Eyewitness to Israel's ethnic cleansing

Eyewitness to Israel's ethnic cleansing

Bill Mullen

In Hebron, graffiti artists have renamed Shuhana Street "Apartheid Street" (Bill Mullen | SW) January 24, 2012 Purdue University professor Bill Mullen traveled to Palestine with a delegation of academics to find out about the obstacles facing Palestinian students and educators. AT 4:45 a.m. on the morning of August 2, 2009, the family of Miraym Al-Ghawi was awakened by pounding on the door of their home in Sheikh Jarrah, East Jerusalem. A small bomb was detonated, throwing open the door. Through it walked masked and armed Israeli commandoes, who dragged the Al-Ghawis, including the six Al-Ghawi children, into the night. They collected the family's belongings in trucks and dumped them outside the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, where they were ransacked. The Al-Ghawi's youngest child, age 4, stood and watched as commandoes set fire to her bed and her playthings. The daughter still cannot sleep without her mother. Medical experts have diagnosed her ailment as "settler trauma." Miraym Al-Ghawi told us this story as we visited Palestine as part of a delegation sponsored by the U.S. Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (USACBI). Five U.S. professors from the delegation, myself included, talked with the Al-Ghawis in Sheikh Jarrah, once one of the liveliest Palestinian neighborhoods in East Jerusalem. Since 1967, however, nearly 9,000 Palestinians have lost their residency rights in East Jerusalem, 15 Israeli settlements have been built, and Palestinians now have access to less than 15 percent of the available land. The Al-Ghawi family is one of four families in East Jerusalem evicted since 2008 as part of Israel's annexation, settlement and "de-Arabization" plan for Palestine. The plan has been effective: unemployment among Palestinians in East Jerusalem is now nearly 35 percent, while the poverty rate is nearly 50 percent. Palestinians in East Jerusalem make up about 35 percent of the population and pay 33 percent of all municipal taxes, while the Israeli municipality spends less than 5 percent on services for East Jerusalem. A 163-kilometer "separation wall" in Jerusalem denies more than 22,000 residents easy access to their work and markets. There are currently more than 270 Palestinian prisoners from East Jerusalem and 197 detainees. Eight of the prisoners are children. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ISRAEL'S COLONIZATION of Palestine is a de facto totalitarianism meant to strangle decades of resistance by an entire people. But it has not succeeded. After her eviction, for example, Miraym Al-Ghawi set up a tent near a fig tree outside their former residence and in defiance stayed there for six months. On 17 occasions, the municipality forced her to tear down the tent; 17 times, she rebuilt. She has repeatedly paid out fines levied against her private "occupation" of her own former home. Today, she rents an apartment in a neighborhood near Sheikh Jarrah, but comes every day to sit near her old residence in order to demonstrate her refusal to be displaced. She remains engaged in a court battle for her house even as parking lots and playgrounds are built in Sheikh Jarrah for newly arrived settlers on confiscated Palestinian land. And this is just one story of the terror and violence of the Israeli police state that saturates daily life under occupation. On a Sunday morning in Hebron, for example, we walked through a Palestinian open market along Shuhada Street. The street sits beside the Ibrahim Mosque, where in 1994 American-born Zionist settler Baruch Goldstein massacred 29 Arab worshippers and wounded 125 others. The massacre set off Palestinian riots and protests in which Israeli soldiers murdered 19 more Palestinians. The street, known as Apartheid Street by locals, has now been closed off at numerous access points by Israeli security forces in order to stop or monitor Palestinian movement, protect newly arrived settlers and restrict commerce. Checkpoints, concrete blocks and impromptu walls appear at nearly every turn. The market itself is under constant siege by settlers who live above street level and throw trash, feces and even acid onto merchants and shoppers below. Numerous storefronts along the street are closed. Israeli police sealed one of them shut because a demonstration was held at the site. As we walked through the marketplace, Israeli soldiers perched overhead on street corners and at one point marched two abreast in three rows straight through the market center. No detail escapes the attention of Israeli authorities--even a 100-meter stretch of sidewalk is divided by a three-foot wall, Palestinians on one side, settlers on the other. Children as young as 2 peddled "Palestine" bracelets on the streets as they tried to help their families scratch out an existence in a strangulated economy. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - THE USACBI campaign began in 2009 in response to the call by Palestinian civil society to join the boycott, divestment and sanction (BDS) movement against Israel. It supports and models the mission statement created in 2004 by PACBI, the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel. The original PACBI statement read in part: Inspired by the struggle of South Africans against apartheid and in the spirit of international solidarity, moral consistency and resistance to injustice and oppression, we, representatives of Palestinian civil society, call upon international civil society organizations and people of conscience all over the world to impose broad boycotts and implement divestment initiatives against Israel similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era. We appeal to you to pressure your respective states to impose embargoes and sanctions against Israel. We also invite conscientious Israelis to support this call, for the sake of justice and genuine peace. These nonviolent punitive measures should be maintained until Israel meets its obligation to recognize the Palestinian people's inalienable right to self-determination and fully complies with the precepts of international law by: 1. Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall; 2. Recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and 3. Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN Resolution 194. USACBI supports each of the above principles and calls for a number of measures to demonstrate support for them. For example, the campaign asks signatories to: 1. Refrain from participation in any form of academic and cultural cooperation, collaboration or joint projects with Israeli institutions; 2. Advocate a comprehensive boycott of Israeli institutions at the national and international levels, including suspension of all forms of funding and subsidies to these institutions; 3. Promote divestment and disinvestment from Israel by academic institutions, and place pressure on your own institution to suspend all ties with Israeli universities, including collaborative projects, study abroad, funding and exchanges. The USACBI call has thus far been signed by nearly 600 U.S. professors, 200 cultural workers, 200 international supporters and 44 organizations. It seeks to point out that the Israeli occupation has damaged or destroyed academic or intellectual freedom, especially for Palestinians living under occupation. For example, Israel routinely restricts the movement of Palestinian students, forcing them to attend apartheid schools, making them pass through walls and checkpoints on a daily basis, and severely limiting their ability to choose a university within Israel/Palestine or to study abroad. Israel has severely restricted the number of students from Gaza who may attend Birzeit University, the most prestigious research university in the West Bank. Palestinian students who do travel abroad to study or seek re-entry to Palestine are often labeled "security risks" or denied entry. Palestinian universities like Birzeit in Ramallah consistently face a "crisis of funding," according to university president Khalil Hindi, with whom we met on our delegation visit. Though the universities operate under Israeli occupation, the Palestinian Authority is the sole source of funds for the university, and Israel provides nothing. Israeli academics, meanwhile, often produce research that colludes with the occupation regime, while the state heavily monitors what Palestinian scholars can produce. We met with a group of scholars at the Mada al-Carmel Arab Center for Applied Social Research in Haifa. The center's advisory board chair Dr. Nadim Rouhana told us that the activities of the Mada Center are heavily monitored by Israel, while Palestinian scholars attached to Mada often work or study in Israeli universities that reproduce intellectual and social apartheid. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - IN ADDITION to attacking the absence of academic freedom in Palestine, USACBI seeks to illuminate the structural relationship between Israeli apartheid and higher education as it impacts Palestinians. As Palestinian scholar George Bisharat has written: Many Israeli academic institutions either benefit from, or participate in, Israeli government actions that violate Palestinian rights. For example, Tel Aviv University sits in part on land belonging to Sheikh Muwannis, a Palestinian village whose residents were expelled by Jewish militias or fled in fear in March 1948. Hebrew University in Jerusalem uses over 800 acres of land illegally expropriated from Palestinian private owners in the West Bank after the 1967 war. Bar Ilan University has established a branch in an illegal Israeli settlement in the West Bank... Finally, discrimination against students who are Palestinian citizens of Israel in admission policies is widespread as revealed by the decision of the heads of Israeli universities in 2003 to reverse experimental admission policies that had increased the number of Arab students. On our delegation visit, we met with Anan Quzmar from the Right to Education Campaign at Birzeit University in the West Bank. The campaign supports the BDS and USACBI campaigns as part of a larger international strategy to destroy apartheid/colonial education in Palestine. According to the campaign: -- Eight of the 11 universities in the West Bank and Gaza Strip have been shelled or broken into by the Israeli Army since September 2000. -- Hebron University and the Palestine Polytechnic University in Hebron were closed down by Israeli military order for much of 2003, and students had to physically break down the gates to their universities, in defiance of the Israeli Army, to reconvene classes and demand their right to an education. -- Birzeit University has been closed down by Israeli military order 15 times in its history and all Palestinian universities and the majority of Palestinian schools, including kindergartens, were closed down by military order between 1987-1992, denying a whole generation their right to education. -- More than 700 children, 200 university students and 39 teachers have been killed by the Israeli military since September 2000. -- More than 3,000 Palestinian children have been arrested by the Israeli military since September 2000, and some 300 children are currently held in Israeli prisons and detention centers. -- Two presidents of Birzeit University student council were imprisoned in 2004, and four of the 11 members of the student council were imprisoned in the same year. Currently, some 80 students from Birzeit University are held in Israeli prisons and detention centers, 10 of whom are being held without charge or trial, including human rights worker and sociology student, Ziyad Hmeidan. The Right to Education mission statement calls for "trade unions, education institutions, social and political movements and concerned individuals around the world to support the right to education in Palestine." The campaign is founded on principles established in UN resolutions that declare education a human right. It calls for scholars, students and activists to "establish connections with Palestinian universities, students and faculty, through solidarity or academic exchange." This strategy is meant to counteract the deadly and ongoing collaboration between American and Israeli universities, such as the new partnership between Cornell University and Technion-Israel Institute of Technology. Technion is Israel's leader in "applied science" research and the development of killing machines like the unmanned armored tanks used in Israel's 2008-2009 Operation Cast Lead that massacred more than 1,400 Gazans. In December, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced plans for a $2 billion research campus in New York in partnership with Cornell and Technion. USACBI's mission seeks to shut down forever such deadly collaborations. Perhaps the most fitting symbol of the need for educators to play a role in the liberation of Palestine was graffiti on the wall of a Palestinian school in Hebron: "To learn or not to learn--that is the question." The words beckon not just to the education of future generations of Palestinians, but to the education of people everywhere about the urgency of ending Israel's colonial regime. >What you can do For more information about the U.S. Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel, or to pledge your support, go to the USACBI website. Find more information about the Right to Education Campaign at Birzeit University at its website. Contact the Civic Coalition for Defending Palestinian Rights in Jerusalem to learn more about organizing efforts to defend Palestinians in East Jerusalem.

Anger in Iraq After Plea Bargain Over 2005 Massacre

Anger in Iraq After Plea Bargain Over 2005 Massacre

By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT

January 24, 2012 BAGHDAD — Iraqis were outraged Tuesday to learn that the Marine considered the ringleader of a 2005 massacre that left 24 of their countrymen dead in 2005 had pleaded guilty Monday to a reduced charge and faced a maximum of three months in jail and a reduction in rank. "That soldier would be sent to prison for more than three months if he had thrown trash on the streets in America," said Khalid Salman, 45, whose cousin was killed by the Marines in the massacre, which occurred in the town of Haditha in November 2005. "This is not new and it’s not new for the American courts that already did little about Abu Ghraib and other crimes in Iraq." For the past nine years, Iraqis have found themselves looking to the American legal system to provide justice for what they believe were war crimes committed by Americans, and most of the time, many say, they have been disappointed. This time was no exception. The Marine, Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich, 31, pleaded guilty in a military court in California to dereliction of duty, telling the judge that he regretted ordering his men to "shoot first, ask questions later," according to news agency reports. He had faced up to 152 years in prison if convicted on the charges of manslaughter and assault on which he stood accused. Mr. Salman vowed not to let the matter rest. "We won’t be silent," he said. "We will resume the case through all international courts, and we will appeal the American resolution. Injustice has won this round, but there are many more rounds left." Assim Omar al-Hadithi, 40, a relative of another victim, said that such a light sentence "shows the lies of the Americans, whether they are judges or members of the military." He continued: "All the world knew that the American soldiers committed crimes in Iraq. We were extensively surprised when we heard the news, and it has made our minds even worse. It is no consolation for the victims’ families." The shadows cast by the Haditha massacre, the abuse of detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison and the killing of civilians by contractors for Blackwater at a square in Baghdad helped turn Iraqi public opinion against the American presence. An agreement to keep American troops here past 2011 collapsed when Iraqi officials would not agree to extend their immunity from Iraqi prosecution. Since the American troops left last month, Iraq has been engulfed in a political crisis, and the Iraqi military has struggled to maintain security as insurgents have conducted a string of devastating attacks. A number of Americans in high-profile cases have received what many Iraqis regarded as token sentences. In August, the supposed ringleader in the Abu Ghraib abuses, Pvt. Charles A. Graner Jr., was released early from prison because of good behavior. He had been sentenced to 10 years but served just 6 1/2. In 2009 charges were dropped against four American military contractors in the killings of the 17 civilians at the square in Baghdad. While a federal court ruling in Washington reopened manslaughter charges against the four, many Iraqis continue to believe that the contractors will never be punished. Iraqis received Tuesday’s plea deal with the same cynicism and anger. "I am not satisfied with the court decision against those killers — they need to be tortured and executed because they killed innocent people," said Tariq Abas al-Najar, 43, a taxi driver in Basra. "If Marines killed a sheep in Europe, the judge would punish them much harsher than for the killing of those innocent Iraqis." Omar al-Jawoshy contributed reporting from Baghdad, and Iraqi employees of The New York Times from Baghdad and Anbar Province.

Marine Involved In Haditha Massacre To Serve No Time

Marine Involved In Haditha Massacre To Serve No Time ‎

Associated Press

January 24, 2012 CAMP PENDLETON, Calif. (AP) — A Marine sergeant who led a squad that killed 24 unarmed Iraqis will spend no time in confinement, despite a military judge's recommendation Tuesday that he spend three months in the brig. Military judge Lt. Col. David Jones said his hands were tied by a plea agreement that prevents any jail time for Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich. Wuterich pleaded guilty to negligent dereliction of duty as part of a deal with prosecutors. The minor charge carried a maximum sentence of 90 days, which is what Jones recommended. But because of the way the military system works, the terms of the deal with prosecutors weren't known to the judge until after he made his sentencing recommendation in court on Tuesday. Prosecutors asked Jones to give Wuterich the maximum sentence of three months confinement, a reduction in rank and forfeiture of two-thirds of his pay. They said his knee-jerk reaction of sending the squad to assault nearby homes without positively identifying the threat went against his training and led to the deaths of the 10 women and children. "That is a horrific result from that derelict order of shooting first, ask questions later," Lt. Col. Sean Sullivan told the court. The judge said he would recommend that Wuterich's rank be reduced to private. He said he decided not to dock his pay because he is the divorced father of three young daughters with sole custody. Wuterich has acknowledged ordering his squad to "shoot first, ask questions later" after a roadside bomb took the life of a fellow Marine, but he said he did not shoot any of the 10 women and children killed in nearby homes that he stormed with his men. "The truth is: I never fired my weapon at any women or children that day," Wuterich told military judge Lt. Col. David Jones, who recommended the sentence that must be approved by the commander of Marine Corps Forces Central Command. The surprise contention by Wuterich contradicts prosecutors who implicated him in 19 of the 24 deaths. It also counters testimony from a former squad mate who said he joined Wuterich in firing in a dark back bedroom where a woman and children were killed. Defense attorney Neal Puckett said Wuterich has lived under the cloud of being labeled a killer who carried out a massacre in Iraq. Lawyers also said he has been exonerated of directly causing the deaths of civilians in the two homes and insisted his only intent was to protect his Marines, calling it "honorable and noble." "The appropriate punishment in this case, your honor, is no punishment," Puckett said. Wuterich, 31, told the court that his guilty plea should not suggest that he believes his men behaved badly or that they acted in any way that was dishonorable to their country. He said he ordered his men to "shoot first, ask questions later" so they would not hesitate in attacking the enemy, but he never intended to harm any civilians. The plea deal that halted Wuterich's manslaughter trial has sparked outrage in Iraq, where many said it proves the United States does not hold its military accountable for its actions. In Iraq, residents of the Euphrates river town of Haditha were angered by the fact that not one of the eight Marines initially charged will be convicted of manslaughter. A survivor of the killings, Awis Fahmi Hussein, showed his scars from being hit by a bullet in the back. "I was expecting that the American judiciary would sentence this person to life in prison and that he would appear and confess in front of the whole world that he committed this crime, so that America could show itself as democratic and fair," he said. In his statement, Wuterich also addressed family members of the Iraqi victims, saying there were no words to ease their pain. "I wish to assure you that on that day, it was never my intention to harm you or your families. I know that you are the real victims of Nov. 19, 2005," he said. Associated Press writers Barbara Surk and Mazin Yahya in Baghdad, Elliot Spagat in San Diego and Raquel Dillon in Los Angeles contributed to this report.

Can solar power help shipping go green?

24 January 2012 Last updated at 00:31 GMT  

 BBC

Can solar power help shipping go green?

 

"I think in 50 to 100 years, all ships will have solar sails”

Robert Dane Solar Sailor

 

By Katie Hunt Business reporter, BBC News, Hong Kong

 

Solar Birdie, which ferries passengers to a golf course on one of Hong Kong's outlying islands, comes into dock

From a distance, the yellow-and-blue ferry docking at the pier resembles the scores of other vessels that hop between Hong Kong's outlying islands and the peninsula every day.

But a closer look as passengers disembark, reveals a grid of gleaming solar panels on the ferry's roof and, instead of the usual throbbing engine noise, there is a barely audible buzz.

The Solar Eagle and three similar vessels shuttle golfers to tee off on an 18-hole island course. Together they form the world's first hybrid powered ferry fleet and a commercial proving ground for technology that could transform the future of marine travel.
The technology, similar to that used in hybrid cars, has been developed by an Australian company called Solar Sailor.
Electricity created by the solar panels and stored in a battery powers the engine while the vessel comes in and out of the harbour. Once out in the open ocean and a faster clip is required, the diesel kicks in.

One of the fleet, the Solar Albatross, sports two sails covered in solar panels that can be raised to harness both the sun and the wind to further reduce reliance on fossil fuel.

Robert Dane, Solar Sailor's founder, says that the technology offers ship owners huge fuel savings and has the potential to be used on all types of vessels from humble ferries and luxury super-yachts to bulk carriers shipping iron ore and navy patrol ships.
"I think in 50 to 100 years, all ships will have solar sails," he says.
"It just makes so much sense. You're out there on the water and there's so much light bouncing around and there's a lot more energy in the wind than in the sun."
Teething problems Three of the ferries began operation in 2010 and the Solar Albatross began carrying passengers last year. The solar-sail technology is also in use in two ferries in Shanghai and Sydney.

 

Solar panels help power the world's first fleet of hybrid ferries in Hong Kong

The Hong Kong Jockey Club, which runs the golf course on Kau Sai Chau island, says its has seen "significant fuel savings" but was still monitoring the overall performance of the ferries.
Mr Dane says that on the golf course-run, the hybrid technology saves 8% or 17% on the fuel bill, depending on the route taken. However, repair and maintenance costs have been more than anticipated.
"The Jockey Club is a new operator so there's a learning curve for them and the new technology," he says.
Despite the teething problems, Mr Dane is confident of future sales.
He says he is in the "early stages" of discussions with the operators of Hong Kong's iconic star ferry, which has been shuttling across Victoria Harbour since 1880, about fitting solar panels on one of their vessels.

 

Solar Albatross in Hong Kong with solar sails raised

 

And in Australia, he hopes to clinch deals this year with the operator of a river ferry and install the technology on two ocean research vessels.
There are other solar-powered ships in operation such as the catamaran Turanor PlanetSolar, which is circumnavigating the globe exclusively by harnessing the power of the sun. However, Mr Dane says the technology developed by his company is the most commercially tested.
More ambitiously, Mr Dane says the company will soon announce a trial with an Australian mining company to attach a 40m (130ft) tall solar sail to a newly built bulk carrier that will ship iron ore and other raw materials to China.

 

Solar Sailor is in talks with an Australian mining company about installing a solar sail on a bulk carrier that transports iron ore and other raw materials

He likens the sail to a "giant windmill blade" that would be covered in solar panels and fold down into the vessel when it is docking and transferring cargo.
By harnessing the wind, the company estimates that the giant sail could shave 20% to 40%, or around A$3m (£2m; $3.1m), off a ship's annual fuel bill when travelling at 16 knots (18mph), with the solar panels contributing an extra 3% to 6% saving.
"The systems were are installing are worth around A$6 million and therefore the return of investment would be a couple of years at the current oil price," he says.
"It's not a matter of if we're going to do it, it's a matter of how - right now we are working out the details."
Green oceans If, as Mr Dane hopes, the technology is adopted more widely, it also has the potential to clean up the shipping industry, which environmental campaigners claim emits more greenhouse gases than commercial aviation.
Roughly 50,000 ships carry 90% of the world's trade cargo, and these ships tend to burn a heavily polluting oil known as bunker fuel.

 

The Solar Albatross ferry, in part powered by two solar sails, comes into dock with sails lowered

 

"It's like tar, you have to heat it up to make it liquid so it will flow," says Mr Dane.
"These incredibly powerful engines run on incredibly cheap but dirty fuel so what we can do in the short-term is to ensure they use less fuel."
The industry has proved hard for governments to regulate as it does not fall into one jurisdiction, however the United Nations International Maritime Organization has recently introduced new regulations on fuel efficiency and sulphur emissions that could drive demand for Solar Sailor's technology.
Mr Dane is optimistic about the company's future even though after more than a decade of doing business it has yet to turn a profit.
He says the company will in future focus on areas less affected the global economic downturn such as defence, with plans afoot to use the technology in unmanned ocean vehicles that could replace navy patrol boats.
"We know (our technology) works. We know the return on investment but there's been factors outside our control like the economic environment that have inhibited what we are doing," Mr Dane says.
"We think we're at a very exciting point with regards to profitability and one of the projects (we're working on) will make us incredibly profitable in 2012."

All About PIPA and SOPA, the Bills That Want to Censor Your Internet

The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA) are two bills that sound like they have a mildly positive aim but, in reality, have serious potential to negatively change the internet as we know it. While the Obama administration has come out against SOPA, effectively shelving it indefinitely, the very similar PIPA bill is still alive and well. Both SOPA and PIPA put power in the hands of the entertainment industry to censor sites that allegedly "engage in, enable or facilitate" copyright infringement. This language is vague enough to target sites you use every day, like Facebook and Google, making these bills a serious problem. Here's what you need to know about the bills and what you can do about them.

What Are SOPA and PIPA All ABout, and Why Should I Care?

The idea behind these bills sounds reasonable. They came about in order to try and snuff out piracy online, as the entertainment industry is obviously not excited that many people are downloading their products without payment or permission. The issue is, however, that it doesn't really matter whether you're in support of piracy, against it, or just don't care. The methods are ineffective. Here's what they are and why they're problematic.
SOPA and PIPA were initially designed to do two things. The first was to make it possible for companies to block the domain names of web sites that are simply capable of, or seem to encourage copyright infringement. This would have been bad for everyone because such a measure doesn't actually prevent piracy. The reason that blocking a domain name isn't effective is because any blocked site can still be accessed via its numeric IP address. For example, if lifehacker.com were blocked, you could still find it by visiting a number-based address. In fact, before the bills were even supposed to come to a vote, tools were created to automatically route domain names to their IP addresses to completely render this measure of SOPA and PIPA useless. As a result, the IP-blocking provisions have been removed from both bills.
The other, still-active measure present in the SOPA and PIPA bills would allow rights holders to cut of the source of funding of any potentially infringing web site. This means any other companies doing business with this site would have to stop. Whether that means advertising, links in search engines, or any other listings would have to be removed.
There is, however, an important difference between SOPA and PIPA. SOPA targeted any site that contributed to copyright infringement, even if it was simply facilitating the act by providing a tool that could be used for illegal purposes (regardless of intention). PIPA, on the other hand, requires the targeted site to have no significant use beyond copyright infringement. Basically, PIPA can only be used to censor a site if it's more likely to be a source of illegal content than not. This is still problematic because a tool designed to accept user-generated content is, to some extent, at the whims of its users. If infringing content is found, rights holders already have the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) to help them request the legal removal of that content. They also have the ability to sue infringers for damages, as we've previously seen with the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) when they, for example, sued a 12-year-old for downloading music. SOPA and PIPA provide a means to censor the tool that provided a means for the infringing content to exist on the internet rather than the content itself. This puts a lot of power in the hands of rights holders and has significant potential for abuse.
This is, of course, our interpretation of these bills. Because we love the internet and oppose censorship, we have an obvious bias. While we believe the right thing to do is to oppose these bills, you should make an informed decision on your own. For more information, please read the exact content of both the SOPA and PIPA bills.

What Can I Do About SOPA and PIPA?

Currently Twitter, Google, Reddit, Kickstarter, Tumblr, Mozilla, Yahoo, AOL, eBay, Zynga, Facebook, and several other sites have spoken out in opposition of SOPA and PIPA. In fact, many sites are censoring their logos (e.g. Google) or completely taking down their sites (e.g. Wikipedia) in protest on January 18th, 2012. There is incredible opposition to these bills because they don't just affect users like you, or small startups, but even very large companies with a large stake in the great things the internet and modern technology have to offer. If you'd like to join in your protest, there are a few things you can do. First, call your congressperson on the phone. This is especially important if you live in a state with SOPA and/or PIPA supports or sponsors. Nonetheless, if your congresspeople do not support these bills you should still contact them to voice your support for their position.
Second, get the word out. Post this article, the American Censorship Day web site, or any other information about SOPA/PIPA on your social media accounts. Send emails to friends and family. If you oppose the bill, help others to understand why you believe they should oppose and encourage them to read more so they can make an informed choice.

Let's End the Fight and Start a Discussion

Finally, if you know a supporter or person in favor of SOPA and/or PIPA, have an open discussion. Myself and many others believe that the root of this problem stems from a lack of communication on both sides. Despite what my articles may suggest, I'm not a supporter of piracy. I do believe there is a compromise that both sides can reach with enough discussion, education, and understanding. It's important to remember that both the supporters and opposers of SOPA and PIPA have legitimate concerns. This should not be a fight but rather a cooperative discussion to find a solution. Whichever side you're on, please encourage a conversation that will move us towards change that is good for everyone rather than extreme measures that won't help anyone.

Is the design of big cruise ships flawed?

 BBC NEWS

Is the design of big cruise ships flawed?

The capsizing of the Costa Concordia has raised many questions about the safety of modern cruise ships. 

They have doubled in weight over the past decade, they sit higher in the water and are flatter underneath to enable them to enter more harbours. To the untrained eye they look top heavy, and with up to 6,000 people on board, they look difficult to evacuate quickly. But is that the case?

One maritime union, Nautilus International, thinks the regulations need looking at. It has been warning for some time that something like this might happen.

Look at this quote, which raises the spectre of the Titanic.

"The grounding of a cruise ship carrying more than 4,000 passengers and crew two weeks into the Titanic centenary year should serve as a wake-up call to the shipping industry and those who regulate it. Attention needs to be paid to existing evacuation systems and more innovative systems for abandonment."

The evacuation of the Costa Concordia didn't go well. The fact that the ship listed so quickly and so far meant they couldn't launch all the lifeboats. Passengers have complained of chaos, confused staff - some of whom didn't speak their language - and the fact they hadn't been taken through a drill.

The International Maritime Organization, which regulates ship safety across the world, sets the rules on evacuating ships and providing drills for new passengers.

Here is what they sent me:

Regulation 19: Emergency training and drills.

• 1 This regulation applies to all ships.
• 2 Familiarity with safety installations and practice musters.
• 2.1 Every crew member with assigned emergency duties shall be familiar with these duties before the voyage begins.
• 2.2 On a ship engaged on a voyage where passengers are scheduled to be on board for more than 24h, musters of the passengers shall take place within 24h after their embarkation. Passengers shall be instructed in the use of the life jackets and the action to take in an emergency.

Effectively, the company has 24 hours to take you through a drill once you are on board. The Costa Concordia was only a few hours into its voyage. Some people arriving back at Heathrow started flashing their drill cards around. They had been scheduled for a rehearsal on Saturday afternoon, by which time the ship was lying on its side.

I suspect, in the light of this accident, all cruise companies will now make sure they drill passengers before they set sail.

But what about the time it took to get everyone off?

Regulation III/21.1.3: All survival craft required to provide for abandonment by the total number of persons on board shall be capable of being launched with their full complement of persons and equipment within a period of 30 min from the time the abandon ship signal is given after all persons have been assembled, with life jackets donned.

In practice, this means all passengers and crew are ordered to lifeboat stations first and then, when everyone is mustered, the captain orders abandon ship. So Coast Guards test to see if ships can load the boats and place them in the water within 30 minutes. 

Regulations also state that a ship's systems should last for at least three hours because that is how long it is expected to take to completely abandon a large ship.

It took a good five hours to get most passengers off the ship. One former sea captain I spoke to had some sympathy with the crew in this situation. Once the ship was listing heavily, he told me, and the lifeboats were sitting on what had become the top of the boat, everyone just had to leave the ship any way they could.

The regulations work to the principle that the ship itself is the best lifeboat, and is designed to be able to limp back to port in most situations.

Prof Philip Wilson at the University of Southampton specialises in ship dynamics and we spoke alongside his 29ft (9m) testing tank. 

"Modern ships are safe as they can possibly be," he told me.

"The centre of buoyancy is in the right place... instinctively it doesn't look right but it is in fact very, very stable, the beam of the boat being very large."

We have also heard a lot about watertight compartments since the Costa Concordia went down. The theory is that if one side of the hull is breached, the other side can be flooded to keep the ship upright. The big question is then, why didn't it work in this case? The truth is we won't know until the investigation is finished.

But Prof Wilson wasn't too surprised, saying: "Every ship will sink if you make the hole big enough."

Latest underwater images reveal previously unseen damage to the hull of the ship

He added, however, that something was "puzzling" him.

The hole in the hull is sticking out of the water. It should be under the sea, because that is where the water came rushing in. In other words, the ship seems to be lying on the wrong side.

"We're working on information that's incomplete so we don't know really what's happened. Potentially of course, the crew could have been pumping water to bring the ship upright, and maybe took too much water on board."

What many people are keen to stress is that cruise ships are still among the safest ways to travel. Companies emphasise that training and regulations are rigorous and that this kind of accident is very rare. But no-one argues that there isn't room for improvement.

The International Maritime Organization has not had a lot to say on this accident so far, but it has released a statement, and once again, it revives memories of the Titanic.

"IMO must not take this accident lightly," it says.

"We should seriously consider the lessons to be learnt and, if necessary, re-examine the regulations on the safety of large passenger ships in the light of the findings of the casualty investigation. In the centenary year of the Titanic, we have once again been reminded of the risks involved in maritime activities."

"human rights shouldn’t be a recipe for national suicide."

Israeli High Court okays Citizenship Law, legalizing racial discrimination of Arabs

Noam Sheizaf

January 12, 2012 According to the 2003 law, Arab citizens of Israel who marry Palestinians will have to emigrate in order to live with their spouses. Israeli Arab MK Ahmed Tibi famously said that "Israel is indeed a Jewish-democratic state: it is democratic for Jews and Jewish for all the rest." This rings truer than ever after Israel’s High Court of Justice rejected yesterday (again) the petitions against the Citizenship Law, one of the first measures to make racial discrimination against the Arab minority not just common practice, but part of Israel’s legal codex. The High Court rejected the petitions against the Citizenship Law in a split, 6-5 decision. The incoming head of the High Court, Justice Asher Grunis, wrote in the decision that "human rights shouldn’t be a recipe for national suicide." You can read the full verdict here [Hebrew, PDF]. Justice Edmond Levy, a religious and somewhat conservative judge, harshly criticized Grunis for his language, claiming he misled the public as to the nature of the citizenship law. The Citizenship Law, which technically is a temporary order, came into effect in 2003. It determines that Palestinian non-citizens who marry Israeli citizens will not be eligible for Israeli residency or citizenship. The couple will only be able to unite outside the borders of Israel. The practical meaning of the law is that Arab citizens of Israel who marry Palestinian non-citizens – something that happens quite often, since these are members of the same nation, and sometimes of the same communities – won’t be able to live with their wives or husbands. If they want to unite, they will have to leave the country. By doing so, the law achieves two (racist) objectives against members of the Arab minority: (a) it prevents non-Jews from entering the country and applying for permanent residency or citizenship and (b) it makes it harder for Israeli Arab citizens to build families in their own community or in their own country, thus encouraging them to leave Israel. Arab Palestinians comprise roughly 20 percent of Israel’s population. It is important to note that it is not the right of the non-citizen wife or husband that is being violated (since the state has no legal obligation towards them), but that of the citizen, who should enjoy the possibility to form a family and live with his loved one in his own community. When the citizenship law came into effect, during the second Intifada, a security pretext was used to justify it, claiming that Palestinian terrorists could use marriage to become Israeli citizens. Yet this argument doesn’t hold: even without the law, the security establishment can veto any demand for citizenship or residency. It’s clear – and the public debate around the law doesn’t even try to conceal this fact – that "demographic" issues were the real motive for the legislation, and more specifically, the desire to limit, and ultimately even reduce, the number of non-Jewish citizens in the state. Until the citizenship order, the only major piece of Israeli legislation that made a clear distinction between Arabs and Jews was the Law of Return, which makes it possible for Jews to immigrate to Israel and become citizens instantly, while non-Jews aren’t allowed to do so, even if their families originally hailed from this land. The 2003 law marks perhaps a new era, in which discrimination against the Arab minority is not only a common practice – for example, in the prevention of Palestinians from buying or building on state land, through the use of state agencies such as the JNF – but an explicit part of the body of laws that apply to the citizens of the state. The new Nakba Law, which allows the state to penalize institutions that commemorate the Palestinian national disaster of 1948, is further evidence of this fact. The High Court also rejected petitions against the Nakab bill, just last week.

Secret Presidential Chemtrail Budget Uncovered

Exposed: Secret Presidential Chemtrail Budget Uncovered – Congress Exceeds Billions To Spray Populace Like Roaches

—The Budget Obama Didn’t Want You To Know About

The Intel Hub
Shepard Ambellas & Avalon
March 30, 2011
© 2011 All Rights Reserved

Geoengineering has now been defined as: “the deliberate large-scale manipulation of the planetary environment to counteract anthropogenic climate change.” – The Royal Society 2009
Recently, the question has been asked, What In the World Are They Spraying? The documentary with the same name answers many of those questions.
The question the world is now asking is “Who in the World Is Spraying Us?”

The World is Now Demanding Answers and Accountability…

As an introduction to this article, we will first cover information to familiarize the uninformed readers as to the core facts and information so that a more complete understanding is possible, given this complex issue.
A recent report by CBS Atlanta detailed how some local citizens are outraged that such “crimes against humanity” are being carried out right before our eyes in secret.
In the report Sen. Johnny Isakson was interviewed on the subject of chemtrails saying quote:

“That is a theory that some people have, but there is no evidence this is happening. This is not happening.”

It looks as if members of the government’s upper echelon and even members of the Senate will go to extreme lengths to suppress this vital information from reaching the American people.
Not to mention they signed off on the multi-billion dollar per year budgets in an economic crisis, with little to no transparency to the public.
Support The Intel Hub – Berkey Light Water Filters, Storable Food, and More(Ad)
In regards to aerosol spraying into the earth’s atmosphere, a recent update to data assembled by The Carnicom Institute reveals the chemicals used and their respective levels of concentration. The toxic levels that are being used in these aerosols goes beyond shocking – it would appear that these levels are indeed criminal by EPA Standards.

An Updated Look at Aerosol Toxins – Part 1
By Dr. Ilya Sandra Perlingieri –
Copyright © 2011 – All Rights Reserved
February 3, 2011
(Excerpt from Report)

A new preliminary draft report by ArizonaSkyWatch shows dramatic increases in heavy metals that simply do not belong in our air. NOTE: The level of Manganese is so shockingly high that ArizonaSkyWatch also included additional information about it (see below). This report will be posted online shortly.
This is only a preliminary overview of Arizona Air Particulates.

2010 Air Particulates
These figures indicate how many times they are over the allowable toxic limit:

Aluminum: 15.8
Antimony: 63.3
Arsenic: 418
Barium: 5.3
Cadmium: 6.0
Chromium: 6.4
Copper: 9.0
Iron: 43.5
Lead: 15.7
Manganese: 513.8
Nickel: 10.7
Zinc: 7.5
Additional Research & Videos are at the CaliforniaSkyWatch.com & theAgricultureDefenseCoalition.org.

Interestingly enough, Monsanto has just released an Aluminum Resistant Seed which is Genetically Modified to tolerate Aluminum in high levels in the soil. Is this a coincidence, or do they know something?

“Control oil and you control nations; control food and you control the people.” – Henry Kissinger

See also: Henry Kissinger National Security Study Memorandum 200

“The common enemy of humanity is man.  In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.” – Richard Haass- Club of Rome

Another famous quote;

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government. - Thomas Jefferson

LINKS FOR CURRENT SOURCES
David Keith GeoEngineering
Fund for Innovative Climate and Energy Research (FICER)

Purpose

The Fund for Innovative Climate and Energy Research (FICER) exists to accelerate the innovative development and evaluation of science and technology to address carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions and their environmental consequences.
The non-profit research fund focuses on early-stage innovative research where relatively small and timely grants can significantly advance understanding, especially of the viability and scalability of proposals to address global warming.
Funded research projects are intended to produce peer-reviewed scholarly articles in recognized professional scientific and technical journals. Any intellectual property that may be generated in the course of such research resides with the researchers or their institutions.

Grants for research are provided to the University of Calgary from gifts made by Mr. Bill Gates from his personal funds.

The activities of the Fund for Innovative Climate and Energy Research fall outside the scope of activities of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. FICER is not a Foundation project and has no relationship with it.
The fund has supported research in a wide range of areas. Some examples include:
• understanding carbon dioxide emissions associated with international trade in goods and services;
• developing technologies to capture carbon dioxide out of the air; and
• climate modeling to understand possible environmental consequences of solar radiation management.

Image: Lawrence Livermore National Library

Report On GeoEngineering

A select group of diabolic oligarch globalists and their puppet cronies embedded within the United States government are now involved in what some would say are crimes against humanity. These tyrants will stop at nothing to usher their hush, hush global aerosol agenda into full swing.

According to a report prepared for the Air Force titled “Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the WeatherBy 2025” the U.S. Air Force wants to fully control the weather on earth by the year 2025.

Far surpassing even the most horrific act of terror (real or staged), posing as literal gods, these globalists will stop at nothing to control the world by not only controlling the fraudulent banking systems but by owning the weather through a process (blanket term) calledGeoengineering.
According to globalist sponsored reports, our planet is in a constant state of threat and is being bombarded with radioactive solar rays increasing planetary temperatures due to human carbon emissions.
However, vast bodies of research now show that that is not the case and that global warming is a another globalist myth, a ponzi scheme to collect a Carbon Tax worldwide, benefitting the very same group behind the curtain.
The myth the global warming “Carbon Tax” pushers have been spouting apparently can only be  fixed by spraying deadly toxins in an aerosol particulate form into the earths atmosphere via large sprayer converted aircraft specifically assigned to perform Geoengineering tasks.

Aerosol sprays (slang: Chemtrails) are filled with a variety of chemical and metal compounds and are known to be very hazardous to human, plant, and animal health worldwide. This danger to plant and human and animal health has been documented in films such as “What In the World Are They Spraying” by Michael Murphy & G. Edward Griffin, who have also appeared on the Intel Hub Radio Show with Shepard Ambellas.

Ultimately, this issue was originally a matter for the EPA to rule over considering that they have the authority to sanction geoengineering activities under the National Environmental Policy ACT of 1969. However, documents such as the report to the chairman, Committee of Science and Technology, House of Representatives – “Climate Change” – Sept. 2010, U.S. Gov. Accountability Office which was submitted to all members of congress in 2010 attempt to put control into the hands of even a smaller group of people.
This report clearly is slanted and leans to take control away from the EPA along with other regulatory provisions such as; the Endangered Species ACT, and the Conformity Provision in the Clean Air ACT – total Geoengineering dis-info submitted to members of the Congress and other government branches alike.

The source of most of the dis-info is Obama’s White House Science Czar John P. Holdren. The following was written on USGCRP letterhead;

“January 2011,
Members of Congress:
On behalf of the National Science and Technology Council, I am transmitting a copy of Our Changing Planet: The U.S. Global Change Research Program for Fiscal Year 2011. The report describes the activities and plans of the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) established under the Global Change Research Act (GCRA) of 1990. The USGCRP coordinates and integrates scientific research on climate and global change and is supported by 13 participating departments and agencies of the U.S. government. This Fiscal Year 2011 edition of Our Changing Planet highlights recent advances and progress made by participating agencies and includes budget information on each agency’s contribution.
This report describes a program in transition. In accordance with the GCRA, the USGCRP agencies requested guidance from the National Research Council on how to best meet the changing needs of the nation to understand climate change and respond to its impacts, and the NRC responded with a 2009 report entitled “Restructuring Federal Climate Research to Meet the Challenges of Climate Change”. In accord with that report’s recommendations, the USGCRP is undergoing a strategic realignment that will ensure that the science produced is maximally useful for decision makers at all scales. As described in the new edition of Our Changing Planet, the program going forward will place greater emphasis on impacts, vulnerabilities, and on understanding the options for adapting to the changing climate. The program will also continue its long-standing support for activities that contribute to a better understanding of the Earth system, including observations, research, and predictive modeling.
All of these focuses will be reflected in the USGCRP’s new strategic plan and its National Climate Assessment.
The USGCRP is committed to its mission to build a knowledge base that informs human responses to global change through coordinated and integrated federal programs of research, education, communication, and decision support. I appreciate the close cooperation of the participating agencies, and I look forward to working with the Congress in the continued development and implementation of this essential national program.
Sincerely,
John P. Holdren Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy Assistant to the President for Science and Technology” – Our Changing Planet
Even more disturbing then that is the fact that your so called representatives have been approving yearly geoengineering budgets in the upwards of billions of dollars per year (as outlined in the document “Our Changing Planet – The US Global Change Research Program for the Fiscal Year of 2011, which is a supplement to the Presidents Budget for 2011, much of which is unaccounted for and not even included in the budget possible signifying even a more nefarious plot involving some black budget.

Back tracking to the year 2001,  President elect George W. Bush established the (CCRI) Climate Change Research Initiative. A year later it was made public that the USGCRP or United States Global Change Research program and the CCRI both would become what is known as the (CCSP) Climate Change Science Program. Now, under the Obama Administration the legacy continues to move forward as the USGCRP.

Geoengineering Regions

A report entitled “Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States” released in 2009, documents how the USGCRP divided the US into nine regions similar to FEMA regions. Also tucked into the report was the statement “A central finding of the report was that the vast majority of climate scientists agree that global warming is unequivocal and primarily human induced” – Source: Our Changing Planet.
The document goes on to mention the devastating effects of climate change, including the effect on crops, human health and livestock.
But the most startling fact in the document is the actual budget itself, a mere 2.7 billion for 2011 alone (not including many costs) 24% higher than 2010’s budget.
The Global Change Research ACT of 1990, SEC. 102, Committee on Earth and Environmental Sciences states;

a) ESTABLISHMENT.–The President, through the Council, shall establish a Committee on Earth and Environmental Sciences. The Committee shall carry out Council functions under section 401 of the National Science and Technology Policy, Organization, and Priorities Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. 6651) relating to global change research, for the purpose of increasing the overall effectiveness and productivity of Federal global change research efforts.

(b) MEMBERSHIP.–The Committee shall consist of at least one representative from–

1. the National Science Foundation;
2. the National Aeronautics and Space Administration;
3. the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration of the Department of Commerce;
4. the Environmental Protection Agency;
5. the Department of Energy;
6. the Department of State;
7. the Department of Defense;
8. the Department of the Interior;
9. the Department of Agriculture;
10. the Department of Transportation;
11. the Office of Management and Budget;
12. the Office of Science and Technology Policy;
13. the Council on Environmental Quality;
14. the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences of the National Institutes of Health; and
15. such other agencies and departments of the United States as the President or the Chairman of the Council considers appropriate.
Such representatives shall be high ranking officials of their agency or department, wherever possible the head of the portion of that agency or department that is most relevant to the purpose of the title described in section 101(b).
(c) CHAIRPERSON.–The Chairman of the Council, in consultation with the Committee, biennially shall select one of the Committee members to serve as Chairperson. The Chairperson shall be knowledgeable and experienced with regard to the administration of scientific research programs, and shall be a representative of an agency that contributes substantially, in terms of scientific research capability and budget, to the Program.
(d) SUPPORT PERSONNEL.–An Executive Secretary shall be appointed by the Chairperson of the
Committee, with the approval of the Committee. The Executive Secretary shall be a permanent employee of one of the agencies or departments represented on the Committee, and shall remain in the employ of such agency or department. The Chairman of the Council shall have the authority to make personnel decisions regarding any employees detailed to the Council for purposes of working on business of the Committee pursuant to section 401 of the National Science and Technology Policy, Organization, and Priorities Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. 6651).
(e) FUNCTIONS RELATIVE TO GLOBAL CHANGE.–The Council, through the Committee, shall be responsible for planning and coordinating the Program. In carrying out this responsibility, the Committee shall–
1. serve as the forum for developing the Plan and for overseeing its implementation;
2. improve cooperation among Federal agencies and departments with respect to global change research activities;
3. provide budgetary advice as specified in section 105;
4. work with academic, State, industry, and other groups conducting global change research, to
provide for periodic public and peer review of the Program;
5. cooperate with the Secretary of State in– (A) providing representation at international meetings and conferences on global change research in which the United States participates; and
(B) coordinating the Federal activities of the United States with programs of other nations and with international global change research activities such as the International Geosphere-Biosphere Program;
6. consult with actual and potential users of the results of the Program to ensure that such results are useful in developing national and international policy responses to global change; and
7. report at least annually to the President and the Congress, through the Chairman of the Council, on Federal global change research priorities, policies, and programs.”
The following is a list of the members included in the Subcommittee on Global Change Research;

SUBCOMMITTEE ON GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH
Made up of the following members:

• Thomas Karl -Department of Commerce Chair
• Thomas Armstrong - Department of the Interior Vice Chair, Adaptation Research
• Mike Freilich - National Aeronautics and Space Administration Vice Chair, Integrated Observations
• Timothy Killeen - National Science Foundation Vice Chair, Strategic Planning
• William Breed -U.S. Agency for International Development
• John Balbus - Department of Health and Human Services
• William Hohenstein - Department of Agriculture
• Jack Kaye - National Aeronautics and Space Administration
• Chester Koblinsky - Department of Commerce
• Linda Lawson - Department of Transportation
• Leonard Hirsch - Smithsonian Institution
• Anna Palmisano - Department of Energy

A description of the subcommittee on (p.2) Our Changing Planet Reads;

“The USGCRP is directed by the Subcommittee for Global Change Research (SGCR), which falls under the National Science and Technology Council. The SGCR comprises representatives from 13 departments and agencies and is led by a Chair from one of the participating agencies (currently from the Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA]). In order to align the program’s governance with the needs, Vice- Chairs have been identified for Strategic Planning, Integrated Observations, and Adaptation Research. Additional vice-chairs will be identified as needed. The program is supported by the USGCRP Integration and Coordination Office and conducts many of its activities through interagency working groups that plan and implement research and crosscutting activities, such as communications, decision support, and information and data concerns. The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) work closely with the SGCR, the Integration and Coordination Office, and the interagency working groups to establish research priorities and funding plans to ensure that the program is aligned with national priorities, reflects agency planning, and meets the requirements of the GCRA. “

The Subcommittee in question has now supplied the President with a supplement to the fiscal budget for 2011, which was presented to members of congress in January of 2011 on behalf of the National Science and Technology Policy – Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, John P. Holdren.
The (USGCRP) brings together a total of 13 different agencies and merges them into one single agency program that has been in the works science 1988 or prior.
In 1990 the USGCRP received generous congressional support under (GCRA P.L. 101-606). It is no mystery that aerosol spraying operations have been ongoing since the early 1990’s. Prior to 1990 one could enjoy a true clear blue sky, a figment of the past in 2011 – where none are to be found.

Airship Proposed for Chemtrail Spraying

So just how deep does the geoengineering/terraforming rabbit hole go? The Intel Hub was able to obtain a copy of the final report prepared by the University of Calgary under contract by Aurora Flight Sciences titled “Geoengineering cost analysis.”
In the report there is smoking gun evidence of the entire geoengineering saga from the secret bases, to the payload, to what type of aircraft or “airship” will be the most cost effective to spread toxic particulates throughout the earths atmosphere.
The final report also included budgets for different applications for aerosol dispersal within the atmosphere.

“Existing aircraft are evaluated based on cost of acquisition and operations. An in-depth new aircraft design study and cost analysis was conducted to determine the cost of developing and operating a dedicated geoengineering airplane type. Similarly, an airship design study and cost analysis was conducted. Finally a survey of non-aircraft systems was conducted to determine how their costs compare to aircraft and airships.
Yearly costs of 1M tonne geoengineering operations for all the systems examined are presented in Figure 2. Some systems are easily written off due to extremely high costs. Rocket based systems are not cost competitive due to the large number of launches required and the impact of occasional rocket failures on required fleet size. A system based on 16Σ” naval Mark 7 guns was analyzed and compared to previous work by the National Research Council.4 This system requires large numbers of shots increasing projectile costs and driving yearly costs over $100B. Gun costs become more competitive if the projectile payload fraction can be increased from about 10% for a standard shell to 50%. With this and a few improvements over the 1940-era Mark 7 gun yearly costs are still in the $20B range….The primary vehicles examined to lift particulate to stratospheric altitudes and disperse them at a predetermined release rate are airplanes and airships; rockets and other non- aircraft methods such as guns and suspended pipes are also surveyed.” –Aurora Flight Sciences: Geoengineering Final Report (p.5)

“Geoengineering may provide a means to create a time buffer against catastrophic cli- mate change while long-term emissions reduction actions take effect. One approach is to disperse sulfur compounds at high altitude to reduce the effective solar flux entering the atmosphere. This report will evaluate the means of delivering sufficient mass of this or similar material to affect climate change on a global scale. The goal of this study is to use engineering design and cost analysis to determine the feasibility and cost of a delivering material to the stratosphere for solar radiation management (SRM). This study does notexamine effectiveness or risks of injecting material into the stratosphere for SRM. Its goal is simply to compare a range of delivery systems on a single cost basis.” – Aurora Flight Sciences: Geoengineering Final Report (p.6)

Operational Costs – Not Including Payload

The report mentions how payload costs are not included in the estimate nor are the base/facility costs and continues on (p.8) to say;

“This study focuses on airplane and airship operations to the stratosphere to release a geoengineering payload with the goal of reducing incoming solar flux. Airships are also considered for this mission. To provide a comparison to conventional aircraft operations, more exotic concepts such as rockets, guns, and suspended pipes are also examined….For maximum cooling impact, the particulate payloads are best placed near the equator. This study assumes that the payload is released within latitudes 30°N and 30°S, though North-South basing location had minimal effect on cost. Transit operations, flying East- West between equally spaced bases around the equator, were examined as a method to ensure adequate dispersal of the payload around the equator. Global winds aid in East-West dispersal so a smaller number of bases and shorter range systems (referred to as Regional operations) can be employed with minimal impact on dispersal. Region- al operations allow the dispersal leg length to be dictated by the desired release rate of 0.03kg/m flown. This means the airplanes fly no further than they have to, on the order of 300-800 km, and fuel costs are minimized.” – Aurora Flight Sciences: Geoengineering Final report Yearly cost estimates from different dispersal methods ranged from over 1 billion dollars a year all the way up to rocket dispersed aerosol in the upper atmosphere at the cost of over 100 billion dollars per year.

GeoEngineering Research 2011

Today Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will pledge with world leaders to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government.” – Henry Kissinger in an address to the Bilderbergers at Evian, France, May 21, 1992.
Note: Websites/News Agencies are welcome to post 50% of this article linking back to us. Or contact us to post in full.

UPDATE – March 31st, 2011

•  Aluminum resistant gene patent # 7582809
•  Patent granted on September 1, 2009
•  Patent developed at the Robert W. Holley Center for Agricultural Health at Cornell University in Ithaca, NY.
•  Leon Kochian and Jurandir Vieira de Magallhaes are the primary inventors/ researchers
•  Patent assigned to US Department of Agriculture and Brazilian Enterprise for Agricultural Research
•  According to Cornell University Chronicle Online, the research project was supported in part by the McKnight Foundation Collaborative Crop Research Program, the Generation Challenge Program, the National Science Foundation and the USDA.
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is a contributor to both the McKnight Foundation and the Generation Challenge Program.
http://www.mcknight.org/international/cropresearch.aspx
http://www.gatesfoundation.org/press-releases/Pages/molecular-breeding-platform-aims-to-enhance-plant-breeding-090901.aspx
Hundreds of Rain and Snow Tests HAVE BEEN DONE!
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/htm/tests.html

Update 4/23/2011 – Amazing Chemtrail Pictures Taken In Phoenix Arizona

Taken 4/22/11 west of Phoenix, AZ suburbs.


From: Tim White
Subject: CHEMTRAILS-my phone call to PATRICK MINNIS of NASA
To: “Rosalind Peterson”
Received: Monday, July 27, 2009, 1:41 PM
I had the distinct DISpleasure of talking to this NASA/CIA/NOAA/NCAR/EPA mouthpiece and fool Patrick Minnis back in May of ’99 when his name first started to come out as the debunker for us CHEMTRAIL WHISTLEBLOWERS.He started to give me his standard bullshit when I told him “STOP RIGHT THERE YOU LYING SACK OF SH%#@” ! I happen to be ex Air Force,a Viet Nam Vet who is VERY familiar with aircraft and I take extreme resentment of you not only lying to me but to all of your victims who are clueless and also insulting my intelligence. Your bulls%$# will NOT work on me so don’t continue. I will do my utmost to expose you and this whole program for what it is. I know a lot more than you realize so why don’t you jamb it and pass the message along to your buddies at that other 3 letter agency at Langley across the way from you”. His next question to me was “What group are you with”? I answer “I’m not with any group. I’m independant of any group. Why do I have to be in a group to have enough balls and initiative to call you as an outraged individual,as a Concerned Citizen”? He responded,”Well,well,a Conceerrned Citttizenn huh….hmmmm? You just don’t want to hear the facts do you? All you conspiracy theorists are all alike-you are all ignorant. Just run your mouths with no facts. I think you’re the problem”. My response,”I sure hope that you’re proud of yourself and all your Project Paperclip Nazi buddies should be too because this IS Nazis at work so take your lies and shove them Minnis,I’m done with you”!CLICK. Gee,that son of a bitch hung up on me! What cheek! I guess he didn’t want to hear anymore,do ya suppose?
Tim White, Viet Nam Vet(USAF)
Concerned Citizen,Researcher,Investigator,Whistleblower
==========================================
NASA Confirms Weather-Shaping Chemtrails are Real-91 viewswww.mail.archive.com/WeatherShapingChemtrailsarereal
NASA: S-L-O-W To Spit Out The Truth
by Lisa Guliani
In the June 17, 2002 issue of the American Free Press newspaper, a bold headline caught my attention: “NASA Confirms Weather-Shaping Chemtrails”. What?? Could it be? Do I dare believe my eyes? NASA is confirming that chemtrails are real? Naturally, I had to read this article written by Mike Blair.
You betcha, the good ole boys at NASA are FINALLY admitting what many of us already know and have been saying for quite some time – that chemtrails are not only REAL, but are also wreaking their deleterious effects on weather conditions. Well, whaddaya know? It must be a holiday or something. Gee, maybe if they REALLY try, they will even come across with the truth about HAARP someday in this lifetime. I can only dream.
If we assume the “glass-is-half-full” attitude, we might say that this sloooow admission is “progress” since governmental agencies have notoriously denied the existence of chemtrails despite Representative Dennis Kucinich legitimizing them in House Resolution 2977 as a form of “exotic weaponry” back in October, 2001. Sometimes I think if Jesus came down off the cross and declared that chemtrails are real, there would still be some moron to argue with Him about it. Duh.
The American Free Press article further states that NASA researchers (in all their wisdom, I’m sure) have even “concluded that this POLLUTION can create cirrus clouds.” Did you read that, folks? NASA called chemtrails POLLUTION. Ahhh, maybe next time they’ll grow a ball and call it just what it is – POISON. Moreover, NASA’s Langley Research Center in Virginia went on to say that these artificially created cirrus clouds “have an impact on climate because they spread over large areas and effectively trap sunlight”. Woohoo!! NASA began this latest bit of “research” after the events of 9/11/2001, so ten months of “study” and NASA has managed to officially connect the first dot or two. Bravo, fellas. It’s nice to see ya catching up with the rest of us – finally.
Blair’s article continues on to say NASA “came to its startling conclusions while conducting research while all NON-MILITARY aircraft were grounded” in the initial days following the events of September 11th. First of all, “startling conclusions?” Why is NASA startled at all? NASA has known about chemtrails all along. After all, isn’t it NASA that obtained and holds the U.S. patent numbered 3813875? Why, YES, it is!!! Gee, maybe they forgot or something, ya think? They procured this patent in 1974. It is linked with a program that utilizes BARIUM for the purpose of creating ion clouds in our atmosphere. Fancy that. But NASA is “startled” to conclude that chemtrails are affecting our climate, eh?
According to AFP, Patrick Minnis, a senior researcher at Langley, stated that the man-made “cirrus clouds are already having an impact on climate, increasing temperatures on regional levels as much as two to five percent.” Hmmm … I wonder how long it will take my chemtrail debunker knuckledraggers to smear and eat their own? Think they’ll be calling Minnis a kooky conspiracy theorist anytime soon? We’ll see, won’t we?