The HAARP Project and What It Conceals
Installed on August 28, 2002
Updated on September 29 and September 1, 2002 (at the bottom of the page)
May 2008 Update:
The Russian HAARP installation (preceding the American one by ten years). Power output: 190 megawatts!
Summary of the dossier compiled by
Luc Mampaey,
Commercial Engineer
Research Associate at the
GRIP (Group for Research and Information on Peace and Security)
GRIP Address: Rue Van Hoorde, 33, B-1030 Brussels.
The complete dossier (PDF), titled "The HAARP Program: Science or Disaster?", can be downloaded here:
http://www.grip.org/pub/rap/rg98-5_haarp.pdf
The HAARP Website
As a Canadian colleague recently wrote to me, the fundamental concepts behind the HAARP project (High Frequency Active Auroral Program) and its various applications are not new—they date back to the 1960s. But apparently, a kind of maturation has occurred over the past forty years. Technology has advanced, and things are now possible. It's like hypersonic flight (see "The Mysteries of the B2"). As I will explain in my book, "UFOs: The Veil is Ripping Apart," scheduled for release in January 2003 (for purely editorial scheduling reasons), hypersonic flight has become a reality after decades of technological development, primarily based on MHD (magnetohydrodynamics). Only the Americans and the Russians continued to push forward in these fields. The same applies to HAARP. We Europeans are discovering a new domain where, once again, we are left out. Indeed, the progress of military technology today involves a new psychological and sociological strategy: disinformation. It's impossible to keep any field under a decades-long veil of secrecy. Only active disinformation can keep curious minds at bay—and this is the most astonishing phenomenon of our time. It's the same in every field. HAARP is merely the tip of another iceberg.
What to do when you have the technical and scientific capability to gain a significant lead over the rest of the world, even while violating numerous international treaties (mentioned in Mampaey's study, concerning environmental respect in all its forms)? First of all, hide it. It looks very bad to appear as the world's imperialist power, showing you could crush any country, anywhere, at any time. Readers write to me: "But if the Americans had hypersonic bombers with extremely long range, why would they still use their old B-52s?" For many reasons. First, the B-52s are more than sufficient. At the altitudes they operate, the Taliban's surface-to-air missiles couldn't do much damage. Second, they can carry the same bombing equipment as the secret super-planes—synthetic aperture radars, programmable bombs. Are they not stealthy? Big deal—where are the Taliban's radars?
If the Americans possess systems capable of reaching installations buried hundreds of meters underground—such as Al-Qaeda hideouts or secret factories where Saddam Hussein was developing future weapons of mass destruction for the Arab world—why don't they use them? Because doing so would reveal to the world that they already mass-produce antimatter, plain and simple. So the Americans remain deeply modest. Under their ancient B-52s, they hang mockups of hypersonic aircraft propelled by black-powder rockets to Mach 6 or 7. And it doesn't work... "We're only at preliminary testing stages," they say—while Aurora, the satellite-capable spy plane, has been flying at Mach 12 since 1990. How? The answer will come in January 2003, in my book. You won't be disappointed.
During a recent conference (June 2002), ONERA specialists reproduced a crude sketch of Ajax, the Russian equivalent of Aurora, taken from a December 2000 issue of Ciel et Espace, concluding that "all this is beyond the technological capabilities of the era." Of course, beyond ours. In such cases, we resort to massive disinformation. We steer curious minds toward "antigravity" to prevent them from getting too close to a far simpler field: MHD. The web is full of futuristic drawings, created using computer-generated imagery—mirrors that mislead because the proposed solutions are not functional.
This reminds me of a letter I received in 1975 from a UFO researcher. He knew, he claimed, how UFOs worked. I quote from memory:
- Inside the circular UFO, there is a round table around which twelve prepubescent teenagers float in a state of levitating ecstasy.
The egg of Columbus, indeed...
The big question is: how far ahead are things on the other side of the Atlantic, in these "sanctuaries"? The crucial mistake would be to judge these advancements from afar based on our own knowledge and current capabilities. Because we Europeans are behind—terribly behind. Military experts have a hard time accepting this. Let me give you examples of this skepticism (I like the definition my friend Rémy Chauvin gives of a skeptic: "someone who suspects nothing"). In 1976, I returned from Livermore, where chance and luck had placed me in front of the first high-power lasers using neodymium-doped glass. Power per unit: one terawatt. In France and Europe, no laser specialist knew what a terawatt meant, and this power level (a million megawatts) surpassed their imagination. At the time, Gérald Yonas at Sandia, New Mexico, had sketched the early outlines of the Star Wars program. Complete skepticism among French military personnel. I remember a radio debate with a general playing the role of military spokesperson. His reaction:
-
How can a laser hit a one-meter target at a thousand kilometers? That would require a pointing precision of one microradian.
-
General, do you know the pointing precision of the smallest ground-based telescope?
-
No...
-
One microradian.
And this honest general continued: "Countermeasures against laser weapons are easy to imagine. For example, simply spinning the rockets on their axis would prevent lasers from damaging their hulls."
-
General, I think we're talking about different lasers. What kind of power are you referring to?
-
Two megawatts—the power of current CO2 lasers.
-
I believe you're missing a factor of a thousand...
-
But where did you get such information?
-
Right under your right elbow. Look—you're leaning on the latest issue of Aviation Week and Space Technology. It's in the editorial by the editor-in-chief, Robison.
-
Ah... I just bought it... I hadn't read it yet...
The ONERA engineers who claim "the laws of physics are the same everywhere" and find American concepts absurd remind me of that general. In fact, the first reaction is:
- We don't have projects like this, so they don't exist elsewhere—this is science fiction...