Today Steve Aftergood at Secrecy Blog posts a .pdf from the national labs explaining that special secret drone propulsion systems/technology has been canceled due to “poltical conditions.”
A certain technology that could extend the mission duration and capabilities of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) was favorably assessed last year by scientists at Sandia National Laboratories and Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation. But they concluded regretfully that “current political conditions will not allow use of the results.”
The assessment was carried out to explore the feasibility of next generation UAVs. The objective was “to increase UAV sortie duration from days to months while increasing available electrical power at least two-fold,” according to a June 2011 Sandia project summary.
Although the the developers of this new potential drone propulsion power system do not specifically name it in the .pdf from Sandia, the technology and studies most probably stem from use of nuclear materials — radioisotopes and the power-generating processes of fission and radio-decay.
This triggers recall of the secret Timber Wind project of the Nineties, ideas and hardware for use of nuclear reactors in rocket propulsion, born of the same lab featured in today’s announcement.
Aftergood and FAS blew the lid off Timber Wind and the resulting sunlight caused it to wither and die. Global concern over potential US tests and flying of nuclear reactor run rockets did not count as good publicity.
The discovery of the hyper-classified Timber Wind program was an inspiration for the FAS Project on Government Secrecy, since we considered it a compelling instance of classification abuse … Timber Wind was canceled shortly after it became public, and other nuclear rocket initiatives likewise faded away in the 1990s, as the effort to develop nuclear rocketry for military or civilian applications surged and then collapsed, leaving behind only a bunch of good stories.
Today’s post at Secrecy blog also shows that even the boffins of bad ideas are occasionally compelled to admit the atrocious quality of some of the things they come up with preclude them ever being implemented.
Yes, news or even rumors of killer drones loaded with radioisotopes and fission products for purposes of propulsion over the impoverished regions of the world to hunt terrorists and civilians who are in the wrong place — that would really generate the good will. Even moreso than now.
Today I’m reprinting material from many years back, a piece I wrote for the Wall Street Journal, and a bit from Rob Slade’s old Springer-Verlag book on computer viruses.
This in an add-on to the Voice of America blog post on cyberwar and Iran falling prey to the now over twenty year old joke.
Indeed, the editors and reporter Doug Bernard at Voice of America could have avoided the entire thing.
In e-mail yesterday, one of the sources for the story — it’s not too hard to figure out who (look for the “cyber doom” quote) — remarked in e-mail he would have warned VOA’s journalist about it if it had been mentioned in interview — but it wasn’t.)
VOA News did not respond to two of my notifications to them on the matter.
The Gulf War virus hoax story remains relevant, even though I wish it didn’t, simply because the nature of it plays so well to mainstream discussions on cyberwar. Almost all these greatly rely on exaggeration, fantastic claims and the painting of apocalyptic scenarios which make the alleged discombobulation of an Iraqi air defense system in 1991 seem quaint.
Again, since the Gulf War virus hoax writings are now so old, you can’t find the originals on the web. (Well, you can find some material but it’s not at the fingertips.)
Reprints begin below.
Truth is the first casualty of cyberwar by George Smith, Wall Street Journal, September 8, 1998.
Reprinted with permission of The Wall Street Journal c 1998. Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
Concern is growing in many quarters that society’s reliance on computers has made it extremely vulnerable to attack via keyboard. Journalist James Adams has written a new book, “The Next World War,” which claims that information warfare will be the battleground of the future. At the Pentagon, military theorists ponder how to defend America against hackers in the employ of a foreign power who might use the Internet to turn off the electricity, paralyze the armed forces, cause corporations to crumble and write dirty words on your Web site.
Before you run screaming from your computer and haul the old manual typewriter out of the closet, look closely at the source of these cyber-scares. It turns out that many of them are information-age ghost stories that get spookier with every telling.
Mr. Adams’s book passes along a couple of hoary tales. The first revolves around the idea that the National Security Agency developed a computer virus for use in the Gulf War. Supposedly secreted in the hardware of computer equipment destined for Iraq–printers, in the most popular variation–the virus was somehow designed to bushwhack Iraqi air defense computers hooked to the same network. This is implausible on its face: A printer has neither the hardware space nor the capability to spontaneously transmit programs, which is what computer viruses are, to other computers on a network.
The printer-virus story is very similar to an April Fool’s joke published in a 1991 issue of Infoworld magazine. The story was subsequently picked up in “Triumph Without Victory,” U.S. News & World Report’s book on the Gulf War. Many have fallen for it besides Mr. Adams. In 1997, a Hudson Institute researcher gave it credence in an analysis of “Russian Views on Electronic and Information Warfare.”
The second beguiling myth perpetuated by Mr. Adams and many others is that of the electromagnetic pulse gun. Since at least 1992, teenage hackers desperate for media attention have been spinning elaborate tales about this exotic weapon, usually said to be cobbled together out of a few hundred dollars worth of electronic trinkets, radio antennae, bailing wire and automobile batteries. This electronic rifle is allegedly capable of destroying computers by firing an assortment of electromagnetic waves. Mr. Adams reprints part of a 1996 interview in Forbes ASAP in which a hacker insists these are the “poor man’s nuke.” At a hackers’ convention in Las Vegas, one participant– appropriately named “Ph0n-E”–even showed off a bogus contraption that he claimed was a pulse gun.
Obviously, the genesis of this idea lies in a 1962 nuclear test whose electromagnetic pulses famously blocked radio communications. But no one has been able to overcome the basic physics problem of packing these pulses into a gun: Any such weapon would have an effective range of only a few feet while requiring a power supply so large it would severely burn, if not kill, whoever fired the weapon.
Indeed, no genuine pulse gun has ever been produced for examination. But that hasn’t stopped Congress’s Joint Economic Committee from holding two unintentionally amusing hearings, in June 1997 and February 1998, on the matter. Apocryphal claims have even spread that unnamed British financial institutions have had their computers electrocuted by such weapons.
Some other cyberwar myths making the rounds:
In 1997, Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s commission on reducing government secrecy issued a report containing a chapter devoted to computer security. In a boxed-out quote, the commission uncritically reported: “One company whose officials met with the Commission warned its employees against reading an e-mail entitled Penpal. . . . Although the message appeared to be a friendly letter, it contained a virus that could infect the hard drive and destroy all data present.” Actually Penpal is a notorious Internet hoax. In this instance, the pranksters took in a commission whose members included former intelligence agency chiefs John Deutch and Martin Faga. The spring issue of the U.S. Army War College’s scholarly journal, Parameters, contained an article by Lt. Col. Timothy L. Thomas that soberly mentioned a computer virus called Russian Virus 666 allegedly capable of putting computer users into a trance in which they could be made to suffer from arrhythmia of the heart. The virus’s satanic name should have been a tip-off. Yet while no one would give credence to a military publication that wrote about, say, salvaging weapons technology from UFOs, readers seem to leave logic behind when the subject is computers. In the December 1996 issue of the FBI’s Law Enforcement Bulletin, two academics, Andra Katz of Wichita State University and David Carter of Michigan State, discuss the “Clinton virus” which was “designed to infect programs, but . . . eradicates itself when it cannot decide which program to infect.” To the chagrin of the authors, the indecisive “Clinton virus” was revealed to be another Internet joke.
Oh well, look at the bright side: Cyberwar is cheap. Dueling jokes, myths and hoaxes cost almost nothing to produce and even less to spread.
Mr. Smith is the editor of The Crypt Newsletter, an Internet publication about computer crime and information warfare.
Computer security and virus expert Rob Slade also addressed the Gulf War virus hoax in his book, forthrightly entitled “Rob Slade’s Guide to Computer Viruses,” published by Springer in 1995.
In a section on virus myths:
In early 1992, there were reports of a virus that shut down Iraq’s air defense system during Desert Shield/Storm. This seems to have started in Triumph Without Victory … and the serialization of the book by US News and World Report. The articles were rerun in many papers … and the article on the virus that ran in my local paper is specifically credited to US News & World Report. The bare bones of the article are that a French printer was to be smuggled into Iraq through Jordan; that US agents intercepted the printer and replaced a microchip in the printer with one reprogrammed by the NSA; and that a virus on the reprogrammed chip invaded the air defense network to which the printer was connected and erased information on display screens when “windows” were opened for additional information on aircraft.
[Longer technical discussion omitted.]
There is … a much more telling piece of evidence supporting the mythical status of what became known as the Desert Storm virus. Infoworld (April 1991) carried an article reporting a computer virus that US authorities had used to shut down Iraqi computer systems. The Infoworld article, to careful readers, an obvious April Fool’s joke (supported by the name of the virus, AF/91). The article ended with the warning that the virus was out of control and was now spreading through system in the Western world. It was a spoof of the new Windows 3 program, the popularity of which was startling industry analysts.
Although the Triumph Without Victory story was confirmed by sources in the Pentagon, the similarities to the Infoworld AF/91 prank article are simply too great. This is obviously a case of official “sources” taking their own information from gossip that had mutated from reports of the joke …
One of the other rules of thumb in thinking critically on these matters: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, not just someone’s say so.
Voice of America has opened up a new blog called Digital Frontiers.
Reads the banner: “This is the first of a series of Digital Frontiers features, exploring how international tensions translate to the online world.”
That’s nice.
VOA journalist Doug Bernard, writing from Washington, DC, in the first post from Digital Frontiers, leads with:
On January 17th, 1991, as the 34-nation coalition of Operation Desert Storm prepared for its first aerial bombardment of targets in Iraq, the U.S. military sprung a surprise.
Iraqi radar screens suddenly blinked and went dark, momentarily blinding Saddam Hussein’s military. The “Kari” radar control system had been infected with a computer virus, planted and controlled by the Pentagon. “It was a French system,” notes intelligence historian Matthew Aid of the Iraqi radar control. “They gave us the schematics and we found a way to insert some buggies into their system as the first wave of American bombers streaked toward Baghdad.”
It worked brilliantly. Iraq’s defenses were paralyzed, allied bombers faced no serious opposition, and the U.S. became the first-ever nation to launch a documented cyber-attack.
In a post entitled, “The Coming Cyberwar with Iran?” the piece goes on to muse about what is and what is not real about cyberwar.
Yes, there is some irony in the hard stone that the very first example of a real cyberattack used is a now notorious joke in computer security circles.
Did U.S. infowar commandos smuggle a deadly computer virus into Iraq inside a printer? Of course not. So why does it keep getting reported?
“ Many have been enthralled by the Gulf War virus’ siren call, almost all in efforts to hold up some proof of the magical power of information warfare. ”
A creepy enthusiasm for tales of weird weapons rises as war approaches … In this environment, where everyone charges full speed ahead for the hot scoop or astonishing apocrypha, even the oldest hoaxes can return for one more bow.
In a February piece for the Memphis Commercial Appeal, a retired air force man mused on the subject of information warfare and how it might be used to strike Iraq down. Dabbling in a little history, the author recounted how in Gulf War I the U.S. drew up plans to take down an Iraqi anti-aircraft system with “specially designed computer viruses [to] infect the system from within. Agents inserted the virus in a printer shipped to an Iraqi air defense site.”
Special Forces men were also said to have infiltrated Iraq, where they dug up a fiber-optic cable and jammed a computer virus into it. “It remained dormant until the opening moments of the air war, when it went active…” wrote the columnist. Iraq’s air defense system was vanquished.
Frankly, this is a great story. It’s amusing to remember how it kicked up a storm in 1991 after its initial appearance as an April Fool’s joke in Infoworld magazine.
The gag asserted the National Security Agency had developed the computer virus to disable Iraqi air defense computers by eating windows — “gobbling them at the edges…” The virus, called AF/91, was smuggled into Iraq through Jordan, hidden in a chip in a printer — the latter being a distinguishing feature of many subsequent appearances of the hoax.
Chat board gossip on it echoed for days, not only from people who thought the joke quite funny, but also those who missed the original citation and engaged in laborious discussion on the imagined technology of the virus.
Inevitably, a large media organization got wind of the story and pounced without bothering to track down the tale’s provenance.
U.S. News & World Report published news of the Gulf War virus in its coverage of the war, a narrative that also found its way into “Triumph Without Victory,” the magazine’s subsequent book on Desert Storm.
The Gulf War virus, wrote U.S. News, attacked Saddam’s defenses by “devouring windows” Iraqi defenders used to check on aspects of their air defense system. “Each time a technician opened a window … the window would disappear and the information would vanish.” The virus was “smuggled to Baghdad through Amman, Jordan” in chips inside a printer.
From there, the bogus story was reported by the Associated Press, CNN, ABC Nightline, and newspapers across the country.
When queried about the tale’s uncanny resemblance to the Infoworld joke, Brian Duffy, the primary author of the U.S. News article (and now executive editor of the magazine) stubbornly defended his sources — “senior officials” all. In a follow-up Associated Press article outlining the imbroglio, Duffy maintained he had “no doubt” that U.S. intelligence agents had carried out the Gulf War virus attack, but admitted similarities to the Infoworld joke were “obviously troubling.” Duffy’s sources, were, of course, anonymous.
Many have been enthralled by the Gulf War virus’ siren call through the decade, almost all in efforts to hold up some proof of the magical power of information warfare.
In the March 1999 issue of Popular Mechanics magazine, in a piece on cyberwar, the publication wrote: “In the days following the Gulf War, stories circulated that [cyber] weapons had been unleashed on the Iraqi air defense system.” The nefarious printers were again used containing “chips [with] programs designed to infect and disrupt…”
A Hudson Institute analyst peddling a paper on Russian thoughts on cyberwar fell for it and when confronted aggressively argued that it was true because, well, just because. [As a result, she fell into disrepute and never published much again.]
Other appearances include an allegedly seminal book on computer combat entitled “The Next World War.” In this instance, the miraculous Gulf War virus failed to do its job because the U.S. Air Force accidentally bombed the building where Iraq stored the virus-laden printers. The author went on to found an infosecurity firm known for its publicity-happy hyperbolic proclamations on cyberwar. [The firm eventually declared bankruptcy.]
Why was the hoax so successful?
The easy answer is to simply call everyone who falls for the joke a momentary idiot. But the Gulf War virus plays to a uniquely American trait: a child-like belief in gadgets and technology and the people who make them as answers to everything. Secret National Security Agency computer scientists made viruses that hobbled Saddam’s anti-air defense without firing a shot! Or maybe it didn’t work but it sure was a good plan!
In this respect, the joke is ageless. People are just as able to nebulously theorize about the tech of it and its implications in 2003 as they were in 1991. Will an updated version of the nonexistent AF/91 virus be used against unwired Iraq? Stay tuned… April 1st is less than a month away.
Now over two decades old you can still find uninformed US military men, who’ve read about the alleged thing in some “authoritative” source that passed it on years ago, passing it on while adding their own measure of brio.
In the same way myths and apocryphal stories pick up additional dander over time: “They gave us the schematics and we found a way to insert some buggies into their system as the first wave of American bombers streaked toward Baghdad.”
Thrilling!
“The term cyberwar is really just a marketing gimmick,” says the same man, peddling a book “considered the definitive history of the super-secret National Security Agency, or NSA.”
Today the Post ran a piece on development, or the lack of it, of cyberweapons by the US military. The US government still spends way more on cyberdefense.
“To affect a system, you have to have access to it, and we have not perfected the capability of reaching out and accessing a system at will that is not connected to the Internet,” said Joel Harding, an independent consultant who is a former military officer and former director of the Information Operations Institute.
Even if an operator gains access, he said, “unless you already have custom-written code for a system, chances are we don’t have a weapon for that because each system has different software and updates.”
The reporter runs down a small list of incidents from wars in last few years which may have involved cyberweapons, all with iffy, virtually non-existent or mixed results. Almost all the sources are anonymous.
“Some experts believe that Israel may have used a cyberweapon to blind Syrian radar before bombing a suspected nuclear facility in September 2007, but several former U.S. officials say that the technique more likely used was conventional electronic warfare or radar jamming using signals emitted from an airplane,” reads the Post.
However, in many circles, belief in a magical quality for cyberweapons remains strong. It has to do with American society, and I summarized it in 2003 when writing about the longevity of belief in the Gulf War virus hoax:
[The] Gulf War virus [played] to a uniquely American trait: a child-like belief in gadgets and technology and the people who make them as answers to everything.
Automated bad publicity. I like it. So I still want to know when they’ll be put out to pasture so they can get back to burning ants with magnifying glasses and engineering applications to pull the wings off flies.
As told Sunday here, the military non-lethal weapons directorate rolled this out for journalists in yet another attempt to fellate the dead dog back to life.
Over the last decade, the US military’s pain ray — a clumsy weapon that uses millimeter waves to burn the outer skin layer of targets by making the water molecules twitch — has been a public relations disaster.
No one wants to see their career go down in flames over it, accused of torturing civilians. Sent to Afghanistan, it was withdrawn without being used. One can only imagine how popular it would be there now, with what looks like the entire country, except for the paid toadies, up in arms over the American presence.
A sensation of unbearable, sudden heat seems to come out of nowhere — this wave, a strong electromagnetic beam, is the latest non-lethal weapon unveiled by the US military this week.
“You’re not gonna see it, you’re not gonna hear it, you’re not gonna smell it: you’re gonna feel it,” explained US Marine Colonel Tracy Taffola, director the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate, Marine Corps Base Quantico, at a demonstration for members of the media.
Taffola is quick also to point out the “Active Denial System” beam, while powerful and long-range, some 1000 meters (0.6 miles), is the military’s “safest non-lethal capability” that has been developed over 15 years but never used in the field.
It was deployed briefly in Afghanistan in 2010, but never employed in an operation.
The technology has attracted safety concerns possibly because the beam is often confused with the microwaves commonly used by consumers to rapidly heat food.
“There are a lot of misperceptions out there,” lamented Taffola, saying the Pentagon was keen to make clear what the weapon is, and what it is not.
The Pentagon has not yet decided to order any of the ADS system, but Taffola said they would be ready if asked.
From where I stand there’s little misperception. It’s viewed as a weapon for use in torturing unarmed civilians. And it has no application against an armed angry crowd, as opposed to journalists who, over the years by virtually hundreds, have gamely consented to be shot by it in return for a story.
More recently, it’s maker — Raytheon — has tried to peddle a smaller version into California prisons, where it could be used to shoot prisoners rioting in an enclosed room.
And it would seem fairly obvious its makers saw an opening for revival when the OWS crowds hit streets nationwide late last year. (DD blog wrote on the non-lethal arms peddlers being ready for this, here.)
It would also appear obvious the same people would be advocates for its use against Afghans rioting over the burning of Qurans.
The pain ray’s most remarkable property has been the doggedness of its salesmen. For over a decade they, along with a considerable number of journalists, have tried to sell this odious thing onto Americans streets and the desperate places of the world. And they have, somewhat surprisingly, failed again and again at it.
The pain ray has been in newspapers, magazines, on the Internet and on television, from 60 Minutes to Futureweapons on cable, all to no avail.
Yet.
So my question, perhaps rhetorical, is when will the people pushing it be, justifiably. reassigned or fired?
Look guys, you’ve had long enough. Can’t you just go back to burning ants with a magnifying glass or something?
Looking ahead 20 years was the subject of my last question posed to readers. The responses varied in tone …
A comprehensive perspective was contributed by L.R.K., from South Euclid, whose full comments appear online.
He has a cautionary view of the future …
“What will the world look like in twenty years? That is a very interesting question. I wrestle with it because my grandchildren will be in their mid-20s then. In the next 20 years we, the United States, will be or have been engaged in at least two regional wars. I don’t like the idea; but our enemies tend to choose us (as with Afghanistan) rather then we them (as with Iraq). My nightmare is not a nuclear war, which although possible is not likely, but an EMP attack which would put American society back to the 1820s. It would be totally devastating, and also relatively inexpensive, and therefore is more likely.”
The Cult of Electromagnetic Pulse Crazy is everywhere, indelibly written into a unique mythology alleged modern Americans hold dear.
At the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, androids and jargon reign.
How do we know?
From the agency’s solicitations for design proposals, compelling evidence showing no trace of human thought or need for skills in use of the English language.
DARPA’s Adaptive Vehicle Make portfolio programs is aimed at compressing at least five-fold the development timelines for new complex cyber-electro-mechanical systems such as military vehicles. Under AVM, DARPA is pursuing the development of several elements of enabling infrastructure aimed at radically transforming the systems engineering/design/verification (META2/META-II), manufacturing (IFAB)
and innovation (vehicleforge.mil) elements of the overall make process for delivering new defense systems or variants. Each of these capabilities is largely generic, i.e, applicable to any cyber-electro-mechanical system.
In order to excercise these capabilities in the context of a relevant military system, DARPA intends to build FANG — the Fast, Adaptable
Next Generation Ground Vehicle — a new heavy infantry fighting vehicle …
The on-going META program is on track to deliver an integrated capability for: [rest of astonishing run-on sentence deleted] …
DARPA recognizes that the metalanguage specification developed and being refined under the META program and associated follow on efforts is key to the representation of component and context models to be developed under TA1 and TA2. Similarly, the manufacturing model specification being developed under the IFAB program is essential to the representation data assembled under TA3. While these efforts are incomplete , they are mature enough to form the basis of this effort under this BAA …
And, yes, that was as excruciating to transcribe as it was to read.
It cannot have been produced by warm-blooded humans.
Where the whatevers that composed it made on our planet? If not, when did they arrive here?
And what is it like to be in a lunch room with them?
Questions which, obviously, have no answers. The META, perhaps not developed under the TA1 and TA2, does not fit the BAA.
A no byline story on the website of the South Korean newspaper, the Chosun Ilbo, discusses the always said to be coming but never quite arriving electromagnetic pulse bomb.
A military officer who asked to remain anonymous on Sunday claimed South Korea has developed basic technology that will one day allow it to produce a so-called electromagnetic pulse bomb capable of paralyzing all electronic equipment. The bomb is a kind of Bigfoot of warfare.
“But another military source said the technology is a long way from being usable as a weapon,” concludes the paper.
File under: Cult of Electromagnetic Pulse Crazy, SK office.
This week James Arbuthnot, a Tory member of Parliament brought the Cult of Electromagnetic Pulse Crazy to the UK, resulting in a burst of stories on how England could be thrown back to the time of the movie, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, or whatever passes for it in merry Old England.
The Defence Select Committee said the resulting radiation pulse could disrupt power and water supplies, UK defence and satellite navigation systems.
Its chairman, Tory MP James Arbuthnot, said an attack was “quite likely”.
Mr Arbuthnot added: “it would actually have a far more devastating effect to use a nuclear weapon in this way than to explode a bomb in or on a city. The reason for that is it would, over a much wider area, take out things like the National Grid, on which we all rely for almost everything, take out the water system, the sewage system.
“And rapidly it would become very difficult to live in cities. I mean within a matter of a couple of days.
“I wish the government would address this with rather more energy and cohesion and focus. I think sooner rather than later.”
A quick look at it shows part of the Conservative Party mesmerized by the US Cult of EMP Crazy lobby, specifically EMPAct America, and one of its old members, Avi Schnurr. Schnurr is also part of the Bomb Iran/Israeli missile defense lobby and here he is in an old YouTube video for EMPAct America.
“Airplanes could fall from the sky,” he says. It would be back to the days of horse and buggy, no ice cubes in the ice tray, and so on. Readers know the script.
See the witnesses list here and the list of presented “evidence,” here.
And reliance on EMPAct America’s old study, referred to as the EMP Commission Report is shown here.
Schnurr testified on non-nuclear electromagnetic pulse weapons also, a favorite topic of EMPAct America, for at least a decade.
Non-nuclear EMP weapons, like radiofrequency weapons, can damage and destroy electronics locally. Such weapons have short ranges, kilometers for some military systems to meters for devices improvised by terrorists or criminals. Industrial EMP simulators, intended to test commercial systems for hardness against interference from stray electronic and radio emissions, are on the open market and can be purchased by anyone. At least one such EMP simulator is designed to look like a suitcase, can be operated by an individual, and is powerful enough to damage or destroy the electronic controls that regulate the operation of transformers and other components of the power grid. Armed with such a device, and with some knowledge about the electric grid, a terrorist or lunatic could blackout a city.[36]
44. Avi Schnurr said:
The biggest issue with non-nuclear EMP weapons is that the complexity and threshold required to produce them is minimal, to say the most. At the summit meeting in Washington DC, for example, there were two Assistant Secretaries of Defence, a Deputy Under-Secretary and the Pentagon’s chief lawyer, all of whom expressed grave concerns over this risk—the non-nuclear EMP risk in particular, but the risk of EMP in general. The non-nuclear EMP risk is much shorter-range. However, that range, which could be 100 metres, a fraction of a kilometre or a kilometre—under certain circumstances, which I could discuss separately, it could be multiple kilometres—includes the risk of having a field strength that would be even greater, although limited in extent, than a nuclear EMP [...]. We had a speaker at that summit who described, to the extent he was allowed to describe it, a device that he built from hardware he acquired from retail stores in the United States, which he had built into a van.[37]
45. A number of nations are thought to be undertaking research into the development of non-nuclear EMP attack weapons, but the Government does not currently regard them as a serious risk …
In the main, Arbuthnot’s report for Parliament relies entirely on material now five to ten years old, and entirely the product of the US electromagnetic pulse defense lobby.
