OF JAPAN, GRIDS, EARTHQUAKES, GEOPOLITICS, AND OTHER STUFF…
This is a strange story, and so many people picked up on it, and sent me various articles, that I have to blog about it. In fact, most people sent me these articles because I had blogged last week about Japan's involvement in proposals for creating an integrated Eurasian power grid, one able to shuttle excess power from one point of the great Eurasian landmass, and potentially of course, Africa as well.
Anyway, almost as soon as I had blogged about the story, Japan had suffered another earthquake - eerily almost an exact copy of the Fukushima earthquake - rattling the disastrously crippled Fukushima Daichi reactors once again, and send tsunamis against Japan. Here's a version of the story:
Of course, my impulse to indulge in our trademark "high octane speculation" was certainly triggered by this story, because when the original Fukushima earthquake occurred, giving us the ongoing and continuing nuclear disaster of the Fukushima Daichi nuclear reactor meltdown, I couldn't help but notice the strange geopolitical context in which it occurred. For those who don't recall, however, what my basic "argument" was at the time, the following review may be helpful.
At the time of the first Fukushima earthquake, I argued (as did many Japanese investigators) that the quake and tsunami had been deliberately and artificially created and triggered. The first assumption here is that the technologies exist to do this. Some of them have been studied since World War Two, when in fact the Allies did study methods of creating earthquakes and tsunamis to hit Japan prior to the presumed Allied invasion of the Japanese home islands, and invasion which, of course, with the dropping of Little Boy and Fat Man on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, was not needed. These methods include triggering massive explosions (conventional or nuclear) along certain fault lines, to more exotic methods involving energy weapons, low pressure zones above earthquake-prone regions, to standing waves in the Earth itself. One only has to Google to discover all sorts of theories are out there. My purpose here is not to review or comment on the plausibility of others' speculations, but merely to mention them, because these possibilities have been long bandied about, including at the highest levels. For example, William Cohen, Defense Secretary under the Clinton Administration, mentioned earthquake weapons, and more importantly, opined that "terrorist groups" may possess them, or to put it more nakedly, he raised the possibility that they may be in the possession of extra-territorial, transnational "organizations".
There was also a second component in my musings back then, and that was the geopolitical context. After all, if one wants to target Japan with the "plausible deniability" of an earthquake and tsunami, one has to have a reason to do so. My argument back then was that a credible reason may have been provided by the Japanese government that had just taken power a few weeks prior to the earthquake. And it made rapid progress in trying to steer a new course for the nation, as requests were made to the US government to close or at least reign in the US presence on Okinawa. The new government also made significant though quiet advances to China in an effort to patch up the long-standing ill-feelings between the two governments. There was talk of a state visit of Emperor Akihito to Beijing, and for a few moments, the signals were that China was seriously considering it. Then an interesting, and to me, highly significant thing occurred: then US Defense Secretary Robert Gates, the only cabinet level Republican in President Obama's Administration, issued what could only be considered a threat against the new Japanese government, a threat basically warning Japan not to keep pursuing its course, or else there would be "dire consequences." After the Fukushima disaster, it was quickly reported in various sources, some of them even from the corporate globalist media, that Japan had possibly been hiding a secret nuclear weapons development project at the Daichi plants. Subsequently, that nation turned over some (though certainly not all) of its nuclear waste to the USA, including (it was rumored), plutonium.
So reduced to its most basic elements, my argument then was (1) technology + (2) geopolitical context might = (3) a deliberate use of such technologies when certain nations "go off the reservation".
Similarly, former Assistant HUD Secretary Catherine Austin Fitts has speculated that the Indonesian tsunami a few years ago might have been a similar type of event, for she noticed strange financial activity involving that country, activity which had no sound financial explanation, one week before that event. To round out all this "earthquake wars" speculation a bit, even as far back as the Haiti earthquake which still leaves that poor nation devastated, I noted that a quake of that magnitude should have produced some effect in the neighboring Dominican Republic, and yet the corporate globalist media reported next to nothing about such effects. That quake was followed shortly thereafter by a similar large quake in the region of Paral, Chile, and predictions were for tsunamis for Hawaii and the southern Pacific. What actually happened was that the tsunamis, when they did hit Hawaii, were much less powerful than the corporate globalist media had predicted. It was either a case of fear-mongering or, as I argued at the time in various interviews, a case where the after effects of a quake had been deliberately damped. After all, if one can make earthquakes, presumably one can damp some of their after-effects in other regions. As I speculated at the time, Haiti was an important hub for money laundering and other similar types of activity, and the Paral, Chile region was a center of post-war Nazi activity. Think only of the infamous Cologna Dignidad. It thus appeared that one might be looking at some sort of "earthquake war" going on behind the scenes. And to round out this review, one need only recall the recent strange remarks from Russia that further American "unipolar activity" in the Middle East could have "tectonic consequences."
It thus appears that the current episode might - and I emphasize, might - fit this pattern. But how might one argue more solidly for it? In my little "methodological equation" above, note that there are two factors working in the same context: technology, and a geopolitical(which I mean to include international financial) activity. I suspect that if one wishes to "tighten" the arguments for these types of speculations, that one must look at wider sets of data: how deep in the crust or mantle are such events? Are there any evident patterns of significant coordination to their occurrence and the use of various types of technologies (CERN's hadron collider, ionospheric heaters, and so on)? Are there unusual seismographic signatures in these events? Such "cross referencing" over time would be a monumental task, certainly one beyond a one-man blogging effort such as here. But I suggest it's necessary, for my intuition in this case is that this most recent earthquake may be a little too "coincidental."
But, of course, this is also a case of you tell me...
See you on the flip side...
Help the Community Grow
Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.