Tag Archives: weaponizing weather

Who Holds the Thunderbolts Now?

Posted on by
ASSASSINATION BY LIGHTNING
Cosmic War

ASSASSINATION BY LIGHTNING

September 24, 2020 By Joseph P. Farrell

Lately, as you can tell, I’ve been blogging about Sudden Animal Deaths, the decline of insect populations, and so on. And I’ve been entertaining the idea  for some time that these deaths might be due to the unintended consequences of increased environmental ambient electromagnetic radiation, or in some cases, as the deliberate result of the tests of electromagnetically based exotic weaponry. With respect to the latter hypothesis, I’ve entertained it with regard to the sudden deaths of whole flights of birds in mid-air, and – in an entirely different context – with respect to some of the anomalous photos and videos witnesses have gathered from fires in Australia and California. In regard to the latter, I’ve even gone so far as to suggest that the power grid itself might have been weaponized as the broadcast antenna for the fires by simply sending transients through the wires and into homes. With respect to the recent sudden death of a herd of elephants in Africa, I’ve entertained the idea of a lightning weapons test.

Yea, I know all this sounds nutty, and it probably is.

But the nuttiness isn’t mine. It belongs to “them”, you know, the guys that sit around and dream all this stuff up. “N.” found this article and passed it along (our thanks!), and it’s worth absorbing, because it’s not coming from an “alternative media” source, but from Forbes magazine:

When The CIA Considered Weaponizing Lightning

Here’s what has leaped out at me:

Thunderbolts are traditionally the weapon of the gods, but in 1967 the CIA were wondering whether they, too, could call down bolts of lightning from the heavens at will.

The idea is contained in a proposal from a scientist, sent to the CIA’s Deputy for Research ‘Special Activities’ and passed on to the chief of the Air Systems division. The scientist’s name has been redacted in the declassified document from the CIA’s archive, but the proposal mentions a previous discussion with the CIA, indicating they were being taken seriously.

The guided lightning concept is based on the observation that lightning follows a path of ionized air known as a step leader. Once the leader stroke reaches the ground and makes a circuit, the lightning proper is formed and a current flow, typically around 300 million Volts at 30,000 Amps.

The scientist suggests that artificial leaders could “cause discharges to occur when and where we want them.” The artificial leader would be a wire a few thousandths of an inch in diameter and several miles long. Wires would be inserted into storms by aircraft or rockets on a spool, and unrolled by a drogue parachute, and lightning would follow them down to the ground.

“This method is possible because the main discharge will occur through ionized surrounding the wire,” notes the scientist. The wire, like the leader, is only needed to get the lightning going, and would still work even if it broke.

Now let’s dive into today’s high octane speculation. If you’ve been following the phenomenon of “chemtrails” and the spraying being conducted, one of the things you’ll have come across is the claim that much of the material being sprayed is particulate heavy metals. Sometimes the composition of this spray varies, but among the metals most often mentioned in this regard are aluminum, and barium. Sometimes there are others. In some examinations, the spraying began during the Reagan era as a secretive effort to increase the electrical conductivity of the atmosphere for his Strategic Defense Initiative project. This needed a “cover story,” so in some versions, the spraying was being done to “save the environment” or to “combat climate change” (which explanation in itself is intriguing, because that implied the ability to manipulate weather on a planetary scale).

As the article itself notes, the use of wires was intended to provide a channel for lightning to close the circuit between the atmosphere and the ground, but that it “would still work even if it broke.” In other words, you do not need a long wire, but several short ones in close proximity to each other to provide a channel or circuit for the lightning. Like particulate aerosolized heavy metals…

The next thing one needs is the ability to create the large charge differentials to be able to cause lightning to strike, otherwise that sheath of heavy metals might function to block such strikes like a big Faraday cage, though in my opinion this possibility is unlikely for a variety of reasons. In any case, one needs an ability to ionize the atmosphere sufficiently to build up these enormous charges, or to take a naturally occurring storm, and load more energy into it. Enter the ionosphere heaters like HAARP. Indeed, when this technology was being dreamed up and patented – incidentally, during Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative era – some of the uses claimed for it were weather modification and steering, missile defense, and some analysts also made good cases that it could be used to cause lightning strikes.

In other words, the USA had, and has had, this capability since at least the 1980s, and probably now many other nations as well. Put the two together – the spraying and the heaters – and one would have the equivalent, perhaps, of the ability to bombard a region or  area with lightning, a kind of “carpet bombing with lightning”, and to coin a pun, a true and proper Blitz.

Obviously, carpet bombing with lightning isn’t exactly “assassination” in any classical sense. For that, one would need some means for precision strikes, not just an aerosolized region and lightning strikes to start forest fires. One would need some means to be able to dial someone up, or at least, locate them, and use whatever such device that might be providing that location, to pulse it and them.

Yea… I know. It sounds nutty. And probably is.

But… while you’re reading this on your ipad, remember that the first two essential requirements have been around since the 1980s at least, and the weaponized lightning idea since at least 1967, if not long before that, with the lightning bolts of the gods, who may not have been gods at all, but just people with an extraordinarily sophisticated science. After all, the ability to call down lightning strikes at a specific point would certainly impress a bunch of hairless monkeys who were still using bows and arrows to accomplish their mischief.

See you on the flip side…

from:    https://gizadeathstar.com/2020/09/assassination-by-lightning/#comment-102827

On Weather Modification

Posted on by
THE ENVIRONMENTAL MODIFICATION CONVENTION OF 1976

8 Comments

THE ENVIRONMENTAL MODIFICATION CONVENTION OF 1976

As you might have guessed, I’ve been much focused upon the subject of geoengineering lately, given that much of America’s breadbasket has been so under water this season that many crops did not even get planted, and many farmers are facing ruin. But not to worry, disaster capitalism is alive and well, and various journals of crony c(r)apitalism are urging people to buy up farmland, on the cheap. It was a predictable move given the strangeness of the last cycle of storms, which set a record for the number of tornadoes for the year, and they all occurred within a week and a half. Geoengineering has reached such a fever pitch of insanity that yesterday I blogged about people talking about moving the Earth’s orbit in case the Sun decides to go nova, which we’re reassured won’t happen for billions of years (that’s without all that high-tech stuff perhaps inducing unknown resonance effects).

It’s that technological angle that has me exercised today, for a number of regular readers of this website have been sending in various articles on the subject, and V.T. sent an article that sent me looking at the 1976 Environmental Modification Convention, and that in turn brought me to this valuable website which those of you concerned about this technology might want to bookmark:

The Environmental Modification Convention (ENMOD) Weather Warfare Ban

Weaponizing the weather has been an idea that’s been around for a long time,but it received a huge kick during the Second World War, when there were actually serious proposals for producing tsunamis ahead of Allied invasion forces invading Japanese held islands in the  Pacific. The efforts continued after World War Two, particularly in the USA and the Soviet Union, and, as this site actually notes, the USSR engaged in heavy weather modification after the Chernobyl disaster to force rains to “bleed” out radioactivity prior to it reaching Moscow. But it is this convention that tells a whole story, for as V.T. put it in the email that accompanied this article, why bother having a convention if the technologies did not exist?

What caught my eye in the text of this convention were the first three articles:

The States Parties to this Convention,Guided by the interest of consolidating peace, and wishing to contribute to the cause of halting the arms race, and of bringing about general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control, and of saving mankind from the danger of using new means of warfare…

Have agreed as follows:

Article I. 1. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to engage in military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or injury to any other State Party.

2. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to assist, encourage or induce any State, group of States or international organization to engage in activities contrary to the provisions of paragraph 1 of this article.

Article II. As used in article I, the term “environmental modification techniques” refers 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.

Article III. 1. The provisions of this Convention shall not hinder the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes and shall be without prejudice to the generally recognized principles and applicable rules of international law concerning such use.

There’s a couple of glaring omissions here, and I’m sure you caught both of them. Firstly, no corporation – to my knowledge – is a signatory to this convention. Consequently, any state or group of states (to use the language of the convention), wishing to observe the letter but not the spirit of the convention could conceivably use corporate “cut outs” to conduct such geophysical warfare. Indeed, reading the convention one discovers that the development of such technologies and their use for “peaceful purposes” is entirely “ok.” One can almost hear the technocrat narrative: “oh…! We’re sorry! We were trying to relieve our drought. We didn’t realize it would result in massive flooding in your (country, state, region) and wipe out your current crop planting season.”  Indeed, as far as I can tell, the wording is so ambiguous that one reading of the convention would not prohibit the high contracting parties  from utilizing the technologies in such a way within their own jurisdictions, that if it were so used by those parties against another party or parties, would be taken as geophysical warfare.

Secondly, there’s a complete lack of any detail as to how such geophysical warfare is to be detected and determined. While the convention has undergone clarifications since its original signing, those clarifications are still vague enough to drive a truck through. What is interesting is that any complaint or suspicion of such actions can be lodged with the UN Security Council, which will “investigate” and presumably could provide “punitive action” against the offender, provided of course that any such action were not vetoed by the five permanent members, which, interestingly enough, are the very same powers that have access to the technologies in the first place.

Finally,  human diplomatic history and international relations are replete with broken treaties and conventions. And I strongly suspect this convention has already been broken.

But at least it does one thing: it affirmed that even in the 1970s there was a fear of technologies designed to weaponize geophysical processes, from the lithosphere(earthquake weapons), the hydrosphere(tsunami creators), atmosphere(chemtrails), and outer space(ionspheric heaters). And of course, we’ve developed all of them.

(Indeed, Nikola Tesla took out a patent in 1893 for an mechanical oscillator which he claimed produced “earthquakes”, decades before the convention was even a gleam in the UN’s eye, long before there was even a UN. Tesla made lots of strange claims in his life, and the problem is, Tesla was Tesla, and it’s always hazardous to second guess him. Interestingly enough, the television show “Myth Busters” built a version of this oscillator, and tested it. It didn’t produce any earthquakes, leading them to claim the myth was busted, but it did cause oscillations that could be felt hundreds of feet away. I have my  own suspicions about that episode, and I’ll keep them to myself, but as one might guess, they involve “resonance” and the possibility that it was ignored, meaning that the “busted myth” may itself need to be busted.)

In any case, given the recent strange weather, it seems as if the technologies and techniques might have been perfected to a degree only dreamed of when the convention was originally signed.  If so, we might not have to bother about moving the Earth out of its current orbit…

See you on the slip side..

from:   https://gizadeathstar.com/2019/06/the-environmental-modification-convention-of-1976/