------Our transportatino system -
(http://edstrong.blog-city.com/the_car_culture_is_killing_us.htm) - The Car Culture Is Killing Us
In his book Lives Per Gallon:
The True Cost of Our Oil Addiction,
Terry Tamminen outlines the direct
and indirect impact that petroleum consumption has
on millions of Americans every year -
About 100,000 people die every year
from preventable air pollution,
and another 6.5 million suffer respiratory
and other diseases related to smog and polluted air
Many die of heart disease caused by
hearts or lungs strained by air pollution
Smog. That's the first image that comes to mind when people picture the cost to our health of filling up the tank with gasoline.
But in the book Lives Per Gallon, author Terry Tamminen describes how tailpipe emissions are just the tip of the iceberg in assessing how the public health is damaged by our petroleum habit.
Part science lesson and part history book, Lives Per Gallon takes readers on a sobering ride that details the cost to humanity of producing, transporting and consuming petroleum fuel.
Tamminen, whose lengthy career in environmental and health risk assessment included a stint as Secretary of the Environmental Protection Agency in California, clearly describes the toxicity of the pollutants contained in vehicles emission without getting too lost in the chemistry.
Many of the toxins are the same as those contained in cigarette smoke, which is not comforting for diesel bus drivers or smokers. He estimates that more than six million Americans each year seek medical treatment because of illnesses prompted by emissions, and more than 100,000 people die from "preventable smog."
Much of the data that Tamminen offers about the health costs of vehicle emissions focuses on notoriously smoggy southern California, but the analysis is relevant no matter where you live.
That vehicle emissions are harmful is generally known, but Tamminen also details the injury caused by the lesser petroleum-related pollution -- the millions of barrels of oil that are regularly leaked into the oceans, dumped from boats and planes, and the tons of toxins that spewed into the skies during the refining process
These industries are not regulated nearly as closely as the auto industry, but, he argues, need to be more closely scrutinized.
For example, tanker vessels, agricultural equipment, and off-road vehicles are permitted to burn diesel with much less efficiency than automobiles and inflict considerablely more harm per mile to human health.
Lives Per Gallon also talks about the direct and indirect loss of human life around the globe as a result of Americans feeding their "oil addiction."
Tamminen provides a few brief but devastating tales of communities in Colombia, Nigeria and Ecuador that were destroyed because of the clashes resulting from conflicts between the private oil interests and unstable political environment.
Tamminen also connects the dots between the lives lost during the Iraq conflict and petroleum dependence while generalizing about "oil wars," but without providing the supporting documentation that accompanies his other discussions.
The book doesn't digress or overwhelm readers on any one topic, providing momentum that keeps readers engaged through to the conclusion.
Tamminen romanticizes about what modern American cities might have been if not for the efforts of General Motors and its co-conspirators.
He recounts how in the 1940's and 50's, GM, Standard Oil, Firestone Tire and Rubber and others formed a company that dismantled much of the urban electric train systems in Los Angeles, Philadelphia, New York and dozens of other cities.
The company, known as National City Lines, ripped up the tracks and replaced the trains with diesel buses that for decades spewed pollutants, creating the smog-filled cities of today. Tamminen argues that by removing electric mass transit, the group restricted consumer choice.
Tamminen also chronicles the auto industry's history of deception and litigation in fighting regulators and forcing consumers to accept the smog-belching status quo in vehicles.
That deception continues today, according to Tamminen, who berates petroleum companies for hyping high-octane fuels that require more energy to produce while providing no benefit to the majority of vehicles.
While Lives Per Gallon will equally depress and alarm you, Tamminen leaves the door open to a happy ending by describing the road to redemption.
The final chapters outline calls to action for government agencies and individuals that will reduce the health hazards of today's transportation.
Tamminen details the legal and regulatory actions that could prompt the auto and oil industries (whom, he documents, typically only act when forced) to greatly reduce their impact on human health using currently available technology.
Tamminen makes strong arguments as to why auto companies should be held liable for how their products are used, and he outlines the possible enforcement strategies including carbon caps and greenhouse gas trading mechanisms.
While much of the book portrays corporations as the evil-doers and citizens as the unknowing innocents, Tamminen acknowledges that consumers are part of the problem as well as the solution and should use their purchasing power to enact change.
In addition to suggesting greater use of mass transit and pedaling or walking instead of driving a vehicle, the most significant step that will reduce petroleum-related harm is to buy a fuel-efficient vehicle.
By purchasing the most fuel-efficient vehicle that meets their needs, Tamminen says consumers can reduce emissions and in the long term prolong their lives.
His discussion of alternative fuels and propulsion technologies, including plug-in hybrids, hydrogen and electric vehicles, is a good primer for those who are new to the subject, but he omits some of the technical, financial and logistic challenges that they face.
Tamminen's tour of the casualties of petroleum use is a sobering reminder that when it comes to our health, there is no free ride.
Anyone who reads Lives Per Gallon will likely pause before buying their next vehicle or taking unnecessary trips, and that should make us all breathe a little easier. Matter
---global warming - (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1153513,00.html)Now the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us-· Secret report warns of rioting and nuclear war--· Britain will be 'Siberian' in less than 20 years · Threat to the world is greater than terrorism --Mark Townsend and Paul Harris in New York--Sunday February 22, 2004--The Observer -Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters..
A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.
The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents. ----'Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,' concludes the Pentagon analysis. 'Once again, warfare would define human life.'
The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which has repeatedly denied that climate change even exists. Experts said that they will also make unsettling reading for a President who has insisted national defence is a priority.
The report was commissioned by influential Pentagon defence adviser Andrew Marshall, who has held considerable sway on US military thinking over the past three decades. He was the man behind a sweeping recent review aimed at transforming the American military under Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
Climate change 'should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a US national security concern', say the authors, Peter Schwartz, CIA consultant and former head of planning at Royal Dutch/Shell Group, and Doug Randall of the California-based Global Business Network.
An imminent scenario of catastrophic climate change is 'plausible and would challenge United States national security in ways that should be considered immediately', they conclude. As early as next year widespread flooding by a rise in sea levels will create major upheaval for millions.
Last week the Bush administration came under heavy fire from a large body of respected scientists who claimed that it cherry-picked science to suit its policy agenda and suppressed studies that it did not like. Jeremy Symons, a former whistleblower at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), said that suppression of the report for four months was a further example of the White House trying to bury the threat of climate change.
Senior climatologists, however, believe that their verdicts could prove the catalyst in forcing Bush to accept climate change as a real and happening phenomenon. They also hope it will convince the United States to sign up to global treaties to reduce the rate of climatic change.
A group of eminent UK scientists recently visited the White House to voice their fears over global warming, part of an intensifying drive to get the US to treat the issue seriously. Sources have told The Observer that American officials appeared extremely sensitive about the issue when faced with complaints that America's public stance appeared increasingly out of touch.
One even alleged that the White House had written to complain about some of the comments attributed to Professor Sir David King, Tony Blair's chief scientific adviser, after he branded the President's position on the issue as indefensible.
Among those scientists present at the White House talks were Professor John Schellnhuber, former chief environmental adviser to the German government and head of the UK's leading group of climate scientists at the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research. He said that the Pentagon's internal fears should prove the 'tipping point' in persuading Bush to accept climatic change.
Sir John Houghton, former chief executive of the Meteorological Office - and the first senior figure to liken the threat of climate change to that of terrorism - said: 'If the Pentagon is sending out that sort of message, then this is an important document indeed.'
Bob Watson, chief scientist for the World Bank and former chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, added that the Pentagon's dire warnings could no longer be ignored.
'Can Bush ignore the Pentagon? It's going be hard to blow off this sort of document. Its hugely embarrassing. After all, Bush's single highest priority is national defence. The Pentagon is no wacko, liberal group, generally speaking it is conservative. If climate change is a threat to national security and the economy, then he has to act. There are two groups the Bush Administration tend to listen to, the oil lobby and the Pentagon,' added Watson.
'You've got a President who says global warming is a hoax, and across the Potomac river you've got a Pentagon preparing for climate wars. It's pretty scary when Bush starts to ignore his own government on this issue,' said Rob Gueterbock of Greenpeace.
Already, according to Randall and Schwartz, the planet is carrying a higher population than it can sustain. By 2020 'catastrophic' shortages of water and energy supply will become increasingly harder to overcome, plunging the planet into war. They warn that 8,200 years ago climatic conditions brought widespread crop failure, famine, disease and mass migration of populations that could soon be repeated.
Randall told The Observer that the potential ramifications of rapid climate change would create global chaos. 'This is depressing stuff,' he said. 'It is a national security threat that is unique because there is no enemy to point your guns at and we have no control over the threat.'
Randall added that it was already possibly too late to prevent a disaster happening. 'We don't know exactly where we are in the process. It could start tomorrow and we would not know for another five years,' he said.
'The consequences for some nations of the climate change are unbelievable. It seems obvious that cutting the use of fossil fuels would be worthwhile.'
So dramatic are the report's scenarios, Watson said, that they may prove vital in the US elections. Democratic frontrunner John Kerry is known to accept climate change as a real problem. Scientists disillusioned with Bush's stance are threatening to make sure Kerry uses the Pentagon report in his campaign.
The fact that Marshall is behind its scathing findings will aid Kerry's cause. Marshall, 82, is a Pentagon legend who heads a secretive think-tank dedicated to weighing risks to national security called the Office of Net Assessment. Dubbed 'Yoda' by Pentagon insiders who respect his vast experience, he is credited with being behind the Department of Defence's push on ballistic-missile defence.
Symons, who left the EPA in protest at political interference, said that the suppression of the report was a further instance of the White House trying to bury evidence of climate change. 'It is yet another example of why this government should stop burying its head in the sand on this issue.'
Symons said the Bush administration's close links to high-powered energy and oil companies was vital in understanding why climate change was received sceptically in the Oval Office. 'This administration is ignoring the evidence in order to placate a handful of large energy and oil companies
...and more.....and more......(http://articles.news.aol.com/business/_a/cheneys-fund-manager-attacks--cheney/20070205144509990001) - Cheney's Fund Manager Attacks ... Cheney -By Brett Arends, TheStreet.com--The oil-based energy policies usually associated with Vice President Dick Cheney have just come under scathing attack. There's nothing remarkable about that, of course -- except the person doing the attacking........Step forward, Jeremy Grantham -- Cheney's own investment manager. "What were we thinking?' Grantham demands in a four-page assault on U.S. energy policy mailed last week to all his clients, including the vice president.
Titled "While America Slept, 1982-2006: A Rant on Oil Dependency, Global Warming, and a Love of Feel-Good Data," Grantham's philippic adds up to an extraordinary critique of U.S. energy policy over the past two decades.........What Cheney makes of it can only be imagined.
"Successive U.S. administrations have taken little interest in either oil substitution or climate change," he writes, "and the current one has even seemed to have a vested interest in the idea that the science of climate change is uncertain."
Yet "there is now nearly universal scientific agreement that fossil fuel use is causing a rise in global temperatures," he writes. "The U.S. is the only country in which environmental data is steadily attacked in a well-funded campaign of disinformation (funded mainly by one large oil company)."...........That's Exxon Mobil.
As for Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor Richard Lindzen, who appears everywhere to question global warming, Grantham mocks him as "the solitary plausible academic [the skeptics] can dig up, out of hundreds working in the field."
And for those nonscientists who are still undecided about the issue, Grantham reminds them of an old logical principle known as Pascal's Paradox. It may be better known as the "what if we're wrong?" argument. If we act to stop global warming and we're wrong, well, we could waste some money. If we don't act, and we're wrong ... you get the picture.
As for the alleged economic costs of going "green," Grantham says that industrialized countries with better fuel efficiency have, on average, enjoyed faster economic growth over the past 50 years than the U.S.
Grantham says that other industrialized countries have far better energy productivity than the U.S. The GDP produced per unit of energy in Italy is 50% higher. Fifty percent. Japan: 60%.
And China "already has auto fuel efficiency standards well ahead of the U.S.!" he adds. You've probably heard about China's slow economic growth.
Grantham adds that past U.S. steps in this area, like sulfur dioxide caps adopted by the late President Gerald Ford, have done far more and cost far less than predicted. "Ingenuity sprung out of the woodwork when it was correctly motivated," he writes.
There is also a political and economic cost to our oil dependency, Grantham notes. Yet America could have eliminated its oil dependency on the Middle East years ago with just a "reasonable set of increased efficiencies." All it would take is 10% fewer vehicles, each driving 10% fewer miles and getting 50% more miles per gallon. Under that "sensible but still only moderately aggressive policy," he writes, "not one single barrel would have been needed from the Middle East." Not one.
I repeat: This is not some rainbow coalition. This is not even Al Gore. Grantham is the chairman of Boston-based fund management company Grantham, Mayo, Van Otterloo. He is British-born but has lived here since the early 1960s............Grantham is, like most fund managers, prudent, conservative and inclined to favor the free market and smaller government. He has even said he supported Bush-Cheney in 2000. That doesn't make him particularly political. He also manages a portion of the Heinz-Kerry fortune, as well as those of many other wealthy types.
But he's certainly a man Cheney respects highly. According to the vice president's last personal financial disclosure form, filed with the Federal Election Commission, Cheney has somewhere between $1.6 million and $6 million of his family's money invested in four of Grantham's funds. These aren't even index funds. These are discretionary funds, where you trust the manager to look at the landscape, analyze all the data, and make the best investments. Cheney must have a lot of faith in Grantham's judgement and analytical skills..................When I met Grantham last autumn he, quite rightly, refused to confirm that the vice president was a client. But you can see the evidence in Cheney's own personal financial disclosure.
There is an investment angle to Grantham's argument. He says he is "certain" that "oil substitution, energy conservation, and related environment issues will be the biggest investment issue of at last the next several decades." He adds: "It is clear there is no single solution so investment opportunities will be spread very broadly, especially in energy conservation."
He believes we will need more nuclear power.
But he calls corn-based ethanol "more or less a hoax" when it comes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. "U.S. corn-based ethanol, as opposed to efficient, Brazilian sugar-based ethanol, is merely another U.S. farmer-protection program, made very expensive both directly and indirectly by inflating real agricultural prices.".................Tell that to the presidential candidates currently stumping the Iowa caucus. (Incidentally, three MIT scientists told me the same thing about corn ethanol more than a year ago when I interviewed them on the subject. After my article appeared in the Boston Herald, I received a snotty letter denying there was any such thing as "an Iowa corn growers' racket." It was from the "chairman of the Iowa Corn Growers' Association.")
Grantham's full letter can be seen on his company Web site [www.gmo.com] , though you will need to register. It appears as the second half of the investment missive "Goldilocks Rules."
Grantham blames three decades of political cowardice for America's backward energy policy. As he dryly notes, "U.S. drivers -- the world's richest and some of the best behaved -- would, it was said, never accept increased taxes, where Italian drivers would! Even tax-neutral policies, such as taxing high mileage cars at purchase and subsidizing efficient cars, were never seriously considered."
The result: the fuel efficiency of U.S. cars has actually gone backward since 1982.
The irony is that this isn't, or shouldn't be, a partisan issue. Grantham singles out the Ford administration for his strongest praise on environmental matters. Everyone since, of both parties, has been a failure, he concludes. "The past 26 years have been such a wasted opportunity," Grantham writes. "This country had previously shown leadership in this field. President Ford got us off to a running start in energy efficiency... With a succession of President Fords, we would have ended up as an environmental leader and a great model."
I would love to know what President Ford's former chief of staff thinks of that.
His name? Richard B. Cheney.................
---- technology: obselescent tech that is put out even though they have better tech, or tech that is downgraded, because original was too good
----we can begin with the disclosure project. - may 9, 2001. national press club ---csei - dr.steven greer - (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmgncYEuIXk&mode=related&search=)
------- President Eisenhower's historic farewell address to the Nation
---aliens, i'll get to that --- it's one of the most uncomfortable subjects to talk about. start off slowly with this program -- (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFPsh_dT2PA)
(Nasa's scott carpenter " at no time when the astronauts were in space were they alone: there was a constant surveillance by ufo's"
i mean, come on, humanity has come far, but by which means? we suddenly have a genius and he develops blueprints for an airplane which...if constructed..could actually fly.. and this was over 1000 years ago people. like i alwyas say, i can't make this stuff up, it's out there, documented, you just have to get off your fat asses and check it yourself. it's noted that perhaps... PERHAPS! I'M STILL CHRISTIAN! that extraterrestrials created Christ. since he's believed to have been stillborn... all still births on earth ALWAYS have females.. becuase still births are the mechanics of a dying or endangered species. They're female to continue self propogating perhaps. not males. so its said... i'm not going to speculate and i'm not going to research this further, but its said that christ is one of the first attempts at the alien creatures trying to creat a hybrid bridge between us. Jmmanuel was his name in the bible ..etc. etc.. search that yourself, its just a reference of mind that nothing is as it seems and everthing "IS" crazy.
-- they say that the extraterrestrials have a recording device which records ALL of humanities history and can be instantrly replayed in continuity through hologram.
-- anti christ is coming in the form of a powerful roman(maybe italian, maybe roman is the allusion to it being the next great empire(u.s) that has evil leader. blah blah blah) just speculation. just what i've heard, not fact bye a long shot
--the development of aids was funded in 1969, injected into 100 million africans by 1977.
(btw, i get most of this craziness from canibus. the rap group. they sang it. )
hey, another btw, i was thinking. of course nasa and cia know of aliens existence, after all,S3 is attempting to extract info from them. they supposedly walk among us in synthetic biometric skins. aka. human clone bodies. anyways, i was thinking its always said and thought that if the gov't released info about aliens existences, we'd all go into a state of mass hysteria, some people can't handle it, even though common knowledge is, OF COURSE! we'd be able to handle it. we've all seen independence day. of course we'd understand. i mean, i'm going off point here, but didnt humans catalog the entirety of known alien animal species on earth after encounters with them? i mean, didn't the spanish meet the "indians" or southern american inca peoples and shouldnt these natives have been scared to death of white faced monsters arriving by Massive boats to their shores? no, immediate trade. how about the australian aborigines that arrived onto the shores thousands of years ago and encountered a massive herbivorous beast. shouldnt they have been frightened? no, it became their pets, ... until it died of human diseases or consumption of course. no, i submit to you, that the only reason, albeit and intelligent no brainer, to the reason the CIA doesn't open up public communication to the aliens is that: They want to wait until either they have enough technological upper hand to be able to move past the people, or, more logically, they have an urge to make sure they understand the technology before any enterprising human neo-hitler attempts to squeeze super lasers and etc from the aliens in a press for global domination. It would be intelligent to maintain a bottleneck on all that technology as well as understand all the implications before misguided or evil people get the upper hand.
--- there was a tether incident where a 12 mile tether connected to the space shuttle came loose of the shuttle and made a major phosphorescent display in the atmosphere, many people may be aware of this, because cia declassified the tapes, BUT.... what you may not have seen was the interesting crowd the tether drew. a major armada of alien craft came to view this, along with a craft of UNBELIEVABLE proportions that had a diamond back... strangely enough, in 1938, there was a discovery in the mountains of china where they found 4,000 year old stone carvings that were almost a perfect match to the ufo's caught on nasa's cameras.
--, now, back to size, i mean to say, a very reputed scientist found that if the craft surveyed was as large as he imagined, it could very well be larger than 12-24 (2 to 4 actually smallest estimate) miles in diameter. imagine a sperical saucer disc, which pulsates like a disc faster than light to induce gravity for the occupants inside. to imagine it, imagine looking up in the sky at an enormous craft from beverly hills, drive ALL-THE WAY to santa monica beach to the coast... its that big.and possibly as large as all of l.a. so the question now isn't DO ALIENS EXIST. of course they did, even if they hadnt visisted us, the drake equation clears up any misconceived thoughts. and now that we have entered an age where technology VIRTUALLY slaps us with their pretty little faces, its not even a question of "ARE THEY AMONG US!" yeah shirlock.. now.. the question is... can' we accept the technology that they now offer us? i mean, here's an example of the supposed effects their technology has given us. Nerds, schitzo's, cancer patients. just to name a few. look at bill gates, a super nerd, proginator of the digital age, completely thin and seemingly a defenseless beast, yet in a sense, one of.. by no means the most powerful and evil men on the planet. it totally transcends the alpha male, which is big and burly and stupid. fetch me food , i eat, let me get nasty time with woman. mmmm. no, we're evolving as we speak. and perhaps our own technological advances are responsible, unless it isnt actually our technological advacnes.
--- also, about the can we handle "them".... i've heard that they have something to tell us.. a supposed "Truth" that most people just CAN NOT HANDLE! of course i'm exited as hell and WANT TO KNOW. all humans do after hearing about something they should not or can not hear, right? but... what if that truth is that they were the creators of this planet. and that we have finally reached this apex in evolution to homo sapien, intelligent beings. what if the truth really is that this planet can only support 500 million intelligent species. ONLY.... not the 6-7 billion its housing now. the thought comes up that... what? what do you mean, shouldnt we be dead then. yeah, we should, but what if the thinking is, all the nutrients, all the fresh, useable water and all the life supportingn systems currently here, were meant for a population to rise to 500 million to support them completley forever. after that number, their energy and food supplies begin to dwindle and the planet will not support them for the coming thousands or so on years, but oonly for the coming decades or hundred years. now thats scary. i'm not going into ANYTHING here that talks about BEEEELLION years, or TREEEEELION years, i'm not a scientologist, ...although.. i have been to a few of their seminars and "church meetings" ... call me a spy if you will, but wow, what a weird bunch of people i tell you.
--- also, in collusion with david sereda, dan akroyd, the actor reported in the book, "evidence: uncover ufo's, etc." he reported EXACTLY what another spy who had contacts in many u.s. installaitions, cheifly s3(area 51) that reported to him the living quarters of many different alien races. dan akroyd reiterates this "In my view and in that of millions like me, there is no question as to the existence in multiple of these advanced machines and in diverse forms-discs, crosses, wedges, triangles, boomerangs, cigars, and their respective occupants in various manifestations-greys, blues, humanoids, reptilians, and Mothmen, etc. The question is not whether they exist but rather are some of them here to do our species harm or good? "(http://ufonasa.terra-ent.com/)
--more alien talk -- google video - The Disclosure Project: The Truth about UFO's - states that there are over 57 different species. lots of whom are humanoid. which yes, asks a lot a questions about life development.. WEEIIIRRRD. it MEAANS, they were probably birthed by the same race that birthed us. .. man, i'm about to cry, this shit sucks! --- really, those whales and dolphins are falling behind, they need to catch up. in reality, once you gain a simple advancement over any other race or species, you can no longer wait for them to catch up. they fall further and further behind, \becoming more and more a burden. which is exactly which is what's happening to blacks, and southeastern asians. which may be the reason for the amazing gene jumping going on africa. if you'd just go to africa, you find a bunch of little kids, who are about 5-9, who sound like they're 30. an attempt by evolution to push them to where they need to be.
--there's said to be a sanitation organization that goes through allt he images cataloged (aliens, covertly hidden)
(http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=particlization&spell=1) - The Disclosure Project - Two-hour Disclosure Witness Testimony DVD 2of2
- DISCLOSURE WITNESS DVD This 2 hour video is a distillation of over 120 hours of video interviews made by Dr Greer. Dozens of highly ... all » credible military and government witnesses discuss UFO events and projects they have worked on, with introductory and overview commentary by Dr. Greer. The video is divided into sections and is an excellent item to have and show to others, to get a full understanding of what the Project is about. It is more informative to see this video prior to seeing the May 9th Press Conference video. Sections covered in this video are: *Secrecy Risks: what are the global risks if we do nothing *Human Witness Testimony: dozens of witness testimonies that are real and shouldn't be ignored. *Witness testimony to nuclear weapons that were sent into space and destroyed by UFOs. *Astronaut and Satellite Related Testimonials *Craft and Body Retrieval of Extraterrestrial Origin *Secrecy Examined: how it works through the unacknowledged special access projects and compartmentalization. i.e. How some members of our Governments are kept in the dark. *The Secrecy behind Space Based Weapons: its lethal implications. *Threats and Ridicule: suffered by those wishing to disclose the truth. *Why the Secrecy: and why it is no longer necessary. Video available here: http://www.disclosureproject.org/shop.htm Donations are also very beneficial. «
--- (The Disclosure Project 1 hr 2 min 5 sec - Jul 13, 2006 www.seaspower.com) - mcarthur was said to have organized an interplanetary unit. interplanetary phenomena research unit. taken over by general marshall, continued to present day, names changed, records still havent surfaced. army states it wasn't intended to search ufo. i.e. - . interplaneteary space craft. bore fruit. unpopular opinions. - are part of **maudai intelligent operation, recovery of objects of alien origin, assess info, raw feild intelligence data, produce into data that is useful for people who hold and use intel. useful intelligent product
- in 1950's the u.s. had a aifr force ahad elite unit to investigae ufo. outside of bluebooi. 47 air squad. peace time mission was operation blue fly. recover objects of unknowng origino . that fell to earth. because they didnt have spacecaraft up there. no u.s. covers all objects of unknown origins now. moondust. under moondust and bluefly. they recovered alien debry, not of this earth.
alien crashes. we have processes that handle that. its debris, these har highly advanced technicla machines. their flawable, made by intelligence by mortals like ourselves.
severeal crahse in the 40's and 50's, their guidance systems are radar guided.
---usap, unackknowledged special access project. - no one outside of the compartmented part of knowledge, noone talks about it. whether is president or other. dr. greer briefed the sitting head of the defense agency babout this.
--- nro - national recoinaissaince office - air force. - taken on lot more responsiblity (alien, ufo) picked up where blue book left off. . started by eisenhower, couldnt find anyone.
--- WHAT IS BLUEBOOK? - (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Bluebook) - Project Blue Book
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Project Bluebook)
Jump to: navigation, search
Project Blue Book was one of a series of systematic studies of Unidentified flying objects (UFOs) conducted by the United States Air Force. Started in 1952, it was the second revival of such a study. A termination order was given for the study in December 1969, and all activity under its auspices ceased in January 1970.
The goal of the Project Blue Book was to determine if UFOs were a potential threat to national security. Thousands of UFO reports were collected, analyzed and filed. As the result of the Condon Report, Project Blue Book was shut down in December 1969. This project was the last publicly known UFO research project led by the USAF.
By the time Project Blue Book ended, it had collected 12,618 UFO reports, and concluded that most them were misidentifications of natural phenomena (clouds, stars, et cetera) or conventional aircraft. A few were considered hoaxes. 701 of the reports—about six percent—were classified as unknown. The reports were archived and are available under the Freedom of Information Act, but names and other personal information of all witnesses have been redacted.
Though many accepted Blue Book's final conclusions that there was nothing extraordinary about UFOs, critics — then and now — have charged that Blue Book, especially in its later years, was engaging in dubious research, or even perpetuating a cover up of UFO evidence. Some evidence suggests that not only did some UFO reports bypass Blue Book entirely, but that the U.S. Government continued collecting and studying UFO reports after Blue Book had been discontinued, despite official claims to the contrary.
- (http://www.bluebookarchive.org/documentation/about_bba.aspx) - What is the Project Blue Book Archive?
Tom DeMary – 18 February 2005
The Project Blue Book Archive (PBBA) will contain all of the available documents of the Air Force investigations from the early AMC period through the end of PBB. In addition to these nearly 15,000 individual UFO reports, PBB administrative files are included, providing an overview of and insight into, PBB operations. These files include correspondence, formal reports, a series of "monthly" status reports (issued in only a few years of operation), AFOSI investigations, and various public statements and briefing materials.
The primary source of the documents in the PBBA is the set of 94 microfilm rolls, made available to the public by the National Archives and Records Service (NARS) in 1976. Since NARS is now known as the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), the more recent acronym will be used in the remainder of this FAQ.
When PBB was closed down in January 1970, the original files were transferred to Maxwell AFB, where they were available on request for public viewing until 1975. In 1975 the documents were transferred to NARA for review by an Air Force security panel. Before the transfer the Air Force copied the files to microfilm. Then, before microfilming them again for a public release, witness names and other personal information were blacked out. This was justified by the Air Force as being required by its policy of protecting the privacy of witnesses. It was in fact in accordance with existing Air Force policies, but the files had been previously available for copying and inspection for years without these deletions. It has been argued that this policy was invoked as a means to prevent researchers from following up with witnesses more than to protect their privacy. The work of deleting the personal data was actually carried out by USAF reservists, and the quality of their work is highly variable. Some documents have all names removed, while others retain instances of witness names. Sometimes, the names were even blacked out in newspaper clippings, such as in the case of well-known and obvious witnesses such as Kenneth Arnold. Many cases are not so well-known, and the removal of witness data has added to the difficulty of tracing the witnesses of lesser known reports.
In 1998 a set of the first Air Force microfilm rolls of the complete files was discovered at NARA. In addition to witness names and information, it has been confirmed that these rolls contain some pages that are not on the NARA rolls. PBBA plans to make these rolls available on-line, along with the NARA rolls, so that the two sets can be compared by researchers.
During its operations Project Sign produced and distributed its own microfilms of its reports for use by other military and scientific organizations and by individual scientists. Copies of most of the Project Sign microfilm rolls have migrated into private hands, and will also be included in PBBA. These rolls will include Project Sign’s summaries, as well as some of its complete "raw" files. Some reports on the Project Sign microfilm may contain more complete information for reports through 1949 than is found in the PBB files.
----- (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Bluebook) - Verner Von Bron - He told Dr. Carol Rosin - Aerospace executive- there will be a few major enemies, first, it will be the communists, then it would be the terrorists, then it would be the asteroids, then it would be the extraterrestrials. space based weapons against aliens, all of it, will be a lie. speeding up faster than anyone could possibly iimagine. the effort was based ona lie, but accelerate past the point of people being able to do anything about.
they'd been working on the weaponizatino of space for some time, the aliens just wouldnt allow them to do it.
- 1977, fairchild industries, conference room "war room" , creating war in the gulf region, when 25 billion o=in space pbased waepons program, that hadnt been identified, it wasnt called the defense initiative until 1983. it had been going on for a long time. she stood up and said she'd like to know why they'd like to have space based weapons against these enemies. they ignored her.
- the ballistic misssile program is a pipe dream, they design it knowing where its coming from, with rogue nations, they don't need to use it.
- they developed a nuclear weapon that could fit into a suitcase before. in the 1950's. quarter killiton warhead. 8 inch diamaater.
--weapons in space is still an enigma, they don't need it to happen.
--Sergeant Cliffor Stone - US ARMY - extraterrestial retrieval team - feels the same way i do, he's fighting against the clock, he has a short time. they're going to militarize space. they're going to develop interstellar travel capacity. but if we have weapons capabilities as well as light speed travel, we'll be a threat to every other species.
---John Maynard - retired military intelligence analyst - discusses secret sattellite project referred to as OMNI - noticed the positioning of some of their sattellites - he said, this is supposed to protect agasint ground based missiles correct why are half of them pointed towards the moon and blank space? at least half of those satellites are not looking at earth, what are they looking for. -- you have to have a need to know to know about that.
-- Dr. Carol Rosin - stated that because of her knowledge, because of the thousands of honest military officials and personell that have come forward and detailed their own personal accounts of alien activity, because of the thousands of years of countless documented historical artifacts proving that these beings have been visiting us since we attained technological capacity to record it, if someone tells her... tells us, that these beings are here to harm us, that we need to defend against them... we will know, they were completely lying to us. based on her own personal experiences working in the military industrial complex, workign on military strategies, she'd know it was a lie. that's why women are supposed to rule the planet, men are too hostile and blustering. we're way too aggressive. - she wants the new administrations that come to power to turn the war games, into a space game.
---- people supposedly killed because of their knowledge -
----(http://www.bluebookarchive.org/documentation/about_bba.aspx) - The Disclosure Project - Two-hour Disclosure Witness Testimony DVD 2of2
---secretary of defense, forestall. 1st real powerful person eliminated because he was going to release the information . noone ever really investigated his "death" . he was thrown out of the window, he was talking about being erased and it was told he wasn't killed by being thrown out of a window.
--they won't just go after you, we'll go after you'r entire family.
why the secrecy? - during the early 40's and 50's, it was concerned that most people couldnt handle this information back in this day. but today, in the 2000's, that argument is no longer valid. the world has seen humans walk on the moon. has much more to do with the economic order, technologry related to these breakthroughs and the human breakthroughs, not related to this technologry, that would have a huge positive impact on humanity as a while, but negative on the established economic bases. nuclear technology is already obsolete. these are not theories, we have fully operational technologies. we have no need for these polluting forms of energies, but no one wants to give it up.
--the 1st question a person might ask is, "well if there are these peoples from antoerh planet, how did they get here, did they travel at the speed of light and take forever. if not, what other technologies? what energies are they using? not coal? they're using forms of energies that the average perons or physicist proffessor doesnt even know about . they produce more electirc energy out than in. which we can't currently do. zero point energy.
- zero point represents 40-50 megawatss of energy per cubic inch of space. thats 4,600,million watts of power. if you could tap it at will, noone would have to buy gas ever again. its like goin to the great lakes, taking out 1 drop of water, adn using it. to live.
--nikola tesla developed an over unity system.
- John Callahan - Senior FAA Official - It's almost as if i'm walking around all happy and energizes with the answer, and nobody wants to ask me what the question to get the answer. .. that kind of irritates me a little bit.