By Prof. Claudia von Werlhof, Dr. Rosalie Bertell, Elana Freeland, Claire Henrion, Conny Kadia, and Prof Michel Chossudovsky | Global Research
by Michel Chossudovsky
Introduction. GLOBAL WAR-NING! How to Explain What Is Happening Today?,
by Claudia von Werlhof
Slowly Wrecking Our Planet,
by Rosalie Bertell
Geoengineering, the “Deep State”, and Planetary Lockdown,
by Elana Freeland
Engineered Forest Fires in Portugal 2017,
by Conny Kadia
From Geoengineering to a New Deal for Nature: Destroying Earth for Profit
by Josefina Fraile
Eyes Wide Open in Cyprus,
by Linda Leblanc
Why Do People Not Realise They Are Sprayed Like Insects?,
by Claire Henrion
CO2 as the Scapegoat and the Way to a ‘Brave New World’,
by Maria Heibel
Geoengineering: From Geo-Weaponry to Geo-Warfare. The Destruction of Mother Earth as the Ultimate and Supreme Crime of Patriarchal Civilization,
by Claudia von Werlhof
The “Hatred of Life” as Patriarchy’s Core Element,
by Claudia von Werlhof
Between Our Capture by Patriarchy and Our Liberation with Mother Life,
by Vilma Almendra
Planetary Movement for Mother Earth: Second Open Letter to Greta Thunberg, 2019
Rosalie Bertell: Letter to the Durban UN Conference 2011
United Nations: Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques, United Nations, Geneva, May 18, 1977. Entered into force: 5 October 1978
Vilma Rocío Almendra Quiguanás is a native Nasa-Misak from the North of Cauca, Colombia. She is weaving communications for the truth and for life. She is the author of the books: “Regresar del olvido liberándonos con Uma Kiwe. Desafíos de la lucha Nasa del Cauca, Colombia: Tejiendo memoria entre la emancipación y la captura” (2017) and “Encontrar la palabra perfecta: experiencia del tejido de comunicación del pueblo nasa en Colombia” (2010). She is part of the initiative “Pueblos en Camino” which has the mandate to promote weaving the resistance and autonomy between peoples and processes.
Rosalie Bertell, born in 1929 in the USA, has passed in 2012 in her convent “Grey Nuns of the Sacred Heart” in Pennsylvania. She has PhD in Biometrics from the Catholic Univ., Washington DC in 1966. She has nine PhD honoris causae, several awards, f.i. the Right Livelihood Award in 1986 for “No Immediate Danger? Prognosis for a Radioactive Earth”, 1985.
She is co-founder of the International Institute of Concern for Public Health, IICPH, Toronto, and others. She is the author of “Planet Earth. The Latest Weapon of War”, 2000. She is an expert of UN Commissions on Chernobyl, Bhopal, Marshall Islands, etc. working in 60 countries on industrial accidents.
Michel Chossudovsky is an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (emeritus) at the University of Ottawa, Founder and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal, Editor of Global Research.
He is the author of twelve books including The Globalization of Poverty and The New World Order (2003), America’s “War on Terrorism” (2005), The Globalization of War, America’s Long War against Humanity (2015).He is a contributor to the Encyclopaedia Britannica. His writings have been published in more than twenty languages.
In 2014, he was awarded the Gold Medal for Merit of the Republic of Serbia for his writings on NATO’s war of aggression against Yugoslavia.
Josefina Fraile Martín is from Spain. She is an environmental researcher and activist. She was the official Spanish candidate of the Greens to the European Parliament in 2004. She is President of the Association Terra SOS-tenible. She is also promoter of the international civil society platforms Skyguards and Guardacielos opposing ongoing global climate manipulation programs, aka geoengineering, in the political instances of European countries and European institutions.
Elana Freeland from the USA is best known for Chemtrails, HAARP, and the Full Spectrum Dominance of Planet Earth (Feral House, 2014) and has recently completed its sequel Under an Ionized Sky: From Chemtrails to Space Fence Lockdown (Sub Rosa America, 2018) about the resurrected SDI “Star Wars” Space Fence. To be published in 2021, Geoengineered Transhumanism: How the Environment Has Been Weaponized by Chemicals, Electromagnetics, & Nanotechnology for Synthetic Biology. This is the third book in the trilogy on geoengineering.
Maria Heibel was born in Limburg Germany. She studied at the Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe University of Frankfurt/Main. She was granted in 1976 in political and historical sciences for instructional work, and in 1980 in pedagogy. From 1981 to 1991, her main occupation was in graphic art with exhibitions in Italy, Germany, Japan, Poland etc. From 1991, her main occupation has been in the social field. She is the curator of the website: Nogeoingegneria.com. She lives in Florence-Toscana, Italy since 1981.
Claire Henrion, born in La Rochelle (France) in 1960, has founded the ACSEIPICA (Public Association for the Study, follow-up and Information on Atmospheric and Climate Intervention Programmes – www.acseipica.fr). Her website is www.rockastres.org that focuses on research, art and popular education in Astronomy and Astrology, to restore a cosmology able to generate peace.
Conny Kadia, born in 1965 in Germany, studied music, politics, philosophy and languages. She was a professional musician in African Drumming, as well as classical piano and jazz saxophone. She migrated definitively to Portugal in 2000. She loves nature and studies animals. Since 2014, she has been a geoengineering activist in Portugal and in 2017 was a witness of the organized fires by states and military on 15th Oct 17. She is mainly working as a music teacher and translator. She is the co-founder of the groups “Why Fire Group” and “Grupo Céus Limpos” in Central Portugal. Since 2019, she has been an activist in the “National Movements Against Mining“ in Portugal.
Linda Leblanc, a Canadian/naturalized Cypriot, has lived in Cyprus since 1989. She is a writer, politician and active member of the Cyprus Green Party. She made history in 2006 as the first person of non-Cypriot origin to be elected to a Town Council in Cyprus. She is the first woman elected to Pegeia Council and was re-elected in 2011 and 2016.
Claudia von Werlhof, born in 1943 near Berlin, Germany, is a University Professor for women’s studies in Austria at Innsbruck, mother of a sun. She co-invented the “Bielefeld School” in Germany, worked at the grass roots in Central- and South America, developed the “Critical Theory of Patriarchy”, co-founded FIPAZ (Research Institute for the Critique of Patriarchy and Alternative Civilizations), the “Planetary Movement for Mother Earth” and “BOOMERANG – Journal for the Critique of Patriarchy”. She is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization, Montreal.
This important book entitled Global WAR-NING. Geoengineering Is Wrecking Our Planet and Humanity by Prof. Claudia Von Werlhof (Editor) encompasses contributions by prominent scholars and activists.
In Part I, the focus is on Geoengineering, Politics, and the Planet. Part II analyses Women in Defense of Mother Earth
As we go to Press, World leaders are meeting in Glasgow at COP-26 under the auspices of the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
All eyes are now on “the imminent dangers of CO2 and greenhouse gas emissions”.
The so-called “climate emergency” has become a timely and convenient instrument of propaganda which is used to distract people from questioning “the real crisis”, namely the Covid-19 “plandemic” (instigated by the financial elites) which is destroying people’s lives Worldwide.
Exclusion of Geo-Engineering and Environmental Modification Techniques (ENMOD) from the Climate Debate
The COP climate debate under the UNFCCC has persistently excluded the analysis of geo-engineering which is Slowly Wrecking our Planet as outlined by the late Rosalie Bertell (Chapter II). In the words of Rosalie Bertell: “Geoengineering is defined as planetary-scale environmental engineering of our atmosphere: that is, manipulating our weather, our oceans, and our home planet itself.”
As in previous Climate summits, geo-engineering and environmental modification techniques (ENMOD) will not be addressed at the Glasgow COP26 venue. The debate on Climate Change focuses solely on the impacts of greenhouse gas emissions and measures to reduce so-called manmade CO2 emissions under the Kyoto Protocol.
Ironically, Environmental Modification Techniques (ENMOD) have been acknowledged by the UN in 1977 upon the signing in Geneva of the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques.
The 1977 Convention was ratified by the UN General Assembly which banned “military or other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects.” (AP, 18 May 1977).
Both the US and the Soviet Union were signatories to the Convention.
Guided by the interest of consolidating peace, … and of saving mankind from the danger of using new means of warfare, (…)
Recognizing that military … use of such [environmental modification techniques] could have effects extremely harmful to human welfare,
Desiring to prohibit effectively military … use of environmental modification techniques in order to eliminate the dangers to mankind. … and affirming their willingness to work towards the achievement of this objective, (…)
Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to engage in military … use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or injury to any other State Party. (Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques, United Nations, Geneva, May 18, 1977. Entered into force: 5 October 1978, see full text of Convention in Annex)
The Convention defined “‘environmental modification techniques’ as referring to any technique for changing–through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes–the dynamics, composition or structure of the earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere or of outer space.” (Environmental Modification Ban Faithfully Observed, States Parties Declare, UN Chronicle, July, 1984, Vol. 21, p. 27)
The substance of the 1977 Convention was reasserted in very general terms in the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) signed at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro:
“States have… in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, the (…) responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.” (UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, New York, 1992)
Following the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, the issue of Climate Change for military use was never raised in subsequent climate UNFCCC summits. The issue was erased, deliberately forgotten. It is not part of the debate on climate change. The UNFCC’s exclusion of the 1977 Convention pertaining to Environmental Modification Techniques constitutes a blatant violation of the UN Charter.
In the words of Claudia von Werlhof in Chapter I
Military geoengineering is a macro-technology to influence and to change planetary processes and at the same time a micro-technology to influence our bodies and minds, a mind control technology. But military geoengineering is kept not only hidden from the public. … In the meantime, the real geoengineering is, however, violently transforming the planet for military use against us and itself. This means that Mother Earth is “weaponized”, trying to change her into a giant war machine.
In February 1998, however, the European Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defense Policy held public hearings in Brussels on the U.S based weather warfare facility developed under the HAARP program.
The Committee’s “Motion for Resolution” submitted to the European Parliament:
“Considers HAARP.[The High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program based in Alaska].. by virtue of its far-reaching impact on the environment to be a global concern and calls for its legal, ecological and ethical implications to be examined by an international independent body…; [the Committee] regrets the repeated refusal of the United States Administration… to give evidence to the public hearing …into the environmental and public risks [of] the HAARP program.” (European Parliament, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defense Policy, Brussels, doc. no. A4-0005/99, 14 January 1999).
The Committee’s request to draw up a “Green Paper” on “the environmental impacts of military activities”, however, was casually dismissed. Brussels was anxious to avoid a showdown with Washington. (see European Report, 3 February 1999).
“Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather” for Military Use
The Climate consensus is challenged by the authors of Global WAR-NING: Geoengineering Is Wrecking Our Planet and Humanity. The Military use of ENMOD is amply documented. It is part of a military agenda, which is confirmed by the US Air Force:
“[Weather modification] offers the war fighter a wide range of possible options to defeat or coerce an adversary… Weather modification will become a part of domestic and international security and could be done unilaterally… It could have offensive and defensive applications and even be used for deterrence purposes. The ability to generate precipitation, fog and storms on earth or to modify space weather… and the production of artificial weather all are a part of an integrated set of [military] technologies.” (US Air Force document AF 2025 Final Report)
The stated purpose of the Report is described below:
In this paper we show that appropriate application of weather-modification can provide battlespace dominance to a degree never before imagined. In the future, such operations will enhance air and space superiority and provide new options for battlespace shaping and battlespace awareness there, waiting for us to pull it all together;” in 2025 we can “Own the Weather.” (Commissioned by US Air Force document AF 2025 Final Report, (public document)
Weather-modification, according to US Air Force document AF 2025 Final Report,
“offers the war fighter a wide range of possible options to defeat or coerce an adversary”, capabilities, it says, extend to the triggering of floods, hurricanes, droughts and earthquakes:
‘Weather modification will become a part of domestic and international security and could be done unilaterally… It could have offensive and defensive applications and even be used for deterrence purposes. The ability to generate precipitation, fog and storms on earth or to modify space weather… and the production of artificial weather all are a part of an integrated set of [military] technologies.”
See complete reports commissioned by the US Air Force
….From enhancing friendly operations or disrupting those of the enemy via small-scale tailoring of natural weather patterns to complete dominance of global communications and counterspace control, weather-modification offers the war fighter a wide-range of possible options to defeat or coerce an adversary. Some of the potential capabilities a weather-modification system could provide to a war-fighting commander in chief (CINC) are listed in table 1.
Source: US Air Force
Why Would We Want to Mess with the Weather? is the subtitle of chapter 2 of the Report
“According to Gen Gordon Sullivan, former Army chief of staff, “As we leap technology into the 21st century, we will be able to see the enemy day or night, in any weather— and go after him relentlessly.” global, precise, real-time, robust, systematic weather-modification capability would provide war-fighting CINCs with a powerful force multiplier to achieve military objectives. Since weather will be common to all possible futures, a weather-modification capability would be universally applicable and have utility across the entire spectrum of conflict. The capability of influencing the weather even on a small scale could change it from a force degrader to a force multiplier.”
Under the heading:
What Do We Mean by “Weather-modification”?
The report states:
“The term weather-modification may have negative connotations for many people, civilians and military members alike. It is thus important to define the scope to be considered in this paper so that potential critics or proponents of further research have a common basis for discussion.
In the broadest sense, weather-modification can be divided into two major categories: suppression and intensification of weather patterns. In extreme cases, it might involve the creation of completely new weather patterns, attenuation or control of severe storms, or even alteration of global climate on a far-reaching and/or long-lasting scale. In the mildest and least controversial cases it may consist of inducing or suppressing precipitation, clouds, or fog for short times over a small-scale region. Other low-intensity applications might include the alteration and/or use of near space as a medium to enhance communications, disrupt active or passive sensing, or other purposes.” (emphasis added)
The Triggering of Storms:
“Weather-modification technologies might involve techniques that would increase latent heat release in the atmosphere, provide additional water vapor for cloud cell development, and provide additional surface and lower atmospheric heating to increase atmospheric instability.
Critical to the success of any attempt to trigger a storm cell is the pre-existing atmospheric conditions locally and regionally. The atmosphere must already be conditionally unstable and the large-scale dynamics must be supportive of vertical cloud development. The focus of the weather-modification effort would be to provide additional “conditions” that would make the atmosphere unstable enough to generate cloud and eventually storm cell development. The path of storm cells once developed or enhanced is dependent not only on the mesoscale dynamics of the storm but the regional and synoptic (global) scale atmospheric wind flow patterns in the area which are currently not subject to human control.” (page 19)
Military analysts are mute on the subject. Meteorologists are not investigating the matter, and environmentalists are strung on global warming and the Kyoto protocol.
The HAARP Program
The High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) was initially established in Gokona, Alaska, in 1992. According to a US Air Force statement, the HAARP facility was closed down in May 2014. The weather modification technology nonetheless prevails. Was it moved to an undisclosed location? In the mid-1990s, the HAARP technology was fully operational. The evolution of weather modification technologies for military use in the course of last twenty years has not been disclosed.
HAARP was part of a generation of sophisticated weaponry under the US Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). Operated by the Air Force Research Laboratory’s Space Vehicles Directorate, HAARP constitutes a system of powerful antennas capable of creating “controlled local modifications of the ionosphere” [upper layer of the atmosphere]:
HAARP was presented to public opinion as a program of scientific and academic research. US military documents seem to suggest, however, that HAARP’s main objective is to “exploit the ionosphere for Department of Defense purposes.” (See Michel Chossudovsky, The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Destruction: “Owning the Weather” for Military Use, Global Research, September 27, 2004
Without explicitly referring to the HAARP program, the US Air Force study quoted above points to the use of “induced ionospheric modifications” as a means of altering weather patterns as well as disrupting enemy communications and radar. (Ibid)
HAARP also has the ability of triggering blackouts and disrupting the electricity power system of entire regions:
“Rosalie Bertell, president of the International Institute of Concern for Public Health, says HAARP operates as ‘a gigantic heater that can cause major disruptions in the ionosphere, creating not just holes, but long incisions in the protective layer that keeps deadly radiation from bombarding the planet’.
Physicist Dr Bernard Eastlund called it ‘the largest ionospheric heater ever built’. HAARP is presented by the US Air Force as a research programme, but military documents confirm its main objective is to ‘induce ionospheric modifications’ with a view to altering weather patterns and disrupting communications and radar.
According to a report by the Russian State Duma: ‘The US plans to carry out large-scale experiments under the HAARP programme [and] create weapons capable of breaking radio communication lines and equipment installed on spaceships and rockets, provoke serious accidents in electricity networks and in oil and gas pipelines, and have a negative impact on the mental health of entire regions.’
Weather manipulation is the pre-emptive weapon par excellence. It can be directed against enemy countries or ‘friendly nations’ without their knowledge, used to destabilise economies, ecosystems and agriculture. It can also trigger havoc in financial and commodity markets. The disruption in agriculture creates a greater dependency on food aid and imported grain staples from the US and other Western countries.” (Michel Chossudovsky, Weather Warfare: Beware the US military’s experiments with climatic warfare, The Ecologist, December 2007)
An analysis of statements emanating from the US Air Force points to the unthinkable: the covert manipulation of weather patterns, communications systems and electric power as a weapon of global warfare, enabling the US to disrupt and dominate entire regions of the World.
This is the unspoken truth affecting all humanity which is addressed in this book. In the words of Rosalie Bertell:
“Geoengineering is defined as planetary-scale environmental engineering of our atmosphere: that is, manipulating our weather, our oceans, and our home planet itself.”
After more than one year of “lockdowns” all over the world, the issue of “global warming” and “climate change” is back on the table of the international debate.
It seems that natural catastrophies have started to surround us everywhere – from the animal world next to us as well as from the sky above us. Is “nature” the enemy that has to be combatted today, be it by vaccinating humanity against the coronavirus that allegedly jumped out of the wilderness attacking us, be it by tearing down industrial production and consumption in order to avoid the alleged greenhouse gas CO2 emissions, being officially identified as the sole culprit of a so-called global warming? Or be it by applying methods of an alleged civil “geoengineering” against an ongoing climate change that seems to threaten the world?
This is the best moment to publish our book “Global War-ning! Geoengineering Is Wrecking Our Planet and Humanity”. Our warning, however, is not a warning against CO2 emissions that are the alleged reason for the warming of the planet. This is claimed from above, especially the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), from governments, the media, and the super rich, as well as from corrupted social movements everywhere (see Second Letter to Greta Thunberg, Annex).
We are, however, warning against the effects of a form of geoengineering that is not of civil, but of military origin, and a technology which alone is able to produce effects that appear as global warming, climate change, and much more, such as damage to the planet’s ozone layer (Werlhof in this vol.).
This military technology, nevertheless, is not debated nearly anywhere despite its development internationally 75 years ago. Military geoengineering is a macro-technology to influence and to change planetary processes and at the same time a micro-technology to influence our bodies and minds, a mind control technology. But military geoengineering is kept not only hidden from the public, even when some of its “civil” applications are discussed and defined as the only “geoengineering” that exists, but also – referring to its “civil” applications – it is defined the other way around as the technology that would even rescue the planet. In the meantime, the real geoengineering is, however, violently transforming the planet for military use against us and itself. This means that Mother Earth is “weaponized”, trying to change her into a giant war machine.
The technology of military geoengineering has been profoundly analyzed in all its aspects and historical development by North American scientist and UN expert, Dr. Rosalie Bertell (1929-2012), accompanied and followed by many others (Bertell 2000, 2020; Chossudovsky 2020). Bertell concludes and warns that this technology is turning our planet as a whole into a weapon of mass destruction, including “wrecking” it itself, as she says. So, geoengineering should be stopped immediately instead of being defined as a civil science and inversely proclaimed as a means to even save the Earth!
This shows that concepts of the public discourse used today are part of an information war that is producing an incredible confusion everywhere (Engdahl 2018).
So, the time has come to have a new look at military geoengineering in order to better understand what is really going on with the Earth in general and her “climate”, specifically, as well as with humans and our societies.
What we can see now is the beginning of a policy of “climate protection” that has become the major project of the European Union for decades to come, the so-called “Green New Deal” (Rifkin 2019). The same allegedly “green” policies are also central for the concepts of the “Great Reset” in the 21st century, propagated by the “World Economic Forum” (WEF) and its leader, Klaus Schwab, in Davos (Schwab & Malleret 2020). Schwab promotes nothing less than the interests of the world’s super rich. His program looks as if the often-quoted “New World Order” would be “green”, nature-friendly and the dangers for nature – as well as from nature – eliminating civilizational undertaking for the wellbeing of all of us. It seems as if it would liberate us from the sins of resource waste, industrial mass production and overconsumption under capitalism. Were not these the goals of all ecological and anti-capitalist movements of the last century?
Yes, they were, but there is first of all, one argument that points to the real direction of the new global plans. It is the argument of a so-called “overpopulation” that has to disappear as it allegedly threatens nature by being responsible for producing ever growing CO2 emissions due to an always higher production and consumption level. Indeed, only when the world population is reduced to a much lower level can the current development model and its resource use as well as its income concentration be maintained and even expanded. Only in this way can a fundamental change be avoided in the direction of an alternative, truly egalitarian society that does not need to be capital-oriented in production and consumption anymore. In order to go on with capitalism, therefore, it has to be reduced to a minority-project, insofar as production and consumption of limited resources are concerned, because otherwise it would necessarily fail in the near future. “Peak oil” would become the peak of everything.
But, what are the changes the new, allegedly green and resource-protecting political programs from above are announcing, besides “depopulation” – a goal which is unimaginable for most people until today, anyway?
Whereas people are held to believe in the new green and moreover “sustainable” political projects, also supported by the UN Agenda 2010 and 2030, we have to ask what these projects mean in reality and beyond their propaganda. So, is it true that we are witnessing the beginning of a process of transforming our societies into really ecological ones, be it with or without its actual “overpopulation”?
The new “Great Transformation” is announced everywhere. It consists in starting to do away with the results of the former industrial revolutions, based on the energy of coal, natural gas, and oil (Engdahl 2021). Today, a new technological and energy regime is to be established, called the “fourth industrial revolution”. It is supposed to be mostly based on “clean” renewable energies out of water, wind, biomass and sunlight which do not emit much CO2, compared with the times before. The new civilizational project would then be far from leading to more global warming, stabilizing it at the proposed 1.5 degrees, and the climate catastrophes allegedly resulting from it would be limited.
The new energy regime, however, does not exclude nuclear energy – regarded as green for allegedly not producing CO2 emissions (Werlhof 2019) which is not true when at least considering uranium mining, for instance, its precondition, as well. The maintenance of nuclear power supply shows, however, that in reality renewable energies would not be enough at all to maintain the production of all inputs needed, and the requirements of a growing energy supply in an e-oriented traffic, economy and society, not to mention the military which is not going to give up its primary interests in nuclear technologies, with which – by the way – the project of geoengineering had started (Bertell 2000, Werlhof in this vol).
Most importantly, however, the fourth industrial revolution itself is defined by the general application of new technologies that have never been used before on a generalized basis, namely genetic engineering and synthetic biology – the biotechnologies – Artificial Intelligence (AI), nanotechnology, and last but not least, geoengineering!
So, whereas the narrative from above has to do with nature in all her aspects, being the source of all energy, life, and matter, we have to ask: What happens to nature in the time of the new industrial revolution?
It happens that nature in her form as matter and life is systematically dismantled down to its cellular, molecular and even atomic structure, and recombined afterwards to a new “creation”, but a creation beyond all its natural forms, limits, evolution and evolutionary boundaries (Chargaff 1988). I call this the “new alchemy” in which the complete dissolution of all matter, its “mortification”, becomes the precondition of a new “creation”, an Opus Magnum beyond nature as we know it (Werlhof 2020, Bizarri 2012).
This revolution is a revolution, indeed, and may be the most decisive ever. It is inventing a completely new world, a mixture of life and the machine, and of different life forms and matter as such, unseen to the present day. But this revolution has nothing to do with nature, life, and even human life within the natural order on Earth anymore. On the contrary, it wants to supercede and surmount nature in all its appearances, ties, and bonds. The same is true for Mother Earth. “Hacking the planet” by military geoengineering means taking control of its energies and life support systems, and recombining them in the form of a weaponized, giant machinery.
What is green about all that? It is green insofar as all life is concerned, but this life is being destroyed and transformed into part and parcel of a huge mega-machine of AI, the digitized “Internet of Things” moved by military 5G frequencies. In the IoT, all parts are defined as things, as “information”. So, as we all are supposed to become parts of it, we human beings – for the first time in history – will principally not be recognized as living beings or even humans anymore! There will be no need to acknowledge human beings, their rights and freedom, not to speak of democracy anymore. The new life forms in the IoT will – like any innovation – just be patents owned by mega-enterprises (Werlhof 2020).
This is what most people do not understand: We, as human beings, are going to be eliminated, if it happens as being planned (Werlhof 2021).
Is that what ecological movements around the world originally defined as green? Of course not. What we see emerging is a utopian civilization that is the opposite of green in the sense of nature-friendly, because it does away with and replaces nature, life, and also human life by the machine, and machine-guided combinations of them. In this way, the “Anthropocene”, the Age of Man controlling the Earth is conceived as an age that does not count with man as being human the way we have known him and her in history any longer.
I, therefore, suppose that almost nobody does really understand what the Green New Deal and the Great Reset mean in reality.
Connecting the dots, however, we get it together – connecting the alleged pandemic that has been prepared as a “plandemic” already 10 years ago (Rockefeller 2010), with the alleged CO2 danger; connecting the lockdowns with the plans for geoengineering against so-called global warming; connecting the ongoing vaccination against COVID-19 of billions of people with the plans for depopulating the planet and the first step to transhumanism for those surviving, being already altered into genetically modified organisms (GMOs); connecting the ongoing war against the alleged dangers of nature in general with the war against an allegedly greedy human nature; and connecting the “nature” of today’s waste-civilization invented by the ruling classes themselves that now is to be abolished for the majority, with the “weaponization” of the planetary nature.
What is generally forgotten to be said in this context, is that those who proclaim a new “sustainable” civilization are the same ones who invented and forced upon humanity greed, waste and overproduction, overconsumption and even overpopulation themselves during the first Great Transformation in the 16th century, leading to modern civilization, and the hundreds of years following it. Did the inventors of this transformation now understand what was wrong about it?
The answer is no, because they are not propagating a really green and non-capitalistic new civilization but, on the contrary, a new and much more industrialized one, in which nature, matter, life and human life are even more degraded, destroyed and finally always more abolished, like the genders we have known so far, and the mothers needed for procreation. Because the transhuman cyborg, finally, will not be born anymore, but be “man”-made, a product of the new machinery that is developing rapidly.
What we are observing now is a global war that has been started from above, a sort of World War III. (Chossudovsky 2021, Köenig 2021), and one of a completely new character than any war before, as it is not declared as such, does not distinguish between friends and enemies, and is occurring mostly through apparently “natural” catastrophes. It is exactly the new war which Rosalie Bertell foresaw 20 years ago. This war shows what military geoengineering would be like and is most probably already good for. There is no proof, but the means, the technology, and the reasons to apply it do exist (Werlhof in this vol.). For instance, when there are catastrophes, the public can be mobilized against CO2 and in favor of the demolition of the former industrial civilisation.
In this respect, our prognosis would be that the coming reduction of CO2 emissions would not be accompanied by a reduction in natural catastrophes, as the latter ones are of course not caused by CO2 – an invisible natural plant gas that is needed to produce the oxygen we are breathing and that constitutes not more than 0.04% of the atmosphere!
So, in the new concepts of the information war, its technologies and policies, nature plays the central role. It is regarded either as bad, evil, and dangerous, be it by itself, be it because of its reactions vis-a-vis the sins of humanity; or, on the other hand, nature is regarded as good which has to be protected, or even created as an always “better” one, the so-called “second nature”. The best nature is always defined as the one man has created himself! This is what it is all about: the creation of a “second” nature which finally is allegedly the only one mankind or the world ultimately can live with. Nature as the original or “first nature” is, however, regarded as all that has to be dominated, controlled, done away with and transformed into its opposite, a counter-nature.
Today, the transformed and newly created nature is the one that is supposed to be the result of the fourth industrial revolution. Its definition as “nature” is, however, completely misleading when we look at the products of this revolution: a digitized world of AI combining humans with the soft- and the hardware of computers, transhumans or cyborgs, new creations of biotechnology that have passed the evolutionary borders of the species, equipped with nanobots, molecular-sized machines that run through their bodies and brains accomplishing the orders they received from EM, electromagnetic frequencies from the world outside. Many forms of mind control, emotional control, and the control of the will of human, half-human or chimera beings are developing. The resulting mega-machine or super-computer which controls it all is even identified as God himself, the “God-machine” (Harari 2017). This way we would be approaching a totalitarian “technological dictatorship” (Film 2021) with no freedom, free will, democracy, and human individuals the way we are accustomed to know them any longer, and on top of this, a planet that has been geoengineered into a war machine.
What is called “nature” in this context, is “second nature”, the machine itself, proclaimed as the “higher form of life”, nature’s opposite and that which has been invented to replace it. It goes from the nanobot as the mini-machine to the Earth as a planetary macro-machine, in the middle society as a digitized mega-machine with ex-humans as transhumans, cyborgs, robots and bio-computers within it.
This would be the result of a civilization of “patriarchy” as I define it (Werlhof 2011) in contrast to most others, patriarchy being an historical process leading to a purely patriarchal civilization in which everything is man-made instead of born by women/mothers and nature, finally by Mother Earth. It means pater arché instead of mater arché, arché being the origin of everything, the uterus, now the machine as the ultimate male creation of an allegedly “better and higher nature”, a goal that stems from the beginnings of patriarchy in antiquity, and has accompanied us until today where it tries to become our final reality. Patriarchy is about to become really true – for the first time in thousands of years! This is the tradition within which the Great Transformation of today is occurring, and why its followers and producers, the “Fathers of a New World”, are not going to give up whatever is going to happen in the course of time.
Whereas the super rich could maintain modernity as we have known it and remain human, the many, however, would enter into their ultimate dusk — the human race disappearing within a “smart” – instead of brave new world (Heibel in this vol.) or vanishing from the face of the Earth altogether, as “they” don’t need us anymore (Kurzweil 1999, Moravec 1988).
These are the plans laid open, but will they be realized?
It is in these strange and appalling times that we have written our book that sheds a new light on many details of this historical process (Bertell in this vol.), be it the spraying of the skies (Henrion in this vol.), be it the work of ionospheric heaters in relation to other methods of geoengineering (Werlhof in this vol.), be it the possibility to produce natural catastrophes of completely new dimensions on Earth (Kadia in this vol.) and the denial of it all (Leblanc in this vol.), be it mind control and the planetary lockdown from above, the surrounding cosmos itself (Freeland in this vol.), be it the corrupted national and international institutions which organize it all (Fraile in this vol.), the governments and the UN (Bertell in Annex), or the IPCC, for instance, and the media leading the infowar against us, the people (Second Letter to Greta Thunberg, Annex), who have no idea of the wrong of it all, as we have been accustomed to believe that change is always needed and always one to the better and a more civilized world.
Now, however, the new Great Transformation is breaking with the last good traditions of modernity that have remained in spite of their ongoing dissolution – an ethics of respect for humanity and human life, and the aesthetics of a culture of the arts, of the power of thought, of love, and of the beautiful.
We are closing our book with a call against the “Hatred of Life”, this civilization of modern patriarchy is expressing (Werlhof in this vol.) and remembering our ancient indigenous and non-patriarchal traditions of honouring Mother Life and the Earth (Almendra in this vol.).
Military geoengineering could even result in the ultimate matricide, that of our Mother Earth. Additionally, the latest news is that the same is already happening to us as humanity: It has been revealed that nanoparticles made of graphene oxide seem to be the most important substance found in all COVID-19 vaccines, in PCR tests, the masks, and even in the aerosols sprayed into the atmosphere (Global Research 2021, Wigington 2021). If this proves to be true and we do not stop the vaccinations and start with the detoxification of our bodies and air immediately, our destiny as humanity will be determined – as unimaginable as it may appear at that very moment!
We hope to have removed what is in the way to recognize what is happening to our planet and us in reality. It is the moment of truth.
Authors of this volume, quoted without year: Vilma Almendra, Rosalie Bertell, Josefina Fraile, Elana Freeland, Maria Heibel, Claire Henrion, Conny Kadia, Linda Leblanc, Claudia von Werlhof
Bertell, Rosalie: Planet Earth – the Latest Weapon of War, London 2000, Dublin 2020
Bizarri, Mariano, 2012: The New Alchemists. The Risk of Genetic Modification, Southampton, WIT Press
Chargaff, Erwin: 1988: Unbegreifliches Geheimnis. Wissenschaft als Kampf für und gegen die Natur, Stuttgart, Klett-Cotta
Chossudovsky, Michel, 2020: Does the US Military “Own the Weather”? “Weaponizing the Weather” as an Instrument of Modern Warfare? Global Research, 15.1. (first: 12.9.2017)
Chossudovsky, Michel, 2021: The 2020-21 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”, Global Research, 21.7
Engdahl, F. William, 2018: Climate Change, Panic Scenarios, Killing Scientific Debate. The Dark Story Behind “Global Warming”, www.globalresearch.ca, 16.10.
Engdahl, F. William, 2021: “Fit for 55”: The EU Green Deal and the Industrial Collapse of Europe, on Global Research, 14.7.
Film 2021, Die technokratische Diktatur, Victoria – Film, Leipzig
Global Research, 2021:
Harari, Yuval, 2017: Homo Deus, München, Beck
Köenig, Peter, 2021: The WEF’s Great Reset – Euphemism for a WWIII Scenario? on Global Research 27 April
Kurzweil, Ray, 1999: The Age of Spiritual Machines: When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence, New York, Penguin Books
Moravec, Hans, 1988: Mind Children: The Future of Robot and Human Intelligence, Cambridge/London, Harvard University Press
Rifkin, Jeremy, 2019: Der Globale Green New Deal, Frankfurt a. M., Campus
Rockefeller Foundation, 2010: Scenario for the Future of Technology and International Development, New York
Schwab, Klaus & Malleret, Thierry, 2020: Covid-19: The Great Reset, WEF, Davos
Werlhof, Claudia von, 2011: The Failure of Modern Civilization and the Struggle for a “Deep” Alternative, Frankfurt/New York, Peter Lang
Werlhof, Claudia von, 2019: Is the Nuclear “Green”? “CO2– And Climate Neutral”? European Parliament votes in favor of nuclear energy, Global Research, 30.11.2019
Werlhof, Claudia von, 2020: Compulsory Vaccination that Genetically Alters the Human Body – No longer a Human Being? Global Research 22.6.
Werlhof, Claudia von, 2021: A Call for Mother Earth and Humanity, in Klein, Renate und Hawthorne, Susan (Eds): Not Dead Yet. Feminism, Passion and Women´s Liberation, Melbourne, Spinifex Press 2021, p. 369-375
Wigington, Dane, 2021: https://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/graphene-skies/
We are all children of the universe. Billions of years before we were born, the furnace of the stars made, in prolific abundance, the basic chemicals which are needed for all of life, and the supernovas gave up their lives to make all of the heaviest chemicals and trace metal which our bodies need to properly function. More than four billion years ago our planet Earth was formed.
Not too close or too far from our planet’s sun, so that our temperature was just right to support life. Our planet formed a moon, to rule over the night, the water waves and life-giving cycles. Water covered our early planet forming a chemical soup in which long molecules including the proteins of life were formed of the elements made in the stars. Then the waters receded to the places of oceans and the dry land flourished into grasses, trees, flowers, insects, butterflies, birds, amphibians, animals of all sorts and humans. How grateful we must be for this magnificent gift of life and all we have needed to sustain it over the last hundreds of thousands of years! Yet, today it is under threats never felt before in its entire unfolding journey.
While the Earth’s human civic community has been trying to rid itself of nuclear weapons over the last 65 years, some economically developed nations have quietly moved into the realm of geo-warfare. Geo-weaponry has recently been introduced to the public as a ‘new’ high-tech way to mitigate the effects of global warming, and it is being called “geoengineering.”
Geoengineering is defined as planetary-scale environmental engineering of our atmosphere: that is, manipulating our weather, our oceans, and our home planet itself. The methods that are being proposed in geoengineering are already a reality without public participation in debate, prior public notification, or democratic oversight. They are based on a deep understanding of the Earth system, learned through space exploration, and are staggering in number and scope.
Why have these plans not been known to the public and openly discussed, even in so-called democracies, although the geo-experiments have been taking place since the post-World War II period? This question was answered by a geoengineer at the February 2010 meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS):
“…Studies show, however, that people make judgments based primarily on their values, belief systems, world views, and emotions. Facts play a much more minor role. This gap cannot be bridged by loading the public with facts, or trying to make the public more science literate…”
Likely the legal reasons have to do with the fact that no one owns the atmosphere above the Earth, and environmental impact studies for atmospheric manipulations are not required by law. One might add that military secrecy is also an essential part of military culture. The implications of these global experiments involve profound impacts on life itself! Clearly the public and their life-support system are under attack and no one has clearly considered, laid out and admitted to the potential consequences nor have they sought a formal permission from the at-risk public.
Since the Nuremberg trials after World War II, the legal principles guiding experimentation with human beings have been clearly stated. Its very first principle is:
Persons involved should have legal capacity to give consent; and should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him/her to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him/her the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonable to be expected; and the effects upon his/her health or person which may possibly come from his/her participation in the experiment.
It seems quite clear to me (although I do not know the legal opinion) that experimentation with one’s life-support system, Earth itself, is an experiment which fits this definition and requires informed consent!
As early as 1946, the General Electric Company discovered that by dropping dry ice in a cold room one could “create” ice crystals similar to those in clouds. Within months of this discovery they were dropping dry ice from planes into cumulus clouds, converting the water droplets into ice crystals, and then watching them drop onto the Earth like snow! By 1950, industry researchers had found that silver iodide had the same effect. The era of weather modification had begun, and no one considered the people’s right to know and accept this experimentation. Of course, rain was natural, so there was no reason to bother getting permission. The original expressed purpose of rainmaking was to make the dry areas of the plain states more fruitful. It is said that Russia used rainmaking to cause the fallout from Chernobyl to drop before reaching Moscow.
In the race to the moon, early in 1958, both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. cosmonauts discovered the Van Allen belts, magnetic belts protecting the Earth from the destructive solar wind’s charged particles. Between August and September 1958, in Project Argus, the U.S. Navy exploded three fission-type nuclear bombs 480 km (300 miles) above the South Atlantic Ocean in the lower Van Allen belt. The U.S. Atomic Energy Agency called it “the biggest scientific experiment ever undertaken.” The ‘experiment’ caused worldwide effects creating new artificial aurora borealis. Long-term effects of this incredible destruction, that occurred before the protective function of the Van Allen belts was understood, have never been declassified.
This ‘great’ experiment was repeated a second time over the Pacific Ocean on 9 July 1962 in Project Starfish. Three nuclear ‘devices’, one kiloton, one megaton, and one multi-megaton, were exploded, seriously disturbing the lower Van Allen belt and altering its shape and intensity. Scientists predicted that the belts would not return to their original formation for a hundred years (which may be wishful thinking!).[3,4] This so disturbed the Queen’s Astronomer in the U.K., Sir Martin Ryle, that he became a staunch anti-nuclear critic.
By 1962, the U.S. military was using electronic beams to ionize and de-ionize areas of the atmosphere in imitation of lightning. In the same year Canada began launching satellites into the Earth’s ionosphere and chemically simulating the plasma.
Plasma is a fourth state of matter. Starting with the solid state, followed by the more energetic liquid then gaseous states, plasma is even more energetic and contains molecules which are dissociated into positive and negative ions. For example, water molecules in air can be converted into HO+ and H–, positive and negative ions. An example of plasma is lightning.
Later in 1962, the U.S.S.R. undertook similar planetary ‘experiments’, creating three new radiation belts between 7,000 and 13,000 km (4,300 and 8,100 miles) above the Earth. The electron fluxes in the Van Allen belts have changed markedly since this event and have never returned to their former state.[5,6]
Zbigniew Brzezinski, advisor on Foreign Affairs to Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson during the Vietnam War, discussed, investigating ways of using artificial lightning as a weapon in Project Skyfire and hurricanes in Project Stormfury. According to Lowell Ponte, author of The Cooling, the military also investigated the possibility of destroying the ozone layer over North Vietnam with lasers or chemicals, causing damage to crops and humans.
The United Nations General Assembly became so alarmed by these activities that on 10 December 1976 they approved a Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques. However, they failed to exclude “peaceful projects” such as ‘pure research’, solar energy projects or industrial resource development. No thought was given to informed consent of the public. Governments merely changed their public relations posture. As an example, the U.S. began weather research to increase the output of food in the North American plains. Russia was carrying on comparable research to increase food production.
For over 50 years, atmospheric modification experiments have been undertaken either by adding chemicals to the atmosphere causing reactions that may or may not be seen from Earth, such as artificial aurora borealis, or wave experiments using heat or electromagnetic force, or even nuclear atmospheric explosions! These latter interrupt or distort the normal wave motion of the upper atmosphere, often effecting weather changes in the troposphere.
Chemicals dumped into Earth’s atmosphere included barium acid, barium chlorate, barium nitrate, barium perchlorate and barium peroxide. All are combustible and destructive of the ozone layer. In 1980 alone, about 2,000 barium acid kg (4,400 pounds) of chemicals were dumped into the atmosphere including 1,000 kg (2,200 pounds) of barium and 100 kg (220 pounds) of lithium. Lithium is a highly reactive toxic chemical easily ionized by the sun. This increases the density of the lower ionosphere and creates free radicals capable of causing further chemical changes. Although these experiments are clearly a part of the military desire to control weather as a weapon, reports of their environmental impact are non-existent in the public sector. Instead, ozone depletion was blamed on under arm deodorant and cologne, atomizers and asthma medicine dispensers!
Actually, it became evident in the early 1970s that the 300 megatons of atmospheric nuclear bomb testing by the U.S., the U.K. and U.S.S.R. between 1945 and 1963 had depleted the ozone layer by 4% and seriously damaged human embryos, fetuses, children, adults and the whole living environment.
Supersonic military planes and rockets also damage the ozone layer and cause atmospheric changes. This was made public in the evening news during the 70s, and probably influenced the decision of commercial airlines to decline supersonic flight with the exception of the Concord. However, the public soon looked the other way and forgot the supersonic flight problem and atmospheric nuclear testing when refrigerators were blamed for the serious ozone hole damaging human health and crops in various parts of the world, especially the southern tip of South America. Civilian uses of CFC’s exacerbated the problem but were not likely the first cause.
By 1974, U.S. research into heating the lowest edge of the ionosphere first undertaken at the Pennsylvania State University, moved to Plattsville, Colorado, Arecibo, Puerto Rice and Armidale, New South Wales, Australia. This prompted the U.S. Senate to introduce legislation which would bring all military experimentation in weather modification under the control of a civilian oversight committee. Unfortunately, the bill failed to pass Congress.
In 1981, the Plattsville Ionospheric Heater moved to the Poker Flats rocket launch site in Alaska. A second Plasma Physics Laboratory (exploring the ionosphere) is located at Two Rivers, Alaska, and is called HIPAS (High Power Auroral Stimulation). In the foothills of the Rocky Mountains, near Gacona, Alaska, a massive array of transmitters has been erected, called HAARP (High Active Auroral Research Project) by the U.S. Army and Navy. It now contains 180 transmission towers in grid formation, although it began operations in a modular form of a 48 Tower grid in 1994. This powerful synchronized transformer is companioned by a series of SuperDARNS (Dual Auroral Radar Networks) which continuously monitors the effects on Earth’s surface of manipulations of HAARP on Earth’s ionosphere.[1,13]
It now appears to be possible to ‘steer’ the jet stream, deciding the line between warm and cool air in geographic regions; or manipulate the large vapor rivers which move the rain from the tropics to the temperate zones, causing drought or floods. Natural occurrences or instabilities like monsoons, hurricanes, tornadoes, etc., in the atmosphere can be made more severe by ‘adding energy’. Insertion of oil in tectonic faults or creating artificial Earth vibrations with electromagnetic pulses can cause earthquakes.
This is not to say that military experimentation causes all atmospheric events and ultimately climate change. I am just saying that it is difficult in each case to separate out the military geo-experiments from the genuine heaving of the planet! The increase in violent weather is obvious to everyone. Is Mother Earth trying to send us a message of distress? Is only the civilian economy responsible for climate change? I think not.
Not only the U.S. is involved with this high-tech assault on the Earth system. At least Russia, China, the U.K., Australia, Canada and Japan are involved. The geo-warriors are, I believe, wishing to go public with even more risky experiments, with public approval, and maybe even become ‘climate change heroes’. At the United Nations Conference on Climate Change in Copenhagen, 2010, geo-warriors made their most public pitch under the guise of “geoengineering” as a “solution to global climate change.” Those who watch the military prepare for a weather war are alarmed.
Noctilucent clouds over Uppsala, Sweden (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)
On 19 September 2010, the U.S. Navy undertook an artificial cloud study called CARE (Charged Aerosol Releases Experiment). The Naval Research Laboratory and the Department of Defense Space Test Program used a NASA four stage Black Brant XII suborbital sounding rocket from Wallops Island, Virginia, to dump aluminum oxide and chaff, creating an artificial cloud in Earth’s outer atmosphere at 280 km (174 miles) above the surface (normal clouds are at a maximum of about 80.5 km (50 miles) above the surface in the mesosphere). The cloud was designed to glow in the dark. The aluminum will, of course, eventually drop into the ocean or on farmland polluting crops, polluting the food supply. The tests may damage the various atmospheric boundaries that protect life on Earth, and no one knows what they will do to climate, agriculture, human health or if they will alter infrared or UV radiation reaching the planet. The U.S. marine breeding habitats, including the National Marine Sanctuary, are at risk from this experiment. Apparently, this artificial cloud shading of the U.S. East Coast in the fall of 2009 brought on unusual snow and wintry weather. What else it caused is not reported.[14,15,16,17]
Similar naval experiments include: The Unified Aerosol Experiment (UAE 2) in the United Arab Emirates in 2004 and seven South East Asian Studies conducted from Singapore in 2007. Earth has already become a “research victim” of militarism and it is time to stop geoengineering as a cruel farce and crime against life itself! Civil society should clearly not give the geo-warriors a public blessing to do more planetary damage.
Shall we place the healing of our Earth in the hands of those who have for over 65 years shown the grossest carelessness of its well-being? Shall we throw away this magnificent planet, like we do the cheap plastic trinkets? It is time to honor and protect planet Earth as the indigenous people have done for thousands of years. We must acknowledge our philosophy of life to be faulty since it has brought us to this crisis. It is time to question patriarchy, which implies domination over all living things; and raw capitalism that requires excessive military force to guard its greedy hoarding of natural resources. We sorely need a critical plan for a more intelligent, feminized and humanized future.
There is great need to stimulate a sober look at our global lifestyle, philosophy, and social planning so that humans, all life and planet Earth may have a long and fruitful era of peace and prosperity. Our sun has some 4 to 5 billion more years to bless us with its energy – let’s not squander it!
 Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10, Vol. 2, pp. 181-182. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949.
 New York Times, 19 March 1959.
 Multimedia Encyclopedia 1996 and 1998.
 Microsoft Encarta Multimedia Encyclopedia, 1999.
 Keesings Historisch Archief (K.H.A.) 13-20 August 1961, 11 May 1962, and 29 June 1962.
 Nigel Harle, Vandalizing the Van Allen Belts, Earth Island Journal, Winter 1988-89, p.11.
 Zbigniew Brezinski, Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era, Penguin Books, Cambridge, MA 1976.
 Lowell Ponte, The Cooling, Prentice-Hall Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1976.
 Northern Lights Thrill Sky Watchers from Texas to Ohio, Kansas City Star, 10 Nov. 1991.
 The NASA / U.S. Air Force CRESS 1990 Press Kit outlines an atmospheric NASA testing program (linked to H.A.A.R.P. and the U.S. Air Force, that could produce the Vibrant Spectrums (auroras).
 Nick Begich and Jeanne Manning, Angels don’t Play this HAARP, Earth Pulse Press, Anchorage, AK, 1995.
 Long-term effects of Multiple Nuclear Weapons Detonations, U.S. National Academy of Science, 1975.
 Rosalie Bertell, Planet Earth: The Latest Weapon of War, The Women’s Press, London, 2000; p.119-128].
 “U.S. Navy & NASA Dust Cloud Experiments May Begin on Tuesday, September 15, 2009”, Live Science.com September 14, 2009 Article By Clara Moskowitz, Staff Writer (Actually occurred on 19 September).
 An Update on the Charged Aerosol Release Experiment (CARE) Paul A. Bernhardt – Paul.Bernhardt@nrl.navy.mil.
 The NASA / U.S. Air Force CRESS 1990 Press Kit outlines an atmospheric NASA testing program (linked to HAARP and the U.S. Air Force, that could produce the Vibrant Spectrums (auroras).
Just as, at the dawning of a new geological era, the whole world collapses in a gigantic crack, new mountains rise up while gaping abysses open up, and new plains and seas take shape, so will the present structure of Europe be capsized in an immense cataclysm . . . The only chance for Germany to resist this pressure will be to seize the initiative and take control of the inevitable upheaval from which will come a new dawning of history. — Hermann Rauschning, Hitler Speaks / Voice of Destruction, 1939
We’ve arranged a society on science and technology in which nobody understands anything about science and technology, and this combustible mixture of ignorance and power sooner or later is going to blow up in our faces. I mean, who is running the science and technology in a democracy if the people don’t know anything about it? – Carl Sagan to Charlie Rose, May 27, 1996
Before leaving office, the 44th U.S. President struck the word “limited” from the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and thus publicly reinstated the “Star Wars” program of 33 years ago—and on Christmas Eve, no less.
Republican Congressman Trent Franks, who introduced and shepherded the policy changes in the House, said he drew inspiration from former president Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative of the 1980s, which was intended to use lasers and other space-based weaponry to render nuclear weapons “impotent and obsolete.” Known as “Star Wars,” the initiative cost taxpayers US$30 billion, but no system was ever deployed.
Then with the impending inauguration of the 45th President, mainstream media began normalizing the “Star Wars” geoengineering we’ve been covertly undergoing for two decades in the name of “easing climate change.” Space news is now hot and heavy, beginning with increased ozone over 3.5 million square miles of the Pacific Ocean and the Western U.S. (“the most unusual meteorological event we’ve had in decades”), then “magnetized Rossby waves on the Sun” making it easier to “predict” space weather in advance (National Center for Atmospheric Research):
On Earth, Rossby waves are associated with the path of the jet stream and the formation of low- and high-pressure systems, which in turn influence local weather events.
In April 2017, “anthropogenic weather” was finally officially admitted—
Anthropogenic effects on the space environment started in the late 19th century and reached their peak in the 1960s when high-altitude nuclear explosions were carried out by the USA and the Soviet Union. These explosions created artificial radiation belts near Earth that resulted in major damages to several satellites . . . Other anthropogenic impacts on the space environment include chemical release experiments, high-frequency wave heating of the ionosphere and the interaction of VLF waves with the radiation belts . . . (Emphasis added.)
In May 2017, NASA announced “a massive, human-made ‘barrier’ surrounding Earth,” a “humungous bubble we created out in space” that calls for “a whole new geological epoch to be named after us.”
The following month, 36,000 kilometers above the Earth, the AMC-9 satellite in geostationary orbit since 2003 lost contact with its Luxembourg-based SES telecommunications operator and began drifting and breaking up. Radar film footage revealed three orb-like objects flying near the satellite in triangular formation with another orb following aft. Global news discussed the breakup but not the possibility that it could have been a laser space attack.
13 days after the incident, President Trump revived the National Space Council, and the U.S. House of Representatives passed the massive $696 billion NDAA that eliminated the Defense Space Council while streamlining and strengthening Air Force Space Command (AFSC). A year and a half later on February 19, 2019, Space Policy Directive 4 centralized all military space functions under the new Space Force overseen by the U.S. Air Force.
Space Age Background
The race to control space began in 1945 when Operation Paperclip brought 10,000 Nazi engineers, technicians, and scientists to the United States under cover of the Hegelian ruse known to history as the Cold War. SS Nazi Wernher von Braun became chief scientist of the Army Ballistic Missile Agency in Alabama, then of the Aero Propulsion Laboratory at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio. Von Braun’s commanding officer in Germany, ballistic missile engineer Walter Dornberger, went to work for Bell Helicopter, and the aerospace engineer Arthur Rudolph, who had directed the Mittelwerk underground V-2 rocket factory nicknamed “Dante’s Inferno,” went to work for Martin Marietta where he ran R&D for the Pershing missile before becoming director of NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center. Rudolph headed up the Saturn V project (1967-73), then in 1984 renounced his American citizenship and returned to Germany, having faithfully served the transfer of the Third Reich to the resource-rich United States.
Thus, it was through the military-industrial complex that the Trojan horse of amoral, cryptic Nazism entered the naïve, resource-rich United States. In short order, the National Security Act, formation of the CIA, and 44-year Cold War followed. Rockets, satellites, computers, MK-ULTRA brain engineering, and exotic propulsion craft thrust the 20th century into a weaponized 21st century space age, the very opposite of what President Kennedy had envisioned.
The Dr. Strangeloves serving this militarized Space Age have recognized from the beginning that full spectrum dominance over planet Earth, its airspace, near-Earth orbit, and space/atmospheric weather must be their first objective. In the 1950s, Cold War propaganda depended upon the two-pronged lie of a Soviet threat and an imminent ice age, then co-opted the environmental movement and began to showcase international climate conferences packed with PhDs serving up decimals on greenhouse gases and desertification and implanting dire “solutions” like geoengineering. The Stanford Environmental Law Journal defines geoengineering as the intentional human-directed manipulation of the Earth’s climatic systems, but while geoengineering would maintain the weather as an electromagnetic force multiplier, it would also include chemical and biological warfare (CBW) experimentation on populations cloaked by the National Security Act. With need-to-know clearances and compartmentalization, most scientists and government officials would know nothing of the Operation Cloverleaf program for more than half a century.
In Chemtrails, HAARP, and the Full Spectrum Dominance of Planet Earth (2014), I laid out seven military operations underway under the geoengineering rubric: (1) weather engineering, (2) environmental/geophysical modification, (3) electromagnetic manipulation, (4) military/intelligence directed energy weapons, (5) surveillance/neural operations, (6) biological/Transhumanism operations, and (7) detection/obscuration of exotic propulsion technology. With the “Star Wars” Space Fence in place, the 2018 sequel Under An Ionized Sky: From Chemtrails to Space Fence Lockdown expands on operational specifics dependent upon using weather as the sine qua non force multiplier.
The first three operations concentrate on environmental manipulation, while the last three either indirectly or directly concentrate on manipulating the human being and other living organisms in the biosphere.
1. Weather engineering
2. Environmental/Geophysical modification
3. Electromagnetic manipulation
4. Military/Intelligence directed energy weapons (C4)
5. Surveillance/Neural operations
6. Biological/Transhumanism operations
7. Detection/Obscuration of exotic propulsion technology
The “Climate Control” Edifice
The Federal Government has been involved for over 30 years in a number of aspects of weather modification, through activities of both the Congress and the executive branch. Since 1947, weather modification bills pertaining to research support, operations, policy studies, regulations, liabilities, activity reporting, establishment of panels and committees, and international concerns have been introduced in the Congress. There have been hearings on many of these proposed measures, and oversight hearings have also been conducted on pertinent ongoing programs.
Infiltration and co-optation, compartmentalization, nondisclosure agreements, backroom deals, threats, bribes, skewed research, packed peer review committees, embedded international media—one can only marvel at the legerdemain it takes to steer international conferences, publishing houses, news outlets, university and elementary school curricula in order to construct a vast global house of cards turning on carbons, the building blocks of life now become a straw man diversion from the purposeful transformation of our atmosphere and weather by ionospheric manipulation. Carbon taxes and emissions trading ignore the fact that CO2 is at an all-time low for sustaining plant life. Nations should be increasing CO2 instead of being penalized for the CO2 they do have.
But then, the emperor wears no clothes. The first U.S. congressional report on geoengineering was not until October 2010, just before the moratorium against geoengineering issued by the 10th Conference of Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (COP10) in Nagoya, Japan—a moratorium the U.S. had no intention of ratifying. Were the delegates from 193 nations aware that geoengineering had been going on in the U.S. and other NATO nations for well over a decade?
Four months after the Nagoya moratorium, the geoengineered Fukushima earthquake struck Japan. Since then, embedded media have ramped up weather confusion in the public mind, blaming cars and industrial pollutants while assiduously ignoring the greatest polluters and propagandists of all: the over-inflated American military and military-industrial-intelligence complex that runs it.
Once in a while we hear what’s really going on from scientists like CERN particle physicist Jasper Kirby and NASA Goddard Space Flight Center heliophysicist Douglas E. Rowland (“There’s different kinds of chemtrails, as you probably know . . .”). In 2013, the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) basically admitted that solar radiation management (SRM) was already underway: “If SRM were terminated for any reason, there is high confidence that global surface temperatures would rise very rapidly to values consistent with the greenhouse gas forcing.” But such revelations are tacitly ignored by embedded mainstream media. When an Italian senator called for declassification of chemtrail documents, and a Cyprus agriculture and environment minister pledged to look into “chemtrail” aerial spraying—nothing.
Now and then, agents and agencies near the hub of the “climate change” mafia (NASA, NOAA, EPA, IPCC, etc.) are caught lying, but embedded news versions roll on. NASA proclaimed July 2012 to be the hottest month on record and NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center agreed: the July 2012 temperature average of 77.6ºF was 3.3ºF above the 20th century average and 0.2ºF above the previously warmest July of 1936 (during the Oklahoma Dust Bowl years). Meteorologist Anthony Watts checked NOAA’s data and found that July 1936 had been reinstated as the hottest month on record.
“You can’t get any clearer proof of NOAA adjusting past temperatures,” Watts wrote. “This isn’t just some issue with gridding, or anomalies, or method; it is about NOAA not being able to present historical climate information of the United States accurately . . . This is not acceptable. It is not being honest with the public. It is not scientific. It violates the Data Quality Act.”
David L. Lewis, former microbiologist for the EPA’s Office of Research & Development, wrote in Science For Sale: How the Government Uses Powerful Corporations and Leading Universities to Support Government Policies, Silence Top Scientists, Jeopardize Our Health, and Protect Corporate Profits (Skyhorse Publishing, 2014) that EPA leadership consistently “mishandles science.” One bizarre incident among many occurred in 2003 when former Acting Assistant Administrator Henry L. Longest II made midlevel EPA managers read “management consultant” Margaret Wheatley’s Turning to One Another urging environmentalists “to abandon Western science in favor of ‘New Science’ . . . the ‘space of not knowing’ and the ‘abyss.’ While passing through the abyss, new scientists shed their religious beliefs and sexual inhibitions, then turn to one another.” Managerial candidates were required to fill out a confidential questionnaire about their promiscuity, religion, morality, and willingness to keep secrets. What exactly was the EPA up to in the Bush II years? Like NASA, the EPA does not appear to be what it seems.
Image on the right: Kucinich outside the Capitol in June 2007 (Source: Public Domain)
The arsenal of propaganda, manipulation of international convocations, forging bonds of secrecy and sexual confessions, and blackmailing nations with weather threats may even include murder. Ohio U.S. Representative Dennis Kucinich fought hard for the 2001 Space Preservation Act (HR2977)—the first bill to address chemtrails and directed energy weapons—but it finally died after being “revised” and stalled in committee after committee. The deaths of Kucinich’s brother and sister in 2007 and 2008 respectively remain suspicious, as do the deaths of Alaskan bush pilot Theron “Terry” Smith and Alaskan U.S. Senator Ted Stevens in an aircraft crash on August 9, 2010, while investigating HAARP. NASA administrator Sean O’Keefe was also onboard but lived. (Smith’s son-in-law was killed just days before in a C-17 crash at Elmendorf Air Force Base.) The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) blamed “temporary unresponsiveness [of Smith] for reasons that could not be established.”
Because biologicals like desiccated red blood cells have been found in the detritus falling from chemical trails, we must look carefully at other death-related fallout. When the “Star Wars” Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) “went black,” two dozen Marconi and Plessey Defense Systems microbiologists either disappeared or died. More recently, naturopathic doctors and health-minded MDs peering into the big pharma vaccination delivery system and cancer-for-profit may be being sent a message.
Bizarre nation-level purges are underway. For one example, Canada—a Five Eyes (FVEY) Anglophone intelligence consortium member along with the U.S., UK, Australia, and New Zealand—dismissed 2,000 scientists and hundreds of programs monitoring smoke stack emissions, food inspections, oil spills, water quality, climate change, etc., while closing seven of the 11 Fisheries and Oceans libraries:
. . . a document classified as “secret” that was obtained by Postmedia News mentioned “culling of materials” as a main activity in the reduction of libraries . . . reports have emerged of books being strewn across floors and even piled into dumpsters.
In short, decades of subterfuge, manipulation, extreme weather, murder and mayhem have preceded the present normalization of geoengineering, and still citizens and scientists continue to sleep under the spell of “climate change” propaganda.
When it comes to geoengineering, the public is the adversary.
“Science Is Broken”
If you have faith in the soundness of our scientific institutions, you will assume that the dissidents are marginalized for very good reason: their work is substandard. If you believe that the peer review process is fair and open, then the dearth of peer-reviewed citations for [Electric Universe] research is a damning indictment of their theory. And if you believe that the corpus of mainstream physics is fundamentally correct, and that science is progressing closer and closer to truth, you will be highly skeptical of any major departure from standard theories . . . Can we trust scientific consensus? Can we trust the integrity of our scientific institutions? Perhaps not. Over the last few years, a growing chorus of insider critics have been exposing serious flaws in the ways that scientific research is funded and published, leading some to go so far as to say, “Science is broken.”
Tellingly, Rutgers University climatologist Alan Robock has related how CIA-funded consultants once asked him two questions: “If we control someone else’s climate, would they know about it?” and “Would climate experts be able to determine if another nation was attempting to control the climate?”
Few realize that the national security status of geoengineering operations translates to the presence of intelligence agencies and their defense contractors. The history of HAARP is littered with CIA control over scientists, patents, and media outlets. General Henry H. Shelton, chairman of the Pentagon’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, has confessed that a crucial component of the military doctrine of full spectrum dominance is the use of deception to “defend decision-making processes by neutralizing an adversary’s perception management and intelligence collection efforts.”
(3)(b) To employ propaganda assets to [negate] and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose . . . Our ploy should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (I) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (II) politically interested, (III) financially interested, (IV) hasty and inaccurate research, or (V) infatuated with their own theories.
Intelligence and military grant monies supporting university labs largely explain how science has been held hostage for decades by CIA-dominated defense contractors like Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, Northrup Grumman, L3, SAIC, etc.—the military-industrial-intelligence complex intent on weaponizing everything under the sun, if not the sun itself.
Then there’s the captive peer review system relegating scientists who don’t play “national security” ball to the outer darkness of non-publication, stonewalled careers, and worse, plus muzzling heterodox scientists and ideas (like Electric Universe theories). Nobel Laureate biologist Sydney Brenner blasts the system:
I think peer review is hindering science. In fact, I think it has become a completely corrupt system. It’s corrupt in many ways, in that scientists and academics have handed over to the editors of these journals the ability to make judgment on science and scientists. There are universities in America, and I’ve heard from many committees, that won’t consider people’s publications in low impact factor journals . . . it puts the judgment in the hands of people who really have no reason to exercise judgment at all. And that’s all been done in the aid of commerce, because they are now giant organizations making money out of it.
The publishing spigot is useful when it comes to marginalizing heterodoxy. Between 1973 and 2013, six publishers (ACS, Reed Elsevier, Sage, Taylor & Francis, Springer, and Wiley-Blackwell) exercised control over what papers would be allowed to see the light of day:
As long as publishing in high impact factor journals is a requirement for researchers to obtain positions, research funding, and recognition from peers, the major commercial publishers will maintain their hold on the academic publishing system.
With science under control, weather operations weaponized, and the Space Fence up and running under artificial intelligence (AI), the globalist instrument known as the United Nations (UN) is all set to use environment and “climate change” for moving sovereign nations into the New World Order mold of Agenda 21/2030.
The UN Power Shift
The participation of the U.S. and China is significant, as the two account for more than 40 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. The agreement goes into force once 55 countries accounting for at least 55 percent of global emissions officially sign . . . Parties to the agreement will still have to go through the process of joining the agreement, which for most will require processes of approval in their home countries . . .
COP 21: Heads of delegations (Licensed under CC BY 2.0)
The long-awaited United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP21) in Paris (November 30 – December 11, 2015) was quite a show. Climate mouthpieces had been carefully chosen—the IPCC, geoengineers David Keith and Ken Caldeira, other prestigious PhDs, embedded NGOs, government agencies, the World Bank and IMF, and of course the usual Wall Street-London-Hong Kong deep pockets. Scriptwriters worked overtime on the fate of the Earth as cameras panned in on lightning flashes, rolling storms, deluges and droughts, crying babies, hospital emergency rooms filled to overflowing . . .
Climate and environment were to hand over to the UN vast new tax and regulatory powers. Multiple conferences had preceded COP21 to hammer out details and grease the wheels of the New World Order being quietly wheeled through the gates of once-sovereign nations. A month before COP21, the Sustainable Development Summit in New York City had focused on Agenda 21/2030:
To cheers, applause and probably a tinge of relief, the 17 global goals that will provide the blueprint for the world’s development over the next 15 years were ratified by UN member states in New York on Friday. After speeches from Pope Francis and the Nobel laureate Malala Yousafzai, and songs from Shakira and Angelique Kidjo, the ambitious agenda – which aims to tackle poverty, climate change and inequality for all people in all countries – was signed off by 193 countries at the start of a three-day UN summit on sustainable development … The global goals summit continues until Sunday, after which all eyes will be on the UN climate talks in November. Asked if the goals will be scuppered without a strong deal in Paris [COP21], Mogens Lykketoft, the president of the UN general assembly, was hesitant, saying leaders were making more commitments than they were in previous COP meetings. “From what we know and hope for, we will be approaching a better deal.”
Following the two conferences, a militaristic drum roll sounded below all the one-world enthusiasm. The Dutch Defense Joint Meteorological Group (JMG) announced it would provide “weather forecasts for every exercise or deployment of [NATO’s] Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF)”— “weather forecasts” being Orwellian for planned and engineered weather.
Military weather control by the few was surely why developing nations at the 2011 COP17 in Durban, South Africa had attempted to include an International Tribunal of Climate Justice provision. Needless to say, the provision had vanished by COP21.
On Earth Day 2016, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (the Paris Climate Accord) was signed by the 44th U.S. President but remained unratified by Congress. To get around Congress, a September 2016 Executive Order “adopted” it. Incoming President Trump ignored the EO and made it clear that he intended to exit the unratified Accord.
. . . Trump Administration ‘exited’ an accord that had, materially, no legally binding power to change anything. Which also flies in the face of the President claiming he can re-negotiate the U.S. position in the Paris agreement. Why would you need to renegotiate that which can be changed unilaterally at will?
As the Paris Agreement is non-binding and non-enforceable, calling the U.S. participation in it an example of U.S. ‘leadership’ is nonsense. Calling the U.S. withdrawal from it a ‘tragedy’ is a case of hysterical overreaction. And, equally, calling it ‘draconian’ in terms of its potential impact on the U.S. is pure demagoguery.
COP21 and its Accord were basically a Punch and Judy show using environment and weather catastrophes to tweak public fear and generate cash flow. Geoengineering is not about preserving the Earth; it is about controlling and terraforming the Earth for a technocrat-run Space Age. For example, the North American Climate, Clean Energy, and Environment Partnership Action Plan signed in June 2016 by Canada, the U.S., and Mexico is attempting to move the three sovereign nations toward an Agenda 2030 hemispheric bloc.
The problem of removing CO2 from the atmosphere “using an infrastructure we don’t have and with technology that won’t work on the scale we need, and finally to store it in places we can’t find” points to the fact that the carbon solution is little more than a slick way to rake in disaster capitalist cash—$90 trillion in energy infrastructure investments, $1 trillion green bond market, multi-trillion dollar carbon trading market, $391 billion climate finance industry. The UN Green Climate Fund, purportedly to support carbons mitigation in developing countries, would clear $100 billion per year, but how much would ever make it to the developing nations? The naked emperor’s “philanthrocapitalism” is not known for keeping its treaties or promises.
Traditional bureaucratic foundations like Ford, Rockefeller and Carnegie were said to be giving way to “philanthrocapitalism,” a muscular new approach to charity in which the presumed entrepreneurial skills of billionaires would be applied to the world’s most pressing challenges . . .
When will the public finally awaken to the fact that its institutions, agencies, universities, laboratories, and courts obey the very powers that milk public assets dry? Worker and food safety, gone. The world-famous U.S. Bill of Rights, gone. Anti-trust legislation, gone. Environmental protections, gone. With or without the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), technocratic corporate feudalism in the guise of billionaire Good Club “brain institutes” and “sustainable development” is pushing hard for a weaponized Space Age in which Brain Initiative neuroscience and Transhumanism will guarantee the electromagnetic acquiescence of the masses.
Space Fence Lockdown
Obviously, we are a long way from President Kennedy’s 1960s Space Age dream. Physics and directed energy have merged with politics and business; soon, a physics doctorate will be standard for the U.S. Secretary of Defense, plus legislation like the U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act (HR2262) aka Space Act of 2015 that erases the thin line between space and defense corporation control over planetary profits from mining asteroids and helium-3 on the moon.
Then there is the problem of what we are to believe or not believe about the terra incognita of space, given that science and technology are now dominated by geopolitics and a propaganda mind meld. In 2015, the twin LIGOs (Laser Interferometer-Gravitational wave Observatory) were said to have detected a “gravitational wave” generated by two merging black holes at a distance of 1.3 billion light years, whereas heterodox Electric Universe scientists insist that “black holes” don’t exist. And what of NASA’s asteroid “drill” under the National Near-Earth Object Preparedness Strategy and Action Plan? And the “meteors” people see flashing across the sky—are they meteors, or plasma discharges from space operations already underway?
Extreme weather attributed to God, nature, or carbons is wearing thin as the propaganda hiding the militarized Space Age is either unraveling or being slowly admitted. The very first U.S. Department of Defense financial audit ever done has already exposed a padded inventory of 39 UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters ($830,700,000) and 478 structures and buildings at 12 installations—and that’s just the beginning. Investment analyst Catherine Austin Fitts has discovered that $21 trillion is missing from the U.S. government since fiscal 1998 and over $20 trillion from financial crisis bailouts.
The chemical trails from jets and rockets are blotting out the sun and cosmos. The increase in hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, floods, and droughts is suspicious, as is the presence of FEMA, Homeland Security, military and private security forces at every disaster site days in advance, patiently awaiting the event that will spell population removal, bargain basement real estate deals, and lucrative insurance company lawsuits against devastated communities for their failure to prepare for “climate change.”
Geoengineering translates to a road of gold for disaster capitalists and a force multiplier for the military, but what else is it designed for?
Enter the Space Fence, the culmination of “Star Wars” SDI began so long ago. The SSS (Space Surveillance System) Space Fence is a global surveillance and containment infrastructure whose many parts above and below the firmament — ionospheric heaters, radar and laser installations, NexRads, cell and GWEN towers, power lines, fiber optics cable, fracking wells, wind farms, WSACs, Internet of Things (IoT), satellites, etc. — are run by giant military contractors like Lockheed Martin and Raytheon. The Space Fence provides space situational awareness (SSA) not just of near-Earth space debris, satellites, and space weather, but of the entire planet inside and out, down to its molten plasma core and biosphere DNA.
Biosphere means all of life and us. Biological/Transhumanism operations.
With such powerful phalanxes of power and propaganda arrayed against our human and planetary health, it is not difficult to see how chemical giants like Dow, Monsanto, Bayer, and other big pharma corporations collude with military contractors and the medical industry in alliance with the neuroscience and optogenetics paid for by DARPA, the CIA, NASA, EPA, and NGA (National Geospatial Intelligence Agency). Thus it behooves us to learn to read between the lines of Orwellian documents like the “Leaders Statement on a North American Climate, Clean Energy, and Environment Partnership”:
Our actions to align climate and energy policies will protect human health and help level the playing field for our businesses, households, and workers . . . that sets us firmly on the path to a more sustainable future.
“Protect human health,” “level the playing field,” and “sustainable future” sound suspiciously like Fitts’ “free-range totalitarianism”—
AUSTIN FITTS: I call it ‘Free Range Totalitarianism’.
DARRELL HAMAMOTO: Free range chicken necks, yes. That’s what’s happening. The thing is that they won’t have to invest anything into the infrastructure – no prison guards, no prison guard unions, no brick and mortar, no debased food. People are walking around, as you say, free range.
AUSTIN FITTS: So, they support themselves and tithe, so you’re making money on each hamster. They’ve got a smartphone, and you’ve got them online 24/7 between the smart meters and the phone, and you’ve got them on drugs, and you’re right.
DARRELL HAMAMOTO: And you’re assaulting them from the sky with the chemtrails . . .
Inundated outside and in by nanoparticles of chemicals, conductive metals (aluminium, barium, strontium, titanium, lithium, etc.), polymers, sensors, microprocessors, fungi, genetically engineered pathogens, we have become test tubes for a synergy of manifold environmental pollutants being zapped by ionized and non-ionized radiation. We breathe, ingest, and wear this nano onslaught as it slips into our blood with every breath, every bite. Once beyond the blood brain barrier, the nanobots await their instructions from pulsed iPhones.
The linchpin of the entire AI-run Space Fence infrastructure may be the 5G millimeter waves emanating from phased array antennas coupling with the Internet of Things (IoT) whose “neural mesh” blankets every neighborhood. It is no longer just cancer we need to worry about, but how our immune systems and genetics, thoughts, emotions, and what it is to be human are being remotely manipulated by AI algorithms.
Most concerning is that the nature of nanoparticles is still unknown.
“Nanotechnology is a novel technology that poses unique risks unlike anything we’ve seen before,” said Jaydee Hanson, policy director at the International Center for Technology Assessment. “Scientists agree that nanomaterials create novel risks that require new forms of toxicity testing. EPA’s use of a conditional registration could not be more inappropriate in this context.”
Not only is the impact of nanoparticles on the biosphere unknown, but the end-result of the synergy they create inside and outside our bodies, thanks to the ubiquitous radio wave and microwave matrix we are all enmeshed in, is also unknown.
This aerosol delivery system is an international crime against humanity and all of life on the scale of the 1940’s Manhattan Project, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and the down-winders. It is thus imperative that we educate ourselves about the ionized (electrified and radiated) atmosphere we now breathe and learn how the AI-run Space Fence affects all of life now and for generations to come. Chemtrails, HAARP, and the Full Spectrum Dominance of Planet Earth (2014) concentrates on weather engineering and Morgellons, whereas Under an Ionized Sky: From Chemtrails to Space Fence Lockdown (2018) lays out the infrastructure of our weaponized wireless world. The third and final book in my trilogy is due out in August 2021: Geoengineered Transhumanism: How the Environment Has Been Weaponized by Chemicals, Electromagnetics, & Nanotechnology for Synthetic Biology.
It will examine how synthetic biology follows from the virtual reality and Transhumanism built into this AI-run infrastructure whose driving intent is to change forever the human being and life on Earth as we have known it for untold millennia. It completes the picture of what geoengineering has been from its very inception decades ago: to control the ionosphere with phased array heater blasts so as to maintain an ionized atmosphere in which chemicals, nanotechnology, and synbio (synthetic biology) synergies can be continuously laid by jets, drones, and rockets in the name of “climate change.”
Thus, the groundwork for the synbio neural network inside Human 1.0 began by manipulating the macro-environment upon which our extraordinary interior micro-environment depends. The air we breathe, the soil we grow our food in, the water we must replenish—all have been commandeered by biotech and big pharma for Human 2.0 Transhumanism. Chemicals, nanotechnology, and electromagnetics are manipulated for geoengineering, genetics, and vaccinations, all in preparation for the software phase of the brain-computer interface (BCI) we now face after decades of “quiet war” preparation.
 Tyler Durden, “While Blaming Trump for ‘Arms Race,’ Obama Signs Momentous ‘Star Wars II’ Defense Bill. Zero Hedge, December 24, 2016.
 President Trump’s paternal uncle was John G. Trump: “In 1943, as the technical aide in Division 14 of the NDRC, [John G.] Trump reviewed and analyzed the papers of Nikola Tesla when the inventor died in a New York City hotel. The research was completed on behalf of the Alien Property Custodian office in Washington, DC. From February 1944 to the end of the war in Europe, Trump was the Director of the British Branch of the Radiation Laboratory.” – Wikipedia
 Jamie Condliffe, “Geoengineering Gets Green Light from Federal Scientists.” MIT Technology Review, January 11, 2017.
 “A Massive ‘Blob’ of Abnormal Conditions in the Pacific Has Increased Ozone Levels.” Science Alert, 17 February 2017.
 “Planetary waves, first found on Earth, are discovered on Sun.” PhysOrg, March 27, 2017.
 T.I. Gombosi et al., “Anthropogenic Space Weather.” Space Science Reviews, 13 April 2017.
 “NASA Space Probes Have Detected a Human-Made Barrier Surrounding Earth.” ScienceAlert, 18 May 2017.
 BPEarthWatch, “4 Unidentified Objects Take Out Satellite/On Radar!” July 2, 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQ6xsqhDTaU.
 Eric Berger, “A satellite may be falling apart in geostationary orbit.” ArsTechnica, July 2, 2017.
 Bob Fredericks, “Trump signs executive order reviving National Space Council.” New York Post, June 30, 2017.
 Valerie Insinna, “Trump officially organizes the Space Force under the Air Force … for now.” Defense News, February 19, 2019.
 The Joint Intelligence Objectives Agency (JIOA) circumvented then-President Truman’s anti-Nazi order by scrubbing Nazi affiliations and granting them new identities and security clearances.
 In 1995, defense contractor Martin Marietta merged with Lockheed Corporation to form Lockheed Martin, which is presently heading up the Space Fence.
 Define (or invent) the problem, then control the solution.
 Col. Tamzy J. House et al. “Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025,” August 1996. “2025 is a study designed to comply with a directive from the chief of staff of the Air Force to examine the concepts, capabilities, and technologies the United States will require to remain the dominant air and space force in the future.”
 Read Amy Worthington, “Operation Cloverleaf: The Most Dangerous Weapons Testing Program In World History.” Millennium Report, August 29, 2015.
 These categories were initiated by independent scientist Clifford Carnicom in his 2005 film Cloud Cover/Aerosol Crimes, and have been subsequently tweaked.
 Tesla: “Man could tap the breast of Mother Sun and release her energy toward Earth as needed, magnetic as well as light.”
 Robert E. Morrison, Specialist in Earth Sciences, Science Policy Research Division, Congressional Research Service, “Chapter 5: Federal Activities in Weather Modification.” Weather Modification: Programs, Problems, Policy, and Potential. U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, November 15, 1978.
 P. Gosselin, “Atmospheric CO2 Concentrations At 400 PPM Are Still Dangerously Low for Life On Earth.” NoTricksZone, 17 May 2013.
 “Deserts ‘greening’ from rising CO2.” Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO), 3 July 2013.
 Juliet Eilperin, “Geoengineering sparks international ban, first-ever congressional report.” Washington Post, October 29, 2010.
 “Chemtrails Confirmed: Climate Scientist Admits Jets Are ‘Dumping Aerosols.’” Chemtrailsplanet.net, January 9, 2015.
 “NASA Scientist Admits ‘Chemtrails’ Are Real.” Chemtrailsplanet.net, March 11, 2016.
 Rady Ananda, “Solar Radiation Management, Geoengineering and Chemtrails.” Global Research, November 5, 2013.
 Christina Sarich, “Italian Senator Calls for Declassification of Chemtrail Documents.” Naturalsociety.com, April 15, 2014.
 “Minister pledges probe into chemtrails,” Cyprus-mail.com, February 17, 2016.
 J.D. Heyes, “NOAA quietly revises website after getting caught in global warming lie, admitting 1936 was hotter than 2012.” Naturalnews.com, July 1, 2014.
 David Lewis, “EPA’s disturbing leadership.” The Oconee Enterprise, May 12, 2016.
 Presently in Rhode Island, the Geoengineering Act of 2017 (H6011) is undergoing scrutiny: “Theories abound about chemical engineering of the atmosphere and the cloudy spray from aircraft, called chemtrails. The legislation makes Rhode Island one of the first states to study the issue. A five-member committee will make recommendations for licensing geoengineering technologies — real or not — such as solar radiation management, ocean fertilization, and cloud cover protection and cloud whitening. The House commission is tasked to report its findings by April 2, 2018.”
 Alan Levin, “NTSB: Ted Stevens’ plane crash remains a mystery.” USA Today, May 24, 2011. Multiple patents exist for remote piloting of aircraft, overriding pilot control, etc.
 Clifford Carnicom, “Biological Components Identified,” May 11, 2000, https://carnicominstitute.org/wp/biological-components-identified/.
 Mark J. Harper, “Dead Scientists and Microbiologists – Master List,” February 5, 2005, http://rense.com/general62/list.htm.
 Erin Elizabeth, “A Connection with the Holistic Doctor Deaths?” HealthNutNews.com, February 1, 2016.
 Wet surface air cooling (WSAC) of thousands of power plants (including nuclear) is used by geoengineers to feed and steer storm systems. See WeatherWar101.
 Ari Phillips, “Canadian Government Dismantles Ecological Libraries After Dismissing Thousands of Scientists.” Climate Progress, January 10, 2014.
 “Operation Mockingbird, CIA Media Control Program,” January 21, 2012, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDCfTIapds0; also “CIA Operation Mockingbird: How the CIA Controls the Media,” Source Watch, October 10, 2016.
 Quoted in Planet Earth: The Latest Weapon of War by Rosalie Bertell (Black Rose, 2001).
 CIA Document #1035-960, “Concerning Criticism of the Warren Report,” 1967.
 Charles Eisenstein, “The Need For Venture Science.” Huntington Post, August 27, 2015.
 Sean Adl-Tabatabai, “Nearly All Scientific Papers Controlled By Same Six Corporations.” YourNewsWire.com, July 20, 2015.
 “World Leaders Sign Paris Climate Agreement.” Huffington Post, April 22, 2016. The article closed with “a group of businesses, including Google, Ikea, Starbucks and General Mills, lent their support to the signing ceremony.”
 Liz Ford, “Global goals received with rapture in New York – now comes the hard part.” The Guardian, 25 September 2015.
 “The Netherlands takes over meteorology for the NATO Response Force.” SHAPE (Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe) press release, 13 January 2016.
 Sarah Malm, “UN planning an ‘international tribunal of climate justice’ which would allow nations to take developed countries to court.” Daily Mail, 2 November 2015.
 True economics: “6/6/17: Trump, Paris, Climate: The Problem is Bigger than COP21,” http://trueeconomics.blogspot.com/2017/06/6617-trump-paris-climate-problem-is.html.
 Amy Chozick et al., “Leaked Speech Excerpts Show a Hillary Clinton at Ease With Wall Street.” New York Times, October 7, 2016.
 Jocelyn Timperley, “Academics call for geoengineering preparation in wake of Paris Agreement’s ‘deadly flaws.’” BusinessGreen, 11 January 2016.
 James Corbett, “And Now for The 100 Trillion Dollar Bankster Climate Swindle . . .” The Corbett Report, February 24, 2016.
 Tyler Durden, “Deutsche Bank Sued For Running An ‘International Criminal Organization’ in Italian Court.” Zerohedge.com, May 18, 2017.
 Jacob Levich, “The Real Agenda of the Gates Foundation.” Aspects of India’s Economy, No. 57, May 2014.
 Paul Harris, “They’re called the Good Club – and they want to save the world.” The Guardian, 30 May 2009.
 William J. Broad, “Billionaires with Big Ideas Are Privatizing American Science.” New York Times, March 15, 2014.
 So far, two Secretaries of Defense have met this standard: Harold Brown (1977-1981) and Ashton B. Carter (2015-2017).
 One in Hanford, Washington and one in Livingston, Louisiana.
 Stephen J. Crothers, “A Critical Analysis of Ligo’s Recent Detection of Gravitational Waves Caused by Merging Black Holes.” viXra.com, March 8, 2016.
 Doyle Rice, “Are we ready for the end of the world? NASA conducts drill for potential asteroid strike.” USA Today, April 29, 2019.
 Joel van der Reijden, “Special Access Programs: A Look At Secrecy Levels and the Pentagon’s Missing Trillions,” updated May 2, 2017. Institute for the Study of Globalization and Covert Politics, https://isgp-studies.com/USAPs.
 Tyler Durden, “Army Finds $830 Million in ‘Missing’ Helicopters as First Ever Audit Begins.” Zero Hedge, January 11, 2018. The U.S. Department of Defense is the largest employer in the world with 3.2 million employees and $2.4 trillion in assets, and yet has never been required to administer an audit.
 Catherine Austin Fitts, “Who’s Who & What’s Up in The Space-Based Economy.” The Solari Report, Vol. 2018, No. 2.
 John Roach, “Insurer’s Message: “Prepare for Climate Change or Get Sued.” NBC News, June 6, 2014.
 Patrick Wood, “NAU Reborn As ‘North American Climate, Clean Energy and Environment Partnership’.” Technocracy News, June 30, 2016.
 “Universities & Financial Fraud,” The Solari Report, March 24, 2016. Professor Darrell Hamamoto is a professor at UC Davis in Asian American Studies.
 “Groups Sue EPA over Faulty Approval of Nanotechnology Pesticide.” Center for Food Safety press release, July 27, 2015.
 See Peter A. Kirby’s book Chemtrails Exposed: A New Manhattan Project. Self-published, 2016.
A few months after the ecological disasters in Portugal – the result of June and October fires in 2017 in our region – I started to write notes, to share our experience.
We believe that Portugal fires in 2017 are part of the global program of using the planet as a weapon (see: Planet Earth – The Latest Weapon of War by Rosalie Bertell, Black Rose Books 2001). Here it is the international wood industry (eucalyptus), a cooperation between Goldman Sachs Investment Bank from New York and the local Portuguese wood industry, who are renting or buying cheap properties from village people, growing and selling eucalyptus, destroying Portugal’s agriculture and natural forests, the same as in Brazil, Angola, etc. This is not only happening to “produce paper” as reported in mainstream information, but mainly to produce biomass to extract ethanol, which serves as energy for fuel.
In 2017, 30,000,000 GMO eucalyptus trees were ready to be planted even before the fires. We are also concerned about new lithium, gas, 5G, AI and the modern tourism industry. New contracts have been signed since 2017 in Portugal and the biggest lithium mine of Europe is planned for 2020 in Northern Portugal.
In 1974, Portugal emerged from dictatorship and since that time, the “eucalyptus-mafia” started to expand, taking over part of the country and at the same time the “forest-fires” started to increase constantly.
In 1992, Portugal became a full member of the European Community with the objective to serve Europe with paper and tourism industry and also to be geographically an important country as a strategic NATO base in Southern Europe.
Government of Portugal, Islands & the Spraying Programs
Image on the right: Google Maps Azores
In 2010, the Portuguese Government signed the “Contrato Céu Único” (“Contract One Sky”). It seems that since then, “spraying” has been authorized in the airspace of Portugal. From 1972 onwards, the Joint Force Command Lisbon was one of the biggest NATO bases in South European Allied Command Operations. It was based in Oeiras, Lisbon, and was deactivated in 2012.
Today, the “United States Forces Azores” (USAFORAZ) is based at Lajes Field, on Terceira, the Azores, Portugal, the best strategic position in the Northwestern Atlantic Ocean, between Europe and the United States. We believe that in this decade, this military base became very important for the international and intercontinental “spraying program,” passing Portugal on departure and on arrival towards Europe.
At Sta. Maria, the Azores, now being installed is the Portugal Space 2019-2030, a “Space Port” for satellites and spaceships with laser weapons from one of the largest military producers of laser weapons and spaceships, Martin Lockheed Corporation in California, also based in Ireland, Scotland and Canada and selling to China, North Korea, Australia and elsewhere.
Image below: Map Motoristas Portugal 2020
We wonder if these laser weapons during the Portugal fires in 2017 and 2018 have also been used in California, Greece, Sweden and Australia.
Region and Geography
Between June and October 2017, the center of Portugal was threatened by thousands of fires and daily geoengineering, drying out the country and burning down three counties: Inner Pine Forest North, Inner Pine Forest South and Natural Park Serra da Estrela.
It is a region with green hills and many beautiful river valleys and the mountain range Serra da Estrela, elevation 2000 m. Pinhal Interior Norte, with an area of 2,617 km² and ca. 130,000 inhabitants, includes 14 councils all covered with eucalyptus monoculture for the past 30 years.
Our council is Oliveira do Hospital, the only registered city in this region and the last council rejecting eucalyptus plantations, preserving an 80-100-year old “Traditional Pine Forest” (mixed forest with pine, oak and cork oak). This council also belongs to the Parque Natural Serra da Estrela, which participated in UNESCO “Geopark Estrela” in November 2017 (the month after the catastrophe). This area of 2,216 km² and 170,000 inhabitants includes nine councils with two schools, “Instituto Politécnico da Guarda” and the “Universidade da Beira Interior” Covilhã. The Geopark promotes education, science and culture. Programs for the preservation of nature and traditional village life, rural, nature and the upper-class ecotourism have stabilized the local market and small industries. Hundreds of river beaches, thousands of hiking routes and other outdoor sports make this region a famous Mountain Range for National and International Nature-Outdoor-Tourism. It was completely burnt down in 2017.
“The Council Oliveira do Hospital burnt down within three hours,” said a witness. An area of 234,000 ha, 40 km wide to ca. 60 km long, or twice the size of Paris.
On Sunday, 15th October 2017, between 8:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m., 97% of the territory of Oliveira do Hospital was burnt down, an area of 234.52 km2 with almost 21,000 inhabitants. In our council, 12 people died and four were still in recovery after months, 5,000 sheep and goats died, also many domestic animals such as dogs, horses, cats, chickens, ca. 500 houses and 108 enterprises were destroyed, 480 jobs lost, 65 families affected — all that in only one council!
After four months, some villages were still without telephone and internet. Some money was paid by a governmental program for burnt fruit trees, stables, animals or machines. Houses were under analysis for the next 12 months, people have been “evacuated” to alternative places for temporary stay or have been offered a “new” house in the village in exchange to leave their farm behind. This would fit into a program of depopulating the countryside. One year after the disaster, we might say that possibly only 25% of promised reconstructions have been approved. The vast majority of reconstructions had not been completed by the second winter following the catastrophe.
The Portuguese population endured a type of “desperate state” afterwards for a few months, such as mainly men complaining about life and women still crying, but everyone is always trying to look forward. The choice to live in the countryside means to live in nature which now seems completely destroyed. Everyone knows that this destruction was not done by nature but was organized terror. Foreign families and couples, so-called “climate nomads,” who had chosen Portugal for an alternative sustainable living, are thinking to leave the country, whether they have lost everything or just having been witness to this disaster. Security has been lost, many people do not know where to go, as they understand it could happen again, and it could also happen elsewhere. After one year, many dead pine trees have been cut and a new shape of the traditional, native oak forest is starting to appear, where hopefully no eucalyptus will be planted by governmental programs.
Here seven houses burnt in the night of the catastrophe, a drone landed in a garden of people. Nobody knows who the owner is. (Photo ck, October 2017).
In the villages of Lajeosa/Oliveira do Hospital, military munitions were found in uninhabited houses and an airplane was seen at 11:00 a.m. almost landing on a roof of a house, which started to burn 12 hours later, in the center of the village.
However, there is a nice social observation: “People are coming closer to each other!”
Official and Unofficial Causes and Behavior of the Fires
Concentrating on the two huge fires which caused the death of over 120 people on the 17th of June and the 15th of October 2017, the Pinhal Interior Norte Region, 6% of the country of Portugal, was burnt down in only two weekends and, in the year 2017, burnt in total over 500,000 ha of Portugal.
Both fires had a very similar character in “behavior and time schedule.” We have no doubt that both fires had been well planned by the local and international industry, together with the military, on land and from the air. Unofficially communicated, there have been several “letters of threat” and after the June fire which destroyed one part of this county, some people knew that a second huge fire was planned for October to burn the rest of it. Relating to governmental statements, both fires happened outside the high summer season (July – September) and their most catastrophic moments were in the evening between 8:00-9:00 p.m. Suddenly, a kind of “fire tsunami” overwhelmed both regions with flames higher than 30 meters, expanding to 15 km within ten minutes. Everybody had five minutes to escape, to run for their lives or to prepare to try to save the house. There was no warning, no fire brigade, no emergency, no infrastructure.
We question: “Is Europe still a safe continent?”
“Because this happened before summer and at this time of the day, with normally reduced danger for that kind of meteorological conditions, the risk had not been understood by the operating services. This sort of behavior of the fire could not have been foreseen by any emergency service in Portugal, nor in Europe. The forest fire of Pedrogão Grande is an example and an alert … to be confronted with a new problem originating in Climate Change.” (Summary of Independent Technical Commission, Portuguese Government, 12th October 2017, translated from Portuguese.)
Wikipedia continues with the false “mainstream information” after the October fires. In the same year, the number of fires in Europe doubled, the “experts” blaming this phenomenon on global warming.
In my opinion another murder of hundreds of people in 2017, this time in Portugal, a European country — engineered with military weapons and under “false flag” using the term “climate change” as a general lie in terms of physics, with economical interest and power, to control the population by mainstream psychology – a threat against humanity?
Dr. Rosie Bertell in 2013 wrote:
“Further investigations show that in the late 1960s, scientists from the United States together with scientists from the Soviet Union were elaborating efforts about a possible warming of the Arctic, documented in 1976 in the Lowell Pontes Book, ‘The Cooling’. In 1974, at the Meeting in Vladivostok, the leaders of the United States and the Soviet Union started manipulating the weather with common operations. In the late 1970s, the United States participated in weather modification through ELF-signals (extreme low frequency EM-waves.)”
The Movement Against Geoengineering in Portugal Since 2010
In 2012, Benjamin Levy, a therapist from Lisbon, started to organize the first speeches about geoengineering and to inform the public through his website. In 2013, the Facebook group “Rastos Químicos Portugal” started as an important forum for exchange of information and contacts, increasing constantly to over 17,000 Facebook members after six years. Tiago Lopes from Coimbra is an important activist of that group and documents daily spraying with his website. In 2014, I joined that group and started a website for my personal research in Portuguese. Since 2018, many Portuguese citizens have started to publish facts about geoengineering, 5G and the whole spectrum. I also participated in several “Global March Against Geoengineering,” thanks to Marcelo Chelão (Brazil) and Fernando Jorge (Lisbon), who organize this movement for Portugal.
In 2016, we organized regular “Meetings about Geoengineering” in Coimbra.
On 6th February 2017, the “Petition against geoengingeering,” initiated by the Group Rastos Químicos Portugal, was officially passed to the Portuguese Government with over 4,000 signatures.
The Portuguese Department for Environment invited the group, represented by Tiago Lopes (Coimbra) and Elvira Vieira (Porto), for two hearings, 19th April and 27th October 2017. Both hearings brought no response to our concerns about climate manipulation by any of the parties. The petition was likely ignored.
On 17th June 2017, Engineered Forest Fire Pedrogão Grande occurred (officially 64 victims). Further details below.
On 15th October 2017, Engineered Forest Fire Oliveira do Hospital took place (officially 45 victims). Further details below.
On 5th November 2017, Prof. Filipe Duarte Santos, Dept. of Sciences of the University of Lisbon and Director of the National Committee of Environment and Sustainable Development (CNADS), confirmed on Portuguese TV program RTP 3 that “the atmosphere will be pulverized with toxic chemicals to cool down the planet”.
2nd December 2017 was the initiation of the international “Group Why Fire” (WiFi) Climate Engineering and Forest Fires Portugal 2017. A first meeting was planned for the end of the summer in central Portugal, but the home of the organizer burnt down from the 15th October fire. Up to 2019, the Why Fire Organization expanded into several sub-groups – such as Geoengineering – Space Fence, Transhumanism by Hendrik, Lilli, Conny & others, 5G by Ariel, Vaccinations and How to Protect by Leen, Environment for Life by Hanne and Rudy, Reforest for Life – cleaning and planting on burnt land by Leoni, Exposition with local painters “Forest fires Portugal 2017 – questions and answers” by Annie Moreels, Book “Histórias do Fogo/Fire stories” by Rita Fernandes Martins.
16th December 2017 was the start of the Portuguese “Grupo Céus Limpos”/Clean Skies Group founded by the witnesses of crime from the October fire in central Portugal with mostly Portuguese members, co-founders Maria João Sousa, Isabel Pimenta, Júlio Santos Perreira and Prof. João Dinís (Director of the National Confederation for Agriculture CNA).
We published several flyers about geoengineering in cooperation with native experts. Both groups coordinated and worked together. From January 2018, the “Grupo Céus/Clean Skies Group” sensitized journalists and the media with interviews and articles in regional newspapers on how forest fires are more aggressive with high and uncontrollable flames, eliminating forests, passing through villages and entering cities. The group were witnesses of organized fire, from land and from air and referred to their impression that possibly chemical products have been used and speaking about geoengineering as well as laser weapons and drones.
A local newspaper supported our movement by publishing our events, “Crime in the Fires”, which we discussed officially with local politicians and fire brigades, thanks to Director Amadeu Diniz da Fonseca and journalist José Leite who contacted us. Also, we wrote about regular presentations where we invited experts and investigators such as therapist Benjamin Levy from Lisbon, “Geoengineering, to control the climate – an unofficial exotic weapon… and uncontrollable.” More information about our public relations campaigns can be found on our website.
In the first months after the disaster, we communicated with local councils, engineers and professors from different investigation commissions of the Portuguese government so as to be involved as witnesses, to show places where we have seen or heard drones, where uninhabited houses exploded, where airplanes flew past a few minutes before types of fire bombs fell and a kind of fire tsunami exploded from everywhere. We collected soil from the forest and bark from trees to be analyzed for chemicals which have been sprayed before and during the fire (aluminum, magnesium, lithium, manganese, napalm). They were impressed, as they already knew about Geo- and Climate-Engineering. They also wondered about “strange physical happenings” in our forest, what happened to quartz, or to burnt houses. “It should be investigated” was the reply. But the Portuguese government never gave an order to investigate about the crime. Is the Portuguese government hiding secrets? Do they protect the crime of these fires? Why was there no rescue service and no fire brigade working in our villages that night?
In 2019, there were several events in cooperation with the local council and we continued our communication with fire brigades. It is important for every single person to understand that these were “unnatural fires” which have been engineered and can knock on every house door anytime as long as we do not stop this geoengineering program. Is this modern civil war?
Portugal as Part of International Resistance Against Climate-Engineering Since 2017
Many thanks to Franz Miller (Austria) for his patience and support in the very first days. We also hoped to have analyzed “hammered” trees in the forest that look like being eaten at around one meter high, with some up to four meters high. Looks rather like after an atomic bomb. There is a video about our once green paradise … three days after the disaster. We found damaged rocks of quartz, granite and slate with broken exploded small pieces, some pieces as big as two hands. We found very regular holes of 2-3 sq.cm. on the floor. We believe that this could have been caused by directed energy which has also burnt thousands of trees on the inside, “melted” iron in the brick walls of houses and twisted whole factory buildings. In the June fire in Pedrogão Grande, there are witnesses of how people were burnt to ashes just next to another person who was not burnt at all.
Physicist Manuel Feliz from Porto, member of Grupo Céus Limpos, private investigator and publisher on geoengineering, contrails and chemical trails, explains in one of our flyers:
“Possibly inflammable chemical products have been used and (or) electromagnetic weapons. It is a fact that these normally produce such violent fires and inside the trees, as the sap conducts electricity. Holes of 2-5 cm diameter in the forest everywhere? The most strange in these fires was that rocks and crystals of quartz exploded, which was caused due to very high temperature in the inside of these rocks (600⁰C), or otherwise they exploded due to “forced resonance oscillations” by an electromagnetic wave. The resonance frequency of quartz is basically the same frequency as of the HAARP emission, an electromagnetic system for atmospheric experimentations, but not only. A mobile electromagnetic weapon could also emit in this frequency!” (translated from Portuguese)
Broken and partly pulverized quartz.
Forest Fire in Portugal, 17th June 2017 — Pedrogao Grande
The June fire was about 100 km south of us. We were witnessing on TV a so-called “natural disaster” 24 hours live on all TV channels during these days. It was like watching a bad movie, just showing the reality, which means sensitizing people, getting them close to death and catastrophes — a kind of terror.
During the summer, I made notes about the June fire circumstances, as I was working on a leaflet for Portugal about geoengineering and forest fires. I was not expecting a similar disaster knocking on our house door just a few months later. Thanks to Maria João Gaspar Oliveira (philosopher and writer) from Coimbra for all her help in research about this fire.
Was the dryness in Portugal and Southern Europe (Spain, Southern France, Italy, Greece) also engineered everywhere else?
In the week before 17th June 2017, we were witnessing a very unusual wave of heat in central Portugal. From Tuesday 12th June, we had several days with almost 40⁰C heat, grass was burning yellow within two days after a permanently engineered white sky with white and yellow smog in the morning.
Our green tomatoes cooked black hanging on the green plant in our vegetable garden and my neighbor had the same effect with her beans. It was a very unusual heat for this season and only four days were enough for a massive drying out of a whole county. Then came Saturday 17th June 2017. On that day people were killed as if they were “microwaved” in their cars and houses, “carbonized” while they were fleeing on roads or from the forest. One person burnt, another next to a witness, however, was not. The governmental investigation report did not publish the chapter about the dead victims. Many wild and domestic animals also died.
Officially the number of dead victims did not increase further after 24 hours (64), even though there were still people missing. Weeks later, private investigations mentioned 72 casualties, but it is possible that even more people lost their lives. What is the Portuguese government hiding when lying about the number of victims and hiding the death investigations?
“Flames of Hell” were described by witnesses, a very loud noise and 30 m high flames flying over villages. Some animals were killed only by high temperatures with no direct contact with the fire. The same was reported about trees that burnt, without having been in contact with fire. Losing life by radiation?
During the summer, it looked as if everything north of Lisbon up to the Spanish border was burning. Central Portugal and the southern side of the Mountain Range Serra da Estrela seemed to have burnt from June until October.
Disinformation by Mainstream Media and Governmental Chaos
Statements from the government did change several times during the weeks after the June disaster.
The first statement was transmitted on TV saying that it was dry thunder that hit a tree. The tree was found as proof only two hours later. Several days later, nevertheless, a witness’ footage was played on TV, showing how silent the first fire started, no thunder, no lightning at all. Other witnesses heard loud noises as the fire grew very quickly and uncontrollably.
The second statement of the government changed implicating a “criminal hand” as origin of the fire.
The third statement then came two weeks later, 3rd of July, where the fire brigade stated that due to a defect in the high-tension cable the fire started as an effect of high voltage: “efeito arco voltaico.”
The Internal Police continued saying a dry thunderstorm might be the reason for the huge fire.
The IPMA (Institute of Sea and Atmosphere) said that, “In that region no lightning occurred at the time of the beginning of the fire.”(sic)
Also, we would like to ask the meteorology institution (IPMA) how is it possible to get different meteorological information on the same day on different TV channels?
The fourth version came from an investigation group saying that electric discharges (descarga eléctrica) between high tension cables and too close trees lit the fire.
But the EDP, an electricity company, denied these accusations as there were no trees.
The fifth version was to be read in the CTI (Independent Technical Commission) Report from the 12th October 2017 (published only three days before 15th October fire) p. 12, about the “unforeseeable downburst … due to Climate Change.”[sic]
Official Witness with Proof of a Geoengineered Fire?
An anonymous witness is mentioned in this official governmental report concerning this “downburst”:
“A bit after 8:00 p.m. (I cannot say the exact time), it became totally dark and immediately after, a huge fire ball came, pushed by a wind like a cyclone (…). What has happened here was no fire that came from the pine forests around here, but this was a kind of bomb that exploded from nowhere, that opened a sky full of a bright shine of flames which is pouring out amber lights or fire tongues toward all directions. It was these fire tongues, which burnt down my village and others around here.” (translated from Portuguese)
Witness Luis Gregório sent me a video from near Santarem, 100 km away from Pedrogão. He observed a sky full of spraying as well as ELF-Waves.
“It has become normal to see spraying today and it is normal that they become clouds with a strange behavior … but what was not normal this time was that the clouds were standing still for a long time, and at the time when the fire started, about two to three hours later, rain was falling and made thunder.”
On 19th June 2017, the national newspaper “Diário de Notícias” wrote, with plenty of witnesses:
“This was no fire, this was a firestorm!”
On 20th June 2017, spraying before and during the June fire was witnessed by Tiago Lopes from Coimbra. (Admin Facebook Group Rastos Químicos, Anti-Spraying Activism Portugal)
Forest Fire in Portugal, 15th of October 2017 — Oliveira do Hospital
In the morning of 15th October, ten hours before our fire started, I had received an email from Claudia v. Werlhof which I only read two weeks later. As I read it, I became frozen again, as it was the perfect description of what we have survived.
On 15th Oct 2017, at 09:43, Von Werlhof, Claudia <Claudia.Von-Werlhof@uibk.ac.at> wrote:
“The Californian fires look like those in Portugal and remember … 911 effects, explained by Judy Wood. Jim Stone: “California ‘wildfires’ were not wild, they were engineered”: … there should have been several cases of exploding dry trees where there was no fire there before at all. Lots of people are saying these fires suddenly “exploded out of nowhere” – no hint of any previous fire, no lightning, no NOTHING, just a sudden high wind happening at the same time the forest nearby suddenly burst into flames. That would be a telltale sign of a sudden massive electric field heating everything up (everything that could not conduct electricity very well, which means air and dry leaves). There are people saying space-based laser systems are doing this … but I still believe they are using phase cancellation of radio waves to cause a bias field, because whatever happened when a laser was used would not be easily controllable and would too easily result in the creation of massive ionosphere to ground lightning bolts. That is not happening, which is why I am sticking with the EM wave approach to this. Maybe as they get more brazen and not caring about noticeable effects, they will start using lasers, which would be a whole lot easier.
How could you possibly get 66 widely-spaced, massive wildfires appearing instantly with no natural weather causing them, growing rapidly, with perfectly calm weather before, sudden massive winds at the initiation of the fires, blue sparks in the air, malfunctioning electronics, and in some people heart palpitations? My answer: just ask Darpa (Jim Stone). On Darpa see Bertell. Claudia v. Werlhof”
Witnesses of the October fire shared incredible circumstances. “We will have rain on Sunday 15th October” was one of the false meteorological forecasts days before the fire, a sort of mind control of the population, so they would not water anything. And it did work. Friends who are even into geoengineering told me that they were so silly to clean trenches for rainwater instead of watering around house and garden. This could have avoided fire crawling along and burning the Earth every single square meter.
Electricity was off three hours before the fire started so there was no water supply for most houses with their own wells with electric water pumps. Mobile telecommunication started to fail just before the fire and was off during 48 hours, so no rescue communication during the fire was possible, no fire brigade, no official warning or help before and during the fire, no evacuations in our villages. People had five minutes to get prepared to fight or just to run for their lives. Everybody was abandoned in a life-threatening disaster attack. (We heard the same from residents of California.)
To survive was lucky and to have the house kept safe was a wonder. The next morning, we had very dense toxic smog, bright and yellow. We wonder if this could be from burnt iron-oxide, one of the chemicals we guess to have been sprayed.
One village was without electricity for seven days, with no internet or telephone for three months in our village, which made resistance work almost impossible. The circumstances psychologically became worse in the affected population. We had no idea what the media said about the fire or about us. We were under an “emergency state” for three days, no work, no school, no ATM machines working to get money, no charging of phones, no information, no communication. All we could do was to try to come down from the shock and “screwing things back together” around our houses, vegetable gardens and stables. People were still crying months afterwards. Generators were almost sold out in all shops in our region. For those who had been in this fire, life has changed. Everybody knows that this was an attack and not a natural fire.
There was a perfect chaos in the governmental leadership towards financial help for victims who lost houses, stables, animals and jobs, etc., even after one and a half years. Thankfully, thousands of people acted in solidarity immediately and many groups and villages were bringing clothes and food for people and animals. This was rather well-organized in our local council Oliveira do Hospital.
Only two weeks later, I was able to use the internet for the first time in our local coffeeshop, sending my first SOS-EMAIL to international resistance activists and to Claudia v. Werlhof. I found no special emails from friends who normally would ask when forest fires had happened in Portugal. Neither my family in Germany seemed very much worried. I understood then that this fire was not publicized in mainstream media in Europe. Biggest thanks to Claudia, who “heard my SOS” and replied immediately and spread my message to colleagues and sent me a video of California wildfire in October 2017, tree burning from inside.
She brought me into contact with Franz Miller (from Austria) who explained to me about Directed Energy Laser Weapons and sent me a video where I saw Elana Freeland’s research for the first time.
With goosebumps on my skin, I started to put pictures together from Portugal fires and the very similar phenomena in California — Directed Energy Weapon? I published it on my personal website. The same evening my car battery was totally dead, from one moment to the next. No cable from another car battery nor pushing the car down a hill made the engine start, so it went to the garage the next day. I thought, “I hope I am not that important.”
For the 15th October 2017, the weather forecasts had changed at the last minute, depending on which TV channel one watched. Suddenly there were high temperatures around 30ºC announced for Sunday, quite warm for autumn and a few people also heard something about storm warnings. Different channels were giving different information. Remember, only three days earlier the beginning of the seasonal winter rain was announced in the media.
Four big fires had started between 6:30 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. on the Serra Estrela Mountain Range, all fires in one line, east to west, distance around 20 km each, 50 km south from us. A yellow airplane, similar to ones used in fighting fire, had been seen flying along the east border of our council of Oliveira do Hospital during the day; and everything burnt along that 50 km border, from Seia (Sandomil) towards Nelas later in the afternoon.
When the electricity shut down around 5:00 p.m., a smaller fire was still about 15 km away. Neighbors, all Portuguese inhabitants of the village, aged between 60 and 80 years old, came up to our road where there is a nice view towards the mountains, commenting, “In other countries there are attacks in cities, like Paris or Brussels, to make terror. Here it is the fire!”
I mentioned that I heard an airplane spraying strongly at high altitude. It was the normal and “everyday spraying”, but this time it was even louder. When I hear this, rain usually follows in about 30 minutes or the temperature changes. This time I thought, “Are they spraying the fuel to burn down the rest of the region as well?” In fact, they did and the wind started to get stronger only 30 minutes later!
Between 5:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m., four smaller fires had started southeast from us, again all in a line, south direction towards north, all in our council and wind in direction north, towards us.
Around 7:00 p.m., mobile communication went off and friends came by asking for “fire asylum”, in case they would need to leave their farms in the forest with dogs and horses. We were still joking and laughing at this time.
Group Why Fire (WiFi)
(Photo below ck December 2017 Central Portugal)
“At 8 p.m. or a bit later, we heard that the fire suddenly appeared in the wood factory of the village, only three km away. From our front door we saw a throat of dark red and black fire clouds, about 500 m high – twisted in direction north, as the wind was blowing from south. The top of the throat was open and I saw small clouds turning in a kind of a square, dark red and blue colored. I heard the sound of a quarry, iron falling on metal, sound of electricity like lightning … but I did not see any lightning. I thought: HAARP – microwaves and laser. I could imagine a fire tornado coming towards us, taking everything!” – Witness: Conny Kadia, October 2017
Other witnesses have seen yellow airplanes flying in our region during this time, making a circle, coming from Santa Comba Dão towards south of Tábua, continuing in the direction Oliveira do Hospital. We believe that those airplanes flew up to the northern border of our council, Rio Mondego, and back from there over our villages. All this was happening within 15 minutes. Obviously, the plan was to make sure that our council would be black. 97% of our council’s territory burnt in not more than three hours (35 km wide, 60 km long!). Hundreds of people confirmed that the noise was like from an airplane. The fires exploded everywhere at the same time and everything was surrounded by high flames immediately.
One witness thinks that this was the sound of a US military fighter, maybe with laser weapon. A neighbor thinks it could have been an old military bomber (B52). They saw six fireballs falling on their farm, starting small fires with no loud explosions. Within minutes, the whole forest went completely black and suddenly everything was in 30 m high standing flames – five minutes’ time for escaping and rescuing dogs and horses and their lives.
It seems exactly the same phenomenon that we have affirmed in the official governmental report from the witness in the June fire. Also, at the same time of the day, in both fires, most people died between 8:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m.
We also found thousands of glass bottles along forest tracks and roads between villages (as in the fire in the Pine Forest Leiria). We had hoped to intervene with all our proof and knowledge that the second report of the CTI Commission about forest fires 2017 should include “Crime in fire, from earth and from air” as can be read in the Portuguese newspapers due to our publications. But it didn’t.
Climate Engineering in Collaboration with Local Wood Industry and Others for this Ecological Disaster
We asked the CTI Commission and the council to analyze the residue of the sprayings in the soil to find out what chemicals or other materials had been sprayed during the last years as well as during the fires by smaller local airplanes and by drones. We wanted them to study houses, where iron melted in the walls and the entire structures of the houses were destroyed. We also heard from an architect that brick walls became “powder” through the fire. Also, antique granite houses, older than 100 years that usually remain without a roof for decades in rain and wind without harm to the walls, have been mostly destroyed structurally in the October 2017 fire.
There was no further response from the Technical Commission. No investigation of crime on the part of the government. Experts, fire agents and others who were speaking about crime in fire had to be careful so as not to be threatened or to lose their jobs.
“Next to a huge pile of wood in the Industrial Zone Oliveira do Hospital, a lorry machine started to burn, which was about 30 m distance to the fire”. Were electromagnetic microwaves melting metal? Also, he said, “fire brigade was spraying full pressure water on the wooden pile but water was evaporating in the air, not even reaching the wood, neither the flames!”
On the other hand, trees next to burnt vehicles and houses stood intact – something reported as well from the California and Australian “wildfires”.
A farmer reports, “It seemed that water was not extinguishing the flames.”
From a local expert, President of the Fire Brigade B.V.V.N. Oliveirinha, Tábua, District of Coimbra, Vitor Melo, we received some very important information on the unusual circumstances of the October 2017 Fire: “Measurements of wind of 200 km/h (hurricane Ophélia?) and temperature of 70⁰C – BEFORE the fire passed! This would explain why leaves on trees were dried out and did not burn, needles on pine trees were in a vertical position, dried out but did not burn.” This would also explain how some animals, trees or even people died, without having been in touch with fire – just by radiation? The battery of his lorry was suddenly depleted during the night of the fire when he arrived in Midões, where they still succeeded to stop the fire but unable to move towards Póvoa de Midões.
“There was radiation in the air.”
“A normal natural fire would burn on average 900 meters per hour. This fire made 33 ha (3.3 km x 1 km, or 33 football fields, as a Portuguese measurement) in one minute!”
“Also the white smoke was not normal.”
“The command of fire brigade needs to be changed, to ensure an efficient fight against fires in Portugal.”
“This was an Attack of Terrorism!” He continues to state also two years after the disaster:
“Nobody provides for me the opposite!”
Thanks and respect for this encouraging witness, his authorization and collaboration in the investigation work.
Political Crime, Governmental Scandal and Military “Defense” Programs
Did the international corrupt Climate-Change-Industry provoke “un-natural” fire disaster by climate engineering?
Is the 2018 Monchique Fire Just Another Example?
Local government and most mainstream media were reporting in the first weeks that this was an act of terror and a criminal fire, which has to be investigated. After a few months and general advice from the Portuguese and possibly international governments, things “calmed down” and after a year the statements have changed into “natural fire” or “climate change.”
At our events, we continued to include regional fire brigade, as we had witnesses mention that the local fire brigade (Lagares da Beira) did not leave their basement during the night, as they could hardly load water into their empty lorries without main electricity which was shut off. No generator at the location, no generator on each lorry.
From the Monchique fire (02-09 August 2018, between Silvas and Portimão, Algarve) we have been informed that the fire brigade was told to wait for hours. Was there no command to fight the fire? The fire brigade mostly received permission once fires were too big or just to evacuate people. From another witness we heard that the fire brigade emptied the water tanks before driving back to the base station, without fighting the fire.
About this fire we have unofficial information that a member of the government had warned private people to leave that area. So, during the 2018 Monchique fire, the government knew about the plan and did not prevent it?
Thanks to Su Pires from Santarem for helping with the investigation in this fire.
This particular fire lasted seven days and nobody knows why it took so long.
Disorganization or sabotage on the part of the Command, which had been “upgraded” years ago, from Fire Brigade Commander to military generals, or even to a computer (AI)? In this way, it is easier for governmental order to control the Commander – or to let it burn?
We believe that in this Monchique fire, nobody died because people had been sensitized by the results of the fires in 2017 and the consistent information of resistance work and protest about incredible contradictions and miserable crisis management. Entire villages refused to follow the orders of Civil Protection, Police and Fire Brigade to evacuate. It seems that official orders were once again to send people towards the flames, same as happened by police order in June 2017, where 40 people died unnecessarily within ten minutes by a simple mistake. In the Monchique fire in August 2018, only 34 people were injured and no one died. The population refused the order of authorities. They stayed at home and saved their goods and lives. On TV, witnesses were shouting at the government in direct interviews, as the authorities were threatening, policemen were without respect and tried to pull people out of their houses: “This is a political crime in times of freedom!”, reported in coverage by TV Sapo Portugal.
In the future, we would like to include the main electricity company (EDP) in our fire investigations, as well as the Institute for Sea and Atmosphere Portugal (IPMA), who deny governmental accusations from the 2017 June fire that trees were standing too close to high tension cables to cause explosions and that no ‘dry thunder’ was registered in the region when the fires started.
Strangely, on 14th October 2018, exactly the same autumn weekend one year after the fire disaster in our region – we had in the same geographical zone another “hot storm” (Hurricane “Leslie”) – and at about 8:30 p.m. (same time of day as one year ago), in the forest of our village, an explosion cut two electricity wires and lit two smaller fires which the fire brigade managed to control immediately. No tree had fallen on wires. Can wind cut wire in four places and in a distance of five to ten meters? Our local fire brigade explained that possibly ”dry thunder had cut the electric wires, which were lying on the ground”. Would this be confirmed by IPMA or was it something else that cut the wires? Was it to remind the inhabitants, who were coming together at several different memorial events? During two hours, a hot storm was circulating around from all directions with very dark and deep clouds. People got the same feelings of danger and fear as exactly one year before. “We mobilized immediately the entire fire brigade, as we thought the same can happen as last year, with this strange wind, strange heat, strange circumstances,” mentioned the Fire Brigade Commander. Electricity was then cut off. At our stable in the village, we had suddenly the same group of people together, as one year before, rescuing horses and waiting what to do. The fire was finished at 9:00 p.m. The storm had stopped immediately, everything went quiet, electricity came back and everyone went home.
We suggest that there is the possibility of DEW (Directed Energy Weapons) being used with the installation of the 5G electric fence. The pulverization of metallic nanoparticles produce artificial clouds, which serve as a conductor for electromagnetic waves, in order to change temperature and humidity within minutes in the air as well as on the ground. By heating the atmosphere, waves of winds can become as strong as you like, and flying flames over houses and villages can be managed due to fuel in the air. With these wind waves, water can evaporate in air, as fuel and heat make water almost useless!
Is It Possible to Control the Climate of a Geographical Zone in Any Country of Europe to Control the Population? Civil War in Times of Freedom?
We continue to discuss our experiences with responsible institutions and continue to sensitize people to our movements. We also inform the population and our local councils with our activities, our leaflets, festivals, exhibitions and information events.
Drones have been witnessed starting fires at the south border of our council (in Vide). Thousands of empty glass bottles have been found, all in a line along the streets and forest tracks around our villages and in some places it looks (even after one year) as though something had been sprayed from the street into smaller hedges. Was this from jeeps and other land vehicles from the local wood industry? Motorbikes had been heard days before the fire in the forest and were seen racing along our streets. One drone was heard by a witness in an urbanization of Oliveira do Hospital, where in the next minutes “Casa do Espirito” and several uninhabited houses exploded. Hundreds of explosions have been witnessed by the population out in the woods, from nowhere – where no electricity cables are passing, just in nature. A 5G experiment in central Portugal during these days could also explain the possible use of DEW during the fire. Airplanes have been witnessed. Chemicals could have been sprayed by an airplane in high altitude about three hours before the fire started in our villages. Wind started 30 minutes after hearing the spraying. Why is none of this under investigation by Portuguese or European governments?
So, has something like a league of military on the ground, together with air force, been in action to terrorize us, the people and the local governments of the region and continue to do so?
The Movement against Weather and Climate Engineering is now part of the social media and political environment in central Portugal. Every single participant makes the difference, slowly but steadily.
Benjamin Levy from Lisbon, (Holistic and Transpersonal Therapist and Geoengineering Investigator), a very important member of Group Why Fire and Group Céus Limpos, said in February 2018, “people need to wake up from their hypnosis as one of the solutions, becoming active, getting information and informing others!”
Summary of Circumstances Around the Portugal Fire 2017-2020
Acknowledgements and Appreciation
We thank very much Benjamin Levy from Lisbon, (Holistic and Transpersonal Therapist and Geoengineering Investigator), Group Why Fire and Group Céus Limpos, and the council of Oliveira do Hospital for collaboration and hosting events.
Many thanks to Elana Freeland, Jamie Lee and Rick Duarte, who have sent us so much information from the California fires which occurred at the same time, for our comparative investigation in Portugal. (Elana Freeland books: 2014, 2018)
I appreciate all the interdisciplinary work from the editor of this book, Claudia v. Werlhof from Germany/Austria, having introduced me to these international scientists and accepted me in her group where I discovered the Planetary Movement Mother Earth: “From weapon to wreckage – the abuse of the Earth as a mega-machine”
Other important collaborating scientists for research in Portugal are Judy Wood from USA, Harry Rhodes and Terry Lawton from Great Britain and Robert Deutsch from Australia as well to Maria Heibel from Italy. Many thanks to Maria João Gaspar Oliveira, Paulo Silva, Guido Verrier, Annie Moreels, Rita Martins, Laura Wilson, João M. Félix Galizes and Trevor for all the important interdisciplinary work in Portugal and to Pierre Teuber, who rescued my life once I discovered the spraying in 2014. Suddenly I did not know how to breathe anymore and how to find protection. He introduced me into the old native technique of Energy Vortex, to clean the air around our house and vegetable garden and how to raise energy and consciousness. This method is being practiced by more people here in the region. Merci!
Many thanks also to Franz Miller (Austria) for all his information and to Linda Leblanc (Cyprus) for her revision and patience in reviewing this article.
Every single person is important, to make the change, to expose the truth, and to stay connected with our planet Earth. The movement against geoengineering is growing. Nature is giving back to us!
THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH for your advice and responding to all our questions. Peace and thanks to all who make this movement happen. Please continue “keeping an eye” on Portugal!
 Jornal Diário de Notícias: Environment, 29th July 2018, Ricardo J. Rodrigues, Eukalyptus has five times more support than native forest, https://www.dn.pt/edicao-do-dia/29-jul-2018/interior/-eucaliptos-tem-cinco-vezes-mais-apoio-do-que-floresta-nativa-9650078.html
 London South East, Savannah Resources (SAV): September 2018, http://www.lse.co.uk/ShareChat.asp?ShareTicker=SAV&thread=629DABBD-230E-46FF-94E4-D9A45DC771C8&page=20
 Single European Sky ATM Research (SESAR) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_European_Sky_ATM_Research#Project
 Jornal Expresso: 24.09.3018, Virgílio Azevedo, Governo lança concurso internacional para instalar base espacial nos Açores
 Digital Trends: March 7, 2015, by Jason Hahn, https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/lockheed-martins-newest-laser-weapon-can-destroy-a-trucks-engine-from-a-mile-away/
 Estrela Geopark, Portugal: www.geoparkestrela.pt
 Group Why Fire / Grupo Céus Limpos: Co-Production Video Channel – Witnesses Forest Fire Portugal, October 2017 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kE1-tNVmEC4&feature=youtu.be
 Portuguese Parliament: 12th October 2017, Report of Independent Technical Commission, Portuguese Government, Forest fire 17 – 24 June 2017, page 12, https://www.parlamento.pt/Documents/2017/Outubro/Relat%C3%B3rioCTI_VF%20.pdf
Relatório Comissão Técnica Independente, Assembleia da República, Portugal, October 12, 2017, “O facto de tal ter sucedido antes do início do verão e à hora do dia em que normalmente diminui a severidade das condições meteorológicas presumivelmente afetou a perceção de risco por parte dos operacionais. A … MODIFICAÇÃO DO COMPORTAMENTO do fogo não poderia ser prevista por nenhum serviço de emergências em Portugal ou na Europa. “O incêndio de Pedrogão Grande é, portanto, um exemplo e um aviso … para enfrentar um novo problema com raiz nas alterações climáticas.”
 Wikipedia: Forest fires Portugal 2017, https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inc%C3%AAndios_florestais_em_Portugal_de_outubro_de_2017
 Dr. Rosalie Bertell: “PLANET EARTH – The Latest Weapon of War”, 2. German Ed.2013, p. 445 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladivostok_Summit_Meeting_on_Arms_Control
 Benjamim Levy: Geoengineering Investigator and Holistic Therapist, Lisbon, http://despertar.eterhum.com
 Tiago Lopes: www.warsphere.blogspot.pt
 Conny Kadia: www.chemtrailsportugal.netpack.pt
 Public Petition against Geoengineering, Portugal: February 2017, http://peticaopublica.com/pview.aspx?pi=P2012N21770
 Prof. Filipe Duarte Santos, Dept. of Sciences of the University of Lisbon and Director of the National Committee of Environment and Sustainable Development (CNADS), 05th November 2017https://www.bitchute.com/video/73FCD44UCnEr/?fbclid=IwAR3FTr3I0yACNGr0KaumbVQqICJVXM7VyDISCx3CQLCUAJOYVQJzJovmEBM
 Conny Kadia: https://www.chemtrailsportugal.netpack.pt/Panfletos%20Ceu%20Limpo%20Portugal.html
 Jornal O Tabuense: https://www.chemtrailsportugal.netpack.pt/Art%20ck%20Tabuense%2015.01.2018.pdf
 Conny Kadia: https://chemtrailsportugal.netpack.pt/Public%20Relation%20Climat%20Engineering%20Portugal.html
 Fire Aviation: Bill Gabbert, August 2015,Helitorch video, https://fireaviation.com/tag/helitorch/
 Franz Miller: http://www.franzmiller.at/websites/climate-engineering.html
 Jornal de Notícias: Video dokumentation of fire, October 2017, https://www.jn.pt/local/videos/interior/drone-mostra-devastacao-causada-por-fogos-em-oliveira-do-hospital-8856835.html
 Dr. Manuel Feliz: Physics, Porto, Publications,2011, https://paginas.fe.up.pt/~feliz/e_paper28_chemtrails-revised.pdf
2018, Artificial Contrails, Artificial Weather, Artificial Climate Change? The climate scientist as an abuser and a criminal? https://yadi.sk/i/mERJ3LC13UbRYV
 Dr. Manuel Feliz:https://chemtrailsportugal.netpack.pt/CeuLimpo7.pdf
“O que faz pensar nahipotese de terem sido utilizados químicos inflamáveis e(ou) armas electromagnéticas e o facto de normalmente serem eles que produzem fogos desta violência, e no interior das árvores, pois a seiva é condutora eléctrica..” Buracos de 2-5cm de diâmetro na floresta em todo lado? “Mas o mais curioso nesses fogos foi, terem explodido seixos e cristais de quartzo… que ou se deveu a uma transmissão enorme de temperatura para o interior dessas rochas (600ºC), ou então explodiram por terem estado sujeitas a “oscilações forcadas de ressonância” por uma onda electromagnética… A frequência de ressonância do quartzo é basicamente a mesma que a frequência de emissão do HAARP sistema electromagnético de experimentação atmosférica, mas não só. Uma arma electromagnética movel poderia emitir nessa frequência também!”
 Portuguese Parliament: Report, Portugal Fires, 12th October 2017, https://www.parlamento.pt/Documents/2017/Outubro/Relat%C3%B3rioCTI_VF%20.pdf
 Portuguese Parliament: Report page 67, Portugal Fires, 12th October 2017, https://www.parlamento.pt/Documents/2017/Outubro/Relat%C3%B3rioCTI_VF%20.pdf – Relatório CTI “Cerca das 20 horas e pouco (não posso precisar a hora exata) escureceu totalmente e logo de seguir surgiu uma grande bola de fogo precedida por um vento, parecido com ciclone (…). O que por aqui passou não é o fogo que vinha lavrando nos pinhais circundantes mas sim uma espécie de bomba que rebenta do nada e que abre o céu numa claridade de chamas que espalha faúlhas, ou línguas de fogo, em todas as direções. Foram essas línguas de fogo que incendiaram a minha aldeia e outras em redor.”
 Luís MSG: Video documentation, 17th June 2017, https://www.otempo.pt/satelite/
Dia 17 de Junho 2017 Incêndio Pedrogão! Informação do video: VideoTime 12:30-13:00
 Tiago Lopes, Group Rastos Químicos, Anti-Spraying Activism Portugal, witness report video documentation, June 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27o0MJVxVms
 Roxy Lopez, http://www.thetruthdenied.com/news/2014/07/30/fires-burn-hotter-with-nano-metals-in-chemtrails/
 Matthew Mc Dermott: Video documentation, 13th October 2017, Tree burning from inside, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9CKmegMIC0
 ALCYON PLEYADEN 68: Video documentation, 01st November 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkTeWobAX6g
 Conny Kadia: Forest fires Portugal, 2017, documentation, https://chemtrailsportugal.netpack.pt/incendios%20portugal%20forestfires%202017.html
 Peter Luis Venero: The most selective forest fire in history, December 2017, https://twitter.com/peterluisvenero/status/940074757222932480
 Júlio Heitor: TV Sapo Portugal, Portuguese President Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa is confronted with witnesses of Monchique Fire, Southern Portugal, August 2018, https://rr.sapo.pt/noticia/121359/marcelo-ouve-queixas-em-monchique-e-pede-compreensao-sobre-evacuacoes
 Jornal Zap: September 2018, https://zap.aeiou.pt/detencoes-caso-roubo-tancos-219772
 Jornal Diário de Notícias: Tiago Petinga, June 2017, https://www.dn.pt/portugal/interior/ministro-da-defesa-admite-que-roubo-de-material-militar-em-tancos-e-grave-8601268.html
 TV Europa: 29th September 2017, https://www.tveuropa.pt/noticias/ericsson-testa-e-demonstra-5g-em-portugal/
 Jornal Diário de Notícias: 18th October 2017, Henriques da Cunha, https://www.dn.pt/portugal/interior/pj-militar-recuperou-na-chamusca-material-roubado-em-tancos-8853123.html
 Artificial Intelligence Fair Lisbon: 29th October 2017, http://www.lisbon.ai/
 The Law Reviews: The Mining Law Review, October 2019, Erik Richer La Flèche, https://thelawreviews.co.uk/edition/the-mining-law-review-edition-6/1149548/mining-portugal
 Portuguese American Journal: July 2018, President Barack Obama, http://portuguese-american-journal.com/porto-president-barack-obama-guest-speaker-at-climate-change-summit-portugal/
 Jornal Expresso: International Announcement for Space Port “Portugal Space”, Açores Island, September 2018, https://expresso.sapo.pt/sociedade/2018-09-24-Governo-lanca-concurso-internacional-para-instalar-base-espacial-nos-Acores?fb_ref=aY_0nrmXwK-Facebook
 Martin Lockheed: International Military Industry, Directed Energy Weapon, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin
 Josephina Fraile: Skyguards Spain, http://guardacielos.org/
 Slipstream Resources: November 2018, https://slipstreamresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Portugal-Drilling-Update-7.11.18.pdfhttp://www.lse.co.uk/ShareChat.asp?ShareTicker=SAV&thread=629DABBD-230E-46FF-94E4-D9A45DC771C8&page=20
 Claire Edwards UN Staff Member: 5G Is War on Humanity, 2018, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNZOtrAzJzg
 Climate Change Leadership: Al Gore at Climate Change Conference in Porto, October 2018, https://www.thedrinksbusiness.com/2018/10/al-gore-to-speak-at-climate-change-conference-in-porto/
Solutions for the wine industry, Porto, March 2019, https://climatechange-porto.com/
 Mining See: Environment & Natural Resources, Portugal raises the Stakes in the Lithium Market, May 2019, https://www.miningsee.eu/portugal-raises-the-stakes-in-the-lithium-market/
 European Climate Change Adaption Conference: Lisbon, May 2019, https://www.ecca2019.eu/
 National Resistence against Mining in Portugal – National Manifest: 17th January 2020, https://drive.google.com/file/d/11o7xZVDsnwwGsYbifrWXQjtORck49lk7/view
 Elana Freeland: Publications, 2014, https://www.amazon.com/Chemtrails-HAARP-Spectrum-Dominance-Planet/dp/1936239930 , 2018, https://www.amazon.com/Under-Ionized-Sky-Chemtrails-Lockdown-ebook/dp/B079LZWDTH
Prof. Claudia v. Werlhof: 14.09.2015, Interview with Querdenken TV, Germany http://www.pbme-online.org/2015/09/14/prof-dr-claudia-von-werlhof-bei-quer-denken-tv/
 Dr. Judy D. Wood: Publication, January 2010, “Where did the Towers Go? Evidence of Directed Free-Energy Technology on 9/11” https://www.amazon.com/Judy-Wood/e/B005IF6EPM
 Aircrap: Alexandra May Hunter, Monitoring the Planned Poisoning of Humanity, Chemtrail Weather Forecast, https://www.aircrap.org/2016/07/27/cern-weather-satellite-weapons-chemtrails-cloud-busters/
 Robert Deutsch Weather Page: www.zerogeoengineering.com/2017/rob-ds-weather-page/
 Maria Heibl: http: //www.nogeoingegneria.com/category/news-eng/
 Maria João Gaspar Oliveira: https://www.facebook.com/mariajoaogaspar.oliveira
 Paulo Silva: http://factos-desconhecidos-portugal.mozello.com/incendios/geoengenharia/params/post/1557682/
 Guido Verrier: “Why FIRE/ Céus Limpos – Video Channel” https://chemtrailsportugal.netpack.pt/incendios%20portugal%20forestfires%202017.html
 Odiariodumet: https://odiariodeumet.wordpress.com/
 Pierre Teuber: http://regenbogenwirbler.de/
How Climate Deception Is Used by Military and Corporate Interests to Privatize the Global Commons with the Compliance of a Corrupted UN
The purpose of this chapter is to understand the object of the climate warming-climate change deception and the geoengineering proposal, despite the destructive threat that it poses to our environment and public health. In our search to connect the dots, we identify coincident military and corporate interests of global dominance to control global resources and global commons hindered by national sovereignties.
To this end, they created the global national security threat — climate warming — requiring a global technological solution, geoengineering, that in turn demands renouncement of national sovereignties! They also created a myriad of globalist environmental NGOs, movements, private and public institutions and chose the people in charge of issuing global environmental policies from within the United Nations to suit their goals.
The Club of Rome is one of those globalist entities which excelled in its results through many of its members, especially the late Maurice Strong and Al Gore. The Rio Earth Summit was the first of the many steps that would conduct the total corporate takeover of the United Nations on June 13, 2019, with the signature of the multistakeholders’ Memorandum of Understanding.
Our conclusion is that the climate, an essential part of our global commons, has been instrumental to achieve an old globalist agenda of one world government for control and privatization of all Earth’s resources. That agenda is now pressing (Agenda 2030) in face of publicly acknowledged free fall of capitalism, and is sold to us under misleading names such as The Green New Deal, Natural Capital, New Climate Economy, New Deal for Nature, etc., all euphemisms to save the capitalist system.
These glossy names hide a thoroughly planned “Fourth Industrial Revolution”, helmed by the World Economic Forum and the UN, whose costs exceed $100 trillion. Bringing this about will entail a global bailout paid by us (tax and pension funds), the grabbing of land and the monetization of nature at global levels by corporations operating within a corrupted United Nations. In the process, the climate warming gurus Maurice Strong and Al Gore commanded the green non-profit industrial complex for social engineering and for social consent to this insanity by means of indoctrination, creation and manipulation of global climate movements.
Geoengineering, a military weapon for full spectrum dominance, is the key instrument in the globalist agenda promoted by the United Nations that will hold together this gigantic “House of Cards” built on a climate warming deception, setting the stage of the global warming proof and climate chaos, in charge of NATO, under the guise of civil defence programs, right on schedule.
It is a lengthy paper but it covers four decades with much relevant information not usually treated by mainstream mass media, on a subject that regards the gravest issue taking place today, with capacity to destroy our planet as we know it: geoengineering. Hopefully it will be of help to take a firm stand on it.
Understanding the Object of Climate Deception and Geoengineering
Climate Warming, Climate Change and Geoengineering: The Official Scenario
According to the official premises, anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2) alter the balance of terrestrial radiation, potentially posing climate change risks to present and future generations.
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change calls for the reduction of greenhouse gases that interfere with the climate system (UNFCC1992). The reduction of these gases addresses the problem at its root but this method would be too slow and expensive (Barker et al 2007, Keller et al 2007, Nordhaus 2008), so alternatives are proposed such as engineering the climate system (e.g., Keith 2000, COSEPUP 1992, Carlin 2007, Crutzen 2006, Teller et al, 2003, Wigley 2006, Blackstock et al 2009). Of all geoengineering technologies and strategies, dispersing aerosols in the atmosphere to increase terrestrial albedo is considered the most effective and cheapest way to reduce global temperatures (Nordhaus 2001; Wigley 2006; Shepherd et al 2009).
The arguments are mainly based on cost-benefit studies, leaving aside other essential parameters such as the impact of geoengineering on the environment, safety, public health, etc., and legal, moral or ethical aspects. In fact, the analysis for the decision to implement geoengineering strategies assumed that it did not pose any risk, or even that it was benign for the environment!
Wigley (2006) also thought that a modest investment in geoengineering could reduce substantially the economic and technological burden of mitigating the climate, postponing the need to reduce emissions in the short term. It is shocking when one realizes that these are the advisors of the most powerful governments of the world. Crutzen 2006, the expert from the Congress of Deputies of the Kingdom of Spain and also from the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, affirms that if the positive effects outweigh the negative ones, the option of albedo modification should be considered. This is without any regard for issues of impact on the environment and on the public health. Nor is it clear who determines what a positive or negative effect should be.
Admitted Risks of Geoengineering
Some authors made objections, pointing out various risks of geoengineering which, although limited to the stratosphere and leaving out the terrestrial impact, are not minor:
This brief list of risks is not exhaustive but enough to suggest that analysis of geoengineering strategies requires consideration of the risks of geoengineering (Jamieson 1996, Keith 2000, Robock 2008, Schneider and Broecker 2007). Geographer Allan Robock cites 20 reasons why geoengineering is a bad idea but continues working on it.
It is evident that geoengineering has become for these researchers their modus vivendi and that they will persist in their delusions for as long as society allows it.
However, in our opinion, the greatest problem with clandestine geoengineering as well as with “academic geoengineering”, being a military weapon, is what it hides from beginning to end. We have no reason to believe that they will tell us the truth, bad as it is, after four decades of global climate deception, propaganda, manipulation and social engineering. We are convinced that as in the case of fracking we will never be told what are the real materials being aerosolized in our troposphere which will allow for a fast assessment, diagnosis and treatment of its impact on our environment and public health, mainly because they will never facilitate us owning the burden of proof to demand accountability to governments and corporations.
Another Vision of Geoengineering: Impacts on the Environment and Public Health
The American scientist, John von Neumann, wondered if we could survive technology. In 1995, he wrote that climate control by solar radiation management was irrational. In his opinion, “it would alter the planet in its entirety, break down the existing political order, cause the interests of each nation to clash with those of other nations, and provoke completely unimaginable forms of war.” He compared climate control with the nuclear threat (J. Fleming 2010).
From the human point of view, after the atomic bomb, geoengineering is the most serious issue which threatens the survival of the planet. However, despite this, the debate on the subject is being confined to academic and scientific circles and the controversial decision to intervene in the natural climate systems is being taken behind the backs of the billions of citizens of this world by people who are not legitimized to do so.
The so-called geoengineers, incidentally protected by the Convention of the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, are claiming legitimization on the grounds of extreme weather events, the failure of CO2 mitigation measures and in face of political institutions not backing geoengineering openly for fear of paying the political price. On top of this anti-democratic dynamic, some social scientists from universities such as Oxford, with its “Oxford Principles,” claim the role of interface between citizens and geoengineers, arrogating to themselves the representation of society in this grand theatrical play. In this way, everything remains “within the family.” It is widely known that geoengineers talk about geoengineering as a hypothetical technological fix to cool the Earth in case it should be needed, without any field trial. How reassuring! Ten thousand years of civilization played on a single card! As the Romans said: explicatio non petita accusatio manifesta! (He who excuses himself, accuses himself). Certainly, the evidence points out to the opposite conclusion as it coincides fully with the list of causes and effects described in much of their “scientific” literature.
Shielding the Sun with Aerosols Means a Frontal Attack on Life
More and more farmers worldwide are denouncing atmospheric phenomena that they have never seen before and that they do not understand but whose consequences are a substantial loss of soil productivity. Extended in time and space, it could cause a serious food crisis. They report abnormal formation of clouds, disappearance of rain clouds from one moment to the next, obscuration of the sun by a strange white layer that prevents the ripening of fruits, promotes the colonization of trees by fungi and lichens causing the forest to die, the spreading of strange wildfires, crop decline or failure, the occurrence of aluminum particles in soil and rainwater, and the rise of serious health problems.
The following intervention abstract was presented to the Second Conference on Climate Engineering by IASS in Berlin 2017, on behalf of the Spanish farmer, Marcos Alonso, aimed at questioning the geoengineers who participated in it. The proposal was discarded, like so many other critical interventions on the subject:
As a farmer I spend my days in the fields, keeping a caring eye on the development of crops and the related environmental factors. Until very recently farmers had the knowledge of their profession transmitted from generation to generation for ages. They were able to interpret the sky, the clouds and the wind without mathematical models, we knew how to determine the humidity of the soil and the wellbeing of the plants without sensors or latest technological means, and we knew how to find solutions to it. This is not true anymore. In the last decade farmers have witnessed a very odd behaviour of natural weather patterns linked to the aerosol dispersal in the sky which is altering solar light and the weather, destroying the clouds, decimating crops and deteriorating plant life with the disappearance of many species. The aluminium rate in ecological soil has passed in one year from 5.680 mg/kg to 19.300 mg/kg and the titanium rate from 100 mg/kg to 1.500 mg/kg. These materials match with those proposed by geoengineers for climate modification purposes. We have no rain, a poisoned soil and many health problems. These are real facts, not models or academic geoengineering hypothesis. It is obvious that what is dispersed up will come down to Earth. Anyone of you has considered the impact of this contamination for plants, animals and people? So I plead you to stop this madness.
Obscuring the sun with aerosols is a frontal attack on life and must have criminal charges at the highest level. Sunlight is not only essential for the process of photosynthesis, production, reproduction and ripening for plants, for the evapotranspiration and creation of clouds, but also for the immune system and human health. To this scientific aberration has been added the aberration of silence on the part of the scientific community. Among the few exceptions stands Dr. Marvin Herndon, who affirms that geoengineering is actually being carried out with a deadly impact on the terrestrial biota, including human beings, and that the main material used in the climate manipulation programs is coal fly ash, coal combustion residues from power plants.
Coal fly ash is extremely toxic, containing neurodegenerative elements such as aluminum, barium, mercury, etc., which would explain the alarming rise of cases of Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s or childhood and juvenile autism throughout the world, but also of respiratory diseases and lung cancers. Dr Herndon et al. conclude that these geoengineering programs are not only not alleviating global warming but they are generating it. In addition, they have found that deadly ultraviolet radiation UV-B and UV-C are now penetrating the Earth’s surface “with devastating effects on humans, phytoplankton, coral, insects and plants”.
Photomicrograph made with a scanning electron microscope (SEM) and back-scatter detector: cross section of fly ash particles at 750× magnification (Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0)
In their view the aerial spraying of coal fly ash “places vast amounts of chlorine, bromine, fluorine and iodine into the atmosphere all of which can deplete the ozone layer.” This finding challenges the scientific consensus of the Montreal Protocol stipulating that the Ozone layer blocks the deadly portion of solar radiation, UV-C and most UV-B, from reaching the Earth’s surface. NASA knew that UV-B and UV-C reached Earth’s surface since 2007 (D’Antoni et al 2007), but:
Despite the implications of NASA’s 2007 findings for atmospheric science and despite their profound implications for human and environmental health, NASA failed to conduct a follow up investigation… This inaction begs the question: Is NASA complicit in a covert global activity, such as military ‘national defence’ aerial jet-spraying of toxic coal fly ash that poses serious risks to life on Earth?
Geoengineering: A Tool for Spoliation and Concentration of Property that Threatens Food Sovereignty
Geoengineering, which by its nature encompasses complementary agendas such as biotechnology with genetically modified organisms (GMO) among others, synthetic engineering, artificial intelligence, nanotechnologies and nanomaterials, supercomputing, quantum computing, energy, power and telecommunications grid, satellites, etc., is not only a vector of infinite corporate interests, but a geopolitical weapon and a definite threat to the global food sovereignty. This is not only because he who has the power to control the tap of the world controls the markets and the economy, determining who will live and who will die, but also because it is a tool of spoliation and transfer of land from the poor to the wealthy. Technological droughts and contamination by materials dispersed in the atmosphere for the purpose of manipulating the climate impair the productivity of the soil. The same could be said in the case of transgenic seeds designed to withstand high levels of aluminum, water stress and ultraviolet radiation put in the market incidentally, by multinationals like Monsanto, Bayer, DuPont and Syngenta.
In this situation small farmers sell their land at bargain prices, either to foreign corporations or to international consortiums of unknown origins, which under the umbrella of environmental restorations projects have access to the land for a small rent with the right to purchase. In fact, whoever has the land but does not have the water has nothing, whereas whoever has the means to acquire land and the technology to restore it and to control the weather or the climate, has it all.
In this light, considering its global scale and its military origins, geoengineering is above all a geopolitical tool that violates fundamental human rights and could be used to achieve a full spectrum dominance, aka one world government for global control of resources through technological dominion, implying the colonization and privatization of a global common: the atmosphere.
The Right to be Informed and the Duty to Rebel
Denied all public and parliamentary debate on a matter of the utmost importance to humanity as geoengineering, and in the face of misinformation, deception and denial policies by governments involved, we citizens have the right to be informed and the duty to rebel against the total helplessness to which we are subjected in order to organize our own defence. In this respect, it is necessary and unavoidable to transcend with courage the mantle of darkness that surrounds us and seek the truth; questioning in the process the role of the institutions to which we have erroneously entrusted our faith and the fate of our planet because we have been betrayed by them all.
The well-known American astronomer Carl Sagan, in an interview shortly before his death in 1996, warned that in a time of scientific and technological progress, whoever makes the decisions in science and technology will determine the future of our children. However, those that legislate in Congress have no scientific or technological background posing a danger, so that this combustible mixture of ignorance and power will explode in our faces. Did Sagan ignore that actually our congressmen limit themselves to pass laws made by corporations directly involved in science and technologies without any public scrutiny? Will the combustible mixture of greed and power on the part of corporations explode in our faces? We are heading to it because corporations do not care for anything outside profits and this does not necessarily guarantee a betterment of mankind future.
However Carl Sagan’s best warning relates to scientific scepticism. He warned that science is much more than a body of knowledge, it is a way of thinking, a sceptical way of questioning the universe with a subtle understanding of human power. If we are not able to ask sceptical questions to those who tell us that something is true, to be sceptical of those who maintain authority, we are ready for a political religiosity. Sagan recalled President Jefferson who wanted to give citizens the constitutional right to be educated and to practice scepticism in education as a tool to direct the government rather than the government directing the citizenry. It is from this standing that this article will proceed.
Origins of a Political, Scientific and Social Fraud
The spirit of Kyoto inherited from the Rio Summit made its 21st century debut with a political and social mania on a global scale around the concept of climate change, projecting it into all spheres of life, dance, art, poetry, cinema, literature, journalism, schools, universities, research, agricultures, energy, transport, technology, politics, associative activism, geopolitics, etc., a by-product of decades of total immersion in the subject led by the United Nations. Everything suggested that the interest in the environment of this organization was innate and genuine. Was it?
During the first two decades of its existence, the UN was content to apply the politics of adapting resources to economic development. It was not until the early 1970s when the Board of Directors of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) was created and when the United Nations Scientific Conference became aware of the environmental issues that led it to organize the First Earth Summit in Stockholm in 1972. This summit focused on the impact and control of agricultural pollutants, ten years after Rachel Carson published her outstanding book on the subject, Silent Spring.
Curiously, this summit also exposed the impact of human activities on the climate that caused it to change. However, it was not until the 1980s that the United Nations expressed its concern for the ozone layer, acid rain and climate change, making clear the interrelation between industrial development and the environment. In 1988, UNEP and the World Meteorological Organization created the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to become the world authority on the subject.
In 1990, during the Second World Climate Conference, climate was presented as a global problem that required a global response, laying the foundation for a framework of international agreements aimed at protecting the global environment which would materialize in the Rio Earth Summit Declaration and Agenda 21 in 1992, culminating in the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. The objective of this protocol was to return to the levels of CO2 emissions recorded in 1990, which meant reducing emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases of industrialized countries by at least 5% between 2008 and 2012. The Kyoto Protocol entered into force on February 16, 2005 after seven years of negotiation between 160 countries.
From the Dishonour of Climate-gate to the Indignity of the Paris Summit
The catastrophist narrative of global warming/climate change linked to the rights of future generations and to the practice of sustainable development in order to promote wider acceptance of the necessary adjustments suffered a severe setback in 2007 as a consequence of the “Climate Gate” scandal. In fact, after the publication of emails from the scientists of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia (UK), conclusions were drawn of a manipulation of data and measurements to justify and maintain the theory of anthropogenic global warming refuted by a large number of relevant scientists.
The subsequent Copenhagen Summit on Climate Change in 2009 would result in total failure due to the impossibility of setting emissions reduction quotas and not achieving the commitment of the different countries to them. This background determined the script for the Climate Summit in Paris 2015, one needing to project the image of total success or else the individual credibility of the participating states and the collective credibility of the United Nations, UNEP, WMO, IPCC, etc., would be undermined.
The Paris Summit concluded as expected, despite having been the first militarized summit in history under the state of emergency which allowed for a brutal repression of the environmental activists. The overwhelming images of victory of the world leaders were shown over and over in the television screens of the world. After the fireworks, however, the storyline clashed head-on with the force or the facts: CO2 emissions not only had not been reduced in all those years of barren negotiations, but they had increased, without registering any rise in global temperatures. In spite of that, geoengineering was the covert story in the Paris Climate Agreements that governments had signed. But media did not write one single line on it.
The Declaration by the United Nations of the Universal Human Rights on 10 December 1948 in Paris was a milestone in its incipient history. Ironically on 12 December 2015 in Paris, 67 years later, the same institution revoked, de facto, its most sacred foundational charter allowing for the eradication of Human Rights from the Agreements of the Paris Climate Treaty to be signed by all governments. This is a revealing fact as to who really runs the United Nations and as to what their real intentions are. The same can be said in regards to our own respective countries. How is it possible, in face of such moral institutional degeneration, that any government pretending to represent its citizens could have even considered signing that Treaty? However they have. So the message to global citizens is clear enough. Whatever is in the globalist agenda, geoengineering included, is not compatible with human rights, much less with the rights of nature. Yet, they will have the courage to sell us with glossy titles that mankind is at the centre of their sinister agendas. The fact of having eradicated the human rights from the Paris Climate Agreement is enough to revoke not only the Paris Treaty but also the legitimacy of the United Nations to represent and defend humanity and the common good. In addition, the legal mandate of all political representatives that have signed the Paris Treaty must also be revoked, being cause of non-eligibility in future elections.
Trump Questions Climate Change and Abandons the Paris Agreements
The failure of more than 30 years of costly international meetings was even more evident when the new president of the United States, Donald Trump, a climate change sceptic, abandoned in late 2017 the agreements signed by President Obama, plunging the movement of global climate change – institutions, governments, agencies and environmental associations – into a deep shock. That movement only seemed to find consolation in the systematic disqualification of the American leader instead of in self-criticism. Standing at these existential crossroads, the question is not who will now pay the share of the United States, or who will occupy the vacant leadership, the question should revolve around the grounds for their reasons. After all, we are responsible for playing this game with the dice loaded against us from the moment we deliberately replaced science for scientific consensus, a fact which has led many renowned scientists to state that global warming/climate change is the greatest scientific fraud in history.
In this situation the European Union is called on to be the new locomotive of climate change. The time for truth in geoengineering issues has come for this institution, accustomed to hiding behind the EU. That is the good news. The bad news is that emulating Trump and as geoengineering is essentially a military science, Europe will develop the military sector in detriment of everything else. A European armed force will be built in short term which will demand investments of 5.5 billion per year from member states, pushing forward the public debt which, in exchange, will not be submitted to deficit rules.
Geoengineering, a Kafkian Scheme that Does Not Tackle the CO2 Problem
We will approach this in steps. The apparent impotence of an all-powerful institution such as the United Nations in achieving essential environmental objectives to protect life on the planet, such as the reduction of greenhouse gases resulting from the combustion of fossil fuels, without changing a clearly homicidal development model, is outlined here. The failure of these objectives, attributed to the lack of consensus on the part of the politicians of the world on such a dire issue for humanity as climate change, would oblige this institution to propose measures that would exclusively benefit the energy industries responsible for the damage, given that the proposed technological solution, geoengineering or climate manipulation would allow, by means of Solar Radiation Management technologies, lowering the temperature of the planet without having to put limits on the use of those fossil energies that supposedly generate its warming.
Image below: Francisco José de Goya y Lucientes – The sleep of reason produces monsters (No. 43), from Los Caprichos – Google Art Project (Source: Public Domain)
This scheme can only be described as Kafkian. The image that appears before the eyes of an astonished society seems to be taken from the painting Goya’s Dreams. Can all this be real? Could we even imagine that it was not? Do we live in a parallel reality? Are the United Nations’ efforts to protect the planet genuine? Can such institution, a nation of nations, maintain its credibility and continue as if nothing had happened after such a cluster of failures? Or worse yet, has this organization any moral legitimacy to defend the planet after its covert solution in the Paris Agreement of resorting to geoengineering in order to solve a problem created on demand? Could there possibly be any more irresponsibility and dereliction of duty on the part of the politicians of the world in the face of such a precarious juncture? Who then governs the ship of our states and who dictates the policies under which we suffer? Is there any alternative for society to having to choose between dying of heat, hunger, drowning or poisoning? Where are the responsible scientists of the world, teachers, the media, the activists of life and ecology? Where are our institutions, our armies, prosecutors, judges and doctors standing up undaunted to history’s greatest organized crime against humanity? Where are the religions of the world? Where are we, as human beings, consumers of products of the system, lies included, and voters of the politicians that make up those governments that neither defend us nor represent us? Where has the collective moral conscience of the human race and its instinct for survival gone? Why do we pull away so quickly from the truth to take refuge in the thoughtlessness of technological slavery, yielding at each step of unrecoverable freedoms and rights won with blood through the ages? Answering some of these questions is the purpose of the following pages.
Determinants and Euphemisms for Climate Summit Agreements
Perhaps to understand as a society the folly of a situation that seems implausible to us, like the failure of climate summits after decades of negotiation, or the inability of our politicians to reach agreements on issues apparently as vital as climate change – that they have classified at the level of national security — we should know two fundamental things. The first one is that statutorily the agreements of the summits cannot in any case go against the interest of the parties. And the second one is that agreements are not binding. The interests of the parties are economic, financial and geopolitical. Hence their calculations do not match over the decades, specially since those interests change with each tactical move in the chessboard of globalisation. It is also convenient to clarify the euphemism, “the interests of the parties” which, as one might expect, does not refer to all the parties equally, but to the Parties whose economies are hegemonic in the world, since the other can say little being in the belly of the big fish.
Among those hegemonic economies we find that of the United States whose first industry is war, China, the European Union, Russia, Saudi Arabia or Japan. Little is known too about the Treaty of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 1992, prohibiting that any future treaties on climate change affect the international commerce. Needless to say that this prohibition hinders any effective political action to fight climate change. So, the treaties put out by the United Nations in the name of the common good, deliberately drive political leaders to a dead-end road, justifying the need for its Plan B, the application of geoengineering.
Geoengineering: The Keystone of the Military Industrial Complex
In the necessary exercise of separating the wheat from the chaff in this mess of hidden agendas, disguised as “common good”, we highlight the keywords which illustrate the two sides of the same coin: environmental protection, sustainable development, future generations, fossil fuels, global warming, climate change, scientific consensus, interest of the parties, climate emergency, geoengineering, national security, military issue and military spending.
From a bird’s eye view, we perceive a complex architecture which, starting from the general interest, progressively acquires a firm military character with geoengineering as the keystone. It is as if all the failures of reducing CO2 emissions in each negotiation of the different climate summits have been tactical failures to arrive at geoengineering as an ”Arc de Triomphe” through which the military sector enters joyfully.
It is a vicious circle in which the beginning and the end are superimposed. But the thread of civil and military interests in this plot is clear. It is what President Eisenhower called the powerful military industrial complex from whose influence the sovereignty of parliamentary decisions had to be protected. We will therefore focus on analysing this keystone and attempt to connect the dots.
The ENMOD Convention of the United Nations Opens the Door to Geoengineering
Geoengineering is defined as the deliberate manipulation of climate to alleviate man-made global warming. The same pattern of the atomic bomb is repeated here. The civilian applications of the nuclear weapon with the beautiful name of “Atoms for Peace”, would give birth to a nuclear industry where the waste was used to make bombs. Geoengineering is the civilian application of such a weapon of mass destruction, used in Project Popeye during the Vietnam War from 1965 to 1973, although it was denied in its day by the Secretary of Defence. Consequently, and at the request of the USSR, the United Nations adopted the ENMOD Convention in 1977 that bans weapons of environmental manipulation for war or hostile purposes, deliberately leaving the door open to the use of these technologies for civil purposes, i.e. geoengineering.
Such is the case that the Nagoya Convention on Biological Diversity in 2010 states the need for a moratorium on geoengineering, claiming the precautionary principle. This moratorium is basically a dead letter as experiments in a “closed environment” would be justified for scientific purposes. Logic tells us that no country whose first national industry was war would ignore the opportunity to enhance a technology of environmental and climatic warfare that would give it decisive advantages over its enemies on the battlefield. Therefore, in face of a legal ban on the use of such a weapon for military purposes, the tactical solutions of turning the sock inside out was imposed. The answer was to create a global problem that demanded a global political solution and above all a technological one, knowing well which country would take the lead.
The problem would be that of global warming linked to CO2 whose solution, championed by the United Nations and aimed at its reduction, known as Plan A would end in a political failure that would justify the technological solution of Plan B: Geoengineering. In fact, it is bad enough to have a Plan A because that made it presage a Plan B, but the times match. The United States took four years to sign the ENMOD Convention and it seems that the biologists who drafted it went directly to work on issues of global warming, just at a time when scientific vision of an upcoming mini ice age prevailed, as we can read in press articles published at the time. The creation itself of the IPCC in 1988 was not neutral in intent. Its objectives, aimed at consolidating the theory of global warming around a scientific consensus, would leave in evidence a political praxis to the detriment of a scientific one since science is not consensus nor is consensus science. The purging of scientists who were sceptics of global warming, who did not support the conflation of this consensus with science within the IPCC, illustrates the gap within science serving interests that have little to do with the truth.
Climate Scientists, Military Taboo and Geoengineering
How are we to understand this unhealthy distortion in the search for truth, which is what science is all about, made by climate scientists, regardless of whether they were sceptical or believers in global warming? How is it possible that neither camp had taken into consideration, in the framework of their research, the impact on climate of more than 60 years of civil and military programs of manipulation of weather and climate? How can it be that they have not considered in that equation over 2,000 nuclear explosions in the atmosphere? How on earth can they deny ongoing clandestine geoengineering?
It is evident that both the global warming scientists and the detractors preferred to avoid the untouchable military sector and its war activities to ensure the financing of its present and future research. This is inexcusable because if we were to identify a single predator of the planet, either in times of peace or in times of war, which it could never be granted the benefit of the doubt, that is the military sector. One might wonder where then science was but it would be a rhetorical question. Science gave up on its mission to serve light and life since World War I, moving on to the dark side of the massive destruction caused by chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and environmental weapons in the hands of the military sector and its uncontrollable craving for domination which, not content with having its own death scientists on the payroll, has deeply contaminated civil and university scientific research completely militarizing them with the help of an infallible method: the fragmentation of knowledge that would impede an integrated and global vision.
In this militaristic perspective, we can quote here the statement made in 2012 by the aerospace and defence advisor Matt Andersson, ex-director of Booz Allen Hamilton, one of the Pentagon’s largest military contractors.
Few in the civil sector fully understand that geoengineering is primarily a military science and has nothing to do with either cooling the planet or lowering carbon emissions. While seemingly fantastical, weather has been weaponized. At least four countries – the US, Russia, China and Israel – possess the technology and organization to regularly alter weather and geologic events for various military and black operations, which are tied to secondary objectives, including demographic, energy and agricultural resource management.
Indeed, warfare now includes the technological ability to induce, enhance or direct cyclonic events, earthquakes, drought and flooding, including the use of polymerized aerosol viral agents and radioactive particulates carried through global weather systems (emphasis mine). Various themes in public debate, including global warming, have unfortunately been subsumed into much larger military and commercial objectives that have nothing to do with broad public environmental concerns. These include the gradual warming of polar regions to facilitate naval navigation and resource extraction.
Time gave right to Matt Andersson one year later. China deployed its first freight ship through the Artic in 2013 and opened the Artic Route to Europe in September 2018. In June 2019 the Observer writes: Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State, praises climate change in the Artic as “New Opportunities for Trade”. Presently the US, Russia, Canada, Denmark and Norway are asserting rights to shipping lanes, informs the Wall Street Journal.
In tune with Matt Andersson, Professor Michel Chossudovsky states that:
The Pentagon’s global military design is one of world conquest. The military deployment of US-NATO forces is occurring in several regions of the world simultaneously.
On his part, Jacob Darwin Hamblin in his book, Arming Mother Nature (2013) argues that military planning for World War III created the catastrophic environmentalism: The idea that human activity might cause global natural disasters… searching for ways to harness natural processes to kill millions of people. In this perspective he describes how NATO scientists found prospects for environmental warfare and alteration of world climate since 1962. The historical manifestations of the interest in manipulating the climate for reasons of military dominations have been abundant since President Eisenhower said in 1954 that the first country that controlled the climate would dominate the world. In that year, his Advisory Committee on Climate Control explicitly recognized the military potential of climate modification, warning in its report that it could become a more important weapon than the atomic bomb. President Johnson, obsessed with winning the space race, affirmed:
“From space we will manage to control the Earth’s climate, to cause floods and droughts, to reverse the direction of marine currents and increase sea levels, to change the rotation of the Gulf Stream, and to make the temperate climates frigid”.
Under his orders were carried out Operations Gromet I in Bihar, India, Popeye in Vietnam, and Gromet II in the Philippines between 1965 and 1972. The statement of Gordon MacDonald, associate director of the Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics at the University of California, member of President Johnson’s Science Advisory Committee, are of particular interest:
Among future means of obtaining national objectives by force, one possibility hinges on man’s ability to control and manipulate the environment of his planet. When achieved, this power over his environment will provide man with a new force capable of doing great and indiscriminate damage. Our present primitive understanding of deliberate environmental change makes it difficult to imagine a world in which geophysical warfare is practiced. Such a world might be one in which nuclear weapons were effectively banned and the weapons of mass destruction were those of environmental catastrophe. Alternatively, I can envisage a world of nuclear stability resulting from parity in such weapons, rendered unstable by the development by one nation of an advanced technology capable of modifying the Earth’s environment. Or geophysical weapons may be part of each nation’s armory. As I will argue, these weapons are peculiarly suited for covert or secret wars.
However, it is the report elaborated by some military staff for the United States Air Force (USAF) published in 1996 with the title, Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025, that tracks the common thread running through several decades. This report not only makes explicit the objective of controlling the climate for military reasons of dominion but also the technology and the timeline to achieve it. Here are some paragraphs to explain the issue:
In the broadest sense, weather-modification can be divided into two major categories: suppression and intensification of weather patterns. In extreme cases, it might involve the creation of completely new weather patterns, attenuation or control of severe storms, or even alteration of global climate on a far-reaching and/or long-lasting scale.[page 5,6] The number of specific intervention methodologies is limited only by the imagination, but with few exceptions they involve infusing either energy or chemicals into the meteorological process in the right way, at the right place and time. The intervention could be designed to modify the weather in a number of ways, such as influencing clouds and precipitation, storm intensity, climate, space, or fog. [Beginning Chapter IV] Weather-modification technologies might involve techniques that would increase latent heat release in the atmosphere, provide additional water vapor for cloud cell development, and provide additional surface and lower atmospheric heating to increase atmospheric instability (page 19).
One of the most documented sections of this report is that which concerns the modification and control of the ionosphere and the near space environment in order to increase communications, detection and navigation capacity, as this is crucial for the battle space domain.
The second paragraph on page 21 reads:
[A number of methods have been explored or proposed to modify the ionosphere, including injection of chemical vapors and heating or charging via electromagnetic radiation or particle beams (such as ions, neutral particles, x-rays, MeV particles, and energetic electrons).27 It is important to note that many techniques to modify the upper atmosphere have been successfully demonstrated experimentally. Ground based modification techniques employed by the FSU include vertical HF heating, oblique HF heating, microwave heating, and magnetospheric modification.28 Significant military applications of such operations include low frequency (LF) communication production, HF ducted communications, and creation of an artificial ionosphere].
There is not in this report a single reason linked to the use of this technology to mitigate global warming even though that was one of the key issues on the international political agenda. This report also makes explicit that climate control will be part of the foreign policy of the United States and will be imposed on the world through instruments such as bilateral agreements or initiatives within the frame of the United Nations and NATO.
As seen so far, climate is instrumental for military ends of expansion and dominion but is equally instrumental for global corporate power out of the same reasons. The question as to who serves whom is useless here. They are two interlocked corporate worlds pursuing the same goal, the two sides of the same coin. One wouldn’t exist without the other. The armed forces, in theory, are there to defend the nations’ ultimate corporate interests, so we will find them at the same time in the same places. Therefore, it is imperative to spot the articulation of this tandem in the political, civil and military arena at the international level, which is their real agenda and what will be the impact of this tandem’s greed for money and power on the environment and life of human and no human beings.
The Climate Thread and the World Government
The path to search the aforementioned articulation starts at a dark labyrinth with literally thousands of interrelated public and private entities, globalists think tanks, networks, summits, agendas, conventions, programs, projects, forums, conferences, agreements, protocols, etc., that make the individuation task almost impossible. One could think that this mess is made express to impede any understanding of the ongoing insanity. For the purpose of this article, under the assumption that all roads led to Rome, we will follow the omnipresent climate thread. The climate being the key instrument to control world resources and achieve the old globalist dream of a world government; assured, in principle, by the United Nations. A world government with one economic and monetary system, one religion and one military power — thought to be NATO. Among the thousands of globalist think tanks at sight, the Club of Rome created in 1968 by David Rockefeller and a well-known Italian industrialist, Aurelio Peccei, deserves special mention because it became an environmental and foreign policy consultant of the first order in the United Nations since its very onset.
The Club of Rome, born with the specific aim of promoting a world government, symbolizes, like none other, the aforementioned articulation – political, civil and military, within the frame of NATO, United Nations, and other significant players. In fact, Aurelio Peccei, greatly influenced by his friend Zbigniew Brzezinski’s prophetic vision for a “Technetronic Era” — a technocratic dictatorship in a world without national sovereignties led by the US, in his book The Chasm Ahead published in 1969, affirms that the Atlantic Alliance must rule the policy of the world if chaos is to be avoided. What a daring statement! Was the Club of Rome created by NATO to serve its military goals of full spectrum dominance from the springboard of the United Nations under the guise of “civil defense programs” using key global environmental and foreign policy issues such as the global warming deception and the geoengineering technological answer “to save the world”?
The answer to this question is found in the relevant research by Criton Zoakos and Mark Burdman, published in EIR May 20, 1980. Among the founders of the Club of Rome we find NATO officials, representatives of the National Security Council of the United States and of the Committee of Foreign Relations.
“Aurelio Peccei, had been chairman of the Economic Committee of the Atlantic Institute, the main think tank of NATO; Alexander King, the co-founder, Director General of Scientific Affairs of the OECD; Harlan Cleveland, of the Aspen Institute, Ambassador to NATO; Senator Claiborne Pell, former Ambassador to NATO; S. George McGhee, former Ambassador to NATO; Joseph Slate, the director of the Aspen Institute, member of the U.S. delegation to NATO; William Watts, director of Potomac Associates, a NATO think tank, and a director of the Atlantic Council; Donald Lesh, an associate of Potomac Associates and a staff member of Henry Kissinger’s National Security Council; Walter J. Levy, a director of the Atlantic Council member of the Bilderberg Society, and the Council on Foreign Relations; a theoretical advocate of the doctrine of extending NATO into the Third World; Sol Linowitz, the Xerox magnate with extensive history of involvement in NATO.”
In this document we can also note that the idea of disguising military means through “civil defense programs”, which include large scale psychological manipulation of populations, is not new for NATO. Such strategy was developed in the mid-60s by the Tavistock Institute, the Stanford Research Institute, the Institute for Social Relations and other centers of applied social psychiatry, all of which are in the Board of Directors of the Club of Rome.
Resuming, a one world government incarnated by the United Nations will guarantee, under the “guidance” of NATO, the needed control of world resources to assure corporate expansion and profits. The nature of this world government is one of technological dictatorship which will apparently eliminate de facto all national sovereignties. In this new frame colonialism would not be a criminal tag anymore. What a convenient formula for a falling empire! The famous quote of James Warburg, Rothschild Banking Agent and advisor to Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1950, finds its place here: We shall have a world government, whether or not you like it … by conquest or consent. However it is Machiavelli who marks the choice: “Never attempt to win by force what can be won by deception.” This is when climate, an essential global common, becomes a definite global threat in the hands of a climate cartel through fake science and political consensus blaming man-made CO2 of unprecedented global warming. The official narrative paints a world so much in peril as to declare climate a global national security issue requiring a global solution. This solution in turn requires the use of a military technology and knowhow that transcends national sovereignties. Geoengineering, a military weapon, is presented under the guise of a “civil defence” program to save the world, entailing large scale psychological manipulation of world populations. In reality, geoengineering will be a key factor in the programmed manipulation providing the population the irrefutable proof of climate chaos due to climate change.
Climate deception is all about full spectrum dominance: space, air, water, soil, and nature, all living things included. It is all about greed for power and money with the end result to enslave mankind forever through mind control technologies. Climate deception is all about mass manipulation and social engineering for consent. With all the communication and marketing means at hand, they will sell us that dominance under glossy wrapping and pleasant branding: Green New Deal, New Climate Economy, Natural Capital, or New Deal for Nature. Climate deception is a clear operation for the final takeover of the UN by the globalist elite with a very well scheduled programing and timeline agenda written from 1884 by the Fabian Society which greatly influenced the thinking of the political class in England and other countries up to the present day.
This article would not be complete if it did not reason in terms of facts the above statements and if it did not expose the main lines of that old sinister agenda which evolves by the day. For a better comprehension of the whole scenario, we will single out the names and deeds of some of the actors that made it advance till now. After all, behind the policies and programs that determine our lives for the better or worse there are always people, and we must know who they are to link the dots.
Linking the Dots
The very notion of a world government implies the involvement of a world elite. And the Club of Rome describes itself as a group of world citizens who share the same feeling for the future of humanity. It is made up of industrialists, ex-heads of state, bureaucrats of the United Nations, senior politicians, scientists, economists, prominent businessmen, academics, globalists, founders of the most important environmental groups, etc., from all over the world. Its members include Al Gore, Javier Solana, Maurice Strong, Mijail Gorbachov, Diego Hidalgo, Anne Ehrlich, David Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger, Bill Clinton, Bill Gates, Jimmy Carter, Ted Turner, Georges Soros, Tony Blair, The Dalai Lama, Timothy Wirth, Gro Harlem Brundtland, Mary Robinson, Sir Crispin Tickell, Kim Campbell, Wangari Maathai, Petre Roman, Richard Lagos, David Suzuki … and numerous other influential figures that shape globalist politics.
Of all these figures Maurice Strong, father of the “sustainable” euphemism, played the essential role of creating the international legal frame in the environmental and foreign policy arena that would lead to the geoengineering proposals agreed to in the Paris Climate Summit by participant countries. In other words, he took the task of piloting the needed global policies towards a world government for global resources control through environmental activism, promoting the global warming scam in the United Nations and its technological fix. Opening thus the main door to NATO’s Civil Defense Programs, with the rescue remedy of geoengineering to “palliate” atmospheric warming.
All those environmental and foreign policies started its way in the mid-70s, but they really gained momentum after the fall of the “Iron Curtain.” The end of the Cold War in 1989 left the United States without clear enemies and NATO without a real purpose. This situation menaced the first ranking industry of war in the US bringing down the American economy, so a quick solution was deemed. But on what grounds will the government allocate new billions of public money to military budget in the face of no enemies to fight against? The creative answer canvased a global enemy that would pose a global national security threat and thus a global high tech answer. Climate warming became a first ranking governmental concern for the Obama Administration well beyond war on terrorism. To set example, before the Paris Summit, at a moment where capitalism was publicly acknowledged to be in a free fall, the US declared global warming a national security threat to justify the geoengineering proposal already planned to be approved in the Paris Summit. They had long years to prepare the scenario for irrefutable proofs, that of the firefighter arsonist.
NATO and the US had solid war technology with long proven capacity to alter weather and the environment in large scale operations. But as the US had signed the ENMOD Treaty in the early 1980s which banned environmental modification activities for war or hostile purposes, not for civil uses, all they needed was to create the conditions of climate chaos that the climate cartel within the UN, headed by Maurice Strong, would determine to be caused by anthropogenic CO2, in order to present the solution of geoengineering under the guise of a civil defense program to be adopted by most countries through United Nations policies. Finally, the old military dream came true. In the name of a common good, climate, they will get hold of all nations’ sovereignty! This maneuver would allow them to continue their military agenda of racketeering world resources, laundering their bad image by bringing a solution to a problem they had caused in the first place, imposing in the process a technology to control the climatic system, the food markets, the CO2 markets, etc. In order to succeed this complex strategy they needed to co-opt the check and balance instruments of civil society: educational organisms and universities, media, churches, and NGOs through extensive funding. Neutralizing in the process real grassroots movements with the creation of a corporate non-profit industrial complex from the Rio Earth Summit onwards.
It is worth noticing that the Roman Church as one of the most important world’s religions has been in favor of a world government since the Second Vatican Council in 1959. The latest endorsements came from Benedict XVI and Francis I in the speech given to the General Assembly of the United Nations on September 25, 2015. His recent Encyclical “Laudato Si ” published on June 18, 2015, Articles 23 and 24, constitute a faithful copy and paste of the official doctrine on climate change. In addition in the Pontifical Academy of Science, we find sitting pro-geoengineering scientists as Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Veerabhadran Ramanathan and Paul J. Crutzen.
On his part, the Dalai Lama, representing one of the world’s largest faith, is aware of the fact that for some people the message from religious leaders can be more effective. We find useful to quote the post of a certain Josh Horton who describes the intervention of the Dalai Lama at a conference on ethics and the environment held at MIT on October 12, 2012, where he says the Dalai Lama expressed openness toward geoengineering. “In the course of a panel discussion, a faculty member attacked climate engineering as poorly understood, risky, and potentially ineffective. In response, the Dalai Lama warned against dismissing the technology prematurely, declaring “It is our responsibility to look.” And Mr. Horton adds: one can only hope that such open-mindedness will inspire others to approach geoengineering with a greater degree of receptivity. That post can only be signed by a geoengineer. And the irresponsible answer on the part of the Dalai Lama, after having admitted his ignorance on the subject, gives geoengineers a moral legitimation to proceed with their insanity. In fact after checking his name, Mr. Josh Horton happens to be research director for geoengineering projects in Harvard with David Keith.
This cannot be called co-optation. Something is fundamentally wrong with the ethics and moral of these religious leaders in regards to geoengineering and world government. And if we get this kind of answers from those who derive their moral authority from the genesis of their religious foundations as stewardships of God’s master creation, the Earth, what can we expect from the rest of the social building actors?
The following pages will offer a totally different picture of global warming than the one offered by the modern environmental movement fostered by the Rio Earth Summit, but also by the international institutions, globalist organizations and individuals like Maurice Strong put in place to forward it. If the IPCC had been the first step towards the institutionalization of geoengineering, the Rio Earth Summit represented the spring board for its globalization, legislation and social consent building.
But, Who Was Maurice Strong?
The best biographical sketch of Maurice Strong was written by Elaine Dewar in her excellent book, Cloak of Green, — The Links Between Key Environmental Groups, Government, & Big Business — strong, a school dropout, was promoted from a thread-bare existence during the Depression on the Canadian prairie, to become one of the leaders of the drive for globalized eco-fascism.
In order to understand prior and ulterior reference to Maurice Strong as one of the key makers of the international environmental policies dealing with climate change, it appears necessary to name the most relevant institutions where he held power and see how they continue to follow the agenda marked three decades ago, shaping today’s policies and programs including geoengineering.
Patronized by Edmund Rothschild plus David Rockefeller, and under the intellectual guidance of Gro Harlem Brundtland, ex-Prime Minister of Norway, Maurice Strong came to be known with the successful organization of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, Stockholm 1972, as Secretary General where he warned about incipient global warming, the polluted oceans, the devastation of forests, and the population time bomb….. In 1972, E. Rothschild created the United Nations Committee on Environment and Development (UNCED) and Maurice Strong created the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). From this platform, in collaboration with the World Meteorological Association, he promoted the creation of the IPCC in 1988, a political climate cartel with political aims in order to legitimize through fake science the climate warming/climate change theory and its technological fix. He was Secretary General of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development known as the Rio Earth Summit, Undersecretary General of the United Nations in the days of an Oil-for-Food scandal, main architect of the Kyoto Protocol and of the Global Agenda 21 in collaboration with Al Gore, representative of the UN Secretary General in the Kyoto Summit 1997. Among its endless affiliations, Maurice Strong was also Senior Advisor to World Bank President; founding director and President of the World Economic Forum (WEF), Chairman of the World Resources Institute (WRI), director of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WCBSD), council member of International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and Vice-president of World Wildlife Fund (WWF). All these institutions conform the core of the The Green New Deal, Natural Capital, the New Climate Economy, the New Deal for Nature, etc., all euphemisms to name the fourth industrial revolution which requires the monetization of nature, including the climate, through non-profit industrial complex.
Just for the records, Al Gore and Strong, the two global gurus of the climate warming hoax, are directly involved in the only cap-and-trade market present in the US, with the creation in 2003 of the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), which represents a $3 trillion annual market. The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and the World Resources Institute (WRI) are also members of the CCX. Incidentally, as FOX News story by Ed Barnes told: “While on the board of a Chicago-based charity, Barack Obama helped fund a carbon trading exchange that will likely play a critical role in the cap-and-trade carbon reduction program he is now trying to push through Congress as president.” Business is business.
The First Global Revolution and the Rio Summit
Since its creation up to 2017, the Malthusian Globalist Club of Rome has published 43 reports. From the first one: The Limits to Growth, published in 1972, where they warned about the danger posed by overpopulation, to the last one, Population and the Destruction of the Planet, nothing has changed in their focus. Mankind is guilty of its own existence. In the report published in 1991, “The First Global Revolution” by Alexander King, the Club shows its low moral standards, justifying the ends at any cost. In that report we can read phrases like:
“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill,” the book states. “All these dangers are caused by human intervention” and thus the “real enemy, then, is humanity itself.” It does not matter if this common enemy is “a real one or…one invented for the purpose.” In the process of struggling against this implacable enemy, democracy “will be made to seem responsible for the lagging economy, the scarcity and uncertainties. The very concept of democracy could then be brought into question and allow for the seizure of power”.
The long applied rule of capitalism to socialize losses and be rescued by public funds, is applied here by the Club of Rome, to socialize the blame on humanity as means to justify extreme implicit measures and induce compliance out of guilt. It is worth noticing that this Club was defending the scientific consensus of global cooling back in the 1970s.
All in all, the Club of Rome seems not to be oblivious to the corruption of science practiced by some climate scientists, by the IPCC, by the National Academies of Sciences and the national meteorological agencies, to adapt the climatological data to its global agenda. Nor is this organization oblivious to the solution of geoengineering – and of its consequences – proposed by the IPCC to mitigate the supposed global warming in its Fourth and Fifth Reports, although the Swedish meteorologist, Bert Bolin, first chair of the IPCC, warned in 2007:
Geoengineering is not a viable solution because it is illusory to think that all possible secondary impacts can be foreseen. (J. Fleming 2012).
With the publication of the First Global Revolution, the Mankind at the Turning Point and RIO: Reshaping the International Order, the Club of Rome had prepared the advancement of the globalist agenda, setting the final stage for the Rio Earth Summit. As Elaine Dewar writes in her book Cloak of Green: “The Rio Summit would take long steps towards a world in which nation states have withered away in favour of supranational and global institutions…. Advertised as the World’s Greatest Summit, Rio was publicly described as a global negotiation to reconcile the need for environmental protection with the need for economic growth. The cognoscenti understood that there were other deeper goals. These involved the shift of national regulatory powers to vast regional authorities; the opening of all remaining closed national economies to multinational interests; the strengthening of decision making structures far above and far below the grasp of newly minted national democracies; and, above all, the integration of the Soviet and Chinese … into the global market system.” In reference to the interview made to Maurice Strong, she adds: As our interview makes clear, Strong knew that the Rio Summit was aimed to destroy the sovereign nation-state republic. And, he relied heavily on his pal, Al Gore, to convince the United States government to participate at the heads-of-state level.
The Black History of the Rio’s Green Climate Fund for “Sustainable Development”
Yes, the Rio Earth Summit was all about corporate profits under the guise of climate and sustainability. One of the examples is the apparition of a Green Climate Fund that will be managing $100 billion yearly as of 2020, offering “help” (credit) to countries for adapting to climate change, specially to less developed ones. This fund has changed the name twice according to the circumstances, as climate becomes the real issue of the globalist agenda. Its original name was The World Conservation Bank and was created in the frame of the 4th World Wilderness Conference in 1987 by Edmund Rothschild. The following information is offered by a firsthand witness, George Washington Hunt.
We retain important exposing its obscure history because it constitutes an early reference in the monetization of nature and land grabbing which will set the path for the New Deal for Nature three decades later. In fact, this bank that aimed at having the power to make the world’s dollar had no capital. The capital resulted by moving money to the assets coming from the World Wilderness like the Endowment of Wilderness Lands from the inventory put together by the Sierra Club, which amounted to 34% of the land surface.
This bank, under the umbrella of the World Bank, also monetized debt bringing to the asset section the debt of Third World Countries for refinancing: $1.6 trillion. The name was then changed to Global Environmental Facility (GEF), with the purpose to lend money to the poorest countries, taking wilderness areas with natural mineral riches as a security. It worked with the IMF issuing and promoting the Special Drawing Rights (SDR) notes. Finally, indebted countries that could not pay loans to GEF must give up parts of its territory… If land cannot be offered as collateral, the country must starve like Haiti. Brazil’s collaterals as security for loans, for example, is the Amazon.
The Rothschild’s approach to grab 30% of the world’s land, generating food crisis and global land grab with the consent of our governments and central banks is the first carbon copy to the actual New Deal for Nature in which the Sierra Club is now invested. In 1992 the “Facility” became part of the United Nations System, thanks to Maurice Strong, and was branded as Green Climate Fund (GCF). Now over 179 countries seat in the council of the bank and pay for it. As it has been said earlier, other than being the financial mechanism for the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (UNCBD) and for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), this bank constitutes the largest funding tool in the world, working with IMF, World Bank, BIS, all international institutions, NGOs and the Private Sector. The same entities patronizing all COPs, the same actors with the same objectives we will find in the architecture of the New Deal for Nature by the World Resources Institute and the World Wild Found, both members of the Chicago Climate Exchange.
The Rio Earth Summit: A Checkmate to Genuine Environmental Activism
The Rio Earth Summit held the highest expectations for the hundreds of participant environmental activists and NGOs. However much to their disappointment the corporate sector beat them on their own grounds having adopted the Business Charter for Sustainable Development that merged ecology/economy presented by the Business Council for Sustainable Development (BCSD) created in 1990 by Swiss industrialist Stephan Schmidheiny — a major investor in asbestos industry — upon request of Maurice Strong. The Charter, by the way, was non-binding, but the “Green Economy” made its entrance through the main door. In this context, the famous Rio Earth Summit represents, by design, the destruction of the genuine international environmental movement shown in the Stockholm Summit 1972, in favor of a corporate takeover. The all-time environmental activists were practically left with the bad choice of compliance or extinction. Hooked in the official CO2 schemes they lost perspective and became mere decorative pawns in the hands of the new green industrial non-profit complex created by corporations themselves aiming at fabricating social consent for the horrors to come in the name of nature’s protection.
Group photo of world leaders meeting at the ‘Earth Summit’ in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 13 June 1992. UN Photo/Michos Tzovaras
Elaine Dewar, the critical reference with the NGOs’ role in the Rio Earth Summit, underlines in her awarded book — Cloak of Green — the links between key environmental groups, businesses and governments, how these groups called non-governmental and pretended enemies of corporations, end up receiving funding from both, asking all the pertinent questions. Even if those questions focus on Canada, they are valid to this day and can be applied to the rest of us.
Why are some environmental groups using misleading information in their fundraising efforts?
Why are some environmental groups in Canada and the US compromising their independence by accepting funds from government and big business – and putting representatives of their interests on their boards?
Why is the Canadian government channeling funds to foreign charities that play an active role in politics in their home countries?
Why is the Canadian government trying to influence the agendas of foreign environmental groups?
In 1995, the BCSD merged with the World Industry Council for the Environment (WICE) and became the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). Actually this powerful lobby congregates almost 200 forward-thinking global companies committed to advance the sustainability agenda… However, according to Sander van Bennekom of the Netherlands Committee for International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), “BCSD is more a philosophy than a work program… as the ambitious goals to move towards zero pollution emissions and redirecting product development to meet social needs, including those of the poor, are not however, translated into concrete activities and responsibilities for the business sector.” The WBCSD also relies strongly on close partnerships with governments, the UN development and environment programs, the World Bank group and regional development banks, the European Commission, and the World Trade Organization (WTO). The world corporate power embodied by the WBCSD and the global conservatism movement personified by IUCN are the two consortiums that control in last instance the non-profit industrial complex in regards to the climate change/climate emergency movements pushing for a Green New Deal, New Climate Economy, Capital Coalition, and New Deal for Nature.
Lexical Engineering and Indoctrination for Social Consent
The Journalist and Political Science Professor in Brooklyn College, Corey Robin, asserts that fear creates certain propensity in human beings towards an involuntarily indoctrination by the prince in detriment of their own freedom. The globalists know that and in order to advance their globalization agenda for the control of global commons with social “consent” to avoid social unrest, they will display the maximum social engineering efforts. These efforts were supported by the creation of literally thousands of projects and youth movements interlocking with one another and sharing highly qualified CEOs specialized in movement building and behavioral change, drafted from most relevant corporations. However social engineering could not take place without a lexical engineering or the perversion of the language. Klaus Töpfer, a former UN high ranking official explained at the opening of the Climate Engineering Conference held in Berlin, August 2014 that: “thousands of millions of dollars are spent each year in the United Nations and other international bodies to design the lexicon, because he who designs the lexicon controls the topic.” The designers of language perversion work with experts in the field of social and communication sciences: philosophy, psychology, philology, neurology, neuro-linguistic programming, marketing, etc. But in the case of geoengineering, the military sciences have also intervened, completing the picture with techniques of tactics, strategy, logistics, propaganda, information, counter-information, fake identity creation, real identity demolition, or denial, among others. From the Rio Earth Summit onwards, society in general has suffered a daily invasion of new twisted terms with new meanings, imposed by dominant mass media. The perversion of the language has reached unprecedented levels in history, only equivalent to the task of global indoctrination and global deception “science based”, starting at the school to be most effective.
In this perspective, following the Rio Earth Summit, then Vice-President Al Gore assumed the role of “shaping” kids and youngsters to the new earthy conditions. In 1994 he created and launched the Globe Program (Global Learning and Observation to Benefit the Environment) aimed at primary and secondary schools to “educate” children on environmental challenges and stewardship. Globe is based in Washington and receives about $13 million yearly from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Science Foundation, and National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Actually 120 countries participate in it. This program became a Global Weather Project by 1998. In this respect NASA has signed contracts with most countries of the world for over 100 years in regards to climate change. Those contracts have nothing to do with truth or science but they explain the will and need for indoctrinating all generations during at least one century.
Manipulating Indoctrinated Kids – Climate and Green New Deal Marches
Two decades later, time had come for Al Gore to capitalize on the Globe Program and on his film “An Inconvenient Truth”. By 2006 he disposed of literally thousands of indoctrinated youngsters in the four corners of the planet to choose from and make out of the best “shaped Climate Reality Leaders” through his new Climate Reality Project. At the council of this new organization sits James Gustave Speth, founder of the World Resources Institute in 1982, advisor to Climate Mobilizations in 2014, and a key reference in the launching of climate emergency movements to conduct people to an emergency mode since 2018. Products of The Climate Reality Project are youngster Jamie Margolin, founder of “Zero Hour” working later for Hillary Clinton on climate warming issues, or Ingmar Rentzhog, the Swedish entrepreneur who founded the movement “We Don’t Have Time” (partner of the Club of Rome), known also to have launched the Greta Thunberg movement. We wonder if all these manipulated movements who strive for the implementation of agreements under the Paris Treaty know that Human Rights have been taken out of that Treaty. Because simply put that is an essential point they do not have the right to ignore. It is a fact that geoengineering and human rights do not go together.
Much is being written about the climate marches but hardly no information is found about the organizers. That is why we praise here the extenuating work of Cory Morningstar and her team on the subject, upon which we build this section.
On the eve of the Paris Climate Summit the public opinion was being prepared for success long in advance, as it was expected it would happen after the failure of the Copenhagen Summit and the Climate-gate episode. In 2014 participants of all ages marched globally in a festive mood under banners with sharp slogans specially designed to capture emotional adherence. The initiative was called “People’s Climate March” and the organizers were Global Call for Climate Action (GCCA/TckTckTck), Climate Nexus (Rockefeller), 350.org, Avaaz and Greenpeace among others. That year also created the “We mean business”, the most powerful corporations in the world, with the collaboration of Greenpeace, Avaaz and Christina Figueres, UNFCCC’s executive secretary. Ecologists marching hand in hand with corporations. Who said “if you can’t beat them, join them”?
However by 2017 these plural global marches become an exclusive product for youngsters, and were tagged as global “movements”. These perfectly-coordinated movements exhibited ready to consume pressing agendas, around “science-based targets”, wrapped with well-minded aggressive messages. There are hundreds of them but the most media exposed are those quoted above: New Consensus, Climate Nexus (Rockefeller) Data for Progress, New Democrats, 350.org, etc., the newest on the line being “Extinction Rebellion” and “Fridays for Future”. Al Gore’s cloned armies will march in 2018 for a Green New Deal mirroring back to the successful Franklin de Roosevelt’s New Deal in 1930, of infrastructure spending and labor reforms.
This Green New Deal promises a big bold transformation of the economy to tackle the twin crises of inequality and climate change. It would mobilize vast public resources to help us transition from an economy built on exploitation and fossil fuels to one driven by dignified work and clean energy […] “all electricity consumed in America must be generated by renewable sources, including solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, sustainable biomass, and renewable natural gas, as well as clean sources such as nuclear and remaining fossil fuel with carbon capture”. However further down in the report describing this new revolution we read that a Green New Deal is more than just renewable energy or job programs. It is a transition to the “21st century economy” whose bottomline is, as usual, development, growth and high yield markets.
Although the term “Global New Deal for Climate, Energy and Development” had been used by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs back in 2009 to title a study on how to reboot the global economy after the 2008 economic crisis, it did not catch then any public attention. However this document is at the core not only of the Green New Deal narrative, but also of the New Deal for Nature which constitutes by itself a checkmate to planet Earth as is known today.
As journalist Cory Morningstar says: “The Green New Deal is the Trojan Horse for the financialization of nature”. In fact the key tools to assign monetary value to all nature, global in scale, with the goal of creating new markets that exhibited Natural Capital Coalition since 2018 are found in this document drafted by The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity group (TEEB).
Who Was Behind These Climate Marches for the Green New Deal?
The Sierra Club, one of the oldest associations in the US, was the first to announce the need for a Green New Deal and created to this end and ad-hoc movement led by young people: “the Sunrise Movement”. The executive director of the Sunrise Movement is Michael Dorsey, a member of the Club of Rome that, incidentally, is behind the global climate emergency declaration. Soon after, a myriad of organizations joined this motion but the following were directly involved in the elaboration of the foundational document: The Sunrise Movement, New Consensus, Climate Nexus (Rockefeller) and Data for Progress.
Why Al Gore and Company’s Climate Marches Started in 2014
It was not only to create momentum for the Paris Climate Summit. On July 27, 2014, the Financial Times published an article by Mike Scott entitled Blood and Gore: ‘Capitalism is in danger of falling apart’ in which David Blood and Al Gore affirm that investors face a crucial moment and that “The next five to 10 years is the most critical time to accelerate the transition to a low-carbon economy. We think capitalism is in danger of falling apart.”
Just to understand better, David Blood left the asset management direction of Goldman Sachs to set up a new investment business with Al Gore, called Generation Investment Management (GIM), which is the fifth owner of cap-and-trade Chicago Climate Exchange.
On mid-January 2017, founder of World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab, ratified that “Capitalism is in crisis”. Soon, the global movements for climate adopted in 2018 the emergency gear to “lead the public into emergency mode”, casually linking climate to economic growth. This initiative was put forward by the Climate Mobilization movement, created out of the 2014 Climate Marches.
While the Sierra Club maintained the circus in the streets with youngsters claiming for action on climate emergency, on the backstage was busy drawing the path to development and growth with the World Resources Institute (WRI) who set up the New Climate Economy project because Bold action on climate could deliver US$26 trillion in economic benefits between now and 2030. James Gustave Speth, founder of World Resources Institute, the person behind the Climate Mobilization/Climate Emergency is also behind the New Climate Economy Project conveniently bridging the two sides of the river — corporations and non-profit industrial complex.
The New Climate Economy project is all about corporate power and corporate takeover. The fetish term of this new economy to unlock.
But the World Resources Institute had a yet bigger bid. Once the agenda on climate and economic benefits was closed, it endeavoured in the creation of the Natural Capital Coalition project aimed at assuring the monetization of the rest of our natural commons. In fact, they consider nature as stock commodities of which they become self-nominated managers, acting like wholesalers that will make fortunes retailing those commodities as ecosystem services. The business retail packs will be sold to public opinion as the “New Deal for Nature” under the euphemism of “protection”. Those self- appointed managers of nature have attributed an economic value to absolutely every single animate or inanimate thing on Earth. They have even tools to monetize personal values, culture and religious beliefs. It appears that the value of global ecosystem services is estimated at $125 trillion per year. These facts constitute a global bailout given that the cost to revitalize the world economy under the New Fourth Revolution is over $100 trillion to be paid by us.
Geoengineering is the link between the New Climate Economy and the New Deal for Nature, and therefore an essential key to the fourth industrial revolution since this gigantic “House of Cards” rests on the climate warming-climate change deception that needs to constantly fuel proof with the occurrence of ever more weather extreme episodes. On the other hand, since altering atmospheric conditions will alter Earth living conditions, ongoing geoengineering is the perfect excuse to justify the ongoing biotechnology agenda for terraforming the planet as one more business expansion opportunity. Arrived here, among the many questions that need to be answered in this definitely pathological strategy for profit is the following: since every single living and non-living thing, human values, culture and religions on Earth have been attributed an economic value by all these ultra-psychopaths, there is no reason to think that the “human stock”, as Malthusians will say, is not in the covert lot. So, what is the value attributed to us, human beings? Maybe this value differs by nationality, race, sex, age and level of consumption capacity in the cost-benefit chain? These projects on agenda are insane, constitute sheer perversion and need to be stopped. “Because life is not a commodity,” we all need to rally forces with the platform, “No Deal for Nature.”
The Natural Capital Coalition and the New Deal for Nature represent the merger of the massive corporate power conglomerate and the non-profit industrial complex headed by World Wildlife Fund, Nature Conservancy and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development. The New Deal for Nature is expected to be adopted in Beijing in 2020.
For an exhaustive work on the Machiavellian social engineering taking place under the direction of the non-profit industrial complex financed by world’s most powerful corporations, one must read the mastery work done by the independent Canadian journalist, Cory Morningstar, our main reference on the subject.
Geoengineering on the Agenda of the World Economic Forum’s Fourth Industrial Revolution
The course of the agendas developed in the different socioeconomic laboratories of the corporate power merged with the World Economic Forum (WEF) for final compliance and global policy making. The World Economic Forum, based in Geneva, Switzerland, is an NGO founded in 1971, in the frame of a private public partnership, “committed to improving the state of the world by engaging business, political, academic, and other leaders of society to shape global, regional, and industry agendas”. It is a membership-based organization, and membership is made up of the world’s largest corporations.
The World Economic Forum represents the core of the 21st century global economic hegemony, actually leading the global transition to a fourth industrial revolution.
“We are in the early days of a 4th Industrial Revolution, a far-reaching analogue-to-digital shift that will completely transform the $12 trillion global manufacturing industry. It will fundamentally change the way we conceive, design, produce, distribute, and consume nearly everything, with enormous impact to jobs, industries, and economies. It’s a digital industrial revolution spearheaded by the accelerating growth of 3D printing, and its leaders will be defined by their ability to harness the full power of this truly disruptive technology”.
The combined value – to society and industry – of digital transformation across industries could be greater than $100 trillion over the next 10 years. This full potential of “combinatorial” effects of digital technologies will not be achieved without collaboration between business, policy-makers and NGOs. In other words, to save capitalism we need to pour over $100 trillion from tax and pension funds. In addition, businesses and potential high yield markets need that we privatize our natural commons and that on top of it we must pay for ecosystem “protection services” to the very same predators that destroy them. “It’s like putting a fox to guarding a henhouse”. Total insanity!
The question here is how the WEF links this manufacturing Fourth Industrial Revolution with monetizing nature through the New Deal for Nature which is in fact the leitmotif of this Fourth Industrial Revolution given the appealing $125 trillion incentive per year at no cost? It is easy: they add the magic words “Inclusive Bio-Economy” to it and the picture appears to be completed.
The document for the Earth Series published in January 2018 under the title, Harnessing the Fourth Industrial Revolution — Towards an Inclusive Bio-Economy relates that the stress on the Earth’s natural systems caused by human activity has considerably worsened in the 25 years since the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, in a way that the world is currently undergoing a mass extinction. But there is hope, “the transformative change in data and technology capabilities combined with a merging of digital, physical and biological realms will not only transform social networks, scientific research and whole industries, but it will also radically reshape biological and material science innovations. This includes exploring how to harness the Fourth Industrial Revolution as a positive force for managing and conserving life on land better, while mitigating the risks that its developments in science and technology might create.”
The agenda of this Fourth Industrial Revolution is simply frightening. Other than the classical 3D printing advanced materials, robotics, drones, etc., Artificial Intelligence with decision taking capacities, or the Earth Bank of Codes in partnership with the Earth Bio-Genome Project, as an associated work stream of its Fourth Industrial Revolution for the Earth initiative, are particularly worrisome suggesting the control of all life. As worrisome is the focus on biotechnologies terraforming oriented agenda and neuro-technologies’ mind control oriented agenda “that enable humans to influence consciousness and thought decoding of what they are thinking in fine levels of detail through new chemicals that influence brains for enhanced functionality and enable interaction with the world in new ways”.
Unsurprisingly, fitting with artificial intelligence, bio-genome and the biotechnology agenda, we find the Geo-engineering agenda, defined as large-scale, deliberate interventions in the Earth’s natural systems to, for example, shift rainfall patterns, create artificial sunshine or alter biospheres. Clear enough. As in the military report Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025, geoengineering here is not linked to any climate warming or mitigation issue related to CO2. It is presented as a tool to use on demand for their natural capital management and control to guarantee value expressed by trillions… This would explain their stupid slogan of Climate Justice exhibited by their fake environmental and climate emergency movements.
In order to advance the above agenda, the WEF has created the Centre for the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Funnily enough, the first picture of the video presentation is not subliminal publicity, it expressly reminds the Jet Aerosol Dispersal for Climate Engineering.
The final paragraph of this agenda is not a warning, it is direct extortion.
“As humanity faces a mass extinction event on a scale not seen in the last 65 million years, time is of the essence. The Fourth Industrial Revolution holds the keys to fundamentally altering the way people understand and interact with their natural environment. Without rapid, coordinated action, the lifeboat that the Fourth Industrial Revolution presents to pull our planet back from the brink may be missed.”
A rapid coordinated action took place a year later. The World Economic Forum performed a stunning coup d’état in the United Nations with the signature of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on 13 June 2019. That is to say, a Strategic Partnership Framework for Agenda 2030 with no rules, no public scrutiny and no accountability. This Memorandum announces “new multi-stakeholder partnerships” to deliver public goods in the key fields of education, women, financing, climate change and health. In other words multinational corporations will influence over matters of global governance in at least those six core areas which include geoengineering. So, by way of fait accompli, the WEF became the multinational corporation policy making body within the UN in key sectors. In words of Harris Gleckman, former chief of the NY Office of United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, the United Nations “is quietly being turned into a public-private partnership”. In view of the UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, multi-stakeholder groups without any formal intergovernmental oversight are a better governance system than a one-country-one-vote system. Meanwhile the UN global tax cooperation, one old dream of Maurice Strong, to provide for sustainable development goals and services payment, makes its way through. These globalist multi-stakeholders representing a well woven fabric of interrelated corporate and military interests are the ones behind 30 years of UN Climate Summit shows and tactical failures over CO2 emissions reduction to justify geoengineering and all its interrelated globalist agendas.
This closes the circle. A corporate world government for global resource grabbing, from within the United Nations, to convey public authority, legitimacy and consent… without accountability.
Needless to say that the European Union is in the nucleus of these terrifying agendas spying on its citizens and pushing all initiatives US-UN made, European Green Deal included, through its own extensive network of non-profit industrial complex. Few days before the Madrid Climate Summit, to soften its anticipated failure, the EU adopted express resolutions for Climate Emergency through the European Parliament. The political and moral degradation suffered by the European Parliament in the last 20 years is paramount. In fact it has passed from adopting — on January 14, 1999 — a pioneering resolution in regards to the military impact on the environment, through the use not only of nuclear weapons but also of weather weapons and climate manipulation linking NATO, to follow now the globalist tide. On November 29, 2019, in addition to declaring the Climate Emergency, voted in favor of nuclear energy as part of the “climate change solution”. The vote in favor of the MEP Green speaker, Ska Keller, was the cherry on the pie. 50 years of militancy to eradicate nuclear power in the world down the drain in the name of fake climate science! The Council on its part admits that nuclear is now eligible for Green-finance. At least, if any doubts, this fact has the merit to show us who really runs the European institutions. Can the EU be credible on environmental issues when it ranks third in the funding of geoengineering “research”? When it keeps feeding the Energy Charter Treaty, by which corporations have the power to halt the energy transition? When is it planning to create its own army?
Resuming, climate and climate warming deception has been instrumental for the takeover of the United Nations by globalist corporate and military interests pursuing a one world government aiming at global control of resources. Under the guise of Civil Defense Programs, the military industrial complex represented by NATO holds the geoengineering key in charge of producing extreme weather episodes worldwide validating the official narrative of climate change and climate emergency linked to CO2. Meanwhile this key will be used to promote the climate business and privatize the world’s commons, material and immaterial — space, atmosphere, water, air, soil, forests, oceans, living and non-living things, religions, values, culture, etc. — protected now in many parts of the planet by national sovereignties, common law and customary laws. With this tool they will get hold of national sovereignties all over the world to convert every single thing into commodities opening the way to the Fourth Industrial Revolution planned to save the capitalist system in detriment, once more, of the global South. The new high yielding markets created by the New Climate Economy and the New Deal for Nature agendas will be pushed by the non-profit industrial complex headed by World Wildlife Fund, Conservation International, The Natural Capital Coalition, TNC, in addition to Sandrine Dixon, actual Co-President of the Club of Rome and Al Gore in tandem with a corrupted UN. The poor will have nothing to say when the rich come to grab their land by force, driving indigenous communities out of their livelihood sources, attempting to phase-out their culture, their values, their freedom, their dignity, their human rights, their life… Such agenda looks very much like organized crime. Yet all these atrocities will be committed under the euphemism of nature’s protection and peoples’ wellbeing!
Such atrocities would have never had place within a morally healthy United Nations. But the long time corruption of this key institution is symptomatic of a generalized corruption at all levels. A finely engineered global corruption by the corporate elite extends to most relevant social institutions in charge of the “check and balance” of our corrupted corporate political systems: the list goes from International Court of Justice, or Supreme Courts’ failures to anticipate the consequences for our society of patenting life – genetic material, plant patents and utility patents — by corporations, to uncritical educational systems, environmental movements, global faith movements, churches and media, down to individual researchers, experts, consumers and voters, to name some, became object of corruption.
The corruption of the environmental movement will pass to history in parallel to that of the United Nations. It is a fact that the myriad of neo-environmental movements, corporate-owned, rallying to save the planet for over a decade, fails to address the issues that matter most: They not only oppose the agendas oriented to the commodification of nature which will lead to its further exploitation and devastation but join them. They fail to link ecological devastation with our economic system, based on consumerism and programmed obsolescence. They fail to treat nuclear energy, so cherished by the military, as most life threatening dirty energy, ignoring scientific facts. They fail to relate “clean” technologies and technological consumerism in the western world with mining in poor countries where people are practically enslaved and killed for defending their land and water. They fail to acknowledge colonization and imperialism as the source of wars that destroy vast territories and lives of innocent people. They fail to denounce ongoing and future climate manipulation agendas. They fail to admit the impact on climate and on the environment of the US military. As Barry Sanders in his book “The Green Zone”: Environmental Costs of Militarism says:
“Here’s the awful truth: even if every person, every automobile, and every factory suddenly emitted zero emissions, the earth would still be headed, head first and at full speed, toward total disaster for one major reason. The military produces enough greenhouse gases, by itself, to place the entire globe, with all its inhabitants large and small, in the most imminent danger of extinction.”
So it is clear that those which created the destruction of the planet out of greed and power cannot not form part of the solution. The solutions proposed through all these sinister globalist agendas are always the same: capitalist solutions and a runaway from accountability. This is pure insanity. As Albert Einstein put it: “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”
Arrived to this point there are not many options left. It is imperative that the world recuperate the moral standards of all its institutions for which it cannot afford to maintain any longer a corrupted United Nations and its agencies. A better world for mankind demands some basic adjustments: the actual United Nations has to be replaced by one independent body that will truly serve the purpose of the Universal Human Rights. Corporations and their agendas must be outlawed. All institutions and experts working under protocols or conventions of privileges and immunities must have them revoked to become accountable. And the war industry banned.
A deep reform of the economic system, production, consumption, trade, and waste patterns is due, aiming to achieve a stand to reason adapting needs to resources along with the purpose of science and justice, but this is an issue that exceeds the object of this paper.
What can we do in the meantime? Organize our self-defense: STOP ongoing clandestine geoengineering as well as future geoengineering, and the New Deal for Nature agendas, supporting the serious initiatives taken by conscious people; expose the non-profit industrial complex serving corporate interests for rising awareness in general public; establishing international alliances to introduce lawful banning proposals to most nefarious agendas; advancing on the rights of nature by means of an international treaty; constituting a lawful international court to prevent and judge environmental crimes; and promote fair trade and technological transfer to poorer countries to improve their development and life conditions.
No Deal for Nature.
 Marlos Goes et al. (2011) The economics (or lack thereof) of aerosol geoengineering. Climatic Change DOI 10.1007/s10584-010-9961-z https://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/docs/Goes_etal_2011.pdf
 P J Crutzen (2006) Albedo enhancement by stratospheric sulfur injections: a contribution to resolve a policy dilemma? Climate Change 77:211–219
 James Roger Fleming (2010) Fixing the Sky: The Checkered History of Weather and Climate Control New York, NY, Columbia University Press
 J. Marvin Herndon, PhD (2017) An Indication of Intentional Efforts to Cause Global Warming and Glacier Melting; Journal of Geography, Environment and Earth Science International, 9 (1), 1-11.
 J. Marvin Herndon, PhD and Mark Whiteside, MD, MPH (2017) Further Evidence of Coal Fly Ash Utilization in Tropospheric Geoengineering: Implications on Human and Environmental Health (click Here) Journal of Geography, Environment and Earth Science International, 9 (1), 1-8.
 J. Marvin Herndon, PhD (2018) Deadly Ultraviolet UV-C and UV-B Penetration to Earth’s Surface: Human and Environmental Health Implications. Journal of Geography, Environment and Earth Science International14 (2): 1-11.
 Carl Sagan (2012) Carl Sagan’s last interview with Charlie Rose https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8HEwO-2L4w&feature=emb_logo
 ENMOD https://www.unog.ch/enmod
 Jacob Darwing Humblin (2013) Arming Mother Nature: The Birth of Catastrophic Environmentalism: Oxford University Press
 Gordon J.F. MacDonald (1968) How to Wreck the Environment, in Unless Peace Comes, Nigel Calder, Viking Adult
 Club of Rome https://www.clubofrome.org/
 Aurelio Peccei (1969) The Chasm Ahead – Collier Macmillan Ltd
 Criton Zoakos & Mark Burdman (1980) NATO and The Club of Rome: The Aquariam command Executive Intelligence Review, May 20
 Laudato Si http://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html
 Dalai Lama MIT http://news.mit.edu/2012/dalai-lama-visits-1016
 Elaine Dewar (1995) Cloak of Green The Links Between Key Environmental Groups, Government, & Big Business -Toronto: James Lorimer and Company
 Alexander King (1991) The First Global Revolution. Club of Rome
 Robin Corey (2004) Fear: The History of a Political Idea. Oxford University Press
 European Parliament Report on environment, security and foreign policy http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+REPORT+A4-1999-0005+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN
 P Oldham et al. (2014) Mapping the Landscape of Climate Engineering Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci. 2014 Dec 28;372(2031). pii: 20140065. doi: 10.1098/rsta.2014.0065. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4240957/
 Barry Sanders (2009) The Green Zone – Environmental Costs of Militarism- AK Press
Cyprus, an island in the Eastern Mediterranean, boasts of its tourist promotions that it enjoys over 300 sunny days per year, a typical Mediterranean climate with clear blue skies. Tourism, financial services and offshore shipping are the backbone of its economy, which has little heavy industry. Due to the mild conditions, more time is spent outdoors by inhabitants enjoying pristine beaches and national parks which attract visitors from all over Europe escaping industrial smog and grey, cold weather. The outdoor cafés and friendly, traditional family way of life are standard components of living the easy-going island life. This environment is so conducive to outdoor living that people usually don’t have to think much about weather conditions because it is almost always pleasant and predictable.
Perhaps this is one reason why it was so noticeable when the white lines began to criss-cross the blue skies of Cyprus, which then slowly but surely spread, dimmed the sun and created a milky, cloudy haze, now common in the wider Mediterranean area. With limited air traffic and only two internationally recognized commercial airports, the lines in the sky were hard to miss by anyone who happened to cast a glance above. The unpolluted environment and good weather conditions make it easy for such a noticeable change to be observed by tens of thousands of residents.
As a result of this apparently unnatural phenomenon, in 2008 the Cyprus Green Party offices across the island received hundreds of telephone calls from residents about this uncommon traffic in the sky. On days with what appears to be an obvious weather manipulation, Green Party offices were inundated with calls demanding action and public debate about this environmental onslaught which regularly occurs in the skies above Cyprus.
Response to Public Concerns
The Green Party’s then sole Member of Parliament, Mr. George Perdikis, became increasingly engaged in the issue. The Green Party organized many presentations with scientists, writing letters to Parliament and Government Ministers and holding press conferences and public awareness events. In 2010, the Action Committee Against Chemical Spraying was formed by private citizens. In 2012, the Green Party prepared a briefing paper on geoengineering, Weather Modification is Not a Conspiracy Theory – A Call for Action. In 2012, the Cyprus Greens joined the Europe-wide anti-geoengineering movement and officially participated in the 2013 conference held in the European Parliament in Brussels.
The aerial spraying was suspected to be carried out by aircraft from the British sovereign military bases in Cyprus, possibly in conjunction with the experimental operation of the American High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) in the airspace of Cyprus. Demonstrations were held outside the British military bases, which continue to deny any involvement.
Rumours proliferated concerning activities of the British and American military on the British bases that might affect the rainfall on the island, in particular in the coastal city of Limassol. It is worth noting that Limassol actually ran out of drinking water in 2008, resulting in emergency water supplies being delivered by ship tankers from Greece, at a cost of over €35 million. Although Cyprus regularly experiences cyclical droughts, the recent one in the Eastern Mediterranean and near Middle East is thought by scientists to be one of the worst in 900 years.
According to the Cypriot government’s Department of Meteorology, the climate of Cyprus during the last century had “remarkable variations and trends,” particularly in precipitation and temperature, which were also seen in neighbouring countries in the Middle East. Accompanying an erratic amount of precipitation is an upward trend of average annual temperature in Cyprus, in both urban and rural areas. These trends are described on the government website as “evidence of change in the general circulation of the atmosphere in the area.” For Cyprus, in a 30-year period of the second half of the 20th century, the average precipitation decreased by 17%, as compared to those in the first half of the last century. The downward trend continued from 1990 until the winter hydrometeorological year 2018/2019 (October-January), which saw an extremely high 165% increase compared to “normal” during the period 1961-1990, ranking this as one of the highest recorded precipitation years since 1901. Remarkably, the heavy rainfall continued in February 2019, with nearly twice the monthly average. This trend for exceptional levels of precipitation persisted into the next winter season. December 2019 registered 188% of normal, which led to an all-time record of almost 100% of dams overflowing in January 2020 and continued into February, again with record rain and cold. Less than one year later, however, rainfall shifted back to drought, with approximately 30% lower rainfall and resultant decline in reservoir storage. Extreme precipitation variations cause havoc on especially vulnerable semi-arid countries which depend on winter rainfall for agriculture and water supply in general. I doubt it is a coincidence that recently experienced “whiplash” extremes of drought and record-breaking precipitation are accompanied by weather manipulation in the skies above Cyprus.
Actions in Cyprus Parliament
According to various sources, the British military bases in Cyprus reportedly form part of the ECHELON spy network and HAARP, the aim of the latter is believed to be an attempt to control the planet’s weather. Information has linked US aircraft KC-10 and KC-135 with the HAARP program and aerial chemical spraying. Following a question raised in 2009 from the Greens’ MP about these aircrafts, the Cyprus Foreign Minister requested a response by the British High Commission in Cyprus. The reply was that there were certain types of US aircraft crossing Cyprus but that these aircrafts had not passed through the British bases after the end of 2008.
Discussion of the suspected weather manipulation continued in a Parliamentary Committee in March 2009, with the decision to create an Interdepartmental Technical Committee for the study of the phenomenon. For unknown reasons, this committee ceased its operations in June 2010 after only two meetings.
Green Party MP Perdikis submitted other official questions to the Parliament and arranged for further Parliamentary Environmental Committee meetings in 2010, 2012 and 2016 to investigate the issue and to hear the views of the concerned public.
In 2011, another question was raised by the Greens’ MP about the Cypriot position on the UN Treaty (COP10) Convention on Biological Diversity which approved a moratorium on geoengineering.
The government response was that it supported the moratorium, stating that the precautionary principle should be applied due to lack of effective controls on geoengineering and the possible effect on biodiversity and that climate manipulation should be stopped until there is scientific justification for such actions. With respect to the concerns expressed about the possibility of chemical air spraying in Cyprus, the Minister once again affirmed that it had been decided to have the issue researched by the responsible services.
The Greens and the citizen-led Action Committee continued campaigning about the suspicious chemical clouds and overflights by aircraft leaving behind toxic elements considered to be potentially dangerous to public health. A petition was launched so that residents could contribute to the protest movement against the suspected aerial spraying, demanding an immediate investigation and that the Government abide by its undertaking to citizens to examine the likely consequences for the environment and the health of the population.
Sampling by the Cyprus Government
With continuous pressure from environmentalists, the government proceeded in 2011 with sampling of rainwater and air to be carried out by the Forestry and Meteorology Departments.
In 2015, still awaiting the publication of the results of the analyses, the Environment Commissioner, Ms. Ioanna Panayiotou, and the Greens’ MP Perdikis, wrote separately to the relevant minister and to the heads of related departments requesting the publication of the results of the samples taken in 2011. Finally, the information was released. The government reported that in 2011 the Forestry Department collected five atmosphere samplings with an aircraft at two locations in the south and west coasts at a height of 8,000–10,000 feet. Three out of five samplings took place after information was received from the private Action Committee reporting that lines had been noticed in the sky. For comparison purposes, the other two air samples were taken on days when the atmosphere appeared to be clear. The Meteorological Service took measurements on days that rain was noted. After each sampling, the filters were sent to the government’s state laboratory, which performed analyses for aluminum, barium, magnesium, nickel, chromium, strontium and cadmium. The results were then sent to the Department of Labor Inspection which, in a letter dated August 5, 2013, informed the Ministry that the analyses were lower than the usual measurements that the Department takes of air particles in different parts of Cyprus.
The responsible Minister of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environment informed the Parliament in October 2015 that on the basis of the findings of relevant analyses, no conclusion could be drawn that aerial spraying is being carried out in the atmosphere of Cyprus. The Minister, however, also assured the Parliament that the Republic of Cyprus does not support any interference with the atmosphere for the purpose of changing climatic conditions through aerial spraying that might affect the environment and human health.
The Cyprus Green Party nevertheless does not consider that the study conducted by the responsible authorities was comprehensive for a number of reasons, such as that the investigatory team did not include a representative from the grassroots Action Committee as had been promised nor was care taken to examine for nanoparticles.
The Cyprus Green Party does welcome the clear position of the Cypriot government against geoengineering, but the ecologists continue to insist on independent sampling and chemical analysis of the substances contained in the suspected chemical clouds.
In February 2016, again at the request of the Greens’ MP, a hearing was convened by the Parliamentary Environment Committee to discuss possible environmental problems with the implementation of geoengineering. Present at this meeting were politicians and representatives of many government departments to hear the concerns of agricultural associations, including the Cyprus Beekeepers and a researcher from Greece. It was promised at this meeting that a full investigation would be undertaken by the head of the Environment Services, a department of the Ministry of Agriculture, Natural Resources and the Environment, with the full support of the Minister, Mr. Nicolas Kouyiallis.
Some months later, the results of the Environment Services’ investigation appeared in Greek-language newspapers. No written, official report was issued or made public, no air or water samples were taken but it had been decided at a closed meeting of government officials that there was no evidence of geoengineering intervention in Cyprus. The Minister maintained that it cannot be corroborated that experiments and research for the purpose of artificially shaping climatic conditions took place in Cyprus.
In March 2017, Greens’ MP Perdikis stated that the 2016 government investigation did not include any sampling research and that he was still dissatisfied with the government’s failure to address the concerns of the public about suspected geoengineering in Cyprus.
Image on the right: Party logo of Cyprus Greens (Source: European Greens)
Due to the work of the Cyprus Greens, the Cyprus Parliament is possibly the first national Parliament in the world to discuss the issue of geoengineering although there are laws against geoengineering proposed in some American states. Efforts of the Cyprus Greens have been less successful, however, in attempts to engage Green Party colleagues in Europe to research on the issue and its unknown environmental and health consequences. Many politicians and environmentalists refuse to discuss this topic although it affects almost every environmental issue: climate change, air pollution, oceans, biodiversity, forests, public health and safety, quality of life, social justice, informed consent, governance and transparency.
It Has Happened Before
The secret spraying of unsuspecting populations with toxic substances is not without precedent. A few well-documented, covert, unethical operations provide a useful framework to understand better such resistance to accept the possibility of a clandestine, global geoengineering program.
In recent years, shocking instances have come to light of experiments done without consent, in the USA and the UK. As revealed in an independent review of the UK Ministry of Defence, between 1940 and 1979, top secret spraying trials took place in the UK using a chemical concoction of zinc cadmium sulphide. The British military covertly sprayed UK populations over 100 times with similar poisonous compounds, events that successive governments have tried to suppress.
In 1994, the US military confirmed to Congress that it had conducted secret experiments with toxic chemicals sprayed on populations living in low-income housing in several US cities in the 1950s and 60s.
It is due to persistent Freedom of Information requests that these secret spraying operations came to light. These revelations also rarely get much coverage in mainstream media, which further supports the argument that there are concerted efforts to manipulate public knowledge and to deceive the public.
There are mind-boggling implications if similar covert projects are taking place today. This would be in conflict with a carefully constructed façade of a world of responsible governments, accountable to the people who supposedly elected them to protect their safety and well-being. Unable intellectually and emotionally to accept that such programs could be happening and the associated implications, debunkers are simply blind to any evidence whatsoever. Perhaps there is an unacknowledged cognitive burden that some people are just unable to bear.
Aside from the Cyprus Green Party, most environmental groups are guilty of a refusal to consider as valid and worthy of investigation the complaints from the public about potential environmental problems created by ongoing geoengineering. A number of conditions provide fertile ground for such a stubborn refusal to accept what to many is the obvious. Successful global environmental organizations are now a part of the Establishment, whether as non-governmental organizations or as political parties. Reliant on funding, they are eager to maintain their credibility and to increase their status as part of the mainstream. Many employees of environmental groups have become office creatures, spending time at their desks indoors all day with rarely a glance at the increasingly grey, cloud-covered and criss-crossed skies. Do they even look up occasionally from their computers and hand-held devices that hold them captive? If they happen to notice the ubiquitous zig-zag patterns, they dismiss them as normal contrails of commercial air traffic. They as easily reject the “crazy conspiracy theories” they hear reported on mainstream media. The script on the controlled news channels ensures that the issue is constantly ridiculed, designed to castigate this environmental and health issue as a baseless “conspiracy theory.”
Over the years, relentless ridicule on mainstream media silenced some of the Cyprus Green Party leadership who came to believe that it was too politically costly to continue to speak publicly about the issue. The Greek-language media even developed a new label, “the sprayed/Ψεκασμένοι”, applied to those who believe in conspiracies, the “irrationalists”. The derogatory term is now also used for those who oppose the global experimental coronavirus vaccines/injections. Just one example, in July 2021, Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis referred to those opposed to the vaccinations as “the sprayed”.
With such a controversial label promoted by the mainstream media, many organizations and individuals react with a reflex programmed scepticism and refuse to consider independent research. This has been an effective tool to ridicule those researchers and the public who do not accept the deceptive propaganda that is dished out to the masses.
Yet it is indeed a conspiracy – not a theory – against the people and it is crafted to conceal the truth. Fortunately, the increasingly discredited mainstream media are being exposed as captives to their corporate and other masters who are an integral part of the conspiracy.
Fake Public Consent
Coinciding with a mass media campaign to discredit claims of ongoing worldwide weather manipulation, there is a public relations campaign aimed at securing acceptance of the need for geoengineering. Numerous well-funded academic conferences have blossomed in recent years. The Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies (IASS) in Germany organized the first International Climate Engineering Conference in 2014 and holds such gatherings annually. The Universities of Oxford, Cambridge and Harvard are also involved in the climate manipulation issue. Harvard officially established, in spring 2017, a Solar Geoengineering Research Program. These groups all insist that there is no actual geoengineering taking place. Of importance is that these conferences provide a carefully manipulated appearance of “public consultation,” which is then construed to represent public approval. These scientists and academics claim that research on geoengineering is at an early stage, implying that geoengineering and specifically solar radiation management are simply highly theoretical research programs.
Dismissed are credible reports from independent researchers who have meticulously studied this around the world. Their evidence includes soil and water samples with extremely high levels of aluminum and barium in areas subjected to heavy aerial spraying. This indicates that there is already a project of unprecedented magnitude, in full-scale global application, being implemented without legal frameworks, national or international. It violates fundamental human and sovereign rights, the precautionary principle and endangers the planet’s ecosystems and all living organisms.
Europe adopted in 1998 the Aarhus Convention (2003/4 EC, Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters) which links environmental and human rights. This and other international protection for the public have been sidelined (e.g., Universal Declaration of Human Rights, UN Environmental Modification Convention ENMOD prohibiting nations from deliberately altering weather, et al., for hostile purposes). A recent example is in 2016 when the European Parliament dismissed a well-researched and credible petition and call for investigation of geoengineering. It was rejected without further investigation, on advice received by the European Commission that the European Parliament has no competence in the area of military initiatives and that EU environmental legislation is without purpose with respect to military activities. Similar stalls happened over 20 years ago with the Theorin report, which included a proposal adopted by the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defence Policy, but never implemented which called for openness and democratic scrutiny of military research and that civil laws on the environment apply to military activities.
Clearly, exposing the reality of covert global weather manipulation shatters a delusionary world view by which so many people are entranced. This new knowledge can take some too far away from their comfort zone. Maintaining the illusion of an accountable, democratic world becomes paramount resulting in an automatic response of rejectionism.
Why Cyprus May be Different
A simple, careful investigation reveals some basic considerations which are unique to the Republic of Cyprus. There seems to be ready acknowledgement by most residents of the possibility of clandestine weather manipulations above the island. Perhaps this is perceived as just the latest in a long chronicle of suppression and exploitation. Throughout its long tragic history, it has suffered deeply from invasion and occupation, including the current one still dividing the island as a result of the war in 1974, leaving over one-third of the island under occupation by Turkey.
The presence of British sovereign military bases on the island provides opportunities for suspected actions associated with military experiments with weather manipulation. A remnant of the colonial past, the sovereign bases were retained by Britain as a condition of independence granted to the Republic of Cyprus in 1960. These territories, officially part of Britain and not under Cyprus jurisdiction, cover 98 square miles and approximately 3% of the island. There is an air force base, several garrison areas and numerous radar stations, the latter “listening posts” located outside of the official base areas.
Due to the division of the island, there are carefully designated air traffic controls. Some of the suspected geoengineering airplane flights are found outside these official air traffic corridors, criss-crossing the sky in all directions and stretching across the sky in a completely unnatural way. Representatives of the Civil Aviation Department admitted this in parliamentary committees and even wondered who was doing this. There are also reports that these airplanes’ transponders are turned off.
Some Cyprus Green Party members remain unwavering in observations that lead to quite a different conclusion from that of their government. The sightings of chemical aerial spraying and weather manipulation with unnatural lines in the sky continue. In the large coastal town of Limassol, their Green Party office wrote in February 2016:
“We are confident that there is chemical (aerial) spraying. We believe that the Government has a huge responsibility to investigate fully the phenomenon and to take the necessary steps to stop it.”
They have the support of tens of thousands of residents in Cyprus.
For the time being, as more revelations expose the underlying connections of the global cartel with its life-denying projects, the ranks of the “sprayed” continue to grow.
 Cyprus Parliamentary Questions by Green MP George Perdikis, Nicosia.
Question No. 23.06.009.03.279, 29 Dec. 2008 (British Bases in Cyprus and HAARP)
Question No. 23.06.009.03.282, 5 Jan. 2009 (British and US activities on the military bases affecting rainfall)
Question No. 23.06.009.03.286, 7 Jan. 2009 (KC-10 and KC-135 aircraft, HAARP)
Question No. 23.06.009.05.01.724, 7 April 2011 (Geoengineering and UN COP10 Moratorium)
Cyprus Parliamentary Environment Committee Hearings
Oct. 7, 2010: Testimony Dr. Katsaros (chemist scientist, Research Centre Democritos Athens, correct sampling of chemical clouds)
Νοv. 29, 2012, “The impact on the water balance and the health of residents of Cyprusfrom potential aircraft sprays of British bases in the atmosphere,” proposal from MP Perdikis, File Nos. 23.04.028.555-2011 and 23.04.026.049-2009 “Information concerning experimental research of HAARP on the British Bases Akrotiri and serious effects on the environment,” File Nos. 23.04.028.555-2011 and 23.04.025.232-2008
Feb. 17, 2016, MP Perdikis, File No. 23.04.033.014-2016 “Possible environmental problems resulting from intervention in climate conditions with implementation of geoengineering and chemical aerial spraying (chemtrails)”
 Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 2016, Cook, Benjamin I. et al, Spatiotemporal drought variability in the Mediterranean over the last 900 years
 Cyprus Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Meteorology http://www.moa.gov.cy/moa/ms/ms.nsf/DMLcyclimate_en/DMLcyclima te_en?OpenDocument
 Professor Brian G. Spratt FRS, Welcome Trust Centre for the Epidemiology of Infectious Disease, University of Oxford, Independent Review of the Possible Health Hazards of the Large-scale Release of Bacteria During the Forest Defence Trials (2002)
 Lisa Martino-Taylor, Ph.D., Global Studies Program Coordinator, Associate Professor of Sociology, St. Louis, University of Missouri-Columbia, author of “Beyond the Fog – How The US Cold War Radiological Weapons Program Exposed Innocent Americans” (2017), based on her University of Missouri- Columbia doctoral dissertation, “The Manhattan-Rochester Coalition, Research on the Health Effects of Radioactive Materials and Tests on Vulnerable Populations without Consent in St. Louis” (2012)
 Oxford Geoengineering Programme: http://www.geoengineering.ox.ac.uk/oxford-principles/principles/
Cambridge Geoengineering Conference (SRM Science 2015): http://www.srms-cambridge.eng.cam.ac.uk/
Harvard University Centre for the Environment, Spring 2017: Solar Geoengineering Research Program http://geoengineering.environment.harvard.edu/ http://harvardmagazine.com/2013/07/buffering-the-sun#article-images
 Theorin Resolution, European Parliament, A4-0005/1999, 28/01/1999
Resolution on the environment, security and foreign policy
Why don’t they see the incredible quantities of aircraft and their abnormal trails?
Why don’t they understand they are both the victims and the zealous ignorant actors of a monstrous war?
Our civilization conditioned us to be blind.
When I happened to see the first obvious sprayings of toxic products in the sky, aircraft which were obviously flying a lot lower than the required altitude to form condensation trails (that is, 8000m as I had been taught previously as a meteorology student). It was on December 26th, 1999 in Quebec when France suffered the most momentous double storm in its history (but that I didn’t know then). A chill of horror went up and down my spine. They dare do that! They dare go that far in man’s blind race to the destruction and disregard of life! On that same day, I learned from a local woman who lived in the small, charming village called Saint Adolphe where I was staying, that Canada had suffered these trails since 1995. Back to France, I forgot all about it until May 16th, 2002 when I saw from my window, with my own eyes, a lot of aircraft flying about in the sky that produced the same type of trails. Since that date, these sprayings have never stopped. They have even intensified.
I was horrified and appalled, but I soon started to feel a great hope: everyone would quickly be aware of what was going on and it would be the end of the grip of the spirit of destruction, the end of the naive belief that the world leaders work for the public good and that armies protect us; that technology and chemistry will remedy human suffering – whereas they only create and bring more suffering to all creatures. It was just the sign of evil, the necessary signal for human beings to open their eyes and their hearts, to take charge of their common destiny, that of our planet, for future generations and simple respect for Life, for Creation and Nature. The opportunity of turning the page on 5,000 years of imperialism that have produced nothing but human suffering, the wrecking of Nature and of Knowledge.
“There will be fearful events and great signs from heaven”. And yet most of those who proclaim these words do not see these great signs, drawn every day in the sky by unbelievably numerous aircraft squadrons.
What happens in our minds? How can we lose our survival instinct to that extent?
Today we are in 2017. The aerospace assembly lines in our Toulouse region are relentlessly running at full capacity to make aircraft. But who can buy so many aircrafts? Fortunately, more and more people realise every day that there is something wrong in the number of planes, in the altitude they’re flying at, in the trails they leave behind and the consequent effects on the atmosphere, the weather and health. To establish the facts and be convinced that we must put an end to all this has become a vital priority. All our efforts must aim at dismantling the keystone of the whole structure of lying that nowadays totally poisons our health, our minds and our environment: toxic synthetic chemistry which has invaded agriculture and all spheres of everyday life, pharmacopoeia, GMOs, the cacophony in all wavelengths and the whole lot of nuclear, bacteriological, electromagnetic, climate devices used by the sorcerer’s apprentices who are in control of this world.
“The rhinoceros’s shade expands over the skies of our planet” (Overcast).
It Started Because…
In her book, “La Guerre Secrète contre les Peuples”, Claire Séverac has completed a particularly acute analysis of our recent history. In this brilliant work of investigation, she goes back to the legal source and facts of inner dealings that, for many decades, have led industrial, military political groups to carry out the aerial spray programs and electromagnetic interventions that we face today. But why do they do it? – “Because we let them!” Michael Murphy says. And how can we consider a way out of such a dramatic situation?
As I feel particularly concerned and eager to help all of us wake up the conscience of our primal original being, “whose fatal ignorance crowns the reign of darkness”, I dedicated myself to analyse the concepts supporting our present-day society values on one hand, and on the other hand to study the functioning of our brain.
“Human beings give almost no attention to the fundamental, first causes of everything. This is what humanity doesn’t want to take care of; we don’t want to think about it“. According to Noberto Keppe, this fundamental laziness results from the common inversion that makes us think that energy comes out from matter. Surely enough, we are often misled at our expense, but don’t we have a fundamental laziness to question our beliefs and to let others tidy the hearth of our lives where ashes are piling up so quickly?
Claudia von Werlhof on her side analyses this phenomenon as the “hatred of life”, which is the basic concept of all our imperialist civilizations, a concept that has never been questioned: it is to destroy what exists and rebuild everything according to an “ideal”.
I will, therefore, start tracing back the history of events, then I will briefly develop a few chapters to enlighten this search for the fundamental causes:
This Started When…
Recent History of Industrial, Chemical and Oil Companies
Today’s scientists who ponder over ethics of science find that research is always sponsored by those who fund it. And those who fund it have possessed ground and underground riches for centuries. More precisely, they are today, and have been since the end of the 19th century, the oil, chemical and pharmaceutical consortiums. They intervene either directly or through official institutions, especially the European ones. As Dr Rath explains, the European Union founders are none other than the Nazis, soon “cleared” after the Second World War, that is, the promoters of the companies (Bayer, IG Farben …), who previously worked to win power in Germany in the 1930s.
It Was Amplified By…
The Prohibition of Hemp
I would like to digress for a while and talk about a related topic: the prohibition of hemp and cannabis. It was the most widespread and well-known plant on this planet. Up to the 19th century, each American citizen was required to grow an acre of hemp and had to pay his taxes with hemp. In Europe too, each farmer had his plot of hemp. Hemp offers a lot of benefits for people’s health, it enriches the soil, and has many other uses. It competed so well with oil, chemicals and pharmaceuticals that suddenly it became prohibited. It was prohibited first in France in 1934, then in the USA in 1937, under the pressure of puritan lobbies and chemical industries. Since then, the hemp flower (the so-called “cannabis” or “marijuana”) has been demonized and banned as a dangerous drug – and has become sometimes really dangerous due to the ignorance, the fascination effect, and the product’s alteration it got as a forbidden product.
Though it is connecting the two brain hemispheres and healing the pineal gland, it is difficult to measure to what extent its consumption (which is widespread though forbidden) helps people to keep their health and spirits up, but it is very likely that without hemp, the mortality rate would be still higher. Today in France, disinformation and propaganda against cannabis get stronger and stronger in media and through social authorities.
Governments Lose Their Sovereignty
Meanwhile, the oil, chemical, pharmaceutical and bank consortiums had become very rich, thanks to the toxic products they made and sold to supply the trench warfare during the First World War. In fact, they had become rich enough to buy the US government which in turn had been ruined because of its engagement in the war. Consequently, since the First World War, which is now a century ago, the US government has lost its sovereignty: it is led by that cartel of banks and industrial companies. Al Gore says it explicitly in his last book: “The Future: Six Drivers of Global Change”:
“Our democracy has been hacked. The country is utterly and completely paralyzed. Hog-tied. Why? The influence of money. The average member of the House and Senate, has to spend five hours per day begging rich people for money. Begging rich interests for money! And those rich people and rich interests don’t give you money with no strings attached. No way. In return for their money, they want votes that will benefit them. The piper is paid.” (Gore).
Thanks to the prohibition of hemp, they could easily introduce chemicals for agriculture, synthetic textile material, toxics for medicines and food, which are very active to repair their damages – without hemp.
Then it was the Second World War with the horrendous death camps, a tremendous increase of chemicals and industrial companies getting wealthier.
And “Nazi medical scientists” experimenting on men and women … They introduced fluorine in prisoners’ drinking water to make them more obedient. Contrary to hemp, fluorine stops the two brain hemispheres from communicating. Such a practice is still going on today: may we consider it as an obstacle to our realizing what happens in the sky? The dogmatic medical approach today has a lot to do with the Nazi spirit: more and more medical exams, less and less diagnosis, an increasing use of chemicals regardless of the patient’s health … Worse than the sound of boots, there is the silence of slippers.” (Max Frisch)
After the Second World War, every Western European country had to join NATO to help the “big brother” and put themselves under its “protection”. Not to mention all the wars that have never ended all around the world, fomented in order to supply the market.
At least two leaders of European nations strongly resisted NATO expansion: De Gaulle and Tito. But in France, the 1968 movement was used to destabilise De Gaulle. Then in 1981 when Tito, the leader of non-aligned countries, died, a lot of Yugoslavian journalists were murdered abroad and discord was roused among the people.
During the 1990s, French authorities probably did not spontaneously accept to collaborate in spraying their airspace. We had a little signal from HAARP with the terrible storms on December 26th and 27th, 1999. Then we got back to normal until France agreed and general and systematic spraying started in 2001 and 2002. And yet, hardly anyone saw anything.
The Introduction of Civil Geoengineering in Europe and the Onset of a New Enemy: CO2
Since 2008, the Royal Society in London has been organizing public lectures on “geoengineering”. This new term has then been used in other European countries and languages, in different conferences and seminars, establishing the strong belief that CO2 emissions are the main cause of climate warming.
Yet the proportion of CO2 in the Earth atmosphere is ridiculously low (below 0.05%). Within 10 years, CO2 has become the scapegoat, the non-problem to divert our focus and conceal the fact that warming is due to the use of electromagnetic weapons such as HAARP. There is indeed an anthropogenic warming, not because of CO2 emitted by civil activities, but actually resulting from the use of climate weapons which melt the polar icecap, deflect the jet stream, and create climate chaos. These climate weapons are the submerged part of the iceberg, in fact eight ninths of it.
Plants are greedy for CO2. They only need sunlight to synthesize carbon and restore oxygen. But instead, those ignorant “learned” scientists, enacting a false premise, prevent sunrays from reaching the Earth by creating an artificial cloud layer, thus reducing the so-called climate warming which is, according to them, due to the presence of CO2.
From a Civilisation to a System
CO2 is taking today the wretched function endorsed by women for centuries, while women are acquiring male social privileges. But are they not losing at the same time their real feminine value, which is the wisdom they have gained through giving birth and essentially their loving power? Femininity is not really freed. The vile function is no more reserved to a class of persons: that is women, but to a chemical element: CO2. CO2 is for oxygen what the woman is for the man; one without the other is nothing. Without questioning the essential point, that is, why should a gender be noble and the other ignoble if not harming life?
I think we have here the typical signal of the transition from a civilisation to a system. While we reach a global consciousness, the patriarchal rule becoming a system means that when the civilisation is collapsing (people are losing and forgetting their references and values), the hatred of life “hacks” our lives, our spirits and bodies, our cells … Even with the very best intentions, the principle keeps on living as long as it is not identified.
The patriarchal rule has led to the division between the two brain hemispheres: the right hemisphere (feminine) and the left one (masculine), at the individual level as well as the social level. We can see it both in our sciences and our beliefs.
The “Hatred of Life” was first accepted as a rule. It was clearly defined in the Greek civilisation: the masculine was noble, the feminine was wretched. Imperialist civilisations have developed according to this rule, Western civilisations as well as Eastern ones. If we consider the Western one, its empires (Babylon, Rome, and today Washington), its three main monotheistic religions and, if we think of our Greco-Roman references concerning ethics, sciences, and politics, all of them deal with this principle. The Western civilisations, based on the belief of a single inaccessible stranger God whose representative on Earth was the monarch, and building their strength on the armed forces, have spread their power over the world until mutating into a system, while at the same time the whole social structure of the nation states along with their religions are now collapsing.
Moreover, we can notice first that the evolution of women’s social status has been similar in Japan and China, where it has declined simultaneously. Secondly, that all the areas where this change occurred were empires and thirdly, that empires have been born and developed on the most crowded stopping-off places: along the Silk Road in Eurasia, north and south of the isthmus of Panama in America (Mayas and Incas). The same phenomenon of a society getting organized in a superstructure when its habitat is concentrated in an enclosed environment can be observed with animal populations. It seems that there is a universal rule that establishes a certain content ratio in populations that must not be violated.
Human beings were first subjected, submitted, converted, by hook or by crook, in the name of ideals, to the will of the most powerful and they are still today the zealous actors of a system that has never ended to wreck the whole planet. We must not forget that we belong to this planet and totally depend on it to live.
Each one of us is more or less both a victim and an actor, in the most total warfare that was ever fought on Earth, as far as we can remember in human history. But let us remember that, for thousands and thousands of years, history was written according to a dogma dictated by the mighty, and large sections of it have disappeared in fires and stakes. Today, more and more archaeological evidence, whose dating is confirmed by astronomical data, leads us to think that previous civilisations may have destroyed themselves as we do nowadays.
We cling to our beliefs as to the mast of a sinking ship and we blindly repeat the mistakes that we have kept in our collective unconscious: Nature is evil, the Earth is thankless, we must dominate it, we must master it.
Religions are ambivalent. They teach us values of thankfulness, gratitude and love. But at the same time, they convey the assumption that we are to destroy things that live in the name of a mythic ideal pretending to be better than life. It is the patriarchal logic to destroy what IS, in order to achieve an ideal beyond it.
The Greek Myth
The Greek civilisation has been the reference regarding ethics and science for centuries. It is praised as the cradle of the objective and atomist first explanation of the world. From the social point of view, it has led to the devaluation of women’s roles, the sexual preference of men for men and to the fact that rich women downloaded breastfeeding of children onto their female slaves.
More than any other, the Greek mythology has filled heaven with deities. Its myths tell the deeds of Zeus and his court, which mainly consists of kidnapping, raping, murdering, then sending his victims into the sky constellations to absolve his crimes, always driven by jealousy. The feminine creature becomes an object to be possessed over which Zeus means to impose his rights. It has permeated our whole culture, expanding to video game.
The exaltation of the noble masculine in the antique Greek society, the fall of the wretched female is well referenced by a well-known French astrophysicist, André Brahic, in his book “Enfants du Soleil” (Children of the Sun):
“Slaves were carrying out everyday life duties while citizens had all the time to focus on intellectual matters. A new way of thinking had been born. Each one could now ponder over the meaning of life, over the organisation of society and ask himself philosophical questions without having to resort to a myth. We had moved from a mythical way of thinking to a new one based on experience and rationality. But in fact, it took a lot more time and it was a lot more difficult to understand this move towards the triumph of reason than this quick explanation seems to demonstrate.” (Brahic, s. note 11)
Each one means no women, no slaves, only “citizens” and a restricted particular circle which had the time to think completely detached from most of the material constraints of everyday life, keeping away from half of the whole reality of life. The triumph of reason would consist of enslaving your fellow men to free yourself from the obligations due to nature.
Does this “marvelous science” not have any defect? It is common yet to praise this reason that has eradicated myths, throwing them up in the skies, but this glorious masculine reason may become an enormous greedy insect that will devour living flesh. Thus, conscience will end up deserting science.
Based on Aristotle’s way of thinking, it boasts about reasoning only on facts and rejecting any immaterial or transcendental cause. In the Middle Ages until Copernicus, Aristotle’s logic of the two spheres had been the only authorized reference:
The Renaissance threw away a lot of concepts and practises. We forgot about Aristotle’s two spheres, but we didn’t ask ourselves any questions. Basically, the dogma has remained unchanged: reasoning only on facts and finding in facts themselves the causes of their existence.
We could call this thinking tautological.
There is something lacking. There is something wrong.
“In Physics, the focus is on how to extract energy from matter … how to break particles apart so the energy can be released. The approach is the same in biology. Biologists think that the genes are the basic structure of the human being and that if we can control them, then we can control all the aspects of the human being. Some of the ramifications of these inverted ways of thinking are that scientists think that matter is the basis of everything. Geneticists say that everything is 100% genetic and that the environment affects us 100%. The truth is that the environment is an energetic environment, not only a social one. This means that our thinking and our feelings affect the development of our genes. We were born into a society that believes that matter is the basis of everything and is also the source of energy. We need to see that the opposite is true: it is energy that affects matter.”
You Shall Give Birth in Pain
Each human being’s primal physical and mental health is grounded in birth.
The way women have delivered and deliver babies today represents a great physical and mental loss and causes weakness and disease both to the mother and child. The biblical condemnation: “You shall give birth in pain” has led today’s woman to be dispossessed of her dignity in giving birth.
The History of the Loss of the Rights of Mothers Giving Birth
The decline of the feminine functions in Western patriarchal societies appeared with the biblical sentence: “You shall give birth in pain” and the downfall of the feminine values in Greek society. Studying this decline will illustrate how a rule can be embodied in a civilisation to the point of eventually turning it into a system.
At the beginning, as evidenced by 3,000 year old Sumerian tablets, women had the same social status as men. In Greek civilisation and according to biblical texts in the course of the first millennium BC, masculine values were considered as noble while the feminine ones were judged as base. Women themselves ended up thinking their own skills were loathsome, and the rich ones abandoned breastfeeding to their slaves. In the 4th century BC, the union of the Roman Empire with the Church spelled the end of many inspired women like Sainte Foy who died a martyr in 303 BC, because she refused to marry the husband who was imposed on her and because she claimed her faith in Jesus Christ. There was the end of learned women like Hypatia of Alexandria who was tortured and killed in 415 BC, about 100 years later, for the inverse reason, not swearing allegiance to the Church. Then, from the 14th century on, the Church which set itself up as the only holder of knowledge, accused many learned men and women of witchcraft and burned them alive at the stake. Thus, many people disappeared who held a large body of popular science and particularly a great knowledge of herbal contraceptives. As a result, many unwanted babies were abandoned, and during the Hundred Years’ War, famine and epidemics fell on the people.
Then came the time when Louis XIV imposed on women to give birth while lying down.
This “good manner” spread over the world like a powder trail. It meant a lot of suffering and ruin for the health of women and newborns and it is non-physiological as such. Nowadays, chemical and surgery solutions let women think they can avoid the labour pains by anaesthesia and can deliver a baby without having to live its coming into the world. The consequences are born afterwards, not only because of the weakening of overall health but moreover with parents becoming more and more immature and irresponsible.
The way most women give birth today, following the hospital protocol, breaks the essential links with the birth of life. Why?
The Physiology of the Birthing Process
To deliver a baby the easiest way, the mother must be able to relax the neocortical control (the identity of masculine quality), to let the reptile brain work to perpetuate the species (feminine quality). It was confirmed by Michel Odent, a French surgeon and obstetrician who dedicated himself to the study of the birthing process physiology.
In other words, during childbirth as well as during our sexual life and eventually in the course of all our hormonal life, two contradictory hormones and their respective families come into play: oxytocin, typically feminine, and adrenaline, typically masculine.
The Separation Between Astronomy and Astrology
On the social level astronomy and astrology, initially united and known as the “Mother of Sciences”, are now divided into two enemy sisters. This split occurred in France, on the winter solstice of 1666 when Colbert founded the Academy of Sciences under the reign of Louis XIV. Let us remember that Rabelais had said previously: “science without conscience is but the ruin of the soul”. Since that time, a “learned ignorance”, resulting from the deliberate abstraction of all cosmology, has developed. “Contemporary thought has stopped following a logical sequence in analysing facts, as if everything came out of nothing and more precisely as if energy originated from matter. If that were the case, then where would matter come from?”… “the prior philosophical influences that scientists are subject to are hidden from view. And what’s more, these philosophical influences on theories are never questioned; in fact, they are actually removed from scientific books”. We notice that cramming has gradually invaded scientific studies and that the number of specializations is constantly increasing – an obvious consequence in a more and more complex organization. Moreover, a break has taken place in the metaphysical foundation of science. Today, the only people considered as the official reference on a subject, are usually those who have no practical knowledge of it. It is particularly true – and often ridiculous – for the borderline subjects we are dealing with here: astrology, childbirth circumstances, climate and … cannabis.
Though this “ideal science” has never stopped chasing astrology, myths and everything which is “irrational”, astrology is still very much alive in our societies.
Does it respond to the basic needs of a human being, to a natural function of life that pops up again as soon as you throw it away? For more than 350 years, science has deliberately developed on the denial of half of our brain.
How Does the Brain Work?
The left hemisphere can differentiate, identify, count, and develop. It means an opening and it produces movement and excitation. In that hemisphere, everything starts out in the neocortex and moves towards complexity. It is the “-nom-ical”: it can decode. The left hemisphere projects outwards into what is our right.
The right hemisphere can unify, imagine, link and reduce to integrate data. It starts from complexity, the specific nature of the reptile brain, to deduce what will be understandable to the neocortex. Thus, it keeps up an individual protection against the external environment, it gives weight, and it maintains the body homeostasis. It is the “-log-ical”: it can encode. It projects outwards into what is our left.
In the word “logic” we find “log”, in “nomic” there is “name”. In mathematical language, astronomy has the “exponential” function, it enumerates, while astrology has the “logarithmic” function, it organizes into a formula that the body can assimilate.
In 1666, the Academy of Sciences was created and became an official new body for the social representation of knowledge. In the following centuries, the Academy took the dogmatic place that the Church had been occupying for the past thousand years. From that time, the astrologers and astronomers who had never been differentiated before found themselves divided into two separate categories, one which received honours in the name of science set as a myth and the other one getting nothing but the human soul misery that even the priests did not care about. Since that split occurred, both the astronomer and the astrologer have been going around in circles, each one in its own hemisphere, as if separated by the zodiac boundary, that centre line of our Sun-Earth matrix, like the two sides of the same coin. It is a dialogue of the deaf in which each partner sends back his own ignored half. The protagonist of one is the shadow of the other and vice versa.
Have We Not Integrated Relativity Yet?
The postulate of heliocentrism confirmed by Galileo 50 years before the 1666 split induces relativity: The Earth is not the centre of the universe. Anybody is a centre. Hence a phenomenon can be considered from different points of view. Therefore, how is it possible to state that a point of view is superior to another or can replace all the others? And yet this is what our psyches always try to do as they have been shaped by the imperialist “Pater Arche” which means that men are seen as the creators of life – not women.
The quantum dimension which physics is discovering for a century hasn’t yet been integrated in everyone’s mind and astrology has been cut off from astronomy at a time when this revolutionary postulate (the Copernican Revolution) fundamentally questioned dogmas that had legitimized the subjection of some by others for many centuries. And this integration is always on the way. It is the purpose of SORI’Astres.
As the Church nowadays is no longer the ultimate reference and has lost a great part of its spiritual influence, the spiritual power and dogmatic authority have become the issue of the rivalry between the two disciplines. The astronomer does not want to abandon this prerogative to the astrologer and simply treads on the latter’s toes to confirm his dominance, denying the physical reality of the zodiac signs, asserting only the reality of the constellations.
And as the last straw, astronomy secures its leading position, thanks to the Sun King, by making a huge … astronomical mistake! It denies altogether the original rhythm of our Sun-Earth matrix (our star and our planet), that is the alternating lighting of its poles which creates the years and the seasons, our essential natural environment. It is the base of celestial mechanics, their own discipline that they destroy with such an unconscious contempt. In this witch hunt, they thoroughly cut the branch they are sitting on and not least, because it is the branch of the mother of the sciences.
For more than 350 years, official science has moved forward on its own in the split brain of “the mother of science”, losing more and more relation with the right hemisphere and throwing back on itself the individual who observes and experiments. In the meantime, astrology, separated from its astronomical body, has become poorer and poorer; it must be said that it had already been corrupted and submitted for centuries to the wishes of the powerful. As a result, today’s science ethics comes up to knowing how to shut one’s conscience. Is that not the very essence of the Nazi-spirit?
It Was Changed with…
In the end, throwing astrology away that 5,000 years of civilisation had established comes down to throwing the baby out with the bath water.
This natural function that rushes back when you throw it out is the function of the right brain, the brain of knowledge, the feminine half that is absolutely necessary for life to live on, that the irrational “hatred of life” blindly fights.
This feminine quality and knowledge is probably healthier and sturdier than anyone realizes. Think of all the weapons available today and the madness of most contemporary leaders. Without this love for life, the Earth would have been “atomized” long ago. Let us simply accept and recognize the fact. Let us go on with her!
Translation by Monique Fontana
 Gospel of St Luc – 21.11
 Matthias Hancke Film “Overcast“, 2015
 Claire Séverac « La Guerre Secrète contre les Peuples », 2015, éditions Elie et Mado, Porto Vecchio, France
 Michael Murphy and Barry Kolski, Film “Why in the World are They Spraying?“, 2012
 Gilles Roy, « Rock Astres » association – 1993
 Noberto R. Keppe “The New Physics Derived From a Disinverted Metaphysics” , 2005, Publishing House Editora, Sao Paulo (Brazil)
 COMETS-CNRS Conference “Science on a Massive Scale” – Paris January 2014
 Paul Anthony Tailor, Aleksandra Niedzwiecki, Matthias Rath, August Kowalczyk « Les racines nazies de l’Union Européenne de Bruxelles », 2011, Dr Rath Health Foundation, Heerlen (Nederland)
 Gabriel Luneau “Ce qui se cache derrière la prohibition du cannabis“, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTRfViLgKoM
 André Brahic “Enfants du Soleil“, 1999, ed. Odile Jacob, Paris, page 25
 Claudia Bernhardt de Souza Pacheco and collaborators “The ABCs of the New Physics, a workbook based on the New Physics by Noberto R. Keppe”, 2008, Proton Editora, Sao Paulo (Brazil) page 25
 The neocortex is the most complex part of the brain and is particularly developed in man. It is the most recent part from the evolution point of view.
 Michel Odent – « L’Amour Scientifié », 2001, Jouvence Publishing, Thonon-France, and other works. He was the Director of the Pithiviers Maternity Hospital from 1962 to 1985. He is known for having introduced there the concept of women delivering babies « as they would at home » in delivery rooms or swimming pools.
 Ocytocin and its peers, prolactin and endorphin. Prolactin: an ancient hormone in terms of evolution, is involved in mothering behaviours: building nests, protecting and aggressive behaviours of the breastfeeding female.
 Michel Odent – « L’Amour Scientifié » 2001: translation: “This release occurs discontinuously and in a pulsatile manner. It induces a motherly behaviour in the hour following the delivery; it is released during the orgasm, and it plays a direct part in reproduction”
 « La docte ignorance », concept developed by Merleau Ponty, a french philosopher (1908-1961)
 Noberto R. Keppe “The New Physics Derived From a Disinverted Metaphysics” , 2005, Publishing House Proton
 Noberto R. Keppe “The New Physics Derived from a Disinverted Metaphysics”, 2005, Publishing House Proton
 In astronomy, we have fundamentally different coordinate systems which describe the topo-centric viewpoint (from where you are), the geocentric viewpoint (from the position of the Earth), and the heliocentric viewpoint (from the position of the Sun); you can also project to another planet or to any point in the Universe.
 SORI’Astres, un module logique révolutionnaire http://www.rockastres.org/spip.php?rubrique12
The substances we normally classify as polluting are usually those which are known to contaminate, corrupt and endanger the environment. Humans produce and spread an astronomical number of different pollutants. According to Green Cross, there are six main toxic substances: hexavalent chrome, lead, mercury, cadmium and all radionuclides and pesticides.
In the last few years, however, we heard much talking about just one substance: carbon dioxide (CO2) generated by human emissions.
Is Carbon Dioxide a Pollutant?
Carbon dioxide always existed, even before the rise of mankind.
It is a natural gas, part of the atmosphere: its presence is therefore due to a precise strategy of Mother Nature. The earliest sources of carbon dioxide in the history of Earth were volcanoes. This gas enabled life to thrive.
CO2 is a fundamental substance pertaining to the vital cycles of plants and animals, for it is essential for vegetal life and photosynthesis: plants absorb carbon dioxide during the day, when there’s the right amount of light to complete the process and, in exchange, they provide a fundamental lively gas, without which we wouldn’t be able to survive: Oxygen.
How can then we believe CO2 is a contaminant gas?
CO2 is actually considered to be one of the main greenhouse gases present in the atmosphere. Natural greenhouse gases include water vapor, methane, nitric oxide and ozone.
The phrase “greenhouse effect” has become of very common use: it underlines a problem, but some clarification seems to be in order.
The term comes from the (partially incorrect) analogy with the way hothouses and greenhouses operate. This is a natural and important phenomenon for all forms of life on Earth – much alike the ones involving CO2 – since it has the capability of capturing the necessary amount of heat to create and to support the development of life.
Life as we know it is a direct consequence of greenhouse effect, since the very same process regulates temperatures on our planet. Without it, planet Earth would be nothing but an inhospitable ball of ice.
Man’s action pollutes and poses an impressive threat to the protective gas layer wrapped around the globe. The list of our sins is very long: combustion of natural resources in production and consumption processes, introduction of artificial chemicals in the manufacturing industry, massive deforestation, aggressive soil exploitation and overbuilding, contaminated water, sea and soil (a contamination caused by many reasons, wars and conflicts among them), natural resources converted in toxic non-biodegradable compounds, atomic tests, air traffic, rocket launches (which strongly impact on the higher layers of the atmosphere) and many, many more.
But there’s not much debating involving these things.
All experts and all the authorities we trust point to CO2 as the primary cause of the planet’s compromised balance: CO2 is held responsible for altering the greenhouse effect, generating global warming and climate change and leading to possible large scale catastrophes if not confronted.
Climate change, now seen as a dangerous phenomenon to oppose and to fear, has been and always will be natural. Man, of course, with his presence and actions, contributes in influencing climate, but some changes are already happening as part of a natural life movement.
A misleading use of terminology is also to be examined.
The following data should raise interesting questions.
Try a Google research typing: “CO2 – Greenhouse effect – Climate change” and look at the kind of information and visual content you are presented with.
The message is quite clear.
Over the last few years, we’ve witnessed a cultural and perceptive re-programming related to all environmental issues and their consequences on our lives. On the one hand, we could talk about “green-washing” and, on the other hand, “black-washing”.
One may think a distorted and misguided logic is driving our era.
But let’s get back to CO2.
Nowadays we can observe that everything, every gesture, every field, undergoes a specific exam: if it’s carbon-free (a non-sense), it’s deemed good; otherwise it’s bad. In the name of CO2 everything goes under revision, everything has to be scrapped (think about incandescent lamps replaced by harmful but “eco-friendly” light bulbs) and converted according to scientific, political and industrial (especially hi-tech) authorities’ criteria, aiming to one and one purpose only: a CO2-free or CO2-zero world.
Mass media blasts the news: carbon dioxide is responsible for all of our planet’s illnesses. If there’s no rain, it’s because of CO2. If there’s too much rain, it’s because of CO2. If it’s too cold or too hot, it’s because of CO2. All environmental disasters find a common root-cause in climate change, which is influenced by CO2 (and all of us).
Why is methane not charged with any felony, or nitrous oxide – not to mention CFC (chlorofluorocarbons) which are now used on a large scale and have long-lasting effects on the climate – nor all the other harmful man-made gases which significantly contribute to the greenhouse effect?
Our entire economic system (industry, technology, agriculture, transportation, etc.) is today facing the challenge of becoming a “green economy”, following the lead dictated by industries, local governments and international institutions, such as the EU and the UN, who guide the fight against CO2 as the one and only global menace we must deal with.
This is the main broadcasted idea; any disagreement or skepticism is highly frowned upon. To deny any of the theories regarding climate change (in the sense of “global warming caused by CO2”), results in being immediately accused of “negationism”, the very same negationism of those who deny the Holocaust. This unusual term is used to indicate when someone refuses to accept official theories which are not to be considered theories any more, but hard facts.
From Life’s Cornerstone to Death Bearer
After many, many years of “information”, everyone, or almost everyone, has now forgotten all of CO2‘s merits in terms of sustenance for our planet.
CO2, holding such a crucial role in vital processes, should not be demonized at all.
Common sense should tell us that science itself is not evil: it’s the use you make of it that can be addressed towards good or evil goals. What are we doing about this?
Every living cycle, in order to endure, has to constantly keep opposite poles in balance. These are the fundamental features of life on our planet in every circumstance. The very same bipolar essence can be found in the way we breathe, as we all know. Our breathing process starts with the inhalation of oxygen-rich air and ends with the exhalation of CO2-filled air. Breathing is the mean of transportation for oxygen to get to our internal organs and tissues, while carbon dioxide is removed from them.
Earth is a living, breathing being. It has, however, a longer-lasting breathing cycle, way different from what happens with human breath within a handful of seconds. The signs of this respiratory process can be found in the thriving, withering and decaying cycle of vegetable substances. Inhalation: plants start to sprout. Exhalation: leaves and plants decay and return to the soil and the Earth, just as the air we breathe remains inside our body.
NASA’s OCO2 spaceship observes the breathing process of planet Earth from space and is able to examine and trace what happens to the gases partially absorbed by oceans and plants.
Half the oxygen we breathe comes from our oceans and, naturally, from plants.
Plants breathe in a way that is complementary to man’s breathing, inhaling CO2 and exhaling oxygen. Man could not endure without plants. This miraculous balance is threatened by the fast, hectic, aggressive progress of mankind.
Is CO2 Really Dangerous for Man, Flora and Fauna?
Could the “remedies” implemented to “avoid catastrophe” be the real threat instead?
Such persistent and alarming scaremongering could eventually justify an intervention on the atmosphere itself, as if some sort of “air chemotherapy” was our only hope.
For example, Solar Radiation Management (SRM), consisting of inputting nanoparticles in the atmosphere through airplanes, is considered to be a low-cost and easy method (v. Teller, Keith, Caldeira, Robock …). A similar logic applies to Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR), which implies releasing substances that will reduce the amount of CO2 present in the atmosphere (enhanced weathering).
Phil Williamson from East Anglia University estimates that, in order to comply with the Paris climate agreement, it would be necessary to remove more than 600 billion tons of CO2 before 2100. However, according to Williamson, it would be better if this happened within four years. Though he is aware that this kind of “removal” can be very expensive and has not been tested yet on such a “necessary” scale (but some experiments have been done), he strongly believes we should reduce our emissions as soon as possible. Another possible method involves a certain technology capable of operating on clouds, seeding them with substances in order to generate alkaline rains which could respond to carbon dioxide in the air.
Even before mankind could begin to understand life, the environment and its complex auto-sufficient system, we began playing God and remodeling the planet.
Earth itself has responded to the increased quantity of CO2 in the atmosphere by turning a darker shade of green, but even this was deemed to be a negative omen, an act of defense against the oppressor CO2.
It is not my place to decide if the official scientists’ reports are truthful or if anthropogenic CO2 is really first and mainly responsible for present and future natural disasters. A serious and open debate should be started among those who possess the knowledge and experience to ascertain the truth, but I don’t see that happening.
And yet, there are many influential scientists (even Nobel Prize winners) who are now opposing the mainstream dogmas (Dyson, Teller, Rubbia, to name a few).
Assuming all the “official” theories are true, which paths could we undertake?
Shouldn’t we first of all stop attacking and harming our Earth? Shouldn’t we clean up instead of further poisoning the planet in an attempt to save it? Let’s go on and see.
To summarize: the term “climate change” is often used as a synonym for global warming caused by CO2 and is now settled in our heads as the most pressing issue our planet is facing. All of the more and more frequent environmental and extreme meteorological phenomena are now attributed to global warming: desertification, sea level rising (there has been much talk about this in the last few years, but it looks as though we are not there yet), epidemic outbreaks, famines, mass migrations, ice caps melting and so on.
In November 2014, after the IPCC issued its climate report, USA Secretary of State John Kerry warned us:
“Those of you who ignore or question all the data clearly illustrated in this report are endangering us, our children and our grandchildren.“
Another time, he defined climate change as a weapon of mass destruction.
The whole mass media sounding board has been resonating with alarming messages for years now. But are all those people shouting out warnings actually worried? Many and diverse worrisome issues have presented themselves as concrete threats for our climate, but they ended up being systematically ignored.
All of the other greenhouse gases have been overlooked, as well as all the efforts made in the last few decades in terms of climate and weather control.
Many years ago, some thought has been given to this matter.
A 750-page governmental report titled, “WEATHER MODIFICATION: PROGRAMS, PROBLEMS, POLICY, AND POTENTIAL. – MAY 1978″, addressed the massive amount of information concerning the increased involvement of the USA government in climate modification and weather warfare. This document, moreover, exposed the complicity of many other foreign governments – even countries considered to be “hostile towards USA interests”.
The text also discusses a great number of aspects and consequences of national and international weather modification programs: all the biological, social, environmental and legal implications (among which arose the need to obtain complete immunity from any form of legal accountability).
The military-industrial complex has openly declared its will to “Own the Weather“ (Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025).
Aside from this, many other issues carry a strong influence on climate change. According to Maryland University’s researchers, intensive agriculture on a global scale, is contaminant enough to alter the balance of our atmosphere and at a very quick pace due to the increasing need to expand cultivation to the detriment of forests and to the massive use of chemical fertilizers which release ammonia fumes into the atmosphere. This is, in fact, one of the biggest CO2-producing industries, only second to transportation.
The IPCC’s report asks all governments to forego fossil fuels by 2100 in order to put a stop to global warming. Studying bio-fuels, however, one may find that their environmental impact is no better than gasoline and, as aggravating factors, they require deforestation and land-grabbing. These bio-fuels end up emanating more greenhouse gases and polluting more than fossil fuels. Man is the most ruthless predator in the world: exploiting, oppressing, killing.
There is no doubt that we humans are the main cause of global destruction. We are turning our planet into a giant poisonous junkyard.
We act and live in the name of disposability.
Obsolescence is programmed: the shorter an item’s life, the better. The planet is endlessly ransacked, our oceans, soil and skies manipulated with unprecedented brutality. Land, forests and water end up being poisoned by our food production system.
I could list a long catalogue of horrors.
In this extensive wasteland, is CO2 really the main problem?
Let’s suppose that it is and let’s observe reality through this lens.
Intensive farming is crucially and extensively culpable of CO2 and greenhouse gases emission, a massively calamitous production field under many points of view. Man has become excessively carnivorous. Compared to today’s numbers, meat consumption in the past was ridiculously inferior. The meat industry can be considered the first and most significant cause of biodiversity decline.
Mass media, for their own economic interests, continuously appeals to the masses for them to consume animals. Intensive breeding is an unwanted and unseen issue. All over the world, there are 1.3 billion bovine, 2.7 billion ovine and caprine, 1 billion swine, 12 billion poultry. Our cheap meat comes at a very heavy cost for all animals, farm workers, meat-eaters and for the whole planet.
Meat consumption is the great repressed memory of our time.
Intensive breeding, alongside a carnivore diet, generates more greenhouse gas emissions on a global scale than all of the cars, trains, boats, planes and trucks in the world combined. A sole cow has a yearly impact on the environment equivalent to driving a medium-capacity car for 70,000 km.
Sounds unlikely? This data derives from and has been confirmed by FAO (UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization), by World Watch Institute and by the Institute for Environmental Studies at Amsterdam University.
In 2008, the Institute for Environmental Studies at VU University, Amsterdam, led a study to assess how CO2 would decrease by reducing meat consumption, compared to other well known measures – such as eco-friendly light bulbs, limited use of cars, double-glazed windows. Researchers found that simply changing our dietary habits could be much more effective in reducing greenhouse gas emissions on a global scale than all of the other expedients. The case study was sampled in the Netherlands. Results showed that if all citizens were to abstain from meat for just one day a week for a year, 3.2 tons of CO2 would be spared. This is the equivalent of a million cars’ year-long use in the same country. Moreover, if all citizens were to abstain from meat for a whole year, a total of 22.4 tons of CO2 would be speared. This is the equivalent of the year-long domestic consumption of gas in the whole country.
There is yet another factor which holds a huge responsibility in polluting the environment and the proof is to be found in our heavily-disfigured sky.
Planes and Ships Are Heavily Pollutant, but We Play Dumb
In the last few years, air traffic has rapidly increased. Contemporaneously, a strong spike in CO2 emissions was registered.
In the future, air traffic will probably intensify even more, as explained in the EU Environmental Report on Aviation and in Eurocontrol. The Single European Sky project, which stands for a centralized regulation of the European airspace, was the one and only response to the growing air traffic flow.
Curiously enough, atmospheric pollution caused by air traffic and both civilian and military ships has always been completely overlooked in all statistical data on emissions and, therefore, has been excluded from all climate conferences and agreements.
Turbojets release a variety of toxic substances: nitrogen oxide (Nox), hydrocarbons (HC), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur oxide (Sox), particulate matter (PM), carbon dioxide (CO2) and toxic particulates, as recently discovered by atmospheric scientist Ulrike Lohmann.
In 1999 IPCC’s Report of Aviation and Global Atmosphere warned us about the effects of air traffic, but after that the issue went silent, as if a veil was drawn over it.
Did air traffic emissions cease to be seen as a problem?
Yes, and even more so. We can observe a rapid and strong development of air traffic, also thanks to new supporters. In 2002, European military airports opened their runways to low-cost companies such as Ryanair. Such low prices facilitated prodigious air traffic growth, also due to a peculiar advantage: the whole industry benefits from a tax-free policy on all fuels. Furthermore, low-cost air traffic is funded with public money, so it is safe to say someone is paying in order for it to exist and thrive.
But, in the face of these ridiculous prices, no one was seen protesting.
Ryanair recently announced possible free rides in the future. It’s not fake news. It’s a promise made by Michael O’Leary.
Our skies radically changed their appearance in the last 10-12 years, disfigured by contrails: long, short, wide or thin, with a great variety of shapes and colors never seen before, these trails are creating a white veiling and washing out the blue color of the sky.
Questioning this chaos sounds necessary and someone did.
But the answer is always the same: it’s just water vapor, just normal vapor trails – says everyone we deem informed and trustworthy.
This phenomenon has gradually and I mean gradually, spread since 2002/2003 in Europe and a few years earlier in USA/Canada. Today it nearly involves the whole globe.
Low-cost Culture Has Redefined the Skies
Air traffic pollution noticeably increased in the last few years.
Kerosene, a fossil fuel used as airplane fuel, is in itself very poisonous. Air traffic is the cause of greenhouse gases emissions’ rapid growth and therefore represents one of the most relevant threats to our planet’s health. Airplanes generate tons, millions of metric tons of CO2, so it really comes as a surprise that these data were excluded from each and every climate conference to date. These fuels actually release into the troposphere nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide and water vapors which can turn into acidic rainfalls.
Aviation is also responsible for the dispersion of tons of toxic particulates into the atmosphere.
If the severe repercussions of air traffic on our environment are so well known, why were they never seriously taken into account when talking about climate change?
A study asserts that aerosols strengthen storm clouds, facilitating extreme weather conditions to arise. Thunderous formations are, as stated in the article, the “primary source of rainfall in the areas surrounding the tropics and medium latitudes and their duration can directly influence the variability of precipitation, especially the extreme ones which can result in floods and overflows“.
Daniel Rosenfield, atmospheric scientist and researcher at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, adds:
“Clouds can reflect solar radiation and release the corresponding thermal radiation into space: this particular phenomenon is very interesting for it could influence the radioactive balance of our atmosphere and the temperatures on Earth.”
Scientists have verified that aerosol, soot, dust and other particles discharged in the atmosphere can influence weather by reducing rainfall in dry regions and increasing the strength and violence of storms, blizzards and monsoons in humid regions.
Zhanqing Li, who further researched this issue, explains that, in the presence of extremely polluted air, convective clouds undergo a series of mutations which raise the probability of intense rainfall. Fully comprehending the link between clouds, aerosol and precipitation is nowadays one of the main challenges climate research has to face.
NOAA Confirms: Aircraft Trails Are a Form of Geoengineering
For decades now solar light has been shining on Earth with a weaker and weaker impact. The reason is to be found in aircraft contrails, an involuntary geoengineering operation. We are employing geoengineering right now, but we are unaware of it.
Airplane contrail (Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0)
Chuck Long, an eminent expert working for a world-class research agency, the Earth System Research Laboratory at NOAA (USA’s federal agency for the study of atmospheric conditions), strongly believes this. Speaking at the American Geophysical Union convention, he underlined the existing connection between aircraft trails and the gradually fading hue of the sky on an almost global scale: contrails unloading particles in the air cause this phenomenon. Therefore, air traffic is responsible for large-scale atmospheric alteration.
Dr. Peter Kalmus, atmospheric scientist at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, declares that the overall impact of air traffic on climate is two or three times as strong as the one caused by CO2 emissions. The reason is simple: aircraft release nitrogen monoxide in the superior troposphere, creating trails and seeding clouds with aerosols derived from fuel combustion. These three facts combined contribute to increase temperatures on a short-term basis (please note that graphics in this article do not account for these effects). Not only civil and military aircraft emissions but also shuttle launches as well damage and weaken the stratosphere, lacerating the thin ozone layer covering Earth and thereby posing a great threat to life on this planet.
Earth’s Ozone Layer Is Still Depleting
Chlorine chemicals issued directly into the ozone layer by civil aircraft, chemical tanks and military planes flying at an altitude of over 13km above sea level, along with almost daily launches of propellant rockets from Cape Canaveral and Vanderberg, are literally consuming Earth’s ozone layer, already compromised by past nuclear tests, piece by piece. Facing the atrocity of this reality and confronting all the existing data on the subject, one could feel very displeased with the absurd standpoint taken by institutions, scientists and various representatives in front of the situation of our skies.
Going back to CO2, on a final note: the masters of Earth have appointed CO2 with a key role in the transformation of the planet.
Smart World: The Brave New World
In the name of CO2 reduction, the world is going to change. The European Union is planning on spending €270 billion per year on climate safeguards. In the next 40 years, according to Connie Hedegaard, reducing CO2 emissions by 80-90% will be the primary goal.
How? Promoting the foundation of Smart Cities.
The “Smart Grid” concept consists of installing an electronically-controlled widespread network capable of monitoring and coordinating life in society. In the name of “security and sustainability”, monitoring devices will be applied in everyday-use appliances (washing machines, refrigerators, heating systems, light bulbs …). All activities in both public and private spaces will undergo extensive surveillance. Each activity connected to an electronic device will be identified and recorded by sensors.
All data regarding our habits and daily activities will be collected and stored in a database. The European Commission launched the Smart Cities & Communities European Innovation Partnership (SCC). Smart Cities and Communities represent a fundamental part of “Horizon 2020” research. European sustainability goals “20-20-20” strongly encourage this evolution, calling for a 20% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions (compared to the data available in 1990), a 20% increase of energy efficiency and reaching a 20% share of electricity provided by renewable sources – all to be achieved by the year 2020.
This expanding revolution involves everyone’s home, assuming that reducing CO2 emissions must become everyone’s main concern. All of our houses must become “smart and green”. We must all act responsibly towards the environment, in our own small way.
What does that entail? That our house must become “smart”.
In order to facilitate this transition, great promises have been made: comfort, welfare, security, consumer goods and cost reduction – everything will be better managed, they say. Tons of articles advocating Smart Homes support these claims.
However, there’s a catch.
We would be observed, followed, and monitored. Our location and our relationships could be exposed at any given moment. Our habits, our preferences, our political ideas, our likes and dislikes would be openly known.
They already know a lot about us.
Thanks to cell phones, tablets and computers we are constantly analyzed, scanned and filtered. Whatever information can be gathered from our habits is a precious asset. Today more than 10 billion computers, smart phones and tablets constantly exchange data worldwide. The gigantic amount of data collected on each individual allows intelligence agencies to predict and to analyze our behaviors – also in order to identify potentially dangerous subjects.
Is a smart and clean world sustainable? No, it is not.
We would be submerged in even more microwaves, day and night.
There is increasing proof and testimonies pointing out that electro-smog and electromagnetic fields created by antennae, cell phones, cordless phones, Wi-Fi have harmful repercussions on human health. A large number of studies show that radio-frequency radiation damages the environment, as well as the fauna that lives in it.
There is no easy way out.
George Orwell in his novel “1984” has not been able to foresee such ruin, whereas Huxley went pretty close in his “Brave New World”: so much so that it almost seems like a possible script for our future.
The Sweet Dictatorship has begun.
In the name of CO2 and Global Warming, are we going to accept it?
 CO2: IL SATELLITE OCO-2 DELLA NASA MONITORA IL RESPIRO DELLA TERRA https://www.greenme.it/informarsi/universo/13735-co2-satellite-nasa )
 Proposed Intervention Techniques Not Ready for Wide-Scale Deployment
Vandana Shiva interviewed by Maria Heibel: “Destroying Planet Earth: Geoengineering is the Ultimate Hubris” Source
As a scientist dedicated to environmental and health matters, Catholic nun, North American ecofeminist, Dr Rosalie Bertell has worked extensively with the UN as an expert on nuclear and chemical catastrophes. Bertell received the Right Livelihood Award and was granted nine honorary doctorate titles during her life. Her latest book, published in 2000 (Bertell 2000), though difficult to get because the publisher went bankrupt, made me open my eyes and shocked me deeply: Planet Earth: The Latest Weapon of War. It was in 2010 that I got it and we – the participants of a gathering of hundreds of women in Germany – founded the “Planetary Movement for Mother Earth” in order to disseminate Bertell’s work and create a better understanding of the current planetary situation (www.pbme-online.org). We translated the book into German together with new materials elaborated by Bertell until 2011, and published it in five editions (Bertell 2011, 2013, 2016b, 2018, 2020; a Spanish translation which we organized, appeared in Mexico: Planeta Tierra – La Nueva Guerra, Guadalajara 2018, a short Italian one in 2018 in Trieste, Pianeta Terra – Ultima Arme di Guerra, a French translation appeared in Paris in 2018: La Planète Terre, Ultime Arme de Guerre, and in Dublin finally the original version from 2000 as an enhanced edition in 2020).
Rosalie Bertell named me her representative in the German-speaking countries. And I had the opportunity to meet her in person and share a great friendship with her. I think it is because we had a similar approach to the world – loving this Earth and its life and suffering from its ongoing destruction that both of us were aware of very clearly.
As a major result of Bertell’s analyses and the additional research conducted by her before her death in 2012, we now know for sure that the devastation of the Earth is real and ongoing. Her work is unique until today and Planet Earth should be considered of being one of the most important books of the 21st century (Werlhof, 2017).
What Is the Crime Committed Against the Earth, Who Is Driving It and with What Kind of Ambition? “Military Alchemy” and Its Goals
Rosalie Bertell maintained that our planet, Mother Earth, is in the process of being transformed into a very special giant machine, a machine with a huge impact, namely “the latest weapon of war” (Bertell 2000). The talk is about the military of the East and the West, their scientists, their governments, their military-industrial complexes, including private corporations, which have been active in this transformation for more than the past 70 years, starting during the time of World War II (s. Fleming, 2010; Hamblin, 2013; Freeland, 2014; Kirby, 2017; in German C.O.D.E 1981).
It is evident that these developments took place mostly in secret, and subsequent debates only dealt with some of the related topics and mostly from a distorted point of view. This seems to have dragged on to the present day since neither the public and politics, nor civil sciences and most social movements or intellectuals have recognized what is occurring to our planet in reality (Chossudovsky, first 2016; Werlhof, 2017). All of them seem to remain unable to understand what is going on to this very day. In other words, the public remains dormant, though the problem of military geoengineering is already more than 70 years old!
In 1999, the European Parliament (EP) voiced criticism regarding the use of new technologies applied against the Earth, but the European Commission intervened from above bringing forward the argument that the criticized technologies were a military matter and should not be judged by parliamentarians (cf. Fosar/Bludorf, 2011, p. 21). Rosalie Bertell, who had supported the petition to the EP in 1999, remarked:
If the military is tampering with our air, water, the soil, or doing anything that questions our living conditions, let alone has the potential to destroy them, that simply must not happen! We would have to discuss this publicly. Beyond all secrecy, we must have a right to that! (cf. Werlhof, 2017, p. 145).
The same happened to a new initiative brought forward to the European Parliament. We, as a group of 50 activists from all over Europe, launched a new petition in 2013 through our organization “Skyguards,” calling it “Civil Society vs. Geoengineering” (Werlhof, 2013b). In 2014, the EP accepted our petition to re-open an official investigation on the issue. Yet the result paralleled the one obtained in 1999. Again, the European Commission rejected the petition in 2016 as it dealt with “military issues” which are regarded outside the competence area of the EP. 19 years ago, Rosalie Bertell had concluded that the military project of taking control of the planet means using the Earth’s forces for war, a completely new war, not only capable of destroying the “enemy,” now defined as humanity itself and its basic living conditions, but indeed the planet Mother Earth herself.
This insight is unique until now. Most people, however, seem not to know about it yet – including Pope Francis with his Encyclica Laudato Si, Noam Chomsky, and Naomi Klein (2015), as well as almost all ecological and alternative movements across the planet. How can it be that they do not see the new reality of our Mother Earth? Or, if they are indeed aware, maybe they do not understand, and/or they prefer not to speak about it?
What nearly all of them are doing, however, is repeating the story of a “global warming” and “climate change,” as defined by Al Gore, the UN, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), namely: a problem allegedly produced only by growing amounts of industrial CO2 emissions – an alleged greenhouse gas out of many others. As a result, the whole ecological and other political, social and esoteric movements are now demanding a reduction of CO2 emissions and of consumerism as well, so that another lifestyle and less civil industry would solve the problem. They seem not to be aware of any other reason that could have caused the problem and believe in those – including most of their governments – who have defined the problem as being the result of just certain industrial CO2 emissions (critique in Bertell, 2013, pp. 312ff).
According to Bertell (2013, pp. 321-323), phenomena such as “climate change” and “global warming,” which are not – and even cannot – clearly defined scientifically, hardly bear any relationship with the increase in CO2 emissions. The concrete forms of this change and of notions of a warming and other irregularities have instead to be regarded as the result of seven decades of “geoengineering,” namely military experiments on and with our planet. I have defined this endeavour as “military alchemy,” to be understood as an intent to transform the planet into a “better” or “smart” one, namely a giant war machine that obeys the orders of the military (a definition with which Rosalie fully agreed. She even wanted “Military Alchemy” to be the title for a new English edition of her book).
Nature does, however, not react immediately to its manipulation, but generally seems to need a time lag of 40-60 years to do so. We have, therefore, to expect that the effects of the manipulations, experiments, and secret acts of war with her, and against her as well, are just beginning to show up and will eventually accumulate over decades to come.
So, we need to investigate these experiments carried out in free nature and find out more about this new type of war which is already occurring without having been “declared” and which will go on in the future, as to be expected. We call this trend “weaponization” (cf. ETC Group). This means:
What is planned now are climate and weather wars, wars in which earthquakes and volcanoes, floods and droughts, hurricanes and monsoon rains will play a role (Bertell, 2013, p. 57), and even more as we shall see.
In view of these dangers, it is most important to define which types of technologies have already been and are still being invented, used, and developed capable of producing effects so large as to create an impact on a planetary scale.
Moreover, we need to examine the issue of CO2 and its role. Is it really the reason for the destruction that life and the planet are experiencing already, or is it only a pretext for certain policies and serves creating a myth that is misguiding the public by hiding the real problems and their causes?
So, let us investigate into the new technologies that can be said to have or have already had an impact on a planetary level:
Geoengineering and the Nuclear Age
Military geoengineering starts with nuclear technology. The history of nuclear technologies commences with the development of the atomic bomb in the 1940s. It was the famous Manhattan Project, in which the bombs launched over Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 were invented. This was a scientific experiment under the cover of war in order not to spark off too much protest (Easlea, 1987).
The inventors of nuclear technology at that time believed it to be the new solution for solving nearly any problem. Edward Teller, who invented the even more powerful hydrogen bomb, thought of applying it in various projects. Teller was the first “geoengineer,” i.e., someone like a planetary “alchemist,” who tries to dominate, “tame” and transform the Earth as an entire planet using the new technologies for these means. He even was the first to proclaim global warming and to spray the atmosphere with aluminium-aerosols (Kirby, 2017, p. 21f, 26, 29).
Between 1958 and 1962, Edward Teller launched the atomic bomb, including the hydrogen bomb to explode in the atmosphere. He wanted to see what would happen (Bertell, 2013, pp151ff). The experiment occurred in the typically scientific manner of “trial and error.” It consisted of destroying parts of nature, in this case parts of the atmosphere, in order to learn how it reacts and thus being able to dominate it more properly.
Between 1958 and 1998, approximately 2,200 atomic bombs exploded in the atmosphere, above and underneath the soil (especially in Nevada and Central Asia) and above as well as underneath the water surface of the Southern Pacific Ocean and the South Atlantic (Bertell, 2013, p. 323). Regions of the so-called Van Allen Belts in the atmosphere, being part of the magnetic field of the planet, were severely damaged and destroyed by these explosions.
The magnetosphere of the Earth since then is constantly diminishing and the Van Allen Belts have not recovered from these attacks until today and may never be able to do so (Bertell 2013, pp.151ff). This is important to know as these belts are regulating the balance between the Earth’s mass and movement in relation to the Moon and within the solar system in general (Bertell 2013, pp. 454f)
The Ozone Layer Damage
This way, radioactive radiation destroyed and continues to destroy parts of the atmosphere, the blue of Planet Earth, by producing holes in the ozone layer and a general weakness of it, of which it is not recovering (s. Titze, 2018; PMME, 2018). This is important insofar as the ozone layer protects the Earth from cosmic radiation that is detrimental for life on Earth. The first ozone hole was observed over the South Pole, which was then followed by the ozone hole over the North Pole in the aftermath of the accident at the Fukushima nuclear plant in 2011, which continues to emit radioactivity incessantly and cannot be stopped (cf. Shimatsu, 2014; Snefjella, 2015). Yet to this day, for example, scientists tell us that the holes in the ozone layer are simply due to the CFC emitted from our fridges (Bertell, 2013, p.252; cf. Shimatsu, 2014). Since 2018, however, it is known that the ozone layer is also damaged in general and outside of its holes so that UV-B and -C radiation reach the ground and threaten the life of insects, corals, and plankton, as well as trees and plants in general, influencing the food chain and agriculture (Herndon, 2018 in Werlhof, 2018).
The moment of truth has come because it would need decades to let the ozone layer repair itself assuming that the negative influences on it have been stopped. Something like that is, however, not in sight at all because the ozone layer is also damaged by the application of other military technologies, such as supersonic flights (Bertell, 2016a, p. 115), and NASA’s and other agency’s missiles and rockets for space (Bertell, 2013, pp. 184ff, 253, 267). Chemical and nuclear substances, including chlorine and plutonium, the most toxic of all (spacecraft Cassini, launched in 1997, arriving at Saturn in 2015) were necessary for trespassing the protective layers of the atmosphere towards space leading to its increased destruction (Bertell, 2011a, 2013, pp. 156 ff).
According to Bertell, a growing weakening of the ozone layer could even put an end to agriculture in many parts of the world and possibly even across the planet as it amounts from now nearly 10 to 20% (Bertell, 2011a).
Cosmic electromagnetic radiation is composed of not only ultraviolet but also X-rays and microwaves, etc. (Bertell, 2013, p. 230) as well. Especially the latter ones are now imposed on Earth always more from space as well as from the ground (5G; s. Freeland in this vol.). And recently, it was found that beneath the waves, even oxygen disappears (Breitburg et.al. 2018), as ozone is a form of oxygen, too (O3). So, life could even suffocate!
The nuclear experiments have taught us something about the atmosphere which we hardly knew anything about. From the hostile to life point of view of science, however, they “had to be made” to obtain these insights. We, therefore, might never get to know the healthy functioning of the ozone layer and the whole of our atmosphere, the Earth’s magnetism and the relationship between both (Bertell, 2013, pp. 454-458).
A greater sun activity is, besides CO2, sometimes thought to cause the effects of something like a warming experienced in many parts of the globe too. Before, however, accusing the sun for being responsible, one should take the weakening of an always more destroyed atmosphere into consideration as well as the results of conscious weather manipulation as will be explained below.
At mountain levels, there has sometimes been a warming of 5-7 degrees centigrade, which – together with other factors like UV and a growing lack of snowfall and humidity (see below) – is leading to the retreat of the glaciers. In the long term, for instance, this will provoke the drying up of the rivers and the areas around the Himalayas, the Rocky Mountains (of the Hoover Dam close to Las Vegas), in the Andes and in the Alps. As a result, fresh water is becoming scarce in many regions of the world. Besides the air we breathe and the soil we need for our food, our feet to put upon and our housing, fresh water is the most precious resource on Earth and most necessary for assuring our survival (Film, 2010).
The “blue” of our planet, an extraordinary and sensitive layer, the presence of which differentiates us from all other planets, being an expression of life on and above our planet, exhaling and breathing and protecting us from cosmic energies that are detrimental for life on Earth, tells us about the horrid crime that is being committed by having started to destroy it. The necessity to protect the ozone layer of the atmosphere was even officially discussed at a UN conference in Vienna in 1985 (Bertell, 2013, p. 308), but had no influence on the debate further on, so it seems.
The CO2 Myth
Humanity, however, does not protest against the destruction in the atmosphere while protesting against CO2 emissions that have no negative relevance for the atmosphere and life on this Earth at all. On the contrary, CO2 is most necessary for all life on the planet (s. Heibel in this vol.). Carbon dioxide only makes up 0.04 % of the air — not to speak of just the industrial part of it — and has until the 1990s never been identified as causing warming but rather as being a result of warming processes (IPCC, 2018).
In sum, CO2 is a gas that descends to the ground whereas the warming effects are coming from above. There is a life-detrimental, “burning” toxic radiation entering the atmosphere, and — as we still shall see — on top of it there are tons of dirty, toxic, and humidity-capturing heavy metal aerosols released into the atmosphere that – among other things – lead to the effect of a fast drying out of many parts of the planet independently from any alleged warming (Wigington, 2014; Werlhof, 2017).
If CO2 was responsible for climate changes, it would have to originate in the troposphere (up to 10 kms altitude), where the climate is generated. A measurable warming, on the contrary, is happening a lot higher up in the ionosphere (80-200 kms). We should, therefore, be looking at a completely different phenomenon (s. post nuclear technologies) which is not about any CO2-induced climate change but atmospheric destruction above the troposphere and the ozone layer.
Bertell claims that CO2 cannot be responsible for what is called “global warming” and “climate change” (Bertell, 2013, pp. 321ff). If you look at these changes, they comprise many more phenomena that cannot be explained this way. Additionally, there is, for instance, also a “wobbling” of the planet around its axis (Bertell, 2013, p. 321 ff), eventually caused by the nuclear tests leading to more insecurity for the sequence of the seasons as well as for the activities of volcanoes, earthquakes, and ocean currents.
There are more changes of the weather and local climates observed that cannot be explained by the official “global warming” theory. Droughts and flooding, be it felt on islands or coasts, be it inland, can be an effect of rising sea levels due to the loss of ice everywhere and the change of ocean temperatures as well as to “freak weather” anomalies which can be “produced” intentionally (s. post nuclear technologies).
These developments, therefore, are not due to CO2 and a “global warming” either. The melting of the ice in the Arctic, for instance, has to do with electromagnetic extreme low frequency, ELF-waves, which have been emitted by the US and the Soviet Union to the Arctic since 1974 (s. Post nuclear technologies; Bertell, 2013, p. 256; Ponte, 1976; cf. C.O.D.E, 1981, p. 8). The new ozone hole over the Arctic, on the other hand, which appeared there for the first time due to the nuclear accident of Fukushima in 2011 (Shimatsu, 2014; Bertell, 2011), may have even contributed to the melting process because of UV and other cosmic rays penetrating the atmosphere since then with greater ease (Snefjella, 2015; 2016).
In sum, there are various forces acting together in a complex way and producing different effects in the atmosphere and down on Earth that have nothing to do with CO2.
For Bertell, finally, industrial activities are not important because of CO2 or any warming, but because of air pollution (Bertell, 2013, pp. 297-307; 3011-317). Dirt destroys the quality of the air we breathe but it is not responsible for the climate which is a macro-system of the planet as such.
Moreover, there are much more important greenhouse gases (such as water vapor) which are stronger than industrial CO2, particularly methane (cf. Bertell’s enumeration, 2013, p. 302), thousand times as strong as CO2, escaping at a massive scale where permafrost soils around the Arctic are melting. We can observe that methane is also a consequence and not a cause of warming in that area. In the CO2 debate, however, one barely speaks of CO2 in the form of methane; albeit once it has been set free, there is little point in focusing still on CO2 reduction. Reducing the debate mainly to blaming industrially produced CO2 — which is only 3% of all CO2 (Kirby, 2017, p. 29) — for climate change and global warming thus appears completely misleading, if not ridiculous.
On top of it, nobody explains why the air traffic does not play a role in the industrial CO2 debate at all, though it is one of its biggest producers (cf. Heibel, 2017).
Since 1988, policies and scientists representing the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of the UN have been solely focusing on (parts of) industrially produced CO2 (Gore, 2006) and exclude scientists critical of this view from the debate! IPCC scientists disqualify critics as unreliable since most of them have doubts about the role of CO2 and/or so-called climate change, as the IPCC understands it (cf. Curry et.al. 2017; IPCC, 2018; Engdahl, 2018).
There are other groups of “climate sceptics” who doubt that there are any changes at all. They are, for instance, composed of right-wing Republicans and military personnel (s. Hamilton, 2013b). It is precisely the latter group who knows better than others what is really going on because it is they themselves who have produced and are producing many of the observed changes, as we still are going to see.
So, in 1960 already, the CIA proposed “The Need for a Climate Control Study Program,” which was a program for the study and possibilities of induced climate change far beyond any CO2 question:
“The techniques which are and can be used for control of the weather environment vary with the scale of the operation considered and with the specific goals which are to be achieved with such weather control. Large scale climate control requires the modification of the global weather patterns by altering and interfering with the large scale physical processes… polar areas be covered with layers of soot… alter the energy balance of the atmosphere by injecting dust and other particulate matter into the high atmosphere…alteration of the chemistry of atmospheric substances… Achievement of an understanding of the large-scale physical processes of the atmosphere has been a continuing process over many decades… The circulation phenomena of relevance in global climate are not so readily amenable to laboratory simulation… it has now become feasible to… test and study (the) consequences (of human intervention in the atmospheric processes) … Control… will probably require access to energy sources of immense magnitude… In this atomic age, we now have available truly immense potential sources of power… Methods for the control of climate upon all types of human activities… could result in the reclamation of vast territories for … many… types of human activities, desert areas… are known … to require only slight changes in moisture regime to make them suitable for large scale agricultural production… Changes in circulation regimes can also affect the normal paths of destructive storms like hurricanes… and (can) have marked effects upon oceanic circulations… Moderate changes in climatic characteristics will have serious repercussions for all aspects of industrial activity… Militarily, a climatic control capability raises the possibility of a totally new type of warfare. This type of warfare may be termed ‘Geophysical Warfare’ in which our ability to control the weather environment can be used as a weapon” (CIA, 1960, p. 1-7).
At the end of the program, it is announced that “a series of systematical climate control experiments will be performed” (CIA a.a.O., p.14), to be read as “climate change experiments.”
We can consider this paper as a predecessor of Owning the Weather in 2025, from 1996 (cf. SPACECAST, 2020). And, indeed, nuclear power will be used for the application of new “post-nuclear” technologies to follow, including the installations of the production of electromagnetic waves and “plasma weapons,” the “ionospheric heaters”!
As a result, it is vital to promote a third opinion stating that there are indeed new problems the planet is experiencing. These are neither simple nor could they just be blamed on so-called global warming or CO2 at all, but are to be analysed as the results of secret climate manipulation, “weather wars” and the use of “plasma weapons” (Bertell), the “geophysical warfare” in action. What we need to do is to redefine the problem and its root causes. This is what Rosalie Bertell did in her work starting with the nuclear and going beyond it. We do not know, however, how the military today is defining the changes it, itself, is causing since decades. What we know is that after the Manhattan Project that invented the atomic bomb, the “New Manhattan Project” (Kirby, 2017) of geoengineering had developed a global warming perspective already, though at that time independently from industrial greenhouse gas CO2 emissions.
Rosalie Bertell told us that there is so much we do not know yet and a lot of questions she was not able to investigate in her lifetime anymore. The experiments with our planet and its “life support systems” (Bertell) all go on, and it is nearly impossible to know how they are really developing and what their synergies are. Even Rosalie was not able to come to a definite answer on how to explain the existing phenomena that are many, much more dangerous and a lot more diverse than is commonly assumed. Climate change and global warming as concepts are not only wrong in explaining these changes but are a misleading invention by those who want to conceal what is really happening. This is the case even more as we are facing the application of so-called “post-nuclear” technologies which is not considered anywhere in the “official” public discourse yet.
New “Post-Nuclear” Electromagnetic Technologies
The latest technological development after the nuclear one goes back to the Serbian physicist Nikola Tesla (1856-1943), who invented electromagnetic technologies. After his death, Soviet scientists and army personnel applied and developed them further for military use, later joined by US military scientists. Col. Tom Bearden is the next to try to explain Tesla’s inventions and their use (Bearden, 2002). The physicist Bernhard Eastlund later officially patented this knowledge (USA patents) for the functioning of the electromagnetic radar installation HAARP in Alaska (High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program) which is a result of the militarization of Tesla’s inventions, their “weaponization” (cf. CIA, 1978; ETC-group; Begich/Manning, 1995).
Image below: Aerial view of the HAARP site, looking towards Mount Sanford, Alaska (Source: Public Domain)
The public and even civil sciences have practically no understanding of the new military technologies developed by using Tesla’s inventions, since they have been systematically concealed. Mr. Tesla is not considered important, for instance in civil science, despite his inventions being the technological foundation for alternating voltage, electronics, computers, wireless communication, cell phones, electromagnetism, and their military as well as civil use, today’s “digitalization.”
Tesla lived and worked in the age of the inventions of “new physics,” to which also Einstein, Heisenberg, Bohm, v. Neumann and others belonged. Especially his approach to nature was different to the one that is common in modern science, as developed since the 17th century. Instead of perceiving matter merely as dead and solid, as did modern science, Tesla perceived it as somehow alive and moving in waves. One could say that Tesla in a way returned to a vision held in the pre-modern world, which was both material and immaterial, or differently said: he did not reject the idea of the simultaneous existence of matter and spirit, as did modern science by defining matter as “dead” and “spirit” as practically non-existing (cf. Merchant, 1980).
Tesla approached matter through its own inherent energy. He saw this energy in the form of electricity in nature and its relationship to magnetism, resulting in electromagnetic waves or radiation.
Tesla defined space to be filled with electromagnetic “energy” – for example using again the previously abolished concept “ether” (or “5th element”). From there, the world-wide movement in favour of so-called “free energy” developed (cf. O’Leary, 2010). By doing so, Tesla broke with modern classical science which considered space to be void and its notion of being somehow alive as “obscure”. Nowadays, cosmology is debating the same problem, e. g. gravity in relation to “dark matter” and “dark energy”. In indigenous cosmovision, on the other hand, the energy or life contained within space, or being space, equals its spirit, others call it soul and in matriarchal tradition this energy of life is referred to as “gynergy,” female energy (Daly, 1978), the “Goddess” (cf. Saracino/Moser, 2012), or “cosmic love” (Werlhof, 2007b).
Tesla ran many experiments to find out what occurred when the existing energy of the place expanded or shrank and when additional energy was introduced or taken away using an outside source. He produced an ocean of convincing findings, proving that with his method he could attain much greater, if not unlimited effects than when attempting to move solid matter, as is usually done.
Waves and radiation can reach anywhere and can have formerly unimagined effects, depending on the amount of energy that is introduced into the system, especially when done in a pulsed way and in resonance to the local frequencies. By these means, Tesla provoked the first artificial earthquake in 1887 or 1888. He almost destroyed his own house after having increased the electromagnetic energy, creating an effect that later was to be produced by the so-called “Magnifying Transmitter” (cf. Tesla o. D.; Bertell, 2013, p. 239f).
Nikola Tesla was highly conscious of having invented a technology the military could apply creating the greatest harm. He warned the public that used as a weapon and without limiting it, the new technology could theoretically destroy the entire planet and separate it into two parts, throw it out of the magnetic field with the Moon and even with the solar system and catapult it into space or into the Sun (cf. Tesla in Bertell 2013, p. 32, 223ff, 468ff).
Tesla assumed that instead of using electromagnetism for destruction, the world would reject any further war because of its terrible and uncontrollable results. If Tesla were alive nowadays, he would be appalled knowing that shortly after his death in 1943, a system of horrible weapons was developed and is still in the process of further development today, based exactly on his inventions.
Besides macro-effects on the environment that can occur when working with electromagnetic waves, there can also result negative impacts on the micro-level, namely on the human brain (Bearden, 2002), nowadays referred to as “mind control” (first Begich/Manning, 1995; Bertell, 2016). The possibility of controlling the human mind is due to the fact that our brain can be reached by EM-waves like everything else, which means that its own functioning is based on certain EM-waves and can, therefore, be disturbed by other EM-wave emissions similar to or different to it (cf. also CIA, 1978, Bearden, 1986, 2003; Becker, 1990; Bertell, 2010b; Kirby, 2017, p. 31ff on the invention and development of “psychotronic weaponry”).
The installations working with electromagnetic waves across the globe are not all known yet. The Russian “Woodpecker” worked already in the 1970s, its energies stemming from the nuclear plant of Chernobyl (Bertell, 2013, p. 227, 288). There were installations in Plattville/Colorado, Poker Flats and HIPAS in Alaska and, much later, HAARP (High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program) in Alaska from the beginning of the 1990s on (cf. Bertell, 2016a; Kirby, 2017, p.25ff), until recently the largest installation worldwide. Today there are an estimated 40 further installations active, for instance Arecibo/Puerto Rico, EISCAT/Norway, LOIS/Sweden, others in Greenland, the Netherlands, MARLOW/Germany, MUOS/Sicily, spread out across the globe (cf. Radar systems), in most “developed” and several “semi-developed” areas, including the Antarctic, and floating ones in the oceans (X-band radar). This technology introduces us to the largest potential dangers closely following those associated with the atomic bomb.
The installations mentioned vary in size yet the largest among them are built to send out up to a billion kilowatts into the ionosphere, hence called “ionospheric heaters.” These installations can even send this amount of energy to one single spot in the ionosphere to provoke the creation of “lenses” produced through the heat. This means that the atmosphere, which is electromagnetically charged, the ionosphere (at 80/200-1000 kms altitude), starts curving, reacting to the additional energy which is administered in pulses and turns so dense that it can be moved to guide the incoming electromagnetic rays. This way the angle can be determined from which the electromagnetic ray is supposed to return to Earth, to any place, even passing through the Earth’s core. Bertell, therefore, says that the ionosphere is transformed into a sort of giant gun which is directed against the Earth and all its life forms (Bertell, 2103, Part IV. A., C. D., pp. 444 ff). This is why Bertell calls Planet Earth today the “latest weapon of war” which is in use by misusing its own energies!
What is the aim of using the Earth and its energies transformed into weapons? (cf. Bertell, 2010b; 2016a):
Electromagnetic waves, depending on their frequencies, power in form of Kilowatts, and pulse can be and are applied for:
According to Bertell, it was in the 1970s when these “energetic” experiments kicked off and were already in use for acts of warfare against the environment as happened during the Vietnam War.
So in 1977, the UN tried to establish a moratorium on the application of these technologies through the “Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques”, ENMOD Convention (UN, 1977). The UN did not, however, ban the scientific and peaceful use of these technologies, so that HAARP, for instance, claims to be a merely scientific research installation. The European Commission, on the other hand, regarded the problem in a different way. It did not allow the European Parliament to draw conclusions from the investigation of the effects of the HAARP-installation, defining it to be a military affair that does not have to be judged by the public. Therefore, if the EC were right, then HAARP would be a case for the UN to be prohibited! This, however, does not happen.
Around 100 countries have signed the ENMOD convention, yet no country has tried to apply it to judge crimes against the environment until today.
As for Bertell, we surely would need an International Environmental Court (for the lack of laws concerning the damage of the environment, see Storr, 2013).
On the occasion of her participation at the 30th anniversary of the Right Livelihood Award, the Alternative Nobel Prize, in Bonn, Germany in 2010, Rosalie Bertell published a petition (Bertell, 2010a). In this petition, she stated that all the enumerated forms as to how these technologies can be used should be defined as
morally unacceptable and a crime against humanity and the Earth, since it affects the regular workings of the planetary system, causing or intensifying hurricanes, tsunamis, long-term rainfall, droughts, flooding, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions, among other effects.
The von Uexkülls, the founders of the Right Livelihood Award, and 20 of the RLA-Prize-winners who were present at that opportunity signed the petition.
Geoengineering, Geo-weaponry, Geo-warfare
In short, “ionospheric heaters” are capable to do much more than just change the weather in a particular region or promote changes in temperatures. No CO2 would explain their effects. Bertell defines some of them as “weather wars”. She claims the use of artificial electromagnetic waves to be “plasma weapons,” “plasma” being defined as the electrified state of the atmosphere beyond the solid, liquid, or gaseous state. Finally, Bertell calls the resulting military “geoengineering” as geo-weaponry, a possible geo-warfare of new dimensions (Bertell, 2010b; 2016a), and as “destruction of the planet” (Bertell, 2013, p.217).
This new war, unheard of in the history of humankind, is a war that has not necessarily to be officially “declared,” neither in the present nor the future (cf. MacDonald, 1968), as nobody can really prove who has started it and how it occurred. Yet, since the 1970s, Bertell has counted with ten times more seemingly “natural” catastrophes than before (Bertell, 2013, p. 306).
Bertell’s research told her that new wars never fight with the same weaponry as the previous ones. Furthermore, we simply fail to realize the threats the new weapons hold in store for us and our environment since the military is 50 years ahead of us (Bertell, 2010b). We should nevertheless become active before we know everything about the new weapons, otherwise it could be too late (Bertell op. cit.).
Investigating the damage that has already been caused to our Earth, Bertell did not only find out that the atmosphere had been weakened, but also that there was a weakening of the Earth’s magnetic field, at present approximately 10%, which is widely recognized though the reasons are not understood. Additional to the effects of the nuclear detonations, this weakening of the magnetic field can, in the meantime, also have been the consequence of more attacks via the ionosphere as the ionospheric heater installations are operating globally.
The same is true for the slowing down of the speed at which the planet had been spinning. The planet’s axis is even shifting and could indicate the beginning of a pole reversal that would have unknown consequences and eventually trigger the formation of new glaciers and melting of existing ice at the same time. In the Antarctic, both these effects have already been observed. For several years, the peoples who inhabit the Arctic on the other side of the globe have been confirming sighting “another sky” which can only be explained through the shifting axis of the planet.
This again has nothing to do with any CO2 emissions, of course.
There is also concern about the Gulf Stream being reduced in the future due to large amounts of fresh water streaming into the North Atlantic through the melting of Arctic ice. Scientists have measured that the Gulf Stream has now lost 30% of its force already (University of Southampton, 2005). Consequently, Europe could plunge into another Ice Age instead of moving forward to a warmer or even hot one.
Possibly effects on one side of the globe trigger parallel synergetic effects on the other side. Nothing happens without causing consequences. If, for instance, the jet stream is partly moved in one direction, this may have the opposite effect on another part of it. When Arctic cold reaches one continent – as is happening in the US and Canada in January 2018 – another one will be affected by an unusual warmth – as happened to Europe during the same time. Such synergies should be noticed and interpreted. The problem is how one experiment influences other ones and vice versa, producing eventually completely unknown effects or accumulating them.
Tesla remarked that technologies based on the use of electromagnetic waves could also be felt beyond the Earth, in the solar system and even further afield, since we are dealing even with “scalar” electromagnetic waves. Scalar waves seem to pass through the entire universe. However, modern technical devices and institutions are applying them in many civil and military fields. “Scalar-weapons” seem to be in secret use already (cf. Bearden, 2002; 2003; Bertell, 2013, pp. 234-239; Wood, 2014).
The so-called “space climate” which has been debated recently, influences the climate on Earth as well (cf. Rusov et al. 2010) and might be influenced by the application of scalar technologies simultaneously.
All this stands as an alternative to the CO2-related explanations for “global warming” and “climate change.”
It seems a lot more likely that many changes we are observing today result from the use of electromagnetic and their special form of scalar waves on Earth and from Earth into space. We then see accumulated and interrelated effects that are falling back on Earth (ESA, 2015; Weizenbaum in 1998 already talked about similar effects referring to computer systems and their fatal synergies in the future).
To nuclear and post-nuclear technologies that are still developed further (see below), we would have to add:
In sum: our air is a toxic nightmare! Our sky – nothing of a “heaven” anymore, but a hell that is threatening us during our lifetime already! There is even more to come (s. Relationship between spraying and ionospheric heaters).
Climate Change as Business
All this is never mentioned when climate change, CO2 and a so-called warming of the planet are referred to, as well as extreme weather events, apparently natural, together with seemingly “natural” catastrophes and their increase tenfold since the 1970s (Bertell, 2013, p. 306), which can in no way be explained by any growth in industrial CO2 emissions.
Above all, the actors have diversified. There has been an increase of geoengineering interventions in China, private corporations act on their own behalf and stock markets have entered the scene when “climate derivatives” serve to make profits with food disasters and more or less “natural” catastrophes. Climate change has become a billion $ market (cf. Freeland, 2014, p. 173ff), and its secret technologies are used for the atmospheric transport of huge masses of fresh water for “Desert Greening” in Saudi Arabia, for instance, whereas the surrounding regions down to East Africa often lack water for years and are drying out (see this). The economic and political consequences are to be seen everywhere in the region.
In 2010, the UN re-entered the match with the Nagoya Protocol (s. ETC, 2010) attempting to prohibit the use of non-authorized corporate geoengineering projects as well as the use of generally non-approved geoengineering efforts. In contrast to the ENMOD Convention of 1977, however, the UN does not mention the role of the military anymore and we can doubt the importance of its new moratorium. At this very moment it does not seem as if any of the players are listening to it.
What I have laid down here are the effects of current, mostly military geoengineering which is publicly unknown and beyond any public discussion. On the contrary, there are innumerable efforts to hide the role of the military, of corporations, politics and the new technologies applied. The whole political, public, and “scientific” debate has been concentrated on CO2 and “global warming” as a smokescreen, behind which the ongoing catastrophes are concealed, and social movements guided accordingly in the direction of the so-called “alternative”, a controlled life in new “smart cities” (cf. Heibel in this vol.). This alternative would be nothing else than the necessary adaption to the unfertile, toxic, dangerous, scarce, and hostile desert to which we are moving (s. Henrion in this vol.), not to speak of the ongoing war against us, the environment, and the planet as such which we are supposed to ignore or tolerate. Indeed, we are finally blamed with being responsible for having produced the whole dilemma ourselves!
Current State of the Debate on “Civil” Geoengineering: From the Clandestine Spraying of the Atmosphere to “Solar Radiation Management” (SRM)
Since military geoengineering, as described here, is not considered in any public debate because the “elites” cannot possibly confess what they are doing to us and the Earth at all, the issue and concept of geoengineering is wrongly defined, if at all. Only recently, the term “geoengineering” appeared in public though as “civil” geoengineering alone which is presented to be not so much of a danger but a chance in view of the apparent difficulties to cut CO2 emissions (cf. Fraile, 2018).
For instance, the UN climate conference COP21 in Paris (30.11.-10.12.2015) agreed upon to limit so-called global warming to 1.5-2 degrees centigrade, – presupposing that this amount of global warming as such does exist and can be measured at all. How could this goal ever be reached? (cf. Fraile in this vol.)
One of the first civil scientists to speak out was Prof. David Keith from Harvard University, who talked about “solar radiation management” (SRM). Keith proposed to use nothing less than sulfuric acid that he wanted to be sprayed over the planet to cool it down this way (Keith, 2015). Even Keith, however, declared not being sure if the living world would survive this experiment! Such an assault on life did not yet take place, but how is it possible that he could propose this experiment without any public debate, not to speak consent?
In March 2017, world famous Harvard University where Prof. Keith is working announced the launching of “The biggest Geoengineering Research Programme”:
The “Research programme will send aerosol injections into the Earth’s upper atmosphere to study the risks and benefits of a future solar tech-fix for climate change” (Neslen 2017; Harvard University 2017).
After the COP23 in Bonn, Germany in November 2017, it is obvious that finally Plan B is on the table, the use of geoengineering methods against “climate change” instead of mitigation which means continuing to reduce or “bury” industrial CO2 emissions. Before, Plan B was not discussed as a real programme because its existence was concealed and at Geoengineering Conferences it was only held as something to be tested for the future and regarded as too dangerous to be applied already now (Weiss, 2016; Fraile in this vol.).
In the publicly and politically visible academic circles it is – as always – assumed industrial CO2 to be causing the problems of climate change and warming (cf. Heibel, Fraile, Henrion, Freeland and Leblanc in this vol.). The “elites” and those behind them, therefore, declare the problems allegedly caused by CO2 not to be solvable because of the inflexibility of politics and the difficulty of changing our mode of production and patterns of consumption associated with our modern civilization and lifestyle regarded to be responsible for the CO2 problem.
There have been many UN conferences taking place that have failed to produce results in combating industrial CO2. The Paris COP21 gathering was then regarded an opportunity to start to launch for the first time the project of so-called civil geoengineering as Plan B to help against the “warming” of the planet (cf. Fraile in this vol.) by technically removing its symptoms alone. So-called “civil” geoengineering is now always more openly propagated to be the best way for “saving the planet” from climate change and warming. Recently, this happened again with the Special Report of the IPCC, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, published in October 2018 in Incheon, South Korea. Its aim is to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial times, as already debated in Paris.
Never Mentioned: Military Geoengineering as a Whole
Nevertheless, no mention is made of military geoengineering and the history of planetary weather, atmospheric, and climate manipulation and destruction by the military (see also Fleming, 2010).
Civil geoengineers present themselves as inventors of methods to be experimented referred to as new and promising. No one cares or better dares, however, to mention Edward Teller, the hydrogen bomb or the ongoing war against the planet by military geoengineering as geo-weaponry and geo-warfare. Why not?
Alleged “civil” geoengineering, as it is defined generally aims at:
Since geoengineering projects have been carried out in secret and through the military (both in the East and the West), any debate about this fact is deemed “conspiracy-mongering.” Today, however, geoengineering, defined as civil geoengineering – being new, scientific, and useful – emerges from the historical darkness and from the fact that until now its perpetrators have been consciously hiding it from the public because of its military background. Hence, talk about geoengineering is now permitted without risking being accused of making up conspiracy theories, or of simply being crazy, provided military geoengineering as such is left out of the debate.
Methods and projects in the realm of civil geoengineering, as geoengineers are presenting them publicly now, however, have been considered foolish and far too risky by scientists in past decades. But today, on the contrary, geoengineers are launching their projects as future experiments, the risks of which could allegedly in fact be minimized (cf. discussion in “Handelsblatt”, 4.12. 2015). Civil science and society have not massively announced any protests yet, as the constant propaganda makes them believe that such measures would indeed be urgently needed today (Fraile, 2015).
Only recently, a Manifesto, published in 2018 by the NGO “Hands Off Mother Earth,” claims to speak out against military geoengineering. In fact, this relates to SRM alone being now more openly propagated by the IPCC in its special report of the same year (PBME, 2018b). The Manifesto of the “civil society” does, however, not confess that SRM has been used for decades already and that military geoengineering is a very broad set of technologies having been developed since three-quarters of a century already. Additionally, the Manifesto even believes in the CO2-myth.
The Anthropocene and the “Better Planet”?
There is a growing number of geoengineers in the world based at prestigious universities and with always more funds donated (e.g. by Bill Gates). They are celebrating the “Anthropocene” (Crutzen, 2002, 2007), the era of Man dominating Earth!
From the point of view of “Alchemy”, this would mean to have reached the goal of it all, a “higher and better planet,” a “smart planet,” being the “Opus Magnum” of Mankind after having passed through the transitional phase of its transformation through its “mortification” and “taming”. It seems as if we are actually moving through this process. We, nevertheless, have indeed to doubt its being a positive development. What we see instead of a “new Earth” rising – as biblical and esoteric as well as civil geoengineers, the self-proclaimed “saviours” of the planet, want us to believe – is just the opposite, namely the “wreckage” of Mother Earth that is happening while she is being transformed into the latest and biggest “weapon of war” (Bertell, 2016a).
At all the international gatherings of geoengineers, currently growing in number everywhere, we can observe a constant pressure exercised to move to action due to alleged catastrophic global warming and climate change (Weiss, 2014; Fraile, 2015).
What a diabolical undertaking, indeed. People are motivated to agree with continuing to destroy the planet whereas they believe in saving it!
The discussion now centres around the most convenient materials to be applied in SRM measures. Foremost, we encounter metals like aluminium and sulphur in various forms. Yet nobody tells us nor do public institutions officially investigate into the effects those metals cause in the atmosphere (Wigington, 2014) and after having finally reached the ground. There appears to have been no research as of present at all by civil geoengineers about this part of the experiment (Weiß, 2014; Heibel, 2017). They behave as if the aerosols sprayed would remain in the sky.
David Keith, who is planning to sprinkle us with sulfuric acid as previously mentioned, in this way wants to imitate a global volcanic eruption thought to be able to reduce global temperatures as in case of the cooling effect after the eruption of Mount Pinatubo in 1991.
Former experiments using sulphuric dioxide have already at least caused so-called “acid rain,” damaging soils, forests, oceans, and its creatures. Now it is going to be much more threatening.
Various questions arise from these considerations:
Most importantly, however:
Civil geoengineers even make us believe that when they apply SRM to generate a sunshade there will be no serious risk of death on Earth through heat, anymore. They, nevertheless, say that it would be a mortal threat to switch off the global sunshade after a while because in this case, they say, the heat produced in the meantime would be lethal (cf. Weiss, 2016, p.533). They are constantly threatening the public with theories of catastrophic developments whereas they do not speak about the real threats through the weakened ozone layer and its real origins, not to mention the ongoing wreckage of the planet and its life support systems. Ironically, this may be explicable if one takes into consideration that SRM itself is participating in destroying the ozone layer (Wigington, 2014). So, when propagating this method, its side effects are to be denied?
In sum, what we see is a big propaganda network surrounding us that prevents people from knowing and even wanting to know what is really going on behind their backs since decades already, namely a secret war against us, all life, and the planet itself – a war that is supposed to be even supported by the people believing in it being salvation instead…
Meanwhile, an increasing number of social movements have emerged such as our European organisation Skyguards and the Planetary Movement for Mother Earth (Werlhof, 2016a). Especially in the United States we have seen the rise of movements. They have even more experience with the fact that spraying is not something of the future to implement SRM but has already been a reality for decades.
The findings of the various movements on what is dumped on us are the following:
North American film director Mike Murphy refers to them in his films Why in the World are They Spraying? and What in the World are They Spraying? (Murphy, 2012; 2014). There is so much evidence and there are so many documents internationally already that we can be sure beyond doubt that this is indeed happening (PBME, 2018; 2018b).
Moreover, Herndon found an air-drop material in the form of
“Synthetic cryoconite, or proto-cryoconite, whose purpose is to melt glacial ice. That explanation is consistent with the now near-daily, near-global spraying of a particulate substance, evidenced as coal fly ash, into the troposphere, which has the effect of causing global warming. … Yet, the consequences of this near-global weather- and climate modification geoengineering activity have not been taken into account by any of the climate change models evaluated by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a fact that calls into question not only the findings of that organization, but its moral authority as well. …
… Scientists worldwide should call for, and indeed demand, a full and open investigation into these covert geoengineering activities whose potential impacts on Earth’s climate system, the integrity of Earth’s biota, and on human health may prove to be extremely hazardous” (Herndon, 2017b).
As the spraying is even occurring in the atmosphere a lot lower than was assumed namely in the troposphere, this has led to the disappearance of botanical species as well, the reduction in food production and the loss of human lives as Herndon found out. Indeed, the spraying is a new, continued Manhattan Project (Kirby, 2017) against life.
Certain scientific journals, however, would not publish Dr Herndon’s results from his research anymore (Herndon, 2015), which shows the level of corruption reached in the civil sciences as well, not to mention the political sphere (cf. Leblanc in this vol.).
Aerial spraying is done by Air Force planes and a great number of civil airlines across the globe by tanks located on board of the planes. Information about the way how the sprayings are organized have been provided by pilots, mechanics and even air force staff alike, like Kristen Meghan, who have felt the need to share this truth with the public (Meghan, 2013).
Meanwhile, in 2013 Monsanto invented a seed that is resistant to aluminum. How did Monsanto know for so long about aluminum in the soil and why does – still – no ministry of agriculture seem to believe it?
Relationship Between Spraying and Ionospheric Heaters/EM-Technology: The Coming of a Planetary “Lockdown” and “Full Spectrum Dominance of the Earth”?
How then is SRM related to the technologies we have been describing, for example, nuclear and electromagnetic technologies? (s. Worthington, 2017). How relevant is it that spraying has been occurring for two to three decades already and has been increasing in frequency, intensity, and geographical expansion? Why are the perpetrators spraying substances on us that are so harmful to life?
The only thing we know for sure is that they carry out in the open (admitted by CIA, 1978) countless experiments with us and our life, or as we should say, with our death!
What does it mean after all that already in 1961, the US military wanted to create a “telecommunication shield” in the ionosphere by dumping 350 trillion copper needles into the atmosphere? What does it mean that this experiment failed miserably, even producing turmoil in the magnetic field of the Earth accompanied by a tremendous earthquake of 8.5 magnitude in Chile? (Bertell, 2013, p. 156f).
Yet, there seems to be a continued need for “replacement atmospheres,” as I call them, since EM-waves cannot pass holes in the ozone layer and experience increasing difficulties travelling through the remaining atmosphere as in the meantime it has been badly damaged. Spraying, or SRM respectively, is a solution for those interested in emitting EM-waves since the spraying allows guiding the EM-waves, emitted by ionospheric heaters through ozone holes and weaknesses. This may be a reason for the spraying of heavy and other metals that serve those purposes best: especially aluminum, barium and sulphur – if copper did not work out.
Does this mean that without SRM, i.e., without spraying metals into our skies, the military projects using plasma weapons via their installations of ionospheric heaters could not be carried out everywhere on the globe?
In the meantime, it is obvious that the sprayings have not much to do with cooling the planet. In fact, the sprayings originally have not aimed at producing any cooling effects. Instead, other motives have driven these experiments such as an interest in developing new weapons and the conditions for their use, namely “shields” that are surrounding an area or even the planet as such. These shields would guide the respective “plasma” weaponry using artificial metallic clouds, for instance.
Josefina Fraile of Skyguards, our European activist group, has warned:
“Climate engineering and solar radiation management (SRM) are the direst issues, after the atomic bomb, endangering the planet’s survival. In spite of this, the debate is being taken at the back of the concerned millions of inhabitants of this world by people that are not legitimatized to do it. As a result, for the sake of averting any counter reaction to these programs, civil society is kept ignorant of a serious issue that will affect every living being on Earth” (Fraile, 2015).
At this very moment, however, “civil” geoengineering first of all in the form of SRM is being promoted as the new and most promising technology of the 21st century. The idea of a shield or grid around an area or even the planet is not new. The grid is supposed to recognize hostile rockets and destroy them for instance (Bertell, 2013, p. 248f, 250) and transparent “spheres” or “domes” built of electromagnetic energy are used (Bertell a.a.O., p. 245), as Nikola Tesla had already envisaged them (Bertell a.a.O., p. 243ff).
More recently, however, the “weaponization” of our planet in form of a planetary lockdown (Freeland in this vol,) is occurring “before our eyes,” as Elana Freeland explains in her new book Under an Ionized Sky (Freeland, 2018):
“First, we were seduced by the convenience of a wireless world; then, atmospheric weather experimentation in the guise of carbons ‘climate change’ converted the air we breathe into an antenna. Now, the geoengineering we have been subjected to for two decades is becoming normalized as the ‘Star Wars’ Space Fence rises around and within us. Inside the electromagnetic lockdown of the Space Fence, humanity is to be neurologically herded toward a transhumanist future” (Freeland, 2018).
This way “chemical aerosols whiting our skies and ionospheric heaters around the world work together to assure … military operations of global control” (ibid.) and have started to operate from the space around the Earth, using satellites and locking us into a huge prison – our Mother Earth!
Thus, the “full spectrum dominance of the Earth“ (Freeland, 2014), is taking shape consisting of an electromagnetic planetary lockdown, geophysical weaponry like plasma weapons and directed “free“ energy weapons, DEW (Wood, 2014) from space or air (cf. Kadia in this vol.), Electro Magnetic Pulse-weapons (EMP, s. Rötzer, 2018), and psychotronic weapons of mind control, all combined with cellphones, computers, TV, smart homes and smart cities (s. Heibel in this vol.).
Is this the “civilization of alchemists,” the “Brave New World” the “civil” geoengineers are promising to be able to create as a positive future like the one of so-called “smart cities” and we, the people, are thought to help to create it, applaud to it, and agree to even die for it – as we have no idea what it means?
Rosalie Bertell warned us:
“Unfortunately, waiting for these weapons to be employed, in order to then be able to better understand them, will mean the end of our civilization and our life. Our research must be ahead of the threats instead of limping behind. Chemtrails are the attempt of biological and chemical warfare. What they are dumping on us now might only be a pre-taste of what is actually planned” (Bertell, 2011b).
What Is the Outlook for the Planet and Us?
“Few in the civil sector fully understand that geoengineering is primarily a military science and has nothing to do with either cooling the planet or lowering carbon emissions … While seemingly fantastical, weather has been ‘weaponized’. At least four countries – the US, Russia, China, and Israel – possess the technology and organisation to regularly alter weather and geologic events for various military and black operations, which are tied to secondary objectives, including demographic, energy, and agricultural resource management.
Indeed, warfare now includes the technological ability to induce, enhance or direct cyclonic events, earthquakes, droughts, and flooding, including the use of polymerised aerosol viral agents and radioactive particulates carried through global weather systems. Various themes in public debate, including global warming, have unfortunately been subsumed into much larger military and commercial objectives that have nothing to do with broad public environmental concerns. These include the gradual warming of polar regions to facilitate naval navigation and resource extraction” (Andersson, 2012).
The research paper Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025 published in 1996 by the US Air Force (1996) explains when and how the US will take control over everything related to our weather and climate, without needing any CO2 as a reason. We are merely four years away from the suggested 2025. We can assume that the military has done most of the experimentation already, our weather and climatic conditions being the object of constant manipulative interventions everywhere on the globe (cf. Fogg, 2011).
Isn’t it strange to see that the military-industrial-complex today is doing in plain reality what the European “witches” have been falsely accused of four centuries ago, namely, to alter the weather and be responsible for illnesses and death? They were burnt at the stake.
The supposed civil geoengineering is nothing but a continuation of military geoengineering which is now being promoted publicly and officially and even propagated as a way of saving the planet from “warming” through industrial CO2 emissions, a myth invented in the 1990s, mobilizing a large-scale public consent worldwide and occupying the ideas of social movements that believe they act in favour of Mother Earth!
We are instead facing the wreckage of Mother Earth (Bertell, 2016) and her general “weaponization,” paradoxically defined as an improvement through the military “alchemy” of the planet’s transformation into a mega-machine. This is the way that the new Gods show up with their latest “creation,” Mother Earth turned into a monster “born” by the military as her “father”!
In this way, certain human activities are dissolving everything that is important for the existence our planet as a cosmic living being – its cycles, elements, rhythms, matter, life forms, time, space, the relationship between Earth and sky, and between Earth and the surrounding cosmos.
The logic of all these undertakings consists in integrating us as human beings into the transformation of the Planet in order to form part of the expanding “Mega-Machine” the world is planned to become in the future. It is the project of the so-called 4th industrial revolution to realize the respective changes of humanity becoming a “trans”- and “posthuman” race – with unimaginable results and consequences (s. Freeland in this vol.; Introduction). This way the old dream of patriarchal civilization to “create” beyond mothers and Mother Nature would become true – its utopia realized!
Everything I tried to explain in this paper is unbelievable, beyond any imagination, appalling and completely new for all of us – though having become a growing part of our reality already. Recognizing it means to go through hell – the latest man-made hell of modern patriarchy’s “hatred of life” (s. Werlhof in this vol.). Rosalie Bertell, however, who was the first to see this hell, was so full of love for our planet that she was able to bear it and give us strength and hope. So, let us follow her even in times when “the sky may fall down on our heads” (Pasin, 2017, p.8), as the pagans of Saxony prophesied when Bonifacius, the Christian missionary, cut down Yggdrasil, their holy tree which holds the connection between earth and sky.
We are responsible for what happens to Mother Earth and to ourselves. There is, of course, no “right” to destroy her and us. On the contrary, this would be the supreme and ultimate matricide and self-destructive mega-crime possible!
With this “planetary consciousness” we should find out what we are to do now beyond all the fear that the new character and dimensions of this war, unheard of in history, is threatening us with!
We are to become Earth- and life-related human beings again. We belong to the Earth, and we cannot do without her. Women against geoengineering are the first to show this, to be firmly on the side of Mother Earth (s. Almendra in this vol.) and of humanity as her children. We are to defend her and ourselves in new ways which are to be discussed and practiced everywhere (Werlhof, 2021).
In contrast to the belief of patriarchs, the Bible’s apocalypse and many esoteric prophecies of today, there is no “second” Earth. This one is the only one we have. The same is true for our lives and for humanity.
Translation from Spanish by Nina Suzanne Hall and the author
Andersson, Matt: At War over Geoengineering, The Guardian, London 9.2.2012
Antarctic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=414&v=237F1_aLXZ8, Black projects and Climate engineering
Arctic: Why unprecedented ozone loss in the Arctic in 2011? Is it related to climate change? Study finds unprecedented Arctic ozone loss – Phys.org, October. 2011
Bearden, Tom: Fer de Lance. A Briefing on Soviet Scalar Electromagnetic Weapons, Santa Barbara 2002 (1986), Cheniere Press
____, Gravitobiology. A new Biophysics, Santa Barbara 2003, Cheniere Press
Becker, Robert. O.: Cross Currents.The Perils of Electropollution, the Promise of Electromedicine, 1990, J.P. Tarcher
Begich, Nick/ Manning, Jeanne: Angels don´t play this HAARP. Advances in Tesla Technology, Anchorage 1995, Earthpulse Press
Bertell, Rosalie: No Immediate Danger. Prognosis for a Radioactive Earth, Toronto 1985, the Women´s Press
___: Planet Earth. The Latest Weapon of War, London 2000, The Women´s Press; enhanced edition 2020, Dublin, Talma International
—–: Petition, 2010a, in: Bertell 2013, 2016b
—-: Interview: Planet without a Future, 2010b, in: 9th Information Letter, pp. 2-7, www.pbme-online.org
___: Letter to the UN Commission on Biodiversity, Durban 2011a
___: Email to the author, 27.11.2011b
—–: Slowly Wrecking Our Planet, in: Canadian Woman Studies, Vol. 31, No. 1,2, 2016a, pp. 113-117
—–: Kriegswaffe Planet Erde, Birstein 2016b (2011, 2013, 2016, 2018, 2020), 5 ed., J.K.Fischer
—–: Planeta Tierra – La Nueva Guerra, Guadalajara 2018, La casa del mago
___: Pianeta Terra-Ultima Arma di Guerra, Trieste 2018, Asterios
___: La Planète Terre, Ultime Arme de Guerre, 2 tomes, Paris 2018, Talma Studios
Breitburg, Denise et.al.: Declining oxygen in the global oceans and coastal waters, http://science.sciencemag.org/content(359/6371/eaam7240, 31.1.2018
BUMERANG (Boomerang), Journal for the Critique of Patriarchy, Nr. 0, 2015, Nr. 1, 2016, Nr.3, 2017 www.fipaz.at
Caldera, Ken and Govinda, Samy Bala, Long Cao: The Science of Geoengineering, in: Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 41, Nr. 1, 30. Mai 2013, S. 231–25
Chossudovsky, Michel: The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Destruction: “Owning the Weather” for Military Use, on: Global Research, 22. May 2016
CIA: The Need for a Climate Control Study Program, Declassified in Part – Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/06: CIA-RDP78-03425A002100020014-2, 1960
___:(Various documents on Tesla´s methods and their use including Soviet experiences and mind control), Approved for Release 2004/12/22: CIA-RDP81M00980R001100020017-0, 1978
C.O.D.E. (Conföderation Organisch Denkender Europäer): Hintergrundanalyse. Die Verwüstung Amerikas. Der geheime Wetterkrieg der Sowjets oder das verhängnisvolle Erbe Teslas, Frankfurt a. M. 1981, LIBRI
Crutzen, Paul J.: Geology of mankind, in: Nature 415, 23, 2002; Steffen, W., P.J. Crutzen and J.R. McNeill: The Anthropocene: Are Humans Now Overwhelming the Great Forces of Nature? Ambio 36, 2007, pp. 614-621
Curry, Judith et.al. https://science.house.gov/legislation/hearings/full-committee-hearing-climate-science-assumptions-policy-implications-and-the-Scientific-Method, 27 March 2017
Daly, Mary: Gyn/Ecology: The Metaethics of Radical Feminism. Beacon Press, 1978
Easlea, Brian: Fathering the Unthinkable (The Politics of Science and Technology). Masculinity, Scientists and the Nuclear Arms Race, Pluto press, London 1987
Engdahl, William: Climate Change, Panic Scenarios, Killing Scientific Debate. The Dark Story Behind “Global Warming“, on www.globalresearch.ca, 16.10.
ESA, European Space Agency: Weltraumwetter: Gefahren für die Erde, www.esa.int/ger/ESA_in_your_country/Austria. 2015-09-25
ETC Group, http://www.etcgroup.org/content/why-srm-experiments-are-bad-idea. Definition:
“Weaponization: The military origin and implications of geoengineering for warfare are often forgotten or intentionally not mentioned. But the whole idea of controlling the weather comes from military strategies and led even to the signing of the international Environmental Modification Convention (ENMOD). Military leaders in the United States and other countries have pondered the possibilities of weaponized weather manipulation for decades. If the aim of a technology is to “combat climate change,” it doesn’t guarantee its use will be limited only to that application. If anybody can control the Earth’s thermostat, this can and will be used for military purposes…”
___: Geoengineering Moratorium at UN Ministerial in Japan Risky Climate Techno-fixes Blocked, 2010
Federici, Silvia: Caliban and the Witch. Women, the Body, and Primitive Accumulation, Autonomedia, New York 2004
Film, 2010: When the Earth Dried Out, https//:www.youtube.com/watch?v=qznJwdZWYL8
Fleming, J. Rodger: Fixing the Sky. The Checkered History of Weather and Climate Control, New York 2010, Columbia University Press
Fogg, Martyn J.: Planetary Engineering Bibliography, Probability Research Group, London, rev. 2011.
Fosar, Grazyna / Bludorf, Franz: Zaubergesang. Frequenzen zur Wetter- und Gedankenkontrolle, Marktoberdorf 2011, Argo
Fraile, Josefina: Climate Engineers in Berlin – Coup d´Etat against global democracy, in: 11th Information Letter, 2015, pp. 12-20, www.pbme-online.org
____: oral intervention at Conference on Geoengineering, University of Cambridge, 12th of March 2015
Freeland, Elana: Chemtrails, HAARP, and the “Full Spectrum Dominance” of Planet Earth, Port Townsend 2014, Feral House
____: Under an Ionized Sky. From Chemtrails to Space Fence Lockdown, Port Townsend 2018, Feral House
Genth, Renate: Über Maschninisierung und Mimesis, Frankfurt a.M. 2002, Peter Lang
Goodell, Jeff: How to Cool the Planet. Geoengineering and the Audacious Quest to Fix Earth´s Climate, New York 2011, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publ.
Gore, Al: An Inconvenient Truth. The Planetary Emergency of Global Warming, and What We Can Do About It. Rodale Books, Emmaus (PA) 2006
Hamblin, Jacob Darwin: Arming Mother Nature. The Birth of Catastrophic Environmentalism, Oxford/New York 2013, Oxford University Press
Hamilton, Clive: Earthmasters: The dawn of the age of climate engineering, New Haven 2013a, Yale University Press, in Australia: Earthmasters: Playing God with the climate, Auckland 2013, Allen & Unwin
___: Die Rückkehr des “Dr. Stangelove”- Die Politik der Klimamanipulation als Antwort auf die globale Erwärmung (Juni 2010), in: Bertell, Rosalie: Kriegswaffe Planet Erde, J.K. Fischer, Birstein 2013b, 2. ed., pp.485-507
Handelsblatt, 4.12.2015: Thomas Trösch: Geoingenieure nach Paris. Riskante Waffe gegen den Klimawandel
Harvard University: Harvard’s Solar Geoengineering Research Program Launches Spring 2017, Washington 24 March 2017
Heerd, Ulrich (Ed.): HAARP Projekt über Mobilfunk zur Strahlenwaffe, Peiting 2012, Michaelsverlag
Heibel, Maria: Konferenz „Geoengineereing & Desinformation“ im Senat, Rom, www.pbme-online.org, 20.3.2017
Herndon, Marvin J.: Aluminium poisoning of humanity and Earth’s biota by clandestine geoengineering activity: Implications for India, in: 11th Information Letter 2015, www.pbme-online.org, cf.www.NuclearPlanet.com
____: An Indication of Intentional Efforts to Cause Global Warming and Glacier Melting, in: Journal of Geography, Environment and Earth Science International, 9(1): 1-11, 2017a
____: Immediate Release, Feb. 2017b
IPCC: Manufacturing consensus: The early history of the IPCC, 2018
Johnson, Andrew: Uncommon Purpose – Agenda 22, in: BOOMERANG, Journal for the Critique of Patriarchy, Nr.3, 2017, www.fipaz.at
Keith, David: Proyecto SCOPEX, in: Der Spiegel, Junio 2015
—–A Case for Climate Engineering, A Boston Review Book, MIT Press, 2013
Kirby, Peter: Chemtrails Exposed: Truly A New Manhattan Project, 2017 www.activistpost.com/2017/03/chemtrails-exposed-truly-a-new -manhattan-priject.html
Klein, Naomi: Die Entscheidung. Kapitalismus versus Klima, Frankfurt a.M., S. Fischer 2014
Klein, Renate: Stop Surrogacy Now! in: BUMERANG – Journal for the Critique of Patriarchy, Nr. 1, 2015, pp. 187-189, www.fipaz.at
MacDonald, Gordon: How to Wreck the Environment, in: Calder, Nigel: Unless Peace Comes: A Scientific Forecast of New Weapons, London 1968, Pelican
Meghan, Kristen: www.geoengineeringwatch.org/ex-military-bio-environmental-e, 2013
Merchant, Carolyn: The Death of Nature. Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution, Harper & Row, San Francisco 1980
Mumford, Lewis: Mythos der Maschine, Frankfurt a. M. 1977, Fischer (The Myth of the Machine 1967-1970)
Murphy, Mike: Films “Why in the World are they Spraying?” and “What in the World are they Spraying?” (YouTube, 2012, 2014)
Neslen, Arthur: US scientists launch world’s biggest solar geoengineering study, in: The Guardian, 24.3.2017
O’Leary, Brian: The Turquoise Revolution. Innovation and Sustainable Solutions – an Urgent Appeal to Scientists, Environmentalists and Progressives, http://firstname.lastname@example.org, 14 June 2010
Pasin, Patrick: L’ arme climatique. La manipulation du climat par les militaires, Paris 2017, Talma Studios
PBME, Planetary Movement for Mother Earth, www.pbme-online.org, 12th Infobrief 2017
PBME 13. Information Letter 2018
PBME 14. Information Letter 2018b
Philipps-Wefferson, Jeff: On the Brink Radio, email@example.com
Ponte, Lowell: The Cooling. Has the next ice age already begun? London etc. 1976, Prentice Hall Radarsystems: http://www.iarums-r1.org/iarums/radar-2012.pdf.
Rötzer, Florian: Wer wird zuerst eine EMP-Waffe einsetzen? Telepolis, 1.1.2018, htpp://www.heise.de/tp/features/Wer-wird-zuerst-eine-EMP-Waffw-einsetzen-3929961.html
Rusov, Vitaliy et. al.: Galactic Cosmic Rays – Clouds Effect and Bifurcation Model of the Earth Global Climate, in: Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, Vol. 72, 2010, pp. 398-408
Schütt, Hans Werner: Auf der Suche nach dem Stein der Weisen. Die Geschichte der Alchemie, Beck, München 2000
Shasta Community, California 2013: Poisoning the Sky. Geoengineering with Chemtrails. A
community investigates and fights back, en 10. Carta Informativa, www.pbme-online.org, 2014,
Shimatsu, Yoichi, 2014: Arctic Ozone Hole & Polar Melt Triggered by the Fukushima Catastrophe http://www.rense.com/general96/arctic.html
Snefjella, Robert, 2015: Our Nuclear Heritage: The Fukushima Catastrophe, Too Clever by A Half-Life, http://www.countercurrents.org/snefjella140715.htm).
____, 2016: Extremely Cautionary Catastrophes: Fukushima and Chernobyl, 28. of May 2016, in: Countercurrents.org
SPACECAST, 2020, On: Weather as a Force Multiplier. Owning the Weather in 2025, A Research paper by Col. Tamzy J. House, Lt Col James B. Near, Jr., LTC William B. Shields (USA), Maj Ronald J. Celentano, Maj David M. Husband, Maj Ann E. Mercer and Maj James E. Pug, et.al. t
Storr, Dominik, 2013: Eine juristische Betrachtung, in: R. Bertell 2013, pp.525-546
TAZ, Berlin 8.1.2018: Das Sterben der Urwälder im Meer. Zurück bleibt eine Seeigelwüste.
Tesla, Nikola: Das Nikola Tesla-Originalwerk. Tesla Gesamtausgabe, Peiting, Michaelsverlag, o. D.
Titze, Sven: Die Ozonschicht erholt sich nicht wie erwartet, in: Süddeutsche Zeitung, München 6.2.2018
UN: Environmental Modification (ENMOD) Convention, Geneva 1977
UN: Convención de Nagoya (de la geoingenería), Nagoya 2010
UN: Geoingengneria, economicamnte e socialmente inattuable, http://www.nogeoingegneria.com/timeline/brevettileggi-iniziative-parlamentari-e-giudiziarie/geoingegneria-appello-onu-moratiria-su-esperimenti/, 2.2.2018
University of Southampton, The Guardian, London, 1.12.2005; from Quadfasel, Detlef: Oceanography: The Atlantic heat conveyor slows, in: Nature, 1.12.2005, p.565
Venter, Craig in: Posener, Alan: “Wir sind Gott!”, in: Welt am Sonntag, Hamburg 23.5.2010
von Werlhof, Claudia: Losing Faith in Progress? Capitalist Patriarchy as an “Alchemical System”, in: Bennholdt-Thomsen, Veronika/Mies, Maria /von Werlhof, Claudia (Eds.): There is an Alternative. Subsistence and Worldwide Resistance to Corporate Globalization, Zed press, London 2001, pp.15-40
—–: Using, Producing and Replacing Life? Alchemy as Theory and Practice in Capitalism, in: Wallerstein, Immanuel (Ed.): The Modern World System in the Long Durée, Paradigm, Boulder, CA and London 2004, pp. 65-78
___: Capitalist Patriarchy and the Negation of Matriarchy, in: Vaughan, Genevieve: Women and the Gift Economy, a radically different worldview is possible, Toronto 2007a, Inanna, pp.139-153
___: The Interconnectedness of all Being, in: Kumar, Corinne (Ed.): Asking we walk. The south as new political imaginary, 2nd vol, Bangalore 2007b, Streelekha, pp. 379-386
___: The Utopia of a Motherless World. Patriarchy as War-System, in: Göttner-Abendroth, Heide (ed.): Societies of Peace. Matriarchies past present and future, Inanna, Toronto 2009, pp. 29-44
—–: Losing Faith in Progress? In: C. v. Werlhof: The Failure of Modern Civilization and the Struggle for a “Deep” Alternative, Frankfurt a. M. 2011, Peter Lang, pp.153-184
___: Destruction through “Creation” – the “Critical Theory of Patriarchy” and the Collapse of Modern Civilization, in: CNS – Capitalism Nature Socialism, Vol. 24, Nr. 4, 2013a, pp. 69-85
___: Mit Bertell gegen Geoengineering: Debatte im Europaparlament 2013, in Bertell 2013b, pp. 33-41
—–: El secreto inefable de la civilización moderna, man., México 2015a
—–: Madre Tierra o Muerte! Oaxaca 2015b, Cooperativa El Rebozo
—–: A Sojurn into the Critical Theory of Patriarchy, 2015c, in BUMERANG Nr. 0, pp.6-38
___: Geoengineering and the Planetary Movement for Mother Earth, in: CWS, Canadian Woman Studies, Vol. 31, Nr. 1, 2, Toronto 2016a, pp. 118-124
—-: The “Hatred of Life”: The World-System which is Threatening All of Us, on Global Research, 16 August 2016b
___: Earth as Weapon – Geoengineering as War, book presentation and interpretation: ”Planet Earth – the Latest Weapon of War”, in: DEP, Nr.35, University of Venice, Italy, Nov. 2017, pp.130-150
___: The Moment of Truth Has Come! What Now? Threat to Life on Planet Earth: Ozone Dying and the Deadly Ultraviolet Cosmic Radiation, auf www.globalresearch.ca, April 26, 2018
___: A Call for Mother Earth and Humanity, in: Klein, Renate and Hawthorne, Susan (Eds.): Not Dead Yet. Feminism, Passion, and Women´s Liberation, Melbourne 2021. Spinifex., pp. 369-375
Weiss, Mathias: Stimmungsbild zur CEC 2014 – Climate Engineering Conference, in: 10.a Information Letter, 2014, www.pbme-online.org.
___: Zur Geschichte des Geoengineerings, in: Bertell, Rosalie: Kriegswaffe Planet Erde, J. K. Fischer, 3. Auflage, Gelnhausen 2016, pp. 515-546
—-: Daten vs. Dogmen.- Klimaerwärmung, Extremwetter und wissenschaftlicher Konsens. www.pbme-online.org, 2017, in English http://www.pelicanweb.org/solisustv13n02supp3.html#section3
Weizenbaum, Joseph: Kurs auf den Eisberg, München 1998, Piper
Wigington, Dane: Geoengineering is Destroying the Ozone Layer, on GeoEngineeringWatch, 13 May 2014
____: GeoEngineeringWatch, 20 July 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRjmzy9XcaY&list=PLwfFtDFZDpwulG0PJ9IID0iypsRXDSa1E&index=3
Wolf, Doris: Was war vor den Pharaonen? Die Entdeckung der Urmütter Ägyptens, Zürich 1994, Kreuz Verlag
Wood, Judy: Where Did the Towers Go? Evidence of Directed Free Energy Technology on 9/11, Port Townsend 2014, Feral House
Worthington, Amy: Chemtrails; Aerosol and Electromagnetic Weapons in the Age of Nuclear War, on Global Research, 26. Dec. 2017 (from 1. June 2004) www.geoarquitecture.blogspot.com
Yale Environment 360, http://e360.yale.edu, in: TAZ, Berlin 5.1.2018
I only have a few minutes to convince you of the usefulness of a new term; a term that will help us understand the dangerous times we are living in as well as the related struggles on a deeper level, that is, from the roots.
The time for lighthearted jokes and uncertainties is over. The “storm” predicted by the Zapatistas is approaching faster than expected. Our confusion needs to end.
A “Hatred of Life”?
The world system that is threatening all of us is based on a strange phenomenon I was only recently able to fully grasp, namely a “hatred of life”. This hatred has indeed become a system, society, global civilization. It is embodied in all of the modern civilization’s institutions: in economics as much as in politics, in science as much as in gender relations, and, especially in modern technology. There no longer exists a place where the hatred of life has not literally been poured into concrete as the basic idea and sensation of our existence. The hatred of life is no fleeting emotion or a mere individual or personal experience of a certain situation or moment. It is nothing less than hostility to life itself which – and this is my thesis – has become the main foundation, driving force, and defining criterion for a patriarchal civilization dating back almost 5,000 years.
What Is Patriarchy?
After a virtual ban of 30 years, the term “patriarchy” is now re-emerging. This term was commonly used by radical feminists whose movement was destined to be destroyed with the arrival of neoliberalism.
The appearance of so-called “gender studies” was a consequence of this. The term “patriarchy” was shunned and the advocates of gender studies soon rallied behind demands for “equality” within the present system. The goal was integration and a share of power – something the Left had been propagating for a long time.
But the challenge lies in moving beyond a system driven by the hatred of life instead of (voluntarily) turning into an even more loyal accomplice in the massacres it is responsible for.
It has been repeatedly suggested that the patriarchal system is a system of death. That is not entirely correct. The patriarchal system is a system of killing, that is of artificial death: ecocide, matricide, homicide in general and finally “omnicide,” the killing of “everything.
What Is Geoengineering?
Omnicide is already appearing on the horizon in the form of so-called “geoengineering.” Geoengineering has begun with the destruction of the planet itself, of Mother Earth and of her living order. Geoengineering intends to turn planet Earth into a gigantic weapon of war. It uses new, “post-nuclear,” technologies of mass destruction intended to take control of the planet and its energies to employ “weather warfare” and “plasma weapons” among others.
The military geoengineering we are facing is – the term being translated – an “art of war against the Earth” that has been developed during more than 70 years of experimentation with the planet. It cloaks itself in “civil” and “scientific” clothing and claims to protect us from “climate change” and “global warming.” However, climate change and global warming are the results of the named experimentation and not of greenhouse gas emissions as we are falsely led to believe in order to hide the crimes of the military.
We always knew that the military was no institution expressing a love of life. But until recently we didn’t know that our civilian institutions were poisoned by the same perverse, illogical, and, in the words of Ivan Illich, “counterproductive” hatred of life.
Matriarchy and the Love of Life
How can you hate life when you are a part of it? How can you hate yourself? And why?
It is this scandalous secret that needs to be revealed. It is self-evident that the “hatred of life” cannot be acknowledged or openly named, supported, or propagated. It is never mentioned. Practically no one would want to partake in a project driven by a hatred of life. The love of life is still ours; it is deeply human. It is still with us from the times of non-patriarchal civilization, so-called “matriarchy.” Matriarchal civilization is based on a love of life. It is a civilization that cooperates with life, that celebrates life, and that cherishes the “good life” of communities without the state and hierarchies, without the police and banks.
Why the Patriarchal Hatred of Life Needs to be Hidden?
The sinister motive of hating life needs to be hidden. The unspeakable crimes that all patriarchies have committed against life itself, against children, women, and all human beings, against the Earth, animals, and plants must not be revealed. The hatred of life is the reason and the rational justification for the violence against it; a violence that intends to prevent any rebellion or uprising of those not believing in the system it protects; a system that many would see as a grave assault on their dignity if they only recognized it.
We are told that this violence is necessary for development, progress, and a better life for all of us. It is usually only understood and recognized by those who are directly affected by it. Even then, the promise of a better life is supposed to be a consolation, although any chance for a better life has in fact been sacrificed.
Why do we so seldom recognize how flawed this logic is? Why do we so seldom recognize the blatant contradiction of sacrificing life in order to “improve” it?
The reason is patriarchy’s utopian project. This was already laid out in ancient texts during the times of the early patriarchies. The project’s purpose is to turn the natural order upside down and to establish an unnatural and anti-natural order instead.
The origins of this can be found in the wars of conquest against the world’s matriarchal civilizations. Establishing control over those conquered required a system able to administer control: the state. It began to control life itself: humans, nature, and matriarchal culture. The system based on a hatred of life was developed in order to prevent any challenge to patriarchal rule. It culminated in the desire to replace the natural order with an artificial one to dispose of the “problem of life” once and for all. All dependency on nature, women, mothers and the Earth was to be overcome. A male, patriarchal system of creation was invented that had no room for nature’s cycles, webs and motions. The Goddess was replaced by “God the Creator” and finally by today’s “worldly gods,” the managers of an artificial life supposedly “post-human” and “trans-human,” a life of cyborgs, robots, artificial uteri, test tubes and global industries of reproduction.
Capitalist Patriarchy – The “Monster” of Utopian Transformation and Annihilation
The project of replacing life with non-life could only be realized with the help of modern patriarchal-capitalist civilization and its machine technology. All the earlier “alchemist” attempts to produce better, higher, and more divine forms of life had failed. Only modern technology allowed for the monstrous manifestation of the patriarchal project we are witnessing today. This is why I call modern patriarchy the “Monster”!
The Monster is not only characterized by exploitation, extraction and appropriation. It is, first and foremost, characterized by transforming its possessions into their opposites, that is into everything we call “capital”: value, money, machines, and hierarchical structures (following Marx).
In this civilization, true democracy is impossible. We are up against a totalitarian system that does not care for its subjects, that cannot (or no longer) be stopped, and that is constantly becoming faster and more efficient in its attempt to end life on this planet – while turning even this very process into a tool for further accumulation of profit and power.
Supposedly, everything that exists today derives from so-called fathers; each origin is patriarchal and no longer maternal, deriving from a mother, from Mother Earth, matri-archal. Patriarchy is a new “technological social formation” that produces and transforms everything that exists by violence. It will not stop before everything has been annihilated.
Capitalism is the modern form of materializing this utopian project of total transformation. When “pure” patriarchy arrives and even the tiniest matriarchal remnants have disappeared, we will all be dead.
Mother Earth or Death
I hope that the men among you who before had difficulties with the term “patriarchy” can now see that it concerns you, too. I hope that you will decide to switch sides and join nature and women. Women are (still) closer to life since life emerges from them. They are always the first victims of the hatred of life, but they are also closer to the truth of life and the love of life.
When women rise up, they rise up in the defense of life. It has always been like that. Today, women are rising up again against violence and in favor of life, massively and all over the world. Everyone ought to follow them, embrace them, and love them for it (s. contributions in this vol.). It is not them who are the threat, it is the Monster, the patriarchal “Hydra,” an all-encompassing combination of capitalism, neoliberalism, colonialism, globalization and militarism.
Patriarchy is a historical project that has reached its peak with capitalism. Because of its hatred of all life, it inevitably will collapse. It cannot replace the life it continuously destroys. Capital cannot return anything to life. The process of “patriarchization” is irreversible. It is a religion. And the patriarchs cannot stop believing in it because they would otherwise be forced to return to matriarchy.
What a great idea that would be! What joy it would bring! We could leave the patriarchal deception behind us and revive human dignity by rejecting this monstrous system. Without our participation and co-operation, this system cannot be maintained.
Mother Earth or death! This is the alternative we are confronted with today. From a common house to a common cause: liberating ourselves from the ludicrous hatred of life, a collective disease buried in our collective unconscious.
Life is not here to be geoengineered and killed — it is here to be loved and defended!
Translation from German by Gabriel Kuhn
 Claudia von Werlhof: El „odio a la vida“ como característica central del patriarcado,speech at the Colloquium „Tejiendo voces por la Casa Común“, Ibero American University, 20.11.2015a, Mexico City; emgl. Version first published by Global Research:http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-hatred-of-life-the-world-system-which-is-threatening-all-of-us/5541269
 _____: El secreto inefable de la civilización moderna, man. 2015b
 Cf. Rosalie Bertell: Planet Earth: The latest weapon of war. London 2000, The Women’s Press, updated version in German: Kriegswaffe Planet Erde, Gelnhausen 2011, 2013, 2018 4th ed., j. K. Fischer
 Cf. Planetary Movement for Mother Earth, www.pbme-online.org; Claudia von Werlhof: La destrucción de la Madre Tierra como último y máximo crimen de la civilización patriarcal, Mex. 2015c, in: DEP, no. 30, Venice, Feb 2016,
 Heide Göttner-Abendroth: Das Matriarchat, several volumes, Stuttgart, from 1988, Kohlhammer; ___: Societies of Peace – matriarchies past, present and future, Toronto 2009, Inanna
 Cf. BOOMERANG – Journal for the Critique of Patriarchy, no. 0, 2015, www.fipaz.at/bumerang
 Cf. for example, Doris Wolf: Was war vor den Pharaonen?, Zurich 1994, Kreuz
 Cf. Claudia von Werlhof: The Failure of Modern Civilization and the Struggle for a „Deep“ Alternative. On „Critical Theory of Patriarchy“ as a New Paradigm, Frankfurt a.M./New York 2011, Peter Lang publ.; BUMERANG, no. 1: Mutterschaft im Patriarchat, 2015, www.fipaz.at; BUMERANG, Nr. 3: Patriarchat als Technik, 2017, www.fipaz.at/bumerang
 Claudia von Werlhof: Madre Tierra o Muerte! Reflexiones para una Teoría Crítica del Patriarcado, Oaxaca 2015d, El Rebozo
This text is an effort by the author to construct a critical narrative facing patriarchal aggression manifested through the dispossession of land, the assassination of women who defend and nourish Mother Earth, as well as through the institutional feminist interventions exerting their impact over identities and autonomous practices of indigenous women in northern Cauca, southwestern Colombia. Thereafter, some pending challenges and collective actions for the revitalization of the natural tapestry that roots them to Uma Kiwe (Mother Earth) are identified.
From the realization that this millennial patriarchal system feeds itself from capturing and destroying the matriarchal sources of life that remain rooted in Mother Earth, it is necessary for us, birth-givers of life, wherever the struggle finds us, to remain able to name and act critically facing patriarchal forms that are imposing dispossession and death in our territories, while in the same way have the clarity required to point out the moorings and the silences imposed upon us by the institutional feminist interventions on behalf of “gender equality”.[xxi] Furthermore, to recognize some of the challenges and pending actions from the northern Cauca region in southwestern Colombia that feed critical narratives for the debate within and beyond indigenous communities.
I must clarify that in the 2000-2010 decade I took active part in the indigenous movement recognized through the Association of Indigenous Councils of Northern Cauca — ACIN (acronym in Spanish) — as a nasa-misak woman. It is not my intention to speak on behalf of indigenous women[xxi] but from what I was able to observe from other places and also from what I have exchanged with some compañeras[xxi] with regards to the issues at stake.
Patriarchy Continues to Dispossess Mother Life
Without providing here an in depth analysis or supportive evidence, guided only by what the history of the winners has imposed upon us and by the most recent testimonies and complaints of abuses, which circulate within and beyond popular and indigenous resistance processes of our Abya Yala (name with which indigenous peoples in meso and south America have given to this continent), I affirm that: There is no ecocide or femicide because there is a war; on the contrary, there is a war to increasingly kill all that can be born until Mother Earth is subdued to patriarchy. Yes, just as Héctor Mondragón stated years ago: “In Colombia, there is no forced displacement because there is a war. On the contrary, there is war so that displacement can be forced.”
We might be facing a storm (EZLN, 2015) of a magnitude such that we have never imagined before. One that to date generates such a degree of confusion that most of us either can’t understand or refuse to acknowledge its presence and potentially devastating impact. We can begin, for example, by recognizing that when we are angered by violence and murders against women, we generally make reference only to machismo; or that when we denounce the destruction and damage to nature, we assume it is all a consequence of climate change. But we don’t acknowledge the underlying problem, a critical issue that isn’t new because, as Claudia von Werlhof says, “it is more than 5,000 years old” and within the short history of capitalism it has to do with “the alchemical destruction of an alchemical civilization or something of the sort, which is a war against life” (2015, p.21). So our old and current problem is the backbone of what we are subjected to; that which dominates to draw and dry the blood of all that lives: patriarchy.
Hence, patriarchy is, in the end, an inconceivable, incomprehensible, almost inexpressible vindication, totally abstract and removed from the concrete conditions of earthly existence which goes beyond something as trivial as a kind of “envy for the power to give birth”. Its goal is no less than to transform the female body that gives birth into a thing that produces everything and can be universally re-produced; it is nothing other than the replacement of the body of the mother with something that is no longer corporal or feminine but machinery that can then be declared as the goal and end of human history. Such is what happens to Mother Earth and to the Earth itself” (Werlhof, 2015, p.41).
Hence, in order to arrive at the “destruction or alchemical civilization”, all sources of life must be usurped or destroyed with Death Projects throughout all of Abya Yala, “to explore, exploit, exclude and exterminate all territories, which include bodies, particularly those of women; collective imaginaries; and the territories of Mother Earth” (Rozental, 2015). On the one hand, going as far as genetic interventions and manipulations by which “Planet Earth itself has in the meantime been transformed into a weapon of mass destruction”, or — to state it this way — into “bad nature” which as is said it has always been. And now, a new type of destruction follows through apparent natural catastrophes” (Werlhof, 2015, p.218)[xxi]. A relevant preoccupation and a patent reality which demands more action on our part, based on our ancestral and matriarchal knowledge, on what the scientist and nun Rosalie Bertell[xxi] made known in the 1980s, and on what in the last decade has been denounced through tsunamis, earthquakes…which in the end have assisted the reproduction of capital.
On the other hand, on land grabbing and femicide, let us look at some data regarding these as we believe they are related issues. To begin,
The 2016 dataset documents: 491 large-scale land grabs taking place over the past decade. The deals cover over 30 million hectares of land in 78 countries. This means that the number of land deals is continuing to grow, but the growth has slowed since 2012. In particular, several of the largest “mega” projects have collapsed, resulting in a decline in the total number of hectares. The problem, however, is not going away (Grain, 2016, p.4).
Land grabbing continues to expand intensifying conflicts all over the world. Given this situation, it is not fortuitous that concessions for 5 millon hectares of land have been granted for mining, while another 25 million have been requested for the same purpose in Colombia. Nor is it strange that (extensive) cattle ranchers own 45 million hectares and that “from the total amount of land in Colombia, 0.4% of the owners own 41.1% of the land (according to the last agrarian census)” (Proceso de Liberación de la Madre Tierra, 2016). So, while a global war advances dispossessing territories and grabbing lands for capital’s reproduction, women’s bodies continue to be a favourite prey for the predator. Current figures on femicide in Latin America alarms us. According to the UN: “the highest rates occur in 25 countries of the world, 14 of these in the region. Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras figure with some of the highest indices in the world while alarming figures are also reported in Argentina and Mexico”.[xxi] Colombia is no exception. Paradoxically, now that a bilateral cease-fire has been signed between the government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia – FARC (acronym in Spanish) to initiate a peace process, extractivist dispossession of territories and selective assassinations of leaders (men and women) who defend life and protect their territories have increased.
The UN also “registered that by mid-December 2016, 114 people had been murdered in Colombia and 40 of them were from Cauca”.[xxi] One-half of these assassinations were carried out in northern Cauca and 7 were indigenous women: Rubiela Coicué, Beatriz Noemi Morano Dicue and Nhora Alba Coicué Viquis from Huellas Caloto; Sebastiana Ulcué from Munchique Los Tigres; Ninfa Mosquera from Tacueyó and Cecilia Coicué from Corinto. These crimes are finally becoming an issue for discussion and concern within our indigenous organizations’ agendas[xxi] as a result of a paramilitary re-escalation together with the intensification of threats during the “post-conflict” period.
So, once again, my concern is that there is war so that there can be femicide and ecocide; so that patriarchy can abort and master all birthings including life from the womb of humanity: Uma Kiwe (Mother Earth in nasa-yuwe). Although we cannot deny machista-induced violence and assassinations in the community, it would be interesting to carry out in-depth research on the concrete relationship between femicides and territorial disputes in order to better understand who is benefiting from this new wave of selective death. For example, Caloto and Corinto are the communities most affected by the assassination of women and it is precisely there where two years ago, the process of recovery and liberation of Mother Earth began (Pueblos en Camino, 2015).
In this context, beyond structural adjustment processes, ideological subjugation, the cooptation of struggles (Almendra, 2017) to facilitate capital’s reproduction which has become more evident within the last decade, terror and war by other means and in other modalities persist within indigenous, afro-Colombian and mestizo territories. There is then nothing paradoxical or contradictory in the observation that while the warlords talk “peace”, in the country and cities they continue to kill life. Unfortunately they are succeeding in confusing and coopting us into aligning ourselves in favor of “development” at the expense of ignoring that war has been “necessary” for the foundation of modern, progressive and capitalist civilizations. As Claudia Von Werlhof (2015, p.22) reiterates: “…war is the normal mode of patriarchy; there is no peace. This explains why men in the middle of a so-called peace attack women”.
Interventions that Institutionalize Women’s Community Life
“Feminism from above and feminism from below are not the same”. Such is the conclusion arrived at by some women who, while identifying themselves as feminists, are critical to the dogmatic, top-down, vanguardist, illuminated dominant feminist currents. Women who are commited to develop other paths, protecting and promoting diversity while listening respectfully in silence in order to allow themselves to feel and share the pain and joy from our Mother Earth with the women of our territory. It is certain that women of that caliber have walked our mountains leaving historically relevant legacies that nourish our struggles for life. In contrast, most of the “expert advice” (Almendra, 2017) currently provided to women’s programs of the northern Cauca’s indigenous territory follow institutional guidelines from governments and NGOs with emphasis in two themes: women’s political participation and the defense of women’s human rights. To illustrate the first thematic line, I quote from a recent research project of ACIN’s Casa de Pensamiento[xxi] on “Political participation and political culture of Nasa women in northern Cauca”, where by way of results they emphasize two challenges to overcome exclusion and strengthen community-based political action:
The first of these is that the only ways to guarantee ownership or the Nasa community’s own politique is the capacity to potentiate inclusion and the recognition of women’s inputs, demands, expectations, capacities to contribute with the local organizational indigenous process and its projections in the field of political-electoral participation. Women’s participation does not pose a threat to power. It is, rather, the possibility to guarantee equity, harmony and balance. But participation is not enough, what is required is more women’s inclusion and representation. Communities, indigenous authorities and institutions must make sure that women’s demands are included in the Life Plans and in the Development Plans, and that they are granted the degree of importance adequate and satisfactory to the women themselves.
The second challenge consists in that the porous border between community and State associated political activity cannot be weakened by way of equalizing procedures, practices and values. Women were emphatic to recognize that there are differences, and have pointed out the many weaknesses of the Colombian democracy and political system. But, at the same time, they advocated for a clear distinction and differentiation between community political practice and authorities, and State associated political activity, under the understanding that community political activity is for everyone, as women understood it to be (Señas, p.120, 2014 highlighted by author).
Our struggle, however, cannot be reduced and limited to the occupation of positions and access to power pretending to ignore or making use of patriarchy. In order to begin to elucidate the features that define community political understanding and practice required today facing institutional political practice imposed upon us, it is worthwhile listening to Dora Muñoz[xxi], a Nasa community member from the Corinto reserve, who states that the institutional feminist approach, beyond having an impact on women’s activities within the territories, has an impact on our identity:
on the autonomous understanding of issues such as womanhood, family and the relationship between men and women as different and valuable beings. It seems to me that the institutional approach individualizes roles, responsibilities and practices between men and women, fragmenting the idea of unity and collectivity. I believe that the promotion of individual women’s rights, a pretended equality of women with respect to men is stated, fomenting a kind of competition between men and women. By pretending to establish equality between men and women, what is achieved is an image of women as weak beings less than men, so that what is needed, rather than equality, are attitudes and discourses to achieve superiority of some women vis-à-vis men, denying the activities that make us different, but of equal worth. These attitudes reinforce the idea of machismo.
These attitudes and approaches have to do with the impact caused by institutional feminism on our organization, causing mistrust and suspicion from some indigenous authorities, mainly men, who refuse to give up spaces and land to women. For example, Oneira Noscué, Nasa community member of the Miranda indigenous reserve and current coordinator of ACIN’s Women’s Program ACIN-PMA, is troubled because “within the indigenous reserve of Canoas, we used to have Women’s and Family Program, but one of the major difficulties that we face during this period is that we lost it, so that now all that is left is a Family Program. Likely as a consequence of the suspicion from some of the leaders, we lost our space”. Although all this is fed by our machista practices, patriarchy inhabits within us.
With regards to the second theme, it is important to examine how useful it is to enclose ourselves exclusively within the attention to human rights violations while we are sorrounded by a transnational context that exerts different kinds of violence against all territories (bodies, imaginaries, lands). In this regard, Yuranni Mena, indigenous woman at heart who also walked with us, says that during the time she was part of the Tejido de Comunicación ACIN there were a few attempts to come close to ACIN’s Women’s Program –Programa Mujer de ACIN (PMA) — but she recalls that they were invited to participate in the first Women’s Tulpa[xxi]. We felt this was an important gesture given the lack of rapprochement between both spaces. They explained that the purpose of this tulpa was to provide support for women who had been abused within their territories (physical, psychological abuse occurring within the family environment, caused by their partners or relatives). We proposed to them that we could bring along audio-visual educational material to provide some context to these and to other aspects of women’s vulnerability within structural subjugation of women and territories; in other words, to address women beyond the psychosocial aspect[xxi]. Their reply was that their activities were already set and programmed but that they would eventually look for another space for what we proposed.
Obviously, psychosocial attention to heal wounds caused by systematic human rights violations is not the most relevant approach within a militarized territory occupied by different factions who seek to control the economies (legal and illegal) that are destabilizing coexistence within the communities. Nevertheless, Noscué confirms to us that since 2010 they have had the Indigenous Women’s Human Rights Violations Observatory-ACIN with 877 registered cases where the highest percentage of aggression is caused by family violence. “Surely this is related to the rest of the problems of the illicit economy, mining concessions in the territory, but we can’t yet know this because we have just finished the report and have not done any analysis”(Ibid.). She also says that although in the Women’s Tulpa and in other formative, self-care and support spaces for victims, they do talk about what is happening in their territories and in Colombia, it is necessary to decentralize these spaces so that more rural women can participate. From her perspective, Constanza Cuetia[xxi], Nasa community member from the Jambaló reserve points at another concern because
Observing women’s participation in other cultural encounters (more so within the reserves), it is limited to handcraft, knitting and exhibits to sell their produce. The purpose is to obtain some economic assistance for the family but no further analysis develops as to, for example, how the greatest burden on household chores remains on one side and discrimination against women persists simply because they are women, who continue to be expected to remain obedient towards their husbands. Very little of the political is addressed; for example, why is femicide on the rise? Or what needs to be done in this regard? The projects being implemented with women are limited to teach them more about institutions and to become better, more competitive entrepreneurs.
Institutional approaches, in contrast with the concerns expressed by some compañeras with regards to the dispossession of Mother Life, are evidence of a deeper problem which has become more acute since the end of 2010. “Precisely the containment and subordination of autonomous resistance is intended to capture and demobilize more radical struggles that defined our short-term history with greater national and international visibility in the first decade of 2000”[xxi] (Almendra, 2017). This explains why the institutionality arrived with a much more “moderate” approach to occupy our home, taking advantage of the space that terror and war, legislation for dispossession and ideologic subjugation had opened; it made partnerships with the majority of the leaders and is supporting research, funding projects and programs… Consequently, in reality,
Institutional perspectives including those of NGOs seek to align and coopt all processes in every aspect. It is no different with regards to the theme of feminism. Unfortunately, through our own organizations such as cabildos (traditional indigenous authorities) and indigenous associations and through institutional policies for the rights of women, they have implemented within our territories an external perspective, one that systematically denies our own wisdom, knowledge and practice with regards to the recognition of and respect for indigenous women. Institutions promote passive women’s participation in different spaces; an alignment for our subjugation and promotion of external perspectives, which are, almost always, consistently removed from community demands. Feminist leadership is promoted placing certain women in positions of leadership trained to reproduce and maintain a specific ideology that ends up promoting machismo as, generally speaking, these indigenous women leaders end up obeying men’s guidelines. Their participation in political positions follows a representational rather than a real participatory character. To me, those women who do not earn a salary or have not accepted nor been granted political positions are more critical and less submissive, as they do not fear losing some economic or political comfort (Muñoz, 2017).
Pending Issues to Nurture Ourselves as Birth-givers and Defenders of Mother Life
Walking the precise word required in defense of our life in plenitude begins by acknowledging that the death imposed by patriarchy is as much “an artificial and unnatural death as is the life it imposes: an artificial life. An artificial planet…this death is a massacre, which means a sacred mother-sacer, the killing of mother/goddess/Earth…it is a religion” (Werlhof, Virtual exchange, 2016). So we are being denied our death, one through which we transcend as seeds because patriarchy imposes a death for an extractivist, transgenic, mining-energetic, femicide system… committed to the killing of all life, if necessary for the accumulation of profit.
Hence it is necessary to recognize ourselves in Uma Kiwe and to recognize her in us as a birth-giver, of good living, of living plenitudes in the constant search for a balance and harmony that respects and nourishes our natural cycles.
At the same time, we have to be able to see beyond the good intentions of institutional feminism and expose its masks, in order to dis-cover their true faces, but also so that we can recognize ourselves in it, identifying the hidra that inhabits us. Finally, in the mid to long-term, within community rhythms and cycles and facing the context of aggression against us, it is urgent for us to weave one another into matriarchal local and global knowledges and practices that feed life in plenitude.
Consequently, I insist in reiterating that
Uma Kiwe is the birth-giver of life being forced into submission by the patriarch of death. Consequently, these impacts are aggressions not only against women, but also against life as a whole. While defending Uma Kiwe, defending the Mother that allows birthing, one isn’t only defending women, but the birth-giver, the Mother through whom constant and perpetual birthing is made possible whenever necessary. Patriarchy divides men from women, while Uma Kiwe and matriarchy defends life and weaves us together again as diverse, reciprocal, different and indispensable beings” (Almendra, 2016, p.178).
From this perspective, it is certain that defending ourselves while defending Uma Kiwe stems out of conceiving matriarchy not as the power and command of women who replace patriarchs but as the continuous search for maternal knowledge and the root of community transformation processes to nourish resistance and autonomies. It involves to perceive and move together with the flows of Uma Kiwe that are vital in order to avoid being contained and captured by those who insist on our submission to patriarchy, our domestication and our fossilization within the policies of what is allowed. The challenge to realize the spectrum there is between what they say that we can do and the path we have to walk autonomously facing the storm, in other words, to be able to see beyond what is institutionalizing us, remains. To continue nourishing life-facing death, it would suffice for us to listen to compañeras from Chiapas, Cherán, Kobane … but also to join the – indigenous, black peasant — liberators of Uma Kiwe who, from Cauca, are feeling the legacy of their birth-giving ancestors of Abya Yala.
Although we can’t blame it all on outside influences, we must think and act critically with regards to all that arrives to us even if guided from the best of intentions because the impact of “aid”, even though it solves short-term practical problems, is at the expense of an intervention on our cosmovision and feminine practice in the communities.[xxi] Hence, “we must recognize and value our diverse knowledge and capacities, which, obviously, relate to and complement one another. We need to maintain clarity with regards to the principles of our relationship with Mother Earth and to the need to complement ourselves also with men so that we can avoid doubts and confusions arising from uncritically accepting external ideologies which lead to a fragmentation of internal autonomies”, as Dora Muñoz proposes, precisely because as Constanza Cuetia explains: “Women have been and actually remain weavers in every space: within the indigenous guard protecting the territory; in health as caregivers and mid-wives; in the knowledge and use of medicinal plants; in communication-education; in family support… women have been essential for life itself”.
At the same time, we must avoid being identified as victims or heroes. We are women of flesh and blood who cry and laugh through the deployment of the struggle, from the family fireplace to the community assembly, reciprocally interwoven environments for our Life Plans threatened by the Death Project. Our sorrows and joys are also those of Uma Kiwe because, as Oneira Noscué emphasizes, “women and our bodies are as sacred as the territory, which is why, in order to reject them and build our own ways of life, we need to comprehend problems that are looming globally and which we are also experiencing here, including crops for the production of illicit drugs and mining”. In order then to slow down competition, divisions, isolation, as a pending minimum, we need to think with our own minds from the ideology of Mother Earth; to appropriate knowledge and practices that feed into our maternal ways of doing; to walk with dignity beyond the dichotomies imposed on us by the institutions and to understand patriarchy as the dominant visible or invisible social relation, not exclusive of alpha male individuals.
Recognizing the hidra that inhabits us involves addressing our own contradictions. In this regard, Dora Muñoz argues that “on many occasions, whether consciously or not, we have allowed and legitimated machista attitudes when we don’t dare to manifest our inconformity towards certain men or even women’s behaviours”. We are also feeding into patriarchy when we remain impotent and/or submissive, from the community to the organization, when assigned to representative positions by the leaders, because “we obey without questioning when we assume that certain responsibilities, such as home care, are exclusively ours, and also when we don’t venture to take on responsibilities or challenges in areas where we believe we are not as capable to produce outcomes as men are” (Ibíd.). When we become machos (Almendra, 2015) and in the name of the struggle we abuse, gossip, unfairly point fingers at victims and become accomplices of the authoritarian leadership[xxi] that excludes anyone who dares to challenge or to openly criticize our bad attitudes and mistakes. This is why Constanza Cuetia insists on stating that
It is necessary to work on the autonomous organization of women, because we must leave seeds to continue resisting and defending our territories and community life plans. To me this requires from us to continue to communicate critically, walking our Word[xxi] as our elders did without giving up on the recovery of our territory and on the construction of our organization.
We cannot allow ourselves to be confused with regards to our roots in Uma Kiwe. We have to be able to collectively appropriate institutional projects recognizing them at best as one amongst many potential means to life with our Mother Earth; a goal that reaches beyond what arrives and what is instilled on us from outside. The community political stance we need has to go further than any institutional framework through collective actions that “command obeying” our communities, nourished by both our ancestrality and our contemporaneity in the territory. Collective actions – to which I make reference in the end — that are a priority here and now with which we resist in our daily struggles without ever fully trusting institutional support, and which continue to emerge in spite of death-embedded interests infiltrated into our communities to exterminate life. Hence, we must weave ourselves to that minimum required to fulfill our lives, which the defenders and caregivers of our territory are giving rise to within, against and beyond capital.
Woman rebel, woman hope, woman life, woman worker, woman fighter — that must be the role played by women belonging to the Nasa people re-existing against oblivion and invasion for more than 500 years since the arrival of the Europeans to the lands of our America. These millenial fighters are seen walking the streets of Caloto, moving freely at the street market of Corinto where they sell their self-made produce free of GMOs and mono-cultures, thus not causing any harm to Mother Earth; seen as moderators and coordinators of collective life-plan assemblies of the indigenous cabildo of Santander de Quilichao; seen in the beautiful mountains of Jambaló gathering coffee and growing corn; seen also at the tulpa for wisdom in Toribío, guiding armonization rituals with chirrincho, coca and tobacco (Rebeldía Contrainformativa, 2016).
To be with them and to continually become with Uma Kiwe is of vital importance facing the current extractivist wave of aggression (Almendra, 2016), not only for those of us who don’t inhabit the territory but also for those who, living in it, don’t know how to feel with the heart and to see beyond what is institutionally allowed. Hence, as stated by Yuranni Mena, beyond knowing ourselves as Mother Earth and recognizing the hidra that inhabits us, we must realize that:
More so than others, indigenous women are rooted within the notion and practice of what is collective; the logic of sharing that is needed in this world of hierarchies and competition where each one looks after their own. Women have demonstrated a great capacity to construct from a conception of a world organized differently in search for harmony. I don’t fully know the proposals arising from women in Northern Cauca but I am certain that there are many initiatives arising from the base, that must be encouraged and protected to fuel a resurgence of the indigenous movement, before they are hoarded by (local or external) agents whose intention is to make profit for themselves by taking advantage of their work and discourse.
Without salaries or scholarships, without subsidies, without receiving bonuses, without occupying positions and while their homes are surrounded by illicit monocultures, by the grabbing of lands and commons by large or small extractive interests that threaten their sources of living, they rise day by day to defend, care for, liberate and obey Uma Kiwe from and with their diverse territories; mind, body, imagination and land. Those of us who feed ourselves directly or indirectly from the fruits of their efforts, besides weaving ourselves to them, not to give them orders or usurp their word but to strengthen their community tapestry, must acknowledge that:
If patriarchy inhabits us dictating our behaviours, we can also act to change the structures of these ways of thinking in our communities, questioning our lifestyles and detecting situations of domination-submission. In addition, we have to act against the economic model that is privatizing life and fragmenting our organized processes (Tejido de Comunicación ACIN, 2013).
These and many other challenges and actions not mentioned here are pending in the agendas of our struggle that, once again, shows us how after centuries of domination, destruction and manipulation against Mother Life, they have not been able to submit everything to patriarchy. Ancestral principles and common paths – although debilitated — that have guaranteed the survival of entire peoples are standing today against the threat of conquest by rampant capitalism that needs to insist on turning everything into merchandise. It is our responsibility to instill life into these principles and common paths; to recreate, renew and to transform them permanently in the process of weaving resistance and autonomies between popular and social struggles with which we need to walk here and now. We must transform into practice and reaffirm what Avelina Pancho named 30 years ago and still remains a challenge pending within our most visible organized women’s initiative: “I believe we have already been able to overcome the feminist discourse that also once blinded our America. Today, this is not our way of thinking, for our ideal is to strengthen our peoples as peoples rather than as separate groups of men and women” (Londoño, 1999)[xxi].
Translation by Emmanuel Rozental
Almendra, V. (2017), Regresar del olvido liberándonos con Uma Kiwe. Desafíos de la lucha indígena del norte del Cauca: tejiendo memoria entre la emancipación y la cooptación. Editoriales Autónomas: Editorial Grietas, Pensar Cartoneras y En Cortito que es pa´largo. Guadalajara, Chiapas y Querétaro.
Almendra, V. (2016), “Colombia: entre el patriarcado extractivista y la Madre Vida” en Rivista Telematica di studi sulla memoria femminile. Disponible en: http://www.unive.it/media/allegato/dep/n30-2016/n30-2016-completo.pdf
Almendra, V. (2015), Dignidad ante el espejo de nuestras contradicciones. En Pensamiento crítico frente a la hidra capitalista, Vol. II, México.
Comisión Sexta del EZLN (2015), Pensamiento crítico frente a la hidra capitalista I. Participación de la Comisión Sexta del EZLN. México: s/e.
Grain (2016), “The global farmland grab in 2016: how big, how bad?” Disponible en: file:///D:/Downloads/grain-5492-the-global-farmland-grab-in-2016-how-big-how-bad.pdf
Londoño, L. (1999), La perspectiva de género en la organización indígena del Cauca: aproximación a una retrospectiva histórica.Revista Cuadernos de Desarrollo Rural
Proceso de Liberación de la Madre Tierra (2016), “Libertad y alegría con Uma Kiwe: Palabra del proceso de liberación de la Madre Tierra”. Disponible en: http://liberemoslatierra.blogspot.es/1481948996/libertad-y-alegria-con-uma-kiwe-palabra-del-proceso-de-liberacion-de-la-madre-tierra/
Pueblos en Camino. (2015),“Liberación de la Madre Tierra. ‘Un tema Fundamental para Nosotros y para toda la Humanidad’”. Disponible en: http://pueblosencamino.org/?p=1486
Rebeldía Contrainformativa. (2016), “El rol de mujer dentro de la configuración del proceso de democracia directa y autonomía de las comunidades indígenas del norte del Cauca”. Disponible en: https://rebeldiacontrainfo.wordpress.com/2016/12/06/el-rol-de-mujer-dentro-de-la-
Revista Señas. (2014), Participación política y cultura política de las mujeres nasa del norte del Cauca. No.3, Separata No.1, de la Casa de Pensamiento ACIN. Cauca, Colombia.
Rozental, E. (2015), “Desbordando la economía para superar el horror”. Disponible en: http://www.NasaACIN.org/informativo-NasaACIN/3-newsflash/7841-desbordando-la- econom%C3%ADa-para-superar-el-horror
El Tejido Defensa de la Vida y los Derechos Humanos, ACIN. (2016), “Asesinatos de Mujeres, una Nueva Preocupación en Medio de Muchos otros Hechos que Afectan a Comunidades en el Norte del Cauca”. Disponible en http://www.cric-colombia.org/portal/asesinatos-de-mujeres-una-nueva-preocupacion-en-medio-de-muchos-otros-hechos-que-afectan-a-comunidades-en-el-norte-del-cauca/
Tejido de Comunicación, ACIN. (2014), “Cauca: Palabrandar, una tarea de todas y todos los comunicadores”. Disponible en http://www.movimientos.org/es/content/cauca-palabrandar-una-tarea-de-todas-y-todos-los-comunicadores
Tejido de Comunicación, ACIN. (2013), “Comité Zonal de Mujeres: las mujeres indígenas parte y actoras de la historia”. Disponible en http://nasaacin.org/noticias/3-newsflash/5565-comite-zonal-de-mujeres-las-mujeres-indigenas-parte-y-actoras-de-la-historia
von Werlhof, C. (2015), ¡Madre Tierra o Muerte! Reflexiones para una Teoría Crítica del Patriarcado. Cooperativa El Rebozo, Palapa Editorial. Oaxaca, México.
Telesur, Noticias. (2016), “La batalla de Latinoamérica contra el feminicidio”. Disponible: http://www.telesurtv.net/news/La-batalla-de-Latinoamerica-contra-el-feminicidio-20160706-0059.html
Dear Greta Thunberg,
You have not answered our first open letter at the beginning of your steep “career”, which has just culminated in the recognition of the Right Livelihood Award. I nevertheless write a second one. I approached you with sympathy for your awakening and activism, looking at you like a kind of grandmother who would like to give you some advice – to a kind of granddaughter.
It was to give you better information about the real state of Mother Earth because I noticed that you did not have this knowledge. This time I would rather address you in my quality as a scientist, which I am as well, as I hear that you seek the advice of science, for you seem to trust in your mind. This is good and it is really necessary. However, there are always two kinds of science: one that is responsible for nothing less than the endangered state of Mother Earth herself, and one that is opposing it. I belong to the latter kind. That’s why I used to be an enthusiastic demonstrator and demonstration speaker and at first I was just happy how the youth everywhere reacted to your protest in masses. Finally, a movement emerged and even for Mother Earth! Something more beautiful could not happen to me, especially because I was the founder of the “Planetary Movement for Mother Earth”.
But in the meantime, as a scientist, I see how many aberrations and confusions you and the “Fridays for Future” still have, and I cannot see that they are being recognized by you or the people in the protest movement you inspired. Yes, the real dangers for us and Mother Earth are being suppressed and covered up, namely the ones that really threaten us. But one needs the knowledge about them if one acts the way you do, and in addition shares a certain responsibility for an increasing number of followers. So, you and the “Fridays for Future” movement care about the state of the Earth and its causes, but you don’t seem to know very much about it!
School Strike for Climate in front of the Parliament House, Helsinki, 15 March 2019 (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)
On the contrary, you have joined the assertion of international organizations, certain scientists of the first kind at the IPCC, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, as well as corporations, financial institutions, and people of the financial sector. They say that CO2 is the main, indeed the only problem of the Planet, and its very low share of 0.04% in the atmosphere (of which only a small part is manmade) is even the reason for a planetary “climate change” as a result. This would ruin the living conditions on Earth and would soon take on life-threatening proportions in the form of global warming. Therefore, as decided at the UN Conference in Paris in 2015, action must be taken against it by massively reducing CO2 emissions. In the name of an allegedly “green” New Deal, a “system change” against this “climate change” and its capitalist causes is now to be initiated. This system change would consist of introducing a “sustainable lifestyle” in society, in which the consumption and use of particularly CO2-intensive products would be sharply reduced or higher taxes would have to be paid. This should allegedly end “climate change” and “save” the Earth.
So much for the “logic” of the arguments from above, which you have adopted seamlessly and in a surprisingly well-behaved manner without any contradiction.
What is wrong with that? Quite a lot:
So, the plans for what the “system change” that you want means have been developed for some time already. They have nothing to do with the abolition of capitalism and are already being pushed through with full force from above. Consequently, there are several simple questions that have to be answered: What is “sustainable” about this change? Where should the energy for it come from? For whom should it be reserved? Because this energy level cannot be achieved without fossil fuels and with renewable energies only, whereas the fossil fuels are coming to an end anyway, and the renewable ones can only be increased through the additional conversion of agriculture into an energy sector and of forests into palm oil plantations – in other words through massive destruction and hunger production worldwide – not to mention the damages caused by wind turbines, for example, or even by dams for an “alternative” water supply. Is it then a question of expanding nuclear energy in which the military is particularly interested? So, what kind of system change is this, what does it change about the “climate” which is a huge large-scale planetary system, and who gets pushed out? The 5G victims, large regions of the South, the victims of radioactive contamination and…and and?
Why don’t you say anything about this “system change”, Greta?
But it’s much worse. Because even the CO2 thesis which everything is based on is not correct at all!
If you believe in science, as you always say, then you should not believe in the IPCC, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, because it is not a scientific but a political organization. Thousands of scientists in the world have meanwhile spoken out against it, precisely because the IPCC claims that CO2 is to blame for this “climate change”. The scientists who are not committed to the IPCC and its policies defend CO2, as I have just done. Others say that climate change can only result from a change in solar activity. But they cannot determine this for the times in question. The warming of the global average temperature claimed by the IPCC has not even occurred in the last 20 years, says the US space agency NASA. Apart from that, an average temperature for the entire planet is of course an unsuitable, even nonsensical measure, because it depends on the respective measuring stations, which have also been changed, and because it merely levels out huge differences so that in the end it has no significance at all.
Climate Disruption: It’s Not Due to CO2
The many wars in the world and the irreversible consequences of the widespread use of depleted uranium, a waste material from nuclear plants for example, are not even mentioned here.
You see, you have been denied crucial information about the real situation of the planet, its dangers and their causes, explaining everything with CO2, no matter what it was and you have simply believed it. To this day, however, you are on your way claiming to have understood the core of the matter and having to present what seems to follow from it. I also understand that at 16 you can’t know everything. But what you and the others need to know if you really want to be a movement conscious of your responsibility for Mother Earth and not against her, that knowledge exists! So get it if you are serious about your movement. Otherwise your credibility will soon be inevitably gone. Thus, one will also find out relatively soon whether CO2 reductions have any effects on the “climate” and/or the weather, which of course will not be the case at all since it is not the cause of the problems.
Rosalie Bertell, who came to Germany from the USA in 2010 not long before her death assisting the 30th anniversary of the Right Livelihood Award, therefore called for a discussion on the topic among her colleagues who were also award-winners, shouting:
“It is not CO2! It is the military!”
And she hung out a petition which was signed by all those present. It reads:
“It is morally reprehensible and a declaration of war on mankind and the Earth to intervene in the normal functioning of the planetary order by causing or intensifying storms, hurricanes, tsunamis, monsoons, landslides, droughts, floods, earthquakes or volcanic eruptions!”
So, if you and your movement want to get out of your confusion about the real problems of our planet and the unreflected adoption of the slogans from above and if you want to approach the truth and do what Mother Earth needs now, namely our solidarity because of what is done to her all the time, then take care that you know what it is all about and fight against it. For that is what determines our future, and not CO2, which belongs to nature and which you instead portray as its enemy!
Why all this is so twisted, why you are denied the true knowledge and what the CO2 propaganda is about, all this you will have to find out for and by yourself. Because there are those interests behind against which you supposedly compete with your movement. These interests are the ones that finance and organize everything worldwide on a large scale: Your weekly Fridays for Future demos, the “doomsday parties” as I call them, together with the “Die-ins”, an anticipated dying practice – don’t you realize what a perversion this is? They are the ones who produce and provide your regional offices worldwide, who organize the big spectacles, for example with famous pianists, the movies, videos, media work, propaganda material and all that – do they do it because they like you so much?
Why are you helping them?
It is wonderful that the young people are enthusiastic about Mother Earth. I have waited a long time for this to occur. But strangely enough, what you are doing now is not a blessing for Mother Earth, but her mockery! What you have done so far is the reverse of what is needed. It is indeed its reversal.
Image on the right: Thunberg in front of the Swedish parliament, holding a “Skolstrejk för klimatet” (transl. School strike for climate) sign, Stockholm, August 2018 (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)
Don’t you notice at all, Greta and the people inspired by you, what you have gotten yourself into?
You will be very disappointed to see which interests you are really serving, namely those who are responsible for the state of the Earth you are complaining about while believing to be a power for the good. Don’t let yourself be incited against the generation that raised you and against the generation that you yourself could raise because they allegedly leave a “carbon footprint” that should be avoided at all costs. This would mean to accuse life itself instead of accusing those who destroy it!
But now you can perhaps also explain to yourselves the discomfort which you may already feel because of these confusions. Your face, Greta, shows it anyway.
So, don’t let yourself be abused any longer for the opposite of what you want to stand up for, by people who have everything but the good of Mother Earth in mind and even work on her destruction! It would have been a gigantic mistake, a futile effort and a loss of time that we all desperately need to really stand up for our planet. The clock is ticking, but not for the reduction of CO2!
You, Greta and all those who are moving on with you, have missed the point and unwittingly told the world a lie. You want to enforce a policy that benefits neither the Earth nor its weather or climate, but the future and the profits of certain investors and corporations as well as the demolition of social structures and existences that no longer bring any profits. Finally, you have distracted attention from the destructions that have been increasingly perpetrated on the Earth for decades and that are being added to those already known, being the ones committed by the military – on the ground, in the water and in the air, and more recently also from space. This way you are preventing the accompanying, now increasingly massive dangers for life on Earth and the Earth herself from finally being seen, recognized and answered at all.
You’re doing Earth a disservice. But there is still time to turn around and understand and address the real problems instead of the fake ones!
I fear, however, that “they” will not allow it.
Prof. Dr. Claudia von Werlhof and discussion group, Planetary Movement for Mother Earth, Austria
This article was originally published on PBME.
 The money behind “Fridays for Future“ and the „Green New Deal“ https://www.globalresearch.ca/climate-money-trail/5690209
 on 5G
Frightening Frequencies: The Dangers of 5G
 on CO2
German Office on the Environment, Umweltbundesamt, on the amount of CO2: https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/daten/klima/atmosphaerische-treibhausgas-konzentrationen#textpart-1
Critique of the CO2-thesis: https://needtoknow.news/2019/09/top-level-climate-modeler-spills-the-beans-on-the-nonsense-of-global-warming-crisis/?print=print
Click to access Erster-Offener-Brief-an-Klimakabinett_Prof-Doehler1.pdf
The farmer and his climate: https://youtu.be/KbGBcL3x_8s
 Scientists against the IPCC
Click to access v15n2-9.pdf
PBME: 14. Info-Letter 2018, www.pbme-online.or
 Forest fires
California, October 2017:
Portugal June 2017
 SRM – Solar Radiation Management
 Ozone depletion
PBME: 13. Info-Letter, www.pbme-online.org
Claudia von Werlhof: www.NoGeoingegneria.com/news-eng/the-moment-of-truth-has-come/ 16. Aprile 2018; and in NRhZ, Cologne 25.4.2018
 Uranium ammunition
Frieder Wagner: Todesstaub Made in USA. Uranmunition verseucht die Welt. Wien, Promedia 2019 https://mediashop.at/buecher/todesstaub-made-in-usa/
 The other knowledge
Rosalie Bertell: Planet Earth. The Latest Weapon of War, London, The Womens´ Press 2000/ Toronto, Black Rose 2001 /enhanced ed. Dublin, Talma International 2020
____: Kriegswaffe Planet Erde, Gelnhausne, J.K.Fischer Verlag, 4. Ed. 2018
____: Planeta Tierra – la Nueva Guerra, Guadalajara, Mexiko, La Casa del Mago 2018
____: Pianeta Terra. L´ultina arma di guerra, Triest, Asterios 2018
____: La Planète Terre, ultime arme de guerre, Paris, Talma 2018
Elana Freeland: Under an Ionized Sky, Port Townsend, Feral House 2018
Jacob Darwin Hamblin: Arming Mother Nature. The Birth of Catastrophic Environmentalism, New York 2013, Oxford University Press
Patrick Pasin: L´ Arme Climatique. La Manipulation du Climat par les Militaires, Paris, Talma 2018
Claudia von Werlhof: The Latest Challenge: „Military Alchemy“ as a Dystopia for Planet Earth, in: The Failure of Modern Civilization and the Struggle for a „Deep“ Alternative, Frankfurt a.M./New York, 2011, Peter Lang, pp 269-301
www.fipaz.at: Bumerang, Journal for the Ciritique of Patriarchy
I am submitting this critique to the UN Commission on Biodiversity. I hope they will open up their perspective to include the military!
From: Rosalie Bertell, GNSH [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2011 7:01 PM
Subject: Comments of the Draft Document
RE: Comments on Impacts of Climate Related Geo-engineering on Biological Diversity – Draft – 1 November 2011
I was grateful for the direct approach of the Executive Summary, as prepared by the editors and separate from the writers of the document itself. The document had in places the appearance of an apologetic for geo-engineering rather than a serious even-handed evaluation of the proposal.
It feels as if the public is expected to trust the scientists to handle all of the problems of very complex and unpredictable interventions in the earth system, regardless of the dangers, just because scientists think society wishes to continue polluting. There are fewer unknowns and/or dangerous consequences connected with converting our addiction to fossil fuels into developing more benign energy technologies, than there is in manipulation of a delicately balanced earth system with the potentially widespread and irreversible consequences of interruption of the natural interaction between the oceans and the sun, the ionosphere and the magnetosphere!
We already have a wealth of experience, beginning with attempts at weather control with cloud seeding in 1950, and 50 decades of military experiments designed to assure “full spectrum dominance” by 2020.
The failed attempt of the US military to build a “telecommunication shield” in the ionosphere in 1961, to counteract solar wind interference with radio communication, should serve as a caution. They brought 350 Trillion copper needles, 2-4 cm long, into the ionosphere, attempting to build a belt 10 km (6 miles) thick and 40 km. (25 miles) wide to form a belt. They actually tossed the 350 Trillion needles into orbit – and according to the wife of the physicist Walter Richmond: “we had the 8.5 Alaskan earthquake and Chile lost a good deal of its coast. That band of copper wires interfered with the planetary magnetic field.” [See Keesings Historisch Archief (K.H.A.) 1961 and Nick Begich and Jeane Manning, Angels Don’t Play this HAARP, Earthpulse Press, Anchorage, AK 1995, p.53.]
In 1962, the US lifted the ban on atmospheric nuclear testing in July and began testing nuclear bombs in the ionosphere. These experiments included “a one kiloton device, at a height of 50 km and a one megaton and one multi-megaton, at several hundred kilometers height.” These test seriously disturbed the lower Van Allen belt, practically destroying it, with radioactive particles transported to the lower atmosphere, and with virtually no earth radio communication for several hour over many miles.
“On 19 July . NASA announced that as a consequence of the high altitude nuclear test of July 9, a new radiation belt had been formed, stretching from a height of about 400 km to 1600 km (250 – 1000 mi.); it can be seen as a temporary extension of the lower Van Allen belt.” [K.H.A. 5 August 1962]
Later in 1962, The Soviet Union undertook similar experiments, creating three new radiation belts between 7000 and 13,000 km (4300 and 8100 miles) above the earth.
Since this time the electron fluxes in the Van Allen belts have changed markedly and not returned to their former state. Scientists guess at about a hundred years before they return to ‘normal’ (if they ever do).
In the 1970s we learned that the ozone layer had been depleted by about 4% by the 300 megaton nuclear explosions set off between 1945 and 1963. In none of these cases were the results of these colossal experiments predicted – nor have we been able to restore normalcy to our planet after the fact! [U.S. National Academy of Science, Long term effects of Multiple Nuclear Weapon Detonations, 1975]
In 1983, the Saturn V rocket launch malfunctioned, and the second booster burned unusually high in the atmosphere, at 300 km (186 miles). This disturbance of the ionosphere reduced the total electron content by more than 60% over an area 1000 km in radius that lasted several hours, stopping all radio communication. After this experience, the military began to deliberately experiment with burning holes in the ionosphere, using the booster rocket, and later, the orbit maneuvering system. These experiments caused artificial ‘air glows’ as radioactive particles struck the gases in earth’s lower atmosphere. During the 1980s there were about 500 to 600 rocket launches per year, culminating in 1500 in 1989. Each flight injected about 187 tons of ozone destroying chlorine and 7 tons of nitrogen into the ozone layer – both known to deplete it. Yet the burden of this destruction was blamed on under arm deodorant and refrigerators! Civilians were forced to cope with higher skin cancer rates, while no concern for flora and fauna effects, farming or stability of climate reached the civilian consciousness!
In 1981, NASA began inducing ionospheric holes to investigate the artificial plasma instabilities and the modification of radio propagation paths. A six second Orbit Maneuvering System discharge in August 1985, caused an air glow covering 400,000 square kilometers over Connecticut.
Between 1978 and 1990, the ozone layer in the Northern Hemisphere decreased by a further 4 – 8 % [beyond the weapon testing 4%], and the Southern Hemisphere’s ozone layer decreased by 5-10%. It is thought that a 20% decrease would wipe out the food web and make life impossible, yet there was no stopping! In fact the U.S. began launching nuclear powered rockets in 1990, as it prepared for wars in space. In 1995 the U.S. first began to operate the giant HAARP ionic heater which could more easily change the ionosphere density. They set up a series of passive monitoring stations called Dual Radar stations to note all changes at earth level corresponding to ionospheric manipulative activity. HAARP is jointly operated by the U.S. army and navy, in Gacona, Alaska.
These military experiments continue even into the 21st century, especially with the Naval research into building high altitude artificial clouds well above the level of normal clouds. I was astonished that all this research found no space in the lengthy Biodiversity report! Is all this secret for military security? Can we not learn from the serious problems already experienced by Planet earth from the nuclear and space races?
My conclusion and recommendation to the Biodiversity Parties is that the shelve this document until they have had sufficient time and access to documents to take a hard look at the blunders and surprises of the experiments with space for which we are already paying a high price. These past experiments would be consider ‘small’ or ‘local’ experiments compared to what is now being planned both in terms of geographical space and the time extension that they would require! Is this the legacy we want to leave to the next generations! Perpetual life support for a deteriorated and seriously ailing planet is not a good future! I would strongly recommend giving our Planet earth a break and nourishing it back to health before any more ill-thought-out experiments with our life support system, never mind biodiversity. We are all perched on the limb the scientists now want to saw off!
Rosalie Bertell, Ph.D.
International Physicians for Humanitarian Medicine
Geneva, Switzerland, and Palermo, Italy
P.S. by Claudia von Werlhof
This letter was never answered.
Dr. Bertell is the author of: “Planet Earth: the Latest Weapon of War”, The Women’s Press, London, U.K., 2000. Released in an updated German version, “Kriegswaffe Planet Erde” by J-K-Fischer Verlag, Gelnhausen, 2011, 5th edition in 2020. The original version was published in Japanese in 2006. The updated English version appeared in 2020: Planet Earth: the Latest Weapon of War, enhanced edition, Dublin, Talma International.
A French (Talma Studios, Paris), an Italian (Asterios, Triente) and a Spanish version (La Casa del Mago, Guadalajara, Mexico) appeared as well, all of them with the help of the Planetary Movement for Mother Earth, PMME, www.pbme-online.org.
Adopted by Resolution 31/72 of the United Nations General Assembly on 10 December 1976. The Convention was opened for signature at Geneva on 18 May 1977.
The States Parties to this Convention, Guided by the interest of consolidating peace, and wishing to contribute to the cause of halting the arms race, and of bringing about general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control, and of saving mankind from the danger of using new means of warfare,
Determined to continue negotiations with a view to achieving effective progress towards further measures in the field of disarmament,
Recognizing that scientific and technical advances may open new possibilities with respect to modification of the environment,
Recalling the Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, adopted at Stockholm on 16 June 1972,
Realizing that the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes could improve the interrelationship of man and nature and contribute to the preservation and improvement of the environment for the benefit of present and future generations,
Recognizing, however, that military or any other hostile use of such techniques could have effects extremely harmful to human welfare,
Desiring to prohibit effectively military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques in order to eliminate the dangers to mankind from such use, and affirming their willingness to work towards the achievement of this objective,
Desiring also to contribute to the strengthening of trust among nations and to the further improvement of the international situation in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,
Have agreed as follows:
Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to assist, encourage or induce any State, group of States or international organization to engage in activities contrary to the provisions of paragraph 1 of this article.
As used in article 1, the term “environmental modification techniques” refers to any technique for changing – through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes – the dynamics, composition or structure of the Earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, or of outer space.
The States Parties to this Convention undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of scientific and technological information on the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes. States Parties in a position to do so shall contribute, alone or together with other States or international organizations, to international economic and scientific co-operation in the preservation, improvement and peaceful utilization of the environment, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world.
Each State Party to this Convention undertakes to take any measures it considers necessary in accordance with its constitutional processes to prohibit and prevent any activity in violation of the provisions of the Convention anywhere under its jurisdiction or control.
For the purposes set forth in paragraph 1 of this article, the Depositary shall within one month of the receipt of a request from any State Party to this Convention, convene a Consultative Committee of Experts. Any State Party may appoint an expert to the Committee whose functions and rules of procedure are set out in the annex which constitutes an integral part of this Convention. The Committee shall transmit to the Depositary a summary of its findings of fact, incorporating all views and information presented to the Committee during its proceedings. The Depositary shall distribute the summary to all States Parties.
Any State Party to this Convention which has reason to believe that any other State Party is acting in breach of obligations deriving from the provisions of the Convention may lodge a complaint with the Security Council of the United Nations. Such a complaint should include all relevant information as well as all possible evidence supporting ItS validity.
Each State Party to this Convention undertakes to cooperate in carrying out any investigation which the Security Council may initiate, in accordance with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, on the basis of the complaint received by the Council. The Security Council shall inform the States Parties of the results of the investigation.
Each State Party to this Convention undertakes to provide or support assistance, in accordance with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, to any State Party which so requests, if the Security Council decides that such Party has been harmed or is likely to be harmed as a result of violation of the Convention.
An amendment shall enter into force for all States Parties to this Convention which have accepted it, upon the deposit with the Depositary of instruments of acceptance by a majority of States Parties. Thereafter it shall enter into force for any remaining State Party on the date of deposit of its instrument of acceptance.
This Convention shall be of unlimited duration.
At intervals of not less than five years thereafter, a majority of the States Parties to this Convention may obtain, by submitting a proposal to this effect to the Depositary, the convening of a conference with the same objectives.
If no conference has been convened pursuant to paragraph 2 of this article within ten years following the conclusion of a previous conference, the Depositary shall solicit the views of all States Parties to this Convention concerning the convening of such a conference. If one third or ten of the States Parties, whichever number is less, respond affirmatively, the Depositary shall take immediate steps to convene the conference.
This Convention shall be subject to ratification by signatory States. Instruments of ratification or accession shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
This Convention shall enter into force upon the deposit of instruments of ratification by twenty Governments in accordance with paragraph 2 of this article.
For those States whose instruments of ratification or accession are deposited after the entry into force of this Convention, it shall enter into force on the date of the deposit of their instruments of ratification or accession.
The Depositary shall promptly inform all signatory and acceding States of the date of each signature, the date of deposit of each instrument of ratification or accession and the date of the entry into force of this Convention and of any amendments thereto, as well as of the receipt of other notices.
This Convention shall be registered by the Depositary in accordance with Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations.
This Convention, of which the Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall send duly certified copies thereof to the Governments of the signatory and acceding States.
In witness whereof, the undersigned, being duly authorized thereto, have signed this Convention
Done at Geneva, on the 18 day of May 1977.
Annex to the Convention
Consultative Committee of Experts 1. The Consultative Committee of Experts shall undertake to make appropriate findings of fact and provide expert views relevant to any problem raised pursuant to paragraph 1 of article V of this Convention by the State Party requesting the convening of the Committee.
The work of the Consultative Committee of Experts shall be organized in such a way as to permit it to perform the functions set forth in paragraph 1 of this annex. The Committee shall decide procedural questions relative to the organization of its work, where possible by consensus, but otherwise by a majority of those present and voting. There shall be no voting on matters of substance.
The Depositary or his representative shall serve as the Chairman of the Committee.
Each expert may be assisted at meetings by one or more advisers.
Each expert shall have the right, through the Chairman, to request from States, and from international organizations, such information and assistance as the expert considers desirable for the accomplishment of the Committee’s work.