J.D., Elford, R.W. & Brant, R.F. (1993).  Case-Controlled Study of Prenatal Ultrasound Exposure in Children with Delayed Speech. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 149(10), 1435-1440.
Delayed speech is not a pathological or organic syndrome but developmentally defined symptom complex. Clinicians have noted an increased incidence of delayed speech in pediatric patients.This is a matched-case control study of 72 children 2 to 8 years old presenting with delayed speech of unknown cause. The children were measured for articulation, language comprehension, language production, meta-linguisticskills, and verbal memory. When checked for ultrasound exposure, the speech-delayed children were about twice as likely to have been exposed to ultrasound than the matched controls.
The authors believe that delayed speech is a sensitive measure reflecting sub-optimal conditions for development. If ultrasound can cause developmental delays, the authors are concerned about the routine use of ultrasound and they warn against it.
Devi, P.U., Suresh,  R., & Hande, M.P. (1995). Effect of fetal exposure to ultrasound on the behavior of the adult mouse. Radiat Res (QMP),  141(3), 314-7.
Pregnant Swiss albino mice were exposed to diagnostic ultrasound. There were significant alterations in behavior in all three exposed groups as revealed by the decreased locomotor and exploratory activity and the increase in the number of trials needed for learning. These results indicate that ultrasound exposure during the early fetal period can impair brain function in the adult mouse.
Hande, M.P., & Devi, P.U. (1995). Teratogenic effects of repeated exposures to X-rays and/or ultrasound in mice. Neurotoxicol Teratol (NAT), 17(2), 179-88.
Pregnant Swiss mice were exposed to ultrasound, x-rays, and combinations of the two.  Effects on prenatal development, postnatal growth and adult behavior were studied. U + U group showed an increase in percent growth retarded fetuses. The postnatal mortality was significantly higher only in the U + U group. In the X + U group, the exploratory activity was affected at 6 months of  age. There was a significant change in the locomotor activity with a reduction in the total activity as 3 and 6 months of age in the U + U group. Latency in learning capacity was also noticed in this group. The results indicate that repeated exposures to ultrasound or its combination with X-rays could be detrimental to the embryonic development and can impair adult brain function when administered at certain stages of  organogenesis."
Centre for Unhindered Living
4 Sound and Fury Sonic Bullets to Be Acoustic Weapon of the Future By Judy Muller
5 Wonder Weapons: The Pentagon's quest for nonlethal arms is amazing. But is it smart? By  Douglas  Pasternak, July 7, 1997
6 Tues Julian Borger in Washington Tuesday October 29, 2002  Us Weapons Secrets Exposed.
7 ibid
8 Non-Lethal Weapons: Terms and References 1996 http://www.usafa.af.mil/inss