Category: Received

Submitted By: travishartnett@gmail.com – Click to email about this post

Actually, no I don’t.

When was this time?

Was it before, or after the assassination of JFK?
Was it before, or after the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
Was it before or after the Watts Riots?
Was it before, or after the assassination of MLK?
Was it before, or after the assassination of RFK?
Was it before, or after the assassination of Malcolm X?
Was it before or after the Kent State shootings?
Was it before or after the Jackson State killings?
Was it before or after the Wounded Knee occupation?
Was it before or after Richard Nixon resigned?
Was it before or after Three Mile Island?
Was it before or after the assassination of John Lennon?
Was it before or after the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan?
Was it before or after the Iran-Contra Scandal?
Was it before or after Chernobyl?
Was it before or after the AIDS disaster?
Was it before or after the first Gulf War?
Was it before or after the Clarence Thomas hearings?
Was it before or after Columbine?
Was it before or after the Rodney King beating?
Was it before or after the LA riots?
Was it before or after the 2000 US presidential election?
Was it before or after 9/11?
Was it before or after the following middle east wars?
Was it before or after the killing of Osama Bin Laden?
Was it before or after the killing of Trayvon Martin?
Was it before or after the 2016 US presidential election?
Was it before or after the killing of George Floyd?
Was it before or after the many other mass shootings in the United States?
Was it before or after the repeal of Roe vs Wade?

Submitted By: travishartnett@gmail.com – Click to email about this post

1: HAARP is not “new”, it started in 1990. In 2015 it was handed over to the University of Alaska.

2: HAARP is a target of conspiracy theorists, who claim that it is capable of “weaponizing” weather. Commentators and scientists say that advocates of this theory are uninformed, as claims made fall well outside the abilities of the facility, if not the scope of natural science.

3: haarp.gi.alaska.edu

HAARP is the world’s most capable high-power, high-frequency transmitter for study of the ionosphere. The HAARP program is committed to developing a world-class ionospheric research facility consisting of:

The Ionospheric Research Instrument, a high power transmitter facility operating in the High Frequency range. The IRI can be used to temporarily excite a limited area of the ionosphere for scientific study.
A sophisticated suite of scientific or diagnostic instruments that can be used to observe the physical processes that occur in the excited region.
Observation of the processes resulting from the use of the IRI in a controlled manner will allow scientists to better understand processes that occur continuously under the natural stimulation of the sun.

Scientific instruments installed at the HAARP Observatory can also be used for a variety of continuing research efforts which do not involve the use of the IRI but are strictly passive. These include ionospheric characterization using satellite beacons, telescopic observation of the fine structure in the aurora and documentation of long-term variations in the ozone layer.

Submitted By: genedieken@yahoo.com – Click to email about this post

Wow!! HAARP sounds diabolical enough to cause Doctor Stangelove to whip out his circular slide rule and start calculating!

Here’s a paragraph from USAF about the project:

Power for the HAARP HF transmitter is equivalent to that obtained from three or four generators of diesel-locomotive size. The transmitter’s narrow radiating beam is upward pointing and illuminates a relatively small volume in space, producing effects so weak that extremely sensitive diagnostic instruments are required to detect and measure them.

All of the terrible things listed by Ms Gainer would, if even possible, require orders of magnitude more power over long timespans. Thus, climate change is still quite real despite the easy deflection offered by the poster.

Link: www.kirtland.af.mil/Portals/52/documents/AFD-111103-026.pdf

Gene Dieken

Submitted By: travishartnett@gmail.com – Click to email about this post

“The World Health Organization is proposing a global pandemic agreement that would give it undemocratic rights over every participating nation and its citizens. Put simply, in the event of a pandemic, the WHO’s constitution would replace every country’s constitution, whether the elected leaders of this country would agree or not. So there you are! I received an announcement of this proposal with only a few hours left to respond to it. Really – an announcement of this type should give more time to respond. I hope my response got there in time. But I don’t think it matters. This is where the New World Order comes into the picture. And once it is implemented it will be forever. No one likes to relinquish power. The only way to get out of this is to get out of the WHO and the United Nations.”

No, that’s not how it works at all:

“Article 19 of the WHO Constitution gives the World Health Assembly the authority to adopt conventions or agreements on matters of health. A two-third majority is needed to adopt such conventions or agreements.”

There’s no “automatic replacement of a nation’s constitution” by the World Health Organization.

“The INB (intergovernmental negotiating body) held its first meeting on February 24, 2022. The second meeting, where the members are expected to discuss the progress on a working draft, is scheduled to be held by August 1, 2022. A progress report is expected to be delivered to the 76 th World Health Assembly in 2023, and its outcome will be submitted to the 77 th World Health Assembly in 2024 for consideration. Intermittent public hearings are also planned.

In December 2021, the World Health Assembly adopted a decision titled “The World Together” at its second special session since it was founded in 1948.
Under the decision, the health organisation established an intergovernmental negotiating body (INB) to draft and negotiate the contents of the pandemic treaty in compliance with Article 19 of the WHO Constitution.
The pandemic treaty is expected to cover aspects like data sharing and genome sequencing of emerging viruses and equitable distribution of vaccines and drugs and related research throughout the world.
Most countries have followed the “me-first” approach which is not an effective way to deal with a global pandemic, WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said in a statement.”