TBR Newes February 4, 2018

Feb 04 2018

The Voice of the White House

Washington, D.C. February 4, 2018: “The Isrealis who constantly bleat about tolerance and compassion (for them) are now booting out African refugees from their blessed country. Probably this is because the refugees are black and Israelis, being pure Ashkenazi turks cannot abide colored people. They are, after all, the National Socialists of the Middle East and daily practice on unarmed Palestinians what they claim everyone else has practiced on them. They are threatening Lebanon as well but if Hezbollah gets the wind up, terrified Israelis will all move to Skokie and demand at least 50% off on all furniture and dinnerware in Evanston stores.”

Table of Contents

  • Nunes memo ‘a political hit job on FBI’ in service of Trump, top Democrat says
  • Israel issues deportation notices to African asylum seekers
  • Holocaust denier running for Congress has no opponents in Republican primary
  • Israel had plan to shoot down passenger plane to kill Arafat, book claims
  • Lebanon looks to Hezbollah to resolve internal clashes, as Israel’s war threats reach fever pitch
  • Republicans differ with Trump on whether memo undercuts Russia probe
  • Our Enemy, Ourselves
  • Turkey’s Erdogan criticizes EU leaders for lack of support, especially against terror
  • Blessed Prozac Moments! PROJECT WOODPECKER (A Bird or a Decoy? Ed)

Nunes memo ‘a political hit job on FBI’ in service of Trump, top Democrat says

  • Adam Schiff says release of memo will compromise work of FBI
  • GOP’s Gowdy: dossier ‘nothing to do with Trump Tower meeting’

February 4, 2018

by Tom McCarthy

The Guardian

A top Democrat in Congress has accused his Republican colleagues of carrying out “a political hit job on the FBI in the service of the president” with the Friday release of a memo assembled by House intelligence committee chair Devin Nunes.

The extraordinary charge, which underscored the rift that has opened between Donald Trump and America’s most powerful law enforcement agency, was delivered on Sunday by Adam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the intelligence committee.

Schiff told ABC’s This Week that Republican members of the committee had declined to interview FBI officials as they bulldozed forward to release a memo they hoped would discredit the investigation of Trump’s Russia ties.

Trump privately hoped the memo, which ties top figures in the Russia investigation to alleged law enforcement malpractice, would give him political cover to make changes in the justice department and potentially short-circuit the Russia inquiry run by special counsel Robert Mueller, according to multiple reports.

“The interest wasn’t oversight,” Schiff said of the decision to release the memo. “The interest was a political hit job on the FBI in the service of the president.”

Schiff added: “Other sources of information are going to decide not to share with the FBI because they can’t rely on our committee not to be partisan in the handling of that information.”

Speculation continued on Sunday about whether Trump would try to fire Mueller or Rod Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general overseeing the special counsel’s work.

Dick Durbin, the No 2 Democrat in the Senate, told CNN’s State of the Union doing so would “precipitate a constitutional crisis”.

Former Trump chief of staff Reince Priebus told NBC’s Meet the Press: “I never felt that the president was going to fire the special counsel. I never heard that.”

Priebus, who left the White House last July, added that he did not think the president was flirting with the idea of firing Mueller. A White House spokesman told CNN on Friday “no changes are going to be made at the Department of Justice”.

Paul Rosenzweig, a homeland security official in the George W Bush administration, tweeted that with the release of the Nunes memo, the Republican party had fully consummated its union with Trump.

“If you stay in the party you own this,” he wrote.

Even as the president tweeted on Saturday that the memo “totally vindicates ‘Trump’ in the probe”, however, elected officials on both sides of the aisle said the memo had done nothing to change the substantial allegations at the heart of the Russia inquiry.

“I actually don’t think it has any impact on the Russia probe,” Trey Gowdy, the outgoing Republican chairman of the House oversight committee, said in an interview with CBS’S Face the Nation.

While accepting a key assertion of the memo, that law enforcement relied too heavily on a dossier assembled by former MI6 agent Christopher Steele, which Steele has defended against claims of inaccuracy, Gowdy said the Russia investigation at large rested on a lot more than the dossier.

Two former Trump aides, including George Papadopoulos, his first national security adviser, have pleaded guilty and are cooperating with prosecutors. Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign chairman, faces multiple felony charges including fraud and failing to register as a foreign agent.

“There is a Russia investigation without a dossier,” Gowdy said. “The dossier has nothing to do with the meeting at Trump Tower.”

Donald Trump Jr and others met Russian operatives at Trump Tower in June 2016 in hopes of obtaining damaging information on Hillary Clinton, though the president later helped create a false cover story to explain the meeting, key details of which remain unknown.

“The dossier has nothing to do with an email sent by Cambridge Analytica,” Gowdy continued, referring to a data analysis firm that worked with the Trump campaign and has been a target of the special counsel investigation of Russia ties.

“The dossier really has nothing to do with George Papadopoulos’s meeting in Great Britain,” Gowdy said, referring to a meeting between the former Trump adviser and Joseph Mifsud, the Maltese academic who told him Russia was in possession of emails that would be damaging to Clinton.

“It also doesn’t have anything to do with obstruction of justice,” said Gowdy, referring to an accusation against Trump that former federal prosecutors believe Mueller is preparing to make formally.

“So there’s going to be a Russia probe, even without a dossier,” Gowdy concluded.

As a member of the special Benghazi committee, Gowdy was responsible for grilling Hillary Clinton for 11 hours in 2015 about the deaths of state department personnel in the Libyan city.

His work on the committee made Gowdy a star for a previous micro-generation of far-right conspiracy mongers, a stardom that lives on on YouTube in videos with titles like “Trey Gowdy GRILLS Hillary Clinton Benghazi Committee Hearing”.


Israel issues deportation notices to African asylum seekers

Israel has begun notifying African asylum seekers that they have two months to leave for an unnamed third country. Outrage over the plan has long simmered among liberal Israelis and international rights groups.

February 4, 2018


Letters offering a plane ticket and $3,500 (€2,800) on Sunday reached the first of what Israeli newspaper Haaretz said were between 15,000 to 20,000 African migrants.

Israel’s immigration authority said the notices were delivered only to single men among 38,000 persons, mainly Eritreans and Sudanese.

Those told to leave had until late March or face jail and eventual expulsion, the authority warned.

The plan to send them to an unnamed African country under a secret agreement was announced on January 3 by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

His government classes the asylum seekers as economic migrants, using the term “infiltrators” to describe those entering from Egypt.

In 2014, thousands of African migrants protested in Tel Aviv against their treatment by Israeli authorities.

Destination Rwanda or Uganda?

Uganda and Rwanda have denied claims by aid workers that Israel sees them as destinations for migrants who accept the monetary inducement and depart. Some have lived in Israel for more than a decade.

Until 2012, when Israel erected barriers along its border with Egypt, 60,000 had reached the relatively prosperous nation.

Of these, 20,000 have since left. Some of the others were locked up in a large detention center, Holot, in Israel’s remote southern desert.

Netanyahu urged to reconsider

Some Israeli airline pilots have reportedly said they will not fly forced deportees. The UN refugee agency has called on Israel’s cabinet to scrap its plan, calling it incoherent and unsafe.

Last month Holocaust survivors in an open letter urged Netanyahu to reconsider, and academics published a petition, saying the deportations would damage Israel’s image as a refuge for Jewish migrants.

Many of the affected asylum seekers have said they prefer Israeli imprisonment over returning to Africa.

Eritrea has long been ranked by the UN as an abusive state. Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashar is wanted by the International Criminal Court.


Holocaust denier running for Congress has no opponents in Republican primary

February 4, 2018

by Amy B Wang

The Washington Post

Like most candidates running for Congress, Arthur Jones has a campaign website.

It outlines the Republican candidate’s education background, his stance on issues and how to donate to his campaign to represent the Illinois’s 3rd Congressional District.

It also lays out Jones’s unapologetically racist and anti-Semitic views.

In a section called “Holocaust?” Jones describes the atrocities as a “racket” and “the biggest, blackest, lie in history.” Under another tab titled “Flags of Conflict,” he lists the Confederate flag first and describes it as “a symbol of White pride and White resistance” and “the flag of a White counter revolution.”

And in his most recent blog post — dated Aug. 24, 2017 — Jones railed against “Radical Leftists” and blamed them for starting racial violence in Charlottesville about two weeks before. Heather Heyer, 32, who had been there to protest a white supremacists rally, died after a driver rammed a car into a crowd of demonstrators. A self-professed neo-Nazi has been charged with first-degree murder in the incident. Jones painted the death as an accident.

Despite his views, Jones is all but certain to become the GOP nominee for one of Illinois’s most prominent congressional districts, one that includes parts of Chicago and several suburbs to the west and southwest. Jones is running unopposed in the Republican primary — and the deadline to file to run against him was in early December.

His chances of winning the seat are extremely slim. The district is rated “safely Democratic,” according to Ballotpedia, and two Democrats are facing off against each other: Daniel Lipinski, the incumbent, and Marie Newman. An independent candidate, Mat Tomkowiak, withdrew from the race earlier.

Still, even getting that far in the race was a new milestone for Jones. Over three decades, he has unsuccessfully thrown his hat into the ring for the 3rd District seat seven times, according to the Chicago Sun-Times. Jones’s candidacy comes at a time when far-right groups have had new clout in the national discussion: Some hate groups have ramped up recruitment on college campuses and, for a time, alt-right leaders imagined they had an ally in the White House in the form of Stephen K. Bannon, a former adviser to President Trump.

And when Chicago Sun-Times reporter Frank Main drove to Lyons, Ill., the suburb where Jones lives, the candidate was no less vocal about his extreme views.

“Well first of all, I’m running for Congress not the chancellor of Germany, all right?” Jones said. “To me, the Holocaust is what I said it is: It’s an international extortion racket.”

Jones did not immediately respond to interview requests Sunday afternoon. It’s unclear how he arrived at the opinion that the Holocaust, a systematic genocide in which an estimated 6 million Jews were killed by the Nazi regime, was a sham.

In 2016, the state election board tossed Jones from the ballot for the 3rd District for “flagrant disregard of the election code,” the Chicago Tribune reported, although a lawyer for the board did not specify why Jones’s signatures were not valid.

The newspaper that year also highlighted Jones’s former membership in the American National Socialist Workers Party, which the Southern Poverty Law Center lists as a relatively recent offshoot of the National Socialist Movement, “one of the largest and most prominent neo-Nazi groups in the United States.”

Representatives from the Illinois Republican Party and the National Republican Congressional Committee, which supports conservative candidates, did not respond to questions sent by email Sunday. But Tim Schneider, the chairman of the Illinois Republican Party, told the Sun-Times that the party denounced Jones.

“The Illinois Republican Party and our country have no place for Nazis like Arthur Jones,” Schneider told the newspaper. “We strongly oppose his racist views and his candidacy for any public office, including the 3rd Congressional District.”

Israel had plan to shoot down passenger plane to kill Arafat, book claims

Ariel Sharon allegedly told air force to attack planes if thought to be carrying Palestinian leader

January 25, 2018

by Oliver Holmes in Jerusalem

The Guardian

The former Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon allegedly ordered the military to shoot down civilian airliners over the Mediterranean while he was minister of defence in an attempt to kill the Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, a journalist has claimed.

In an article adapted from his upcoming book, Ronen Bergman says that between November 1982 and January 1983 Sharon ordered fighter jets to be placed on interception alert, scrambling at least five times with plans to blow up commercial planes that may be carrying Arafat.

“The air force drew up a detailed plan. They found a spot over the Mediterranean where there was commercial air traffic but no continuous radar coverage by any nation and where the sea below was three miles deep, making a salvage operation extremely difficult, perhaps impossible,” Bergman writes in the New York Times.

His book, Rise and Kill First: The Secret History of Israel’s Targeted Assassinations, details the special taskforce set up to assassinate Arafat, codenamed Operation Salt Fish and later Operation Goldfish.

“When [Israel’s intelligence agency] Mossad reported that Arafat was flying more commercial flights, with [his Palestine Liberation Organisation] often buying the entire first-class or business-class cabin for him and his aides, Sharon decided that such flights would be legitimate targets,” he adds.

Bergman says at least three officers who were present told him that some of the targets were commercial airliners, although he adds that Oded Shamir, Sharon’s adjutant at the time, said all were private aircraft.

The plan was never completed as air force commanders intentionally obstructed the operation, Bergman wrote, with senior officers refusing to obey orders they considered illegal.

The former brigadier general Amos Gilboa told Bergman he warned the chief of staff of the Israeli Defense Forces, Lt Gen Rafael Eitan, that the mission “could ruin the state internationally if it were known that we downed a civilian airliner”.

The air force operations chief, Aviem Sella, also said he attempted to block the killings, saying he told Eitan: “We do not intend to carry this out. It simply will not happen. I understand that the minister of defence is dominant here. No one dares to stand up to him, and therefore we will make it technically impossible

The mission began after Israeli F-15s almost shot down a transport plane that they believed was carrying Arafat from Athens to Cairo in October 1982. That plan was shut down at the last moment when Mossad agents reported that it was Arafat’s lookalike younger brother who was on board.

The plane was also carrying 30 wounded Palestinian children, casualties of the Sabra and Shatila massacre in which Lebanese Christian militia killed hundreds of Palestinians in Beirut refugee camps overseen by Israel. An Israeli investigation later found Sharon was indirectly responsible for the massacres and he was forced to resign.

Bergman says other plans to assassinate Arafat were drafted, including attempting to convince a Palestinian prisoner to become an assassin. He said the idea was inspired by The Manchurian Candidate, a 1962 film in which a US soldier is brainwashed by communists.

In another case, operatives trailed three Israeli journalists who travelled to Lebanon to meet the Palestinian leader. The plan was to bomb the interview, but the team lost track of the reporters, Bergman writes.


Lebanon looks to Hezbollah to resolve internal clashes, as Israel’s war threats reach fever pitch

February 2, 2018

by Martin Jay


Lebanon is a pressure cooker which could blow at any moment, but don’t worry about confused US policy. Israel’s threats to invade are not irking the Lebanese, but many wish Hezbollah would end a local Shiite-Christian spat.

America’s confused position in Afrin, northern Syria, is not the only location in the Middle East where Washington’s loyalties are at odds with the reality on the ground. Lebanon, a country once called the ‘Switzerland of the Middle East’ for its Western pretentions, is now what many call a failed state which is consumed by corruption. And a confused one, for Washington to grapple with.

Lebanon is one of the highest net recipients of US military aid and because of its unique location (bordering Israel) and its dominance by Iranian-backed Hezbollah, that makes it a special case in the eyes of Washington. Indeed, only recently when Israel threatened to attack, it was the US which “pledged”  support for the Lebanese Army, which it erroneously believes acts as a “counterweight” to Hezbollah. Is the US misinformed and comically out of touch of the recent developments in Lebanon, or is it simply confused about the realities on the ground?

A lot has changed since the 2006 invasion of Lebanon by Israeli forces. Recently, President Michel Aoun made it very clear that the Lebanese Army would support Hezbollah in attacking the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), if Israeli forces entered the country. Given this stark change to 2006, when the Lebanese Army didn’t fight Israel in the south, this new situation would put two US allies at war with each other – the IDF and the Lebanese regular army.

This presents Washington’s foreign policy hacks with a conundrum: does this abnormality of military support act as an incendiary device to pushing Israel to invade Lebanon (for a third time), or simply mean that Israel will merely threaten to do so more than it normally would, without going ahead? Are Israel’s threats strong words from an empty stomach?

In recent weeks, barely a few days pass without Israel making another threat to invade. Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman recently said that Israel would not let Beirut’s residents go to the beach (like they did in 2006) while the south of their country was at war (and Israelis in Tel Aviv were in bomb shelters). In the same week, he also accused Lebanon of illegally taking Israel’s territorial waters – for oil and gas exploration – which he called a “provocation,” resulting in a no-nonsense response from Hezbollah: it will be war if you go there. Concurrent to these statements, an IDF spokesman also warned of war if Iran’s weapons facility, rumored to be in Lebanon, started production.

None of the Israeli threats stirs the average Lebanese though, even though in recent months a massive IDF build-up on the Lebanese-Israeli border has been ongoing.

A good barometer of how worried people are about stability in Lebanon can be found at the bank, where interest rates linked to the local currency indicate whether people are panic selling their lira; another one is inflation in supermarkets.

But the best one is without a doubt the price of black market guns. Lebanon has one of the highest concentrations of guns in the world. Yet in the last few months, gun dealers are bemoaning how a Syrian war in its twilight stage, combined with a period of no car bombs or assassinations in Lebanon for at least two years, is forcing prices down to record lows. Two years ago, a brand new Russian Viking pistol was selling on the streets of an Armenian neighborhood in Beirut for over US$2,200; until this Christian-Shiite spat, the price was as low as $1,300.

Yet there is something which the Lebanese really fear and which might spike prices of weapons, certainly assault rifles. In recent days, Lebanon’s house speaker, Nabih Berri, was called a “thug” by Aoun’s son-in-law, Foreign Minister Gebran Bassil  – a man who has a rare talent for poorly-timed or inappropriate statements – leaving the elderly Shiite figurehead somewhat riled. Not wishing to rise to the bait himself, the defamed gentleman in question left it to his loyal militias to enter neighborhoods in Christian areas, burning tires and firing AK47s into the air – managing to pull off an impressive impersonation of “thugs” to boot.

But it’s no laughing matter. Many Christians are worried that things could escalate and leave Lebanon vulnerable.

This can be really dangerous for Lebanon,” a Christian shopkeeper in an affluent Christian area in Beirut tells me. “This is what started the civil war, exactly this…”

“People now will start buying AKs which will push the price up because of these thugs, not because of Israel’s threats,” he adds, while showing me a compact pistol which he says he paid $2,500 for, still glistening in oil.

The ‘demonstrations’, which lasted three days and included the house speakers’ thugs closing the airport for two hours and which also pitched them against a gun-toting Christian neighborhood which scared them away, could get out of hand. This is what the Lebanese fear more than anything. An escalation of rival groups’ anger which could result in just one death – sparking a state of emergency, akin to a civil war.

Shake-up of power in Lebanon

Under normal circumstances, nobody believes that the Israelis would be so stupid to invade, given Hezbollah’s new strength and experience, following Syria and its latest missiles acquired from Iran. But if the country was in chaos, this could be more likely as it would be an opportunity that might not come around again.

The current row is about the house speaker’s own Shiite power base being threatened by the Christian president’s shake-up, allotting top military jobs to Christians and (perhaps) not getting his fair share from oil and gas ‘bonuses’. Corruption is the core issue, although Lebanon’s parliamentary elections are also making the country’s ruling warlords nervous, excluding Hassan Nasrallah, the Hezbollah leader, who has never looked more confident or relaxed in his TV speeches.

Perhaps he chuckles to himself when he hears of the US talking about supplying the Lebanese Army with more weapons, when hardly anyone in Lebanon believes that it is any real match for Hezbollah, regardless of the hardware it might have.

Some here argue that it will be Nasrallah who puts the house speaker’s armed thugs in order, as Hezbollah wants peace here in Lebanon more than anyone. Nasrallah may well be content, as he’s holding all the aces. He has his own Christian president who the West believes is in its own pocket and will protect Lebanon and Hezbollah against any regional hegemony either in Riyadh or Tel Aviv overstepping red lines. It doesn’t really get any better than that. Nasrallah also probably believes that US President Donald Trump would not allow the Israelis to attack Lebanon, where the national army is US-supplied and ready to hit back. It would make the US president look stupid and bewildered, and Washington’s foreign policy appear hit and miss. Chocolate cake. With candles.

There are even those who believe that the constant funding of the Lebanese Army is, in itself, a smart way of both deterring Israel from invading and making its political class an even more astute enemy of Iran. But this merely strengthens the Hezbollah leader even more.

In the meantime, in many Christian areas in Beirut the normal price of a used AK47 (around $1,100 to $1,200) jumped now to $1,600 because of the local clashes. Many Christians are worried that the speaker’s mob will spark a turf war. “The few [Christians] who didn’t have one before are now under pressure from friends to get one,” Philippe, a restaurant owner tells me before smiling. “Of course, I have one. We look now to Nasrallah to intervene and stop these incidents even though it’s not his people.”


Republicans differ with Trump on whether memo undercuts Russia probe

February 3, 2018

by Jonathan Landay and Doina Chiacu


WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Several Republican lawmakers disagreed on Sunday with President Donald Trump’s assertion that a memo released last week by the House Intelligence Committee vindicated him in the investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election.

Tweeting from his resort in Palm Beach, Florida, on Saturday, Trump called Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe of election interference a “witch hunt” and a “disgrace” and said the memo “totally vindicates” him.

But several Republican lawmakers played down the memo’s significance for Mueller’s probe, including Representative Trey Gowdy, a member of the intelligence committee and one of the authors of the four-page memo.

Speaking on the CBS program “Face the Nation,” Gowdy said he believed the Republican memo showed sloppiness by investigators in the handling of an application to the top secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court.

But he said the Russia probe should continue regardless.

“I am on record as saying I support Bob Mueller 100 percent,” Gowdy said. “I say investigate everything Russia did, but admit that this was a really sloppy process that you engaged in to surveil a U.S. citizen.”

The Republican memo has fueled a battle between Trump and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which argued against the document’s release.

The memo accuses senior FBI and Justice Department officials of using unverified information from a politically biased source when they sought approval from the FISA court to monitor the communications of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page on Oct. 21, 2016.

Investigators had asked for permission to monitor Page as part of the wider probe into alleged Russian meddling in the election and potential collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russia.

Russia has denied meddling. Trump has insisted there was no collusion by his campaign.

Democrats accuse Trump and his Republican allies of trying to use the memo to undermine the Russia probe and possibly make the case for the firing of Mueller or Rod Rosenstein, the No. 2 official at Justice who is overseeing Mueller.


The comments on Sunday from Republican lawmakers suggest Trump could face resistance if he sought to use the Republican memo as a basis to try to fire either Mueller or Rosenstein.

The Republican memo was commissioned by Republican Representative Devin Nunes, a staunch Trump ally who is chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.

The FBI had objected to the memo’s release, saying it had “grave concerns” that the document gave an inaccurate account of the application to carry out surveillance on Page.

Republican Representatives Will Hurd, Brad Wenstrup and Chris Stewart, all of whom sit on the House Intelligence Committee, agreed with Gowdy that the Republican memo should have no impact on Mueller’s investigation.

“Bob Mueller should be allowed to turn over every rock, pursue every lead, so that we can have trust in knowing what actually the Russians did or did not do,” Hurd said on ABC News’ “This Week.”

Stewart, speaking on ”Fox News Sunday,“ said the ”memo has nothing to do with the special counsel … they are very separate and I hope the special counsel will complete his work and report to the American people.”

Asked on CNN’s “State of the Union” if the Republican memo would provide justification for Trump to fire either Rosenstein or Mueller, Wenstrup said: “No, I don‘t.”

On Monday, the House intelligence panel will consider whether to release a memo from Democratic lawmakers that is expected to outline what they see as flaws in the Republican memo.

Two sources told Reuters on condition of anonymity on Sunday that the intelligence committee would consider declassifying the Democratic memo on Monday and making it public. One said the meeting would take place at 5 p.m. (2200 GMT) and that there would be a vote.

A Democratic member of the intelligence committee, Representative Michael Quigley, said on Sunday he was concerned that Trump could censor the Democratic memo that must be sent to him for a five-day security review before it is released under the same rule by which the Republican document was made public.

“I think he would redact (the Democratic document) in a fit of hypocrisy,” Quigley said in a phone interview. “I have more concern about the president than I do about my committee. The president is seriously delusional.”

The White House declined to comment on Quigley’s remarks, but said earlier the president would be open to releasing the Democratic memo after it was subjected to a security review. “If voted out, we’ll consider it. Nothing more to add,” White House spokeswoman Lindsay Walters said on Sunday.

Additional reporting by Lesley Wroughton and Ayesha Rascoe; Editing by Caren Bohan and Peter Cooney


Our Enemy, Ourselves

Ten Commonsense Suggestions for Making Peace, Not War

February 4, 2018

by William J. Astore

Tom Dispatch

Whether the rationale is the need to wage a war on terror involving 76 countries or renewed preparations for a struggle against peer competitors Russia and China (as Defense Secretary James Mattis suggested recently while introducing America’s new National Defense Strategy), the U.S. military is engaged globally.  A network of 800 military bases spread across 172 countries helps enable its wars and interventions.  By the count of the Pentagon, at the end of the last fiscal year about 291,000 personnel (including reserves and Department of Defense civilians) were deployed in 183 countries worldwide, which is the functional definition of a military uncontained.  Lady Liberty may temporarily close when the U.S. government grinds to a halt, but the country’s foreign military commitments, especially its wars, just keep humming along.

As a student of history, I was warned to avoid the notion of inevitability.  Still, given such data points and others like them, is there anything more predictable in this country’s future than incessant warfare without a true victory in sight?  Indeed, the last clear-cut American victory, the last true “mission accomplished” moment in a war of any significance, came in 1945 with the end of World War II.

Yet the lack of clear victories since then seems to faze no one in Washington.  In this century, presidents have regularly boasted that the U.S. military is the finest fighting force in human history, while no less regularly demanding that the most powerful military in today’s world be “rebuilt” and funded at ever more staggering levels.  Indeed, while on the campaign trail, Donald Trump promised he’d invest so much in the military that it would become “so big and so strong and so great, and it will be so powerful that I don’t think we’re ever going to have to use it.”

As soon as he took office, however, he promptly appointed a set of generals to key positions in his government, stored the mothballs, and went back to war.  Here, then, is a brief rundown of the first year of his presidency in war terms.

In 2017, Afghanistan saw a mini-surge of roughly 4,000 additional U.S. troops (with more to come), a major spike in air strikes, and an onslaught of munitions of all sorts, including MOAB (the mother of all bombs), the never-before-used largest non-nuclear bomb in the U.S. arsenal, as well as precision weapons fired by B-52s against suspected Taliban drug laboratories.  By the Air Force’s own count, 4,361 weapons were “released” in Afghanistan in 2017 compared to 1,337 in 2016.  Despite this commitment of warriors and weapons, the Afghan war remains — according to American commanders putting the best possible light on the situation — “stalemated,” with that country’s capital Kabul currently under siege.

How about Operation Inherent Resolve against the Islamic State?  U.S.-led coalition forces have launched more than 10,000 airstrikes in Iraq and Syria since Donald Trump became president, unleashing 39,577 weapons in 2017. (The figure for 2016 was 30,743.)  The “caliphate” is now gone and ISIS deflated but not defeated, since you can’t extinguish an ideology solely with bombs.  Meanwhile, along the Syrian-Turkish border a new conflict seems to be heating up between American-backed Kurdish forces and NATO ally Turkey.

Yet another strife-riven country, Yemen, witnessed a sixfold increase in U.S. airstrikes against al-Qaeda on the Arabian Peninsula (from 21 in 2016 to more than 131 in 2017).  In Somalia, which has also seen a rise in such strikes against al-Shabaab militants, U.S. forces on the ground have reached numbers not seen since the Black Hawk Down incident of 1993.  In each of these countries, there are yet more ruins, yet more civilian casualties, and yet more displaced people.

Finally, we come to North Korea.  Though no real shots have yet been fired, rhetorical shots by two less-than-stable leaders, “Little Rocket Man” Kim Jong-un and “dotard” Donald Trump, raise the possibility of a regional bloodbath.  Trump, seemingly favoring military solutions to North Korea’s nuclear program even as his administration touts a new generation of more usable nuclear warheads, has been remarkably successful in moving the world’s doomsday clock ever closer to midnight.

Clearly, his “great” and “powerful” military has hardly been standing idly on the sidelines looking “big” and “strong.”  More than ever, in fact, it seems to be lashing out across the Greater Middle East and Africa.  Seventeen years after the 9/11 attacks began the Global War on Terror, all of this represents an eerily familiar attempt by the U.S. military to kill its way to victory, whether against the Taliban, ISIS, or other terrorist organizations.

This kinetic reality should surprise no one.  Once you invest so much in your military — not just financially but also culturally (by continually celebrating it in a fashion which has come to seem like a quasi-faith) — it’s natural to want to put it to use.  This has been true of all recent administrations, Democratic and Republican alike, as reflected in the infamous question Secretary of State Madeleine Albright posed to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Colin Powell in 1992: “What’s the point of having this superb military you’re always talking about if we can’t use it?”

With the very word “peace” rarely in Washington’s political vocabulary, America’s never-ending version of war seems as inevitable as anything is likely to be in history.  Significant contingents of U.S. troops and contractors remain an enduring presence in Iraq and there are now 2,000 U.S. Special Operations forces and other personnel in Syria for the long haul.  They are ostensibly engaged in training and stability operations.  In Washington, however, the urge for regime change in both Syria and Iran remains strong — in the case of Iran implacably so.  If past is prologue, then considering previous regime-change operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, the future looks grim indeed.

Despite the dismal record of the last decade and a half, our civilian leaders continue to insist that this country must have a military not only second to none but globally dominant.  And few here wonder what such a quest for total dominance, the desire for absolute power, could do to this country.  Two centuries ago, however, writing to Thomas Jefferson, John Adams couldn’t have been clearer on the subject.  Power, he said, “must never be trusted without a check.”

The question today for the American people: How is the dominant military power of which U.S. leaders so casually boast to be checked? How is the country’s almost total reliance on the military in foreign affairs to be reined in? How can the plans of the profiteers and arms makers to keep the good times rolling be brought under control?

As a start, consider one of Donald Trump’s favorite generals, Douglas MacArthur, speaking to the Sperry Rand Corporation in 1957:

“Our swollen budgets constantly have been misrepresented to the public. Our government has kept us in a perpetual state of fear — kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor — with the cry of grave national emergency. Always there has been some terrible evil at home or some monstrous foreign power that was going to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it by furnishing the exorbitant funds demanded. Yet, in retrospect, these disasters seem never to have happened, seem never to have been quite real.”

No peacenik MacArthur.  Other famed generals like Smedley Butler and Dwight D. Eisenhower spoke out with far more vigor against the corruptions of war and the perils to a democracy of an ever more powerful military, though such sentiments are seldom heard in this country today.  Instead, America’s leaders insist that other people judge us by our words, our stated good intentions, not our murderous deeds and their results.

Perpetual Warfare Whistles Through Washington

Whether in Iraq, Afghanistan, or elsewhere in the war on terror, the U.S. is now engaged in generational conflicts that are costing us trillions of dollars, driving up the national debt while weakening the underpinnings of our democracy.  They have led to foreign casualties by the hundreds of thousands and created refugees in the millions, while turning cities like Iraq’s Mosul into wastelands.

In today’s climate of budget-busting “defense” appropriations, isn’t it finally time for Americans to apply a little commonsense to our disastrous pattern of war-making?  To prime the pump for such a conversation, here are 10 suggestions for ways to focus on, limit, or possibly change Washington’s now eternal war-making and profligate war spending:

  1. Abandon the notion of perfect security. You can’t have it. It doesn’t exist.  And abandon as well the idea that a huge military establishment translates into national safety.  James Madison didn’t think so and neither did Dwight D. Eisenhower.
  2. Who could have anything against calling the Pentagon a “defense” department, if defense were truly its focus? But let’s face it: the Pentagon is actually a war department. So let’s label it what it really is.  After all, how can you deal with a problem if you can’t even name it accurately?
  3. Isn’t it about time to start following the Constitution when it comes to our “wars”? Isn’t it time for Congress to finally step up to its constitutional duties? Whatever the Pentagon is called, this country should no longer be able to pursue its many conflicts without a formal congressional declaration of war.  If we had followed that rule, the U.S. wouldn’t have fought any of its wars since the end of World War II.
  4. Generational wars — ones, that is, that never end — should not be considered a measure of American resolve, but of American stupidity. If you wage war long, you wage it wrong, especially if you want to protect democratic institutions in this country.
  5. Generals generally like to wage war. Don’t blame them. It’s their profession.  But for heaven’s sake, don’t put them in charge of the Department of “Defense” (James Mattis) or the National Security Council (H.R. McMaster) either — and above all, don’t let one of them (John Kelly) become the gatekeeper for a volatile, vain president.  In our country, civilians should be in charge of the war makers, end of story.
  6. You can’t win wars you never should have begun in the first place. America’s leaders failed to learn that lesson from Vietnam. Since then they have continued to wage wars for less-than-vital interests with predictably dismal results. Following the Vietnam example, America will only truly win its Afghan War when it chooses to rein in its pride and vanity — and leave.
  7. The serious people in Washington snickered when, as a presidential candidate in 2004 and 2008, Congressman Dennis Kucinich called for a Department of Peace. Remind me, though, 17 years into our latest set of wars, what was so funny about that suggestion? Isn’t it better to wage peace than war? If you don’t believe me, ask a wounded veteran or a Gold Star family.
  8. Want to invest in American jobs? Good idea! But stop making the military-industrial complex the preferred path to job creation. That’s a loser of a way to go. It’s proven that investments in “butter” create double or triple the number of jobs as those in “guns.” In other words, invest in education, health care, and civilian infrastructure, not more weaponry.
  9. Get rid of the very idea behind the infamous Pottery Barn rule — the warning Secretary of State Colin Powell offered George W. Bush before the invasion of Iraq that if the U.S. military “breaks” a country, somehow we’ve “bought” it and so have to take ownership of the resulting mess. Whether stated or not, it’s continued to be the basis for this century’s unending wars. Honestly, if somebody broke something valuable you owned, would you trust that person to put it back together? Folly doesn’t decrease by persisting in it.
  10. I was an officer in the Air Force. When I entered that service, the ideal of the citizen-soldier still held sway. But during my career I witnessed a slow, insidious change. A citizen-soldier military morphed into a professional ethos of “warriors” and “warfighters,” a military that saw itself as better than the rest of us. It’s time to think about how to return to that citizen-soldier tradition, which made it harder to fight those generational wars.

Consider retired General John Kelly, who, while defending the president in a controversy over the president’s words to the mother of a dead Green Beret, refused to take questions from reporters unless they had a personal connection to fallen troops or to a Gold Star family. Consider as well the way that U.S. politicians like Vice President Mike Pence are always so keen to exalt those in uniform, to speak of them as above the citizenry. (“You are the best of us.”)

Isn’t it time to stop praising our troops to the rooftops and thanking them endlessly for what they’ve done for us — for fighting those wars without end — and to start listening to them instead?  Isn’t it time to try to understand them not as “heroes” in another universe, but as people like us in all their frailty and complexity? We’re never encouraged to see them as our neighbors, or as teenagers who struggled through high school, or as harried moms and dads.

Our troops are, of course, human and vulnerable and imperfect.  We don’t help them when we put them on pedestals, give them flags to hold in the breeze, and salute them as icons of a feel-good brand of patriotism.  Talk of warrior-heroes is worse than cheap: it enables our state of permanent war, elevates the Pentagon, ennobles the national security state, and silences dissent.  That’s why it’s both dangerous and universally supported in rare bipartisan fashion by politicians in Washington.

So here’s my final point.  Think of it as a bonus 11th suggestion: don’t make our troops into heroes, even when they’re in harm’s way.  It would be so much better to make ourselves into heroes by getting them out of harm’s way.

Be exceptional, America.  Make peace, not war.


Turkey’s Erdogan criticizes EU leaders for lack of support, especially against terror

Turkish President Erdogan has insisted in an interview that Turkey should still join the EU. The comments came despite mounting pressure against the Turkish leader’s human rights record and his intervention in Syria.

February 4, 2018

by Sertan Sanderson (with AFP, AP)


Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan told the Italian La Stampa newspaper in an interview that he still expects the European Union to eventually admit Turkey as a full member, stressing that “we won’t accept any other solution.”

“Turkey has done everything it needed to do to fulfill criteria for entry into the European Union,” Erdogan told the newspaper, adding that according to his view, the EU was responsible for blocking Turkey’s accession process by blaming the country for a lack of progress.

“I call on the EU to remove these artificial obstacles to our membership, and to be more constructive. Internal politics should not stand in the way of the accession process.”

‘Operation Olive Branch’ continues despite US warning

Turkey’s ambitions to join the EU date back half a century, but accession talks only started in October 2005 while Erdogan was still prime minister.

However, out of the total of 35 chapters that need to be closed in order for Turkey to join the EU, only 16 have been opened with just one closed.

No new chapter has been opened since June 2016 – a month before a coup attempt in Turkey saw more than 270 people killed and Erdogan’s regime taking on an increasingly authoritarian tone as a result under emergency rule provisions.

Defending Afrin

Erdogan also said that he was “very disappointed” to see MEPs in the European Parliament in Brussels wearing emblems in support of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) – even though most European states had labelled the PKK as a terrorist organization.

“I don’t speak to people who support terrorism. I only speak to those who fight it. I deal with terrorists like I’m dealing with them in Afrin; this is the only language they understand,” Erdogan said in the interview with La Stampa.

The Turkish leader defended his recently-launched “Olive Branch” operation in the northern Syrian region of Afrin, fighting Syrian Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) militia, which Ankara also sees as a terror group alongside PKK.

“The Turkish armed forces are not in Afrin to fight armed Kurdish groups. We don’t have problems with the Kurdish Syrians, we are only fighting terrorists, and we have the right to do it,” Erdogan insisted, while repeating that Turkey was not seeking territorial gains.

When reminded that the EU and the United States did not consider the YPG a terrorist organization and that they had supported the YPG in the fight against the “Islamic State” (IS), Erdogan bluntly told the interviewer:

“Well, they are wrong. Considering the PKK and the YPG any different from each other is misleading. You cannot fight a terrorist organization with another terrorist organization.”

Erdogan, Macron hoping to end Syrian war

The interview came shortly after details of a phone conversation between French President Emmanuel Macron and Erdogan were made public, in which the two leaders reportedly agreed to work on a “diplomatic road map” for an end to the seven-year war in Syria despite Turkey’s military involvement in the region.

“The two presidents agreed to work on a diplomatic road map for Syria in the coming weeks,” the Elysee Palace said.

“To that end, discussions between France and Turkey, which both hope for a political solution overseen by the UN, will increase in the coming days.”

Erdogan has sought to build a strong relationship with Macron not only over the issue of Syria but also to help him overcome his rocky relationship with the EU – despite the fact that Macron is among the European leaders who have openly rejected the prospect of Turkish EU membership, floating the idea of a partnership instead.

Hosting Erdogan on a visit to Paris in January, Macron had said that claiming there was any progress in Turkey’s accession process would amount to “hypocrisy.”

International isolation

The partnership between France and Turkey is of strategic concern for Erdogan, as Turkey is in dire need of international support and goodwill, following its much-criticized incursion into AfriKurds in Germany look anxiously to Afrin

Despite suffering its worst day of fighting, with seven Turkish soldiers dying on Saturday alone, Erdogan wants to press on with expanding Operation “Olive Branch,” saying that the incursion could expand beyond Afrin to the town of Manbij and possibly east of the Euphrates river.

The Turkish military claims it has killed nearly 900 YPG fighters during the operation so far.

Turkey’s reputation further tanked after a report was published by Human Rights Watch claiming that Turkish border guards had shot and killed Syrian refugees trying to cross into Turkey last year.

Despite suffering its worst day of fighting, with seven Turkish soldiers dying on Saturday alone, Erdogan wants to press on with expanding Operation “Olive Branch,” saying that the incursion could expand beyond Afrin to the town of Manbij and possibly east of the Euphrates river.

The Turkish military claims it has killed nearly 900 YPG fighters during the operation so far.

Turkey’s reputation further tanked after a report was published by Human Rights Watch claiming that Turkish border guards had shot and killed Syrian refugees trying to cross into Turkey last year.


Blessed Prozac Moments!


PROJECT WOODPECKER (A Bird or a Decoy? Ed)

PROJECT WOODPECKER pertains to the “Electron Cyclotron Resonance Heating Method” now being used to alter the earth’s magnetic field—in order to modify weather,  create or trigger earthquakes and volcanoes, spread  viruses, create the phenomenon known as “electromagnetic pulse”, and, to modify behavior control among the populous. The HAARP (i.e. High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program) transmitter site, that is located NE of Gakona, AK, is large enough to cover most of the Northern Hemisphere. It is however but one of other such sites (some of which are known as “Ionospheric Research Instruments”) scattered around the world. And, many of them here in the U.S.are able to tie into the much smaller GWEN (i.e. Ground Wave Emergency Network) remotely controlled transmitter sites that have been built all over the U.S. in a grid pattern, with their antennas spaced about every 200 miles or so.

The original research concerning the “Electron Cyclotron Resonance Heating Method” was done by Nickola Tesla, and later expanded upon by not only Soviet scientists, but also by U.S. scientists, such as Bernard J. Eastland—a scientist who was associated with ARCO (Atlantic Richfield Oil Co.).

ARCO has traditionally been controlled by members of the CFR (i.e. Council on Foreign Relations). Eastland, who was the “front man”, now resides at 6615 Chancellor Drive; Spring, TX. He transferred the patent rights to APTI, Inc. (i.e. ARCO Power Technologies Industry, Inc.) in the late 1980s, which was a Los Angeles, CA subsidiary of ARCO. APTI, Inc. then sold out to “E-Systems” on June 10, 1994, which company has pretty much, over the years, been under the control and influence of the CIA. On April 3, 1995, “E-Systems” sold out to the still larger Raytheon Corp. I don’t know what has happened, by way of “transfers” since that time.

The U.S. and the Soviet Union first began secret cooperation on world weather engineering in about 1971. On July 4, 1976, the Soviets began generating powerful electromagnetic transmissions, that were dubbed “The Russian Woodpecker” by western ham radio operators. On June 18, 1977, the US government OFFICIALLY became covert partners with the Soviets in these operations by sending them sophisticated scientific material and equipment for further research and development. The secret code name given US operations was Project Woodpecker. The Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory located at Livermore, CA was and is the main research center for US development of the Project. Covert funding for the Project was funneled through the CIA and the National Security Agency. The DOD and NASA have, of course, been cooperating in the Project from the beginning stages.

On Jan. 10, 1985 there was officially filed of record a Patent No. 4,686,605 entitled: a “Method and Apparatus for Altering a Region in the Earth’s Atmosphere, Ionosphere, and/or Magnetosphere”. The

Patent was approved on Aug. 11, 1987. This Patent explains and describes the “Electron Cyclotron

Resonance Heating” method that is presently being covertly and cooperatively used by the two super powers to help bring about their coveted NEW WORLD ORDER, which is a “One World Government”.

In 1993, researchers announced that they had discovered (back as early as perhaps 1985) a never before seen network of rivers, some of which flow for thousands of miles ABOVE earths surface, that transport as much water in the form of vapor as the Amazon River. Apparently, these narrow streams of

ATMOSPHERIC rivers are transient, but at any given time, there are at least a few of them in the atmosphere, typically around five in each Hemisphere. The longest of them runs for about 4800 miles. They  are generally about 150 miles wide (the largest being almost 500 miles wide), and about a mile deep, with some 364 million pounds of vapor flowing past a given spot each SECOND—which is comparable to an average flow of the Amazon River. These atmospheric rivers are flowing at an altitude of no more than 1.9 miles above the earth’s surface, which makes them readily reachable by low pressure weather cells. In general, the atmospheric rivers head for the poles, but on the way, they can get deflected by the earth’s Jet Stream Their flow originates from along the equator. These vapor rivers sometimes get sucked into low pressure systems, and are the major sources of the massive flows of water that rains out of the storms and into the sky river’s counterparts on land. US and Soviet scientists are now cooperatively “tracking” these atmospheric rivers for use in covert activities of Project Woodpecker.

In order to fully understand how the conspirators are able to use high powered r.f. transmissions to trigger  earthquakes and/or volcanoes, one must have some knowledge of the “principle of sympathetic vibratory  resonance”. Von Nostrand’s SCIENTIFIC ENCYCLOPEDIA (Seventh Edition) defined RESONANCE: “Every physical system (i.e. all bodies, structures, mediums, etc.) has one or more NATURAL (or Fundamental) VIBRATION FREQUENCIES, characteristic of the system itself and deterrmined by constants pertaining to the system.If such a system is given impulses with some arbitrary frequency, it will necessarily vibrate with that frequency, even though it is not one of those NATURAL to it.” These “forced vibrations” may be very feeble, but if the impressed frequency is varied, the response becomes rapidly more vigorous whenever any one of the NATURAL (i.e. Fundamental or a harmonic of that Fundamental) frequencies is approached. Its amplitude often increasing many fold as an exact synchronism (i.e. or at a harmonic of the NATURAL) frequency is reached. This effect is known as RESONANCE. The greatest vibration will be induced in a system at its NATURAL or FUNDAMENTAL frequency (or at a harmonic thereof).

The Earth’s NATURAL (or Fundamental) frequency (also sometimes referred to as the Schumann Resonance) is about 10 Hz. This appears to be the Resonant Frequency of our Galaxy, so, all bodies, structures, mediums, etc. within our particular Galaxy will be found to be RESONANT at either this Natural frequency or around 10 Hz, or at a harmonic thereof.

In the triggering of Earthquakes or Volcanoes, the trick is in determining the unique resonant frequency of the Earth’s mantle AT THAT PARTICULAR SPOT (or target!) ON THE EARTH. Once the conspirators determine this, they can unleash an ELF carrier frequency through the earth, and then SUPERIMPOSE the harmonic frequency of the “target zone” using a second set of transmitters. This might be called: “Selective Targeting”. Of course, the conspirators will also have predetermined that the target zone will have built up enough stress within the zone to be “ripe” for activation.

This system of using ELF radio waves as a technique has many other applications. Not only is it being used to artificially trigger earthquakes and volcanoes, to develop high and low pressure weather cells that are used to steer the Jet Streams, to transport and deposit microscopic entities such as viruses and chemical agents, but, they are able to create a phenomenon known as an earth damaging “electromagnetic pulse” (EMP).

To understand how they do it, one must have at least some knowledge about the earth’s magnetic field. The earth’s magnetic field is comprised of atoms which are gyrating about a magnetic field line as its guiding center. The atoms are comprised of negatively charged electrons and positively charged protons. If you would look at a cross section of earth at the equator, you would see a solid core at the center, ringed by a liquid layer of molten iron, which is in turn surrounded by the solid mantle and crust. Within the liquid layer are several constantly circulating streams of iron called convection cells which workl ike oval conveyor belts. Driven by heat from the core, material in these cells rises towards the mantle, where it cools and sinks back down, until the heat pushes it up again. Geologists believe, that after these cells formed, early in the earth’s history, the weak magnetic field that permeates the galaxy generated in them an electric current which in turn generated the earth’s “magnetic field”.

Now, in order for you to understand how the magnetic field lines of our earth work, you must understand the basic principal of how a simple “magnet” works. And, the way that most of us learned it back in our earlier school years, was WRONG WRONG WRONG! There is a “old concept” and, a “new concept” of the laws of magnetism. In the “new concept”, you will note that  there is a “NEGATIVELY charged NORTH MAGNETIC POLE, and, a POSITIVELY charged SOUTH MAGNETIC POLE. (Draw it out on a piece of paper). The atom leaves the South Magnetic Pole spinning to the right (or clockwise). It then dips to the surface of the earth (at its Equator), and changes its spin (or phase relationship) by 180 degrees. When it leaves the Magnetic Equator of the Earth, it travels with a left (or counterclockwise) spin to reenter the earth at the North Magnetic Pole. The negatively charged electrons and positively charged protons both follow helical paths around a field line, but they rotate at a certain gyromagnetic or ‘CYCLOTRON FREQUENCY’ in opposite directions. There is therefore linear movement along the earth’s magnetic field lines. Thus, one can see, that this change in phase relationship between electrons and protons creates a different potential of magnetic energy in the Northern as compared to the Southern Hemisphere. By way of analogy, winds in low pressure weather cells circulatecounterclockwise in the Northern Hemisphere, but they circulate clockwise in the Southern Hemisphere.

When side-by-side earth magnetic field lines are “altered” by speeding up one line’s flow of negatively charged electrons, the magnetic field strength will combine to form a larger and stronger field. If the electron flow around one line is reversed or slowed down, the magnetic field strength between any two lines can be made to oppose each other and tend to cancel or lessen the magnetic field strength. The “force of gravity” in that particular local can thus be made to increase or decrease.

The atmospheric media that is being crossed by the earth’s magnetic field lines is itself comprised of  various molecules whose elements have different energy levels and which gyrate at different frequencies.  Relatively recent discoveries have established that there are naturally occurring radiation belts (sometimes referred to as the Van Allen belts) of trapped ionized particles, which particles bounce or oscillate back and forth at a specific cyclotron frequency, between so-called magnetic mirrowed boundaries, along the earth’;s magnetic field lines. The scientific conspirators have also discovered that they can artificially increase the density of the charged particles within these radiation belts, and even create a radiation belt where none had existed, by injecting large clouds of gases—such as lithium, barium, hydrogen, etc.—from orbiting satellites or from earth launched rockets. These injected gases become ionized by the ultraviolet light of the sun, and by injecting them at a certain critical velocity. The procedure is enhanced when they are injected during periods of so-called “high tidal forces”—such as at New or Full Moon. And, when the Moon is at “perigee” and/or when it is over the “Equator”. Also, when the Sun is directing large Solar Flares and/or Coronal Ejections towards the Earth.

By using extremely high powered radio transmitters to transmit a “tuned circular polarized ELF radio wave along or parallel to selected earth magnetic field lines, the charged electrons within that radiation belt will become “excited” or “heated”. This causes the charged particles to move outward in a “plum” out of their mirrowed boundaries. The plume of heated rising plasma is replaced by new plasma within the radiation belt. The aforementioned Patent states that temperature within the target radiation belt can be raised by hundreds of degrees, which incidentally issufficient to cause an air glow or a phenomenon known as aurela boralis. This might be the only way that you might know that such covert operations are taking place. There may also be a sonic boom or noise that might occur from the rf bombardment. To continue: The kinetic energy of the moving particles so developed is on the same order of magnitude as the total kinetic energy of stratospheric winds known to exist. These changes in temperature and winds aloft gives rise to the creation of high and/or low pressure weather cells that can alter the paths of the earth’s Jet Streams. By using multiple transmitters, these weather cells can be made to move or hover over selective locations on earth, thus causing torrential damaging moisture to occur in some areas, while devastating droughts are made to occur in other areas. When the electromagnetic energy is suddenly released (by DECREASING the earth’s magnetic field strength along that specific earth magnetic field line), the low pressure cell with its rising plume of air can be made to collapse—thus dumping the high winds and moisture that was present in that particular cell. This would be called a microburst by the weather guys reporting on your local TVs. These damaging hurricane strength winds would be “straight line winds”.

When the rf bombardment of a target radiation belt is extremely powerful, the negatively charged electrons and positively charged protons can be forceably made to separate. This will cause an earth damaging electromagnetic pulse to occur, that is similar to lightning. This EMP will couple to surface antennas and power transmission lines, which will destroy sensitive electronic equipment. Thus, power outages can be so induced over selective targets.


No responses yet

Leave a Reply