THIS PAGE
TO A FRIEND
Agenda-Driven Response –
Weather to Help or NOTSunday, June 29, 2008
By Deanna Spingola
NewsWithViews.comUnfortunately, despite the government’s responsibility to protect citizen’s rights, it is blatantly obvious that the government is following an alternative, deliberately destructive agenda including: rural cleansing of the resource-producing population, economic destabilization, runaway inflation, unrestrained immigration, illegal surveillance, the NAU, deteriorating infrastructure, ethnic disparity, de-population through war, disease, toxicity, and chemtrails; selective response to “natural” disasters, destruction of the middle class, seizure of private property and obliteration of God-given liberties – all at the hands of an elite ruling class – crony monopoly capitalists and war profiteers, intent on stealing and controlling the earth’s resources, a contrived diminishing food supply and the surviving useless eaters, still obedient and moderately productive. What happened to that illusive balance of power?
At the president’s discretion, along with those covert councils who supervise him, and without congressional or constitutional oversight, fifteen Executive Branch Secretaries control all federal bureaucracies which exert dictatorial power over every aspect of our lives. These agencies and their many sub-agencies facilitate U.N. programs including Agenda 21, developed during the Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro, June 3-14, 1992. These regulatory, metastasized Departments are: Agriculture (1889), Commerce (1903), Defense (1947), Education (1979), Energy (1977), Health and Human Services (1953), Homeland Security (November 25, 2002, absorbed FEMA in 2003 which was created by Presidential Order on April 1, 1979), Housing and Urban Development (1965), Interior (1849), Labor (1913), State (1789), Transportation (1967), Treasury (1789), and Veterans Affairs (1988), and the Attorney General (1789).[1]
Significantly, under the Bilderberg-approved George W. Bush, cabinet-level status was granted to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA, created December 2, 1970) and to the U.S. Trade Representative (1962).[2] In addition to power over our children through education, price of gas through manipulation of energy, etc., this allows a sitting president to bypass Congress regarding anything and everything that has to do with the environment – a veritable Pandora’s Box. With cabinet-level status for the Trade Representative, the president may sign treaties without congressional approval. A declaration of war, once required, was quietly disbanded with the current, unconstitutional king’s cabinet structure.
The elevation of the EPA was first attempted in March 1990 under G. H. W. Bush. He wanted it in time to celebrate Earth Day on April 22, 1990.[3] Clinton also attempted to empower the EPA which, like FEMA and Nixon’s 1972 Regional Councils, is divided into ten regions (for better control) – see maps. The EPA declares its Agenda 21 commitment, as noted on the web site.
The Army makes it perfectly clear that it intends to seize private property in southeastern Colorado. They don’t “need” the land for training purposes – that is a pretext. They have sufficient mega military training bases in Iraq (along with the world’s biggest and most expensive embassy), also on plundered land. The power of eminent domain is an oft-used seizure tactic; there are others. On February 4, 2008, Not 1 More Acre!, advocates for the beleaguered citizens of southeastern Colorado, said: “The Pentagon and its military contractors are continuing to push plans to more than triple the size of the Piñon Canyon Maneuver Site in southeastern Colorado – in contravention of a law passed by Congress which forbids them to do so.”
Remember, the Pentagon and the Department of Defense, since 1947, are under the jurisdiction of the king’s cabinet. Congressional leaders, frequently indebted to campaign contributors and deep-pocketed lobbyists, go through the legislative motions and pass laws they can’t or won’t enforce. Many sincere officials are out-numbered by the compliant power-loving majority, who long ago abdicated their sworn responsibilities – just like those who handed America’s financial resources to the Federal Reserve private bankers – the internationalist bankers who currently manage the president, his cabinet, elections and the monopoly media’s talking heads.
Despite sounding conspiratorial, it is a fact that the U.S. has the capability of manipulating “the climate for military use.” They have applied those “modification techniques” for “more than half a century” covertly maneuvering “weather patterns, communications and electric power systems as a weapon of global warfare, enabling the U.S. to disrupt and dominate entire regions” – against “enemy countries, friendly nations” or even, dare I say, the U.S. to “destabilize economies, ecosystems and agriculture.”[4]
According to a top-secret congressional hearing held March 20, 1974, the military used weather modification in Vietnam and by 1977 was spending $2.8 million a year on weather-modification research; the same year that the United Nations banned the “hostile use of all environmental modification techniques.” Allegedly, the U.S. discontinued all weather-modification research in 1979.[5]
HAARP, initiated in 1992 by Advanced Power Technologies, Inc. (APTI), a subsidiary of Atlantic Richfield Corporation (ARCO) “was developed as part of an Anglo-American partnership between Raytheon Corporation “which owns the HAARP patents, and British Aerospace Systems (BAES). The HAARP project is one among several collaborative ventures in advanced weapons systems between the two defense giants. APTI (including the HAARP patents) was sold by ARCO to E-Systems Inc, in 1994.”[6]
“BAES was involved in the development of the advanced stage of the HAARP antenna array under a 2004 contract with the Office of Naval Research. The installation of 132 high frequency transmitters was entrusted by BAES to its U.S. subsidiary, BAE Systems Inc. and their Electronic Warfare division. In September 2007, BAE Systems Inc. received the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s (DARPA) top award for “outstanding leadership and engineering innovation in designing, constructing, and activating the Defense Department’s High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) instrument.” “HAARP, the world’s largest and most capable ionospheric research facility, will serve the U.S. scientific and defense communities for the next 30 to 50 years.” HAARP was dedicated June 27, 2007 and is “jointly funded by the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy, and DARPA.[7][8]
The Department of Defense and the CIA, the president’s enforcement agencies, has contracts with E-Systems, founded in 1964. The CIA is “the intelligence-gathering and covert-action arm of the president.” It is not “some sort of independently run mythical loose cannon.”[9] E-Systems, owned by war-profiteer Raytheon since 1994, “manufactures and distributes electronic systems and communications networks, including electronic warfare equipment, navigation and reconnaissance machinery, and highly sophisticated spying devices.”[10] In the early 1970s, E-Systems installed communications equipment on the President’s Air Force One.[11] This created an airborne command post for the Pentagon and the White House. This “Doomsday Plane” enables the president to manage a nuclear war.[12]
Although, there is no hard evidence that HAARP has or will be used for military purposes, the involvement of the Department of Defense would decidedly suggest such use. After all, they are not recognized for life and health improvement studies. Advanced technology and weaponry would provide ample opportunities to achieve their ultimate “full spectrum dominance,” including the “globalization of the world’s economy.”[13]
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) “has a mandate ‘to assess scientific, technical and socioeconomic information relevant for the understanding of climate change.’ This mandate includes environmental warfare. ‘Geo-engineering’ is acknowledged, but the underlying military applications are neither the object of policy analysis or scientific research in the thousands of pages of IPCC reports and supporting documents, based on the expertise and input of some 2,500 scientists, policymakers and environmentalists.”[14] How convenient – just ignore the horrific possibilities and implications.
HAARP was unable to detect the “precise location of tunnels and underground shelters which was defined as a “serious weakness in the Department of Defense plans for precision attacks on hardened targets and for counter proliferation.” Therefore, increased funding of $75 million a year was allotted, in May 1994, for further research.[15]
Residents of southeastern Colorado had already suffered through seven years of drought, accompanied by major financial losses due to the skyrocketing cost of hay, for which there was no assistance.[16] Benefits, financial or otherwise, are typically and repeatedly extended to well-connected corporations – rarely to independent, struggling producers.
Then in December 2006, two back to back blizzards delivered record snow volume of 3 to 4 feet, with snow drifts as high as 10 to 18 feet causing financial losses of at least $500 million, economically devastating the people.[17] During the storms, between 10,000 and 15,000 cattle perished from starvation and exposure. The numbers increased as the snow melted and more carcasses were revealed. The area affected was home to “345,000 head of cattle and calves, 23,500 head of producing sows and 112,000 head of sheep and lambs.”[18] Livestock contributes 70% to Colorado's agricultural gross product.”[19]
The record storms forced “the closures of Interstate Highways 25, 76 and 70, as well as U.S. Routes 350, 36 and 85.” Following Holiday Blizzards I and II, as they were named, more than a foot of additional snow fell on January 4-5, bringing the total snowfall for 16 days to more than 80 inches in some areas.[20]
On January 16, 2007, newly elected Governor Bill Ritter wrote to U.S. Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns asking for federal “financial assistance to offset livestock and agricultural losses and to help prevent additional cattle deaths.” Additionally, he sought funds to “help cover” the costs of “snow removal and emergency rescue operations.” Ritter wanted the USDA to “declare the following counties disaster areas: Baca, Bent, Cheyenne, Crowley, Huerfano, Kiowa, Las Animas, Lincoln, Otero and Prowers counties,”[21] some of the same land that the Army had targeted for seizure.
The federal government offered emergency “loans” to the ranchers and farmers, people who already had burdensome bank loans.[22] The state also offered funds for “the rescue and recovery of livestock.” But, the most immediate help came from other ranchers – neighbors helping neighbors. Legislation was approved for those who suffered livestock losses based on a presidential disaster declaration. Ranchers then counted on federal help.[23]
Unfortunately, there were restrictions. According to their disaster declarations, “thousands of dead cattle” apparently were not “enough of a disaster” for the U.S. Department of Agriculture who “denied disaster relief and the attendant low-interest loans” to the ten Army-targeted counties devastated by the blizzards in southeast Colorado.[24] Lack of assistance might force some discouraged ranchers to sell their land. Although ranchers were not “holding their breath” for state or federal relief, such relief was desired and somewhat expected, given other disaster declarations programs instigated by FEMA and the USDA.[25]
Governor Ritter expressed disappointment over assistance conditions that were impossible to meet. It was an additional setback to ranchers and farmers who watched their livelihoods dissolve after “prolonged drought followed by devastating storms.” Ritter, along with a state delegation appealed the USDA decision against granting low-interest loans. However, the ranchers had “sustained such terrific losses that more bank loans” would not have kept “them from going under.”[26]
The Emergency Farm Relief Act of 2007, in the works for several years, would have provided payments to ranchers for livestock losses due to floods, wildfires, hurricanes and blizzards. However, USDA denial was based on its assessment that the counties had not suffered 30 percent production losses - not economic losses.”[27] “One factor leading to the limited assistance was that livestock do not fall under USDA crop disaster designations, since livestock are not a crop.”[28]
Additionally, freezing rain during those December 2006 storms resulted in “significant ice accumulation” causing “tens of thousands of people” in the five affected states to lose electrical power, “paralyzing much of the Great Plains. Ice accumulation also downed trees and communication towers.”[29]
“The worst victims of the December storms, particularly in Colorado’s High Plains, were cattle; thousands were trapped by heavy snow and strong winds, which created drifts up to 20 feet in some areas. Strong north winds caused unbelievable blizzard conditions, with drifts as tall as two-story buildings.”[30]
That blizzard may affect cattle reproduction for years to come. Bulls experienced reproductive problems “due to frozen testicles.” Cows whose embryos died in early pregnancy due to the cold were vulnerable to deadly infections. Large numbers of “stillborn or aborted calves” resulted in a decreased “number of replacement females. Such reproductive problems resulting from the blizzard may have an economic impact for the next three to five years.”[31]
Some hay deliveries arrived weeks later, too late for the deceased cows. “Some ranchers felt the distribution could have been timelier in execution. Ranchers and farmers have not received federal disaster relief and emergency aid, such as money for livestock rescue and recovery.”[32] Too little, too late – just like New Orleans and currently, Iowa. FEMA immediately responded on 9/11. Debris, which may have provided evidence, was hurriedly cleared away, an anomaly in such circumstances. The EPA, also very quickly, declared that the toxic air was harmless. People, trusting authority, accepted the falsehood. Many individuals developed serious health problems and have since died.
Colorado applicants for assistance had to leap through numerous hoops despite very public, appeasing, sympathetic rhetoric and philanthropic performances associated with the Presidential Snow Emergency Declarations. One may view the After Action Report. Yes, folks, we can trust the government – NOT!
HAARP: Part 1
HAARP: Part 2
Who's Controlling the Weather?
HAARP - Nature Modification Weapon
Chemtrails and Fort Carson Just why/how did healthy, 51-year old Brig. Gen. Bruce Barlow (scroll down) die? He was stationed at Fort Carson.Footnotes:
1, President Bush's Cabinet
2, Ibid
3, New York Times, House Panel Votes to Elevate The E.P.A. to Cabinet Status, March 14, 1990
4, Weather warfare, Beware the US military’s experiments with climatic warfare, by Michel Chossudovsky, December 7, 2007
5, Don't like the weather? Change it by Drake Bennett, July 3, 2005
6, Ibid
7, Ibid
8, USA. BAE Systems space weather research facility wins top award
9, The Mafia, CIA & George Bush, the Untold Story of America’s Greatest Financial Debacle by Pete Brewton, 1992, Introduction
10, The Princeton Review, Internship: E-SYSTEMS
11, Brazil: Amazon Contractor Raytheon has CIA Ties by Pratap Chatterjee, Inter Press Service, December 3, 1995
12, Weather warfare, Beware the US military’s experiments with climatic warfare, by Michel Chossudovsky, December 7, 2007
13, Weather warfare, Beware the US military’s experiments with climatic warfare, by Michel Chossudovsky, December 7, 2007
14, Ibid
15, HAARP: Detection and Imaging of Underground Structures Using ELF/VLF Radio Waves
16, State, ranchers fear record loss of cattle, Toll from snowstorms expected to rattle beef industry in Colorado by
Deborah Frazier and David Montero, Rocky Mountain News, January 3, 2007
17, Colorado's ranchers face 7-figure losses because of last month's Snowfall
18, Gov. Ritter Seeks Federal Aid For Livestock Losses, January 16, 2007
19, USDA Approves Blizzard-Relief Loans To Ranchers In 10 Southeast Colorado Counties, January 26, 2007
20, December 20-21, 2006 Colorado Blizzard
21, Gov. Ritter Seeks Federal Aid For Livestock Losses, January 16, 2007
22, USDA Approves Blizzard-Relief Loans To Ranchers In 10 Southeast Colorado Counties, January 26, 2007
23, Colorado's ranchers face 7-figure losses because of last month's Snowfall by Amy Gillentine, Jan 12, 2007
24, Editorial, Ranchers deserve federal aid, February 13, 2007
25, Emergency Responses for High Plains Cattle Affected by the December 28-31, 2006, Blizzard by Bimal Kanti Paul, Deborah Che, and Vicki L. Tinnon, Department of Geography, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas
Quick Response Research Report 191. Boulder, CO: University of Colorado Natural Hazards Center
26, Editorial, Ranchers deserve federal aid, February 13, 2007
27, Ibid
28, Emergency Responses for High Plains Cattle Affected by the December 28-31, 2006, Blizzard by Bimal Kanti Paul, Deborah Che, and Vicki L. Tinnon, Department of Geography, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas
Quick Response Research Report 191. Boulder, CO: University of Colorado Natural Hazards Center
29, Ibid
30, Ibid
31, Ibid
32, Ibid
Deanna Spingola has been a quilt designer and is the author of two books. She has traveled extensively teaching and lecturing on her unique methods. She has always been an avid reader of non-fiction works designed to educate rather than entertain. She is active in family history research and lectures on that topic. Currently she is the director of the local Family History Center. She has a great interest in politics and the direction of current government policies, particularly as they relate to the Constitution.
web site: www.spingola.com
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For further information please refer to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml