US Use of EMF Weapons Devices on humans

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Human Rights
State Sovereignty
Conclusion
Works Cited

Introduction

In the modern world, the US has the capability of utilizing electromagnetic (EMF) devices to harass, terrorize and execute human life. There is an ongoing government funded research to strength the use of such weapons, which raises concerns of human rights and freedom. The project was set up in 1950s by the CIA to influence human cognition, feeling and conduct.

By applying psychological understanding of individuals as social animal, the government of US has been funding studies aiming at controlling human behavior in the best ways possible. Human behavior can be maneuvered through segregation, drugs and hypnosis. The government has been funding researches such as application of wireless controlled electromagnetic energy. Such strategies are termed as information fighting and Non-lethal armaments.

The new technology aims at manipulating human feelings, interrupting thought and presenting agonizing twinge using magnetic fields. The government therefore has at its disposal some of the dangerous weapons that have already been used in suppressing human life. The weapons are usually used in quelling violence that could cause mass destruction, as well as lose life and property.

The issue of human rights is an all-inclusive concept that every person in society must be granted. The use of such weapons violates the rights of some individuals because other means of solving conflicts in society exist. By signing the Military Commission Act of 2006, the US government through the congress aimed at denying people their rights and freedoms.

The 2006 Act elucidates that the state has the authority and power to utilize electromagnetic weapons in torturing an individual perceived by the president to be a terrorist or associated with terrorism. The provision actually violates the constitutional right of an individual provided in the independence constitution. This paper analyses the effectiveness of the policy by looking at its strengths and weaknesses. The paper finally evaluates the rationale behind the use of the new technology in the US.

Human Rights

Individual rights are usually incompatible with state sovereignty but the constitution at independence identified that some rights are innate in an individual and that they could not be separated from an individual. Such rights include the right to liberty, life and the right to pursue pleasure.

The state should therefore strive to offer these rights without compromise. In 1948, the United Nations declared the universal rights contained in chapter ten and five. The US government endorsed the rights and further incorporated them into the national laws. The charter provides that human beings have inherent rights that should always be given without concession. Such rights include various fundamental freedoms, justice and worldwide tranquility.

The laws have been in operation for over six decades meaning that the US should respect them or consider them whenever designing national laws. Article ten of the UN constitution on human rights asserts that each individual is entitled to full egalitarianism and reasonable public trial by a sovereign and unbiased court in the deliberation of his/her rights and duties (Ignatieff 34).

Furthermore, article five proscribes torment or unkind, brutal or humiliating treatment or castigation. The 2006 Military Commissions Act goes against all these provisions. The US government allowed the passage of the bill meaning that individual liberty and freedoms are no longer recognized in the state.

On the other hand, the Universal Declaration of Human rights continue to assert that each individual has the right to freedom of thinking and freedom of expression, as well as attitude. This implies that each person has the right of giving his or her views voluntarily that is, without intimidation or being forced.

The introduction and application of EMF weapons endangers this fundamental right. Freedom of thinking or cognitive independence is the natural right of each individual. This implies that an individual should perceive the world in his/her best understanding that is, without external interruption or influence. Each person has his/her own way of reasoning. We all have different orientations and perceptions to the world. The use of EMF weapons is a threat to human life and freedoms according to human rights groups.

Use of EMF in extracting information from an individual is egregious human rights felony. Forceful extraction of information is illegal and in most cases inaccurate. An individual may be forced to give false information just because he/she is in pain. Such information is not useful at all because it does not have any theoretical grounding. Voluntary data is usually accurate and more applicable because it is usually ordered in a logical way.

Human rights activists argue that EMF weapons are not used to fulfill the interests of Americans. Military elites set out to dominate the world after the Second World War without considering the interests and wishes of the majority in the state. The new technology is used to safeguard the interests of the ruling elites in many ways.

Demonstrating workers and other aggrieved parties in the labor market are usually subjected to unnecessary torture only to satisfy the bourgeoisie (Landman 89). Those suspected to have engaged in property crime are also taken through pain in order to make them agree with the rules and regulations set by the ruling class. Furthermore, the activists continue to observe that victims of torture are people from particular races and social classes.

The bill serves to deny some people their right to equality. Individuals from the Middle East have no peace in the US because their movements are trailed always. They are usually suspected to be having hidden agendas, which exposes them to torture and unfair treatment. The state must come up with a different way or technique of identifying criminals instead of relying on cultural background of individuals.

State Sovereignty

As noted earlier, state sovereignty is incompatible with individual sovereignty. The interests of the state are superior to the desires and wishes of an individual because the state aims at fulfilling the public good. In this way, use of EMF weapons is justified and allowed because of state security and the nature of the international system.

Terrorism and the rise of fundamentalism call for extra ordinary measures in case the state is to maintain its sovereignty (Paleri 115). The existence of the law frustrates the activities of extremist groups because relevant information is easily obtained through torture. All through history, there are times that the only language a man understands is violence. The use of brutal techniques in solving conflicts is valid due to the intrinsic nature of a human being. Man is inherently brutal, anarchic and self-centered.

The existence of the central authority serves to control the individual self-interests. Such interests are always controversial and may pose a threat to life. As noted by early scholars, the society was on fire implying that life was short lived and indecent before the invention of the state. This forced individuals to sign a contract that would guarantee peace and harmony. The contract gave powers to one central authority, referred to as the state.

The central authority or Leviathan as Hobbes could document, would have powers to exercise authority over individuals. Individuals on their part surrendered power to the Leviathan mainly to achieve greatness (Haftendorn 519). The state has a prime role of protecting the interests of the society because it is the custodian of the public welfare.

Therefore, the state is authorized to use techniques such as trickery, negotiation, murder and any other available method, whether good or bad to maintain peace. It is not surprising for the state to use EMF weapons to execute its duties. In other words, it means that the Leviathan cannot share its powers with any other entity in society. Furthermore, it has powers granted to it by the majority to control life and property

Conclusion

The use of EMF weapons is justifiable and the state should come up with ways of strengthening its application. The existing international system is anarchic and tension full implying that the state must explore all possibilities and arrive at the best solution.

This would require neglecting individual sovereignty because it is incompatible with state sovereignty in real practice. It is also established that man is intrinsically brutal and full of conflicts hence application of one technique in extracting important information from him would not function.

The state would lose its hegemonic powers in the international system in case human rights considerations are taken seriously. Treating criminals or suspects softly would comprise state security meaning that force is the only viable technique. Strategists in the military borrow from psychology the idea that pain forces the brain to expose everything in it. Overall, much needs to be done to improve the use of EMF weapons in maintaining state security.

Works Cited

Haftendorn, Helga. The Security Puzzle: Theory-Building and Discipline-Building in International Security. International Studies Quarterly, 35.1, 1991.

Ignatieff, Michael. Human rights as politics and idolatry. 3rd ed. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2001.

Landman, Todd. Studying Human Rights. London: Routledge, 2006.

Paleri, Prabhakaran. National Security: Imperatives and Challenges. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill, 2008.

Click Here To Order Now!