By James R. Hanson*
The following is the first installment of an exclusive four part series on memoryholeblog.com probing the relationship between America’s police state and less-understood weather warfare programs. The work will run weekly through July 30. -JFT
Mother Nature does not engage in terrorism. Her ravages are integral to the natural world in which mankind must adapt or die. Insofar as we know, Mother Nature has no motive to induce terror. That’s where human beings come in.
The following report is about aspects of weather and environmental modification which are not presented in the corporate media but can be found at alternative news and analysis websites offering explanations of weather phenomena caused by human beings. For example, in an introductory note of an article found at Global Research, Prof. Michel Chossudovsky states:
Environmental modification techniques (ENMOD) for military use constitute, in the present context of global warfare, the ultimate weapon of mass destruction. Rarely acknowledged in the debate on global climate change, the world’s weather can now be modified as part of a new generation of sophisticated electromagnetic weapons. Both the US and Russia have developed capabilities to manipulate the climate for military use.
… The US military has developed advanced capabilities that enable it selectively to alter weather patterns. The technology, which is being perfected under the High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP), is an appendage of the Strategic Defense Initiative – “Star Wars”. From a military standpoint, HAARP is a weapon of mass destruction, operating from the outer atmosphere and capable of destabilizing agricultural and ecological systems around the world.
There is no official statement or major media recognition of the uses that have been made of this capability to bring death and ruin to large numbers of people. In my report I provide details which I believe illustrate the high probability of implementation of these capabilities including their use in planned debilitation of the people and productive capacity of the United States.
Hurricane Sandy is my first subject because it fit such a use of the power. Before one dismisses this particular possibility as a fool’s errand they must conclude that it is never used for deleterious effects upon the United States, even if it might seem more than coincidental in its use on nations such as Russia or Iran at critical places and times.
Along these lines, for a conspiracy researcher such as I, Sandy has been an especially suspicious phenomenon. I couldn’t turn away because it was so historically unprecedented and affected the political situation at such a high level. With terrorist events—such as 9/11—one is left more so to guess at the suspects, and it takes a while to find out because the news media can’t seem to hear those low notes. While the aftermath of Sandy was still bounding around in the public consciousness there was a smaller event called “Sandy Hook” that understandably got to everyone’s heart and made them want to do something. Further, because it featured firearms and the slaughter a flock of first graders in their schoolrooms, naturally enough many wanted to ban guns so that such an event would never happen again.
Mother Nature didn’t do that one, of course, nor in my estimation Hurricane Sandy, a form of terrorism unrecognized as such. “The Sandy Hook massacre” is a new form used to alter public policy. One can sense the terror that energizes action due to the pain in everyone’s heart for those lovely young children who were mercilessly slaughtered. I felt it. But after a calm appraisal of the facts my reaction turned to assessing the named terrorist, Adam Lanza, to be as innocent as the children–a probable victim of terrorists who established his reputation as having performed the single most unfathomably dreadful deed in collective memory. As one faces the actual facts, he finds the same sort of evil (illegal) force behind Sandy Hook as that responsible for Hurricane Sandy, the result in both cases being debilitation of the American people and their human rights.
The similarity to 9/11 terror was not apparent at first. Sandy Hook Elementary School was much smaller and it focused on the horror of blood-drenched children who were 100% innocent, while 9/11 destroyed all the buildings in the World Trade Center and some 3,000 100%-innocent adults. (The thousands who had notice and didn’t come to work that day were not 100% innocent, and survived.) If you are amazed that intelligent people can still believe that it was attributable to four airplanes flown by amateurs, you will be blown away by the national credibility accorded the “Sandy Hook massacre.” Blown away. It is connected by the same old principle of substituted reality, or “false flag,” used for terrorism designed to affect the judgment of target groups of people–e.g. leaders of a fleet, an army, or the people in a republic. With 9/11, the blame was placed falsely on 19 Muslim hijackers in order to create hatred to permit our leaders to start illegal wars against Middle Eastern countries populated by Muslims. Most Americans and most media are still buying the “hijacker” explanation as correct in reference to that underworld event.
The enemy selected as the villains of Sandy Hook are not Muslims but gun owners said to be led by the National Rifle Association, known for its history in preserving firearm ownership. When one examines the detail, one finds that a false image was created at Sandy Hook to stampede citizens for a political end just as was the historic event of 9/11. The desired effect by managers of the false flag of Sandy Hook is a diminution toward ultimate deletion of Article II of the U.S. Constitution which grants states and their citizens a means to defend themselves against a federal tyrant to replace the one they rejected by use of firearms in 1776. That tyrannical voice echoes as Englishman Piers Morgan speaks down to those bold enough to stand up for American principles inconsistent with those of the royal tradition, as if dim-witted American loyalists should be taught of their error.
If the Sandy Hook event had been a tornado someone could point to the damage and say “That’s Mother Nature for you!” The essence of Sandy Hook is that the declared damage is fictional, devised, playing Americans as dull, complacent folks who are confident that the commercial media would analyze the facts before nullifying dissent with their opinions. Surely, the people behind this would not be a party to the construction of a police state. This hope is dashed by the way the media has succumbed to a carefully-organized plot for just that. You will find me critical of the New York Times on this subject because it is not unlike the “hometown paper” for Newtown, Connecticut, and likely knew of the falsehood.
An Election Season Hurricane
Hurricane Sandy was the largest in history for Atlantic hurricanes, rather specially put together as hurricanes go, the most costly since Katrina, and remarkably timed by Mother Nature to “freeze” the presidential campaign by closing airports and roads in east coast states. She crossed into New York and New Jersey on October 29 just before hurricane season closed on October 31. The presidential election was held on November 6. In the society of hurricanes, Sandy was a stranger. President Obama immediately went out to the disaster area to promise help to everyone when they badly needed reassurance.
In this four-part report that begins with an analysis of Sandy, I want to describe connections between this storm and other apparently natural events. After hurricanes and aspects of weather control, I’ve included earthquakes, which are like an ancestor of “weather warfare.” I must refer to Sandy Hook because it is an eminently notable part of deceptive democracy. You and I are arguably connected to all this by the phenomenon called “chemtrails,” which are connected to the police state that Paul Craig Roberts so eloquently describes in “It Has Happened Here in America: The Police State is Real.”According to Roberts, “9/11 was used to create an open-ended ‘war on terror’ and a police state. It is extraordinary that so many Americans believe that ‘it can’t happen here’ when it already has.”
New York City had a notable hurricane in 1938. Remarkably the next one of similar notability was Hurricane Irene in 2011–73 years later. Overnight, Irene had spread out and didn’t flood the subway as feared. Before Sandy hit, people thought she would be another Irene. Sandy turned out the lights, the water, all transportation, and future prospects of life near the seacoast. She flooded the subways like they had never been flooded before and destroyed or made unlivable more than 300,000 homes, of which New York Governor Andrew Cuomo announced that he would buy 10,000 to turn the land into flood-proof parks and beaches. The state would pay for flood-proofing structures in the hazard areas. Buildings at sea level would require giant 15-foot pylons. In March more than 2,000 people were still living in hotels at an average $252 a night, paid for by FEMA, because they could not afford to rent an apartment.
An article in the Arts section of the New York Times for November 20 by Michael Kimmelman refers to “no brainers” that aggravated the damage from Sandy, like not having floodgates at subway entrances, not getting transformers and switching stations out of harm’s way, and not getting Congress to order a Corps of Engineers study on the impact of barriers and barrier islands. “Hurricane Sandy was a toll paid for procrastination.” Early pledges were made by officialdom to bring things back the way they were. But that’s the last thing we want to do, says Kimmelman. “Now the task is to create a whole new ecological infrastructure for the region.” This seems to make Sandy a blessing, like a timely gift from God.
The Times had synthesized the problem in a November 1 editorial, “Worrying Beyond Hurricane Sandy.” This piece views Sandy as a lesson for both cities and citizens for ignoring the “grimly precise detail by scientists in the latest state and city climate studies.” The coastal waters are rising as the ocean warms and expands. The editor quotes Klaus Jacob, research scientist at the Columbia University’s Earth Institute and adviser to the city on climate change as saying the political process hadn’t recognized that we’re playing Russian roulette. Governor Cuomo wants surge barriers, involving billions of dollars, which the Times editors see as “a bargain if Sandy and Irene are truly harbingers of more frequent disasters eating deeper into the city’s heart.”
The fact that Sandy came ashore eight days before the presidential election gave President Barack Obama time to find his way through the debris in New Jersey for a tearful embrace and endorsement (before the television cameras) of Governor Chris Christie, who had become known for his livid excoriation of Obama in the election season. With the election less than a week away the President must have said something to the Republican governor that made him very happy. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, neither Republican nor Democrat, enthusiastically joined in the endorsement. Definitely not a Mormon hurricane, Sandy put Mitt Romney’s campaign out of action in the transportation vacuum of critical eastern states where his staff was organized for a strong finish. No airports, railroads, highways, restaurants, hotels, parking lots, schools, welcoming crowds, or time for paying attention to TV ads even if they had electricity.
A few weeks after Obama’s re-election, using the entire front page of its November 25 Sunday Review for a picture of the Statue of Liberty, the flame of her torch breaking the surface of the water just above her head, the Times asked “Is This the End?” This headlined a James Atlas op ed with the explanatory subhead “Whether in 50 or 100 years, there’s a good chance that New York City will sink beneath the sea.” Now this is getting serious.
In the midst of this gnawing uncertainty, a rather small event occurred, compared with Hurricane Sandy. On December 14 the national attention was yanked from the still-flowing stream of unnerving discoveries of debilitating harm from Sandy, to an event in the track of Sandy: a new nightmare named “Sandy Hook Elementary School,” envisioning a pile of 20 shredded first graders. It instantly overcame Hurricane Sandy’s rank in national attention, gaining daily with wholehearted engagement of the media as if it were the essence of what news should be. No need for a huge investigation. When 20 innocent children are murdered, we don’t need one. It was obviously a local boy, Adam Lanza, who killed himself, thus no need for a trial. He was seen as a mental case, with a whole bunch of guns which evidently were his mother’s. Gun control was now equated with the subject of “Sandy Hook.”
Mother Nature: not guilty
Hurricane Sandy thus far has taken 44 American lives, almost 300 total. Older people were affected in ways that will hasten their demise. They weren’t tourists in a hot air balloon, or vacationers on a 4,000-passenger cruise ship, they were people simply trying to live day by day wherever they happened to be located and had no choice but to stay, wait, and hope.
If I hear Mother Nature being blamed, I rise to her defense. Anyone analyzing the current atmosphere of threat to human rights must clearly see the fact that the USA does not have to experience any hurricane it does not prefer to experience. “We” have long had the capability to prevent hurricanes and tornadoes, and to guide and empower them. Sandy was not the result of “Russian roulette,” it was more likely the result of targeting with our military assault weapon: weather.
For the states or the Congress to be preparing gun control bills in this light is corrupt in itself, because its motivational reference is presumptively false. If directed from the White House—to which the event does not appear unimportant, but rather, vital—one must bear in mind that human life and justice, even for Americans, is not considered as important as the need for respect of fabrications vital to secret government objectives.
Would our federal government lie to us? We hear of nameless agencies equipped with “black budget” money of secret and incredible amounts that even the president and Congress are not permitted to know, and we are required to pay taxes without knowing how the money is spent in addition to wars that have clearly been improper and wasteful.
The Iraq “war clock” is currently approaching $900 billion, the estimated overall damage in trillions That was enabled by a Bush/Cheney lie. But Obama? In order to adequately defend the nation, no one outside the black budget agency can know what it is doing because of the presumed advantage that knowledge would give to the nation’s enemies. The black budget that has grown and been used continuously since World War II could by itself make it impossible for the United States to survive as the free state we say we admire.
Hurricane Sandy has the fingerprints of a criminal phenomenon, one being shielded by the President, the Vice-President, all federal agencies concerned with the military or the environment, and the major media which are threatened and commercially blackmailed into silence.
Blackmailed? That is a generalization, but I must assert that for one reason or another the flow of facts has been so restricted that it feels like the atmosphere after 9/11.
Some weeks ago I watched a couple of Weather Channel programs—“Hacking Tornadoes” and “Hacking Hurricanes,” presented as cheery-jokey explanations for schoolchildren, in which the object of each was ways to protect ourselves from them. “What if we could have pushed a button and prevented Sandy?” Hurricanes have been getting more numerous in the past decade due to ocean warming. “We need to reduce insurance claims.” Or play offense, attack the hurricanes the way they attack us. Some ideas, nothing practical, need more resources for study and experiment. Sorry, folks, nothing yet, but silver iodide produced rain in Vietnam a few decades ago.
For comparison I watched my DVD of “Weather Warfare,” from the History Channel, one clearly for adults, telling us about the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) and its 3.6 megawatt ELF wave projection from Alaska. These waves are Extremely Low Frequency which allows them to penetrate the earth, or bounce off the ionosphere to cause an earthquake or a hurricane, or re-route the jet stream and decide who gets rain and who doesn’t. Or—affect the human mind.
There is much more information available in books I reference is subsequent installments of this series, but I find that most people don’t see what’s happening to us. The History Channel DVD came out about four years ago, was shown a few times on TV, then the History Channel refashioned its programming to focus on trivial things such as artifacts in a pawn shop. The DVD is still available for purchase under the politically correct title, “THAT’S IMPOSSIBLE.” Yes, I had thought it impossible that several of the best-informed people on this subject would be allowed to do an exposure on television.
Before New York City is re-designed as a subterranean metropolis, why not look to the well-funded and forward-looking scientific community and ask if there isn’t some way to prevent another Sandy, not just sit back and let it happen? I picture the late Senator Claiborne Pell looking down at all this and shaking his head. He had seen the future clearly when the Treaty on Environmental Modification (ENMOD) was being discussed in 1976-77. Its main thrust was to prohibit use against an enemy of “techniques that would have widespread, long-lasting or severe effects through deliberate manipulation of natural processes and cause such phenomena as earthquakes, tidal waves, and changes in climate and weather patterns.”
Pell lost in his challenge to an amendment allowing research and experimentation on these prohibited techniques, correctly picturing any agency permitted to develop them as becoming unable to resist the temptation to use environmental modification as a military weapon. He may have anticipated their domestic use, but should he have seriously anticipated illegal (criminal) domestic use to distort public opinion and Congressional motivation? Or long-term, to convert the United States into a police state on par with the Soviet Union or a Nazi Germany?
The U.S. and the U.S.S.R. signed the treaty in 1978, bringing a momentary quiet, but after the U.S.S.R. was dissolved in 1991 it announced that as “Russia” it was no longer bound by the treaty, followed by the U.S. position that neither was the U.S. The race was on. Ten years later, Representative Dennis Kucinich could be quoted in “Columbus Alive” for January, 2002: “The truth is there’s an entire program in the Department of Defense, ‘Vision for 2020,’ that’s developing these weapons.” Publisher Bob Fitrakis was asking him about the use of “chemtrails,” an operation which the U.S. Air Force denied, and still routinely denies, calling them “a hoax.” In print, the Air Force had announced its objective to master (“own”) the weather, once seen essentially as an answer to Russia. There is no reason whatsoever to believe that this objective has been discontinued or reduced. The more useful it becomes, the heavier the silence surrounding it.
Representative Kucinich has been constant in his attempt to enact legislation to prevent weather control from becoming standard operating procedure, as has Fitrakis in keeping it before readers of the Free Press. The Ohio Republicans, as of this Congressional term, have thrown the courageous Kucinich off the train by isolating him from his voting support through re-districting. That’s “dirty trick” democracy.
Gun control is a foremost ingredient to a “police state.” Guns of sufficient number and size are an obstacle to the growing concretion of such a police state, which following rules of the rapist, gets its way unless someone can effectively say “no.” It needn’t come to a violent revolution. Gun ownership gives the people confidence, just as it gives pause to officials who would compress the middle class and enslave all but the wealthy. It cannot be discussed rationally with everyone weeping over dead children. It’s too serious for snap judgment, either way, when “the people” are democratically disabled.
When I first heard a talk on the subject of weather control in a water management conference some 25 years ago, chatting with a civil engineer at intermission I found him enthusiastic about the possibilities of growing crops more predictably and economically by reallocating rainfall. As an attorney I was appalled, picturing the impossible confluence of this human factor in life or death with due process of law, which requires that the taking of property meet standards decided by U.S. Supreme Court interpretations of the U.S. Constitution. Secret weather control turns the Constitution into a worthless document.
The tough question is not just the taking of property by drought, flood, snow, or wind but the accompanying deprivation of life and health. Will there be a special court for that? One who can control the weather has his hand on a switch (perhaps a keyboard) to kill people, a subject still considered by most as improper, and clearly unconstitutional. Today we talk about use of drones and the thoughtless murder of innocents, including children not unlike those said to have been killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School and considerably more numerous. This is justified by those who defend it as necessary if the U.S.A. is to be “safe from terrorists.” We openly deplore it, but it will most likely be the course again on any day somewhere, to our discredit as Americans.
It has become increasingly impressed on all involved that the outstanding aspect of weather as a military force is that it must appear to be the action of Mother Nature. It thus cannot be successfully attributed to a particular source to attract a reaction, military or political, by the injured party. In the United States at the present time the façade includes disciplined fabrication by all federal agencies concerning the ability to affect the weather, from chemtrails to floods, droughts, tornadoes, hurricanes, and earthquakes. This phenomenon of tight secrecy is intended to furnish “plausible deniability,” an overriding objective that is most feasible with a controlled media, as in a police state. The inherent problem that undercuts virtue, and thus human rights, is that the method requires that the government lie to its citizens, and that the media cooperate– not just now and then, but by principle, all agencies, always. It all but makes the country destined to become a police state.
In considering the morality of weather warfare bear in mind that weather kills people, whether you intend it or not, including kindergartners and first graders in much greater numbers than massacres by assassins. As discussed extensively in the U.S. Congress in the lead-up to approval of ENMOD, hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, droughts, heat waves, extreme cold, and earthquakes amount to lethal weaponry capable of being used secretly by a military force to destroy another nation without its knowing who did it, feigning innocence and tsk-tsking about Mother Nature and global warming. Masked by “plausible deniability” it starves an enemy, drowns it, tears up its cities, destabilizes its people and its military gradually without their knowing what is happening. With the same facility, it can spread toxins and hallucinogens from the air, unsuspected, or endured for lack of proof—that is, “plausible deniability.”
With weather warfare used against an avowed enemy, cooperation of citizens would be considered patriotic. Using it against one’s own citizens would be a crime of the highest order, the withdrawal of human rights, a police-state standard. In a police state, people who protest would be “disloyal” and subject to penalty as severe as necessary to prevent cracks in the illusion of national greatness. A letter-writer to the Columbus Dispatch asks “Is the U.S. government tyrannical? Of course not!” He asserts that to make such an allegation demonstrates contempt for the democratic principles that make our country great. “To express disagreement one goes to the voting booth,” says he.
If one has studied Ohio elections as have Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman, one must see this letter-writer as the ideal citizen for a police state, an element of which would be elections decided by those able to prevent media from reporting or acknowledging substitute vote counts, as seen by those of us watching from Ohio. The newspapers in Ohio, one being the capital city’s Columbus Dispatch, saw no evil in the method that gave Bush/Cheney another term—Ohio being the swing state in 2004. Bush had been overwhelmed. Depression ruled in the Bush camp until the next morning after things had been rearranged. The Republican state chairman, to whom I had earlier written to tell him he was head of a criminal organization, got the last laugh.
That banditry changed elections in more ways than we realized at the time. It allowed Bush appointee John Roberts to become Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, where he chose the “Citizens United” case for hearing even though the subject upon which the court acted was not the issue on appeal. It allowed Roberts, with the court majority, to declare that a corporation be treated as a “person” for purposes of political contributions, thus without the limits intended to keep corporate contributions from overpowering those from individuals. It has had the predicted undemocratic result by shifting the effect of money to those who have the most. It took us a long step away from a free state where the “common man” still had a voice that could be heard.
In these reports it is my purpose to examine weather control, not detailing how it is done, but to give the reader a circumstantial and statistical basis for seeing it in a different light. One must start with the reality of the power. There is no question whether it is possible. The “chemtrail” factor, for one, is not just possible, but an actual, provable crime that anyone who chooses can witness being committed, yet another manifestation of a permanent police state, enshrouded in official lies.
*James Hanson is a native of Nebraska and graduate of Oberlin College. His first job was as reporter for the Defiance, Ohio Crescent-News. Drafted, he was with the Korea Military Advisory Group (KMAG) 1952-1953. His law degree is from the University of Michigan, where he learned the importance of well-drafted legislation.
For the Ohio Water Commission, born of the 1959 flood, Hanson assisted in creating an intelligent framework for water management. He was legal advisor to the Director of Natural Resources, then legislative counsel for the Ohio Legislative Service Commission.
In private practice Hanson’s long-term representations were for environmental organizations such as the volunteer Water Management Association of Ohio and the Ohio Water Development Authority, bond-issuing agency for municipal sewer and water facilities. The Wildlife Legislative Fund and the Wildlife Legislative Fund of America became his major clients, which he created under the direction of James H. Glass as the defenders of sportsmen’s interests in Ohio and wherever wildlife laws came under attack. Their present successor is the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance.
Retired, Hanson was writing histories of immigration into Nebraska when he suddenly found himself duty-bound to concentrate on the flood of government falsehoods spilling over especially since 2001.