“What is at stake is more than one small country [Iraq], it is a big idea, a New World Order, where diverse nations are drawn together in common cause …”
- President George H.W. Bush, in a speech on September 11th, 1991
Obama Hails Bush Sr’s ‘Excellent Job’ in First Gulf War
Highway of death
George Bush New World Order
Categories: 2008 Election · Perpetual War
March of the titans: Topol-M intercontinental ballistic missiles roll through the square
Kremlin’s blast from the past: Awesome display of military power in Red Square for Russia’s new leader
By EDWARD LUCAS
It was a chilling sight from a different age.
Nuclear missile launchers and scores of tanks rolled across Red Square yesterday for the first time since the end of the Cold War.
The military hardware - including Topol-M ballistic missiles and T-90 tanks - may be a reminder of the days when the Soviet Union’s nuclear arsenal cast a shadow over the world, but in truth there is little reason for us to fear the corrupt, decrepit husk of the Russian armed forces.
Yet we should be deeply alarmed about the politicians who command them, greeted with the traditional chants of “Ura! Ura!” (Hurrah! Hurrah!) by the 8,000 troops who goose-stepped through the ceremony, which marks Stalin’s victory in the Second World War.
There they stood on their podium, the great leader, Vladimir Putin, and the new president, Dmitri Medvedev.
Master and his pupil: Putin, centre, and Medvedev, right
Mr Putin, now prime minister, is credited with rescuing Russia from chaos and poverty, while Medvedev will supposedly add the ingredients of freedom and the rule of law.
So those hurrahs from the Russian troops - known as the Red Army until 1946 - in Red Square yesterday are echoed by the Kremlin’s supporters abroad too, who maintain the country is on the verge of a golden age.
But keep the cork in the shampanskoye (Russia’s sickly tank-fermented version of champagne).
The grim military parade reflects the Kremlin’s increasingly ruthless approach to politics - and the direct threat it poses to to Georgia, a plucky western ally on Russia’s southern flank.
Even if Mr Medvedev wants to change the style of Kremlin rule, and dares to try, how will the brooding steely figure of the prime minister, his political mentor and the darling of public opinion, react?
Mr Putin has said that no big changes in Russia’s policies at home and abroad should be expected.
He has come close to humiliating Mr Medvedev over the tiniest perceived differences of opinion. It is his hands that will stay on the levers of power.
Never has the gap between deeds and words seemed bigger. Mr Putin claims to have stepped down out of respect for the Russian constitution, which allows only two successive terms.
Yet he remains the most powerful person in the country.
Mr Medvedev, a diminutive lawyer with - unusually for the Kremlin - no background in the military or espionage, talks about freedom and the rule of law, which Mr Putin and his ex-KGB pals have trampled into the ground.
Make no mistake: Mr Medvedev’s job is to put a presentable face on the sinister regime that runs Russia.
He may criticise, rightly, Russia’s colossal corruption, shambolic public services, crumbling infrastructure, soaring inflation, grotesque abuses of power, sprawling bureaucracy, and overweening state intervention in the economy. But that does not mean he can or will do much about them.
A system that has proved so hugely lucrative to the hard men in the Kremlin is not going to disappear over night, if at all. Mr Medvedev’s “hurrah chorus” say that the ruthless tycoon-bureaucrats of the Putin regime will be pensioned off.
They will either accept their “severance packages” of a few billion dollars or they can join Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the oil baron who was once Russia’s richest man, in his prison cell near the Chinese border.
But for this to happen, Mr Medvedev will have to turn on his own.
Nothing in his eight years in senior positions at Gazprom, Russia’s biggest company, suggests he will do so. For a start, the firm epitomises the overlap between business and politics that he claims to despise.
It would be better named ‘Kremlin Inc (Gas Division)’ for its unwavering support of Russian diplomacy.
Nor is there any sign that Mr Medvedev will change Russia’s prickly relations with the west, and its bullying of former captive nations.
Earlier this year he described the U.S. as a “financial terrorist” for seeking to impose its accounting standards on the rest of the world.
Mr Medvedev has called the British Council, sponsor of folk dancers and well-meaning culture vultures, a nest of spies.
His supporters stress he likes rock music and yoga. He has a glamorous and devoutly religious wife. Such clues are spun into an illusory blanket of good intentions.
But those who have met Mr Medvedev speak of a pedantic, chippy figure, a nervous nitpicker ill at ease with the limelight.
He may change. Mr Putin did. I remember how he emerged into public view in 1999, looking more like Dobby the house elf from Harry Potter than a world leader.
Many thought the third-rate spy with a taste for gutter slang would last months, not years.
How wrong they were. It is now Mr Putin who dominates Russian politics. The clan of his predecessor, Boris Yeltsin, is history.
So are the “oligarchs”, the overmighty tycoons who once ruled the political roost. Some are in exile. Others have kow-towed to the Kremlin, gaining even greater riches in return for obedience.
Under Mr Putin, elections have become a sham, dissent criminalised, the legal system part of the Kremlin, and assassination a tool of foreign policy.
Many blame the Kremlin for the poisoning in London of Alexander Litvinenko, who fled to Britain after uncovering what he termed murderous corruption in the FSB, the KGB’s successor.
Since then Russia’s relations with Britain have been in a deep freeze, thawed only by the recent “football diplomacy” in which both countries have relaxed visa regulations for each other’s fans.
Changing Russia’s increasingly hard-edged foreign policy stance would be a formidable undertaking for Mr Medvedev.
And why bother? The current policy is working well. The Russian people delight in the stability and high living standards that the Putin era has brought - in contrast to the poverty and uncertainty of the 1990s.
Many Russians are pleased too that their country is respected (or at least feared) by its neighbours.
A muzzled, sycophantic media means that the country’s real problems, and the corrupt, threadbare record of the Putin years, receives little scrutiny.
Nor is there much to worry about abroad. The bullying of Georgia has brought only ineffectual bleats of protest from the EU and NATO.
Germany’s cosy ties with Russia have created a Trojan Horse in the heart of the west’s two main alliances.
Silvio Berlusconi’s Italy and Nicolas Sarkozy’s France adopt the same stance: accepting the riches of trade with Russia, while ignoring the political cost.
The U.S. and Britain are too distracted by Iraq and Afghanistan.
Yet Lithuania, one of the smallest and poorest countries in Europe, is bravely challenging the consensus, insisting that the EU toughens its stance before starting talks with the Kremlin.
Its neighbour Latvia is scraping together some symbolic diplomatic support for Georgia.
Every new man in the Kremlin enjoys a honeymoon with the west. And in each case that is followed by bitter disillusion: Mikhail Gorbachev caved in to hardliners and proved ineffective; Yeltsin succumbed to alcohol and the corruption of his cronies; Mr Putin turned into a menacing autocrat.
How long before we learn our lesson?
Categories: Advanced Weaponry · Communism · Perpetual War
The agency’s National Cyber Range for cyberwar simulation would be similar to Star Trek’s holodeck or a Snow Crash-style Metaverse.
By Thomas Claburn
Police officers practice their firearm skills on a shooting range, so why shouldn’t government computer security experts have the same kind of training ground?
The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or Darpa, on Monday issued a call for research proposals to develop the National Cyber Range, or NCR (NYSE: NCR), a virtual network environment for cyberwar simulation.
In other words, Darpa wants to build something along the lines of The Matrix, Star Trek’s holodeck, or a Snow Crash-style Metaverse to test cyberwar strategies and drill cyberwarriors.
That’s not to say Darpa is aiming for a visually immersive world to entertain people; rather, it wants a place to pit hackers against simulated machines.
Darpa’s interest in such matters reflects a growing U.S. government and military commitment to develop more sophisticated cyberwar capabilities. A major reason for this is that other countries, such as China, are pursuing similar goals.
“The NCR will become a National resource for testing unclassified and classified cyber programs,” Darpa’s announcement explains. “Government and Government-sponsored Test Organizations (TO) authorized to conduct cyber testing will coordinate with the NCR performer for range time and resources. …The NCR will support multiple, simultaneous, segmented tests and testbeds. At the completion of the test the NCR will sanitize and de-allocate the testbed resources, thus absorbing them back into the range.”
The NCR aims to provide the ability to replicate military, government, and commercial IT systems and infrastructure; to monitor and manage events; and to analyze, collect, and present test data.
The NCR should be able to “realistically replicate human behavior and frailties,” to provide “realistic, sophisticated, nation-state quality offensive and defensive opposition forces,” and to “accelerate and decelerate relative test time.”
With any luck, human frailties won’t manifest themselves in the form of a ballooning budget as the NCR takes shape.
Categories: Big Brother Surveillance Society · Intelligence Agencies · Perpetual War · Predictive Programming · Virtual Reality
Canadian military looking for Iron Man-type suits for overburdened soldiers
By Dean Beeby, The Canadian Press
OTTAWA - Iron Man Canuck may be appearing soon at a theatre near you.
The Defence Department posted a contract tender Monday asking companies for proposals for high-tech body suits that could help Canadian soldiers carry bigger loads into battle.
“One of the key challenges faced by soldiers today is the large weight they must carry,” says the notice.
Soldiers have been beasts of burden since the early days of the Roman legions, when the legionaries fighting under Gaius Marius laughingly called themselves Marius’s mules.
Soldiers in the field today regularly tote loads of 45 kilograms, including water, rations and ammunition.
“A soldier carrying a large pack on their back will be limited in terms of speed and endurance. . . . Exoskeletons and other mobility devices may offer alternative solutions to the important problem of reducing load burden for the soldier of tomorrow,” the posting added.
The contract, worth up to $204,000, is to be awarded in June and could include creation of a prototype and demonstration suit. The work is set to run until Jan. 31, 2011.
A spokeswoman for the military said the Dartmouth, N.S., scientific group ordering the research would not comment until after a contract has been awarded.
“They’re . . . in the early stage (and) they don’t really have any details that would be of any value to share,” said Bobbi Jo Bradley. “They’re not sure which direction it will take.”
Exoskeletons and similar body-armour have been the stuff of science fiction for decades and have been under study by the U.S. military since at least the 1960s.
But in early 2001, the U.S. Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency began concentrated work on producing a working version, earmarking US $50 million for the project.
The Pentagon agency eventually awarded a contract to Sarcos, a Salt Lake City, Utah, company now owned by Raytheon, that produced a test version this year - not unlike the Iron Man suit of the blockbuster film that opened last weekend. Known as the XOS Exoskeleton, it uses a single engine and hydraulics to assist movement.
A spokesperson for Sarcos was not immediately available for comment. But an official who’s in charge of the military program said a prototype worked well.
“I sort of felt like The Hulk and I’m a skinny guy,” John Main told a media outlet last fall. “I wore a 100-pound weight on my back and it felt like I was carrying nothing like that amount.”
The Canadian military has struggled for years to find a balance between the high-tech gear that’s rapidly becoming available and the ability of its soldiers to actually carry the equipment in the field.
In recent years, for example, National Defence has ordered research on the neck strain caused by helmets weighed down with night-vision goggles.
Military researchers have set aside as much as $310 million for a so-called “integrated soldier system” that would, for example, connect radios, digital maps, night-vision goggles and range-finding laser binoculars into a single system.
Related
Categories: AI Robotics · Advanced Weaponry · Perpetual War · Sci-Tech · Social Engineering · Transhumanism
By Richard Spencer in Beijing
China is undertaking a dramatic overhaul of its nuclear weapons in an effort to modernise and expand its arsenal.
One of the world’s leading arms control experts has said that the Chinese have realised that their nuclear weaponry has fallen behind those of other major powers and might not survive a first strike.
Bates Gill, head of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (Sipri), said that as a result it was developing more flexible delivery systems, including from submarines, as well as the capacity to use multiple warheads.
“Among the major nuclear powers China stands out in its effort to modernise, expand and improve its nuclear weapons capability,” he said at a conference in Beijing.
China’s first nuclear test took place amid huge patriotic pride in 1964.
But Chairman Mao was famously ambiguous about such weapons, once calling them “paper tigers”.
Its arsenal, estimated at between 100 and 200 warheads, is the smallest of the big powers – the United States, Russia, Britain and France. The US is currently updating its missiles and warheads.
China now has a stated policy of never using nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear country and never as a “first strike”. But Dr Gill said its static nuclear delivery system had left it vulnerable to a first strike.
A sea-based capability would “make it less likely that an adversary could wipe out the possibility of a response,” he said.
The Telegraph disclosed last week that China is constructing a secret nuclear submarine base to bolster its capabilities in the Pacific.
Dr Gill said the advances China was making raised questions about whether it could be an active participant in future arms control or reduction talks.
His comments were notable for being presented alongside a spokesman for China’s own arms control association, which is publishing the Chinese language version of Sipri’s annual report.
Teng Jianqun, a former navy colonel in the People’s Liberation Army, said the increase in military spending was partly a result of improving equipment and the living conditions for its troops, and partly due to refocusing strategy across the Taiwan strait.
On the positive side, Dr Gill said that China had made a complete about-turn in policy on weapons proliferation compared with 15 years ago, when it actively sought to undermine international treaties.
He also said that despite criticisms over its supplies of weapons to Africa and other unstable regions, its share of the global arms trade had fallen to about two per cent.
Categories: Advanced Weaponry · Communism · Perpetual War
“We had 10 years after the Cold War to build a New World Order and yet we squandered them,” he said.
Telegraph | May 7, 2008
Gorbachev: US Imperialists could start new Cold War
By Adrian Blomfield and Mike Smith in Paris
Mikhail Gorbachev has accused the United States of mounting an imperialist conspiracy against Russia that could push the world into a new Cold War.
With Dmitry Medvedev due to be inaugurated today as Russian president, the Soviet Union’s last leader said that the White House’s claims of peaceful intentions towards its former superpower rival could no longer be trusted.
Delivering one of his most scathing attacks on the US, Mr Gorbachev told The Daily Telegraph that a US military build-up was under way to contain a resurgent Russia.
From Nato’s expansion plans in the former Soviet Union to Washington’s proposals for a bigger defence budget and a missile shield in central Europe, the US was deliberately quashing hopes for permanent peace with Russia, Mr Gorbachev said.
“We had 10 years after the Cold War to build a new world order and yet we squandered them,” he said.
“The United States cannot tolerate anyone acting independently.
“Every US president has to have a war.”
The 1990 Nobel Peace Prize winner’s denunciation of the US mirrors the most belligerently anti-Western speeches of Vladimir Putin – who is said to consult Mr Gorbachev on foreign policy matters.
Mr Putin may be switching jobs to become prime minister, but many expect him to remain the most powerful figure in Russian politics.
Mr Gorbachev hinted that the former KGB spy could still direct Russia’s foreign policy, leaving President Medvedev – seen by some as more liberal than his mentor – to concentrate on internal matters.
Yet if Washington blames Mr Putin’s self-aggrandising rhetoric for the worst crisis in East-West relations since the Cold War, for Mr Gorbachev the blame lies entirely with the administration of President George W Bush.
“The problem is not with Russia,” he said, speaking at a friend’s château outside Paris.
“Russia does not have enemies and Putin is not going to start a war against the United States or any other country for that matter.
“Yet we see the United States approving a military budget and the defence secretary pledging to strengthen conventional forces because of the possibility of a war with China or Russia.
“I sometimes have a feeling that the United States is going to wage war against the entire world.”
Last year, Robert Gates, the US defence secretary, told a congressional committee that America needed to boost military spending to counter myriad threats including the “uncertain paths of China and Russia”.
Those comments caused uproar in Russia, with pro-Kremlin newspapers claiming they heralded the start of a new Cold War.
Tensions have already been heightened by a US proposal to build a missile defence shield in Poland and the Czech Republic to counter a nuclear strike by Iran.
Mr Gorbachev, however, claimed the plans were an aggressive act against Russia.
“Erecting elements of missile defence is taking the arms race to the next level,” he said. “It is a very dangerous step.”
Relations have further deteriorated after Nato promised eventual membership to Georgia and Ukraine, a move interpreted by Mr Gorbachev as an attempt to extend America’s sphere of influence into Russia’s backyard.
“The Americans promised that Nato wouldn’t move beyond the boundaries of Germany after the Cold War but now half of central and eastern Europe are members, so what happened to their promises? It shows they cannot be trusted.”
For a man hailed as one of the heroes of the 20th century, Mr Gorbachev, now 77, often sounded like the ageing hardliners he struggled against in the Kremlin during the 1980s.
He railed against a “military-industrial complex” that he insisted was the “real government” of the US and, quoting a Russian documentary on state television, suggested that Margaret Thatcher had supplied weapons to Chechen terrorists.
Still, while Mr Gorbachev may be delighted by the rebirth of what many see as Russian imperialism, many wonder whether he approves of the way in which Mr Putin has eroded freedom of expression to such an extent that some claim glasnost is dead.
“I do not think that glasnost is dead in Russia,” he said.
“There is a phenomenon in the West to criticise Putin’s domestic record. But in Russia he has mass support. His popularity ratings are 70 to 80 percent.
“Is this not democracy?”
Categories: Communism · New World Order · Perpetual War
Hart hails a “New World of globalization, eroding national sovereignty and a revolutionary changes in warfare.”
Why Is Gary Hart So Fearful Of Discussing His “New World Order”?
CFR member contradictory, deceitful about context of term - ex-Senator repeats warning that Neo-Cons looking to stage incident as pretext to attack Iran
by Paul Joseph Watson
Note the black inverted pentagram behind him on the Democratic Leadership poster - PW
Former Senator Gary Hart seems to be having difficulties remembering his last lie because he fouled up again in his latest confrontation with We Are Change by reversing his assertion that he never used the term “new world order,” contradicting his previous falsehood, but still seemed fearful of discussing exactly what the term meant.
In the clip, Luke Rudkowski quotes Hart’s response to 9/11 at a September 12th Council on Foreign Relations in which he called for the disaster to be used to “make lemonade out of lemons” and create a “new world order”.
Hart lies by claiming the term was only used to highlight right-wing hostility to the phrase “new world order” which is completely false as you will see later and he also contradicts his previous response to the question in which he claimed to have never used the phrase “new world order” in his life.
Seemingly wary of the fact that a lot of people know exactly what “new world order” means now (global government, loss of sovereignty and individual liberty), Hart is frightened of admitting to using the phrase and refuses to discuss its meaning.
Categories: Crime & Corruption · Global Government · Globalization · Operation 9/11 · Perpetual War · Social Engineering · Terror Psyops · Uncategorized
By Joby Warrick
Swelling populations and a global tide of immigration will present new security challenges for the United States by straining resources and stoking extremism and civil unrest in distant corners of the globe, CIA Director Michael V. Hayden said in a speech yesterday.
The population surge could undermine the stability of some of the world’s most fragile states, especially in Africa, while in the West, governments will be forced to grapple with ever larger immigrant communities and deepening divisions over ethnicity and race, Hayden said.
Hayden, speaking at Kansas State University, described the projected 33 percent growth in global population over the next 40 years as one of three significant trends that will alter the security landscape in the current century. By 2050, the number of humans on Earth is expected to rise from 6.7 billion to more than 9 billion, he said.
“Most of that growth will occur in countries least able to sustain it, a situation that will likely fuel instability and extremism, both in those countries and beyond,” Hayden said.
With the population of countries such as Niger and Liberia projected to triple in size in 40 years, regional governments will be forced to rapidly find food, shelter and jobs for millions, or deal with restive populations that “could be easily attracted to violence, civil unrest, or extremism,” he said.
European countries, many of which already have large immigrant communities, will see particular growth in their Muslim populations while the number of non-Muslims will shrink as birthrates fall. “Social integration of immigrants will pose a significant challenge to many host nations — again boosting the potential for unrest and extremism,” Hayden said.
The CIA director also predicted a widening gulf between Europe and North America on how to deal with security threats, including terrorism. While U.S. and European officials agree on the urgency of the terrorism threat, there is a fundamental difference — a “transatlantic divide” — over the solution, he said.
While the United States sees the fight against terrorism as a global war, European nations perceive the terrorist threat as a law enforcement problem, he said.
“They tend not to view terrorism as we do, as an overwhelming international challenge. Or if they do, we often differ on what would be effective and appropriate to counter it,” Hayden said. He added that he could not predict “when or if” the two sides could forge a common approach to security.
A third security trend highlighted by Hayden was the emergence of China as a global economic and military powerhouse, pursuing its narrow strategic and political interests. But Hayden said China’s increasing prominence need not be perceived as a direct challenge to the United States.
“If Beijing begins to accept greater responsibility for the health of the international system, as all global powers should, we will remain on a constructive, even if competitive, path,” he said. “If not, the rise of China begins to look more adversarial.”
Related
Revolution, flashmobs, and brain chips. A grim vision of the future
Categories: Borders and Immigration · Depopulation · Economic Meltdown · Hegelian Dialectic · Islam · Perpetual War · Police State · Social Degeneration · Social Engineering · Terror Psyops
Old-Thinker News | May 4, 2008
By Daniel Taylor
In July of 1994 the U.S. Army War College Strategic Studies Institute (SSI) produced the paper titled Revolution In Military Affairs And Conflict Short Of War that uncannily forecasted the future in a “hypothetical future history” written in the year 2010.
The hypothetical situation contains many disturbing predictions, several of which have come true, some partially. After a series of terrorist attacks, foreign policy “fiascos” and various disputes between “supporters of multinational peace operations” and “isolationists”, a small number of “revolutionaries” recruits members in all branches of the U.S. government and shift American foreign policy to a practice of pre-emption.
Computer generated insurgents claim responsibility for attacks that U.S. forces carry out, pharmaceutical drugs are used as a part of national security strategy, “attitude shaping campaigns” are directed against the American people, traditional boundaries between military and law enforcement are abolished, subliminal conditioning is used in combination with propaganda, and bioelectric tags are implanted in citizens. By 2010 the revolutionaries’ goals were met.
All of this will likely sound eerily familiar to followers of current events, or for that matter anyone who lived to see the events of September 11th 2001, its resulting wars, and its truly “revolutionary” effects in the reorganization of government and law. The Bush administration’s signature legislation, the Patriot Act, has infringed on multiple sections of the Bill of Rights and Constitution. Posse Comitatus, which has protected Americans from the military engaging in domestic law enforcement since 1807 was reversed when the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 was passed last year.
The Neoconservatives reign in the United States holds striking similarities to the scenario outlined in the 1994 SSI report. Interestingly, the document clearly stated that, “Saddam Hussein’s Iraq or the other Third World caricatures of the Soviet Union are perfect opponents for a RMA-type [Revolution in Military Affairs] military.”
Categories: Big Brother Surveillance Society · Big Pharma · Bioweapons · Depopulation · Global Government · Intelligence Agencies · Mind Control · Perpetual War · Police State · Social Engineering
Predictive programming: Government agents release swarms of robotic spiders which jump onto the faces of innocent citizens forcing them to endure retinal scans in the movie Minority Report.
By DANIEL COCHLIN
It may have seemed like just another improbable scene from a Hollywood sci-fi flick – Tom Cruise battling against an army of robotic spiders intent on hunting him down.
But the storyline from Minority Report may not be quite as far fetched as it sounds.
British defence giant BAE Systems is creating a series of tiny electronic spiders, insects and snakes that could become the eyes and ears of soldiers on the battlefield, helping to save thousands of lives.
Plans for a robot that can crawl like a spider are ‘well developed’
Prototypes could be on the front line by the end of the year, scuttling into potential danger areas such as booby-trapped buildings or enemy hideouts to relay images back to troops safely positioned nearby.
Soldiers will carry the robots into combat and use a small tracked vehicle to transport them closer to their targets.
Then they would swarm into the building and relay images back to the soldiers’ hand-held or wrist-mounted computers, warning them of any threats inside.
BAE Systems has just signed a £19million contract to develop the robots for the US Army.
Researchers hope they will eventually create machines that can fly like a butterfly
Plans for a creature that can crawl like a spider are said to be well developed, and researchers eventually hope to be able to create creatures that can slither like a snake or fly like a dragonfly.
While some of the creatures will be fitted with small cameras, others will be equipped with sensors that will be able to detect the presence of chemical, biological or radioactive weapons.
A computer-generated video from BAE Systems shows the tiny invaders being released by a soldier, before scouting out a suspect building, which is finally blown up by ground forces.
BAE Systems scientists from the UK and America plan an army of the electronic bugs, and have ambitions to equip every front-line soldier with them.
Programme manager Steve Scalera was inspired by the way creatures use their senses to detect danger.
“What we are doing is providing an enhanced awareness for soldiers, basically an extension to their eyes and ears,” he said.
“The creatures have external sensors. They can be tossed out into a building or a cave or even a pile of rubble and then send images back to the troops.
“The idea is to get a number of these working together – some tiny, some maybe up to a foot in length, and all going into a building together carrying out different tasks. Eventually we hope to have animals flying and slithering.
“The five-year programme has just started but we could have them with soldiers within six months, and then continue to develop the concept as the project goes along.”
Despite the high-tech gadgetry involved, BAE Systems insists once production is in full swing, each bug will cost no more than £100 to produce.
The Ministry of Defence declined to comment.
Related
Minority Report: A Dystopic Vision
When government agents search for Anderton, they release swarms of tiny, robotic “spiders” which leap onto the faces of innocent citizens and force them to endure retinal scans.
Categories: AI Robotics · Advanced Weaponry · Big Brother Surveillance Society · Perpetual War · Predictive Programming · Social Engineering
