|
from Collective-Evolution Website
The official story is that he died in a
military hospital following a severe 'heart attack', but
others have suggested that the United States government may have
played a role - an accusation quickly and vehemently denied by the
U.S. State Department. Chavez was known for speaking his mind and stirring up controversy, which is one reason why people speculate about his death.
His comments regarding the earthquake that hit Haiti in 2010 were particularly direct; he claimed that the United States Navy induced the Haiti Earthquake using a weather weapon, accusing the United States of "playing God."
A Spanish newspaper quoted Chavez as saying that,
When I first came across this comment about Iran, I was immediately reminded of a similar accusation made by Four Star U.S. General Wesley Clark made, who revealed plans by the United States to invade several countries - a plan which would end with the invasion of Iran.
This isn't just crazy talk. Chavez had a long military career, and was well respected in his work.
He's also not the only person to suggest that the United States is, and has been, manipulating and controlling the weather for years.
For example, in 2010, then-president of Iran Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that the U.S.'s High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) was responsible for the devastating floods in Pakistan, and that Western countries have been causing drought in various parts of the world, including Iran.
According to The Telegraph, Ahmadinejad emphasized that,
Renowned Pakistani columnist Nusrat Mirza accused the U.S. of artificially causing the March 11, 2011 earthquake and tsunami in Japan, calling the radiation leaks resulting from damage to nuclear plants the U.S.'s,
Weather Modification Is No Conspiracy Theory
Weather modification is far from a 'conspiracy theory', as Professor Michel Chossudovsky, the University of Ottawa's Emeritus Professor of Economics, tells us in an article he wrote for The Ecologist several years ago:
Weather-modification, according to the US Air Force document AF 2025 Final Report, "Weather as A Force Multiplier - Owning The Weather in 2025,"
It goes on to explain the value such technology holds for military operations:
The report also provides details of governmental spraying schedules, chemical orders, and correct nomenclature used in airline operating manuals.
It provides support for its notion of,
In 2007, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) published a statement that included "Guidelines for the Planning of Weather Modification Activities" - page 12 of document.
Acknowledging that the modern technology of weather modification began in the 1940s, it notes is still "an emerging technology."
The document states that "in recent years there has been a decline in the support for weather modification research, and a tendency to move directly into operational projects." It makes no mention of military application, however.
Obtained from the NASA archives, a document (A Recommended National Program In Weather Modification) prepared for the Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences by Homer E. Newell, a mathematics professor and author who became a powerful United States government science administrator with NASA, also outlines weather modification efforts, successes, and recommendations for future applications.
Bear in mind, this was over 50 years ago.
In 2010, Dr. Arnold Vermeeren, an assistant professor at the Delft University of Technology in the Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering, compiled a 300-page history of weather modification programs titled "CASE ORANGE - Contrail Science, Its Impact on Climate and Weather Manipulation Programs Conducted by the United States and Its Allies."
It was prepared for the Belfort Group by a team of scientists but presented anonymously, then sent to embassies, news organizations, and interested groups around the world "to force public debate." It is another great document to look if you want more information.
In November of 1978, the United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation argued in a report that this is a 'National Security' issue. This is important because, in the United States, whenever something becomes a 'national security issue' it is immediately classified and hidden from public eye.
Some historians estimate that the United Stats classifies up to half a billion documents every single year.
It's well known that the CIA and other government organizations and, as the quote below states, Federal agencies are involved in these programs.
According to the report:
Rosalind Peterson, President and Co-Founder of the Agriculture Defense Coalition (ADC) and an ex-United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) employee, made this statement at a 2007 United Nations hearing on global warming:
A couple of months ago, HRH Princess Basmah Bint Saud, the daughter of King Saud and an active humanitarian, compared geoengineering science and programs to weapons of mass destruction, arguing that their implementation is like setting off a bomb without the nuclear explosion.
I wrote an article about it, also outlining how geo-engineering proposals are now part of mainstream academic science.
For example, if we look at SPICE, a United Kingdom government funded geoengineering research project that collaborates with the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, Edinburgh, and Bristol, some of the proposed particles to spray in the air include:
They refer to it as Solar Radiation Management, and the idea is to spray these chemicals into the atmosphere in order to combat the effects of global warming by deflecting them away from Earth's surface.
In mainstream academic circles, there is still a harsh resistance to the idea that the manipulation of our climate and weather is and actually has happened, but with all of the documentation and statements given from various people who are 'in the know,' this is hard to believe.
What is happening is not 'open' and transparent to the public, which is very concerning. I'll leave you with this final statement given to us by M. Granger Morgan, the head professor of Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University:
There is much more evidence out there, but I wanted to offer a small sample of research to inform readers about these programs and to make clear why arguments made by Chavez and others are not only plausible, but quite sound.
Even if you don't believe the United States is using this technology for ill intent, all of this information at least begs the question, why isn't geoengineering and climate control a topic of discussion/interest at major climate summits?
|
