[spectre] HAARP -it is to say Haarp?

[Louise Desrenards]

J'ai suivi un lien dans le site de elli medeiros

http://www.ellimedeiros.com/logz/journal/

et je suis tombée sur le projet Harrp - enfin pas un projet une réalité...

Alors j'ai cherché davantage dans google:
http://www.google.fr/search?hl=fr&q=harrp&btnG=Recherche+Google&meta=

et j'ai trouvé toutes sortes de choses dont aussi ce lien:

http://www.geocities.com/jilaens/haarp.html

Je cite intégralement :

UFO Reality Interview

Jilaen Sherwood Interviews Dr Nick Begich on HAARP

Dr Nick Begich reveals the frightening truth behind the United States'
latest black technology project.

JS: Can you tell me a little bit about your background?

NB: I was born and raised in Alaska. I was a Senator and President of the
Confederation of Teachers for
two terms, and President of the Council of Education for two terms. I have a
doctorate in traditional medicine.

JS: How long have you been researching the HAARP project?

NB: I began in early 1994. My co-author, Jean Manning, had started her work
in this area around 1991.We became acquainted after I had published my first
major article in Nexus, in Australia, and it was published in the summer of
1994. From that article we were contacted by a number of people, including
Jean Manning.

JS: What does HAARP actually stand for?

NB: It stands for High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program

JS: What is the purpose of the program ?

NB: It's a project being managed by the US Air Force and Navy for the
purpose of what they describe as upper atmospheric research. The reality of
it is this is a proto type, which they acknowledge as a prototype, basically
to develop Tesla-type technologies..

JS: So, it's like Star Wars?

NB: Absolutely. At the very end of the Presidential election in this last
cycle Doyle raised the issue of Star Wars again, and in the raising of this
issue he mentioned a couple of things that are relevant. First of all he
said that the cost of Star Wars had gone down significantly, and second that
the reason the cost had gone down
significantly was because Star Wars was essentially comprised of four
ground-based systems augmented by satellites, and HAARP was providing some
of that research for those ground-based systems.

JS: In your opinion what will the Star Wars weapons system be used for?

NB: What they describe in the military is a 'number of things'. The first
thing they talk about is communication
with submarines, and the idea in this application is by sending a radio
frequency signal, which is what HAARP produces, of a very high power Which
can cause the ionosphere - which is an area about 30 miles above the Earth's
surface and is a protective layer from the sun - they can cause it to
vibrate. It sends them a returning signal which penetrates the Earth and
sea, which they can use for communicating with submarines.

They can also use it for ground-penetrating tomography which is currently
funding the United States Congressional Project, and this abdication of, if
you will, X-raying the Earth, or looking into the Earth several kilometers
deep for underground facilities, shelters, geologic strata differentials
currently this particular use has proven to be effective. Beyond that it
deals with over-the-horizon radar technologies; looking around the curvature
of the Earth; and for detected incoming objects. They can also distinguish
which of those incoming objects carry nuclear payloads. They can also
disable those objects with the same system that detected
, so it becomes a defensive as well as an offensive weapon. Beyond that the
things that we have uncovered
in our research is how the system can be used for affecting human
physiology, human behaviour, as well as weather systems.

JS: Do do you think that some of these incoming objects" might be of
extraterrestrial origin?

NB: That's really out of my field, but certainly it's plausible. I mean, the
idea that this weapon and technology can be used against high technology I
think is quite probable.
'Whether or not it will be, that is beyond my area of research. But it's a
very sophisticated
weapons technology. It represents a major initiative of the United States
military, of
which HAARP is just one part. I mean the whole idea of electromagnetic
weapons and
technologies is just now being talked about in the main- stream again. Our
research goes back to the '7Os, '8Os and look at what HAARP is as a early
'70s, when these weapons were first being evolved. And what has happened is
tat most of the evolution of these weapons was done in secrecy under what
are called 'black projects'.
HAARP is a visible representation of a very large program.

JS: So in truth HAARP is a top-secret weapons program?

NB: Yeah. I think the technologies that surround it really deal with some of
the most sophisticated weapons technologies conceived. When you research
facility, every weapons program begins that way. To say that HAARP is not a
research project would be wrong, but to say it is not a weapons project is
equally wrong. It is a weapons program based on early research. Where it
goes from here really remains to be seen, but we believe we have hit the
very beginnings of a very large project. The documents that we point to are
primarily their own - military documents, HAARP planning documents,
mainstream media reports and press releases that they've released about the
technology.

JS: Where is the HAARP project based?

NB: The HAARP project located ... about 150 miles northeast of Anchorage, in
a place called Gakona, Masks. So it is very remote, and very few people live
in the region. It's an area the size of, say, Connecticut, that might have
5000 or 6000 people, so it is very sparsely populated.

JS: Why is it located there? Is it because Gakona close to the pole?

NB: Absolutely, that is a major reason it's located there. There are really
three criteria for locating in Alaska: one was it's closer ... to where the
naturally occurring magnetic lines of force intercept the Earth, which
happens to be at the poles; the second cnteria was that you needed large
supplies of fuel, natural gas being the ideal fuel source, and Alaska is
well-known now for its natural gas supplies; and, thirdly, the remoteness of
the location, while still being within the confines of the United States.
This is the idea when you build a weapons system. A Star Wars weapons
system, totally satellite-based, is very
vulnerable. I mean you could have accidents, you could have all kind of
things occur involving other countries. You could pretty well say maybe it
was an accident, maybe it wasn't. If you have a ground- based system on,
say, US soil, any country who violates that system has to really cross a
line tat is pretty clearly distinguished - I think that a large part of it.
The other part is maintaining the system. A ground-based Star Wars system to
maintain is much cheaper than a satellite-based system where you have to use
space shuttles to do service
work instead of a mechanic in a pick-up truck!

Weather Modification

JS: You mentioned that it could have an effect on the Weather

NB: This particular effect is one that people, when you first raise the
question, doubt. But weapons technology in terms of weather modification
goes back to the l950s. In the I 970s, the middle of the '70s (1976) we
signed an agreement with over 60 other countries, where we agreed to not use
weather warfare - weather modification as a
weapon. The idea that we would sign that agreement over 20 years in advance
speaks for itself.
The idea of using the system for weather modification is described quite
clearly. The Program Manager at
Hanscom Air Force Base for the military has said on public television in
Canada that you can, and they will,
put holes in the ionosphere - in other words, create a lifting of the
ionosphere so that there is a space, and
the idea in creating holes in the ionosphere is that if a satellite enters
one of these spaces they encounter
an atmosphere that shouldn't be there and it causes drag forces, causes
satellites to malfunction, so as an anti- satellite weapon it has that use.
The problem is that when you create a hole, even if it is only 30 miles in
diameter or 250 miles in diameter
(which is the range the military have been talking about) at 250 miles high
what happens is that the lower atmosphere rushes in to fill this empty
space, and as a result wind patterns in the area underneath change. This can
have a dramatic effect, because it is not just a small area that is affected
- a large area becomes affected by these changes in weather patterns, and
anyone who's watched global weather maps knows that what happens in Alaska
effects most of Canada and the entire West Coast of the United States. The
flow of our weather patterns flow right through the Mid-West, so somehow to
view this in isolation is absolutely ridiculous. The fact is that it will
affect the weather patterns throughout the United States.

JS: So this would also have quite an effect on people?

NB: This is one of the other areas that we explored very thoroughly. We
viewed countless documents from the United States Air Force, also from the
Navy, dealing with the bio-effects, the biological effects of
electromagnetic weapons systems. This is a relatively new area in terms of
public disclosures, but it has been around a long time. The idea is that you
can go back to some of the older weapons that they've talked about, like
particle-beam weapons or laser weapons.
On 60 Minutes, one of the major CBS television programs, they put out a
'special' last year and used a pulsed microwave for creating symptoms of
sea-sickness or illness in people. The most recent documents that have come
out on these technologies - one in particular 'New World Vistas', produced
by the United StatesAir Force - talks about these kinds of weapons being
used to affect the emotional state rather than the physiological state. What
we know in terms of what you can do with a pulsed microwave ... you can also
do with pulsed signals when they hit a certain range that biologically
happens to be in a very low range of power, and it was called ELF, an
extremely low frequency.
Research done in Yale University from the '60s all the way through to the
'8Os has demonstrated that using pulsed or electromagnetic signals you can
create huge chemical changes within the body that manifest either as illness
or behavioural change, and they would demonstrate this at Yale with animals
and humans - they were able to change the mental state of humans and animals
almost like turning on and off a light the switch, from highly agitated to
very passive.

The systems have been around but what HAARP can produce, according to
according to its Program Managers, is energy densities approximately equal
to what the Earth naturally produces in the ELF range. What was shown at
Yale is that energy densities one-fiftieth as strong were sufficient for
changing the behaviour of animals, so it is fifty times more power than you
need within the frequency range of modeling human behaviour.
The question is: will it be, as John Hefiier has said, a side-effect which
they aren't particularly interested in, or will it be a deliberate effect?
We don't know the answer to that question, but the fact that it can create,
if you will,these side-effects or purposeful effects is highly disturbing to
us, because it is not disclosed in any of the environmental impact
statements dealing with this project. Many of these risks have now.

There are no biological scientists on the project looking at the
physiological risks. Even if they had the standard biologists, if you will,
what they really need are people skilled in electro-physiology, people with
the requisite backgrounds dealing with electromagnetic effects on humans.
They are available to the military but they are not on the program, and they
should be on the program..
What we are talking about is their gains with the ionosphere; the ionosphere
belongs to everyone on the planet.
This is not an Alaskan issue. The idea that they're going to create changes
in the ionoshere - which protects us
from incoming cosmic radiation, X-rays, and a number of other particles
could make life impossible on the planet, and that's why it's really an
international issue.