1

U.S. Indifferent to Human Experimentation and Biological and Chemical Weapons — New Book Points to a Monstrous Agenda

By | Activist Post

At the Breaking Point of History: How Decades of U.S. Duplicity Enabled the Pandemic by Activist Post contributor Janet Phelan details the US government’s indifference to the welfare of individuals and to its legal obligations under national and international accords prohibiting human experimentation and biological and chemical weapons. (The book is available at TrineDay and elsewhere.)

From lead pipes in Flint, Michigan to a duplicitous water commission in Medford, Oregon to a secret psychiatric ward at UCLA to the elegant halls of the Palais des Nations in Geneva, Switzerland, Breaking Point reveals deceitful machinations executed at the highest and lowest levels of power.

Ms. Phelan recently said,

“We are embroiled in a pandemic which has collapsed economies, caused death by starvation and has resulted in severe new restrictions on civil rights in the US and elsewhere. Yet many medical professionals and researchers are questioning the genesis of Covid-19. Was it bioengineered? Was it deliberately released? They’re also questioning the numbers alleged to have died from it, pointing to dictates from the CDC to list deaths not directly caused by the virus as virus-caused deaths.”

Many of the articles were written prior to the Covid-19 pandemic and point to a monstrous political agenda, implicating media, government, and foreign nations in the plan to launch this. Details as to other vectors which may be deployed in a pandemic scenario, details that have been suppressed by other media, are fully disclosed here.

Janet Phelan is an investigative reporter. Her articles have appeared in the Los Angeles Times, the San Bernardino County Sentinel, Orange Coast Magazine, New Eastern Outlook, and elsewhere. She currently writes for Activist Post and has previously published an intelligence exposes, Exile, and two books of poetry.

TrineDay is a small publishing house that arose as a response to the consistent refusal of the corporate press to publish many interesting, well-researched, and well-written books with but one key “defect”: a challenge to official history that would tend to rock the boat of America’s corporate “culture.” TrineDay believes in our Constitution and our common right of Free Speech.




The Manmade Biowarfare Threat Continues

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | mercola.com

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • The NIH and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), led by Dr. Anthony Fauci, have funded gain-of-function research on coronaviruses. Several such grants were given to EcoHealth Alliance, which in turn subcontracted some of that research to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV)
  • A loophole in the review process set up to ensure the safety of gain-of-function research allows funding institutions to bypass review. Fauci and the NIAID are accused of shirking the review process for some of the research performed at the WIV
  • Two lengthy reports have been published detailing Fauci’s questionable research activities and attempts to mislead the public on a number of issues, including the benefits of hydroxychloroquine, the effectiveness of masks, and the possibility of SARS-CoV-2 being a lab creation
  • Many were aware that gain-of-function research on coronaviruses and other dangerous pathogens was taking place at the WIV, and that the lab had known safety lapses, yet nothing appears to have been done to shore up security and prevent an outbreak
  • While government officials would like you to believe that SARS-CoV-2 is one of the most serious threats to life on earth, the reality is that the gain-of-function research they fund is a far greater threat. Even if the COVID-19 pandemic wasn’t the result of this kind of research, history tells us there will be another leak. It’s only a matter of time, which is why we must ban all gain-of-function research, worldwide

We first reported on this issue with my interview with Francis Boyle over a year ago, which received well over one million views. Of course, our coverage was disparaged as fake news and removed from YouTube, but now one year later it appears the facts are confirming our speculations.

In the April 4, 2021, Sky News report above, award-winning investigations writer Sharri Markson summarizes the findings1,2,3,4 of the World Health Organization’s investigative team, tasked with identifying the origin of SARS-CoV-2.

She blasts the report as a “PR exercise for China,” calling the team’s conclusion that one of the most likely origin theories was that the virus entered Wuhan in or on frozen food from overseas, “embarrassing.” As noted by Markson, even the director-general of the WHO ended up backpedaling in an effort to salvage the organization’s credibility.5

As reported by The Washington Post, March 30, 2021,6 the WHO director-general, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, and 13 other world leaders have now joined the U.S. government in expressing “frustration with the level of access China granted an international mission to Wuhan.”

According to Ghebreyesus, the team “did not conduct an ‘extensive enough’ assessment of the possibility the virus was introduced to humans through a laboratory incident,” which will therefore necessitate additional studies with “more timely and comprehensive data sharing.”

NIH Has ‘Systematically Thwarted’ Oversight Efforts

I’ve previously detailed how the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), led by Dr. Anthony Fauci, have funded gain-of-function research on coronaviruses. Several such grants were given to EcoHealth Alliance, which in turn subcontracted some of that research to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).

EcoHealth Alliance is led by Dr. Peter Daszak, who is also on the WHO’s investigative team, and who has plenty of reasons to hide the truth, were the virus in fact from the WIV. In 2014, a federal moratorium was placed on gain-of-function research, which focuses on making pathogens more virulent and lethal, due to public safety concerns.

After the moratorium was lifted in 2017, a special review board, the Potential Pandemic Pathogens Control, and Oversight, or P3CO Review Framework, was created within the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), to evaluate “whether grants that involve enhancing dangerous pathogens, such as coronaviruses, are worth the risks and that proper safeguards are in place,” Daily Caller reports.7

According to Rutgers University professor Richard Ebright, an NIH grant for research involving the modification of bat coronaviruses at the WIV was sneaked through because the NIAID failed to flag it for review.8 In other words, the WIV received federal funding from the NIAID without the research first receiving a green light from the HHS review board. According to the Daily Caller:9

“The review framework split oversight responsibilities between two groups — the funding agency … and the P3CO Review Committee … The committee is responsible for recommending whether a research grant involving gain-of-function needs to include any additional risk mitigation measures … But the committee is kept in the dark on any grant until the funding agency flags one for its review …

Ebright said the offices of the director for the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) — the subagency that funded EcoHealth — and the NIH have ‘systematically thwarted — indeed systematically nullified — the HHS P3CO Framework by declining to flag and forward proposals for review’ …

Had EcoHealth’s grant been subjected to P3CO review, an HHS panel would have independently evaluated the grant and, if necessary, recommended additional biocontainment measures to prevent potential lab leaks — or even recommended that the grant be denied entirely.”

Is the NIAID Telling the Truth?

An NIAID spokesperson told the Daily Caller that the grant in question had not been forwarded for review because it did not involve “the enhancement of the pathogenicity or transmissibility of the viruses studied.” The problem is that the P3CO Framework does not require the HHS review committee to double-check the determination of the funding agency, in this case, the NIAID.

According to Ebright, this is a loophole that can easily be misused. In this case, he strongly disagrees with the NIAID’s statement that the research didn’t involve gain-of-function research. The Daily Caller writes:10

“Ebright told the DCNF that NIAID was wrong to determine that the EcoHealth grant did not involve enhancing the transmissibility of Chinese bat-based coronaviruses.

He said the project’s abstract11 for the 2019 fiscal year, which referenced ‘in vitro and in vivo infection experiments’ on coronaviruses, ‘unequivocally’ required risk-benefit review under the HHS P3CO Framework. Other scientists have said EcoHealth’s NIH-funded work in China involved gain-of-function research on bat-based coronaviruses.

‘It is hard to overemphasize that the central logic of this grant was to test the pandemic potential of SARS-related bat coronaviruses by making ones with pandemic potential, either through genetic engineering or passaging, or both,’ Drs. Jonathan Latham and Allison Wilson wrote12 in June [2020].”

Rep. Scott Perry, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, is now saying Fauci really needs to answer why his agency bypassed oversight for research done at the WIV and intends to call Fauci in to testify. He’s pessimistic, however, about an open hearing actually taking place, as House Democrats are unlikely to support it. Perry told the Daily Caller:13

When it comes to oversight of U.S. tax dollars headed to the Chinese Communist Party, Dr. Fauci seems like he’s literally whistling past the graveyard … We seem so cavalier about this approval paradigm for this funding, and the definitions seemingly allow you to drive a truck through them regarding what is gain-of-function research and what isn’t.

It seems to me this was done by design to allow this kind of research to be done in these kinds of places without any kind of scrutiny. And this is the result of that.”

Fauci’s ‘Criminal Violations’ Deserve Review

Fauci has more than one or two questions to answer, though, considering at least two lengthy reports have been issued detailing Fauci’s questionable research activities and attempts to mislead the public on a number of issues, including the benefits of hydroxychloroquine, the effectiveness of masks and the possibility of SARS-CoV-2 being a lab creation.

One report, “Dr. Fauci’s COVID-19 Treachery,”14 was written by Dr. Peter Breggin and published in October 2020. The other, a 205-page paper titled “The Fauci/COVID-19 Dossier,”15 was compiled by Dr. David E. Martin, in which he reviews “numerous criminal violations” by Fauci, the CDC, and others, “that may be associated with the COVID-19 terrorism.” Here’s just a small sampling of paragraphs from Martin’s paper:

“Using the power of NIAID during the alleged pandemic, Dr. Anthony Fauci actively suppressed proven medical countermeasures used by, and validated in scientific proceedings, that offered alternatives to the products funded by his conspiring entities for which he had provided direct funding and for whom he would receive tangible and intangible benefit …

NIAID’s Director, Dr. Anthony Fauci is listed as an inventor on 8 granted U.S. patents. None of them are reported in NIAID, NIH, or GAO reports of active licensing despite the fact that Dr. Fauci reportedly was compelled to get paid for his interleukin-2 ‘invention’ …

Through non-competitive grant awards to UNC Chapel Hill’s Ralph Baric, to selection of the Bio-Safety Level 4 laboratory locations, to the setting of prices for Remdesivir and mRNA therapies from Moderna and Pfizer, NIAID, CDC, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services have been involved in allocating Federal funds to conspiring parties without independent review.

Around March 12, 2020, in an effort to enrich their own economic interests by way of securing additional funding from both Federal and Foundation actors, the CDC and NIAID’s Dr. Fauci elected to suspend testing and classify COVID-19 by capricious symptom presentation alone.

Forcing the public to rely on The COVID Tracking Project — funded by the Bloomberg, Zuckerberg and Gates Foundation and presented by a media outlet — not a public health agency — Dr. Fauci used fraudulent testing technology (RT-PCR) to conflate ‘COVID cases’ with positive PCR tests in the living while insisting that COVID deaths be counted by symptoms alone.

This perpetuated a market demand for his desired vaccine agenda which was recited by him and his conspiring parties around the world until the present. Not surprisingly, this was necessitated by the apparent fall in cases that constituted Dr. Fauci’s and others’ criteria for depriving citizens of their 1st Amendment rights …

While Moderna enjoys hundreds of millions of dollars of funding allegiance and advocacy from Anthony Fauci and his NIAID, since its inception, it has been engaged in illegal patent activity and demonstrated contempt for U.S. Patent law. To make matters worse, the U.S. Government has given it financial backing in the face of undisclosed infringement risks potentially contributing to the very infringement for which they are indemnified.”

Many Were Aware of Lab Leak Threat Yet Did Nothing

The harsh reality is that any number of people, both in the U.S. and China, were aware that gain-of-function research on coronaviruses and other dangerous pathogens was taking place at the WIV, and that the lab had known safety lapses. Yet nothing appears to have been done to shore up security and prevent an outbreak.

As reported by the National Review16 in July 2020, American State Department officials who visited the WIV in 2018 wrote two separate memos — one in January and one in April — detailing safety concerns. This included “a shortage of the highly-trained technicians and investigators required to safely operate a [Biosafety Level] 4 laboratory and lack of clarity in related Chinese government policies and guidelines.”

“These memos do not prove that SARS-CoV-2 pandemic was caused by a laboratory accident,” the National Review wrote,17 “But they do dispel one of the less-plausible arguments against the lab-accident theory: That the Chinese scientists working at WIV were simply too professional and diligent to ever have an accident that released a contagious virus.”

Ironically, this is precisely the argument presented by the WHO’s corrupted investigative team. The team leader, Danish food safety and zoonosis scientist Ben Embarek went on record saying that lab accidents are “extremely rare;” hence, it’s “very unlikely” that SARS-CoV-2 could have escaped from the WIV or any other lab18 — so much so, the team dismissed the possibility entirely and said it would no longer consider it.

Meanwhile, in the real world, biosafety incidents involving dangerous pathogens occur twice a week, on average, in the U.S. alone,19,20 and virology labs accidentally released the original SARS virus on no less than four separate occasions.21,22

Gain-of-Function Research Is the Real Threat

While government health officials would like you to believe that SARS-CoV-2 is one of the most serious threats to life on earth, the reality is that the gain-of-function research they fund is a far greater threat. It’s quite possible that the COVID-19 pandemic was the result of this kind of research, but even if it wasn’t, history tells us there will be another release, another leak, another accident. They happen far more frequently than people like to imagine.

Already, as detailed in “New Engineered Coronaviruses Are Under Development” and “Bioweapons Labs Get More NIH Funding for Deadly Research,” scientists are tinkering around with SARS-CoV-2, trying to see if they can make an even worse version. Meanwhile, the same establishment is drumming up panic in the streets, warning of new, more infectious, and dangerous variants. Never do they tell you that they’re also busy creating them.

This hypocrisy must end. I firmly believe we need to ban gain-of-function research across the world. We do not need it. As noted by Marc Lipsitch in his 2018 review, “Why Do Exceptionally Dangerous Gain-of-Function Experiments in Influenza?”:23

“While there are indisputably certain questions that can be answered only by gain-of-function experiments in highly pathogenic strains, these questions are narrow and unlikely to meaningfully advance public health goals such as vaccine production and pandemic prediction.

Alternative approaches to experimental influenza virology and characterization of existing strains are in general completely safe, higher throughput, more generalizable, and less costly than creation of PPP [potential pandemic pathogens] in the laboratory and can thereby better inform public health.

Indeed, virtually every finding of recent PPP experiments that has been cited for its public health value was predated by similar findings using safe methodologies.”

While the origin of SARS-CoV-2 remains to be conclusively proven, a paper24 published in Nature in 2015 discussed how a “lab-made coronavirus related to SARS” capable of infecting human cells had stirred up debate as to whether or not this kind of research is worth the risks:

“Although the extent of any risk is difficult to assess, Simon Wain-Hobson, a virologist at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, points out that the researchers have created a novel virus that ‘grows remarkably well’ in human cells. ‘If the virus escaped, nobody could predict the trajectory,’ he says.

With 20/20 hindsight, we now have a much clearer idea of what the release of such a virus can do. We may chalk it up to luck that SARS-CoV-2 turned out to be orders of magnitude less lethal than initially suspected, although government containment measures have turned out to be devastating and deadly as well. If this kind of research is allowed to continue, the next time there’s a leak, we may not be as lucky.




Geoengineering is Chemical and Biological Terrorism

By John D. Fleming | www.stopchemtrailterrorism.com | Graphic copyright attribution: Copyright: <a href=’https://www.123rf.com/profile_dennisvdwater’>dennisvdwater / 123RF Stock Photo</a>

123rf.comChemtrailPhoto2-223108010_m

Editor’s Note: After writing my article, “How Can We Do a Better Job Erasing Chemtrails from our Sacred Skies”, I read this wonderful article and thought it would be great to share with CLN Readers. Each of our articles has a general thrust that terrorism, of whatever nature or source, is wrong. While our human tendency may be to turn away from difficult subjects like this, it is important to at least take away one thing from these articles: Chemtrails can be equated with terrorism – not protection of the environment. So we should always take a moment to ask 2 questions “why does this have to happen?” and “how can we stop it?” For if our families were in a restaurant and deadly gas escaped and put everyone in the hospital, suffering respiratory problems and awful skin lesions, would we not react with anger at this having happened and demand to know why, what can be done about it, and how can the sick be compensated. The world is that restaurant. And just because no one in authority wishes to broach this subject does not mean that you have to remain silent.

 

Many Americans are unaware of current geoengineering programs, which admittedly use chemical terror agents, such as sulfur dioxide and hydrogen sulfide, on the population.

Recently, Assad was supposedly “gassing his own citizens with chemical terror agents” in Syria – which would have justified an invasion of that country. However, John Kerry’s farce proved to be nothing more than a domestic problem – rather than another war for oil or a coup d’etat for the Central Intelligence Agency.

Geoengineering programs are active in the United States, above the population, and have been active for quite some time. Unfortunately for the citizens below, this is nothing more than a chemical terror attack.

Chemical terrorism is the form of terrorism that uses the toxic effects of chemicals to kill, injure, or otherwise adversely affect the interests of its targets.”  Wikipedia, Chemical Terrorism

So, chemical terrorism is using a toxic chemical to harm the population. Let’s see what geoengineering offers the population below:

“The ability of stratospheric sulfate aerosols to create a global dimming effect has made them a possible candidate for use in climate engineering projects[1] to limit the effect and impact of climate change due to rising levels of greenhouse gases.[2] Delivery of precursor sulfide gases such as sulfuric acid,[3] hydrogen sulfide (H2S) or sulfur dioxide (SO2) by artillery, aircraft[4] and balloons has been proposed.” Wikipedia, Stratospheric Sulfate Aerosols (Geoengineering)

So, spraying chemical terror agents on the globe has been plotted against us. Is it happening now?

“An ad hoc committee will conduct a technical evaluation of a limited number of proposed geoengineering techniques, including examples of both solar radiation management (SRM) and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) techniques, and comment generally on the potential impacts of deploying these technologies, including possible environmental, economic, and national security concerns.” National Academy of Sciences, Geoengineering Climate: Technical Evaluation and Discussion of Impacts

Well, an admission of guilt. How lovely. Now that we have confirmed the plotting of chemical terror attacks against United States citizens, we have also confirmed the use of chemical terror agents on the population as well.

Now, we move on to biological agents: “Bioterrorism is terrorism involving the intentional release or dissemination of biological agents. These agents are bacteria, viruses, or toxins, and may be in a naturally occurring or a human-modified form. For the use of this method in warfare, see biological warfare.”  -Wikipedia, Bioterrorism

So, where is the evidence that geoengineering operations spray bacteria on your children for “global warming?” “Ice-nucleating bacteria are used in cloud seeding.” -Wikipedia, Bioprecipitation

More references? Sure, why not. “We are worried about the negative impacts of geoengineering and synthetic life forms on Africa,” said a representative from Malawi at the final session of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice (SBSTTA). This group is made up of scientific and technical experts from more than 100 countries that are signatories to the U.N. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).” IPS News, UN Urges Caution Against Synthetic Bacteria, Geoengineering (2010)

[Read more here]

 

Robert O'Leary, JD BARA

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products and modalities since the early 1970’s, and he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist and father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive and safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield (MA), New England and “virtually” the world, through his new website, www.romayasoundhealthandbeauty.com

 




How We Can Do a Better Job Erasing Chemtrails From Our Sacred Skies?

ChemtrailPhoto-3-11-2014-680x380

You may or may not be aware that there are enough people concerned about so-called “chemtrails” or “geoengineering” that there have been a few marches, known as the “International March Against Chemtrails”. The latest happened on September 27, 2014. I have attended some of these and am a part of the group, “Worcester Sky Watch”. I have some thoughts about this activist cause that I would like to share. I personally consider chemtrails to be a scourge, one that  has given rise to one of the most important health matters of our time,  and therefore has the potential to affect us socially, politically, economically, and even spiritually.  I would suggest that the lack of attention in mainstream media makes it all the more necessary for the awakened and activist among us to spread the word about chemtrails and to do the most effective job at “marketing” our movement – which I hope will convince millions more that this is “their” movement too.

I have been involved in the Worcester Branch of the International March Against Chemtrails (See the Worcester Sky Watch Facebook Page at https://www.facebook. com/WorcesterSkyWatch) for a couple of years. My friends in this part of the movement are Karen Ann Barlow, Mindy Kristoff and Hermis (www.7hawksmedia.com). Susie O’Brien came to at least one of the marches and is a great representative from www.geoengineeringwatch.org.

Another important mention is for Clifford Carnicom and Hilda Staninger and their innovative work to get to the bottom of what Chemtrails are and what they do to affect our health [See carnicominstitute.org and https://1cellonelight.com/index-4.html].

Www.aircrap.org and morgellonsresearchgroup.com are some other important websites that have trumpeted important developments in this area.

The following are the ways in which, I believe, we will make our anti-chemtrail activist efforts more effective:

  1. Let’s stop exclusively using the perpetrators’ language for this evil activity. “Chemtrails” as a term was coined by the DOD in or before 1991 in a manual prepared for the U.S. Air Force (See the link at: https://chemtrailsplanet.net/2013/03/31/ confirmed-the-word-chemtrails-first-published-by-the-air-force-academy-in-1990/). Some may say, “hey we never saw that manual when we started hearing these things called chemtrails”. True, but I would submit that the same people, inside and outside of the DOD, probably directed their operatives to start whispering this term into the public consciousness and that’s the name by which these emissions came to be known.

What’s in a word? Well, the term “chemtrails” to me seems to have limited the impact of what we are fighting for, because: a. It puts us in to the “contrail/chemtrail” paradigm, which stops the thrust of our argument at “is it or isn’t it?”; b. People live with “chemicals” everyday and get benefit from them, so something that is called a “chemical trail” or “chemtrail”, without more, lacks impact for them; and c. This stops meaningful discussion about who is behind these emissions, what’s in them, and why would this spraying be being done?

And how about the word “geoengineering”? This term is more technical than “chemtrails”, but again lacks a certain gravitas necessary to get people motivated and involved in the way we activists would wish them to be. For us to say, “you know certain people are using geoengineering to make us sick and kill us”, may make some people think, “but geoengineering doesn’t sound so bad” It’s like saying “watch out! Geology (or oceanography or stenography, or cosmetology) are going to get you!!!”

“Geo” is ” a combining form meaning “the earth,” used in the formation of compound words…” [See https://dictionary.reference.com/browse/geo-] and “engineering means:

  1. “the art or science of making practical application of the knowledge of pure sciences, as physics or chemistry, as in the construction of engines, bridges, buildings, mines, ships, and chemical plants[and]
  2. the action, work, or profession of an engineer [and]
  3. skillful or artful contrivance; maneuvering.” [See https://dictionary. reference.com/browse/engineering?s=t]

So, again geoengineering is not a term that is likely to motivate many to become involved in fighting against a grave threat to our health and our way of life.

This is not to say that we have to throw away either of these words. For one thing, they have the benefit of familiarity, but they need more. I would suggest that we add a tack-on:  “Biochemical Warfare against the American People” or “Biochemical Warfare against the world.” While still a technical term, the import and seriousness of “biochemical warfare” has been made somewhat clear to the average person, due to its coverage in Iraq in the 1990’s and 2000’s equating it with Weapons of Mass Destruction (i.e., WMD’s)

This tack-on, or the similar, “biological warfare” is likely to get more people motivated because of the common understanding of it and the term’s immediate dramatic effect.  This effect was demonstrated not so long ago when President Obama, pundits and talking heads got up in arms about President Assad, of Syria, allegedly using the gas, Sarin, against his own people. President Obama nearly involved us in World War III over it.  Not many people realize that this gas reduces to Flouride in our bodies. Our president was about to start a huge war and threaten the world for something that is in many of our toothpastes and communities.

President Obama designated a “red line” at what he alleged was biochemical warfare against the Syrian Peoples in a country half a world away.

The use of the words “biochemical warfare” may, at first, seem to be extreme. But let’s consider that our country seems to be being subjected to chemtrailing nearly every day with concomitant redistribution of moisture that causes deadly droughts and drying of the air — which causes and worsens forest fires. Many people have come down with a mysterious illness, called Morgellon’s and Mr. Carnicom and Ms. Staninger have analyzed aspects of the chemtrails which seem to indicate that nano creatures may have been made/cultivated/constructed to cause illness and arguably even more nefarious things See https://1cellonelight.com/index-4.html].

HAARP technology seems to be related to the chemtrail phenomenon and, although the government states that HAARP is only for innocuous scientific purposes, it appears that  HAARP Technology has been used to create storms and other meteorological phenomena (such as reportedly the Fukushima disaster) or to threaten countries that do not wish to cooperate with the government — not to perform more worthwhile functions like steering  storms away from communities or diminishing the severity of our most dangerous storms. In fact, some in the alternative media suggest that the major drought in the West and heavier than normal rainfal on the Eastern Seaboard can be sourced back to the HAARP Machine(s). It is further noteworthy that a mobile HAARP Machine was reportedly brought over by ship in the above-mentioned Syrian crisis.

By shifting the language like I am suggestin, we can bring people to the question of “if President Obama could draw a ‘red line’, that almost caused WWWIII [See https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/08/president-obamas-red-line-what-he-actually-said-about-syria-and-chemical-weapons/], where is the consistency in his permitting the nearly day-to-day toxic carpet-bombing that is chemtrails or geoengineering.  For that matter, why does he continue to support fluoride in our water and toothpastes.

In any case, in light of the recent emphasis on “biological or biochemical warfare” and the sanguine nature of those terms in the public mentality, I believe that we will enhance the reach and depth of the International March Against Chemtrails, if we use  this strategy.

  1. Another way to make our efforts more effective is to grab on to an image and product with which many are familiar: how about Chemtrails or Geoengineering is “the new cigarette, one you have no choice but to smoke“.

Think about it, with the “Truth Campaign” actively showing the dangers of cigarettes with more and more places going smoke-free, and with the realizations about the significant dangers of even “third-hand smoke”, people know how bad a habit smoking is [See https://www.legacyforhealth.org/content/download/569/6830/file/truth-research-summary-2012.pdf]. People also have a sense that the cigarette companies have not always been honest with them about this danger or even the ingredients of their product. Add to that, the specific advertising to children and people in “minority populations”,  and you have a populace in America , and the world, who are at best suspicious and at worst downright p!$$ed at being lied to for decades. And cigarettes cause cancer, which is still a leading killer of men and women throughout the world.

By relating chemtrails/geoengineering to cigarettes goes a long way to convey the essence of our movement in a couple of words. I have already prepared a handout that includes the “ingredients” found in chemtrails/geoengineering, according to various online articles and reports. It was well-received at the last event I attended; in fact it was the one about which I got the most questions and comments about.

I am very hopeful that the upcoming March Against Chemtrails will be our most successful one yet. Please accept these humble words as food for thought and discuss them among your groups, your families and friends and share any thoughts that you may have about this article. And if you feel that activism around this issue resonates with you, please become involved in the International March Against Chemtrails. There is likely to be an event near you. And for those already in the movement, please keep up the good work!

 

Robert O'Leary, JD BARA

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products and modalities since the early 1970’s, and he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-s0ngwriter, martial artist and father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive and safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield (MA), New England and “virtually” the world, through his new website, www.romayasoundhealthandbeauty.com