September 20, 2013 –
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security will test its crowd-scanning facial recognition system, known as the Biometric Optical Surveillance System, or BOSS, at a junior hockey game this weekend, according to the Russian news agency RT.
With assistance from the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, DHS will test its system at a Western Hockey League game in Washington state. The test will determine whether the system can distinguish the faces of 20 volunteers out of a crowd of nearly 6,000 hockey fans, to evaluate how successfully BOSS can locate a person of interest.
According to DHS, BOSS technology consists of two cameras capable of taking stereoscopic images of a face and a back end remote matching system. Stereoscopic images are two images of the same object, taken at slightly different angles that create an illusion of three-dimensional depth from two-dimensional images.
The cameras transfer the pair of images to the remote matching system by way of fiber optic or wireless technology. The system then processes and stores the two images into a 3-D signature, which is the mathematical representation of the stereo-pair images that the system uses for matching.
Using the BOSS facial recognition algorithms, the signature is matched against a locally stored database created from volunteers, using a combination of mathematical and statistical analysis.
BOSS is capable of capturing images of an individual at 50-100 meters in distance. The system can capture images of subjects participating from a specific distance, or be set up in a way that tracks and passively captures frontal face images of an individual as he/she moves in front of the camera.
Recently the system was not deemed ready since it could not achieve 80 to 90 percent identification accuracy at a distance of 100 meters and could not process and identify images in less than 30 seconds against a biometric database.
This weekend’s test will attempt to rectify this deficiency. If the test succeeds, the technology conceivably could be used at international crossings and other ports across the United States patrolled by the department.
These days, I hear more and more about how people are waking up. I even write about it. When I write about “waking up” I’m trying to convey the concept of becoming aware of hidden reasons for why reality is the way it is. I’m trying to get people to look behind the illusions and the curtains and discover the truth to the manipulations that are really going on. But what if there is more to even that truth than meets the eye? What if even the manipulators are being manipulated? What if those who are creating the illusions are merely an illusion in and of themselves? What if we are stepping out of one cave only to find ourselves in another? The possibilities are mind boggling. Read more
U.S. Ready to Offer Mercenaries $10 Billion for a Drug-War Air Force
Unsure how your private security firm makes money as the U.S. war in Afghanistan winds down? One option: Go into the drug trade — more specifically, the lucrative business of fighting narcotics. The State Department needs a business partner to keep its fleet of drug-hunting helicopters and planes flying worldwide. You could make up to $10 billion-with-a-B.
Starting next month in Melbourne, Florida, the State Department will solicit some defense-industry feedback on a contract to help operate its 412 aircraft, based in at least eight nations, before it reopens the contract for bidding. Among the missions the diplomatic corps needs fulfilled: “Provide pilots and operational support for drug interdiction missions such as crop spraying, and the transport of personnel and cargo,” according to a pre-solicitation the department’s bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs released on Friday.
From its headquarters at Florida’s Patrick Air Force Base, the State Department directs 51,000 annual hours worth of air operations. In Colombia, Bolivia, Peru, Pakistan, and Guatemala, it mostly performs “counternarcotics and law enforcement activities,” explains State Department spokeswoman Pooja Jhunjhunwala, and in Afghanistan it does transportation support as well. Diplomats at the mega-embassy in Iraq also rely on State’s contractor air fleet to move about the country. And in recent years, that fleet has also needed to perform short-term air missions in Sudan, Honduras, Malta, Libya and Egypt. Private-security giant DynCorp currently holds the contract for supporting the diplomatic fleet.
If you’ve got pilots and air-maintenance crews on your payroll, the risk of operating in “permissive and non-permissive” environments (i.e., dangerous places) could be worth your while. “The total dollar value of services could reach $10B over the life of the resulting contracts,” the pre-solicitation reads. That’s as much as State pays for its entire crew of mercenaries that protect diplomats worldwide.
The aviation contract covers more than just counternarcotics. State needs vendors for “personnel and cargo transport, aerial reconnaissance, medical and casualty evacuations, aerial herbicide application, aerial support to narcotics interdiction operations, aircraft ferrying, and emergent surge type operation.” But the lion’s share of missions have to do with stopping drugs. Of State’s 412 aircraft, some 120 perform “drug interdiction and transport of personnel,” and the remaining 292 are in some form of storage. DynCorp’s website describes the mission as “help[ing] foreign governments improve their ability to develop and implement national strategies and programs to prevent the production, trafficking, and abuse of illicit drugs.” (A company representative didn’t say if DynCorp will seek to retain the revised aviation support contract.)
Without much publicity, the State Department has built a bespoke air force since the mid-1980s, one that’s stacked with helicopters and heavily reliant on contractors. In the days before the U.S. military left Iraq, the diplomats who remain there solicited for a contract air force capable of the difficult, dangerous work of medical evacuation and search and rescue missions. A 2010 State Department inspector general report highlighted similar work performed in Pakistan — with an emphasis on crop eradication and interdiction — by DynCorp, one of State’s longtime security contractors.
It’s not just the State Department. One of the largest pots of security-contractor cash in the U.S. government, worth $3 billion, comes from an obscure Pentagon bureau called the Counter Narco-Terrorism Program Office (CNTPO), which disburses cash for missions that blend counternarcotics with counterterrorism. Among them: “airlift services the trans-Sahara,” website support in Pakistan, and helicopter flight training in Mexico. Last month, CNTPO put out a contract to support counter-drug operations in Afghanistan beyond the 2014 date for ending the U.S. combat mission there.
But State won’t look to dispense cash in Florida next month: its pre-solicitation vaguely alludes to awarding “a core operations contract” during the fiscal year that begins next October. In advance of assigning that aviation support contract, it’s looking for feedback from potential vendors to help State “redefine its requirements to take advantage of modern aviation practices.”
Doug Brooks, the president of the International Stability Operations Association, the professional association of security contractors, said he was unfamiliar with the State aviation effort. He cautioned that many aviation companies competing for these types of support-services contracts don’t actually have much involvement in the private security business. DynCorp, however, does both private security and aviation support.
And some familiarity with security apparently helps. Among the tasks State wants handled for its counter-drug airfleet include “defensive security for air fields” and “reconnaissance missions when required,” in addition to generic maintenance services and training foreign militaries in flight operations. The drug game is a dangerous trade, and so is maintaining a special air force for the American diplomats who try to contain it.
Part 1: Government Documents Link Global Warming to Advanced Military Climate Modification Technology
Documents from 1966 reveal the mission of the military and federal agencies to modify the climate
By Harold Saive
November 29, 2012
It’s unacceptable that the UN/IPCC continue to push CO2 as the cause for climate change but refuse to acknowledge the military has been actively engaged in Climate Warming Weapons Technologies for more than twenty 20 years.
TITLE: “Present and Future Plans of Federal Agencies in Weather-Climate Modification”
This set of documents from 1966 reveals a network of government agencies in perpetual and secret collaboration with each other and the military to Modify the Global climate.
Created by the elitist National Academy of Sciences – decades of an inter-agency culture of secrecy explains why the issue of covert aerosol Geoengineering is a taboo topic to be degraded to the status of “conspiracy theory” by a matrix of complicit bureaucrats at every opportunity.
This is why your local TV “meteorologist” will rarely make a helpful comment about an unusual sky filled with persistent jet trails.
TITLE: “The Evolution of a Weather Modification R&D program Into a Military Weapons System”. A 1986 Critique of the 1966 initiative.
This document appears as an anonymous draft intended as a critique of the US Weather Modification Program that the author characterizes as hijacked into a military weapons system.
Jules Verne wrote about geoengineering the earth’s climate in 1889 in a sequel to “From the Earth to the Moon” called “The Purchase Of The North Pole”.
Verne writes that the Baltimore Gun Club purchased large tracts of the Arctic then used the famous canon from the earth-to-the-moon to tilt the Earth’s axis. The goal was to establish a tropical paradise as a profitable tourist attraction at the North Pole while “improving” the entire global climate.
If Verne correctly predicted that man would travel from the earth to the moon, it should be no surprise that he also predicted that a small group of influential men would consider warming the climate for profit.
Verne could have been inspired by Harvard geologist Nathaniel Shaler who proposed diverting warm Atlantic water into the Arctic back in 1877 – a dozen years before Verne’s “fantastic”story was published.
Warming the Arctic with large-scale Geoengineering projects has been the vision of industrialists for 100 years – and still is.
Remember when People Thought Arctic Warming was a Good Idea?
VILLAGE VOICE: “ Hey, remember when climate change was a swell idea? Coconuts were in the offing.”
“Imaginations ran wild, and The Washington Post envisioned Manhattan becoming a tropical paradise” … “People would be gathering oranges off the trees in Central Park, or picking cocoanuts from palms along the Battery, [and] hunting crocodiles off the Statue of Liberty.”
The prospect sounded so splendid to New Yorkers that Senator William Calder (1917-1923) tried to get $100,000 appropriated for a study of the idea. Village Voice
Remember when Scientists Thought Arctic Warming was a Good Idea?
1962 Harry Wexler (March 15, 1911- 1962) was an MIT graduate and PhD in meteorology. Wexler had been researching the link connecting chlorine and bromine compounds to the destruction of the stratospheric ozone layers, but died of a heart attack while on vacation in Woods Hole, Mass.
Wexler had already accepted an invitation to deliver a lecture entitled “The Climate of Earth and Its Modifications” at the University of Maryland Space Research and Technology Institute. (Source)
Wexler’s was last in a long line of ambitious proposals to warm the Arctic. Coincidently, his proposals were made at the same time the National Academy of Sciences was working to create a national weather modification program – a direction in which the military had already embarked in 1958.
“Global Warming” initiatives proposed by Wexler:
- To increase the global temperature of the Earth by 1.7°C, “by injecting a cloud of ice crystals into the polar atmosphere by detonating 10 H-bombs in the Arctic Ocean – the subject of his 1958 article in Science magazine” (Wexler H., 1958, “Modifying Weather on a Large Scale,” Science, n.s. 128 (Oct. 31, 1958): 1059-1063).
- To diminish the global temperature by 1.2°C could be doable, “bylaunching a ring of dust particles into equatorial orbit, a modification of an earlier Russian proposal to warm the Arctic”.
- To destroy the ozone layer and hence increase abruptly the surface temperature of the Earth, by spraying “several hundred thousand tons of chlorine or bromine” with a stratospheric airplane. Fleming, 2007(a), pp. 56-57; Fleming, 2007(b), “note n° viii” p. 9 & p. 5 (source)
The decision to reverse direction from warming the arctic to cooling the arctic was announced in 1963 - the year following Wexler’s death when the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Atmospheric Sciences recommended appointment of a Panel on Weather & Climate Modification. pg 2
Prevailing Circumstances following WWII:
- Operation Paperclip (Also called Operation Overcast) succeeded in recruiting scientists from Nazi Germany for employment in the US after WW II and led to the formation of NASA and the ICBM program.
- The National Security Act passed in 1947 made possible the rise of the military industrial complex and creation of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA ) to increase opportunities for scientific experiments to be conducted without public knowledge or Congressional oversight.
- Post-war advances in science and advanced physics opened up opportunities to develop concepts of advanced thinkers like Nikola Tesla that had been waiting on the shelf for over 50 years.
- In 1958, military application of Tesla’s little known methods of electromagnetic manipulation of earth’s atmosphere was already underway. White House advisor on weather modification to President Eisenhower reported the DoD was studying ways to manipulate electrical charges of the earth and sky in order to manipulate the weather for purposes of national defense.
- The rise of an informed and educated middle class looked down on proposals that employed nuclear detonations that became regarded as dangerous and arrogant. This is not to say that proposals to mediate the arctic climate were totally abandoned.
If warming the arctic was regarded as good for commerce for 100 years why would a discovery that found carbon dioxide was already performing the task for free, suddenly be regarded as a catastrophe to prevent?
With an established record of corporate sociopathy, Big Oil would have little interest in what event would cause arctic ice to retreat as long as their long-held dream of new arctic navigation routes and access to previously ice-locked oil and gas reserves was realized.
It could make marginal difference if the arctic temperatures rise due to (1) rising CO2 levels or (2) covert arctic climate manipulation.
This timeline of determined Geoengineering projects suggests the goal of mediating arctic climate remains a favorite goal of the fossil fuel industry.
1877 Harvard geologist Nathaniel Shaler proposed channeling more of the warm Kuroshio Current through the Bering Strait to raise temperatures in the Polar region by 30 degrees.
1912, New York Engineer and Industrialist, Carroll Livingston Riker proposed building a 200 mile jetty off Newfoundland to increase the Gulf Stream’s flow into to the Arctic Basin with the added benefit that it would “shift” the axis of planet earth. The New York Times characterized the proposal as “amazing”… but not insane.
1929: Hermann Oberth, German-Hungarian physicist and engineer; Proposed building giant mirrors on a space station to focus the Sun’s radiation on Earth’s surface, making the far North habitable and freeing sea lanes to Siberian harbors.
1945; Julian Huxley, biologist and Secretary-General of UNESCO 1946-48; Proposed exploding atomic bombs at an appropriate height above the polar regions to raise the temperature of the Arctic Ocean and warm the entire climate of the northern temperate zone.
1946 Village Voice article from 2005 reporting on theMay, 1946 issue ofMechanix Illustrated that featured several arctic-warming geoengineering proposals. One “brave new idea” was proposed by Julian Huxley, then the Secretary-General of UNESCO, and brother of Aldous Huxley, that would detonate atomic bombs to warm the Arctic.
1958; M. Gorodsky, Soviet engineer and mathematician, and Valentin Cherenkov, Soviet meteorologist; Proposed placing a ring of metallic potassium particles into Earth’s polar orbit to diffuse light reaching Earth and increase solar radiation to thaw the permanently frozen soil of Russia, Canada, and Alaska and melt polar ice.
1958; Arkady Markin, Soviet engineer; Proposed that the United States and Soviet Union build a gigantic dam across the Bering Strait and use nuclear power–driven propeller pumps to push the warm Pacific current into the Atlantic by way of the Arctic Sea. Arctic ice would melt, and the Siberian and North American frozen areas would become temperate and productive.
1958 Russian Oil engineer, P.M. Borisov’s proposed melting the Arctic and Greenland icecaps by spreading black coal dust on the ice, creating cloud-cover across the poles to trap heat and to divert warm Atlantic waters into the polar regions. This scheme was taken seriously by Soviet climatologists. Two conferences were held in Leningrad in the early 1960′s following an initial meeting in Moscow by the Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences in 1959.
1958 Atlantic Richfield geologist L.M. Natland, proposed exploding up to 100 underground nuclear bombs to mine the Alberta Oil Sands. Heat from the detonations was expected to boil the bitumen deposits, reducing their viscosity to the point that standard drilling operations could be used. The plan was encouraged by US efforts to find “peaceful uses” for atomic energy. The project was approved in 1959 but the Canadian government reversed their decision in 1962 and declared that Canada was opposed to all forms of nuclear testing. In 2012 the Canadian Tar Sands are, again an issue of international concern.
1962 Harry Wexler (March 15, 1911- 1962) was an MIT graduate and PhD in meteorology. Wexler had been researching the link connecting chlorine and bromine compounds to the destruction of the stratospheric ozone layers, but died of a heart attack while on vacation in Woods Hole, Mass. Wexler had already accepted an invitation to deliver a lecture entitled “The Climate of Earth and Its Modifications” at the University of Maryland Space Research and Technology Institute. (Source)
It remains largely unexplained why decades of optimism for warming the arctic was suddenly replaced with a campaign of fear and doom for the consequences of warming the arctic under the name of “Global Warming”
In the 1960’s Geoengineering proposals to warm the Arctic took a largely unexplained U-turn when oceanographer, Roger Revelle’s research concluded that carbon dioxide was already warming the climate for free and without the need for expensive and risky geoengineering projects.
This U-Turn of direction appeared to be a setback with the exception of those stakeholders in the energy sector who had been invested in arctic warming projects for decades.
Did the CO2 story finally promise to give Exxon, BP and Shell what they wanted?
If the science of Roger Revelle’s forecast for global warming turned out to be wrong or too slow, the DoD could step in – for reasons of national security – to assist arctic warming as secret component of the military’s classified weather modification and weapons program.
The 1996 Air Force document that forecasts “Owning the Weather in 2025” would not rule out using Tesla and plasma technologies to increase arctic temperatures in order to disadvantage a perceived enemy.
A decision not to intervene might betray the military’s primary objective of “Full Spectrum Dominance”. After all, access to Oil and Gas has been a national security priority for decades.
In 1966, Dr. Gordon J. F. MacDonald was Chairman of the ICAS Select Panel on Weather and Climate Modification and wrote:
“Carbon dioxide placed in the atmosphere since the start of the industrial revolution has produced an increase in the average temperature of the lower atmosphere of a few tenths of a degree Fahrenheit.” Gordon MacDonald “Unless Peace Comes: How to Wreck the Environment. Source
MacDonald was referring to Roger Revelle and Hans Suess paper that reversed the debate from how to warm the arctic to how to avoid warming the arctic. Revelle’s ocean research reported a rise in carbon dioxide in earth’s atmosphere was allegedly a result of industrial age manufacturing and coal-burning.Source
Revelle had worked with the Navy in the late 1940’s to determine which projects gained funding and successfully promoted the idea that the Navy should invest more in “basic research”. Revelle was deeply involved in the global growth of oceanography.
He was also one of the committee chairmen in the influentialNational Academy of Sciences studies of the “Biological Effects of Atomic Radiation” (BEAR), 1954-1964.
Revelle’s world influence was significant as president of the Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research, an international group of scientists devoted to advising on international projects.
Revelle and other scientists at Scripps Institution of Oceanography helped the U.S. government to plan nuclear weapons tests so that oceanographers might make use of the data.Source
The conclusions of the BEAR report were understandably significant for demonstrating the harmful biological and environmental damage of atomic radiation and could easily suffice to thwart geoengineering projects that recommended detonating H-bombs.
But the evidence is weak that all intentions to mediate arctic climate was totally abandoned.
If the fundamental goal to warm the arctic remains an unspoken priority of national security in the energy sector, the project could be taken out of public view and committee oversight to become a classified operation in the development of the military’s weather warfare program – an initiative that was acknowledged by civilian weather modification programs formalized by the 1966 NASA and ICAS charter.
Since 1958 Congress and the military had already been working on exotic weather warfare systems that involved electromagnetic manipulation of the ionosphere.
US Congress, Senate, Committee on Inter-State and Foreign Commerce, Weather Modification Research, Hearing, Washington D.C. US Govt. Printing Offlce, March 18-19, 1958; Lowell Ponte quotes Capt. Orville as reporting “that the Dept. of Defense was studying ways to manipulate the charges of earth and sky and so affect the weather by means of an electronic beams to ionize or de-ionize the atmosphere over a given area” …. Capt. Orville also discussed ongoing US Air Force experiments with ‘sodium vapor, ejected from jet planes to intercept solar radiation ‘ over enemy countries and rain their weather. (The Cooling, op. cit. pp. 168-169 Source P. 42
The flip-flop from finding ways to warm the arctic to suddenly finding ways to keep the arctic from warming was announced in 1963 – the year following the sudden death of Meteorologist, Harry Wexler.
This event could serve to consolidate military and civilian weather modification programs for peaceful purposes or – if necessary – as covert weather modification and even climate warming operations secretly carried out by the military under the catch-all justification of “national security”.
FOLLOW THE MONEY: Lobbyists for Big Oil publicly claim Global Warming is a hoax while quietly investing billions in new drilling opportunities due to the reality of receding arctic ice.
The energy sector has made huge investments in ice-breakers and drilling equipment to profit from the very global warming they are reluctant to acknowledge.
The position of having your cake while eating it is essential. When arctic climate warming is revealed as a military climate modification operation, big oil can fall back on “we told you so”.
Since governments may come and go over the next 100 years, they calculate the demand for oil – and the companies who drill for it – will remain intact.
- “As the polar ice cap retreats, energy companies are looking north for a potentially huge new source of crude” Source
- “Shell is one of six companies planning to extract oil, gas and minerals in the Arctic as global warming melts ice and opens new sea lanes to commerce.” Source
- “Remote and dangerous sources of arctic oil are becoming increasingly attractive as the global need for oil grows and the existing reserves dry up.” Source
Documents from 1966 reveal how the military and federal agencies are modifying the global climate.
TITLE: “Present and Future Plans of Federal Agencies in Weather-Climate Modification”
This set of documents from 1966 reveals a network of government agencies in perpetual and secret collaboration , working with the military to Geoengineer the climate.
Created as an agenda of the elitist National Academy of Sciences – decades of an inter-agency culture of secrecy explains why the issue of covert aerosol Geoengineering is a taboo topic to be degraded to the status of “conspiracy theory” by every government agency in this web of complicit bureaucrats at every opportunity.
This is why your local TV “meteorologist” will rarely make a helpful comment about an unusual sky filled with persistent jet trails.
- 1966, JUN: “Present and Future Plans of Federal Agencies in Weather-Climate Modification” Prepared by the ICAS select Panel on Weather Modification
- 1966: NOV: A Recommended National Program in Weather Modification – A Report to the Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences (ICAS) by Homer E. Newell – Associate Administrator for Space Science and Applications, NASA, Washington, D.C.
- 1966: APPENDIX I – Panel on Weather and Climate Modification to Committee on Atmospheric Sciences NAS-NRC – Membership Recommendations
- 1966: APPENDIX II – Special Commission on Weather Modification – National Science Foundation Membership Recommendations.
- 1966: APPENDIX III Report prepared by the ICAS Select Panel on Weather Modification; “Present and Future Plans of Federal Agencies in Weather-Climate Modification,” dated June 20, 1966
- 1966: APPENDIX IV Memorandum for Dr. Homer E. Newel1 from J. Herbert Hollomon, Chairman, ICAS, Subject: National Weather Modification Program, dated June 21, 1966
- 1966: APPENDIX V NASA Panel to Study Weather Modification Activities; Membership, Chronology of Meetings, and a Compilation of Supporting Material used by the Panel
- 1966: APPENDIX VI Budget Recommendations and Trends for a National Weather Modification Program
1966 – NASA: A Recommended National Program in Weather Modification – A report to the Independent Committee for Atmospheric Sciences (ICAS) by Homer E. Newell – Associate administrator for Space Science and Applications, NASA, Washington, DC.
In 1966, a report from NASA to ICAS (Independent Committee for Atmospheric Sciences of the National Academy of Sciences, NAS) was the first step in establishing a national Weather modification program that would ultimately involve multiple federal agencies.
The report focused on four initial agencies: ESSA, NSF, NASA, and the Dept. of Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation.
Under Recommended Principals it was noted that (a) each agency would be independently funded while stressing inter-agency cooperation in research.
Independent funding of agencies could make the program less conspicuous and more difficult for Congress to defund.
Also, new agencies could be brought on board without high profile budget hearings. (b) A designated “central” agency – while having responsibility for focusing the national program – would not have any real authority to implement programs, leaving those decisions to probable unidentified civilian lobbyists and DoD “stakeholders”.
Although the theme of the ICAS report is in the context of protecting water, agriculture, forests, lands and natural resources, the knowledge gained from climate manipulation was of more immediate interest to the military and their industrial complex.
Thirty years following the creation of the Nation Program in Weather Modification, the US Air Force published a document (“Owning The Weather in 2025” ) establishing that federal agencies involved in the National Weather Modification program are under tacit authority of the Department of Defense.
Owning the Weather in 2025 – Opening Statement: Current technologies that will mature over the next 30 years will offer anyone who has the necessary resources the ability to modify weather patterns and their corresponding effects, at least on the local scale. Current demographic, economic, and environmental trends will create global stresses that provide the impetus necessary for many countries or groups to turn this weather-modification ability into a capability.
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. These levels could include unilateral actions, participation in a security framework such as NATO, membership in an international organization such as the UN, or participation in a coalition. Assuming that in 2025 our national security strategy includes weather-modification, its use in our national military strategy will naturally follow. Besides the significant benefits an operational capability would provide, another motivation to pursue weather-modification is to deter and counter potential adversaries.
In this paper we show that appropriate application of weather-modification can provide battlespace dominance to a degree never before imagined. In the future, such operations will enhance air and space superiority and provide new options for battlespace shaping and battlespace awareness.1 “The technology is there, waiting for us to pull it all together;”2 in 2025 we can “Own the Weather