The Tonka Report

Real News In A Changing World

Archive for the ‘Geo-Engineering’ Category

Zeitgeist And The Venus Project: Vision Into The New World Order

leave a comment »

April 12, 2011: Alex Newman / The New American – March 10, 2011

The Zeitgeist Movement is described on its website as “a grass-roots campaign to unify the world through a common ideology based on the fundamentals of life and nature. It is based on the social/technological work of Jacque Fresco and his Venus Project.”

The Venus Project, for its part, “proposes a feasible plan of action for social change, one that works toward a peaceful and sustainable global civilization” — essentially creating Heaven on Earth. The Zeitgeist Movement has already attracted a large following, claimed to be over a half a million people so far — worldwide.

Numerous Facebook groups — one with more than 70,000 people, another with more than 35,000, and still one more with almost 20,000 — transmit instructions and ideas to the activists around the globe. Various local and national groups have memberships in the thousands, using social-networking services to coordinate their campaigns and events.

It is led by a man who calls himself Peter Joseph. He refuses to release his last name, citing privacy concerns about his family and friends. Regardless of his true identity, he has made certain statements that have caused great concern amongst various groups. For example, in one video posted online, Joseph called people who bear children “self-serving,” saying they don’t care about the “carrying capacity of the Earth.” When things get really bad, he said, “I might not be against governments imposing one-child policies.”

The worries of some aside, today he is a truly famous man. His first video reportedly received 100 million views in just its first year. The New York Times published a glowing article about a “Z-Day” event Joseph hosted in New York, offering not one critical word about any of the ideas presented by Joseph — or his mentor, Fresco. One of Joseph’s movies won an “Artivist” award at a prominent film festival backed by the United Nations.

His first “documentary,” called Zeitgeist: the Movie, exploded into the Internet-video world in 2007, and has garnered, according to Joseph, some 200 million views to date. Divided into three parts, each one with a separate focus, the film uses a mixture of truth and dubious “facts” to reach some astounding conclusions.

The first part claims Jesus Christ did not exist, referring to Christianity as “the fraud of the age.” Drawing heavily on the work of “theosophy” luminaries, Joseph, as the film’s narrator, claims Christ is a representation of the sun and that Christianity is essentially a hodgepodge of ancient religious myths. Jesus’ apostles, according to the film, were “symbolism” representing the 12 signs of the Zodiac.

The second part of the film deals with the Federal Reserve System and the debt-based money system it oversees. This portion actually does a good job explaining some of the problems in the current monetary system, making it simple to understand even for someone with no background in economics.

Finally, the third section claims — citing first responders, initial media reports, and a variety of experts — that the terror attacks of September 11 were orchestrated by elements of the U.S. government at the behest of the international elite.

Zeitgeist: the Movie laid the foundation for the success of Joseph’s second film, Zeitgeist: Addendum. That “documentary” goes into more depth on currency and monetary-system issues, making an excellent case yet again that the existing debt-money fraud is dangerous and harmful. However, the film then proceeds to call for abolishing money entirely, not simply reforming the system or introducing sound money. Jacque Fresco’s Venus Project is portrayed as the solution to the world’s problems. The “Zeitgeist Movement” then officially becomes what Joseph and Fresco refer to as the “activist arm” of the Venus Project.

Finally, a third film was released in late January entitled Zeitgeist: Moving Forward. It describes in more detail the exact vision of the Venus Project and its “Resource Based Economy.” It also features a parade of “experts” — mostly academics — touting the supposed benefits of collectivism and the purported evils of private property, profit, and free markets. Using a barrage of pseudo-intellectual terms such as “Unified Dynamically Updated Global Management Machine,” the movie essentially concludes that Fresco’s vision is the only way to move forward. It ends with the statement, “The revolution is now.”

The long-term goals are to abolish money — all forms of money — entirely, collectivize all of the Earth’s resources under a global management system, and relocate the Earth’s population into planned communities. Robots and machines would provide for every human need, the movement claims. The promises are similar to those made by tyrants of all varieties throughout the centuries, only bigger: There would supposedly be no more war, no more exploitation, no more starvation, no more crime, no more poverty, and no more problems. Or so the narrative goes.

Arizona Tragedy Connection?

The movement and its movies burst into the headlines recently after the Tucson shooting. Apparently, accused murderer Jared Loughner was a big fan of the movement’s films.

“I really think that this Zeitgeist documentary had a profound impact upon Jared Loughner’s mindset and how he viewed the world that he lives in,” Loughner’s friend Zach Osler told ABC News, noting that the 22-year-old shooter didn’t watch TV or listen to the radio.

Osler’s allegation catapulted the Zeitgeist Movement, and the Venus Project by extension, into the media spotlight. Commentators on the political Left tried to pin Zeitgeist’s anti-money, anti-market, and anti-religion films on the political Right, while right-leaning commentators claimed it should clearly be associated with the Left.

In defense of the movies, Peter Joseph responded: “Make no mistake: The social system is to blame for the rampage of Jared Loughner — not some famous online documentary, which is known as the most viewed documentary of all time in Internet history.” He added: “Are the other 200 million people who have seen the film also preparing for murder sprees? I think not.”

Joseph is undoubtedly correct that his “200 million” viewers won’t go on rampages because of watching the film, but he fails to recognize that it would also be safe to assume that the six billion people living in “the social system” that he blames for the rampage probably are not going to begin blasting away with bullets either. Perhaps the irony of assigning collective blame in response to allegations of collective blame eluded him. But it is very indicative of the movement’s collectivist mindset, which permeates every facet of its push for a global collectivist regime.

The Venus Project

Headquartered on a 20-something-acre “Research Center” in Venus, Florida, the Venus Project is the brainchild of 94-year-old Jacque Fresco, a friendly and witty industrial designer and “social engineer” who, along with his younger partner Roxanne Meadows, claims all of the world’s problems could be solved using the scientific method.

In the “sustainable new world civilization,” Fresco notes in an online video that “there will be no families.” Plus, “children are a pain in the [rear end]” anyway, he said. Overpopulation and global warming, among other things, “threaten each of us,” the organization claims on its website.

“[The Venus Project] calls for a straightforward redesign of our culture,” the site notes in its frequently-asked-questions section. “It envisions a time in the near future when money, politics, self- and national-interest have been phased out.” To solve the problems, “we must declare Earth and all of its resources the common heritage of all of the world’s people,” it concludes, echoing the terminology of internationalists the world over, especially those at the United Nations, about how to redistribute the world’s wealth in areas such as the law of the sea, outer space law, environmental law, human rights, and humanitarian law.

Eventually, government would be abolished, the project claims. But during the transition from a money-based system to the so-called “resource-based economy,” a team of specialists would be needed. “Their job will be to carry out the restoration of the environment to near natural conditions as possible on land and in the sea,” the webpage explains. “They will also economically layout the most efficient way to manage transportation, agriculture, city planning, and production.” (In other words, specifics are lacking, but it caters to ultra-environmentalists, technophiles, atheists, and other segments of liberal ideology.)

And while the ideas might sound far-fetched to critics, the duo has had some interesting audiences for their speeches. In the ’70s, Fresco was a guest of Larry King. More recently, a Florida Fox News affiliate called him a “very brilliant man” who knew what the future looked like because he was “designing” it. Fresco and Meadows also spoke at a conference recently put on by Mikhail Gorbachev’s globalist “Green Cross International” foundation, and at another in the Queen Beatrix Palace in the Netherlands for the 10th anniversary of the United Nations “Earth Charter.”

Leader Jacque Fresco Goes on Tour

The New American had an opportunity to spend the day with Fresco and his partner during the project’s 28-country “World Tour” stop in Stockholm, Sweden. The event attended by this correspondent, one of two in the Scandinavian capital, filled a good-sized presentation room in an expensive downtown hotel. Estimates on the number of people in attendance just that night ranged from 200 to 300, each of whom paid the equivalent of about $30 in Swedish money.

Present were older men in suits, young hippies in goofy hats, many people wearing Zeitgeist t-shirts, ragamuffins with oddly colored hair, and generally what felt like a microcosm of Swedish society: teachers, students, factory workers, professors, clerks, and the unemployed.

After a presentation lasting more than an hour that introduced the main points of the project — abolishing money, having robots build futuristic new cities, advocating the notion that people are entirely a product of their environment, attacking religion and national sovereignty, explaining some of the logistics, and more — it was time for the question-and-answer session. Most of the people who raised their hands and spoke were wondering what they could do to advance the mission.

One woman, for example, suggested introducing the Venus Project as part of government-school curricula, to which Meadows responded that some countries already had. Another asked if vegetarianism wouldn’t be a better route for the new society. Fresco replied that a cucumber was six times more sensitive to pain than humans, but that veggies were indeed more environmentally friendly. A younger gentleman wondered how the rich could be persuaded to give up their property. Another demanded to know what the transition away from the monetary system would look like, and how its arrival could be hastened. A Greek man asked if the Venus Project would create a new international language based on science, perhaps unaware that just such a language — known as Esperanto — was created in 1887.

During the Q&A session, Fresco gave as an example of his past success in this realm his experiences helping the communist Cuban regime put technology to better use. His partner admitted that some people in a new system would still be “required to work” — the numbers would “vary” but it would decrease over time.

After the event, throngs of enthusiastic supporters rushed to the front of the auditorium. Everybody, it seemed, had more questions. Eventually it got late, and the organizers shuffled Fresco and Meadows out the door. The crowd, however, remained, excitedly gesturing and chatting about the future world they envisioned. The next day, The New American joined Fresco and his partner for an in-depth interview at their hotel.

Fresco Speaks to TNA

In the interview, when asked about his inspiration for the Venus Project, Fresco admitted that at a young age he was attracted to the communist movement in America. The Communist and Socialist Parties, he said, taught him about the debt-money scam — in a nutshell, the scam works by creating all “money” as debt with interest attached, making it ultimately impossible to pay off because more money is owed than has been created. But unlike most of the people at party meetings, he asked a lot of questions. Realizing that the leaders didn’t actually have answers to problems like how millions of people would be housed, or how corruption would be prevented under communism and socialism, Fresco proposed the creation of a “technical branch” of the Communist Party. “They said: ‘You’re deviating from the teachings of Marx,’” he recalled. “I said: ‘I don’t mean any harm’ … and they said, ‘You’ll have to leave.’”

No worries though, Fresco said, communism and socialism weren’t “radical enough” anyway. Eventually he linked up with a group advocating rule-by-technical-experts known as a Technocracy. He eventually left them, too, after becoming disillusioned with their alleged racism. “When I resigned, I tried to design a new social system that took care of everybody all over the world,” Fresco said. And that was the start of what would eventually become the Venus Project.

Finally, in 1971, Fresco incorporated a predecessor of the Venus Project called Sociocyberneering to advance the ideas he had been working on for decades. Then came the Venus Project itself, starting off with the piece of land north of Miami where the endeavor is still headquartered today. Some 10 futuristic-looking structures dot the acreage, containing everything from models of future cities to work areas.

The System

The entire system is based on, to put it bluntly, brainwashing the entire populace of the world to adhere to Fresco’s notions of what science “requires.” Critics have said his ideas are reminiscent of the push by Mao to re-educate China’s populace with his Little Red Book and efforts by Lenin and Pol Pot to influence their populations — except Fresco believes he can coerce the world without force.

Prior to opening Sociocyberneering, to test the theories he was coming up with, Fresco says he decided to join the Ku Klux Klan to see if he could change them. “I worked on the [local] leader only,” he said. After a long time trying to explain to the KKK boss that humans were a product of their environment, Fresco said, “gradually I turned them around and dissolved that organization.” Meadows chimed in to add that Fresco had also succeeded in turning drug and alcohol users away from substance abuse as well.

Put in practice on a mass scale, computer programs designed by technical experts would determine policies, such as how many people should be on the Earth. Then, the masses would be convinced to act in such a way as to accomplish the population goal — or whatever other goal might have been set. The population would be kept down to “sustainable levels” prescribed by resource surveys through the use of “education,” according to Fresco. “Schools and television [would] show a story called ‘Dynamic Equilibrium in Nature,’” he said. Using foxes and rabbits, for example, children would be taught that if the population grows too much, everybody would suffer. “You can’t have more people than the Earth can support, so all schools [would] teach dynamic equilibrium.” Most people would see the sense in that and limit their procreation, he said.

The educational system required for such an undertaking, however, would be radically different from today’s schools, he claimed. A controversial video posted online explains his planned methodology: “You’re taught in school that everybody should have a right to their own opinion — never give people the right to their own opinion.” In fact, Fresco emphasizes that idea a lot in regard to education. But his followers don’t seem perturbed in the slightest, perhaps because even now schools’ penchant for preaching individualism doesn’t translate into actions — schools are intolerant of non-politically correct viewpoints, especially religious views — and so Fresco’s seeming giant push would really only be a little nudge.

At his lecture in Sweden, in response to a question from this correspondent about what would guide production in the absence of prices, Fresco said it again, referring to the act of thinking as a privilege. “If you give everybody a right to their own opinion, you damage society,” he claimed. In the interview with The New American, he emphasized the point yet again. “Giving everybody a right to their own opinion is dangerous,” he said, adding that in the future, people could access all sorts of information, but not opinions.

So, in the new world’s schools, children would be raised with certain values — not opinions. “The kids would be brought up to understand how we relate to forests,” Fresco said, noting that they would be raised in “the science of behavior.” He insists that human nature is malleable, saying people cannot be “good” or “bad” — it just depends on how they were raised. “Human beings never do anything wrong; they do what they know,” he insisted, citing head-shrinking tribes and Nazis who became that way through their environment. (He overlooks the fact that many children in school have been conditioned with behavioral socialization techniques, such as those developed by B.F. Skinner, since early in the twentieth century, and human concern for others’ welfare is rapidly becoming an afterthought, not a guiding principle.)

“When you run into a person who says, ‘You’ll never be able to control human nature,’ do you think they’ve worked on it for 40 years? No. They know nothing about it. But you lost them in school by giving them the right to their own opinion,” Fresco said. In addition to schools, children would be trained and “modified” at summer camps to reject the “old value systems” of their parents, he added.

As for religion, that too would be changed through the educational system, though not banned per se. “If you try to stop religion, it will go underground,” Fresco acknowledged. “You can’t stop it. You can educate people out of it, but you do that by means of soap operas. We would still run soap operas…. Every soap opera is a device for turning people around,” he said. Movies would play a role as well. “[Religion] would be educated out through motion pictures,” Fresco said. (Again, already happening.)

Meadows also jumped in, saying: “You re-educate people to have different value systems.” Speaking about sexual relations and mores, she said the Venus Project would stop “imposing” an “ethical morality system.” Everybody would have all the sex they wanted, she said. “You’ll have access to marijuana if you want it,” Meadows noted, “because nothing is banned, otherwise it goes underground.”

Fresco obviously has a special disdain for Christianity, telling a story about how a minister beat him once for asking a question about rain. He called himself an atheist, adding that he became that way after reading the Bible and “realizing” Noah would have had big problems with animal excrement on the ark. Plus, he said, “I’ve never met a Christian yet,” at least not one who lived up to the ideals expressed in the Bible.

How would resources be seized from their current owners? Getting a direct answer proved to be impossible. Fresco spoke of crises, Nazis, Charles Lindbergh, and President Roosevelt’s takeover of industries during World War II. But he never explained precisely how resources would be expropriated. Should owners be compensated? He said on the subject, “Socialists believe that… that people should be compensated for their factories that the government takes over.” (Again, not a direct answer, but since money would be abolished, any compensation would seem to be of little use in the Venus Project.) The key to seizing goods, it sounds like, is to wait for an economic collapse of epic proportions. Then, property owners will voluntarily surrender their factories and resources for the greater good, Fresco said.

After asking several times how the world’s collectivized resources would be turned into useful products and allocated properly without a pricing mechanism, he finally offered something of a response. “There’s a group in the Venus Project called the Survey Committee. They do a survey of the land, and they tell how many acres of arable land … you have. How much water is there on that land? That tells us how big the city has to be,” he said. “Fresco does no decision making. The Survey Committee tells me how many people each area can support, and how many people the Earth can support.” The same thing would be true at the global level, he said.

Meadows re-emphasized a point that is central to the argument: The current system, in her eyes, doesn’t work well. “The monetary system rations how we distribute resources in a terrible way,” she said. In fact, “The whole market system is a waste of energy,” she added, citing advertising and everyone having their own lawns and lawnmowers as examples.

But without the monetary system and markets, who would make decisions? “Nobody makes decisions in the Venus Project, they arrive at them,” Fresco said. For example, a soil sample would go to “Central Agriculture,” which would analyze it, and make a determination as to what the best crop to grow in that soil would be. “We intend to use surveys to arrive at decisions rather than make decisions,” Fresco said.

The “Planning Committee” would then decide where factories would be built, how many were needed, and what they would produce. Hospitals would be allocated based on a survey of the diseased population in the area.

Despite the apparent similarities to communism, Fresco insisted repeatedly that the system should not be referred to as central planning. As an analogy to rule by computer programs, Fresco pointed to radar systems on airplanes. Machines, far more accurate than humans, would tell people the facts. (But conclusions by machines are only as good as the data fed into them — garbage in, garbage out — and there is no way any government or “committee” can possibly keep track of and compute all necessary variables needed to make decisions in a sizeable economy, as was demonstrated by Cuba, the Soviet Union, etc.)

Fresco agreed that scarcity in everything— private jets, for example — could never be abolished. His solution, in the absence of prices and considering the fact of potentially limitless demand: no ownership, just access. As an example, he cited cars sitting unproductively outside of factories for eight hours. Essentially, everyone could use whichever one they wanted, but would have to return it to a central distribution point after they were done so others could use it as well.

He also compared Earth to a cruise liner that needs to be planned and stocked for just the right number of passengers. “We have to maintain a population and city size in coordination — perfect coordination — with the carrying capacity of the Earth,” he said, adding that the world couldn’t support four billion people “well.” (There are more than six billion people alive today.)

Countless critics have drawn parallels between Fresco’s vision and totalitarian systems that have wreaked havoc and death in the past such as communism, socialism, Marxism, and fascism. But Fresco rejects those comparisons. The difference, he said, is that the Venus Project would not have armies, navies, banks, governments, or pledges of allegiance. “You pledge allegiance to the Earth when you join the Venus Project,” he said.

Among other differences, the Venus Project “doesn’t want to kill anybody, doesn’t want to hurt anybody. It’s not that kind of organization,” Fresco said. “Hollywood makes all planned colonies look like a dictatorship of the technicians,” and that is simply not the case for the Venus Project, Fresco said. Critics, he added, have invented “all kinds of lies” about him, for example that he was being bankrolled by the mafia, the Vatican, or the Rothschild family.

In videos posted online, however, more similarities between the Venus Project and various sorts of tyranny become even more apparent. In one speech, Fresco informs the audience that everybody’s location would be tracked by satellite. But not to worry, he said, “It’s not Big Brother watching you…. It’s for your own good.” In another, he expresses hope that humanity will become a “modified species” through biotechnology.

The plan, in its entirety, overlooks the most obvious of all roadblocks to its implementation: human nature (and the lack of “thinking” robotic slaves). No matter the brainwashing done, self-interest will reduce any such plan to failure, as it has when implemented by the plan’s kissing cousins — socialism and communism — for generations. But also because of the nature of human nature, don’t expect this plan to go away soon.

The Zeitgeist Movement And The Venus Project

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: It all looks and sounds great until you realize how many people must die for the global elite to create their so-called “Heaven on Earth.” As the late, great, comedian George Carlin once stated in regard to the New World Order… “It’s a big club, and you ain’t in it!” – SJH

George Carlin: It’s A Big Club, And You Ain’t In It!

Link to original article below…

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/world-mainmenu-26/north-america-mainmenu-36/6640-zeitgeist-and-the-venus-project

US Government Not To Be Trusted On Dangers Of Radiation Plume

leave a comment »

March 17, 2011: Paul Joseph Watson / Prison Planet.com – March 17, 2011

9/11, Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, Project SHAD, Atomic Soldiers – governments habitually deceive the public on health threats… Given the brazen contempt with which the EPA lied to ground zero workers in telling them that the air was “safe to breathe” on 9/11, government agencies cannot be trusted to give accurate information about the Fukushima radiation plume, which is set to reach California on Friday according to the United Nations.

This is the reason potassium iodide pills and geiger counters have sold out and it goes to the heart of the whole Fukushima catastrophe. Governments worldwide have proven themselves completely deceptive and untrustworthy, which is why no one believes their assurances about “harmless” radiation, and have taken steps to prepare themselves for the worst case scenario.

“A United Nations forecast of the possible movement of the radioactive plume coming from crippled Japanese reactors shows it churning across the Pacific, and touching the Aleutian Islands on Thursday before hitting Southern California late Friday,” reports the New York Times.

“Health and nuclear experts emphasize that radiation in the plume will be diluted as it travels and, at worst, would have extremely minor health consequences in the United States, even if hints of it are ultimately detectable. In a similar way, radiation from the Chernobyl disaster in 1986 spread around the globe and reached the West Coast of the United States in 10 days, its levels measurable but minuscule.”

The same people telling us that the levels are miniscule and the radiation “harmless,” are from the same organizations who assured us that the Chernobyl disaster only killed 9,000 people, when in reality it exposed 550 million Europeans, and 150 to 230 million others in the Northern Hemisphere to notable contamination and led to nearly a million deaths.

Given the fact that Japanese authorities have overseen a clear cover-up of the amount of radiation being spewed by the stricken Fukushima nuclear plant, added to the fact that the EPA and the White House, both of which conspired to engage in a cover-up on 9/11 in claiming that the air was safe to breathe at ground zero (aided by establishment media outlets like the New York Times), which led to chronic illnesses and deaths of thousands of Americans, also cannot be trusted, the fact that the UN is making assurances that the radiation plume will be “harmless” should be treated with the utmost suspicion.

As the Washington Blog notes, “If we could rely on the Japanese and American governments to inform us of any danger, we wouldn’t have to be so vigilant…But given the American government’s cover up of the severity of the BP oil disaster, the health risk to New Yorkers after 9/11, and numerous other health issues, we will have to educate ourselves.”

There are numerous people on the west coast who are streaming continuous live pictures of geiger counters to the Internet. One example is embedded below (link to original article). Normal background radiation can range from 5 CPM to 60 CPM – anything above 100 should raise an alarm.

Assurances that the majority of the radiation plume will disperse over the Pacific Ocean are also glib, given how the Chernobyl radiation cloud smothered most of the northern hemisphere within a week. Remember, experts are calling this crisis “Chernobyl on steroids,” if the worst comes to the worst the radiation cloud could affect the entire globe.

The history surrounding both Three Mile Island and Chernobyl give us a clear warning that governments and “trusted” authorities habitually lie about the threat posed by radiation as part of their supposed effort to “prevent mass panic” amongst the population.

The false claim that there were no “deaths or long-term health effects connected to the accident,” at the Three Mile Island nuclear plant, which is again being parroted by the corporate media, is based on deceptive assurances made at the time by authorities that levels of radiation emitted were harmless.

In reality, cancer rates in children and infants living Dauphin County, where Three Mile Island is located, are significantly higher than the national average. Similarly, the devastating long term health impacts of Chernobyl have been routinely downplayed.

As a 2010 book published by the New York Academy of Sciences documents, “Nearly one million people around the world died from exposure to radiation released by the 1986 nuclear disaster at the Chernobyl reactor.”

The book, written by Alexey Yablokov of the Center for Russian Environmental Policy in Moscow, and Vassily Nesterenko and Alexey Nesterenko of the Institute of Radiation Safety, completely demolishes claims made by the WHO and the IAEA that the disaster led to only 9,000 deaths.

“Drawing upon extensive data, the authors estimate the number of deaths worldwide due to the Chernobyl fallout from 1986 through 2004 was 985,000, a number that has since increased.” Janette Sherman, MD, the physician and toxicologist who edited the book, notes that the consequences of Chernobyl “were far worse than many researchers had believed”.

Numerous governments, including the French government, “deliberately suppressed information about the spread of radioactive fallout.” In parts of France, thyroid cancer surged as the population didn’t take steps to protect itself having believed their government that the radiation cloud was harmless.

The book also reveals how, “Americans also consumed contaminated food imported from nations affected by the disaster. Four years later, 25 percent of imported food was found to be still contaminated.”

Let us not forget either the disgraceful legacy of Project Shad, wherein the US Department of Defense exposed unwitting and unwilling participants to deadly biological and chemical weapons. Similarly, under the atomic soldiers program, US troops were ordered to walk directly into the shockwave of nuclear bombs.

Given the documented history of governments, and particularly the White House, routinely lying to their populations about the severity of health threats, particularly radiation, anyone who believes assurances about the “harmless”-ness of the plume of radiation which will reach the west coast tomorrow is not only foolish, but is putting their own life and the lives of their loved ones at risk.

Watch the video below to get an idea of how Chernobyl impacted the whole of Europe and beyond. The clip tracks the path of the radioactive cloud over the course of 7 days…

Radioactive Cloud Fallout Over Europe From Chernobyl Disaster

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: Well, at this point, all I can say is let’s all hope there is a complete and catastrophic meltdown so that most of the rods melt right down into the ground to somewhat contain this… Granted, it sucks for Japan, but that really is the best overall outcome at this critical juncture. – SJH

The New York Times: Animated Forecast For Path Of Radioactive Plume

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/03/16/science/plume-graphic.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=thab1

Link to original article below…

http://www.prisonplanet.com/u-s-government-cannot-be-trusted-on-radiation-plume.html

The Father Of Weaponized Weather: Geo-Engineering Is A Weapon

leave a comment »

February 20, 2011: THElNFOWARRlOR / You Tube via Infowars.com- February 19, 2011

Geo-engineering the atmosphere. Can anyone say… Chemtrails!SJH

Veteran weather modification expert Ben Livingston is a former Navy Physicist who briefed President Lyndon B. Johnson on the effectiveness of weather control back in the 1960′s during the Vietnam era, when he was involved in cloud seeding programs that worked to slow down the advance of Vietnamese and Korean troops. Livingston asserts that hurricane control was a national priority of the government more than 40 years ago and that the technology was fully operational to control the weather at the time.

Dr. Livingston was assigned in 1966 from the Naval weapons research Laboratory to a marine fighter squadron in Vietnam. Instead of guns, the aircraft under Livingston’s control were fitted with cloud seeding equipment. “My mission was to find clouds and seed them for maximum precipitation value” he stated.

Dr. Livingston presents evidence from the Stanford research Institute, who were brought into Project Storm Fury (a weather control program) in the late sixties as a third party, which stated conclusively that knowledge of how to stop hurricanes had been uncovered and that they would be directly liable should a hurricane hit and cause extensive damage and loss of life. Four decades later and Livingston exposes how the devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina could have been greatly minimized but was allowed to fully impact Gulf states for political reasons.

Having personally flown on 265 missions into the eyes of hurricanes, Livingston remarks that he was “disgusted” by the failure to lessen the impact of Katrina. Livingston’s revelations that weather control has been a decades long program in which the US government has been deeply involved are particularly alarming given the abundant modern-day evidence of how chemtrails are being used to warp our environment in a secret geoengineering plot that threatens a myriad of unknown human health and ecological consequences.

GET IT FIRST AT http://prisonplanet.tv

Ben Livingston: The Father Of Weaponized Weather

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: Just remember, weather modification is well over 40 years old– SJH

Link to original article below…

http://www.infowars.com/the-father-of-weaponized-weather-2/

COP16: Climate Change Concern Morphs Into Chemtrail Glee Club

leave a comment »

December 9, 2010: Rady Ananda / Activist Post – December 9, 2010

These freaks refuse to go away! – SJH

In Cancun, Mexico, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is under pressure to overturn the UN ban on chemtrails. This would dissolve an agreement reached in October at the UN Convention on Biological Diversity conference in Japan. In that landmark decision, the 193-member CBD agreed by consensus to a moratorium on geoengineering projects and experiments. The US has not agreed to it. 

Citing profits, the US further refuses to cut greenhouse gas emissions attributed to global warming, the purported concern of the United Nations. Instead, it seeks to expand its geoengineering projects for which hundreds of patents have already been filed. (See sampling below.)

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) opened the Cancun conference last week by discussing geoengineering options that will be further explored in Peru later this year. Such environmental modification (ENMOD) programs include putting mirrors in space, iron seeding the oceans, planting genetically modified forests, and chemtrailing the skies.  Of course, all of these activities are already well underway.

The next UN climate change assessment report, AR5, is due out in November of 2014. It will include geoengineering options, said Indian businessman and economist, Rajendra Pachauri, who chairs the IPCC. In his introductory comments in Cancun, he stated, “The scope of the AR5 has also been expanded over and above previous reports, and would include, for instance, focused treatment of subjects like clouds and aerosols, geo-engineering options,” and the usual climate related issues.

Shady Science and Corporate Profits

The IPCC has been condemned for inflating temperature records and exaggerating estimates of glacial retreat. IPCC chair Rajendra Pachauri has also been criticized for his “extensive interests in companies that stand to benefit from carbon trading,” and for using his position “to attract major funding to his own organization, The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), known previously (and concurrently by some), as the Tata Energy Research Institute,” noted the Science and Public Policy Institute in an April 2010 investigative report entitled, “Dr Rajendra Pachauri and the IPCC – No Fossil Fool.”

The Tata Group, “has a total market capitalization worldwide of some $77 billion, with major involvement in energy and energy-related industries, including carbon trading,” reports SPPI.

Tata is also linked to India’s war on tribes. Ongoing corporate ecoterrorism and land grabs led world-renowned author Arundhati Roy to agitate on behalf of indigenous peoples, demanding freedom for the people of Kashmir’s disputed territory. Last week, Delhi filed charges against her for defense of tribes characterizing it as “waging war against the state.” Corporate dominance was slowed, however, when a ‘real Avatar tribe’ won a stunning victory over mining giant, Vedanta Resources, last August. (See the 11-minute, award-winning film, “Mine: Story of a Sacred Mountain.”)

It bears repeating that the man connected to Tata, Mr. Rajendra Pachauri, chairs the IPCC which advises the UN on climate actions.

Global governance on geoengineering has a history of profiteering.  See, e.g., Chief sponsor of landmark climate manipulation conference maintains close financial ties to controversial geo-engineering company, by Joe Romm, Climate Progress, 18 Mar 2010. For a partial list of patents for stratospheric aerial spraying programs from 1917 thru mid-2003, see Lori Kramer’s Patently Obvious: A Partial History of Aerosol and Weather Related Technologies.”

In CASE ORANGE: Contrail Science, Its Impact on Climate and Weather Manipulation Programs Conducted by the United States and Its Allies,” researchers revealed that “the proposed scenario by the IPCC in 2001 is identical to the claims” in Hughes Aircraft’s 1991 patent. Hughes was acquired by Raytheon, a major defense contractor, in 1997.

Delivery systems aren’t the only types of patents related to chemtrails. Aluminum is part of the various metal-chemical cocktails sprayed and is highly toxic to plants, therefore representing a serious threat to normal agriculture. For over thirteen years, biotech scientists have researched aluminum resistant genes in plants, finally isolating one in 2007. Today, a “new generation of genetically engineered crop research” seeks to develop aluminum-resistance in commercial crops.

Environmental watchdog ETC Group notes in its 56-page report, “Geopiracy: The Case Against Geoengineering,” that, “there is a complex web of connections between big capital and the global technofixers, comprised of researchers, multinational corporations and small start-ups, the military establishment and respected think tanks, policy makers and politicians. The non-profit institutions that promote geoengineering are well connected with the private sector.”

On December 6th, energy and environmental ministers from around the world began meeting to discuss a “balanced package of decisions.” Louise Gray at The Telegraph advises, “It is generally agreed that a global deal to cut emissions is unlikely.”

Instead, these UN meetings on climate change appear to be more about protecting pollutive industry practices and promoting another environmentally toxic industry: geoengineering.  It would almost be laughable except for the homicidal and ecocidal affect of such plans.

Blogger Cassandra Anderson recently noted that the ETC Group is partly funded by the Ford Foundation, “known for supporting depopulation.” So far, ETC has adamantly opposed geoengineering, as well as genetic engineering, both suspected depopulation tools. However, ETC also denies current ENMOD activities, saying “there is no actual deployment to govern.”

In “Confronting the ‘futuristic’ branding of geoengineering,” mass perception management and the ETC Group are explored in more detail.

What In The World Are They Spraying (Part 1 of 7)

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: To all of you out there who throughout the years, rather than look at the evidence I have been presenting on Chemtrails for over 12 years now, scoffed instead… Look up, idiots! – SJH

TTR Archive For Chemtrails

https://stevenjohnhibbs.wordpress.com/category/chemtrails/   

Link to original article below…

http://www.activistpost.com/2010/12/un-climate-concern-morphs-into.html

Are 2012 Olympics A Zionist Plan For Holographic Alien Invasion?

leave a comment »

December 6, 2010: Steve Rose / The London Guardian (guardian.co.uk– December 5, 2010

This is a fascinating read, and quite plausible given today’s technology! – SJH

When Wenlock and Mandeville, the official mascots of the London Olympic Games, were unveiled to the world in May, the general reaction was one of bemusement.

These stumpy, one-eyed, metallic-skinned creatures, the organisers explained, had formed out of stray drops of molten steel during the construction of the Olympic stadium, but most of the public and media simply interpreted them as aliens. What do monocular extraterrestrials have to do with the Olympics?

A year earlier, the 2012 Olympic logo was greeted with a similar mix of derision and puzzlement. Jaded observers passed off these designs as sorry reflections of the state of British creativity, but a small minority had a very different answer: we were being primed for the establishment of the New World Order, by means of the greatest hoax in history.

Even in conspiracy-theory terms, the London Olympics plot is a difficult one to swallow, but that hasn’t stopped a credulous minority from gulping it down. You’ll find them on cult conspiracy blogs such as Red Ice Creations, Godlike Productions and Above Top Secret, or even making their own video presentations on YouTube.

The basic scenario goes something like this: while the world’s eyes are on London in 2012, a spectacular alien invasion will take place at the Olympic stadium. Or so the public will think; it will actually be a hoax invasion, orchestrated by the New World Order as an excuse to stage a global coup d’etat.

Terrified by the appearance of aliens, the world’s populace will surrender their civil liberties, and “they” – a vague array of elite cliques such as the Bilderberg group, the Freemasons, the Illuminati, and dynasties such as the English royal family, the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds – will have smoothly achieved their goal of a single world government, economy and religion. It sounds like a cross between Dan Brown, the X-Files and Watchmen, but believers insist this stuff is real.

The evidence for such a plot is vague: exhibit A is the 2012 Olympic logo. Rearrange the four angular numerals of the bizarre design, the theorists say, and it really spells “zion”. There’s even a dot to go over the “i”. This is a sign that “they” plan to build the new Jerusalem right here in England’s green and pleasant land, just as William Blake’s poem predicted. The “dark satanic mills” of the Lea Valley will become the epicentre of the New World Order.

Conspiracy theorists insist there is nothing anti-semitic in their use of the word “zion”, although the suspicion is there. (Zionism and Judaism are diametrically opposed! – SJH)

The next giveaway is the street names around the Olympic site: Great Eastern Road, Carpenter’s Road, Angel Lane, Temple Mills Lane, Church Road – don’t they all seem a little biblical? Isn’t it strange that such a large patch of land has stood undeveloped in London all this time?

It goes on: Prince William is the obvious choice for king of this New Jerusalem because of his royal bloodline, his birthday (the 21 June – the summer solstice) and the fact that he will be 30 years old in 2012, the year of the 30th Olympiad, or XXX in roman numerals. Numerology counts for a lot in these circles.

And as for the fake UFO invasion, the theorists note the closing ceremony of the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics, in which a flying saucer landed in the stadium and an alien walked out and waved to the crowd. The staged spectacle, in which a blacked-out military helicopter lowered a model spaceship by cable into the Coliseum, did not prompt mass panic, but it has been interpreted as a warm-up.

The advocates of “London Zion”, as the theory has become known, have been poring over London Olympics promotional videos and finding a lot of suspicious symbolism in them – flying saucers and other spaceship-like objects, lights in the skies, stadiums in flames, all-seeing eyes. Then Wenlock and Mandeville came along and the theory really had legs, albeit stumpy alien ones.

“Once your eyes are open to it, it’s amazing what’s hidden in plain sight,” explains David (not his real name), the friend of a friend who first told me about the London plot a year ago. So in the name of curiosity, and, perhaps, the future of civilisation, we arranged to meet at the Olympics site to look for evidence. You can’t get into the site itself – construction continues apace and security is tight – but there are daily guided tours of the perimeter.

On a clear, chilly morning, as we wait outside Tesco for the tour to begin, David explains how most of the clouds in the sky are now man-made. Aeroplanes have been lacing the atmosphere with metal particulates for decades to facilitate holographic projection, he claims. That’s how they’ll pull off the UFO illusion. These “chemtrails” also enable the use of top-secret super-weapons that bounce energy off the upper atmosphere to remote locations. The Haiti earthquake was triggered this way.

David spends hours scouring the internet for conspiracy information, and stumbled on the Olympics plot theory two years ago on a blog called the Cosmic Mind, run by 28-year-old Rik Clay from Leeds. Clay was making a name for himself in these esoteric circles. As well as the Olympics, his blog discussed everything from the significance of the No 11 to crop circles to Princess Diana. But three months after the Cosmic Mind launched, it suddenly went down in August 2008. Clay had died. Internet forums were full of wild allegations about the cause of his death.

As the tour proceeds, David’s eyebrows rise at certain points, such as when the guide explains how they had to reroute power lines crossing the site 30 metres underground. “There’s bound to be a secret network of tunnels so that dignitaries can escape when it happens,” David says. Had the guide ever seen anything paranormal going on here? “What, you mean like flying saucers? No, nothing like that,” she laughs. David’s eyebrows rise again. No one mentioned flying saucers. The vast construction site looks fairly innocuous to me. David isn’t so sure. “What about that cross in the sky up there?” he says. Two short fragments of aeroplane contrail have formed a distinct cross in the sky directly over the stadium. That is good enough for him.

Unsurprisingly, the London Olympics organisers deny all knowledge of the conspiracy. “Since we launched the logo in 2007, many people have passed comment on it and have suggested it resembles different shapes or characters,” a spokesperson says. “This is a new one on us. The logo represents the figure 2012, nothing else.” The conspirary theory is far from cast-iron: you could make the word “zion” out of the numbers 2,0, 1 and 2 however you designed them. And while some of the road names around the site might sound biblical, the ones that don’t, such as Pudding Mill Lane, have been conveniently omitted. “Of course it sounds ridiculous,” David acknowledges.

And then he delivers the killer blow: “But if I had said to you 10 years ago that a few people were going to destroy the Twin Towers by flying planes into them, and that Britain and the US would start two wars as a result, would that have sounded believable?”

Just as the assassination of JFK and Watergate fuelled a golden age of paranoia, so the attacks of 11 September 2001 and its repercussions have ushered in a new, productive generation of conspiracy theories. It’s not just a fringe minority. In a 2006 poll by Scripps Howard/Ohio University, 36% of Americans agreed that the US government was either involved in the 9/11 attacks or did nothing to stop them. Another poll by Zogby in 2007 put the proportion at 26.4%.

Then again, polls this year also found that 18% of Americans believe Barack Obama is a Muslim and 27% believe he was born outside the US. Public credulity seems to be at an all-time high, or reliable information at an all-time low. For the conspiracy hardcore, though, 9/11, the London 7/7 attacks and other terrorist incidents are what’s known as “false flag” operations; hoax attacks designed to advance the conspirators’ agenda, and the London Olympics plot is the next one.

Rik Clay’s Olympics theory was chiefly inspired by another British researcher, Ian R Crane, whom he saw speaking at an event in Glastonbury in 2007. A former oil industry executive, Crane is something of a heavy hitter on the conspiracy circuit. He regularly holds public lectures and releases DVDs on what he calls “deep geopolitics”, and claims to have predicted the BP Deepwater Horizon oil rig disaster, and pre-empted a failed terrorist attack in Chicago in 2006.

It was Crane who first deciphered the “Zion” in the Olympic logo, and who suggested a fake UFO invasion was being planned. “We’ve seen the abilities of computer graphics in Hollywood movies,” he says. “It doesn’t take much to recast that fantasy as something that’s then presented as a reality.”

Crane also acknowledges that the Olympics conspiracy sounds crazy, but “it’s only when one puts it into context with the much deeper geopolitical agenda that it starts to have some basis,” he says. He sketches out this context in dizzying strokes. How the recent financial meltdown was deliberately planned, purported links between Obama adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski and extreme right wing think tanks, Henry Kissinger and global warming.

“They’re all inextricably linked,” he says. “What we’re really looking at here is a web of intrigue that actually goes back a long way. The individuals who believe themselves to be the rightful rulers of the planet have some concern about what the very short-term future holds. In their belief system, they feel they need to have total planetary control by 2012.”

Crane and Clay exchanged emails, but never met. Crane doesn’t think there was anything suspicious about Clay’s death. Nor do others close to Clay, including his parents, who have been understandably distressed not just by the death of their son but by the subsequent internet rumours. “There have been many outlandish ideas put forward about Rik’s death, some that beggar belief, but most have come from people ignorant of the real facts and who have been too lazy to do their research,” says John Clay, Rik’s father. “An autopsy was carried out and an inquest held at Bradford coroners court in February 2009.

The official verdict was that Rik took his own life while the balance of his mind was disturbed.” There were clear pointers to where Rik was heading, says John. A few weeks before his death, he had suffered some form of mental breakdown. He had jumped out of a third-floor window, fracturing his heel. His parents took him in for six weeks. “During his time with us he was not the Rik that we knew and was mostly very withdrawn,” says John. “He told us that he had things in his head that shouldn’t be there but would not elaborate, which was quite normal for Rik – he would only tell you what he wanted you to hear. Rik could be quite obsessional.”

Another close friend of Rik’s also believes his death was caused by a combination of his work and his mental health: “It’s a stressful arena, conspiracy stuff. You can’t trust anything any more. What level do you take it to? If you’re passionate and paranoid, it can really take over, and I think that’s what happened with Rik. He wanted to get to the bottom of everything. Unfortunately the result of that was that he pulled apart his own reality.”

One of the problems with many conspiracy theories is that, unlike scientific theories, they’re impossible to definitively prove wrong. Any attempt to do so invites accusations that you’re in on them. Conversely, labelling something as a “conspiracy theory” is a convenient way to close down political debate or a challenge to authority by painting the theorists as wackos.

Tony Blair described his critics as obsessed with conspiracy during the Chilcot inquiry earlier this year, just as George Bush in 2001 urged the UN not to tolerate “outrageous conspiracy theories” about the 9/11 attacks. Neutral observers point out that regardless of their content, conspiracy theories are “unofficial” knowledge, and therefore threaten institutions of official knowledge, such as academia and journalism. The two sides resemble each other more than they would like to admit.

The London Olympics theory is an intriguing case, not least because it actually makes a prediction. Either something will happen in 2012 or it won’t: the theory will be right or wrong. What will people such as David do if nothing happens? “I’ll be really bloody surprised,” he says, “but if nothing happens, I’d say that the forces of good behind the scenes, like us, saved the day and the forces of evil were stopped.”

Holographic 3D Digital Projection Explained

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: I stumbled upon Project Blue Beam back in 2000, about a year after my research into chemtrails was well underway. After doing so, I concluded that indeed the atmosphere could be used as a three dimensional projection screen for just such an event using satellites as projectors– SJH   

Project Blue Beam

http://www.educate-yourself.org/cn/projectbluebeam25jul05.shtml

Link to original article below…

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/dec/05/olympic-games-2012-alien-conspiracy-theory

COP16: Geo-Engineering And The Insane Global Warming Agenda!

leave a comment »

December 5, 2010: Charles J. Hanley / Associated Press via Yahoo News – December 5, 2010

CANCUN, Mexico – Like the warming atmosphere above, a once-taboo idea hangs over the slow, frustrating UN talks to curb climate change: the idea to tinker with the atmosphere or the planet itself, pollute the skies to ward off the sun, fill the oceans with gas-eating plankton, do whatever it takes.

As climate negotiators grew more discouraged in recent months, US and British government bodies urged stepped-up studies of such “geoengineering.”

The UN climate science network decided to assess the options. And a range of new research moved ahead in America and elsewhere.

“The taboo is broken,” Paul Crutzen, a Nobel Prize-winning atmospheric scientist, told The Associated Press. Whatever the doubts, “we are amazingly farther up the road on geoengineering,” Crutzen, who wrote a 2006 scientific article that sparked interest in geoengineering, said by telephone from Germany.

But environmentalists are asking: Who’s in charge? Who gets to decide whether to take such drastic action, with possibly unforeseen consequences for people worldwide? “This is really a risky, dangerous option,” said environmentalist Silvia Ribeiro, here for the two-week negotiating session of parties to the 193-nation UN climate treaty.

Just a few years ago, geoengineering was regarded as a fringe idea, a science-fiction playground for imaginative scientists and engineers. Schemes were floated for using aircraft, balloons or big guns to spread sulfate particles in the lower stratosphere to reflect sunlight, easing the warming scientists say is being caused by carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases emitted by industry, vehicles and agriculture.

Others suggested assembling gargantuan mirrors in orbit to fend off the solar radiation. Still others propose — and a German experiment tried — seeding the ocean with iron, a nutrient that would spur the spread of plankton, which absorb atmospheric carbon dioxide.

Sky, sea and land — the ideas vary, from spraying ocean clouds with sea salt to make them brighter and more reflective; to planting vast arid lands with agave, the “tequila plant,” which stores carbon for years and grows where climate-friendly forests can’t; to developing the chemistry and machines to suck in CO2 from the air and store it.

Specialists regard the stratospheric sulfates proposal as among the most feasible. The US government’s National Center for Atmospheric Research has undertaken computer modeling to assess its effect, for one thing, on the protective ozone layer. The Colorado center also is researching the brightening of maritime stratocumulus clouds with seawater droplets. The center’s John Latham, a British physicist, has drawn up plans for a field trial, although he said they’re not yet funded.

Funding may not be far off. In September, the US Government Accountability Office recommended in a 70-page report that the White House “establish a clear strategy for geoengineering research” within its science office.

A month later, a report from US Rep. Bart Gordon, a Democrat from Tennessee who chairs the House Science and Technology Committee, urged the government to consider climate-engineering research “as soon as possible in order to ensure scientific preparedness for future climate events.”

The US panel had collaborated in its study with a British House of Commons committee. “We may need geoengineering as a `Plan B,'” the British report said, if nations fail to forge agreement on a binding treaty to rein in greenhouse gases.

Perhaps most significantly, the UN -sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC, the global authority on climate science, agreed in October to take on geoengineering in its next assessment report. Its hundreds of scientists will begin with a session next spring.

“You have to understand its potential. We also have to understand the downside,” IPCC Chairman Rajendra Pachauri said in an interview with the AP. Of the proposed sulfate layer, he asked, “What might be some of the implications of making that change in the atmosphere?”

Skeptics point to implications: For one, blocking the sun could itself suddenly shift the climate, especially precipitation patterns. For another, it would do nothing to keep the atmospheric CO2 buildup from acidifying the oceans, a grave threat to marine life.

But the science and engineering may be the easier part, says Britain’s national science academy. “The greatest challenges,” the Royal Society said in a 2009 report, “may be the social, ethical, legal and political issues associated with governance.”

Activist Ribeiro’s Canada-based ETC organization accuses Washington of taking a “coalition of the willing” approach to geoengineering, going ahead with its British ally and perhaps others, disregarding the rest of the world. Ribeiro said the United Nations must be in control: “It can’t be voluntary schemes outside the UN when you’re talking about manipulating the climate.”

Critics suggest the Americans, whose resistance to mandatory emissions reductions has long helped block a global climate deal, view “Plan B” as a “Plan A,” to avoid having to rein in emissions. The US and British parliamentary reports seem to diverge on governance. The House of Commons committee concluded, “The UN is the route” to a regulatory framework. The US report never mentions the UN.

The ETC campaigners scored a coup in October at a biodiversity treaty conference in Japan, where the parties adopted a vague moratorium on geoengineering experiments that might endanger biodiversity. One problem: The US is not a party to that treaty. “Can anything be meaningful if the US is not a party to it?” Scott Barrett asked rhetorically.

Barrett, an environmental policy expert at New York’s Columbia University, helped organize a geoengineering conference last March in California. He said he wants to see emissions slashed, not climate manipulation. But he opposes research bans. “What happens if we discover we’re on the precipice of a runaway greenhouse effect, and the only thing we can do is geoengineering? Are people going to say you can’t do it?” he asked.

He believes geoengineering controls should be negotiated under the UN climate treaty. Pachauri agrees. “If they feel there are risks involved, then it’s up to them to decide how best to monitor them,” the IPCC chief said of the treaty parties.

What In The World Are They Spraying? (Part 1 of 7)

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: This article illustrates the utter insanity of the eco-fascists! Meanwhile…

England: Coldest Winter In 100 Years

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/214932/THE-COLDEST-WINTER-FOR-100-YEARS-SO-WHERE-ARE-THE-GRITTERS

Sweden: Coldest Winter In 100 Years

http://cwojournal.wordpress.com/2010/12/01/swedish-military-preps-to-battle-coldest-winter-in-a-century/

Norway: Coldest Winter In 140 Years

http://arcticsnap.com/index.php?id=198

And yesterday here in Chicago, the record for snowfall for the date set way back in 1964, was eclipsed! – SJH

Chicago: Record Snowfall – December 4, 2010

http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/metro/flights-canceled-ohare-streets-snow-plowed-snowed-snowing-cold-weather-winter-chicago-forecast-20101204 

Link to original article below…

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101204/ap_on_sc/climate_broken_taboo

The Royal Society: Halt Economic Growth And Institute “Rationing”

with one comment

November 29, 2010: Steve Watson / Prisonplanet.com  – November 29, 2010

Ultra elitist environmental group The Royal Society has published a series of papers to coincide with the latest round of UN climate talks, in which influential scientists suggest that politicians should force the population of the developed world to adhere to a system of rationing in order to stave off rising global temperatures. The papers suggest that 1930s and 40s style crisis rationing should be implemented by Western governments in order to reduce carbon emissions.

Such a move would see “limits on electricity so people are forced to turn the heating down, turn off the lights and replace old electrical goods like huge fridges with more efficient models. Food that has travelled from abroad may be limited and goods that require a lot of energy to manufacture.” the London Telegraph Reports.

“The Second World War and the concept of rationing is something we need to seriously consider if we are to address the scale of the problem we face,” one Royal Society affiliated professor

Professor Kevin Anderson, Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, added that in his view, economic growth in the developed world should be completely halted within the next two decades if the planet is to avoid mass upheaval in the form of rising sea levels, floods, droughts and mass migration. “I am not saying we have to go back to living in caves,” he said. “Our emissions were a lot less ten years ago and we got by ok then.”

Ironically, Anderson’s point here reveals a fundamental flaw in the theory of anthropogenic global warming, namely that CO2 emissions have increased, yet temperature rise is slowing. By all accounts, the warming trend observed predominantly throughout the 1980s and 90s stopped just over a decade ago.

Even the Royal Society itself was forced to admit this fact in a recently published guide, titled ‘Climate change: a summary of the science’ which was altered following multiple complaints from 43 of the Royal Society’s own members that “knowledgeable people” were seeing through brazenly alarmist climate change rhetoric.

The Met office concurs that global warming has been slowing for some time, and the admission was also recently noted by Professor Phil Jones, the figure at the head of the Climategate scandal.

It is hardly surprising to see the Royal Society still pushing a de-industrialization agenda, however, given it’s history and cadre of members and patrons. The Royal Society, a 350 year old establishment outfit, has traditionally been the most vocal proponent for the hypothesis of AGW. It was the former president of The Royal Society, Lord May, who made the infamous statement “The debate on climate change is over.”

When he was head of the Society, May told government advisors: “On one hand, you have the entire scientific community and on the other you have a handful of people, half of them crackpots.”

The Royal Society has thrown its full weight behind the global warming movement, lending its absolute support for legislation aimed at reducing carbon emissions by 80%, a process that will devastate the global economy and drastically reduce living standards everywhere.

It has been even more vehement than national governments in its advocacy of the man-made cause of global warming, calling for such drastic CO2 cuts to be made in the short term, not even by the usual target date of 2050. Not surprising then that The Royal Society was also intimately tied to efforts to Whitewash the Climategate emails scandal.

The society has also conducted extensive research into geoengineering the planet, and continually lobbies the government to divert funding into it. A recently published lengthy UK Government report drew heavily upon the Society’s research and concluded that a global body such as the UN should be appointed to exclusively regulate world wide geoengineering of the planet in order to stave off man made global warming.

This information becomes even more disturbing when you consider the mindset of those who make up the membership of the Society. It is riddled with renowned eco-fascists, open eugenicists and depopulation fanatics.

One notable member is James Lovelock, an eco-fascist who advocates ending democracy and instituting an authoritative elite to oversee global climate management and a radical stemming of the human population in order to combat climate change. He is also a patron of the Optimum Population Trust, a notorious UK-based public policy group that campaigns for a gradual decline in the global human population, which it refers to as “primates” or “animals”, to what it sees as a “sustainable” level.

Lovelock is also an ardent advocate of geoengineering. In 2007 Lovelock proposed laying vast swathes of pipes under the world’s oceans in order to pump water from the bottom of the seas – rich in nutrients, but mostly dead – to the top. The idea being that the action would encourage algae to breed, absorb more carbon and release more dimethyl sulphide into the atmosphere, a chemical known to seed sunlight reflecting clouds. Such methods are also covered in the Commons report.

Another member is Jonathon Porritt, former chair of the UK Sustainable Development Commission, one of former Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s leading green advisers, who has stated that Britain’s population must be cut in half from around 60 million to 30 million if it is to build a sustainable society.

Porritt is also a member of the Optimum Population Trust, a connection that caused raised eyebrows when it was announced that Porritt was to be a part of a forthcoming Royal Society “Objective” Global Population Study.

Also on the Royal Society’s working group for their global population study is another of their patrons, and another OPT member, BBC darling wildlife broadcaster and film-maker Sir David Attenborough. Attenborough has called for a one child policy like that of Communist China to be implemented in Britain. The proposal is one of the OPT’s main initiatives. Again, how is this man’s influence going to result in an “objective” study on population? Another member of that working group is Cambridge economist Sir Partha Dasgupta, also a fellow of the OPT.

Professor Malcolm Potts, another member of the working group was the first male doctor at the Marie Stopes Abortion Clinic in London, he also advised on the UK’s 1967 Abortion Act. Marie Stopes was a prominent campaigner for the implementation of eugenics policies. In Radiant Motherhood (1920) she called for the “sterilisation of those totally unfit for parenthood [to] be made an immediate possibility, indeed made compulsory.” That group, according to her, included non-whites and the poor.

Stopes, an anti-Semite Nazi sympathizer, campaigned for selective breeding to achieve racial purity, a passion she shared with Adolf Hitler in adoring letters and poems that she sent the leader of the Third Reich. Stopes also attended the Nazi congress on population science in Berlin in 1935, while calling for the “compulsory sterilization of the diseased, drunkards, or simply those of bad character.” Stopes acted on her appalling theories by concentrating her abortion clinics in poor areas so as to reduce the birth rate of the lower classes.

Stopes left most of her estate to the Eugenics Society, an organization that shared her passion for racial purity and still exists today under the new name The Galton Institute. The society has included members such as Charles Galton Darwin (grandson of the evolutionist), Julian Huxley and Margaret Sanger.

Perhaps most notably, the head of the Royal Society’s new study, John Sulston, most famously played a leading role in the Human Genome Project, the effort to identify and map the thousands of genes of the human genome. Sulston worked under James D. Watson, a notorious eugenicist who has previously argued that black people are inherently less intelligent than whites and has advocated the creation of a “super-race” of humans, where the attractive and physically strong are genetically manufactured under laboratory conditions.

Watson is also affiliated with the Royal Society, indeed, in 1993 he received the society’s Copley Medal of honour for “outstanding achievements in research in any branch of science, and alternates between the physical sciences and the biological sciences”. Sulston is also a leading advocate of the renowned Atheist group, The British Humanist Association.

It is clear that this organisation and these people are immersed in the science of eugenics, and that they have continued the science under the guise of environmentalism. They hate humanity and any notion that their studies will represent anything other than an establishment avocation of mass depopulation is farcical.

Given the standing of the Royal Society and its ability to influence policy making on an international scale, it is imperative that the media, places of education, government representatives and the wider public are made aware of these facts.

The Great Global Warming Swindle

Global Warming Or Global Governance?

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: These bastards are like cockroaches that just keep coming back! – SJH 

Telegraph – Cancun Climate Change Conference: Scientists Call For Rationing

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/8165769/Cancun-climate-change-summit-scientists-call-for-rationing-in-developed-world.html

Link to original article below…

http://www.prisonplanet.com/ultra-elitist-environmental-group-halt-economic-growth-institute-rationing.html

Global Warming And “Climate Change” No Longer Frighten Europe

with 3 comments

November 13, 2010: Hans Labohm / The Washington Times – November 5, 2010

The fight against the delusion of dangerous man-made global warming remains an uphill struggle. For decades, the climate debate has been obfuscated by cherry-picking, spin-doctoring and scaremongering by the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other climate alarmists, including the environmental movement and mainstream media. Their massive campaign to overstate the threat of man-made warming has left its imprint on public opinion. But the tide seems to be turning.

The Climate Conference fiasco in Copenhagen, the Climategate scandal and stabilization of worldwide temperatures since 1995 have given rise to growing doubts about the putative threat of “dangerous global warming” or “global climate disruption.” Indeed, even Phil Jones, director of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit and one of the main players in Climategate, now acknowledges that there has been no measurable warming since 1995 despite steadily rising atmospheric carbon dioxide.

People are paying attention, and opinion polls in many countries show a dramatic fall in the ranking of climate change among people’s major concerns. People also are beginning to understand that major rain- and snowstorms, hurricanes and other weather extremes are caused by solar-driven changes in global jet streams and warm-cold fronts, not by CO2, and that claims about recent years being the “warmest ever” are based on false or falsified temperature data.

In various parts of the world, the climate debate displays different features. The U.S. and other parts of the non-European Anglo-Saxon world feature highly polarized and politicized debates along the left-versus-right divide. In Europe, all major political parties are still toeing the “official” IPCC line. In both arenas, with a few notable exceptions, skeptical views – even from well-known scientists with impeccable credentials – tend to be ignored and/or actively suppressed by governments, academia and the media.

Nevertheless, skepticism about man-made climate disasters is gradually gaining ground.

In my own country, the Netherlands, for instance, that skepticism even has received some official recognition, thus dissolving the information monopoly of climate alarmists. The Lower House’s Standing Committee on Environment recently organized a one-day hearing at which both climate-chaos adherents and disaster skeptics could freely discuss their different views before key parliamentarians who decide climate policy.

This hearing was followed by a special seminar organized by the Royal Netherlands Academy of Sciences, using the same format but focusing on scientific topics. The academy will soon publish a report about this seminar.

Europe often brags about its emission-trading system (ETS), regarding itself as the vanguard of an international climate policy. In the European view, the Copenhagen climate summit should have produced a worldwide extension and sharpening of its ETS. But the vast majority of countries in the world refused to follow Europe’s example, so the meeting turned into a fiasco. Its follow-up in Cancun, Mexico, at year’s end surely will produce a similar result. For good reason.

Contrary to official claims, Europe’s experience with ETS is dismal. The system is expensive and prone to massive fraud. More important, it serves no useful purpose.

The European Environmental Agency tracks Europe’s performance regarding the reduction of CO2 emissions. Its latest report states: “The EU’s greenhouse gas inventory report … shows that emissions have not only continued their downward trend in 2008, but have also picked up pace. The EU-27’s emissions stood 11.3 percent below their 1990 levels, while EU-15 achieved a reduction of 6.9 percent compared to Kyoto base-year levels.”

On the face of it, the system seems to be pretty successful. However, much of the downward trend was caused by the global economic recession, not the ETS. Moreover, both climate-chaos proponents and climate-disaster skeptics agree that the scheme will have no detectable impact on worldwide temperatures – perhaps 0.1 degrees – though this crucial piece of information has been carefully and deliberately shielded from the public eye.

What about renewable energy as an alternative? Consider these costs for various sources of electricity in cents per kilowatt-hour: Nuclear is 4, coal is 4, natural gas is 5, onshore wind is 13, biomass is 16 and solar is 56.

Obviously, the price tag for renewables is extremely high when compared to that for hydrocarbons. The additional costs can be justified either by imminent fossil-fuel scarcity (the “oil peak”), which would send prices for petroleum and coal through the roof, or by the threat of man-made global warming. But on closer inspection, neither argument is tenable.

The authoritative International Energy Agency does not foresee any substantial scarcity of oil and gas in the near to medium future, and coal reserves remain sufficient for centuries to come. As for global warming, there has been no statistically significant rise in average worldwide temperatures since 1995. Meanwhile, recent peer-reviewed studies indicate that increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere (natural or man-made) have minimal effects on climate change – and on balance, this plant-fertilizing gas is beneficial, rather than harmful, for mankind and the biosphere.

All this argues for a closer look at the cost/benefit relationship of investing in renewable-energy projects, to prevent a massive waste of resources in uncompetitive and thus wasteful forms of energy. Because every cloud has a silver lining, the ongoing economic crisis might give extra impetus toward that end.

Hans Labohm is a former professor at the Dutch Institute of International Relations and guest teacher at the Netherlands Institute for Defense Studies. He has also been an IPCC reviewer.

The Great Global Warming Swindle (Trailer)

The Great Global Warming Swindle (Full Length)

Global Warming Or Global Governance? (Full Length)

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: Using Al the Goracle’s words, the science is settled… Indeed! – SJH

Link to original article below…

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/nov/5/climate-change-no-longer-scares-europe/?page=2

New Chemtrail Film Debut ‘What In The World Are They Spraying?’

with one comment

November 12, 2010: Truth Media Productions / YouTube ~ Antibilderberg88 – October 27, 2010

What In The World Are They Spraying? – Part 1 of 7

What In The World Are They Spraying? – Part 2 of 7

What In The World Are They Spraying? – Part 3 of 7

What In The World Are They Spraying? – Part 4 of 7

What In The World Are They Spraying? – Part 5 of 7

What In The World Are They Spraying? – Part 6 of 7

What In The World Are They Spraying? – Part 7 of 7

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: For more information about Chemtrails, click on the link below– SJH

The Tonka Report Archive For Chemtrails

https://stevenjohnhibbs.wordpress.com/category/chemtrails/

Link to original YouTube video below…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngYTQIiprbA

A Chemtrail Documentary: “What In The World Are They Spraying?”

with one comment

October 10, 2010: Steve Watson and Paul Joseph Watson / Infowars.com – October 8, 2010

What In The World Are They Spraying? is an investigation into all aspects of the phenomenon of chemtrails. Over the past decade and more, long white trails emanating from jet planes have been seen lingering in the skies all over the planet, often expanding and merging to form vast swathes of artificial cloud cover.

These trails are clearly not water vapour contrails, which evaporate after several minutes. They remain overhead for long extended periods of time, often culminating in strange grid like formations. Now they have people asking some serious questions. What are these trails, who is spraying them into our atmosphere and for what purpose?

This film, produced by G. Edward Griffin, Michael Murphy and Paul Wittenberger sets out to answer those questions and discovers some disturbing answers. Research indicates that the trails are part of a geoengineering program that may already be in its initial implementation phase.

Scientists at the Carnegie Institution are using taxpayer money to lay the groundwork for injecting the atmosphere with materials they believe will artificially cool the planet, in a bid to stave off what we are told is modern civilization’s greatest threat to date, anthropogenic global warming.

Even if you buy into the as yet unproven theory that human produced carbon emissions are voluminous enough to significantly alter the planet’s climate, you should still be extremely wary. Playing God with the atmosphere may have severe consequences, particularly given that the compounds these scientists are testing are known to cause debilitating health problems and could lead to massive droughts and famines.

Based around the madcap method of “injecting aerosols of sulfate into the stratosphere” to produce “a global sunshade,” researchers at the Carnegie Institution’s Department of Global Ecology have been running advanced trials on how to distribute artificially added sulfates to the atmosphere in the name of cooling the planet.

“The Carnegie scientists ran five simulations using a global climate model with different sulfate aerosol concentrations depending on latitude. They then used the results from these simulations in an optimization model to determine what distribution of sulfates would come closest to achieving specified climate goals. They then tested these distributions in the global climate model to assess how well the climate goals were met,” states a recent press release about the study.

One of the main authors of the study was Ken Caldeira, the man who told a conference of fellow warmists earlier this year that it would be a good idea to make the emission of CO2 an illegal act. Presumably, that would include the very process of breathing since all humans exhale carbon dioxide. That’s right – the man tasked with playing God with the environment thinks breathing should be criminalized.

Caldeira also promoted the idea of dispersing sulphur dioxide into the skies in an attempt to reflect sunlight in a September 2008 London Guardian article entitled, Geoengineering: The radical ideas to combat global warming. “One approach is to insert “scatterers” into the stratosphere,” states the article.

“Caldeira cites an idea to deploy jumbo jets into the upper atmosphere and deposit clouds of tiny particles there, such as sulphur dioxide. Dispersing around 1m tonnes of sulphur dioxide per year across 10m square kilometres of the atmosphere would be enough to reflect away sufficient amounts of sunlight.”

But it gets worse – Caldeira is an advisor for and is being funded by Bill Gates – the man who thinks that old people should be killed to save teaching jobs, and the man who says that vaccines which his foundation bankrolls to the tune of billions should be used to lower population and bring CO2 emissions down to a level approaching zero. But the Carnegie study is just one recent example of a research program that has been ongoing for up to 20 years.

Experiments similar to Caldeira’s proposal are already being carried out by U.S. government -backed scientists, such as those at the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Savannah River National Laboratory in Aiken, S.C, who last year began conducting studies which involved shooting huge amounts of particulate matter, in this case “porous-walled glass microspheres,” into the stratosphere. The project is closely tied to an idea by Nobel Prize winner Paul Crutzen, who “proposed sending 747 aircraft to dump huge quantities of sulfur particles into the far-reaches of the stratosphere to cool down the atmosphere.”

The science of geoengineering through chemtrails is also vehemently backed by John P. Holdren, the White House science czar, who in his 1977 book Ecoscience advocated poisoning the water supply to involuntarily sterilize humans as part of a “planetary regime” that would control every aspect of our existence. The fact that such eugenicists are now in control of geoengineering programs that will have a direct impact on our health is alarming.

Would you let Ted Bundy take your teenage daughter out on a date? Would you allow Ian Brady and Myra Hindley to baby sit your children? And yet here we have a gang of elitists who have publicly stated their intent to use the threat of global warming and overpopulation as a justification for killing and sterilizing people, and we’re giving them free reign with taxpayer money to play God with planet Earth? What is wrong with this picture?

Geoengineering programs have also been promoted by the Council on Foreign Relations, which is one of the main steering committees behind the implementation of global governance. In a document entitled Geoengineering: Workshop on Unilateral Planetary Scale Geoengineering, the CFR proposes different methods of “reflecting sunlight back into space,” which include adding “small reflecting particles in the upper part of the atmosphere,” adding “more clouds in the lower part of the atmosphere,” and placing “various kinds of reflecting objects in space either near the earth or at a stable location between the earth and the sun.”

The proposals in the CFR document match exactly the atmospheric effects observed in the aftermath of chemtrail spraying. A recent report issued by the UK government also calls for the UN to exclusively regulate world wide geoengineering of the planet in order to stave off man made global warming.

Discussion of geoengineering technology is often framed as a future consideration, yet governments are already conducting such programs at an advanced stage. The Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Program was created in 1989 with funding from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and is sponsored by the DOE’s Office of Science and managed by the Office of Biological and Environmental Research. One of ARM’s programs, entitled Indirect and Semi-Direct Aerosol Campaign (ISDAC), is aimed at measuring “cloud simulations” and “aerosol retrievals”.

Another program under the Department of Energy’s Atmospheric Science Program is directed towards, “developing comprehensive understanding of the atmospheric processes that control the transport, transformation, and fate of energy related trace chemicals and particulate matter.” The DoE website states that, “The current focus of the program is aerosol radiative forcing of climate: aerosol formation and evolution and aerosol properties that affect direct and indirect influences on climate and climate change.”

What In The World Are They Spraying? – Trailer:

U.S. government scientists are already bombarding the skies with the acid-rain causing pollutant sulphur dioxide in an attempt to fight global warming by “geo-engineering” the planet, despite the fact that injecting aerosols into the upper atmosphere carries with it a host of both known and unknown dangers.

Such programs merely scratch the surface of what is likely to be a gargantuan and overarching black-budget funded project to geo-engineer the planet, with little or no care for the unknown environmental consequences this could engender. Injecting the atmosphere with sulfate aerosols is a completely insane, untested and dangerous proposal.

Rutgers University professor Alan Robock has warned that such experiments “could create disasters,” damaging the ozone layer and potentially altering the stratosphere by eliminating weather patterns such as the annual Asian monsoon rain season, which 2 billion people rely upon to water their crops and feed the population. “Imagine if we triggered a drought and famine while trying to cool the planet,” Robock told a geo-engineering conference last year.

However, when you consider the fact that the global warming mantra is a thin veil for eugenics and population control, it’s unlikely that the world’s elite care about one third of the planet’s population being unable to eat, in fact they would probably see that as a bonus.

The known facts about what happens when the environment is loaded with sulphur dioxide are bad enough, since the compound is the main component of acid rain, which according to the EPA “Causes acidification of lakes and streams and contributes to the damage of trees at high elevations (for example, red spruce trees above 2,000 feet) and many sensitive forest soils. In addition, acid rain accelerates the decay of building materials and paints, including irreplaceable buildings, statues, and sculptures that are part of our nation’s cultural heritage.”

The health effects of bombarding the skies with sulphur dioxide alone are enough to raise serious questions about whether such programs should even be allowed to proceed. The following health effects are linked with exposure to sulphur…

– Neurological effects and behavioral changes

– Disturbance of blood circulation

– Heart damage

– Effects on eyes and eyesight

– Reproductive failure

– Damage to immune systems

– Stomach and gastrointestinal disorder

– Damage to liver and kidney functions

– Hearing defects

– Disturbance of the hormonal metabolism

– Dermatological effects

– Suffocation and lung embolism

According to the LennTech website, “Laboratory tests with test animals have indicated that sulfur can cause serious vascular damage in veins of the brains, the heart and the kidneys. These tests have also indicated that certain forms of sulfur can cause foetal damage and congenital effects. Mothers can even carry sulfur poisoning over to their children through mother milk. Finally, sulfur can damage the internal enzyme systems of animals.”

Fred Singer, president of the Science Environmental Policy Project and a skeptic of man-made global warming theories, warns that the consequences of tinkering with the planet’s delicate eco-system could have far-reaching dangers. “If you do this on a continuous basis, you would depress the ozone layer and cause all kinds of other problems that people would rather avoid,” said Singer.

Even Greenpeace’s chief UK scientist – a staunch advocate of the man-made global warming explanation – Doug Parr has slammed attempts to geo-engineer the planet as “outlandish” and “dangerous”.

Stephen Schneider of Stanford University, who recently proposed a bizarre plan to send spaceships into the upper atmosphere that would be used to block out the Sun, admits that geo-engineering could cause “conflicts between nations if geoengineering projects go wrong.”

Given all the immediate dangers associated with bombarding the atmosphere with sulphur dioxide, along with the unknown dangers of other geo-engineering projects, many people are concerned that “chemtrails” are a secret component of the same agenda to alter the Earth’s eco-system. The fact that chemtrails are blocking out the sun, which is precisely what the geoengineering advocates call for, strongly indicates that they are an integral part of this dangerous and wide-reaching program.

This graphic proposes, “Spraying aluminum powder and barium oxide into high levels of the atmosphere, again delivered by aircraft, to increase planetary reflectance (albedo) and cloud cover.” High levels of barium have been found in substances associated with chemtrails.

Producer G. Edward Griffin talks about the film What In The World Are They Spraying?:

Reports of chemtrails have increased dramatically over the last 10 years. Many have speculated that they are part of a government program to alter climate, inoculate humans against certain pathogens, or even to toxify humans as part of a population reduction agenda.

In conducting Google searches, one finds discussion, such as this example, of using sulphur dioxide as a jet fuel additive to be dispersed over the world during routine commercial flights. “I suggest that both the sulphur dioxide and the silica particles could be delivered into the stratosphere by dissolving an additive in jet aviation fuel,” writes engineer John Gorman, who has conducted experiments to test the feasibility of such a scenario. “We would want to burn fuel containing the additive specifically when the aircraft was cruising in the lower stratosphere,” he adds.

In 2008, a KSLA news investigation found that a substance that fell to earth from a high altitude chemtrail contained high levels of Barium (6.8 ppm) and Lead (8.2 ppm) as well as trace amounts of other chemicals including arsenic, chromium, cadmium, selenium and silver. Of these, all but one are metals, some are toxic while several are rarely or never found in nature.

Local News Station Confirms Barium In Chemtrails

The newscast focuses on Barium, which its research shows is a “hallmark of chemtrails.” KSLA found Barium levels in its samples at 6.8 ppm or “more than six times the toxic level set by the EPA.” The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality confirmed that the high levels of Barium were “very unusual,” but commented that “proving the source was a whole other matter” in its discussion with KSLA.

KSLA also asked Mark Ryan, Director of the Poison Control Center, about the effects of Barium on the human body. Ryan commented that “short term exposure can lead to anything from stomach to chest pains and that long term exposure causes blood pressure problems.” The Poison Control Center further reported that long-term exposure, as with any harmful substance, would contribute to weakening the immune system, which many speculate is the purpose of such man-made chemical trails.

Indeed, barium oxide has cropped up repeatedly as a contaminant from suspected geoengineering experimentation. KSLA also put aerosolized-chemical testing in its historical context, citing a voluminous number of unclassified tests exposed in 1977 Senate hearings. The tests included experimenting with biochemical compounds on the public. KSLA reports that “239 populated areas were contaminated with biological agents between 1949 and 1969.”

One of the accepted truisms of scientific study is the fact that if scientists are proposing an idea, then those scientists with access to the bottomless pit of black-budget secret government funding are already doing it. It is highly likely that chemtrails are merely one manifestation of “geo-engineering” that is taking place without proper debate, notification or any form of legality, and with a callous disregard for the potential dangers to both our health and our environment.

On the face of it, the idea of artificially poisoning the atmosphere with a substance known to cause massive health problems and one that many environmentalists say will lead to crippling droughts and famines, is a complete over-reaction to combating climate change which has naturally occurred for eons before man ever set foot on the planet.

Add to that the fact that the people proposing, funding, and researching the issue are all avowed eugenicists who have been vocal in their mission to enact draconian measures of population control and the true scope of what we’re dealing with is clear – an effort by control freaks whose sole interest is not about caring for the planet but hijacking well-placed concerns about the environment as a vehicle through which to enforce their putrid cocktail of death and tyranny.

All of this explosive information and more is contained within the groundbreaking new documentary What In The World Are They Spraying.

* Produced by G. Edward Griffin, Michael Murphy and Paul Wittenberger

* Expected ship date October 22, 2010 – Runtime 95 minutes

Related Reading: What In The World Are They Spraying? Part One, Part Two – By Michael J. Murphy

Order the DVD at the Infowars shop here.

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: This is a highly anticipated documentary that will finally put the crime of chemtrail spraying and geo-engineering into the mainstream consciousness once and for all– SJH

Link to original article below…

http://www.infowars.com/chemtrails-what-in-the-world-are-they-spraying/