2004 the Fourth Warmest Year Globally
24 Dec 2004 02:00 GMT
The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) has determined that 2004 was the fourth warmest year since accurate records commenced in 1861. The last 10 years (1995-2004), with the exception of 1996, are among the warmest 10 years on record.
The Tenth Session of the Conference of Parties (COP 10) of the Framework Convention on Climate Change has just completed meeting in Buenos Aires, Argentina. The USA continues to obstruct Climate talks, along with Saudi Arabia. For the first time Australia distanced itself slightly from the United States' hardline attempts to stall international action to stop global warming.
COP10 Report (es), Photos: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9, Audio: Moira Millan (es).
The United States is about to be charged with human rights violations for contributing substantially to global warming, by the Inuit, whose homeland stretches from the northeastern tip of Russia across Alaska and northern Canada to parts of Greenland. The Bush Administration Shuns Latest Global Warming Studies.
one mistake
lam oiwan 24.Dec.2004 08:43
不是最暖的一年, 而是第四個最暖的年頭.
waste of time to charge with simple human rights violation
chiptruth@excite.com 24.Dec.2004 13:24
sooner or later people groan becase they are so quick to say "that's just a conspiracy theory." then they complain about things and say 'its;a mystery1 no one knows why this happens?'
http://www.globalwarming.net/gw11.html
http://www.au.af.mil/au/2025/
http://www.xyz.net/~nohaarp/earthlight.html
http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/
http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/envronmt/weapons.htm
http://www.jedefense.com/
http://www.unfccc.de/resource/conv/conv_002.html
chossudovsky@videotron.ca
chossudovsky@sprint.ca
the wheat gets sepaarated from tehchaff as those who really want to know whatis going on a re sperated from those who complain about issues to see their names in lights or hear the sounds of their own lips flapping senslessly -- with no interest in th real issues.
well, like we say in philly, fuck 'em.
Washington's New World Order Weapons Can Trigger Climate Change
Michel Chossudovsky 26nov00
Washington's New
World Order Weapons Can Trigger Climate Change
Michel Chossudovsky 26nov00
[also
see An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security SCHWARTZ & RANDALL / GBN 1oct03]
Professor of Economics, University of Ottawa,
author of The Globalization of Poverty, second edition, Common Courage Press,
2000.
The important debate on global warming under UN
auspices provides but a partial picture of climate change; in addition to the
devastating impacts of greenhouse gas emissions on the ozone layer, the World's
climate can now be modified as part of a new generation of sophisticated
"non-lethal weapons." Both the Americans and the Russians have
developed capabilities to manipulate the World's climate.
In the US, the technology is being perfected under
the High-frequency Active Aural Research Program (HAARP) as part of the
("Star Wars") Strategic Defence Initiative (SDI). Recent scientific
evidence suggests that HAARP is fully operational and has the ability of
potentially triggering floods, droughts, hurricanes and earthquakes. From a
military standpoint, HAARP is a weapon of mass destruction. Potentially, it
constitutes an instrument of conquest capable of selectively destabilising
agricultural and ecological systems of entire regions.
While there is no evidence that this deadly
technology has been used, surely the United Nations should be addressing the
issue of "environmental warfare" alongside the debate on the climatic
impacts of greenhouse gases.
Despite a vast body of scientific knowledge, the
issue of deliberate climatic manipulations for military use has never been
explicitly part of the UN agenda on climate change. Neither the official
delegations nor the environmental action groups participating in the Hague
Conference on Climate Change (CO6) (November 2000) have raised the broad issue
of "weather warfare" or "environmental modification techniques (ENMOD)"
as relevant to an understanding of climate change.
The clash between official negotiators,
environmentalists and American business lobbies has centered on Washington's
outright refusal to abide by commitments on carbon dioxide reduction targets
under the 1997 Kyoto protocol.1 The impacts of military technologies on the
World's climate are not an object of discussion or concern. Narrowly confined to
greenhouse gases, the ongoing debate on climate change serves Washington's
strategic and defense objectives.
"WEATHER WARFARE"
World renowned scientist Dr. Rosalie Bertell
confirms that "US military scientists are working on weather systems as a
potential weapon. The methods include the enhancing of storms and the diverting
of vapor rivers in the Earth's atmosphere to produce targeted droughts or
floods."2 Already in the 1970s, former National Security advisor Zbigniew
Brzezinski had foreseen in his book "Between Two Ages" that:
"Technology will make available, to the
leaders of major nations, techniques for conducting secret warfare, of which
only a bare minimum of the security forces need be appraised... [T]echniques of
weather modification could be employed to produce prolonged periods of drought
or storm."
Marc Filterman, a former French military officer,
outlines several types of "unconventional weapons" using radio
frequencies. He refers to "weather war," indicating that the U.S. and
the Soviet Union had already "mastered the know-how needed to unleash
sudden climate changes (hurricanes, drought) in the early 1980s."3 These
technologies make it "possible to trigger atmospheric disturbances by using
Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) radar [waves]." 4
A simulation study of future defense
"scenarios" commissioned for the US Air Force calls for:
"US aerospace forces to 'own the weather' by
capitalizing on emerging technologies and focusing development of those
technologies to war-fighting applications. From enhancing friendly operations or
disrupting those of the enemy via small-scale tailoring of natural weather
patterns to complete dominance of global communications and counterspace
control, weather-modification offers the war fighter a wide-range of possible
options to defeat or coerce an adversary... In the United States,
weather-modification will likely become a part of national security policy with
both domestic and international applications. Our government will pursue such a
policy, depending on its interests, at various levels. 5
THE HIGH-FREQUENCY ACTIVE AURAL RESEARCH PROGRAM (HAARP)
The High-Frequency Active Aural Research Program (HAARP)
based in Gokoma Alaska --jointly managed by the US Air Force and the US Navy--
is part of a new generation of sophisticated weaponry under the US Strategic
Defense Initiative (SDI). Operated by the Air Force Research Laboratory's Space
Vehicles Directorate, HAARP constitutes a system of powerful antennas capable of
creating "controlled local modifications of the ionosphere". Scientist
Dr. Nicholas Begich --actively involved in the public campaign against HAARP--
describes HAARP as:
"A super-powerful radiowave-beaming technology
that lifts areas of the ionosphere [upper layer of the atmosphere] by focusing a
beam and heating those areas. Electromagnetic waves then bounce back onto earth
and penetrate everything -- living and dead." 6
Dr. Rosalie Bertell depicts HAARP as "a
gigantic heater that can cause major disruption in the ionosphere, creating not
just holes, but long incisions in the protective layer that keeps deadly
radiation from bombarding the planet."7
MISLEADING PUBLIC OPINION
HAARP has been presented to public opinion as a
program of scientific and academic research. US military documents seem to
suggest, however, that HAARP's main objective is to "exploit the ionosphere
for Department of Defense purposes." 8 Without explicitly referring to the
HAARP program, a US Air Force study points to the use of "induced
ionospheric modifications" as a means of altering weather patterns as well
as disrupting enemy communications and radar.9
According to Dr. Rosalie Bertell, HAARP is part of
an integrated weapons' system, which has potentially devastating environmental
consequences:
"It is related to fifty years of intensive and
increasingly destructive programs to understand and control the upper
atmosphere. It would be rash not to associate HAARP with the space laboratory
construction which is separately being planned by the United States. HAARP is an
integral part of a long history of space research and development of a
deliberate military nature. The military implications of combining these
projects is alarming. The ability of the HAARP / Spacelab/ rocket combination to
deliver very large amount of energy, comparable to a nuclear bomb, anywhere on
earth via laser and particle beams, are frightening. The project is likely to be
"sold" to the public as a space shield against incoming weapons, or,
for the more gullible, a device for repairing the ozone layer. 10
In addition to weather manipulation, HAARP has a
number of related uses:
"HAARP could contribute to climate change by
intensively bombarding the atmosphere with high-frequency rays... Returning
low-frequency waves at high intensity could also affect people's brains, and
effects on tectonic movements cannot be ruled out. 11.
More generally, HAARP has the ability of modifying
the World's electro-magnetic field. It is part of an arsenal of "electronic
weapons" which US military researchers consider a "gentler and kinder
warfare". 12
WEAPONS OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER
HAARP is part of the weapons arsenal of the New
World Order under the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). From military command
points in the US, entire national economies could potentially be destabilized
through climatic manipulations. More importantly, the latter can be implemented
without the knowledge of the enemy, at minimal cost and without engaging
military personnel and equipment as in a conventional war.
The use of HAARP -- if it were to be applied--
could have potentially devastating impacts on the World's climate. Responding to
US economic and strategic interests, it could be used to selectively modify
climate in different parts of the World resulting in the destabilization of
agricultural and ecological systems.
It is also worth noting that the US Department of
Defense has allocated substantial resources to the development of intelligence
and monitoring systems on weather changes. NASA and the Department of Defense's
National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) are working on "imagery for
studies of flooding, erosion, land-slide hazards, earthquakes, ecological zones,
weather forecasts, and climate change" with data relayed from satellites.
13
POLICY INERTIA OF THE UNITED NATIONS
According to the Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC) signed at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro: "States
have in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of
international law, the responsibility to ensure that activities within their
jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States
or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction." 14
It is also worth recalling that an international
Convention ratified by the UN General Assembly in 1997 bans "military or
other hostile useof environmental modification techniques having widespread,
long-lasting or severe effects."15 Both the US and the Soviet Union were
signatories to the Convention. The Convention defines "'environmental
modification techniques' as referring to any technique for changing--through the
deliberate manipulation of natural processes--the dynamics, composition or
structure of the earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and
atmosphere or of outer space." 16
Why then did the UN --disregarding the 1977 ENMOD
Convention, as well as its own charter, decide to exclude from its agenda
climatic changes resulting from military programs?
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ACKNOWLEDGES IMPACTS OF HAARP
In February 1998, responding to a report of Mrs.
Maj Britt Theorin --Swedish MEP and longtime peace advocate--, the European
Parliament's Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defense Policy held
public hearings in Brussels on the HAARP program.17
The Committee's "Motion for Resolution"
submitted to the European Parliament:
"Considers HAARP by virtue of its far-reaching
impact on the environment to be a global concern and calls for its legal,
ecological and ethical implications to be examined by an international
independent body...; [the Committee] regrets the repeated refusal of the United
States Administration... to give evidence to the public hearing into the
environmental and public risks [of] the HAARP program." 18.
The Committee's request to draw up a "Green
Paper" on "the environmental impacts of military activities",
however, was casually dismissed on the grounds that the European Commission
lacks the required jurisdiction to delve into "the links between
environment and defense". 19 Brussels was anxious to avoid a showdown with
Washington.
FULLY OPERATIONAL
While there is no concrete evidence of HAARP having
been used, scientific findings suggest that it is at present fully operational.
What this means is that HAARP could potentially be applied by the US military to
selectively modify the climate of an "unfriendly nation" or
"rogue state" with a view to destabilizing its national economy.
Agricultural systems in both developed and
developing countries are already in crisis as a result of New World Order
policies including market deregulation, commodity dumping, etc. Amply
documented, IMF and World Bank "economic medicine" imposed on the
Third World and the countries of the former Soviet block has largely contributed
to the destabilization of domestic agriculture. In turn, the provisions of the
World Trade Organization (WTO) have supported the interests of a handful of
Western agri-biotech conglomerates in their quest to impose genetically modified
(GMO) seeds on farmers throughout the World.
It is important to understand the linkage between
the economic, strategic and military processes of the New World Order. In the
above context, climatic manipulations under the HAARP program (whether
accidental or deliberate) would inevitably exacerbate these changes by weakening
national economies, destroying infrastructure and potentially triggering the
bankruptcy of farmers over vast areas. Surely national governments and the
United Nations should address the possible consequences of HAARP and other
"non-lethal weapons" on climate change.
NOTES
The latter calls for nations to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions by an average of 5.2 percent to become
effective between 2008 and 2012. See Background of Kyoto Protocol at
The Times, London, 23 November 2000.
Intelligence Newsletter, December 16,
1999.
Ibid.
Air University of the US Air Force, AF
2025 Final Report,
(emphasis added).
Nicholas Begich and Jeane Manning, The
Military's Pandora's Box, Earthpulse Press,
See also the HAARP home page at
See Briarpatch, January, 2000. (emphasis
added).
Quoted in Begich and Manning, op cit.
Air University, op cit.
Rosalie Bertell, Background of the HAARP
Program, 5 November, 1996,
Begich and Manning, op cit.
Don Herskovitz, Killing Them Softly,
Journal of Electronic Defense, August 1993. (emphasis added).
According to Herskovitz, "electronic warfare" is defined by
the US Department of Defense as "military action involving the
use of electromagnetic energy..." The Journal of Electronic
Defense at
has published a range of articles
on the application of electronic and electromagnetic military
technologies.
Military Space, 6 December, 1999.
UN Framework Convention on Climate
Change, New York, 1992. See complete text at
(emphasis added).
See Associated Press, 18 May 1977.
Environmental Modification Ban Faithfully
Observed, States Parties Declare, UN Chronicle, July, 1984, Vol. 21,
p. 27.
European Report, 7 February 1998.
European Parliament, Committee on Foreign
Affairs, Security and Defense Policy, Brussels, doc. no. A4-0005/99,
14 January 1999.
EU Lacks Jurisdiction to Trace Links
Between Environment and Defense, European Report, 3 February 1999.
Copyright by Michel Chossudovsky, Ottawa, November,
2000. All rights reserved. Permission is granted to post this text on
non-commercial community internet sites, provided the essay remains intact and
the copyright note is displayed. To publish this text in printed and/or other
forms contact the author at:
Michel Chossudovsky
Department of Economics
University of Ottawa, Ottawa, K1N6N5
voice box: 1-613-562-5800, ext. 1415,
Fax: 1-514-425-6224
E-Mail:
Altern. E-mail:
To
send us your comments, questions, and suggestions click
here
The home page of this website is www.mindfully.org
Please see our Fair
Use Notice
Inuit petition against the United States
Gaia Overwatch 26.Dec.2004 20:33
It is commendable that the Inuit Circumpolar Conference (speaking for all 111+ thousand Inuit, of course) are taking a brave stand against the world's number one polluter and exploiter.
Of course, this means that all Inuit must immediately cease and desist using any and all products and services produced by US companies; vehicles, computers, tools, toilet paper, etc.
If they fail to comply, then as per their own petition, they will be declared human rights violators for contributing to global warming and the destruction of the environment. As such, all 111+ thousand of them will have forfeit their lives. If that becomes the case, the Gaia Overwatch will prosecute the sentence of the Inuit people with extreme prejudice.
Ding Dong Kyoto's Dead
Gil Kobrin 27.Dec.2004 04:16
That's all I've got to say, fellas.