Washington's NWO Weapons
Have the Ability to Trigger Climate
Change
"You take the blue pill and the story ends. You wake in your bed and you believe whatever you want to believe."
"You take the red pill and
you stay in Wonderland and I'll show you how deep the
rabbit-hole goes."
by Michel Chossudovsky [11-26-2000]
Professor of Economics, University of Ottawa, author of The
Globalization of Poverty, second edition, Common Courage Press, 2000.
The important debate on global warming under UN auspices provides but
a partial picture of climate change; in addition to the devastating
impacts of greenhouse gas emissions on the ozone layer, the World's
climate can now be modified as part of a new generation of
sophisticated "non-lethal weapons." Both the Americans and the
Russians have developed capabilities to manipulate the World's
climate.
In the US, the technology is being perfected under the High-frequency
Active Aural Research Program (HAARP) as part of the ("Star Wars")
Strategic Defence Initiative (SDI). Recent scientific evidence
suggests that HAARP is fully operational and has the ability of
potentially triggering floods, droughts, hurricanes and earthquakes.
From a military standpoint, HAARP is a weapon of mass destruction.
Potentially, it constitutes an instrument of conquest capable of
selectively destabilising agricultural and ecological systems of
entire regions.
While there is no evidence that this deadly technology has been used,
surely the United Nations should be addressing the issue of
"environmental warfare" alongside the debate on the climatic impacts
of greenhouse gases...
* * *
Despite a vast body of scientific knowledge, the issue of deliberate
climatic manipulations for military use has never been explicitly part
of the UN agenda on climate change. Neither the official delegations
nor the environmental action groups participating in the Hague
Conference on Climate Change (CO6) (November 2000) have raised the
broad issue of "weather warfare" or "environmental modification
techniques (ENMOD)" as relevant to an understanding of climate change.
The clash between official negotiators, environmentalists and American
business lobbies has centered on Washington's outright refusal to
abide by commitments on carbon dioxide reduction targets under the
1997 Kyoto protocol.(1) The impacts of military technologies on the
World's climate are not an object of discussion or concern. Narrowly
confined to greenhouse
gases, the ongoing debate on climate change serves Washington's
strategic and defense objectives.
"WEATHER WARFARE"
World renowned scientist Dr. Rosalie Bertell confirms that "US
military scientists ... are working on weather systems as a potential
weapon. The methods include the enhancing of storms and the diverting
of vapor rivers in the Earth's atmosphere to produce targeted droughts
or floods." (2) Already in the 1970s, former National Security advisor
Zbigniew Brzezinski had foreseen in his book "Between Two Ages" that:
"Technology will make available, to the leaders of major nations,
techniques for conducting secret warfare, of which only a bare minimum
of the security forces need be appraised... [T]echniques of weather
modification could be employed to produce prolonged periods of drought
or storm."
Marc Filterman, a former French military officer, outlines several
types of "unconventional weapons" using radio frequencies. He refers
to "weather war," indicating that the U. S. and the Soviet Union had
already "mastered the know-how needed to unleash sudden climate
changes (hurricanes, drought)
in the early 1980s."(3) These technologies make it "possible to
trigger atmospheric disturbances by using Extremely Low Frequency
(ELF) radar [waves]." (4)
A simulation study of future defense "scenarios" commissioned for the
US Air Force calls for:
"US aerospace forces to 'own the weather' by capitalizing on emerging
technologies and focusing development of those technologies to
war-fighting applications... From enhancing friendly operations or
disrupting those of the enemy via small-scale tailoring of natural
weather patterns to complete dominance of global communications and
counterspace control, weather-modification offers the war fighter a
wide-range of possible options to defeat or coerce an adversary... In
the United States, weather-modification will likely become a part of
national security policy with both domestic and international
applications. Our government will pursue such a policy, depending on
its interests, at various levels. (5)
HIGH-FREQUENCY ACTIVE AURAL RESEARCH PROGRAM (HAARP)
The High-Frequency Active Aural Research Program (HAARP) based in
Gokoma Alaska --jointly managed by the US Air Force and the US Navy--
is part of a new generation of sophisticated weaponry under the US
Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). Operated by the Air Force Research
Laboratory's Space Vehicles Directorate, HAARP constitutes a system of
powerful antennas capable of creating "controlled local modifications
of the ionosphere". Scientist Dr. Nicholas Begich --actively involved
in the public campaign against HAARP-- describes HAARP as:
"A super-powerful radiowave-beaming technology that lifts areas of the
ionosphere [upper layer of the atmosphere] by focusing a beam and
heating those areas. Electromagnetic waves then bounce back onto earth
and penetrate everything -- living and dead." (6)
Dr. Rosalie Bertell depicts HAARP as "a gigantic heater that can cause
major disruption in the ionosphere, creating not just holes, but long
incisions in the protective layer that keeps deadly radiation from
bombarding the planet."
7
MISLEADING PUBLIC OPINION
HAARP has been presented to public opinion as a program of scientific
and academic research. US military documents seem to suggest, however,
that HAARP's main objective is to "exploit the ionosphere for
Department of Defense purposes." (8) Without explicitly referring to
the HAARP program, a US Air Force study points to the use of "induced
ionospheric modifications" as a means of altering weather patterns as
well as disrupting enemy communications and radar. 9
According to Dr. Rosalie Bertell, HAARP is part of a integrated
weapons' system, which has potentially devastating environmental
consequences:
"It is related to fifty years of intensive and increasingly
destructive programs to understand and control the upper atmosphere.
It would be rash not to associate HAARP with the space laboratory
construction which is separately being planned by the United States.
HAARP is an integral part of a long history of space research and
development of a deliberate military nature. The military implications
of combining these projects is alarming. ... The ability of the HAARP
/ Spacelab/ rocket combination to deliver very large amount of energy,
comparable to a nuclear bomb, anywhere on earth via laser and particle
beams, are frightening. The project is likely to be "sold" to the
public as a space shield against incoming weapons, or, for the more
gullible, a device for repairing the ozone layer.
(10)
In addition to weather manipulation, HAARP has a number of related
uses:
"HAARP could contribute to climate change by intensively bombarding
the atmosphere with high-frequency rays... Returning low-frequency
waves at high intensity could also affect people's brains, and effects
on tectonic movements cannot be ruled out. (11)
More generally, HAARP has the ability of modifying the World's
electro-magnetic field. It is part of an arsenal of "electronic
weapons" which US military researchers consider a "gentler and kinder
warfare". (12)
WEAPONS OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER
HAARP is part of the weapons arsenal of the New World Order under the
Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). From military command points in
the US, entire national economies could potentially be destabilized
through climatic manipulations. More importantly, the latter can be
implemented without the knowledge of the enemy, at minimal cost and
without engaging military personnel and equipment as in a conventional
war.
The use of HAARP -- if it were to be applied -- could have potentially
devastating impacts on the World's climate. Responding to US economic
and strategic interests, it could be used to selectively modify
climate in different parts of the World resulting in the
destabilization of agricultural and ecological systems.
It is also worth noting that the US Department of Defense has
allocated substantial resources to the development of intelligence and
monitoring systems on weather changes. NASA and the Department of
Defense's National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) are working on
"imagery for studies of flooding, erosion, land-slide hazards,
earthquakes, ecological zones, weather forecasts, and climate change"
with data relayed from satellites. (13)
POLICY INERTIA OF THE UNITED NATIONS
According to the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
signed at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro:
"States have... in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations
and the principles of international law, the (...) responsibility to
ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not
cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the
limits of national jurisdiction."
(14)
It is also worth recalling that an international Convention ratified
by the UN General Assembly in 1997 bans "military or other hostile use
of environmental modification techniques having widespread,
long-lasting or severe effects." (15) Both the US and the Soviet Union
were signatories to the Convention. The Convention defines
"'environmental modification techniques' as referring to any technique
for changing--through the deliberate manipulation of natural
processes--the dynamics, composition or structure of the earth,
including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere or of
outer space." (16)
Why then did the UN --disregarding the 1977 ENMOD Convention as well
as its own charter-- decide to exclude from its agenda climatic
changes resulting from military programs?
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ACKNOWLEDGES IMPACTS OF HAARP
In February 1998, responding to a report of Mrs. Maj Britt Theorin
--Swedish MEP and longtime peace advocate--, the European Parliament's
Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defense Policy held public
hearings in Brussels on the HAARP program.(17) The Committee's "Motion
for Resolution" submitted to the European Parliament:
"Considers HAARP... by virtue of its far-reaching impact on the
environment to be a global concern and calls for its legal, ecological
and ethical implications to be examined by an international
independent body...; [the Committee] regrets the repeated refusal of
the United States Administration... to give evidence to the public
hearing ... into the environmental and public risks [of] the HAARP
program." (18).
The Committee's request to draw up a "Green Paper" on "the
environmental impacts of military activities", however, was casually
dismissed on the
grounds that the European Commission lacks the required jurisdiction
to delve into "the links between environment and defense". (19)
Brussels was anxious to avoid a showdown with Washington.
FULLY OPERATIONAL
While there is no concrete evidence of HAARP having been used,
scientific findings suggest that it is at present fully operational.
What this means is that HAARP could potentially be applied by the US
military to selectively modify the climate of an "unfriendly nation"
or "rogue state" with a view to destabilizing its national economy.
Agricultural systems in both developed and developing countries are
already in crisis as a result of New World Order policies including
market deregulation, commodity dumping, etc. Amply documented, IMF and
World Bank "economic medicine" imposed on the Third World and the
countries of the former Soviet block has largely contributed to the
destabilization of domestic agriculture. In turn, the provisions of
the World Trade Organization (WTO) have supported the interests of a
handful of Western agri-biotech conglomerates in their quest to impose
genetically modified (GMO) seeds on farmers throughout the World.
It is important to understand the linkage between the economic,
strategic and military processes of the New World Order. In the above
context, climatic manipulations under the HAARP program (whether
accidental or deliberate) would inevitably exacerbate these changes by
weakening national economies, destroying infrastructure and
potentially triggering the bankruptcy of farmers over vast areas.
Surely national governments and the United Nations should address the
possible consequences of HAARP and other "non-lethal weapons" on
climate change.
NOTES
1. The latter calls for nations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by
an average of 5.2 percent to become effective between 2008 and 2012.
See Background of Kyoto Protocol at http://www.globalwarming.net/gw11.html.
2. The Times, London, 23 November 2000.
3. Intelligence Newsletter, December 16, 1999.
4. Ibid.
5 Air University of the US Air Force, AF 2025 Final Report, http://www.au.af.mil/au/2025/
(emphasis added).
6 Nicholas Begich and Jeane Manning, The Military's Pandora's Box,
Earthpulse Press, http://www.xyz.net/~nohaarp/earthlight.html. See
also the HAARP home page at http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/).
7. See Briarpatch, January, 2000. (emphasis added).
8 Quoted in Begich and Manning, op cit.
9. Air University, op cit.
10. Rosalie Bertell, Background of the HAARP Program, 5 November,
1996, http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/envronmt/weapons.htm
11. Begich and Manning, op cit.
12. Don Herskovitz, Killing Them Softly, Journal of Electronic
Defense,
August 1993. (emphasis added). According to Herskovitz, "electronic
warfare" is defined by the US Department of Defense as "military
action
involving the use of electromagnetic energy..." The Journal of
Electronic Defense at http://www.jedefense.com/ has published a range
of articles on the application of electronic and electromagnetic
military technologies.
13. Military Space, 6 December, 1999.
14. UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, New York, 1992. See
complete text at http://www.unfccc.de/resource/conv/conv_002.html,
(emphasis added).
15. See Associated Press, 18 May 1977.
16. Environmental Modification Ban Faithfully Observed, States Parties
Declare, UN Chronicle, July, 1984, Vol. 21, p. 27.
17. European Report, 7 February 1998.
18. European Parliament, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and
Defense Policy, Brussels, doc. no. A4-0005/99, 14 January 1999.
19. EU Lacks Jurisdiction to Trace Links Between Environment and
Defense, European Report, 3 February 1999.
(C) Copyright by Michel Chossudovsky, Ottawa, November, 2000. All
rights reserved. Permission is granted to post this text on
non-commercial community internet sites, provided the essay remains
intact and the copyright note is displayed. To publish this text in
printed and/or other forms contact the author at chossudovsky@videotron.ca,
fax: 1-514-4256224.
Department of Economics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, K1N6N5 Voice
box: 1-613-562-5800, ext. 1415, Fax: 1-514-425-6224 E-Mail:
chossudovsky@videotron.ca; (Altern. E-mail: chossudovsky@sprint.ca)
***