Updates for the Month of October 2012
1 Oct 2012
Pain along spine continues, with headaches, chest pain and difficult breathing, swollen tongue, pain in throat. I have no plans of returning to new york as I have never considered it a my home, nothing but trouble from that state as well as trouble from here.Abdominal pain increasing, starting to have massive abdominal and spinal pain.
The connect is between my ex mother and the cohorts employed to help her over trivial matters
This is induced biophysical stress in other to produce and desired effect
The african American female in the red shirt flinging insults and bin demeaning body language on Kamehameha highway as I drive to school is subject to observation just as she performs her psyops antics in my direction the same goes for the others
When you poke a bear, bees nest, lions tigers etc capriciously they will snap at you.
My outlook has not so much changes, as I had suspect it is ironic for Hawaii to make the dispositions it makes all the while elements within the stat harass its citizens and residents.
I wonder how this will go over at the UN.
Whether someone instigate to make it look so is beyond me in the game o f divide and conquer there are numerous shadows and machinations..
Do you not think it strange that candidate Romney’s advisors advise him and his company to take the stance he does and the sitting occupant of the current white house advisors advises him and company to take the stance he does. Despite the will and desire s of the people
All in the name of democracy
all under the guise of representation
All one big illusion
dived and conquered
The Russian Federation takes notice and thus protects itself.
2 Oct 2012
Pain along spine continues, with headaches, chest pain and difficult breathing, swollen tongue, pain in throat. I have no plans of returning to new york as I have never considered it a my home, nothing but trouble from that state as well as trouble from here.Abdominal pain increasing, starting to have massive abdominal and spinal pain.
How sweden became what it is today:
Some Remarks on the US/UK Submarine Deception
In Swedish Waters in the 1980s
International Peace Research Institute Oslo
After a Soviet Whiskey submarine was stranded in 1981 in the Swedish
archipelago, massive submarine intrusions took place within Swedish
waters – later described as the first Soviet military initiative against a
Western European state since the Berlin crisis.1 After a dramatic hunt in
1982, a parliamentary commission stated that six Soviet submarines had
‘played their games’ in the Stockholm archipelago – one even in Stockholm
harbour. The Swedish government protested strongly, and relations between
the two countries were icy for several years.2
Today, all evidence for Soviet intrusions appears to have been
manipulated, or simply invented. Classified documents point to covert US
and UK activity. Former US secretary of defense Caspar Weinberger stated
that Western submarines operated ‘regularly’ and ‘frequently’ in Swedish
waters in order to ‘test’ the Swedish coastal defences, and former British
navy minister Sir Keith Speed confirms the existence of such operations.
Royal Navy submarine captains admit having carried out top-secret
operations in Swedish waters, and that a member of Cabinet signed
approval for every single operation.
In a new book, The Secret War Against Sweden – US and British
Submarine Deception in the 1980s, published by Frank Cass (Naval Series),
I discuss these problems in detail. I have used a large amount of now
declassified or partly declassified documents from the submarine hunt as
well as hundreds of interviews with senior officers and local commanders as
well as interviews with officers and officials in various Western countries.
This article is based on material from this almost 400-page volume, which
also includes maps and excerpts from documents. The maps in this article
are derived from this book.
The author is a Research Professor at the International Peace Research Institute in
Oslo (PRIO) and was for several years heading its Foreign and Security Policy
Program. In 1987, he published a report for the Swedish Defence Research
Establishment about the US Maritime Strategy and Scandinavian geopolitics, pre-
supposing Soviet submarine intrusions into Swedish waters. The report was used as
one of two major textbooks for the Swedish Military College. Two years later, he
wrote a larger volume on the same theme, Cold Water Politics – US Maritime
Strategy and Geopolitics of the Northern Front (London: Sage, 1989), he visited the
Naval War College in Newport and lectured at the Center for Naval Analysis in
Washington and at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey. In the 1990s, more
and more indications pointed to covert US and UK activities. In 2000, after US
former secretary of defense Caspar Weinberger had spoken about US/NATO
submarines operating ‘regularly’ and ‘frequently’ in Swedish waters, the Swedish
government appointed Ambassador Rolf Ekéus as a one-man investigation of the
political and military dealing with the submarine incidents. Ekéus invited Tunander
as an expert to this investigation, which gave Tunander access to archival material
and interviews with military officers. He also made hundreds of interviews himself
for the book The Secret War Against Sweden – US and British Submarine Deception
in the 1980s (London: Frank Cass 2004, pp. 392).
The submarine incidents in Swedish waters in the 1980s had an enormous
impact on Swedish mentality and threat perceptions. In a report for the US
Air Force from 1990, Gordon McCormick writes:
Since 1980, Swedish sources indicate that an average rate of between
17 and 36 foreign operations are being conducted per year.… For
the first time Soviet intruders began to penetrate into the heart of
Sweden’s coastal defence zones, including the harbours and the
country’s major naval bases. More often than not, these operations
now involved the use of multiple submarines, mini-submarines, and
combat swimmers operating in a coordinated manner.3 (italics in
The submarine hunts were major media events. During a two-week hunt at
Muskö Naval Base 1982, journalists from all over the world visited the
Navy Press Centre. They filmed helicopters and small Swedish attack crafts
carrying out complex operations against the intruder and dropping large
numbers of depth charges. The anti-submarine war entered the living room
of every Swede, and many people believed that Sweden was already at war
with the Soviets. The submarine hunt was first-page news in US and
European newspapers, and the Swedish Commander-in-Chief, General
Lennart Ljung, talked about using ‘war methods in peace time’,4 and Prime
Minister Olof Palme said that the state responsible for the intrusions had to
consider that Swedish military forces might sink a submarine in Swedish
waters.5 From early 1984, Swedish Defence Minister Anders Thunborg was
given daily briefings about the submarine intrusions as if there were
continuous reports from the front.
Still, only on two occasions – after the stranded Whiskey submarine
in October 1981 and, in April 1983, after the presentation of the
parliamentary report on the 1982 submarine incidents – did the Swedish
government point to the Soviet Union and protest against Soviet intrusions.
In 1985, after four years of continued reported submarine intrusions,
Foreign Minister Lennart Bodström told the mass media that only in two
cases had it been proven that these sub-surface operations originated from
the Soviet Union, and that it was impossible to protest against an intruder
that had not been identified. The public, however, was convinced that all of
the intrusions originated from the Soviet Union and that the government
was adapting to Soviet pressure. According to journalists criticizing
Bodström, the Foreign Minister even seemed to express scepticism about
the 1982 incident and the Submarine Defence Commission Report that had
already pointed to the Soviets. Bodström’s statements were perceived as
unacceptable. A few months later, after a harsh political debate, Prime
Minister Olof Palme had to sacrifice his Foreign Minister.6
Today, these large and coordinated submarine operations along the
Swedish coast, deep inside the Swedish archipelagos with midget
submarines and Special Force divers appearing among the Swedish summer
houses, have become more of a mystery. It is now clear that the alleged
evidence presented to prove Soviet involvement in connection with the
1982 submarine hunt was invented for political reasons. In this dramatic
submarine hunt, which was presented as the final proof of the Soviets’
extremely provocative nature and demonstrated that all other intrusions
most likely originated from the USSR, the Swedes had nothing on the
Soviets. Rather, the evidence that has since emerged points in another
direction. These high-profile submarine operations appear as a form of US
and UK psychological warfare. They may possibly have been what William
Taylor recommended: ‘Psychological operations to induce the government
and/or population to resist Soviet intervention or psychological operations
to undercut support of an undesirable government.’7
The 1982 Operation in the Stockholm Archipelago
The submarine hunt at Muskö Naval Base, started on 1 October 1982. Less
than two weeks earlier, on 19 September, the Social Democratic Party had
won the parliamentary elections. The new government was due to replace
the previous Centre-Liberal government on 8 October. Whereas Prime
Minister Thorbjörn Fälldin’s government was on its way out, the new
Social-Democratic government of Olof Palme had not yet been established.
In September, NATO had carried out a naval exercise in the Baltic
Sea, BOLD GUARD. On 25 September, when this exercise was finished,
some of the US vessels went on a port visit to Stockholm, while others, a
cruiser and a frigate, went to Helsinki. The US cruiser USS Belknap, the
frigate USS Elmer Montgomery and the US Navy depot ship USS
Monongahela stayed in Stockholm on 25–27 September. After lunch on 27
September,8 they left for another naval exercise in the Baltic Sea, US
BALTOPS, which ended on 2 October. At 14.00 on 26 September, people
travelling with a small ferryboat saw a small silver-grey periscope in the
waters at Kastellholmen in central Stockholm only a few metres from US
cruiser Belknap and frigate Elmer Montgomery and not more than a few
hundred metres from the royal palace. Indeed, several people saw the
periscope. It was 35–40 centimetres high and 10–15 centimetres in
diameter. It turned around and displayed its aperture, and a detailed drawing
of the periscope was made by the couple on the ferryboat.9 This behaviour
is not typical for a covert operation, and does not indicate Soviet activity.
This submersible might have been part of a routine security arrangement for
the US ships: there is a long tradition of sabotage in foreign harbours,10 and
US ships would routinely have a sub-surface presence – usually in the form
of divers – to protect the ships from sabotage. Half a year later, when the
issue was brought up by the Submarine Defence Commission, General
Ljung also indicated that there was a link to the US ships.11 The small
submersible was most likely a US vessel released from the US tanker
Monongahela, which could easily have been adapted for such a purpose.
At 13.10 on 29 September, a small submarine sail was seen a
couple of kilometres further out in the Stockholm harbour.12 The observer
saw bubbles, the water was seemingly boiling, and then, for ten seconds,
something dark grey, with an antenna – a small submarine sail, 1 metre high
and 1.5 metre wide – before it disappeared.13 Most likely, the ‘small
submersible patrolling the US ships’ had been left on its own in order to
exercise its way out from Stockholm. The naval base war diary contains the
following entry at 18.00: Tomorrow morning, exercise will take place in
interesting area.14 At 22.00, forces for the mine barrages were deployed at
the narrow channel at Oxdjupet, Vaxholm, outside Stockholm harbour.
They were waiting for magnetic indications from a submarine. Naval
Special Forces were brought to the area. ‘The submarine was expected,’
wrote Colonel Lars-G. Persson, Chief of the Coastal Defence Regiment
KA1, in his diary.15 At 05.00, an object, perhaps above mentioned ‘US
submersible’, passed the mine barrage on its way out from Stockholm, and
the ‘ASW exercise’ – with helicopters, patrol boats and a fast attack craft –
started. At 14.00, there was supposedly a new indication in the mine barrage
at Oxdjupet. 16
It is always very difficult to say anything for sure about all these
technical indications and visual sightings, but one or possibly two small US
submersibles seem to have exercised an escape operation while Swedish
anti-submarine forces exercised a submarine hunt. It is very unlikely that
Swedish military authorities would have been willing to use force against a
Swedish submarine. Furthermore, from 28 September, Swedish submarines
were not allowed to operate submerged in the archipelago.17 On the other
hand, a Warsaw Pact submarine would never surface in central Stockholm,
it would never have been used in an exercise, and it is unlikely that the
exact timing of such a submarine would have been known in advance.
Instead, all information point to US submersibles. One submarine was
described as ‘not Warsaw Pact’. The naval base war diary states: ‘not to be
reported to the Commander of the Eastern Military District and not to be
reported to the Commander-in-Chief’.18 All the preparations on 28–29
September indicate that somebody in the Swedish Navy leadership knew
about one or two US submersibles were going to exercise their way out
from Stockholm, which would presuppose US-Swedish Navy-to-Navy
consultations facilitating this exercise (see interview with former US
secretary of defense Caspar Weinberger below). In a PM signed by the
Chief of the Naval Base, Rear-Admiral Christer Kierkegaard, this operation
was described as an anti-submarine warfare exercise that the local forces
and the regional staff were not informed about.19
The Naval Analysis Group report writes that two observers were
traveling in a boat at 12.50 on 1 October, when they observed a periscope
entering the waters at Muskö Naval Base. They saw two dark pipes (0.3
metres high, flat top, 0.1 metres in diameter, and distance from each other
about 1–1.5 metres) going towards Berganäs. They observe them for about
one minute with an estimated the speed of 5 knots.20 A submarine, however,
has to put up the periscope only for a few seconds and not more than
centimetres above the surface.21 The behaviour of this submarine showing
‘two periscopes’ (or rather a periscope and a short-wave antenna) for a
minute or more close to the major Swedish naval base of Muskö indicates
that it wanted to demonstrate its presence. This behaviour does not indicate
war preparations, but a test of the Swedish readiness, which rather points to
a Western operation. It is also interesting to note that, a few hours after this
first observation of a submarine at Muskö the new chief of staff, Vice-
Admiral Bror Stefenson, ordered the information division to prepare for a
press centre with up to 500 journalists as if he already knew that this
incident was going to become a major international event.22
On 4 October, there was a clear observation of a submarine at
Sandhamn further out.23 The local Coastal Defence commander, Lieutenant-
Colonel Sven-Olof Kviman, told me that a large submarine sail – a ‘huge
wall’ – passed through a narrow channel only a few metres from his people
at Sandhamn. He gave orders to prepare for an artillery attack – to lay a
carpet of shells – but the submarine submerged before live shells had been
brought up from storage. The attack boat Mode was sent out. It made
contact with the submarine and dropped depth charges. The Naval Analysis
Group report has an attachment covering this incident: ‘At 18.15 [dusk],…
W sees a square [submarine] sail. The height of the sail is about ten metres.
The sail is higher than it is wide. The ship is travelling at high speed (about
15 knots)’.24 This five-minute observation of a huge submarine sail passing
close to the observer is in all documents described as the sighting of a
‘certain submarine’. However, all Soviet submarines had rather flat sail,
while several Western submarines had such a design with a high square sail.
According to the Naval Base War Diary on 5 October, the reading
from one echo in the Muskö area – an object 35–40 metres in length and 15
metres above the sea floor – indicated a small submarine.25 Several depth
charges were dropped against this submarine. The figures relating to the
echo reading – 6 metres high, 35–40 metres long – have been confirmed by
intelligence personnel at the naval base. This may possibly indicate a West
German, Danish, Italian or US submarine. Closest to this estimate is the US
NR-1 (41 metres; 2 propellers), which has wheels for crawling on the
bottom. It has been used for deploying SOSUS systems on the ocean floor,
but also for conducting top-secret operations ‘into territorial waters of those
nations considered friendly to the US’.26 At the time, there were, to my
knowledge, no Soviet submarines between 20 and 55 metres long. The
Soviet Quebec submarine (probably no longer operational in 1982) was 56
General Ljung writes: ‘At 07.30, I called [State Secretary for
Defence Sven] Hirdman and demanded a meeting with [Defence Minister
Torsten] Gustafsson at 09.15 to brief him about the submarine incidents….
The minister agrees on the necessity of using force – to force the submarine
to the surface’.27 Later, at 14.40, General Ljung and the Chief of Staff
Stefenson gave a briefing to a high-level meeting, including Prime Minister
Thorbjörn Fälldin…. The participants expressed unity over detaining the
submarine once in Swedish military possession.28 Defence Minister Torsten
Gustafsson stated publicly: ‘It seems that the only way to force the
submarine to the surface is to damage it.… If foreign powers believe that
they can enter Swedish waters safely, they take a great risk’.29
This submarine hunt was carried out a few hundred metres from
land, while hundreds of journalists followed the events from the new press
centre at Berga. TV cameras followed the spectacular ‘battle’. This was a
TV war – like the Gulf War of 1991 or 2003, though on a much smaller
scale and with an evasive opponent. A detailed investigation of the sea
floor, carried out in late October, found parallel tracks from a bottom-
crawling vessel.30 A number of sonar echoes, Doppler and forceful air boil-
ups also indicates the presence of a submarine. On 6 October, 300
journalists turned up at the Navy Press Centre at Berga, of which 70 were
foreign correspondents (22 from the USA). The next day, there were about
100 foreign correspondents. On one particular day, there were 500
journalists at Berga at the same time, and altogether 750 received
accreditation cards from the Swedish military authorities.31 New York
Times, Washington Post, Times, and Stern as well as the TV-channels like
ABC, NBC, and CBS were all present.32 The submarine hunt was first-page
news. Every day, the New York Times and other major newspapers had one
or two stories about the Swedish submarine hunt.33 Commander Sven
Carlsson from the Navy Information Division said that his ‘private guess’
was that the submarine originated from the Soviet Union.34
At 15.25 on 7 October, a submarine sail was observed at Berga.35 A
helicopter received contact with the submarine, a Doppler echo and a depth
charge was dropped. An attachment to the Naval Analysis Group Report
speaks about a 3-4 metres dark square sail. The top of the sail is ‘rugged’,
possibly because of masts or other instruments.36 Neither the behaviour of
the submarine, nor the description of the sail seem to fit with a Soviet
submarine but rather with the 35-40 metres submarine reported on 5
October and this information fits best with the US NR-1. This is no proof of
Western or US involvement, but it is still remarkable that all significant
information (including that of submarine sails in daylight) was classified.
Nothing appeared in any open sources afterwards. There were a number of
visual observations of submarines during these days. These submarines
seemingly demonstrated their sails or periscopes, as if they wanted to play
with the Swedes, as if they wanted to trigger the submarine hunt to test
Sweden’s capability and will to defend itself. It is difficult to understand
why the Soviets would want to do such a thing. Rather, these observations
point to a testing of Swedish will and readiness by Western submarines (see
interview with Weinberger below).
A US Submarine Damaged in the Stockholm Archipelago in 1982
At 12.20 on 11 October, the personnel registered a clear indication in the
mine barrage west of Mälsten (MS2) at the final exit from the Muskö Naval
Base area. The magnetic sensors indicated a submarine, a magnetic field
passing out. There was nothing on the surface. One mine was detonated.37
The explosion of the 600-kilogramme mine created a pillar of water some
60 metres above the surface, Lieutenant-Colonel Kviman told me. Not only
Mälsten but also the town of Nynäshamn further east and the underground
naval base at Muskö 15 kilometres north were shaking.
One hour after the explosion, one observer went into a bright
yellow patch of 20×30 metres perhaps 100 meters from the explosion. It
was a ‘chemical substance’. It was ‘bright yellow’, he said.38* At 13.45,
about 15 minutes later, the helicopter Y46 observed a [yellow- or] green-
coloured area in the water (according to Y46’s drawing about 50×150
metres) at the island of Måsknuv ‘about 10 metres from land’39 – perhaps
150 metres north of the first observation. About 14.00, Chief of Måsknuv
mine barrage (MS2), Captain Johan Eneroth writes in his war diary: ‘a
yellow cloud in the water 200 metres north [of Måsknuv, 150 metres north
of the former observation], extension 300×100 metres.’40 At 15.00, Y46
report states: ‘the patch had moved further north since we were there last
time [13.45]: about one kilometre’,41 and, according to the drawing,
expanded from 50×150 metres to the size of about 150×450 metres.42 At
14.35, the commander at Mälsten gave order to a small patrol craft to take
samples.43 Ambassador Rolf Ekéus report writes that no result from the
analysis of the samples has been found. However, ‘it was noted when
samples were taken that the layer of the patch was thin, that the patch kept
together, was floating as a film on the surface for hours, and that it
consisted of a fine substance that did not mix with water.’ It was described
as ‘artificially green’.44 General Ljung writes in his diary: ‘Mine detonated
at Mälsten – directly under [the indicating object/submarine] – green patch.
Ceasefire for the mine barrages until investigation is made.’45 By saying
that the mine was activated ‘directly under’ the submarine, General Ljung
implied that the submarine may have been seriously damaged or even sunk.
The next day, he wrote in his diary: ‘In the afternoon, no new information
on a possibly sunken submarine.’46
There is no other explanation for this yellow/green patch than a
yellow/green sea-marker dye from a submarine. The US Navy Research
Laboratory describes how the sea-marker dye ‘spreads rapidly over the sea
surface and … [creates a] one-molecule-thick film … readily detectable
both visually and by radar, with radar providing nighttime and poor weather
detectability’.47 The US Navy textbook for search and rescue procedures
(referring to the 1983 US Navy Manual) states that ‘EVENT SUBSUNK
[search and rescue of sunken submarine] must be started … [if s]ighting
green dye marker.’48 Today, US, British and a couple other Western
countries use a yellow/green dye as a visual distress signal (VDS) for
submarines.49 In 1982, this yellow/green sea-marker dye was primarily used
by the US Navy. Actually, a messenger buoy, a yellow/green sea marker
dye and a red flare were standard VDS for US Navy submarines, and a dye
was most likely used in foreign waters, because it would be detectable from
satellite both visually and by radar.50
At Mälsten, on 11 October 1982, the dye’s appearance as a small
concentrated yellow patch – exactly where a damaged submarine would
most likely have bottomed, about one hundred metres from the place of the
explosion – about one hour or more after the explosion, its expansion to 40-
50 times its original size within half an hour, and finally its dissolving after
less than three hours all indicate a VDS or marking chemical from a
damaged submarine. The size and positions of the patch given by helicopter
Y46 and by the war diaries MS (Mälsten) and MS2 (Måsknuv) indicate that
the patch expanded (fast in the beginning), and that it moved northwards at
a speed of about 750-800 metres in an hour (almost 200 metres every 15
minutes from 13.30-15.00). This is the same speed as recorded for the patch
of mud and oil that appeared immediately after the mine explosion. This
patch drifted northwards one hour earlier.51* There is no doubt that a
yellow/green sea-marker dye was sent up by, most likely, a damaged US
submarine. Commander Anders Hammar, a member of the Naval Analysis
Group, who briefed the Submarine Defence Commission, says today that he
never had access to my material. However, this material leaves no doubt, he
says. He is now supporting my analysis about a Western or rather US
submarine.52 Commander Bengt Gabrielsson, Chief of Naval Operations,
Eastern Military District, says that he wrote drafts for the Submarine
Defence Commission, and his war diary was used when writing the
Commission’s report, but he was never informed about the green patch.53 A
Norwegian admiral told the Ekéus Investigation: ‘if I had received
information about a yellow/green dye appearing on the surface after a mine
explosion, this information would have been presented to the government at
very moment I received it.’54 This did not happen in the Swedish case.
During the night of 11–12 October, the bottom-fixed sonar system
at Mälsten registered metallic sounds, apparently work on or in a damaged
submarine. Around 21.25 on 11 October, it was possible to hear work with
a hammer. Later, there were knocking metallic sounds and high-frequency
sounds. In the morning, there were propeller sounds, and something was
shuffling and scraping against the sea floor.55 The Mälsten technical report
writes about metal objects (1-1.5 metres) found at 150 metres south-
southwest of the mine explosion56 (exactly at the place where the dye first
appeared). Pictures showed square objects believed to be steel-plates. The
Commanding Officer at Mälsten, Lieutenant-Colonel Kviman, stated on
Swedish TV: ’[After the mine explosion on 11 October], we had tape-
recorded sounds that indicated repair works. We had hammering several
times from some kind of activity below the surface.’57 The Mälsten war
diary states: ‘At 21.25 [on 11 October], hammering registered by the sonar
system.’.58 The naval base war diary confirms: ‘At 21.35, report from
Mälsten: at 21.25, metallic hammering registered by the sonar system.
Tape-recorded. At 21.45, report to MBÖ [Commander of the Eastern
Military District]. Also to ÖB [Commander-in-Chief], CM [Chief of Navy],
CFK [Chief of the Coastal Fleet].’59 When Prime Minister Olof Palme
briefed the Conservative Party leader Ulf Adelsohn a couple of days after
this incident, Palme talked about a ‘seriously damaged submarine’ (in
At 18.00 on 12 October, the war diaries and protocols speak about a
tape-recording of a ‘certain submarine.’61 All reports made the following
years describe this tape-recording as evidence for a ‘certain submarine’.62
The submarine was seemingly moving towards the microphones and then
passed the microphones out to the open sea. General Lennart Ljung writes:
At 21.00, CFst [the Chief of Staff, Bror Stefenson] turned up at my
home after having visited CM [Chief of Navy, Vice-Admiral Per
Rudberg]. FOA’s sonar system at Mälsten has received a positively
certain contact with a submarine at a distance of 1,000 metres outside
the minefield. We both went to MSB [the Defence Staff].63
In early 1990s, a part of the 12 October tape was brought to Moscow by
Prime Minister Carl Bildt to prove Soviet responsibility for the intrusions.
However, this 3.47 minutes tape-recording is not the same as the almost
half an hour tape-recording made around 18.00 on 12 October. Arne
Åsklint, who made the analysis in 1982 three days after the incident (on 15
October), says that this tape had nothing to do with what he listened to in
1982. The 1982 tape had hydraulic sounds from the rudder and had low
rotations per minute (less than 60 rpm or perhaps 30-40 rpm), while the
3.47 minutes has about 200 rpm.64 Similar to Åsklint, the sonar operator
Anders Karlsson speaks in his first report from 14 October about ‘low turns
per minute’65 (less than 60 rpm). Commander Erland Sönnertstedt, Chief of
Defence Staff Security Division, speaks in a first report already from late 12
October about 30-40 rpm for this tape-recording.66 The Ekéus Investigation
actually found that the 3.47 minutes was recorded earlier, possibly hours
earlier, on the same tape and nobody knows who recorded it, while at 18.00,
there is today nothing on the tape, only sounds from the sea. When the
sonar operator Anders Karlsson, on the tape’s speaker channel (for half an
hour), speaks about ‘probable submarine’ and later ‘certain submarine’
there is nothing on the other channels. All submarine sounds have been
Several Norwegian intelligence officers confirmed to me that the
Norwegians had made an analysis of this tape in October 198, and ‘it was
not a Soviet submarine’, they said. In 2001, the Ekéus Investigation turned
to the Norwegian government asking for a briefing from its now retired
intelligence officers about what they had told the Swedes in 1982. However,
according to the letter from Oslo received by the Investigation, the
responsible [Defence Ministry] official vetoed this. The letter states:
‘Despite several attempts from the [Norwegian] Foreign Ministry to
convince the officials responsible for Norwegian intelligence these officials
have considered themselves unable to comply with our wishes, because of
the sensitivity of this issue in relation to the USA.’68
The following night on 13 October, Vice-Admiral Bror Stefenson
ordered a ceasefire for the mines. Three hours later, at 23.00, a submarine
passed the mine barrage at Mälsten, and two hours after that, at 01.00, the
ceasefire was over.69 The sonar operator Anders Karlsson described how the
submarine was moving forward in intervals of 10–15 seconds and then
stopping in order to avoid detection. ‘It seems that the submarine is going
with five-six-seven-eight turns with the propeller and then stops. He is
possibly going very close to the sea-floor.’70 The whole sequence was tape-
recorded. A propeller blade or propeller axis was damaged, and this was
clearly registered on the tape.71
Sven-Olof Kviman told that he had been denied to use the mines and
because of this he prepared three vessels for a massive drop of 16 depth
charges. The helicopter had contact with the submarine and was preparing
for the drop. At 01.30, the helicopter gave the position of the submarine:
‘close to microphone no. 5. Contact close’. (At this very moment, the
submarine hit or passed within in the range of one metre of the microphone.
The signal reached maximum and the fuse melted).72 A couple of minutes
afterwards, at the moment of the drop of the 16 depth charges, the operation
was interrupted by an order from the naval base: ‘drop only two’. The order
was given when there were just seconds left before the drop. According to
several participants, a voice suddenly appeared on the frequency, and the
helicopter and the patrol vessels did not know who gave the order. They
were disturbed and asked the voice to leave the frequency. Only two depth
charges were dropped.73
At 17.20 on 14 October, ceasefire in darkness is terminated. A new
order about ceasefire in darkness is not given until 17.00 on 21 October.74
After the two submarines had passed out, there is a permanent right to use
force at night for a week. On 13-14 October, the five-hour ceasefire for the
mines and the denial of the massive drop of depth charges most likely saved
the submarine. The commander at Mälsten, Lieutenant-Colonel Kviman,
was upset. The naval base and Stockholm Coastal Defence were contacted.
Two days later, Vice-Admiral Stefenson went to Mälsten by helicopter to
talk with the personnel.75 It seems to have been important to Stefenson to
calm down the personnel, and particularly Kviman. Stefenson sent
Kviman’s wife hundreds of red roses and a letter of thanks saying that her
husband was still needed
The regional coastal defence chief, Brigadier-General Lars Hansson
said later that he was forced to release a submarine.76 Ambassador Rolf
Ekéus found that the pages covering this incident in the Defence Staff War
Diary (from afternoon on 13 October to early morning on 14 October) have
disappeared both in the handwritten and the typed versions.77 Also the tape-
recording has disappeared. The first report about the two tape-recordings
(12 October and 13-14 October), made in the evening on 14 October, states:
The subsequent analysis made of the tapes recorded on 12–14
October shows that the classification ‘submarine’ [‘certain
submarine’] that was done on 12 and 13[–14] October is confirmed.
C [Anders Karlsson] says that propeller sounds, turns per minute and
cavitation sounds are clearly heard on the tapes…. The [12 October]
submarine is very different from the one tape-recorded on 14
October. The sound of the former is richer, stronger and more distinct
than the latter. Also, on 13[–14] October, is it possible to hear how
the submarine starts up and moves and, when the helicopter arrives in
the area, stops and hides on the sea floor…. The conclusion made by
C [Karlsson] is that this submarine has a damaged propeller shaft, or
one of the blades is broken…. The speed of both submarines are
estimated at 1–2 knots. Low turns per minute.78
Three months later, General Ljung wrote in his diary that Henry Kissinger
had said: ‘it was smartly done by the Swedish Government to release the
submarine the way they did it’.79 Of course, by first damaging a submarine
and then covertly releasing it, Sweden would have been able to demonstrate
its resolve to defend its territory without causing a foreign power to lose
face. But this does not make sense if this foreign power was the Soviet
Union. Kissinger seems to speak about a Western, or rather US, submarine
that Sweden had released after having first damaged it.
Manipulation of Government Policy
The Submarine Defence Commission Report presented half a year after the
October 1982 incident claimed that all submarines had been from the
Warsaw Pact, most likely from the Soviet Union.80 This conclusion was
followed by a strong Swedish protest delivered to the Soviet Union.81 The
Commission used a Defence Staff Report from 18 April 1983. It stated,
firstly, that all visual observations had been interpreted as submarines from
the Warsaw Pact. Secondly, two acoustic observations were made. In both
cases, the conclusion was submarine from the Warsaw Pact. Thirdly, the
results of signal intelligence cannot be made public for security reasons.
Signal intelligence proved definitely that there were Warsaw Pact
submarines. Fourthly, the existence of tracks from midget submarines
supported the conclusion that the Warsaw Pact was responsible for the
intrusions. It would, according to the Defence Staff Report, be ‘almost
impossible to keep such systems secret in the West.’82
However, the 1995 Submarine Commission shows that all these
arguments were made up to prove Soviet responsibility for the 1982
operation. The visual observations and tape-recordings did not point to
Soviet submarines and the signal intelligence information did not exist.
Swedish signal intelligence agency FRA stated in a letter to the Defence
Minister that they had no information on signals linked to Soviet activities
during this submarine hunt, and the Navy’s signal intelligence had received
a couple of signals from Swedish waters, but they were believed to originate
from the west. The quality of instruments, however, made it impossible to
draw any conclusion.83 We have to admit that all information on Soviet
submarines was invented by the Defence Staff under leadership of the
Commission’s military expert Vice-Admiral Bror Stefenson. The ‘signal
intelligence’ information was, according to later Prime Minister Ingvar
Carlsson, ‘an important background material’ for the strong Swedish protest
against the Soviet Union.84 Now, it is clearly established that this
information was invented to prove Soviet presence. The Minister of Justice,
Ove Rainer, was against pointing to the Soviet Union despite the
conclusions of the Submarine Defence Commission. He said that the
evidence or indications pointing to the Soviet Union would not hold water
in a trial. Foreign Minister Lennart Bodström had the same view.85 In 1994,
The Social Democratic Government was in doubt about the
conclusions made by the Submarine Defence Commission Report in
Spring 1983, but the Government yielded to the public opinion.86
In 1996, former defence minister Anders Thunborg said:
As Defence Minister I did not have the same view as the Submarine
Defence Commission. I thought they were too self-confident.… But
what could we do? We could not dive ourselves.87
In 1984, the Soviet General Secretary Yuri Andropov let the Finnish
President Mauno Koivisto tell Prime Minister Palme: ‘just bomb them’.88
According to Koivisto, the Soviet leader had said: ‘It will suit us very well
if the Swedes use live ammunition against the intruding submarines’.89 This
attitude seems illogical if these submarines originated from the Soviet
Union, and neither the Government nor the Commander-in-Chief wanted to
touch the nationality issue the following years.
More and more people became sceptics. In January 1992, the Bildt
Government started talks with Russia to get the final proof for Soviet
intrusions into Swedish waters. The Swedes were able to convince the
Russians about the existence of submarines. In January 1993, Prime
Minister Carl Bildt, brought with him two tape-recorded cavitation sounds:
one was the 3.47-minute tape from Mälsten on 12 October 1982; the other
was a recording from May 1992. In July 1994, it was revealed that the May
1992 cavitation sound most likely originated from swimming minks.90 In
January 1994, a group of independent critics including former Foreign
Minister Lennart Bodström, former Chief of Army, Lieutenant-General Nils
Sköld, and former Chief of Naval Base South (Karlskrona), Captain Karl
Andersson, demanded an independent commission.91 The resulting criticism
forced Defence Minister Thage G. Peterson (1994-7) to appoint a new
official submarine commission in February 1995 with a majority of
scientists, under chairmanship of Professor Hans G. Forsberg and with
Major-General Bengt Wallroth, former Assistant Under-Secretary for
Defence, former Deputy Chief of Staff and Chief of Swedish Military
Intelligence (SSI) and Chief of Swedish Signal Intelligence (FRA), as its
The 1995 Commission went through all this material from the secret
files made by the Naval Analysis Group from 1982 and onwards. Their
critical investigation still confirmed the existence of ‘certain submarines’.
That there were regular, large scale operations threatening Sweden were
confirmed, but the Commission did not find any particular state responsible
for these threats.92 In 1999, former defence minister Thage G. Peterson went
one step further. He came up with some questions indicating US
If such serious matters occurs as submarine intrusions into the waters
of the neutral Sweden in this very sensitive area, and Soviet
Union/Russia is believed to be responsible for these intrusions,
shouldn’t the Americans in that case be interested in what has
happened or still is happening. In practical terms, this would be a
forwarding of the positions of the other military bloc. But the USA
has never been concerned about the submarine issue. Isn’t that
strange? … In late 1996, I was visited by the US Secretary of
Defence, William Perry…. I brought up the submarine intrusions. My
American colleague smiles and looks at me with sympathy: ‘It may
be other things than submarines in the water, and if there is a
submarine, it doesn’t have to be Russian!93
The National Origin of the 1982 Submarines
The large number of Soviet submarines in the Baltic Sea, the threatening
Soviet rhetoric, and the Soviet security interest in activities along the
Swedish coast (for example because of possible US use of Swedish air
bases in a war-time) convinced most Swedish academic scholars that the
Soviet Union was responsible for almost all intrusions into the Swedish
archipelagos.94 Others, primarily US scholars like Robert Weinland, Gordon
McCormick, and Paul Cole, underlined the Soviet need for reaching the
Norwegian Atlantic coast by attacking and then passing through central
Sweden. The Soviets would land Special Forces from submarines and attack
the political and military elite and thereby paralyze Sweden.95 In 1983,
former Director of the CIA, Admiral Stansfield Turner, said that the Soviet
Baltic Fleet had midget submarines as well as naval Special Forces, and
these forces ‘have to be given something to do’.96 Michael MccGwire writes
that the Soviets have two interests in the Swedish archipelago, both linked
to intelligence and navigational training: ‘to prevent it being used to their
disadvantage and to use selected parts of it for their own purposes.
Thorough peacetime reconnaissance is important to both missions’.97 The
same year, Carl Bildt argued: ‘Operations on this scale, and on this nature,
cannot be explained by the intelligence and navigational training tasks often
pointed at in the public debate…. [A] possible (indeed probable) mission
for these submarines in wartime might be landing of special purpose forces
to undertake sabotage raids against … political and military installations.98
Bildt is probably right that the primary purpose is not intelligence
gathering, but it is difficult to understand how the demonstration of
submarine sails and periscopes for a minute or more in densely populated
areas can be interpreted as preparations covert landing of Special Forces.
These preparations might very well have taken place, but the activity at
Muskö and in other known operations are difficult to explain with such
tasks. In a Swedish TV programme in the autumn 1996, an anonymous
former Soviet naval officer said that he had participated in submarine
operations in Scandinavian (allegedly in Swedish) territorial waters. He also
said that Western submarines operated in these waters.99
West German submarines have been found in Swedish waters and
have covertly used Swedish waters as a base area for exercising offensive
operations against Soviet vessels along the Latvian and Lithuanian coast.100
A Swedish intelligence officer told me that in early or mid 1980s, West
German submarines had exercised offensive operations against Soviet
vessels along the Latvian coast, then left for an official port visit in the
Swedish harbour of Norrköping, while other West German submarines
replaced the first ones. After that, the first submarines went back to the
Latvian coast replacing the second group as if the port visit in Norrköping
had been part of the exercise. The Germans were training to use Swedish
ports as bases, and this may be an additional reason for Soviet activities in
the Swedish archipelago. Also the Soviets had to make themselves
acquainted with the underwater terrain. However, it is very difficult to
believe that the German Navy would operate deep into the Swedish
archipelago risking the lives of their officers and divers. Different from the
British Royal Navy and the US Navy, the German Navy has no, and did not
at the time have any global responsibility, which could have justified a
damaged submarine and a loss of personnel. The Royal Navy and
particularly the US Navy, have been much more willing to accept loss of
lives. In 1982, the US Navy lost 562 men, and, in the 1980s altogether
5,865 men were lost.101
Let us first look at the UK alternative. From 1977 up to early 1990s,
a couple of Oberon class submarines regularly patrolled the Baltic Sea. In
1988, Swedish Navy made a perfect tape-recording of a submarine north of
Mälsten in Swedish internal waters – the only tape-recording to my
knowledge where class of submarine has been identified. It was reported to
the Ekéus Investigation that when this tape was demonstrated to British
sound experts they confirmed that it was an Oberon class submarine: ‘It is
one of ours’, a surprised British expert exclaimed. In 2001, Commander
Leif Holmström, former Chief of MUSAC (The Navy’s sound institute)
confirmed on TV that his counterparts in a NATO country had exclaimed:
‘It is one of ours’.102
According to a Swedish naval officer, Oberon class submarines went
on a yearly basis (two or three times a year) into the Baltic Sea up along the
Baltic coast towards Finland and down along the Swedish coast, sometimes
into Swedish territorial waters to test Swedish readiness with approval of
somebody in the Swedish naval leadership. Despite Danish and International
Law, such intelligence and Special Force submarines often went submerged
through the Danish Straits (Store Belt). According to a Danish general, the
Danish Naval Operative Command at Århus was pre-notified to avoid
trouble. They were ordered to ‘close their eyes’, he said. He also told that
Oberon class submarines landed Special Force troops in foreign countries
without their approval. A Danish admiral told me that he gave approval for
British Oberon submarines to go submerged through the Danish Straits. The
passages were made into exercises for testing the instruments and the
personnel. This also made the submerged passages legal, he said. One such
submarine was the Orpheus, I was told. Orpheus was the first submarine
‘fitted with a purpose-built five-man chamber that allowed Special Forces to
enter and exit from the submarine when it was dived in a group rather than,
as hitherto, one or two at the time’.103
I have got most of this information confirmed by two Royal Navy
officers: both commanding officers of Oberon class submarines. A former
Chief of Staff to Flag Officer Submarines (chief of submarine operations)
told that he used to go up along the Norwegian coast, but he also had made a
couple of trips into the Baltic Sea. The submarine went submerged through
the Danish Straits and then along the Soviet Baltic coast and back along the
Swedish coast. He also confirmed that they had landed SBS (Special Boat
Service) troops on the Soviet side, but he could not speak about the Swedish
side, because these operations were considered extremely secret. ‘We landed
SBS troops’, he said. ‘I just went where I was ordered to go.’
The other Oberon captain, one of Britain’s most experienced
submarine officers, also confirmed the trips into the Baltic Sea along the
Soviet and Swedish coasts from late 1970s and during the 1980s. He also
said that they did go north of the Åland Islands (to the Gulf of Bothnia), but
he did not want to come up with any details. ‘I cannot speak about
operations into Swedish waters’, he said. ‘These, as well as some other
operations, are still classified’. However, it is more than likely that they
landed Special Forces in Sweden, because why would they otherwise operate
a submarine rebuilt for this specific purpose along the Swedish coast, or
even in Swedish archipelagos. In the 1980s, approval was granted on
ministerial level for every single operation, he said. They also briefed the
Prime Minister’s Office regularly about the risks with these operations.
Sir Keith Speed (British Minister of Navy 1979-1981 and Member
of the Parliamentary Defence Committee 1983-1987) also confirmed that
British submarines were testing Swedish coastal defences. On Swedish TV,
he was asked if he could confirm if this testing was conducted in Swedish
waters. His answer was ‘yes’. He said they used Oberon and Porpoise class
submarines, because they were ‘much cheaper’, ‘smaller’ and ‘very quiet’.
Speed spoke about surfacing in the Stockholm harbour. ‘Not quite, but that
sort of things. How far could we get without you being aware of it.104 Paul
Beaver (Spokesman for Jane’s in London) said these intrusions were no
problem as long as they were notified and ‘as long as somebody in the High
Command in Stockholm was aware that there was going to be some
intrusions during a given period’.105
I have earlier indicated that Chief of Staff Vice-Admiral Stefenson, or
Chief of Navy Vice-Admiral Per Rudberg, may have been the officer in the
Swedish High Command, who was pre-notified of Western intrusions or
testing operations in order to avoid a catastrophe. Rudberg has confirmed that
he was the Swedish secret liaison to NATO,106 and was chosen by US
Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger and his British counterpart Michael
Heseltine as their escort officers during their visits in Sweden.107 In the TV-
programme with Speed and Beaver, the Danish Lieutenant-General Kjeld
Hillingsø (Commander of BALTAP [NATO war-time supreme commander for
Denmark, northern West Germany and the Baltic Sea] 1993-1995) said:
One was interested in testing if Sweden firstly was capable and
secondly willing to defend its territory. This was a legitimate NATO
interest. The Norwegians and the Danes could say to the other NATO
countries: ‘We trust the Swedes. They would certainly defend that
flank.’ However, the great powers and the superpowers preferred to
get their own information, to have it confirmed themselves.108
British submarines conducted regular secret operations in Swedish waters
during the entire 1980s, but US submarine operations were probably as
important as the British, which was revealed in a TV-interview with former
Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger. He confirmed that US operations
were conducted in Swedish waters both ‘frequently’ and ‘regularly’ after
consultations with the Swedes. However, these consultations were not on the
level of ministers. He never discussed this issue with the Swedish Prime
Minister or Defence Minister. There were US-Swedish ‘Navy-to-Navy
consultations’, Weinberger said.109 The Commander-in-Chief, General Bengt
Gustafsson (1986-92) stated afterwards that he was never informed. He was
quite upset.110 Later, he spoke about himself as a ‘useful idiot’. Below follows
a quote from the interview.
Weinberger: [Operations in Swedish waters were] part of a routine
regular scheduled series of defence testing that NATO did and indeed
had to do to be responsible and liable. [The Soviet Whiskey submarine
in 1981] was a clear violation, and submarines can get in where they
are not wanted, and that is exactly why we made this defensive testing
and these defensive manoeuvres to ensure that they would not be able
to do that without being detected… The [Navy-to-Navy] consultations
and discussions we had were designed – with all countries not just
Sweden – to assure that NATO was able to perform this mission and
had ample opportunities to test through manoeuvres and other
activities as to whether the defences were adequate and whether or not
the Soviets were requiring any new capabilities that would require any
changes in their defences or anything of that kind. So, the result of all
that I think was very satisfactory. Besides from that one intrusion of
the Whiskey class submarine, there were no violations, no capabilities
of the Soviets to make an attack that could not be defended against …
The point was that it was necessary to test frequently the capabilities
of all countries, not only in the Baltic [Sea] – which is very strategic,
of course – but in the Mediterranean and Asiatic waters and all the
Swedish TV: How frequently was it done in Sweden?
Weinberger: I don’t know. Enough to comply to the military
requirements for making sure that they were up to date. We would
know when the Soviets required a new kind of submarine. We would
then have to see if our defences were adequate against that. And all
this was done on a regular basis, and on an agreed upon basis.111
On the day the interview was sent on Swedish TV, Swedish Defence Minister
Björn von Sydow said he was surprised, but added: ‘I have no reason to
question what a former US defense secretary is saying’.112 The following day,
Swedish Prime Minister Göran Persson stated in the Swedish Parliament: ‘if
there are any document I don’t know, but I know that a former secretary of
defense, a US secretary of defense, in a long interview, in a clear wording has
presented a rational for what, according to his view, NATO apparently did in
our waters.’113 One hour after the i
nterview with Weinberger, Associated
Press made an interview with Sir John Walker, former head of Britain’s
Defence Intelligence. He said that NATO was ‘allowed a certain amount of
intrusions during a given period’.114 Both Weinberger and Walker speak
clearly about ‘NATO’, but Weinberger also said that the operations were
carried out after US-Swedish Navy-to-Navy consultations indicating US
commanded operations. After these interviews General Vigleik Eide, former
Norwegian Commander-in-Chief and former Chairman of NATO Military
Committee, visited me at my office. He said that they did not mean NATO as
a formal organisation, but rather US or UK operations in cooperation with one
or more allies. After having received a US briefing, NATO Secretary General
George Robertson came up with a similar hint. He said in a Swedish TV
interview: ‘It is not a matter for NATO. It is a matter between [stop]. If people
wish to go back to the history between Sweden and the individual countries
that own individual submarines [stop]. If retired secretaries of defense wants
to sound off that is their prerogative and their memory will be tested. It is not
a matter for me.’115 After the interview with Weinberger, a US senior official
I don’t know why Weinberger said what he did. Covert submarine
operations is the most secret thing we have.… The decisions were
taken by a committee of DIA and CIA people [most likely the
National Underwater Reconnaissance Office (NURO)], but I will
neither confirm nor deny any operations in Swedish waters.
A high-ranking CIA officer confirmed to me that US operations in
Scandinavian waters were run by NURO, and he spoke about the 1982
incident in Swedish waters as ‘something of an underwater U-2’. In other
words, the damaging of the US submarine in 1982 was as serious incident as
the shooting down of the U-2 over the Soviet Union in 1960. He said that he
was never himself involved in these operations in Swedish waters, but he
knew the people responsible for them. Similarly, a senior US Navy officer
actually told the éminence grise of the Norwegian Foreign Ministry, Einar
Ansteensen, that the damaged submarine in 1982 was American. ‘It was a sad
story’, he said.116 Ansteensen was well-connected. He was the maker
ministers of defence and foreign affairs in Norway and had been at NATO
Defence College in Rome. He had been the director of the ministry’s Political
Division and the Policy Planning Division in the 1960s and 1970s. During the
1982 incident, he was at the Embassy in Stockholm. He reported about the
damaged US submarine to his Commander-in-Chief General Sven Hauge, but
he did not inform General Ljung and the Swedes, he told me.117 Also a
Norwegian intelligence officer spoke about a damaged Western submarine in
1982, and he pointed to the USA and said that ‘Caspar Weinberger knew
about it’.118 In an interview in 1987, the Swedish Chief of Army, Lieutenant-
General Nils Sköld, spoke about a passage of a damaged submarine out of the
Baltic Straits just after the 1982 incident.119 The then Commander-in-Chief,
General Bengt Gustafsson, said in 2000 that, as he remember, General Sköld
had told him that this submarine was American.120 In 1993 former US
secretary of defense James Schlesinger confirmed to me that a US submarine
was damaged in the Stockholm archipelago in 1982, but he did not want to go
into details.121 Former commander of SEAL-Team Three, Garry Stubblefield,
[We conducted some covert operations in early 1980s, some] really
smart interesting training in the NATO and Atlantic theatres.… We
set up and worked with support networks, E&E [escape and evasion]
networks and we started getting smart about going into foreign areas.
All that involved looking like people who weren’t in the US Navy and
doing things that people in the US Navy weren’t supposed to do.122
The first part of the paragraph indicates training for the Stay-Behinds, but the
second part indicates something more and seems to refer to the same
operations that Caspar Weinberger discussed with direct reference to Sweden.
Lieutenant Joseph Maguire has described how swimmers from SEAL Team
Two trained harbour penetration from submarine in the Baltic Sea in the early
1980s. He tells about a penetration exercise at the German Baltic coast to
establish contact with an E&E net, but this is ‘probably the only one we can
tell you about’, Lieutenant Maguire said.123 An admiral from a NATO country
told me that already in the 1970s, SEALs used a Soviet cover and Soviet
weapons systems to play enemy forces to make the threat appear more real,
which has been confirmed by former commander of SEAL Team Six, Richard
When asked by the House of Representatives’ Subcommittee on the
Department of Defense, Rear-Admiral John L. Butts, Chief of Naval
Intelligence, responded that – different from the 1982 incident – the Soviet
submarine in Karlskrona in 1981 was ‘genuine’. In 1982 ‘the Swedes had
several submarine contacts’ close to Muskö Naval Base, but his following
paragraph on the national origin is classified. However, later in the text he
speaks about NR-1 as if it had been used in Swedish waters.125 Soon
afterwards, John McWethy, the Pentagon correspondent of the ABC TV
American submarines are repeatedly violating territorial waters of other
nations while gathering intelligence. Most of the top-secret missions are
into the waters of the Soviet Union, but according to both active duty
and retired military sources, some missions have been run into the
territorial waters of those nations considered friendly to the US. Even
friendly countries, sources say, sometimes do things they don’t want the
US to know about, things that could inadvertently threaten American
security. The missions are conducted by specially equipped nuclear
powered attack submarines and in some cases by a nuclear powered
mini-sub called NR-1 (MINI-SUB). It has a seven-man crew, wheels on
its underside for crawling along the bottom and is described by the
Navy as a research vessel.126
During the 1982 incident, the length of the submarine measured with an echo
ranger on 5 October and the description of a submarine sail observed on 7
October fit both with the NR-1. Statements by US and other sources, the US
confiscation of the tape-recording, and the yellow/green sea marker dye from
11 October all point to a US operation, and NR-1 was the only US submarine
(and actually one of the few submarines) with a length of 40 metres. This is
not a proof for NR-1’s participation in this operation, but neither should it be
ruled out. Operations in friendly waters were, according to ABC, conducted by
NR-1 and by ‘specially equipped nuclear powered attack submarines’. One
such submarine was most likely USS Seawolf that operated together with NR-
1 in Libyen waters in 1986.127 In 1974, it was equipped for special project
operations,128 and it was also rebuilt with a compartment for SEAL divers.129
It operated together with DSV Turtle,130 and the Seawolf was able to operate as
a mothersub for the Turtle and other submersibles. It was the only submarine
that explicitly had been given that role. In 1983, the Seawolf received a medal
for excellence in ‘Battle Efficiency’ and another medal for excellence in
‘Damage Control’ indicating a serious damage. In 1983, she was in a shipyard
recovering from some kind of damage (allegedly from a ‘storm’),131 while
Turtle received its award for excellent bravery 30 August – 5 November
1982,132 which exactly corresponds to the time of the 1982 operation in the
Stockholm archipelago. Another submarine that received an award for
excellent bravery in some ‘hazardous operations’ in second half of 1982 (and
in 1983) was USS Cavalla, which was rebuilt for carrying SDVs (SEAL
Delivery Vehicles) and for conducting naval special warfare operations.133
For the 1982 submarine hunt (the only operation when the Swedish
government held Moscow responsible for the intrusions) not a single
indication and even less technical evidence pointed to the Soviet Union.
However, statements by senior US officials, hundreds of indications and
even technical evidence point to the USA. I do not know which submarines
were used, to paraphrase Caspar Weinberger, but we can conclude that this
certainly was a US and not a Soviet operation.
The Psychological War Against Sweden
The submarine operations in Swedish waters in the 1980s were a test of
Swedish capability and readiness as discussed by former defense secretary
Caspar Weinberger, former chief of defence intelligence Sir John Walker and
former navy minister Sir Keith Speed. Or to quote former commander of
BALTAP, Lieutenant-General Kjeld Hillingsø: The Americans and the British
wanted to test ‘if Sweden firstly was capable and secondly willing to defend
its territory’. But these tests would also, according to Hillingsø, ‘strengthen
the moral within the military forces and in the population as a whole’.134 In
other words, these tests of the Swedish military readiness are not possible to
clearly distinguish from psychological operations (PSYOP) with an ambition
to remake public opinion and Swedish Government policy.
In Sweden, the fact is that the 1982 submarine incident and the
following incidents in the 1980s radically changed Swedish public opinion.
The submarines were transformed into ‘material facts’ demonstrating Soviet
aggression. The physical realities changed the ‘emotions and the objective
reasoning’ in Sweden. In 1976, 6% of the Swedish population perceived the
Soviet Union as a direct threat and 27% perceived the Soviet Union as a
threat or unfriendly against Sweden. These figures refer to a study by the
Swedish Board of Psychological Defence.135 In spring 1980, after the Soviet
invasion into Afghanistan, these figures increased marginally to 8% and
33%. After the Soviet Whiskey submarine had been stranded on an island in
the Karlskrona archipelago in October 1981, 34% of the Swedish population
perceived the Soviet Union as a direct threat and 71% perceived the Soviets
as either a threat or unfriendly against Sweden. After the 1982 incident and
the presentation of the Submarine Defence Commission Report (and the
Swedish protest against the Soviet Union), this change became even more
dramatic with 42% looking at the Soviet Union as a direct threat and 83% as
a threat or unfriendly towards Sweden, and those high figures were kept for
several years. Not until 1987 did the last figure fall below 70%. The
submarine incidents in the early and mid 1980s seem to have totally changed
the Swedish views about the Soviet Union. In the 1970s, the Soviet threat
had no reality to the Swedes. The physical experience of intruding
submarines created an awareness in line with US perceptions. The number of
Swedes perceiving the Soviet Union as a ‘friendly’ was reduced from 10-
15% in the 1970s to 1-2% in 1983, while the corresponding figures for a
‘friendly’ USA were swinging between 20-40% seemingly unrelated to any
The test of readiness and the effort to convince the public opinion of
the reality of the present danger was unofficial but internally stated US
policy for ‘friendly countries’. This seems to have been particularly
important if they had been ‘lulled into a false security’ like Sweden in the
1970s with only a few percent of the population perceiving Soviet Union as
a direct threat. Or, in the British case, SBS swimmer teams would conduct
‘reconnaissance on specific sabotage targets, if a foreign country shows sign
of becoming a little frisky’137 – something that definitely was perceived as
true in the case of Sweden. Doctrine for Joint Psychological Operations
describe PSYOP as:
Planned operations to convey selected information and indicators to
foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective
reasoning and ultimately the behaviour of foreign governments,
organizations, groups and individuals … so that their behaviors and
actions will promote the attainment of US national goals.138
Indications of subsurface decoys masquerading as Soviet submarines are
picked up by the intelligence service of the host country. Instead of reducing
the adversary’s ability to detect a periscope deception seeks to increase the
visibility of these indicators, and lets them be verified through ‘back channel
networks’, and by assets operating ‘inside’ the adversary’s decision cycle, all
supporting the general story.139
In Western Europe after World War II, war became increasingly
unlikely. Power struggles in democratic countries accordingly tried to find
new forms at the lower end of the conflict spectrum: for example by the use of
psychological operations. For a great power or a superpower to dominate a
democratic state, it had to control or change the mindset of its population and
its government, and this was no longer possible by the control of mass media.
In contrast to the authoritarian state, the democratic states of Western Europe
have no monopoly of mass media to form the minds of their citizens. Instead,
to create a ‘false reality’ has become a suitable alternative. It is no longer
possible to primarily manipulate mass media but rather to manipulate the
experience of people that will turn up as news in TV and newspapers. In other
words, a major power has to create decoys or indicators that will be
interpreted in a false way to change the mindset of the people. When the
existence of foreign submarines had been accepted by the Swedish public –
because sufficiently many people had themselves experienced (seen with their
own eyes periscopes and submarine sails) – journalists accepted ‘Soviet
intrusions’ as a fact. There were different explanations for these intrusions,
but there was a consensus about their existence. Soviet Union was the
dominating power in the Baltic Sea region. People were automatically
pointing to the perceived enemy. It was not possible to imagine that a friendly
nation could have been responsible for these operations. And after the Soviet
Whiskey submarine had stranded in the Swedish archipelago in 1981, no one
would doubt the Soviet origin of the continued submarine activities.
The ambitious submarine campaign totally changed the psychological
climate in Sweden. It created ‘facts’ that prepared the population for a war
against the Soviet Union, but it also undercut the support of an undesirable
government. No one doubted the Soviet origin of the continued submarine
activities, and combined with leaks to the press about the Government
purposely releasing submarines, large parts of the population turned against
its own ‘conciliatory government’. It is impossible that US and British leaders
would not have understood that. Caspar Weinberger were briefed regularly on
these operations and in the UK approval was granted on ministerial level ‘for
every single operation’. US and British covert submarine operations in the
1980s appear as a form of PSYOP in line with Taylor’s proposal:
‘Psychological operations to induce the government and/or population to
resist Soviet intervention or psychological operations to undercut support of
an undesirable government’.140
Leitenberg (1987), pp. 155-7.
McCormick (1990), p. v.
Svenska Dagbladet (11 October 1982).
KU 1982/83:30, pp. 19-20.
Lampers (1996); Bodström 2000.
Taylor & Maaranen (1982), p. 475.
MAna Hårsfj. Attach. 2.
Compton-Hall (1987), p. 39.
ÖB TD (21 April 1983).
Aftonbladet (1 October 1982). MAna Hårsfj. Attach. 6
Kierkegaard et.al. (1990), p. 8.
MAna Hårsfj. Attach. 15.
Bruzelius (1982; 1995).
SOU (2001), pp. 316-317.
SOU (1983), p. 83.
MAna Hårsfj. Attach. 25.
McWethy, ABC (1984); Tunander (2004).
ÖB HWD; ÖB TD.
Dagens Nyheter (6 October 1982).
SOU (1995), pp. 243-249; Cato & Larsson (1995).
Dagens Nyheter, Svenska Dagbladet
Expressen (7 October 1982).
New York Times ( 5-11 October 1982).
Expressen (7 October 1982), p. 7.
MAna Hårsfj. Attach. 37.
CMS Report; CMS WD; CörlBO WD; SCSK Report.
SOU (2001), p. 124.
NRL (1998), p. 47.
US Navy (2000), p. 13-13.
CCEB (1996); CHS (2003)
NRL (1998), p. 47.
Interview with Anders Hammar (May 2003).
Interview with Bengt Gabrielsson (Sept. 2000).
Ekéus Investigation Files (2001).
MAFU report 1982; CMS WD; CÖrlBO WD
CMS Report (12 October).
Aktuellt, Swedish TV (7 March 2000).
CMS WD; CMS HWD.
Adelsohn (1987), p. 97.
FOA Tape 1, Tape-recordings from Mälsten 1982 (MUSAC)
SOU (1995), pp. 140, 145.
MAna Hårsfj. Attach. 38.
MAna Hårsfj. Attach. 61.
Ekéus Investigation Files (2001).
FOA Tape 3.
CMS WD; MAna Hårsfj. Attach. 38.
MAna Hårsfj. Attach. 38.
SOU (2001), p. 119.
Kadhammar, 1987; see also Tunander (2004).
SOU (2001), p. 118.
MAna Hårsfj. Attach. 38.
SOU (1983), p. 80.
Svenska Dagbladet (27 April 1983); SOU (2001), p. 144.
SOU (1995), pp. 144-146.
Carlsson (1999), p. 115; see also SOU (2001), p. 145.
Mellbourn (1988); see also Carlsson (1999), p. 75.
Dagens Nyheter (6 June 1994).
Aland & Zachrisson (1996), pp. 150-151; see also Thunborg (2001).
SOU (2001), pp. 186-187.
Sven Svensson (Dagens Nyheter 21 October 1986).
SOU (1995), pp. 222-227; see also Svensson 1995, p. 38.
Bergström & Åmark (1999).
SOU (1995), pp. 275-281.
Peterson (1999), pp. 556-557.
Agrell (1986); Tunander (1987), pp. 97-101; (1989), pp. 114-7.
Hansen (1984); Weinland (1986); McCormick (1990); Cole (1990).
Quoted in Leitenberg (1987), p. 142.
MccGwire (1987), p. 302.
Bildt (1983), p. 167.
‘Reportrarna’, Swedish TV2 (22 October,1996).
See also Tunander (1989), p. 116.
Department of Defense (1991), pp. 3, 30.
‘Rapport’, Swedish TV1 (21 November 2001).
Ring (2001), p. 133.
‘Striptease’, Swedish TV2 (11 April 2000).
‘Striptease’, Swedish TV2 (7 March 2000).
Interview with Rudberg (August 1999).
‘Striptease’, Swedish TV2 (11 April 2000).
‘Striptease’, Swedish TV2 (7 March 2000).
Associated Press, 08.38 pm (7 March 2000).
’Rapport’, Swedish TV2 (8 March 2000).
Associated Press, 08.38 pm (7 March 2000).
‘Aktuellt’, Swedish TV1 (29 March 2000).
Interview with Ansteensen (Dec 1999).
See also Hasselbohm (1984).
Interview with Bengt Gustafsson (May 2000).
Interview with Schlesinger (June 1993).
Stubblefield (1995), p. 134.
Kelly (1995), p. 247.
Richard Marcinko, Red Cell (Video, 1993).
Department of Defense (1984), p. 676.
McWethy, ‘World News Toninght’, ABC (21 March 1984).
Sontag & Drew (1999), p. 356.
Sontag & Drew (1999), p. 277.
Craven (2001), p. 137.
Sontag & Drew (1999), p. 338.
Sontag & Drew (1999), p. 356; http://www.seawolf-
Sontag & Drew (1999), p. 433.
Secretary of Navy (1984).
Interview with Hillingsø (12 March 1999).
Stutz (1987), p. 64.
Stutz (1987), p. 64
Foster (1996 ), p. 156.
Joint Pub. 3-53 (1996), pp. I-1, I-5, I-7, IV-2, GL-4.
Taylor & Maaranen (1982), p. 475.
CCEB (1996). Communication Instructions, Distress and Rescue Procedures, ACP
135 (E), The Combined Communications-Electronics Board (Australia, Canada, New
Zeeland, UK and US), March.
CHS (2003) ‘Chapter 34 Information Concerning Submarines’ (Canadian National
Defence Headquarters), Notice to Mariners. Canadian Hydrographic Service (CHS),
Canadian Ministry of Fisheries and Oceans.
Department of Defense, 1981-9. Prepared statements of the director of Naval
Intelligence (Sumner Shapiro, John L. Butts, William O. Studeman and Thomas A.
Brooks) Before the Committee on Armed Sevices House of Representatives.
Seapower and Strategic and Critical Materials Subcommittee Title 1. (Washington
D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1981-9).
Department of Defense, 1984. Department of Defense Appropriations for 1985 –
Hearings Before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations. House of
Representatives, Ninety-eighth Congress. Subcommittee on the Department of
Defense (Part 2). (Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1984).
Department of Defense, Worldwide U.S. Active Duty Military Personnel Causalities,
October 1, 1979 – June 30, 1991. (Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing
Joint Pub 3-53, Doctrine for Joint Psychological Operations, July 10 (Washington:
The Joint Chiefs of Staff, 1996).
(KU 1982/83:30) Konstitutionsutskottets betänkande (the parliamentary hearing)
1982/83:30 (including an attachment on the Hårsfjärden submarine hunt [KU
1982/83:30 Attach. 7]).
NIMA (2003). ‘Special Notice to Mariners’, Maritime Safety Information Division
NRL (1998) 75th Anniversary: Awards for Innovation. Celebrating 75 Years of
Science and Technology Development for the Navy and the Nation. Naval Research
Laboratory 1923-1998. Washington (http://www.nrl.navy.mil/).
SOU 1983:13. Att möta ubåtshotet – Ubåtskränkningar och svensk säkerhetspolitik.
Betänkande av ubåtsskyddskommissionen (Stockholm: Försvarsdepartementet, 1983).
SOU 1983:13 (Unofficial translation] Countering the Submarine Threat – Submarine
Violations and Swedish Security Policy (Stockholm: Ministry of Defence, 1984).
SOU 1995:135. Ubåtsfrågan 1981-1994 – Rapport från ubåtskommissionen (Report
from the Submarine Commission) (Stockholm: Försvarsdepartementet, 1995).
SOU 2001:85. Perspectiv på ubåtsfrågan – Hanteringen av ubåtsfrågan politiskt och
militärt. (Stockholm: Statens Offentliga Utredningar, Försvarsdepartementet, 2001).
US Navy (2000) ‘Chapter 13 Search and Rescue’, in Operation Specialist (NRTC
September 2000, NAVEDTRA 14308), vol. 1.
Declassified or Partly Declassified War Diaries, Diaries and other Documents
from the 1982 Submarine Hunt
(CÖrlBO INT) CÖrlBO Underrättelseorienteringar (Chief of Naval Base East,
Intelligence Briefings), October, 1982.
(CörlBO WD) CÖrlBO Krigsdagbok (Chief Naval Base East, Rear Admiral Christer
Kierkegaard, War Diary), September 27 – October 15 1982.
(CMS WD) CMS Krigsdagbok (War Diary of Chief of the Mine Troops and the Chief
of Mälsten Coastal Defence Base [Chief MS under Stockholm Coastal Defence]
Lieutenant Colonel Sven-Olof Kviman), October 6-15, 1982.
(CMS HWD) CMS Krigsdagbok (Hand-written War Diary of Chief of the Mine
Troops and the Chief of Mälsten Coastal Defence Base [CMS under Stockholm
Coastal Defence] Lieutenant Colonel Sven-Olov Kviman), October 6-15, 1982.
(CMS2 WD) CMS Krigsdagbok (War Diary of Chief of the Mine Barrage MS2
[under the Chief of Mälsten Coastal Defence Base] Lieutenant Johan Eneroth),
October 6-15, 1982.
(CMS Reports) Special reports about incidents at Mälsten Coastal Defence Base from
October 11, 12 and October 14, 1982 (signed by Sven-Olof Kviman and Per
(FOA Tape 0-11) Protocol for the speaker channel on the tapes recorded at Mälsten
between 11-28 October (The tapes had one channel for each of the four microphones
plus one speaker channel for comments from the sonar operator). The tapes were sent
to FOA and were called ‘FOA 0’ – ‘FOA 11’ (Protokoll made by Chef MUSAC Peter
Gnipping June 2001 for Ambassador Rolf Ekéus Submarine Investigation, The Ekéus
Investigation Files, Riksarkivet, Stockholm).
(LGP HWD) Lars-G Persson, Dagbok (Handskriven) (The Hand-written Diary of
Lieutenant General Lars-G Persson), September 27 – October 15, 1982.
(MAFU Report) Protocol from the tape-recording of underwater sounds in the
Mälsten area from the so called ‘FOA testing station’. The report is made by Rolf
Andersson from FMV (Swedish Defence Material), October 11-12, 1982.
(MAna Hårsfj 1982) Marinens Ananlysgrupp Rapport från Hårsfjärdsincidenten (The
Naval Analysis Group Report for the Hårsfjärden incident under Captain Emil
Svensson). The report cover the period September 27 – October 15, 1982.
(MAna Hårsfj FOA 1982) Marinens Ananlysgrupp Rapport (Attachment 38,
Subattachment 2). FOA’s rapport om bandinspelningar vid Mälsten: Ananlysresultat
sammanfattning. 20 October 1982 (FOA report on the tape-recorded sounds at
Mälsten 11-14 October.
(SCSK Report) ‘Ubåtsincident Hårsfjärden’ (Submarine incident Hårsfjärden). Report
from day-to-day decision at the Stockholm Coastal Defence Staff in Vaxholm under
Chief of Staff, Lieutenant Colonel Jan Svenhager. The report cover the period of
October 5 – 14.
(Y46 Report) Drawing and notes made by the personnel on the helicopter Y46 after
its reconnaissance trip to Mälsten-Måsknuv on 11 October 1982
(ÖB HWD) ÖB Lennart Ljung, Dagbok (Handskriven) (The Hand-written Diary of
the Commander-in-Chief, General Lennart Ljung), Krigsarkivet, Stockholm (The
Stockholm War Archive), September 30 – October 15, 1982.
(ÖB TD) ÖB Lennart Lennart Ljung, Dagbok (Utskriven) (The Typed Diary of the
Commander-in-Chief, General Lennart Ljung), Krigsarkivet, Stockholm (The
Stockholm War Archive), 1978-1986.
Declassified or Partly Declassified Reports or Notes Made after 1982
(CM/Grandin, 1982) ‘Granskning av ubåtsjaktverksamheten mot bakgrund av
händelserna I Stockholms skärgård’, av Gunnar Grandin (ordförande) och Sven-Åke
Adler (vise ordförande) för Chefen för Marinen 3 december 1982 (Swedish Navy
internal investigation on the Hårsfjärden submarine hunt by Rear Admiral Gunnar
Grandin (Chairman) and Sven-Åke Adler (Vice Chairman) for the Chief of Navy 3
Ekéus Investigation Files (2001), Riksarkivet (Swedish National Archive). These files
includes some 269 documents: notes, letters and reports. Notes from interviews are
(Försvarsstaben, 1987) Rapport om undervattensverksamhet som riktats mot vårt land
(Report about subsurface activity against our country), signed Bengt Gustafsson and
Thorsten Engberg (Stockholm: Försvarsstaben, 25 Novmber 1987).
(Kierkegaard et. al., 1990). PM 27 December: ‘Hårsfjärdsincidenten 1982 –
Erfarenheter och reflektioner i ett snart 10-årigt perspektiv’ (The Hårsfjärden Incident
1982 – Experiencies and Reflections in a Soon 10-years Perspective signed by Rear
Admiral Christer Kierkegaard, Commander Lars Erik Hoff and Commander Rolf
(Svensson, Emil, 1995) ‘Slutrapport Ubåtssamtalen’ (Final Report – The Submarine
Talks [with the Russian Counterpart]), Emil Svensson (Ordförande [Chairman]),
January 24, 1995.
Statements and Interviews on TV
Olof Palme, ‘Aktuellt’, Swedish TV1; ‘Rapport’, Swedish TV2, (26 April 1983).
John McWethy, ‘World News Tonight’, ABC, (21 March, 1984).
Richard Marcinko, Red Cell – Secret SEAL Terrorist Operations (Video). (Boulder:
Paladin Press, 1993).
Ingvar Carlsson, ‘Aktuellt’, Swedish TV1, (25 October 1999).
Caspar Weinberger, ‘Striptease’, Swedish TV2, (7 March 2000).
Bengt Gustafsson, Striptease, Swedish TV2, (7 March 2000).
Sven-Olof Kviman, ‘Aktuellt’, Swedish TV1, (7 March 2000).
Göran Persson, ’Rapport’, Swedish TV2, (8 March 2000).
George Robertson, Aktuellt’, Swedish TV1, (29 March 2000).
Björn von Sydow, Swedish TV2, (29 March 2000).
Keith Speed, ‘Striptease’, Swedish TV2, (11 April 2000).
Books and Articles
Adelsohn, Ulf, Partiledare – Dagbok 1981-1986 (Diary of the Conservative Party
Leader Ulf Adelsohn 1981-1986) (Malmö: Gedins Förlag, 1987).
Agrell, Wilhelm, Bakom ubåtskrisen – Militär verksamhet, krigsplanläggning och
diplomati i Östersjöområdet (Behind the Submarine Crisis – Military Activity, War
Planning and Diplomacy in Baltic Sea Area) (Stockholm: Liber, 1986).
Aland, T & B. Zachrisson, Berättelser om Palme (Stockholm: Norstedts, 1996).
Bergström, Lars & Klas Åmark, (eds), Ubåtsfrågan – En kritisk granskning av den
svenska nutidshistoriens viktigaste säkerhetspolitiska dilemma (Uppsala: Verdandi,
Bildt, Carl. ‘Sweden and the Soviet Submarines’, Survival, vol. Xxv, no. 4
July/August (1983), pp. 165-9.
Bodstöm, Lennart, 1999. ‘Politik och ubåtar’ (Politics and Submarines), pp. 151-164
in Bergström, Lars & Klas Åmark, (eds), Ubåtsfrågan – En kritisk granskning av den
svenska nutidshistoriens viktigaste säkerhetspolitiska dilemma (Uppsala: Verdandi,
Bodström, Lennart. Mitt i Stormen (Stockholm: Hjalmarson & Högberg, 2000).
Bruzelius, Nils. ‘Sveriges territorialhav – En motorväg för ubåtar’ (Sweden’s
Territorial Sea – A Highway for Submarines), Marinnytt, no. 5-6 (1982).
Bruzelius, Nils. ‘Ett motiv till ubåtskränkningarna’ (A Motive for the Submarine
Intrusions), Tidskrift i sjöväsende, no. 1 (1995).
Carlsson, Ingvar. Ur skuggan av Olof Palme (Out of the Shaddow of Olof Palme).
(Stockholm: Hjalmarson & Högberg, 1999).
Cole, Paul M. Neutralité du Jour – The Conduct of Swedish Security Policy Since
1945 (Ann Arbor MI: UMI Dissertation Service, 1990).
Compton-Hall, Richard. ‘Re-emergence of the Midgets’, Military Technology, no. 10
(1987), pp. 39-46.
Craven, John P. The Silent War – The Cold War Battle Beneath the Sea (New York:
Simon & Schuster, 2001).
Foster, Nigel. The Making of a Royal Marines Commando (London: Pan Books,
Macmillan, 1998 ).
Hansen, Lynn M. Soviet Navy Spetsnaz Operations on the Northern Flank:
Implications for Defence of Western Europe. STRATECH STUDIES SS84-2 (This
study was prepared for the office of the Secretary of Defense/Net Assessment),
(Center for Strategic Technology, The Texas Engineering Experiment Station of the
Texas A&M University System, 1984).
Hasselbohm, Anders. Ubåtshotet – En kritisk granskning av Hårsfjärdsincidenten och
ubåtsskyddskommissionens rapport (Stockholm: Prisma, 1984).
Hasselbohm, Anders. ‘Fem år och två månader efter Hårsfjärden kommer
bekräftelsen: Skadad ubåt smög ut genom Öresund’, Dagens Industri, December 17
Holmström, Mikael. ’Marinchef i exil skulle försvara riket’, Svenska Dagbladet 22
Janes’s Fighting Ships (from 1974-5 every year to 2001-2), Jane’s Information
Kadhammar, Peter. ‘Vi tvingades släppa ubåtten – Dagbok från ubåtsjakten’ (We
were Forced to Release the Submarine – Brigadier-General Lars Hansson’s Diary
from the Submarine Hunt), Z, 25 November (1987), pp. 99-107.
Kelly, Orr (1995) Never Fight Fair – Navy SEALs’ Stories of Combat and
Adventure. Novata CA: Presidio Press.
Kemp, Paul. Underwater Warriors – The Fighting History of Midget Submarines
(London: Cassel Military Paperbacks, 1996).
Lampers, Lars Olof. Bodströmaffären och det säkerhetspolitiska debattklimatet i
Sverige 1982-1985 (Stockholm: Statsvetenskapliga Institutionen, Stockholms
Leitenberg, Milton. Soviet Submarine Operations in Swedish Waters 1980-1986. The
Washington Papers/128, CSIS (New York: Praeger, 1987).
MccGwire, Michael. Military Objectives in Soviet Foreign Policy (Washington
D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1987).
McCormick, Gordon H. Stranger than Fiction – Soviet Submarine Operations in
Swedish Waters. (R-3776-AF) A Project AIR FORCE report prepared for the United
States Air Force, Rand Corporation, January (1990).
Mellbourn, Anders. ‘Efter ubåtsrapporten 1983 – Palme tvingad peka ut Sovjet’,
Dagens Nyheter, 6 March (1988).
Peterson, Thage G. Resan mot Mars – Anteckningar och minnen (Stockholm:
Ring, Jim. We Come Unseen – The Untold Story of Britain’s Cold War Submariners
(London: John Murray, 2001).
Sontag, Sherry & Christopher Drew with Annette Lawrence Drew. Blind Man’s
Bluff – The Untold Story of American Submarine Espionage (New York:
Stubblefield, Gary. Inside the US Navy SEALs (Oskeola (WI): Motorbooks
Stütz, Göran. Opinion 87 – En opinionsundersökning om svenska folkets inställning
till några samhälls- och försvarsfrågor hösten 1987 (Stockholm: Styrelsen för
psykologiskt försvar. December 1987).
Taylor, William J. & Steven A. Maaranen. ‘Conclusion: Thinking About Strategy’,
pp. 459-480 in William J. Taylor & Steven A. Maaranen (eds), The Future of
Conflict in the 1980s (Lexington: Lexington Books, 1982).
Thunborg, Anders. ‘Ohållbart att peka ut Sovjetunionen’, Dagens Nyheter, 6 May
Tunander, Ola. Norden och USAs maritima strategi – En studie av Nordens
förändrade strategiska läge (The Nordic Countries and US Maritime Strategy – A
Study of the Changed Strategic Position of the Nordic Countries). Försvarets
Forskningsanstalt (Swedish Defence Research Establishment), FOA Rapport C
10295-1.4 September (1987).
Tunander, Ola. Cold Water Politics – The Maritime Strategy and Geopolitics of the
Northern Front (London: Sage, 1989).
Tunander, Ola. The Secret War Against Sweden – US and British Submarine
Deception in the 1980s (London: Frank Cass, 2004).
Weinland, Robert G. ‘Soviet Naval Buildup in the High North’, pp. 22-44 in Sverre
Jervell and Kåre Nyblom (eds), The Military Buildup in the High North – American
and Nordic Perspectives (Lanham, MD & London: Center for international Affairs
Harvard University / University Press of America 1986).
Religion was the means by which the Russian Federation and the Soviet Union was infiltrated and it is the modus operandi of infiltration, subversion and harassment today.
The democratic loving peaceniks and hippies that think they are carrying out the vast gift of democracy as bastion of democratic movements not once stopping to think who is at the top or in control of their movement, or where is the funding coming from.
The legacy of the student movement protest was effectively split (divide and conquer). They are allowed to think they are independent of the ruling powers when they are not. The childish fervor is used as a means so not as to pump excess monies at them, their conviction and drive is thus used as an effective tool against them and the opponents of the west.
The current generations of democratic protestors do not fully understand psychological and information warfare and its many complex dimensions and how they themselves can be snared and manipulated into doing the bidding of the same power elites they are protesting against.
These fools still don’t get it:
Allow me to elaborate:
The western electorate is caught in a genjutsu:
By creating the illusion of democracy.
This pattern started to emerge (Poject Infinite Tsukuyomi /月の眼計画, Tsuki no Me Keikaku)after the 9/11 incident
One administration through its policies counter to the national interest alienates the electorate or voting citizenry who become enraged and pissed off, in doing so votes out the ruling parties and company as punishment thinking themselves satisfied and democracy prevails. However does it really? NO, the replaced parties are just the continuation of the first group with the initial promises and proposal counter to the first. This is just a superficial make over designed to fool (the great illusion) and is only laid bare when the voting citizenry realize not much has changed, business is the same as usual, the same policies and injustices are carried on under the guise of change and a different name.
Things don’t change only the people who are placed as the face of the times do, so as to create the illusion of change.
This has happened in Europe also
If the voting citizenry thinks change will come in the from voting in the next guy, the are falling into the same illusion and caught in the genjutsu loop.
Change comes from the bottom up not top down.
3 Oct 2012
Pain along spine continues, with headaches, chest pain and difficult breathing, swollen tongue, pain in throat. I have no plans of returning to new york as I have never considered it a my home, nothing but trouble from that state as well as trouble from here.Abdominal pain increasing, starting to have massive abdominal and spinal pain.
TYPE ERROR FROM EARLIER-THEY COULD NOT
They COULD NOT implement project infinite Tsyukuyomi in The Russian Federation so Russia is repeatedly attacked
The manga was used to describe and observation, that is all.
They COULD NOT implement project Tsyukuyomi in The Russian Federation.
By asserting its sovereignty Russian disproves their equation
Not one mention of this in the human rights class-ignorance is usually feinged when it is brought up:
“A federal appeals court has extended a stay on the injunction blocking the notorious indefinite detention provision in the 2012 defense bill that lets the US government jail any American without end over even suspected terrorist ties.
This comes as attorneys for the White House fight to lift the order imposed by a federal judge last month that made permanent an injunction on a statute of the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA. On Tuesday, an appeals panel weighed in to offer the latest installment in the Hedges v Obama saga and agreed to side with the White House.
President Barack Obama signed the NDAA into law late last year, and the now infamous provision that allows for indefinite detention of US citizens without trial — Section 1021 — was challenged in court shortly thereafter by a team of plaintiffs led by former New York Times journalist Chris Hedges.
The Obama administration insists that the indefinite detention provisions of the legislation are necessary for the safety and security of the nation, a claim that Hedges and his colleagues have condemned whole-heartedly in the ten months since the NDA went on the books. Journalists and human rights activists insist that Section 1021 actually allows the government to label any American citizen as a suspected terrorist and then treat them accordingly.
“We conclude that the public interest weighs in favor of granting the government’s motion for a stay,” Appeals Court Judges Denny Chin, Raymond Lohier and Christopher Droney — all appointed by President Obama — wrote in a three-page order that also expedited the appeal. POLITICO obtained the motion on Tuesday (.pdf).
“Upon due consideration, it is hereby ORDERED that the government’s motion is GRANTED.”
The order by appeals court comes after Judge Lohier temporarily blocked Judge Forrest’s decision, using a so-called administrative stay on September 17.
The appeals court judges argue against the fears of Hedges and his co-plaintiffs, decision that in its motion the US government “clarifies unequivocally that, ‘based on their stated activities,’ plaintiffs, ‘journalists and activists[,] . . . are in no danger whatsoever of ever being captured and detained by the US military.’”
They also stated, “the statute does not affect the existing rights of United States citizens or other individuals arrested in the United States.”
In May, Judge Forrest ruled Section 1021 of the NDAA failed to “pass constitutional muster” and ordered a temporary injunction.
In its original form, the NDAA allows the military hold anyone accused of having “substantially supported” al-Qaeda, the Taliban or “associated forces” until “the end of hostilities” and indefinitely imprison anyone who commits a “belligerent act” against the United States, yet fails to explicitly define what is constituted as such. In her injunction, Judge Forrest said, “In the face of what could be indeterminate military detention, due process requires more.”
“An individual could run the risk of substantially supporting or directly supporting an associated force without even being aware that he or she was doing so,” Judge Forrest ruled.
During both a question-and-answer session on Reddit.com last week and during a recent appearance at a Bradley Manning fundraiser in Washington, Mr. Hedges expressed fear over his personal assumption that the Obama administration is already using the NDAA to hold Americans without trial. Because of the White House’s relentless legal fight to keep Section 1021 on the books, Hedges say, he fears that American-Pakistani dual-citizens could already be behind bars without charge.
Plaintiffs and their attorneys say they intend on taking the case to the Supreme Court.”
This resiliency training Dina Dhabny Miraglia used to go on about-just another government run experiment-induce the condition then find the cure-Dina did admit that she did some training =psychological for the government-how ironic to find a lot of things discussed in the military programs.
There response on their t-shirts of why -well just because was one of the answers-
They get persons of different ethnic groups on this island to hurl dirty looks, snare and other psyops,harassments at you, as if I am to believe they are the representatives of the Chinese, Japanese, Russians etc.
As if any of those countries would send people all the way to o’ahu to harass me psychologically, yeah right. All that shows is who is in the employ of influence of certain individuals or agencies and as I said this whole island is an entire spy network. Which makes since,t raining a generation of Asian ethnicities in intelligence craft and what not.
That the NDAA was stayed by the courts, means that war is coming, more than likely to hold the protestors indefinitely. There will be a lot of disappointments after the November elections.
For years these people built and profile wrongfully so and then they say just because…/
The African American woman at the intersection oft he pearl harbor road leading to the Arizona memorial was kind enough to point to her red shoes.
Laughing I hear a lot of it these days loud and intoned in public settings not natural but orchestrated, the difference between facetious and original one supposes, and am reminded of the form of civilized oppression in which the Europeans used to think to be overtly humorous was a sign of incivility.
It is also the case that humor is also a weapon of oppression, I think its called put-down humor-people often forget to make the distinction between laughing with and at someone and the context is always lost in translation
For such a penetration to occur it took years, false flags and well placed moles it is astound this level of manuevering
my observation nothing more
I would have never thought it possible to induce someone into action or committing a crime or the like had I not experienced this type of harassment, which of course is publicly known and there are blatant examples and prejudices.
they don’t care that these people they induce are innocent before said crime, the induce a psychophysiological condition and wait for the person to ac then so oh, we found something.
Random observations, musing facts and the like
A scientist many moons ago discovered something intriguing. That vessels of numerous classes, types and disposition can be found and tracked at nearly all ocean depths, distance and even aircraft using one often overlooked and craft factor (technique)
The publication later disappeared and was relagated to the dustbin of history never to be seen again
Something to think about-by something to think about means what an interesting area of research-who knew.
I have no need to wear dark glasses , my eyes have nothing to hide-my glasses are big wide brimmed
As expected Turkey has been goaded into a course that will see manuevered into a position of hostility this was widely predicted by some.
No wonder the secularists war over thrown-as observed infiltration through religion
4 Oct 2012
Not a peep from PACE on the following, I wonder why:
Homeland Security gathers ‘crap intelligence’ and spies on Americans
I couldn’t help but notice at the last RES class I stayed back to ask the instructor a question and two of the keys went missing. We asked every but know one knew, no mind you were were all in the class facing the same direction at the same times, come to find out the keys were in the bag and the on of the students whose’ colleague had not showed up due to an alleged sun burn, stayed back also and in passing mentioned to the instructor I stayed back I saw you were nervous.
Nervous of who? A scary short back man
It appears someone is using their alleged policing powers spreading rumors at various places I go.
Secret Cold War tests in St. Louis raise concerns
ST. LOUIS (AP) — Doris Spates was a baby when her father died inexplicably in 1955. She has watched four siblings die of cancer, and she survived cervical cancer.
After learning that the Army conducted secret chemical testing in her impoverished St. Louis neighborhood at the height of the Cold War, she wonders if her own government is to blame.
In the mid-1950s, and again a decade later, the Army used motorized blowers atop a low-income housing high-rise, at schools and from the backs of station wagons to send a potentially dangerous compound into the already-hazy air in predominantly black areas of St. Louis.
5 Oct 2012
Alll thes voilation, program of civil right s ect within the las decade are so are varionts on known Nazi counterintelligance internal stabilization and subversion places.
IT is amazing that no one has yet noticed
It is even more amaing that niether political camps have remarked on this
Which speaks volumes
It is as I said, one hands tickle the democrats and the other the the repulicans and thus continues the illusion of democracy
Well that is why they placed those gentleman in the HWST
and the 19th Century Russian Literature class harass and act as a deterrent because they told those professors some false story of some psychological condition:
The scary short black man
I will not be looking at HWST history in the same light, when I have Hawaiians and those implying to be at the behest of external forces harassing me
I am not int he business of goading people and trying to set them up under unscrupulous means and shout “oh look a job well done.” There is a name for such behavior farce
In Other random observations:
С Днем Рождения
To the gentleman from Moscow
Elaborate in scope meant to cast the Hawaiians in a bad light and the other ethnic groups at the same time manipulating others.
If one is not a care observer one would assume that hte attack i scoming from one side or the other alternating sources of atacks based upon manipulated disposiotns and views of religons politics, etc all the while there is and was only one source of all this.
Now you have a picture of what is being done in Russia
Stalin had his own secret service outside of the KGB as he Did not Trust a few individuals and had investigations done but by the time they could reach him it was too late he had already died. So secretive was this organization that they could not risk exposure in contacting him directly at the time of his near incapacitation.
They were lost to the dust bin of history, the Upper echelons of the Council of Ministers of the Soviet Union had already been infiltrated and it was one agent who the were determined to find so close but yet so far away the trail was a most interesting and unexpected one-even today to think at such cunning and the shear simplicity of it is beyond admiration down to the last detail of this plan.
And one specificity in recent international relations caught my eye for it near exactitude and the most uncanny of manner.
6 Oct 2012
The various ethnic, religious and political groups involved advertently and inadvertently in co-opting and obscuring of native hawaiian identity.
If one solely visits the Island of O’ahu, one could easily mistake the myriad pacific islanders and other ethnic groups as native Hawaiians.
It is this obscuration that has allowed the western the hold on HAwaii through manipulation of demographics, through various inter-ethnic relationships *which cannot be helped-you can’t help who you fall in love with) and supporting those identities of mixed and perceived Hawaiians alined towards the christian, western or dominant spectrum at the expense of native hawaiian identity.
Thus, control is maintained in one form or another.
By manipulating the sensibilities and dispositions of these various groups or factions, making, imparting or insinuating such claims as “he is not religious”, or “her is not your political stripe,” or he is anti-female or anti-kids (Don’t laugh-yes they have done all this-no kidding) various factions are enticed into harassing and spying on each other
Otherwise known as classic divide and conquer
My Humble observations nothing more
8 Oct 2012
Growing up and going to school where I lived at that age it was common for kids to walk to school if within walking distance or catch the minibus, as our parents had no cars or privately owned vehicles at the time.
This is harassment of the religious nature
They place these individuals (pawns) in your way or vector so that you can through psychological means develop some sort of sympathy and engage in the human rights and spreading democracy movements, which serve to undermine the internal stability of various states.
9 Oct 2012
The harassers in the 19th century Russian literature class are well known, along with Agent M and her cohort Mr. V
As for Professor Bennett unusual for a Russian name, as I know the last name well and it is not Russian.
One cannot tell if one is supposed to like or hate Russia the way that that class is structured…it is a fair guess that most of the students developed a critical disposition of Russia from a lot of their comments.
Case in point, we are currently finishing up “Fathers and Children” By Turgeneyev
Everyone has something negative to say about Bazarov. No doubt the stunning theme of existentialism in the book is breathtaking.
Well, the case of fathers and sons is one of tradition versus change, existentialism versus the incorporeal.
Bazarov straddles the line of existentialism anarchism
Realizing the need for change, he proposes, but does not advocate his solution as he clearly realizes nether the traditionalists not the radicals have a viable solution.
The translation to fathers and sons was done purposefully I surmise by western propagandists.
It is a struggle of reconciling the past (fathers) and the future (children).
The class focuses their attention on Bazarov’s perceived condescension and hypocrisy to the peasant class, on the contrary he recognizes the need for change and makes his position clear, but he does he go about advocating and spreading his idea of change, the book (or at least the translation they have for the class calls it nihilism)
Bazarov recognizes the need for change, but he knows the failings of the aristocracy (prejudice and classism) as well as the peasantry (mob rule mentality)
His death was more about that than anything else. He was a man of science who advocated the scientific method, but in that brief moment in the end he put his hand in the old ways with out the new medical and doctoral methods of using a glove or sterilization and thus contracted the illness and died. By doing the procedure the old way (without gloves or protection) he put his hands into the traditional way and died.
In the end the characters that survive are indicative of eternal Russia, moves forward and finds a way to reconcile change. This we see in the characters endings. Arcady engrosses himself in the estate management, his father is involved in land reforms, his uncle and Madame Kukshin move abroad to Germany where the science of the day rules, furthering Bazarov’s cause which lives on and his parents reconcile them selves (at least in this translation, I haven’t read the original in Russian yet) with their life without end eternal religious traditionalism symbolized by the flower above is grave.
Thus the two sides reconcile themselves in a common but divergent ways. Bazarov lives on in his ideas to those whom held his views by spreading them such as Arcady and Madam Kukshin and in the traditional way to his parents. Thus the two sides reconcile themselves by varying in interpretation.
They will do everything to attack Russia as such Russia must be eternally vigilant
If the new nuclear plan of NATO is to try and get the Russian Federation to move its nuclear stockpile away from Europe while maintaining of 200 warheads in Europe, that plan it is a dead cat.
[It also affirms that, “in any future reductions, [NATO’s] aim should be to seek Russian agreement to increase transparency on its nuclear weapons in Europe and relocate these weapons away from the territory of NATO members.”]
There is a two fold problem and concealed motive here, as NATO Expands to the borders of Russia, that means nuclear weapons will be stationed near the borders of Russia, while demanding Russia relocate their weapons away from the territory of the EU and NATO members. Why this is a blatant contradiction, riddled with a trap. (That trap being containment and neutralization)
To quote the phrase, “…. nuclear weapons in Europe and relocate these weapons away from the territory of NATO members,” means that this is a two ponged attack to expand NATO so as to create the conditions of its borders close to the Russian Federation in order to make the demand that it (The Russian Federation) remove its weapons close from its (NATO’s) borders, which would be close to Russia’s borders, so as to contain and neutralize Russia’s deterrent within the country. It is nothing more than containment in disguise and the Russian Federation, as a sovereign state is now obliged to defend itself.
My Observation nothing more
10 Oct 2012
The usual suspects disappeared yesterday and a different group came back.
Today they are back again.
Second part of the harass they used people believed to be beyond suspicion or those perceived beyond to harass you
Moscow is right in many ways, but the shear magnitude of this harassment and resources means that they develop, work and scope out potential recruits or people they can manipulate at a very young age it’s not beyond plausability
As for the harassment and coercion-every possible ethnic group is used so as to create or condition to create the impression of on group or country, when all along it was one source
Mr Robert Hicks before he left in a degrading manner said “you should consider yourself, a failure, and just die, go kill yourself”
The Hawaiians continue to think they got a good deal
and the universe moves on.
“comrade wolf know whom to eat” Indeed!
Stalin had more than ample evidence and well-placed sources of how the west would infiltrate the Soviet Union
Religion and Christianity has been the historical means by which the west performs social infiltration
The conditioned image of the Christian or religious missionary was one of someone nonviolent and non-threatening doing the seemingly infallible and object work of the religion.
The conditions were and had to be created too lay the foundations for religion. This was both facilitated and instigated in various contexts, so as to create the dichotomy of us versus them, or more specifically the appearance or condition of religious persecution.
Once this was achieved, various underground religious movements and sects were recruited to fight the ungodly communists. This fostered generations of 5th columns or weak points to use against the Soviet Union and establish secure lines of communication and travel in and out of the Soviet Union undetected.
Faced with this dilemma and Intel, what was Stalin to do?
Close the Churches? Ban Religion? The west knowing and hoping that was exactly he would do, as this would fan and fuel the flames. He fell into the Trap
The same is going on to day albeit in a more modified and repackaged form. By manipulating the dispositions and sensibilities of the various factions of Russia’s political spectrum, enticing various groups to espouse extremist ideology and behavior, this done whether it be the Communists, Neo-Nazis (that’s a whole different history and covert ops program all together), Orthodox, Muslims or Non-Religious groups, the attempt is being made of conditioning instability the Russian Federation.
If they can conduct this type of harassment with impunity, what does that tell you? That htye have built an extensive network here, that’s what ti tells you.
11 Oct 2012
Letting us in on a secret
While walking towards my car, at the circular building across from the university drive intersection, after class today two, gentlemen ( Dark complexion, I
could not tell if they were mixed, hawaiians or not at the time) placed themselves along my path and walked away in a hurried manner as a car came scurrying around the corner. Their sang “stop teasing me” in a teasing manner.
Under other circumstances a response and demonstration would be in other, however only megalomaniacs pay notice to such doltish teasing, beside it would be a crime to respond in said manner above the teasing.
Comfortable in their belief of being protected on the o’hau
One hand presents a facade and the other instigates
One hand purports to engage Russia while the other or others instigate within the territory
This the Russian Federation knows, so it moves on in modernizing the country
while defending it self
My observation-nothing more
I know a lot about fraternities and masonic lodges
Stalin knew a lot about them too-he was mostly interested in why they pointed their swords towards the Soviet Union
Those who know, knows where the trinity comes from-no not the biblical history, the real history but that for another day , do not get distracted from the matter at hand
Thailand-in Moore hall at UH Manoa Right Before RUS 101 class the screen plays images of Thailand, you notice it as you enter the hall way , what a coincidence?
It doesn’t matter , if you were going to China them some instability would have created in china-extensive networks built up during the cold war.
well they use and discard you, and as such the Russian Federation must protect itself.
12 Oct 2012
It is religious harassment or the appearance thereof and it is done in such a manner as to inflict religious conversion, doubt, guilt and questioning without casting suspicion. It is the interspersed references to the religious covertly, while externally harassing to the commit these people to some sort of religious following. A very wide network indeed.
Once the person commits to some religious following, they fall into the trap and the inter-subjectivity is created to pit religion against religion, belief against belief or to manipulate that religious belief for some other benefit.
They intend to cast every debate or conflict into a religious conflagration to divide and conquer. However there is a risk with this mode. It can backfire and people will most likely shun religion, from being tired of the conflict and conflagration
As I said, one can harness the abstract momentum of the universe but one will not, have no way of and cannot and know what the end result would be.
In this striving to control, the universe does not bend to our will.
Russia must be ever watchful of the Maltese Falcons.
I remember the nurse sneaking into the emergency room talking about being from the New England area and that injection
It was placed in the water at FOB FENTY
What is it that would make Russia Great?
Russia shall soon have something that will make it second to none in the world.
The alcohol in the fridge is the roommates-I do not drink
Well I told you, they either use you as a medical guinea pig of a celebrity display and when your usefulness is up discard you on to the next candidate
Why do you think all those songs by minority celebrities wanting to be rich and a billionaire and all that jazz. They control nothing-glorified employees that’s all
Selling dreams and peddling false hopes, that is what they do, truth be damned
Random observations of random observations:
14 Oct 2012
They latch themselves on to the wealthy, celebrities, intellectuals or those who would be in order to siphon off their talents and monies by unscrupulous and nefarious means. That is how they’ve been getting funding initially and as a backup.
Went to Barnes and noble yesterday to finish some work.
When I first arrived on this island very few places I went to did accept debit transactions, now they only accept credit, strange coincidence.
Barnes and noble no longer accept debit transactions.
Anyhoo, I was there yesterday and the usual suspects came out, one of their operating bases is the Barnes and noble at ala moana mall. Like clockwork, when the other seekers came, they did their harassment, emplaced their people, got their Intel and disappeared. Someone is feeding them inside information.
The west in its messianic felt justified by any means necessary in attacking, disrupting and dismantling of the soviet union.
To them that meant instigating confrontation, even if innocent people died. The legacy left from this and I have heard it repeated numerous times, is the conviction and mantra that “no one his innocent,” that is why they habitually set people up or put them in compromising situations in order to blackmail, so that they can control. Celebrities, leaders, activists have all been done this way.
My observation nothing more
In that class they lady sat there in lamenting tone about how Russia is too big, distort history about the Caucuses and wax religious sentiment, Psyops at its mediocre.
Every time the Russian orthodox church gets into a tiffy it is instigated and meant to project, highlight and spotlight you as the grand manipulator of Russian political life so as to create a “boogeyman” to castigate and scape goat. It is also meant to create intersubjective conflict.
If I was the patriarch I would stay out of politics, say nothing to the provocation and respond when it is warranted, i.e. to present factual evidence counter to a claim. It denies the instigator the platform of instigation.
Every provocative act is meant to pull the Russian orthodox churching into intervening or tacking action in so aspect of social-politcal life to make an accusation of non-seperation of church and state. It was the same trap used against the Soviet Union but in reverse.
My Observation nothing more
Can you manipulate stop and redirect traffic, with moving or roving traffic stoppers on the back of trucks, who knows especially since there are videos of strange people rummaging through your place of dwelling while your are stuck in traffic. coincidence
When you have randoms strangers driving up to your car whom you have never met before, give dirty looks, wipe their eyes in a crying mocking motions and laughter at you and drive away, is that random coincidence?
coincidences I wonder of T Pease is related to Major Frank Pease was president of the Hollywood Technical Director’s Institute
15 Oct 2012
What is going on his religious tyranny
It was not atheists that invaded three countries in the middle east
it was religious fanatics
It was not atheists that attacked and contributed to the dissolution of the Soviet Union it was religious fanatics
It is not atheists threatening the world now with the onset of WWIII, its religious fanatics
Aided and abetted by religious organizations, secret orders and religious sects, anthropologists and revisionist history
The lackey in LING 102 made sure I saw the Jesus shirts-
It it was someone else , that guy probably would have been pummeled-sending harassers to their demise.
The whole thing is nothing more than religious harssament
They have harassed many to their deaths-sinister and sickening stuff all for control
This is the evil the Russian Federation faces
Why don’t you ask the lady from new york, she knows about the suicides as a result of the psychological experiment on the unsuspecting public
16 Oct 2012
What thinking in abstracts can do for you:
17 Oct 2012
So we are currently reading Anna Karinen
As usual everyone in the class is enthralled with the plight of the peasantry, their horrible treatment at the hands of the Aristocracy and Anna’s ill treatment.
Well, as the class progresses, in these reading I see the re-occurring themes of struggle and change. During that time in Europe and the world, Religion was a central part of the power dynamic and social structures of not just European but Russian society.
A lot of the dominant social norms, customs and practices in Russia at that time was predicated on and structured around religious values and doctrine. If the peasantry suffered, that was a result of this intrinsic nature and influence of the church, as the Tsar and most royals in Europe at the time claimed rule, title and disposition of territory and peoples by rule of divine right (more commonly termed divine rule) established during the age of Absolutism.
Anna suffers from this because as a Christian (orthodox) woman she was expected to maintain a life of obedience and piety. In most cultures the burden was and is placed upon women to transmit and maintain the cultural practices, norms and teachings, especially during that time. The peasantry was expect to be lay, obedient and god fearing.
There was no concept of universal suffrage or universal education (except within some societies and circles, but only for the selected few) and the church did not support it, unless the teachers were religious or to maintain the status quo.
This is why the Soviets, attacked the church and anything religious. The student movements of the time wanted to educate (Foolish as the idea was-you can’t give knowledge, you can only inspire) and free the peasantry. Russia’s astute intellectuals knew that Russian could not advance technologically unless it had a wide technological and intellectual base. They could not rely solely on the Aristocracy to produce the intellectual pool for an industrial base, as the rest of the major powers were in a race for military and industrial supremacy in an elaborate game of economic brinksmanship.
The church at the time was interested in maintaining its center of power. Gradually, the Christian faiths started incorporating education and scientific teaches, but usually as a result of war, to further occult knowledge of the religious, or to some extent, put a lid on the supremacy of scientific teachings. Thus, the co-opting of science to incorporate religious themes and discourse began, as was the case with the Jesuits, various protestant denominations, the Anglican Church, and Catholicism.
The Soviets in their fervor for change embarked on a program to “Educate the peasantry,” who were already steeped in centuries of religious traditions, did not want it.
This is the gist of the conflicts and themes of 19th century Russian literature; the past versus the future, and how to reconcile the two. It was this vector, which the west was able to effectively exploit in order to effectively disrupt and attack the Soviet Union.
Western Aristocracy and elites, even to this day, do not care about religion so long as it remains a tool, which allows them to maintain hegemonic control.
Whole regions were thrown, facilitated and allowed to be flung into turmoil for the explicit purpose of have populations run to the arms of religions or maintain chaos, as this was established as an effective means of world domination.
Stalin found this out; a lot about his secret organizations have been underestimated.
Thus we are full circle with the same situation with the Russian Federation today. Religion was facilitated or allowed back into the Soviet space precisely to sow the seeds of these conflicts as a means of destabilization; with the eventual goal being, the gradual disintegration of the Russian federation by fomenting generations of hostility.
It is a plan older that the 1917 Revolution, older the Tsar Nicholas’ II reign. Intelligence agents of the Tsar in fact, were the ones who found this plan in a most unsuspecting and inauspicious place.
Before the Tsar could do anything about it, well the rest was history. Before Stalin could do anything about it, well the rest was history. He did however; find the extent of infiltration of one specific religious network, one that he had discovered while in his theological studies, it astounded him.
So here we are again, full circle, how to reconcile the Past with the present and future, the Religious with the non-religious in Modern Russia.
They do not care about Russia; only Russia can care about Russia and take care of itself.
18 Oct 2012
Fairy tales you say?
Believing that gentleman shot himself in the head in the underground bunker of the Nazi headquarters is a fairy tail. An amusing one at that.
What is it Herr Nietzsche used to say?
“convictions are a more dangerous enemies, than lies are to the truth”
There are many myths told throughout history in order to obscure the truth, such is the nature of those who would have the truth buried, either for control, such is the nature of those who would rule or conquer the world.
myths and conspiracies are just tools.
Myth: country x invaded country B because of y and z
its a an age old formula
18 Oct 2012
Well, I remeber MAJ Beatty did joke with the LTC at FOB Fenty, remarked “we gave that right cancer,” wide enough for me to here, it was all in jest though, right. I sure the spooks they were communicating with fed them that to try and ratle somees nerve in the bathroom.
There was an interesting observation of late. It seems some individuals are in the business of telling people to “stop whining.” I know the phrase well; it was the same harassment Psyops used against me just before the being of this entire incident.
“Stop Whining” they say
“Stop whining” is what people who have never seen the heat of battle combat or any frontlines say when the push cannon fodder to the front, while they protect themselves behind seemingly infallible missiles, armies and security.
I am sure the late ambassador felt that sting, when he was told to “stop whining”
Or the football player, both of whom were assassinated
You say I know what was done I am just waiting for my own independent conformation of what it was that was sent into my system.
Dina Danby Miraglia said the same thing, because as her logic goes she endure 68 years of their harassment, though what she claims and says is always a double edge as other sources have opined.
This whole experience made me realize the injustice Russia is up against, and all for what? “Just because,” they said.
To them we are just medical experiments, cannon fodder or tools.
The harassers in Ling 102/LLEA 351/ and PACE 420 will find that out to their own naive detriment when the time comes
The football play and ambassador found out and they killed them- when planning a murder some people leave unsuspecting clues, forgetting to clean up their work I suppose or surmise, who knows
The same people advising both the democrats and the republicans and people still think the vote or choice counts. please allow me to elaborate:
Those who control ther resouces and means of power do not care whether you vote or not or what candidate theat you vot for whom they put forth, the illusion of choice is just that, a theatrical show.
You do not have the military or security means of overthrowing or removing them because:
a) They hav eneough wealth to create havoc and divide and conquer: some people are willing and ablet to cause trouble for a few bucks, diamonds or pearls
b) The Police , security force etc and those who run them are happy with theri pensions, job secury and money to be worried about morals and being scrupulous
c)The people who controls the modes of communication are already bough and paid for as Mr Assange found out, though why he did not know this at all is beyond me
d)) Geneartions of cold war and unfetered capitalist propoganda have effectively convinced half they population, that they to can be in control and bully their fellow human beings in a marque de sadesque saadism
E) A certain percentage of the population is goaded into immroal, thieving, and other crimanl active for explicty to exert control and maintain a pool of the population who are willing and able for matiealistic rewards to create havoc against their fellow human beings for the sole purpose of divide and conquer
This why Russia must eternally protect itslef and the Patrich must steer away from churtch interefernce into secualr and public lives, for once the ORthodox church does that it loses it moral standing, the west will attack and say see, you’r e just like us, so no need to maintain your own indepence or securit, just do our bidding.
This is how they use corruption as a mens a tool of underming, coopting and placting movements and populations
Personnel in vehicles with military tags ant set intervals and intersections pointedly look at my car and give me dirty looks or shout remarks. I just record the license plates. That is all
Language directors were switched this year, I wonder why-these people are alway trying to steer you to some person for some influence or agenda
It appears Mr Tyler Heston and students in the class know each other..attend the same church maybe?
21-22 Oct 2012
This is how depraved these people are I had told the two Fires Chiefs (both African Americans) of 3rd Brigade 3BCT who are no longer on the island. I don’t eat pork.
And for awhile the harassers arranged situations where there was pork stealthily placed in the food. This past saturday at the RES class the representative kindly brought some food with stealthily placed pork, no doubt her handlers sent her to do this bidding, and it becomes clear why they moved the class from UH manoa under the pretext of not enough students signed up.
I am willing to bet money the people in that class are intelligence agents are acting ass proxies along with the classes I attend at UH Manoa directed under the auspices and frame up of of the Department of Defense which leads to another trail
By the way , I don’t eat pork because of a child hood incident in which the taste of it creates a funny taste in my mouth, kind of like eating chicken skin.
I am not a Muslim. I am an atheist
Dina Miraglia, Robert Hicks (his female friend who left schofield barracks) and the ex relatives and a long list of others were all involves, in a very interesting link
Coincidence: Singer of “Moon River” and “Veer Zaara” which I listen in my car every day, have passed away this year
Well I have experienced this harassment for a long time and continue to do so
They used other minorities (Divide and conquer) to include women (using the guise of sympathy apathy and feminine wiles-ridiculous) to do their bidding
Tried to make it out as if I am some bisexual
I am strictly homosexual
These minorities (to include some Hawaiians, mixed and non-native Hawaiians) some knowing better and some not, lacked the courage to be themselves in the face of adversity and in so doing betrayed many a causes, all to prove some sort of loyalty and belonging
The Russia federation must avoid the above machinations and nonsense:
Without honor and courage there is no such a thing as loyalty
Loyalty is not the crime and nefarious deed one is willing to commit in other to belong or have the illusion of belonging, why that is just another name or mode(s) for committing a crime(s)
It is the shared behavior in the end result that produces the collective condition of loyalty irrespective of human and social of distinctiveness unattached to arbitrary machinations directed by a few in manipulating the many to commit crimes against their fellow human beings.
IT is the ties that bind inseparable bonds
He was one of my favorites:
The African Americans were involved too
I Still cough up the phlem daily-might have been strep throuaght
which cause irreparable damage to the hart and kidneys
What ever it is I am pursuing my own medical testing and waiting for the results
This is harassment, criminality and murder by religious people or those purporting to be so. What a Shame the the government and administrative institutions in the State of Hawaii should sanction and be involve in such behavior, in which a whole country was invaded explicitly for that purpose.
Why select African Americans intercepting surveillance of me at certain rout points in and out of manoa looking at me and spitting on the ground.
I am not defense less
23 Oct 2012
24 Oct 2012
The US army and company are part of this harassment no doubt thats where th injury started.
I will find my justice that ismy solemn promise to myself.
Reviewing the Cartoon incident and case of the journalist and neo-nai case in either Denmanrk
It would seem at that the one case was instigated in order to perpetuate the Mohammed cartoon case, so as to not have the Danish newspapers be liable for incited racial hatred.
It was a very sneaking and stealthy way of manipulating the law.
The EU Court of Human rights found that the Danish government could not penalize the journalist for filming the neo-nazis
What a coincidence that couple weeks or months later the Mohammed cartoons were published
Hook, line and sinker divide and conquer, this is type of machinations what the Russian Federation is up against.
My project Orion disk drive was mysrteriously wiped while sitting in my car,
and none on the island could recover it,
One of the car keys went missing while overseas it never returned with my gear
nor the missing drive from my laptop
I surmise you did or did not find what you were looking for
Along with the external drive that mysteriously dissparead from my dwelling space
I keep nothing of interest on external drives and computers
Please allow me break it down for you:
The African Americans-not the average electorate, but the elites. were promised untold riches and some semblance of prestige and position if they got in line with the agenda
It is a formula they use with all minorities who are oppressed, repressed or disenfranchised
“Sell us your soul, intellect and ideas for a few material comforts,” is their sales pitch
Which is ironic since they all claim to be devoutly religious and I am a declared avid atheist.
Well I got my answer indirectly
From the evil lady in LING 102
They put these people in your path
to try and coax you
She said well, the disabled have to be helped!
there is the gist of it
InjurING people to CreatE inspiration for others
IT is the same thing theY do with these celebrities that they maim and kill
“Vengeance is Mine.. I shall repay”
I am not religious, nor do I seek Vengeance
I will however, find justice and I know what I must do because of what these bastards did.
No, I will not be going on any rampage as they have induced others to.
Dina Miraglia is a evil woman for what she did and does.
My existence now is geared to that Question
What will make Russia Great, and in the process I will find my justice
I am done with here
I am and shall be an inspiration to no one
I am me
My existence is now geared to what will make Russia Great
Great in music, arts, sciences, civilization
26 Oct 2012
Another Birthday comes and goes
Well what do you think their doing?
It’s called provocation
As far as celerities and intellectuals go they provoke them,
slap a mental disorder on them, then harass them into doing their bidding.\
They milk finances and influence out of them, then discard them
Its as Dina said, they are vampires, she would know,
I wonder how she knew them so well.
As for these wars and the midlde east, what do you think the drones are for?
It provocation , so that those people will get arngry and recruit and create more terrorism
so that they can have death by attritions one generation at a time.
Madeline albright said it and I paraphrase “It’s worth is if 500,000 Iraqi children die”
that is what they believe and strive to
the stinging irony that a Nazi plan of extermintion would be used by the selfprofessed of the free world and
by currently being heading by a minority no less, divide and conquer.
Well the people they elevate to these positions, have know free will, minimal influences and power,
the illusion is created by the circle around them to inflate their ego, by surround and setting them up with people
who perpetuat the myth.
This is nothing new, its an age old formula of control and deception
control the leader (s), you control the people and the movement
you create plausible deniablity, a scape goat, fall guy and
they discard them when they are no longer useful or develop their own intellectual independence
This as is well known, it is what the Russian Federation Faces
They put the feminists in your path to extract sympathy for the feminist-They put the disabled in your way to extract sympathy for the disabled
and other minorities ad infinitum in a cascading effect, while simultaneously instigating problems with various minorities in other states to say, oh look we take care of minorities here we have a human rights violation, we are morally superior etc.
That is why whatever Russia does or transmitted it would be used against the Russian federation . I have seen and experienced it first hand.
Well of course the had their agents already in place , so in report or complaint that came through they could redirect and delegitimize any claims.
The had to induce and slap on some mental diagnosis and create a trail o false profile to make what they are doing legitimize. It’s nothing new its been done before. Robert Hicks was right when he said you were not the first they did this to, but how did he know?
The neighbors, roommate, acquaintances, professor (especially the LLEA one), students (some not all), nurse, doctor, receptionist, movie stars, interviewer, supervisor and some seeming random personnel are well place meant to do nothing more that act as obscurants to the real culprit. That is not a conspiracy ,that is how intelligence and covert operations are conducted.
27 Oct 2012
Another Birthday comes and goes
If I were you I would not get caught up in the Discourse of political and class divisions within Hawaii. Both and all groups are just as evil in their Harassment. They are all being manipulated from multiple angles by the same group, into doing their bidding, who keep them that ways so as to stunt the growth of a collective Hawaiian identity with native Hawaiian roots.
Their movement was infiltrated a long time ago, some of their senior members are double agents and turn coats.
The Native Hawaiians could have revived their population a long time ago and within 20-30 years redouble their population.
What happened was the group was effectively split into various semi democratic factions by means of very nefarious methods.
The gentleman from D.C. knows this as he has the highest authority to access this information and if he doesn’t then it tell you who really is in charge and it is not he democratic will oft he people.
The same people advising the natives and their injustice is the same people advising the other side and neither group are none the wiser.
My observation nothing more
28 Oct 2012
Another Birthday comes and goes
Hmnn I went to go buy a Roti pan couple weeks or months ago and remember seeing a fully veiled muslim lady in the shop, I though it strange as she looked like she was from Sudan. I didn’t know they visited Hawaii.
Well, they got that mixed African american SSG to lie and try and report me as some mental case. They always use someone of your own background in these types of setups, a stooge if you will….It was a gradual setup process…….
When I told Dina of some suspected double agents based upon a random recent pattern analysis. The first phrase that came out of her mouth were feigned shock and a “O Really”. Her tone changed.
When they give these instructions of harassment to the stooges, they get to harass you, they tell them use military lingo, be forceful, speak in a stern voice
“Go Help people” (in a deep stern voice-which is what Dina did)
“You need to come in asap” which is what the grotesque advise did at Manoa-she-was just another stooge)
All the while not understand anything about military life and behavior but grossly trying to mimic and misrepresent it.
The harassers from LLEA are part and parcel of the same group-that is not he first time they had that professor-they know each other well.
29 Oct 2012
Well some took pictures-I did not–lieing?
when you realize the depth of these people evilness there can be no going back to the state quo ante with regard to perspective
when you realize the whole time was for psychological conditioning despite who is being hurt, you can get to the depths and depravity of understand why Russia is right in so many ways. Why Russia must always protect itself from these monsters. I know now with 100% certainty Russia is right.
The headaches, diffuclty breathing, muscle spasm, pain along the neck, spein back, abdominal pain gastrointestinal pain continues, who knows how long it will last. Today I contactd the Moscow State University on the Status of my application.
LLEA 351 Class was low turn out today.
These people knew what they were doing, Dina knew what she was doing. They are all responsible, what they do is try to get you to psychologically take the blame (self blame) for the injustice they have committed, otherwise known as reverse psychology.
This is what she (DIna Dahbny Miraglia) and Robert Hicks meant when they said you are not the only person they have done this to.
Woe, if they have already established this in the Russian Federation, then a lot will be lost.
Russia is right and from now until eternity I will not believe otherwise.
Once they started with the pysops in LLEA 351 I just got up and left
31 Oct 2012
They’ve been trying to set me up the wole time-this is what they do in order to get you to cooperate or bee some stooge-that the fact that this is occuring with imounity and here in ohau of all places means:
A) it reaches to the gentleman from D.C.
B) The FBI is involved
C) Dina is involved
D) The Army and Defence department is involved
E) the ex-relatives are involved
Random coincidences RU”S 101 Prof keeps calling me Jason, I guess its easier to translate in Russian
Did I read I both this disappearnce of Russian gold on a ship
Jason and the argonauts
It got me thinking, would these people be so brave as to steal Russian gold?
If so it would confirm one of my suspicions
P.S.: The imagery should tell you what happened to the ship and the gold.