Could a strange substance found by an Ark-La-Tex man be part of secret government testing program? That's the question at the heart of a phenomenon called "Chemtrails." In a KSLA News 12 investigation, Reporter Jeff Ferrell shows us the results of testing we had done about what's in our skies.
"It seemed like some mornings it was just criss-crossing the whole sky. It was just like a giant checkerboard," described Bill Nichols. He snapped several photos of the strange clouds from his home in Stamps, in southwest Arkansas. Nichols said these unusual clouds begin as normal contrails from a jet engine. But unlike normal contrails, these do 'not' fade away.
Soon after a recent episode he saw particles in the air. "We'd see it drop to the ground in a haze," added Nichols. He then noticed the material collecting on the ground.
"This is water and stuff that I collected in bowls. I had it sitting out in my backyard in my dad's pick-up truck," said Nichols as he handed us a mason jar in the KSLA News 12 parking lot back in September after driving down from Arkansas.
KSLA News 12 had the sample tested at a lab. The results: A high level of barium, 6.8 parts per million, (ppm). That's more than three times the toxic level set by the Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA.
Armed with these lab results about the high levels of barium found in our sample, we decided to contact the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality. They told us that, 'yes,' these levels are very unusual. But at the same time they added the caveat that proving the source is a whole 'nother matter.
We discovered during our investigation that Barium is a hallmark of other chemtrail testing. This phenomenon even attracted the attention of a Los Angeles network affiliate, which aired a report entitled, "Toxic Sky?"
There's already no shortage of unclassified weather modification programs by the government. But those who fear chemtrails could be secret biological and chemical testing on the public point to the 1977 U.S. Senate hearings which confirmed 239 populated areas had been contaminated with biological agents between 1949 and 1969. Later, the 1994 Rockefeller Report concluded hundreds of thousands of military personnel were also subjected to secret biological experiments over the last 60-years.
But could secret testing be underway yet again? "I'd rather it be something inert and you know something that's not causing any damage but I'd like to know what it is," concluded Nichols.
KSLA News 12 discovered chemtrails are even mentioned by name in the initial draft of HR 2977 back in 2001, under the Space Preservation Act. But the military denies any such program exists.
It turns out, until just nine years ago the government had the right, under U.S. law, to conduct secret testing on the American public, under specific conditions. Only a public outcry repealed part of that law, with some "exceptions."
Mark Ryan, Director of the Poison Control Center, explained that short term exposure to barium can lead to anything from stomach to chest pains, with long-term exposure causing blood pressure problems.
Ryan addressed concerns by chemtrail researchers that barium could be meant to wear down a person's immune system. "Anything that causes ill effects on the body long-term, chronically, is going to affect your ability, it's just constantly working on the body. So from that aspect yeah it's a potential."
Ryan told us he's conducted research of his own about secret government testing on the public. But he's still a bit skeptical about chemtrails at the moment, especially considering that his Poison Control Center has seen no calls about barium exposure.
93% Of Congress Passes Bill That Targets Americans Critical Of
Government Showing Both “Big Box” Parties Have Same Agenda...More
Control, Less Freedom
Lancaster, PA: Congress passed a bill which would make certain political
ideologies suspect, under the guise of preventing “homegrown terrorism”.
The Constitution Party, the largest and fastest-growing third party in
the country, calls on liberty-minded Americans across the political
spectrum to take issue with HR 1955, a bill which allows the government
to call virtually any crime and any thought “radical” and consider it
"The provisions of this bill should be causing the highest degree of
alarm in our country. HR 1955 is, to date, one of the most damning to
our constitutional rights. If this gets by the Senate, our freedom of
expression will be obliterated”, warned Constitution Party National
Committee Chairman Jim Clymer.
H.R. 1955, titled the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2007 allows the government to target Americans and
actually calls “thought” crimes “homegrown terrorism”.
Part of the bill (Section 899A) employs extremely vague terminology
(“violent radicalization”) to describe the promoting of any belief
system that the government considers “extremist”.
The Constitution Party suggests that since the language in H.R. 1955 is
so vague, the government can consider anything at odds with its agenda
to be “radical” or “extremist”.
“Would those who advocated for a different governmental policy by
calling into a radio talk show or setting up a website critical of
government be considered criminals under H.R. 1955? Absolutely; the
wording of the bill says it all”, Clymer noted, calling attention to the
text of HR 1955 which says:
“The term `violent radicalization’ means the process of adopting or
promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating
ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social
Would protests, marches, demonstrations, websites, and internet radio
content calling for “political” or “social change” constitute a crime
under the provisions of H.R. 1955?
H.R. 1955 says it is a crime to “intimidate or coerce the United States
government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment
thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives”.
The Constitution Party cautions Americans not to allow their government
to limit political dissent under the guise of curbing “terrorism”.
“Since this bill includes caveats about ‘internet streaming’, it’s
apparent the motive is to limit discussion amongst those who use the new
medium to make their voices heard…typically those most critical of the
parties now running our country”, noted Clymer.
The Constitution Party points to the overwhelming bi-partisan approval
of this bill with 93% of Congress voting in favor of its passage as
proof both major parties have broken their oath of office to uphold and
defend the Constitution of the United States. “H.R. 1955 is yet another
blatant indication that both ‘Big Box’ parties have set us up and sold
us out, once again”, Clymer added.
CCR's Ratner Says His Litigators Will Pursue Bush & Cheney Even After They Leave Office
World Radio Network, Dean Lawrence R. Velvel, Host
Bush, Cheney, and Others Responsible for Torture, Including Lawyers, Will Be Legal Targets Even After They Leave Office, Ratner Says
President Bush and any of his aides that advocated or participated in torture will be the targets of legal action even after they leave office, President Michael Ratner of the Center for Constitutional Rights(CCR), New York, said.
"After Bush is out of office, the Center(CCR) will pursue Bush and (Vice-President) Cheney. We are not going to let go of these people," said Ratner, whose organization coordinates the work of more than 600 lawyers nationally involved in defending the rights of prisoners held by the U.S. at Guantanamo, many of whom say they have been tortured. The non-profit CCR is the leading civil rights litigating and advocacy organization in the nation.
"We think (those responsible for) this systemic program of torture (conducted by) this country have got to be made accountable whether it takes us one year or five years or ten years. And (we're going) to go after the key architects of this torture program and make it particularly hot for them, particularly to travel to Europe," Ratner said.
Ratner said former Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and the authors of the so-called "torture memos" written by the Office of Legal Counsel in the Justice Department could be targets. "What you can't do as a lawyer is to advise people to find ways to escape criminality and violate the laws," Ratner said. "There's no issue to me. These lawyers are deep deep into what we consider the torture conspiracy," Ratner said.
He also said Vice President Cheney is considered to be "the architect of a lot of the torture programs" and "there's a lot of evidence George Bush had to sign off on executive orders that approved essentially the torture program, (and) extraordinary rendition." "We believe there is clear evidence the Bush administration went off the pages of law and implemented a torture program which essentially violated the Geneva Convention against torture and its own (U.S.) laws whether at Guantanamo or Abu Ghraib (Iraq) or Pakistan," Ratner told Dean Lawrence Velvel of Massachusetts School of Law at Andover, host of the program, "What The Media Doesn't Tell You," aired globally over the World Radio Network.
Ratner said as long as the Justice Department was headed by Attorney General Gonzales and the military was headed by Donald Rumsfeld, both of whom were complicit in torture, CCR felt it had a better chance of success of initiating legal action in Germany and France based on the legal concept of "universal jurisdiction." This enables countries to prosecute those, such as pirates, thought to be guilty of heinous crimes, no matter where they committed their crimes or where they are arrested. Ratner noted "Rumsfeld was actually forced to flee France before we could get an arrest warrant served on him."
"Aggressive war," Ratner said, "is the penultimate crime because it is the crime from which all the other crimes such as mass killing or genocide flow. " He indicated this is the case in Iraq and termed the war "clearly a violation of norms under the UN Charter."
Ratner went on to say one of the reasons Attorney General nominee Mukasey evaded giving senators his view on waterboarding during his confirmation hearing was that if he did so "it would set up people in the CIA for prosecution" under the Anti-Torture statute. Both the Soviet Union under Stalin and the present Chinese communist regime resorted to waterboarding, Ratner noted, "and we prosecuted WWII Japanese who used waterboarding against Filipino resistance fighters. It's amazing to me we're having a debate on this in this country."
The Massachusetts School of Law at Andover is a non-profit educational institution dedicated to providing a quality, affordable education to underserved populations such as minorities, immigrants, and students from families of modest means.
SAN FRANCISCO, California, Nov 16 (IPS) - Two U.S. Army deserters who fled to Canada and sought refugee status on grounds of their opposition to the war in Iraq have lost their bids to have the Supreme Court of Canada hear their cases.
The court refused to hear the appeals of Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey Thursday, who were rejected two years ago by Canada's immigration authorities.
The board ruled they would not be at risk of their lives if they returned to the United States, nor were they at risk of "cruel and unusual treatment or punishment".
Hinzman and Hughey deserted the U.S. Army in 2004 after learning their units were being deployed to Iraq to fight in a war they have called immoral and illegal. The men argue that serving in Iraq would force them to commit crimes against civilians, and that they would be persecuted if forced to return to the United States.
There are currently about 200 U.S. Army deserters in Canada. Among them is Ryan Johnson of Visalia, California. He fled to Canada in 2005, the day his unit deployed to Iraq.
"The Canadian government decided not to fight an illegal war," he told IPS. "Canada was going to go into the war in Iraq, but then decided that because the U.N. did not sanction it, Canada would not participate in the war in Iraq. That's a major reason that I came to Canada. Canada felt the same way I did about the war in Iraq."
Canadian immigration officials ruled, however, that "as mere footsoldiers", U.S. war resisters "could not be held responsible for the breach of international law committed by United States in going to Iraq." Immigration authorities also ruled that "ordinary footsoldiers are not expected to make own personal assessment as to the legality of any conflict they may be called upon to fight". They also said there is no internationally recognised right to object to a particular war.
"It's disappointing that the Supreme Court of Canada would not even go as far as to hear our case," Johnson said. "It is definitely not something that is pertinent. They've used legality of war in other refugee cases, I don't know why in our case they refused to use the legality of the war in evidence."
A spokesperson for Canada's immigration minister put a different spin on the Supreme Court's decision.
"Canadians want a refugee system that helps true refugees," spokesperson Mike Fraser told Reuters.
"All refugee claimants in Canada have the right to due process and when they have exhausted those legal avenues we expect them to respect our laws and leave the country," he added.
During the Vietnam War, between 30,000 and 60,000 draft dodgers sought sanctuary in Canada. Veterans of that fight say the atmosphere in Canada today is very different than it was during the 1960s and 70s.
"Our government is pretty clear that it is pro-[George W.] Bush and [wants to] reassure Americans that the Canadian border is very secure," said Leigh Zaslofsky, who fled the United States in 1970 and now coordinates Canada's War Resister Support Campaign.
"When I deserted I was able to apply for permanent residency and obtain it there if I passed a points assessment so that's what I did," he said, "and I was readily admitted to Canada as a permanent resident and didn't have to worry about being sent back to the United States."
Even so, U.S. war resisters in Canada are not facing immediate deportation.
After losing their appeal at the Supreme Court, Hinzman and Hughey will now receive a "pre-removal risk assessment", which is designed to judge whether in the United States they would be at risk of torture, death or cruel and unusual punishment or treatment.
That's only the beginning of a drawn-out deportation process that could go on for years.
"We still have a bit of time before anyone is looking at getting sent back imminently," Ryan Johnson said.
War resisters can also apply for permanent residency in Canada on humanitarian or compassionate grounds.
Meanwhile, supporters of U.S. soldiers who fled across the northern border are turning their efforts toward the Canadian Parliament, which they hope will pass a law overruling existing policy -- despite the opposition of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, the National Democratic Party and Bloc Quebecois. If they can get the centre-left Liberal Party to go along, supporters say, such a bill could become law without Harper's support.
"When I signed up for the Army in November 2003, I was thinking there were weapons of mass destruction, that Iraq had ties to 9/11," Johnson said. "Our president, our vice president, [then defence secretary] Donald Rumsfeld lied to us. They betrayed the American people and they're betraying every soldier they send over there to fight a war based on false pretenses and greed."
Johnson has not seen his parents since he fled to Canada more than two years ago.
WASHINGTON, Nov 17 (IPS) - The George W. Bush administration's campaign to seize and detain Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) officials in Iraq, presented by Bush himself last January as a move to break up an alleged Iranian arms smuggling operation in Iraq, appears to have run its course without having been able to link a single Iranian to any such operation.
Despite administration rhetoric suggesting that the U.S. military had solid intelligence on which to base a campaign to break up Iranian-sponsored networks supplying armour-piercing weapons, what is now known about the kidnapping operations indicates that the actual purpose was to obtain some evidence from interrogations that would support the administration's line that the IRGC's elite Quds Force is involved in assisting Shiite forces militarily.
None of the six Iranians now held by the U.S. military, however, has provided any evidence for the administration's case despite many months of very tough interrogation usually employed on "high value" detainees.
Wayne White, former deputy director of the Bureau of Intelligence and Research Office of Analysis for the Near East and South Asia, told IPS he believes the administration badly wanted to get information from the Iranian detainees that they could use to make their case, but has been unable to do so.
"I'm convinced that they haven't gotten anything out of them," he said in an interview. "They haven't come up with anything they can shop around."
The programme has also been a political embarrassment in relations with U.S. allies in Iraq. U.S. military seizures of Iranians who the U.S. military claimed were IRGC Quds Force officers have been condemned not only by the Shiite government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki but by Kurdish leaders as well. The U.S. military apologised in August for "a regrettable incident" in which eight Iranians were arrested in Baghdad, and then freed after Iraqi protests.
The U.S. quietly released nine Iranian detainees last week, two of whom were seized in the Kurdish city of Erbil in January, saying they were "of no continuing intelligence value". The others do not appear to have been part of the deliberate targeting of Iranian officials.
What was later learned about the U.S. raids on Iranian officials in Kurdistan last January and again in September and in Baghdad last December shows that the U.S. military was targeting Iranians merely on the basis of their affiliation with the IRGC, while claiming publicly to have intelligence of their involvement in weapons trafficking.
The Jan. 10 raid was on an Iranian liaison office that had been operating in the Kurdistan capital of Erbil for 10 years with official Iraqi government approval. The U.S. military issued only a vaguely-worded rationale for kidnapping the five Iranians, saying they were "suspected of being closely tied to activities targeting Iraqi and coalition forces..."
That was a thinly-veiled allusion to their suspected membership in the Revolutionary Guard Corps.
Iraq's Kurdish foreign minister Hoshyar Zebari, who demanded the release of the five Iranians, explained that they were not part of a "clandestine network" but were working on visas and other paperwork for travel by Iraqis to Iran. Zebari pointed out that the men were working for the Revolutionary Guard Corps because that institution has the responsibility for controlling Iran's borders.
It is also common for IRGC officers to be given positions in a wide range of non-military Iranian government agencies. That was the case with Mahmoud Farhadi, the Iranian official kidnapped by U.S. military from a hotel in Soleimanieh, Kurdistan Sep. 20.
U.S. military spokesman Rear Adm. Mark Fox told reporters that Farhadi was a member of the "Ramadan Corps" of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard command responsible for all Iranian operations inside Iraq and the "linchpin" behind the smuggling of "sophisticated weapons" into Iraq by the Quds Force.
But officials of the Kurdistan regional government and the Kurdish president of Iraq, Jalal Talabani, publicly confirmed the Iranian government's assertion that Farhadi was a civilian official of the Kermanshah province governor-general's office on a "commercial mission with the knowledge of the federal government in Baghdad and the government of Kurdistan."
Again, Kurdish authorities did not contest the fact that Farhadi had been in the IRGC. The governor of Suleymaniye, Dana Majeed, acknowledged his IRGC membership to National Public Radio a week after the U.S. kidnapping, but insisted that his job was to expedite trade and transit across the border.
The U.S. military was apparently operating on the basis of information from the Iranian armed opposition group Mujahideen E Khalq (MEK) that was badly out of date. The political arm of the MEK, the National Council or Resistance of Iran, which had been providing information to U.S. intelligence on the Iranian nuclear programme and on Iranian officials operating in Iraq, published a detailed article on Farhadi Sep. 25 which claimed that he was the commander of the Quds Force Zafar Base and said nothing about his having working for the province on cross-border trade.
But an article in a local Kurdish language daily in Soleminiye on Sep. 24 reported that an "informed source" belonging to unnamed "Iranian opposition group -- obviously the MEK -- had used the past tense in regard to Farhadi's role as Quds Force commander and acknowledged that Farhadi was now working in a commercial delegation.
In December 2006, two accredited Iranian diplomats were kidnapped from the Embassy car on the way from praying at a mosque and later had to be released. But four other Iranian officials were kidnapped in the compound of Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, the head of the Shiite political party called SCIRI, who had visited Bush three weeks earlier. They were in the home of the chairman of the Parliamentary security committee and head of the Badr organisation.
The official explanation was that they were being detained on "suspicion of carrying out or planning attacks against Iraqi security forces". But the Iraqi interlocutors are part of the Iraqi government which supports the occupation and opposes the Madhi army. If the Iranian officials detained were actually plotting with their hosts to attack Iraqi security forces, it would have meant that the SCIRI and the Badr Group were planning to attack their own government.
U.S. military officials claimed to the Washington Post that they had captured maps of Baghdad delineating Sunni Shiite and mixed neighbourhoods that would be useful for militias, lists of weapons systems and "information about importing modern, specially shaped explosive charges into Iran".
But Laura Rozen of the National Journal quoted a U.S. official as saying that the evidence was far less conclusive than was claimed. "They are trying to walk this back," said the official. "There are no smoking guns about Iran in Iraq."
None of the allegedly damning evidence was mentioned in the Feb. 11 military briefing to the U.S. media on the alleged Quds Force EFP smuggling, indicating that these claims were vastly exaggerated.
*Gareth Porter is an historian and national security policy analyst. His latest book, "Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam", was published in June 2005.
1,600 school children and their parents have been ordered to appear in circuit court this Saturday where health workers will immediately force them to receive required shots. Parents who don't bring their children to court for the shots are to be jailed.
"We can do this the easy way or we can do this the hard way, but it's going to have to get done." said State Attorney Glenn Ivey.
Victim Families Say Autism-Vaccination Link Painfully Obvious
Attempts at disclosure have been silenced by the government and media, who continually deny that any connection exists. Huge potential liabilities and lost profits are thought to be the primary reason for stonewalling relief for a situation that now effects approximately 1 in 66 families.
After the shots, the twins began to grow non-communicative and withdrawn. At three years of age they were officially diagnosed as having autism. Faith was told she could do nothing to remedy their condition and that she might as well have them institutionalized.
MOSCOW -- The Russian senate voted Friday to suspend compliance with a key Cold War treaty limiting conventional military forces across Europe, confirming a move strongly criticized in the West and by NATO.
The unanimous vote in the upper house Federation Council, followed last week's decision in the lower house of parliament, the State Duma, to freeze Moscow's participation in the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) treaty from December 12.
General Yury Baluyevsky, Russia's chief of the general staff, said the move was "the correct, logical step from the political and military point of view," ITAR-TASS news agency reported.
NATO has criticized Russia's withdrawal from the 1990 CFE, which places strict limitations on deployment of tanks and other hardware across Europe.
President Vladimir Putin ordered the moratorium on July 13 amid a row over US plans to install an anti-missile shield in eastern Europe. Technically, Russia could still return to the CFE if Putin reversed parliament's decision, state-run RIA Novosti news agency said.
The treaty's demise highlights deteriorating relations between Moscow and countries of the Atlantic alliance as Putin's administration pushes to reassert Russia on the international stage.
"This will be an indicator of Russia's seriousness in its uncompromising stand on ensuring its defensive capabilities, including in answer to US plans to put anti-missile defenses in eastern Europe," State Duma deputy Leonid Slutsky told ITAR-TASS.
Last week Deputy Defense Minister Alexander Kolmakov said that plans were being considered for boosting troop deployments on the western flank, something impossible under the CFE.
In other moves contributing to Cold War-style tensions, Putin and other top Russian officials this year have renewed long-distance strategic bomber patrols, as well as threatened to retarget nuclear missiles at European cities, and to withdraw from other bedrock disarmament treaties.
Moscow says the CFE is not working because an updated version agreed on in 1999 has been ratified by Russia, but not by NATO countries.
NATO members, led by the United States, say they cannot ratify the pact because of Russia's military presence in ex-Soviet Georgia and Moldova.
Although Russia this week handed over a third Soviet-era base to the pro-Western Georgian authorities, there is controversy over a fourth.
Russia says that base has been decommissioned, but Georgian officials are unable to inspect the facility, which is in the Russian-backed separatist Abkhazia region.
Adding to bad blood between Moscow and the West is growing unease with wide-ranging limitations imposed by Putin on democratic reforms and what critics call Russia's aggressive use of massive energy resources.
Moscow accuses the United States of interfering in Russia's backyard and attempting to rule the world as the sole superpower.
Riding a tide of petrodollars and growing influence on key international issues such as the Iranian nuclear program and the status of Kosovo, Russia's authorities are in no mood to compromise.
Speaking about the decision to quit the CFE, Baluyevsky said: "The US and NATO political leadership hoped that Russia would flinch at the last moment and not take the decision about introducing a moratorium," RIA Novosti reported.
National Clean Elections Lawsuit Papers Filed in Utah
"50 States Sued to Block Computerized Vote Counting"
There is Nothing More Important Than to
Save the Core of our Republic – the Vote!
The Counting of the People’s Votes Must
Be Open, Verifiable and Transparent