Giza Death Star

A Website of Alternative Thinkers & Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

22 Comments

VACCINEGATE: AN ITALIAN PERSPECTIVE

S.D. found this article, and if you've been following the mounting controversies over Big Pharma and vaccines, you'll want to pay attention to this one. And, just for the record and to make my position clear for anyone unfamiliar with it, I'm not opposed to vaccines per se, but neither am I in the camp that (1) they should be forced on people, (2) that one should give cocktails of them to newborn infants, and (3) I do think Big Pharma has been deliberately covering-up and manipulating some of the science, particularly with respect to the vaccine-autism connection. I can perhaps illustrate my attitude by a personal anecdote. When I was a child, the only vaccine I ever received and that my parents would allow me to receive, was the polio vaccine, and here my parents decided on the Sabin, and not the Salk, vaccine, due to the problems with the latter that had been reported by the media in the day, and the advice of our doctor. He was an old-fashioned kind of doctor, and was loathe to pump infants and young children full of vaccines. In later life, I am one of those who never gets a flu shot. My mother did, faithfully, every year, and felt miserable and "down" for days after doing so. I finally persuaded her one year not to do so and see how she felt. Sure enough, the vaguely sick and tired feeling was not there.

More recently we've seen allegations in the alternative news media of all sorts of problems with vaccines, and of course, Robert Kennedy Jr. has been successfully suing over the issue.

But now vaccinegate took yet another dramatic turn in Italy with this story, and it's a whopper-doozie:

 

The opening of this article says it all:

Italian scientists from an organization called Corvelva have published results from their investigation of the 6-combo vaccine, Infanrix Hexa, which is administered to infants.

They have shocked the world by claiming that their investigation shows that the ingredients in this popular childhood vaccine does not contain the antigens it claims, and also contains some toxic chemicals that are not listed as ingredients.

They are calling the results of their investigation “Vaccinegate.”

According to the European Medicines Agency:

Infanrix Hexa is a vaccine used to protect babies and toddlers against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (whooping cough), hepatitis B, poliomyelitis (polio) and diseases such as bacterial meningitis caused by the bacterium Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib).

Infanrix hexa contains the following active substances:

  • toxoids (chemically weakened toxins) from diphtheria and tetanus;
  • parts of Bordetella pertussis (B. pertussis, a bacterium that causes whooping cough);
  • parts of the hepatitis B virus;
  • inactivated polioviruses;
  • polysaccharides (sugars) from Haemophilus influenzae type b.

But according to the scientists at Corvelva, the ingredient claims for this vaccine were not verified by laboratory examination:

In Infanrix Hexa we found

  • chemical contamination from the manufacturing process or cross-contamination with other manufacturing lines;
  • chemical toxins;
  • bacterial peptide toxins;
  • insoluble and indigestible macromolecule that reacts to the protein assay, but cannot be recognized by any protein databases.

We have not found:

  • Protein antigens of diphtheria toxoids, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, haemophylus influenzae B, Poliomyelitis 1-2-3;
  • Formaldehyde and glutaraldehyde, phenoxyethanol, antibiotic residues indicated in the composition; (Bold-italic emphasis added)

None of the listed ingredients were found, but what was found was chemical contaminants and toxins. I don't know about you, but that appears to be outright fraud. And I'm not alone, the article implies the same

Dr. Sherri Tenpenny discusses the overall backlash against vaccine fraud in Italy and how important this study is in the following video. (Emphasis added, and I'll leave it to you to watch the video)

As Dr. Tenpenny notes in her video, the complete absence of the actual antigens in the vaccine, and the presence of cross contamination, and unrecognizable macromolecules means that this "vaccine", in addition to appearing to being fraudulent, it means that there is 100% risk and 0% benefit to the vaccine. Consider the following remark in this context:

Not only vaccine antigens have been not detected, there were also 65 signs of chemical contaminants of which only 35% is known, there are among these various processing residues and cross-contaminations from other manufacturing  lines, and their identification will be checked during the second level of the analytical study (i.e. with standard controls).

7 chemical toxins among these signals have also been identified, probably deriving from chemical contaminants of the manufacturing process or other manufacturing lines at the vaccine manufacturing site; these toxins have a structure that could probably be partially derived from the formaldehyde, glutaraldehyde and cyanogen bromide reaction with other chemical contaminants in the vaccine. We’d like to point out that the toxicity of many of these toxins have been confirmed and published in Pubchem or Toxnet and this poses important safety problems, issues and concerns.

Such findings are consistent with other studies in other countries of various vaccines, and remember, we've not even touched upon the autism issue.

The bottom line here is that Big Pharma is willing to completely lie about contents of its "vaccines." Think of it as the medical equivalent of what the big banksters have been doing: masking their fraud and manipulation behind the power of coercive government, a kind of pharmaceutical version of FASAB 56 regulations, taking everything black, and putting you and your children at high risk, and then charging you an arm and a leg for their drugs when you get sick... from their drugs.

Trust these people? I don't know about you, but as for me and my house, Absolutely NOT.

See you on the... oh, by the way, check out this Wikipedia article on Dr. Tenpenny; it sort of sums up the problem in "big medicine": practicing physicians are given less "weight" than approved "papers" by approved "people" in approved "journals" financed by Big Pharma

Sherri Tenpenny

Funny, one wonders who in the Wikipedia "staff" went to medical school and actually practices medicine, and what their peer-reviewed papers are.

See you on the flip side...

 

15 Comments

OF GEORGES SAGNAC, RING LASERS, AND TIME MACHINES

This story was spotted by M.H., and it's a lot of fun, and I knew when I saw it I'd be blogging about it; it went straight from "inbox" to this week's "finals folder" right off the bat.

But you might be asking yourself "who the heck is Georges Sagnac"? To answer that question we have to take a little stroll around Harvey's Barn, as my mother used to say. I've written a great deal of high octane speculation in my books concerning the famous Michelson-Morley experiment in physics. It's one of the most famous, if not the most famous, experiments in modern physics. In 19th century physics thinking, it was known that light traveled in waves. Physicists drew an interesting conclusion from this: all waves had to have a medium upon which to "wave" as it were. So how did electromagnetic phenomena like light propagate through "empty" space? Their conclusion was a logical one: there had to be some sort of medium permeating all "empty" space that was so "fine"  that it was not detectable to ordinary techniques of measurement and observation. Physicists named this ultra-fine medium the aether (or ether) lumeniferous, or literally, "light-carrying stuff," or even better, "light-carrying air." Obviously, the Latin sounded so much more sophisticated and academic than the English that the term stuck.

Well, the American physicists Michelson and Morley set out the measure and observe that light-carrying stuff second hand, as it were. They reasoned that as the Earth rushed through space, that it would create an "aether wind" and blow against light propagating in the opposite direction. But how to detect it? They reasoned that if the aether hypothesis was true, then it could be detected by splitting a beam of light, running one beam against the direction of the Earth's rotation, and another perpendicular to it, and then combining the beams on an interferometer. If there was an aether wind, the beam of light traveling against the Earth rotation would be slowed down, and this would show up against the other beam as an interference pattern as the two waveforms mixed. The interferometer would show a kind of checkered "ripple effect", like tossing several stones into a pound and watching the waves crisscross.

Their reasoning may be more readily appreciated by drawing an analogy to sound (and indeed, this analogy was actually used in different publications by Albert Einstein to explain their reasoning). If one stands by a railroad track as an approaching train is blowing its horn, the waves of sound will be compressed, and thus be of higher phase, and the tone of the horn will be high. As the train passes, the sound waves appear to stretch, and the tone falls.  Now take a sound sample of the same horn blowing as the train is stationary, then combine the two: one will hear a steady tone, and in addition, a high-pitched and then a falling tone. You will hear the mixing of waveforms. The only difference in Michelson and Morley's case, was that they were trying to see the two different waveforms, to take a picture of it.

But when they performed their experiment (over and over in fact), the detected no difference of wave forms from the split beam of light.

This threw such a monkey wrench into the physics of the period that we know the rest of the story: Albert Einstein stepped into the picture in 1905 to offer an explanation for the result of the experiment with Special Relativity, maintaining that the experiment showed that the speed of light was an "upper speed limit" regardless of the frame of reference. The aether wind was not detected because there was no aether, at least, not in the sense that it had been understood up to that time.

But in 1913, French physicist Georges Sagnac had a different take, and decided to reperform the Michelson-Morley experiment, but with certain modifications. He reasoned that since all major physical systems were in some state of rotation, then the Michelson-Morley experiment's interferometer had not been constructed properly, since it wasn't rotating. He therefore decided to test if there was an "aether drag" or "aether wind" that could be detected by an interferometer in rotation. Setting up his apparatus on a modified phonograph turntable in a high speed of rotation, he split a beam of light to run with the rotation and against it, and then recombined the beams to take a picture. Sure enough, this time, there was a detectable interference pattern. His experiment has since been reperformed using ring lasers in a rotating system. To borrow our sound analogy once again, imagine two trains racing in opposite directions on a rotating system of parallel tracks, blowing their horns. One sound will be modified to a particular pitch going in the same direction as the rotation, and another will have its sound dropped running in the opposite direction. The upshot is that a rotating system gave harmonic properties to wave forms propagating within it depending upon the direction of propagation.

So with that rather long trip around Harvey's Barn in mind, consider this story:

Astrophysicist Says He Knows How to Build a Time Machine But his peers are far from convinced that it'll work.

Now remember that little bit about rotating systems, light, and harmonic properties, and ponder  this from the article:

“If you can bend space, there’s a possibility of you twisting space,” Mallett told CNN. “In Einstein’s theory, what we call space also involves time — that’s why it’s called space time, whatever it is you do to space also happens to time.”

He believes it’s theoretically possible to twist time into a loop that would allow for time travel into the past. He’s even built a prototype showing how lasers might help achieve this goal.

“By studying the type of gravitational field that was produced by a ring laser,” Mallett told CNN, “this could lead to a new way of looking at the possibility of a time machine based on a circulating beam of light.”

As optimistic as Mallet might be about his work, though, his peers are skeptical that he’s on the path to a working time machine.

“I don’t think [his work is] necessarily going to be fruitful,” astrophysicist Paul Sutter told CNN, “because I do think that there are deep flaws in his mathematics and his theory, and so a practical device seems unattainable.”

Even Mallet concedes that his idea is wholly theoretical at this point. And that even if his time machine does work, he admits, it would have a severe limitation that would prevent anyone from, say, traveling back in time to kill baby Adolf Hitler.

“You can send information back,” he told CNN, “but you can only send it back to the point at which you turn the machine on.” (Emphasis added)

But for the sake of a bit of fun high octane off-the-end-of-the-twig speculation, let's assume that there has already been a large ring system of electromagnetic propagating beams in opposite directions and that it's been around and operating for a while. And let's say that you mix those streams or cause them to collide at a certain point. (CERN, anyone?) One wonders what sorts of time dilation or gravitational effects might result. One wonders, too, if we'd ever be told about it.

And for that matter, why not build a great big huge gigantic ring laser?

And while we're speculating, why not find a way to tap into large, naturally occurring rotating systems that have some sort of differential rotation within them, like, say, the Sun? Might it be possible, then, that in addition to massive objects bending space-time, one might discover eddies and currents within that overall bending? Might, indeed, the eddies and currents in the Sun's plasma be a manifestation of those deeper temporal eddies and currents? And might one be able to find a method to tap into them and "read that information" from when those systems were "turned on"? (And while I'm off the end of the twig in fantasy land, just for the record, I'm thinking of ring lasers arranged in hexagonal formation with phase conjugate mirrors on the beams, and of rotating Kohler coils, and all sorts of abstruse stuff).

Well anyway, maybe. Maybe not. Time - to coin a pun - will tell; it remains to be seen whether the public will be told. In any case, it's fun to speculate and let the imagination run wild from time to time.

See you on the flip side...

 

PLANTS, CONSCIOUSNESS, AND RATIONES SEMINALES

Regular readers here are aware that I'm fascinated by consciousness studies and the relationship of consciousness to the brain. These studies actually began in the 19th century, and typically were done by spiritualists or other "New Agers" of the era as a reaction to the Victorian age's galloping materialism and "mechanism" cosmology. World War One shattered much of that, and consciousness studies moved into private research or, in the cases of a few begrudging universities, into the academy. The rise of quantum mechanics in physics also provided a huge impetus to the effort, since the Uncertainty Principle prioritized the role of the Observer in experiments. As the 2oth century proceeded, more data was amassed, and increasingly it looks as if the brain-consciousness, or brain-mind relationship is not as ironclad nor materialistically biased as it once appeared. Cases began to be documented of people living normal lives, with almost no brain, or significant parts of their brains missing (see https://www.iflscience.com/brain/man-tiny-brain-lived-normal-life/). Neuronal structures have been discovered in the human heart, perhaps indicating a kind of "distributed brain", and perhaps buttressing the more ancient idea that human reason is inclusive of, rather than exclusive of, human emotions and passions, and is not mere Cartesian ratiocination. If that idea sounds a little crazy, then consider the octopus (one of my favorite animals). These creatures are demonstrably intelligent; they not only learn, but can learn by observing other octopi performing tasks and solving problems and puzzles. They have nine brains: a central one, and one in each of their tentacles, yet their actions show that there is one "entity" inside of all of that. Crows have been documented solving multi-step puzzles, and so on.

As the stories about people without significant portions of a normal brain might also indicate, size is apparently no factor either. I've told the story of a friend of mine, Dr. Scott DeHart, who owns an African gray parrot named Murray. When leaving his presence, I used to say, "You be a good bird, I'll be right back." On one occasion, however, and much to my and one of Dr. DeHart's son's surprise, Murray spoke before I could give my customary farewell statement, and he stated "I'll be a good bird." It was a sentence he had never heard before, composed on the spot, with proper grammar and apposite to the context! Needless to say, our jaws were on the floor.

That brings me to today's article shared by V.T., and to today's high octane speculation, and it concerns life forms with no brains at all, plants:

https://www.collective-evolution.com/2019/12/05/studies-on-plants-suggest-consciousness-exists-as-a-separate-entity-from-the-brain/

There's something in this article that caught my eye, and it forms the context for my high octane speculation of the day, and it's this:

When it comes to plants, I’ve always thought that they were living, thinking, breathing, conscious beings. Grover Cleveland Backster Jr., was an interrogation specialist for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), who became well known for his experiments with plants using a lie-detector machine. Through his research, he believed that plants feel pain and have extrasensory perception (ESP). Author Michael Polan describes his experiments quite well in a piece he wrote for the New Yorkera few years ago regarding plant intelligence:

(Cleve) hooked up a galvanometer to the leaf of a dracaena, a houseplant that he kept in his office. To his astonishment, Backster found that simply by imagining the dracaena being set on fire he could make it rouse the needle of the polygraph machine, registering a surge of electrical activity suggesting that the plant felt stress. “Could the plant have been reading his mind?” the authors ask. “Backster felt like running into the street and shouting to the world, ‘Plants can think!’ ”

Backster and his collaborators went on to hook up polygraph machines to dozens of plants, including lettuces, onions, oranges, and bananas. He claimed that plants reacted to the thoughts (good or ill) of humans in close proximity and, in the case of humans familiar to them, over a great distance. In one experiment designed to test plant memory, Backster found that a plant that had witnessed the murder (by stomping) of another plant could pick out the killer from a lineup of six suspects, registering a surge of electrical activity when the murderer was brought before it. Backster’s plants also displayed a strong aversion to interspecies violence. Some had a stressful response when an egg was cracked in their presence, or when live shrimp were dropped into boiling water.

And then there's this:

Poland also describes the work of  Monica Gagliano, a thirty-seven-year-old animal ecologist at the University of Western Australia. He describes an experiment she conducted with the plant Mimosa pudica, a fast moving plant that can be seen by the naked eye, kind of like the Venus Fly Trap.

Gagliano potted fifty-six of these plants, and had a system that dropped them from 15 centimetres every five seconds. When they are in danger, these plans curl up, and close their leaves. The plants did this after a few drops, but then realized that the drops weren’t really harmful so they remained open after that. It wasn’t just fatigue either, when the plants were shaken they closed up, and furthermore, the plants retained this knowledge because Gagliano tried again a month later and got the same response.

Gagliano said, imagining these events from the plants’ point of view. “You see, you want to be attuned to something new coming in. Then we went back to the drops, and they didn’t respond.” Gagliano reported that she retested her plants after a week and found that they continued to disregard the drop stimulus, indicating that they “remembered” (source)

Clearly, they learn, remember and apply that knowledge. These are all factors associated with consciousness and thinking. There has to be something or someone in there that’s responsible for that learning. (Emphasis added)

These things made me remember an ancient doctrine of some of the philosophers, which was picked up by many of the Church Fathers, and which persisted all the way up to such people as St. Maximus the Confessor in the 7th century. The doctrine is that of the rationes seminales (in the Greek, logoi spermatikoi), the "seminal reasons". Maximus went as far as to say in one of his works (the seventh Ambigua, if you're interested), that "The One Logos", meaning Christ, "is the many logoi, and the many logoi are the one Logos." These "seminal reasons" were the rational principles, in "small" or "seedlike" form, that existed in all things as their raison d'etre, so to speak, and particularly in living things. This idea makes short shrift of the modern notions of ancient ideas, the notion that the ancients viewed only mankind as rational, and all other things, especially living things, like animals, as irrational. Rather than being some sort of dialectical opposition between man(rational) and other living things (irrational), it was rather a sliding continuum of rationality, with perhaps different types of rationality and consciousness being exhibited in specific cases. (The idea went so far that in the Middle Ages, there are records of animals actually being put on trial, and the idea perhaps persists in a new guise in modern laws regarding the destruction of dangerous animals by court order.) The metaphor of plants is in evidence in the choice of words used to describe the metaphor itself: seeds of rational principles. Maximus, by stating what he stated, is not only implying some underlying consciousness to things, but also tying that consciousness in his case to the one Logos underlying them all, implying that they live and move in that "meta-consciousness" so to speak.

Which brings me to my high octane speculation of the day: are we looking at the beginning of a modern scientific confirmation of a very old idea? Perhaps, for I cannot help but think that had certain Stoic philosophers, or for that matter, certain Church Fathers - a Maximus or an Augustine or a Justin Martyr - would have immediately recognized these modern studies of plants as examples of what they were all calling "seminal reasons." And that raises yet another intriguing speculative possibility. Is that ancient doctrine of seminal reasons yet another holdover of a high science of a high civilization lost in the mists of "pre-history"? For my part, I think so, and I'd be willing to bet on it.

See you on the flip side...

FIRST TIANJIN, THEN SIBERIA, THEN IRAQ, THEN ROUEN, FRANCE, AND NOW ...

I had a lot of people emailing me this story  in various versions in the past week about the explosion at the synthetic rubber chemical plant in Port Neches, Texas:

Massive explosion at chemical plant in Port Neches, Texas lights up night sky (VIDEOS)

60,000 people ordered to flee as another explosion rocks burning Texas chemical plant (PHOTOS, VIDEOS)

If you're a regular reader here, you know me: I'm very skeptical of all these explosions. In fact, it seems as if we've seen a raft of them, beginning with the strange explosion of the Chinese chemical plant in Tianjin east of Beijing a few years ago. Remember that one? I even blogged about it. (See https://gizadeathstar.com/2015/08/more-on-the-tianjin-explosion-the-conspiracy-theories-begin-to-emerge/  and https://gizadeathstar.com/2015/08/tidbit-pictures-of-the-tianjin-blast/  and https://gizadeathstar.com/2015/08/explosions-in-china-explosions-in-japan-is-there-a-covert-war-going-on/) This was followed by yet another explosion at a Chinese chemical plant, and then of course we watched two Russian ammunition dumps and munitions factories explode, another explosion at a Russian hospital, an explosion of an ammo dump in Iraq, another chemical plant explosion in Rouen, France, and now a chemical plant explosion in Port Neches, Texas.

The Iraqi ammunition dump explosion I found highly suspicious, if for no other reason than that Arabs have been stockpiling munitions for decades in high heat without incident. They know how to do it. And similarly, the Chinese, French, Russians, and Americans know how to run chemical plants and store ammunition. Or do they? We'll get back to that in a moment.

If there's a pattern here, it's this: the explosions seem to be either mainly in petro-chemical plants, or ammunition facilities. And they pose a nasty and highly problematical question: have the people running chemical plants and storing ammunition from France, Russia, and China to Texas all of a sudden become curiously incompetent and stupid? (Or, to put it differently, did they all attend American schools and learn their unique gifts of incompetence and stupidity from Common Core?) Or are we looking at something more sinister?

Back when the Tianjin explosion occurred, I speculated that perhaps it was not an accident, but a message. But if a message, who's sending it? If we assume that the raft of these explosions is not accidental, nor incompetence, nor stupidity, then other questions of interpretation arise: are we looking at a kind of covert warfare going on between the countries involved? Or are we looking at one behind-the-scenes actor, with tentacles in each of the affected countries? Or are we looking at cyber-warfare, such as some suspect was involved at Fukushima? or are we looking at some sort of exotic technology able to detonate munitions and chemical plants at a distance? Some, for example, speculated after the Tianjin chemical plant explosion that a "rod of God" may have been the culprit, due to the extraordinarily deep and narrow crater left at the site of the plant. Others, myself included, have speculated that some sort of exotic energy weaponry may be involved, similar to what has been speculated for some of the California fires anomalies.

So on to the high octane speculation of the day, because there's another pattern in evidence here. It's one of those obvious things that one doesn't notice until the obviousness attracts a bit of attention. And it's a curiously contradictory pattern. In some cases, there's a rush to (nonsensical) explanation. For example, in the case of the Iraqi ammunition dump explosion, there was a rush to explain it all as being due to high heat, the destabilization of explosives due to that, and so on. As I pointed out in a previous blog, that doesn't make much sense to me, because as I pointed out, all major combatants in the region in the past few decades have been storing munitions all over the place, without incident. But in most other cases, there is a curious lack of explanation of the explosions, or if there is, they are long on narrative and short on plausible details.

It's not much to go on, of course. As the old adage goes, the absence of evidence is not evidence of the absence of evidence, or something like that. It's that strangely contradictory pattern both of the rush to explain certain incidents (the Iraqi ammo dump explosion) and the curious lack of explanation in other cases (Tianjin, Novosibirsk, Port Neches) that raises my suspicion meter into the red zone.

Or to put it country simple: my money is not of the "string of coincidences" hypothesis... covert ops are a game that two or more can play.

See you on the flip side...

THERANOS UPSTAGED BY TOSHIBA?

Wow...  I mean, wow...

Although today's blog concerns a short, and not very informative article, it's a whopper doozie. (And a big thank you to S.H. for spotting it and passing it along). But first a bit of context before we get to today's article and high octane speculation.

If you're a regular reader here, you might recall that one of the stories that fascinates me is that of Elizabeth Holmes, and her Silicon Valley start-up, Theranos. The name "Theranos" was Holmes' idea to combine "therapy" with "diagnosis", because according to her, her company was developing a technology that would be able to test blood for a whole panel of diseases. The catch was, that Holmes claimed she had developed a concept and technology to do so (1) from a few droplets of blood, and (2) do so in the home, with a small unit about the size of a desktop computer or printer, and that the machine would analyze the sample and produce results within a few hours. No more waiting for days and days for laboratory results; no more giving syringe after syringe of blood.

Within a few months of starting Theranos, Holmes was well on her way to becoming a billionaire; she was smart, attractive, articulate, and the darling of media talk shows and magazine articles about her, her idea, and her company. And her company, Theranos, had begun to attract some very big names to its board: Riley Bechtel, former Secretary of State George Schulz, General Mattis, Henry Kissinger, just to name a few. The military interest is explainable: imagine being able to do such blood tests on the battle field with a small portable unit. And there was a further implication of her claims: testing for diseases via chemical signatures in the blood would allow for very early detection without the need for more embarrassing tests for cervical or prostrate cancers, and so on.  Early detection could equal early treatment, and early treatment, especially in the case of cancers, could lead to remissions and cures.

The whole problem with Holmes' claims was she was never completely forthright about how it would work. Assuming she was not committing egregious fraud (and I don't believe she was), such a concept would require a complete revolution in technology and medical testing, and again, if you're a regular reader here, you'll know my prior speculations on this claim assumed that Holmes was testing at the quantum level. I've blogged about technologies and discoveries about the passage of light from crystal to liquid: at the boundary condition between the two, unique light waves are created in response to the medium. In my speculation, it was a very different kind of spectroscopy that Holmes was after. (See:

UPDATE: THAT STRANGE THERANOS STORY, AND ITS OPTICAL PATENTS

and see

UPDATE: OPTICAL PHASE CONJUGATION, BIOLOGICAL TISSUE, AND THERANOS

As the above blogs point out, there did exist concepts in biophysics similar to what I was guessing Holmes was after, and one regular reader of this website even sent along a Theranos patent that seemed to confirm my speculations in a broad was, for the patent called for the use of a prism, a crystal, in its devices. Regardless, Holmes  went on to be indicted for fraud, and the value of her company collapsed.

But now there's yet another twist in the story. The famous Japanese company of Toshiba is now making a similar claim:

Toshiba creates a device that detects 13 types of cancer with a single drop of blood

Note, that in Toshiba's case at least, the claim is very similar to that of Holmes and Theranos: just a few drops of blood will be all that is needed to test for a whole panel of cancers; only the breadth of Toshiba's claim appears to be narrower than Holmes'; Toshiba is testing for specific cancers, whereas Holmes' claims were not restricted, so far as I know, to cancers:

Toshiba announced Monday the development of a technology capable of detecting up to 13 types of cancer from a single drop of blood, and with an accuracy of 99 percent.

...

Specifically, the new test will be used to detect gastric, esophageal, pulmonary, hepatic, biliary, pancreatic, intestinal, ovarian, prostate, bladder and breast cancers, as well as sarcoma and glioma.

Toshiba has created a chip and a small device that carries out the diagnosis in less than two hours. (Emphasis in the original)

Now, you can color me "very suspicious," for it would seem all but obvious that there may be some sort of relationship between Toshiba's claims for its device, and the original claims of Holmes. So we're confronted with a "problematic": is Toshiba making fraudulent claims? That's very unlikely; Toshiba's reputation for high-tech advanced engineering is so well-known it hardly needs any explaining. If it says it can do it, it probably can. So that means that Holmes' claims are not as far-fetched and fraudulent as certain reports on Theranos's claims say they are.

To put it country simple: why does Toshiba get a pass, and Theranos does not?

And that leads to more disturbing "high octane questions." If the fundamental idea that Holmes had is true, why then does it appear that someone did not want her involved with the elaboration of her concept, and the development of the accompanying technology? Was the fraud case against Holmes and Theranos for the express purpose of stealing her technology? Toshiba did not steal it, because as far as I know, the Japanese company does not appear in the chain and any principals involved with Holmes. More likely Toshiba heard about Holmes and her idea and concepts, studied some Theranos patents, and decided it was an area worthy of investigation and development. But that raises another disturbing question: who did shut her down, and why?

Or to put it country simple once again, the Toshiba story just raised big questions about Holmes, Theranos, and the whole surrounding legal quagmire. There's something going on with this story, and we have yet to find enough clues to know what it is. Rest assured though, it's probably very big, and very murky.

See you on the flip side...

A STRANGE SPACE X VIDEO

Regular readers here know I rarely post videos or tweets as the main subject of a blog, and the reason for that is quite simple: if you  get on average of 100 emails per day, and if all of them contained videos that everyone claimed was "so important that I know you'll want to watch this one even though you don't watch videos," I'd get very little done. It takes me far less time to scan through an article in a few seconds, than to watch a video of several minutes. Additionally, the problem with referencing a video is that you have to provide a time stamp for people for the specific point one wants to reference. 99% of all emails containing videos get immediately deleted. I simply don't watch them. And finally, I have this innate skepticism when it comes to video or photographic "proof" of anything. Things can be faked.

But... occasionally I do, and even more rarely, I blog about them, and this is one such case. It may indeed prove to be one of those occasional fakes that make the rounds on the internet, and if that should prove to be the case, we can all have a good laugh at my expense and then move along.

This one, however, really caught my eye and I rather suspect it will yours as well. And it's the subject of our trademark High Octane Speculation for today. It was shared by C.V., and it concerns some highly unusual footage of what is claimed to be a Space X rocket launch:

Now, it should be pointed out that the video is coming from one of those flat earth websites, and they of course have their own agendas, in this case made clear by the quotations "Does it look like it is hitting something? Maybe a barrier some people call a Firmament or a Dome?" Well, sorry, I'm not a flat earther of a firmamenter or anything of the sort. There are other kinds of "domes" that one can envision, and these fall under the heading of "Tesla stuff", and have been amply catalogued in the various books and papers of Lt. Col. (US Army, Ret) Tom Bearden. There are reports of such "energetic domes" even as far back as World War Two, and I have chronicled a couple of these in my books. One concerned the strange case of a dome being seen in 1943 during the Russian counteroffensive after Stalingrad. A dome was seen by Russian troops over the suspected position of a German infantry regiment. When the Russians arrived at the position, the Germans were found dead, and all the ammunition in their magazines and belts had exploded. Another episode close to the end of the war recorded an American bomber flying into a "dome", and simply disappearing. No wreckage, no debris, no nothing. Tall tales? Reality? I don't know. But they're worth mentioning.

Whatever one makes of such anecdotal reports, something like that appears to be the case here. What intrigues me about the video is the context in which the video might be viewed, and no, it's not flat earth or firmaments or such nonsense. Let's go back to the Chelyabinsk Meteor Incident. Recall that a month prior to the incident, Russian prime minister Dmitri Medvedev went  on Russian television, calling for an asteroid defense shield be built for planetary defense, and called on the major powers of the world to cooperate in building it. Then he went on to say that if they didn't, Russia would have to proceed on its own, and do so. Asked what weapons might work, Medvedev opined that Russia's ICBMs and thermonuclear weapons could do the trick, and if that wasn't possible, then it had "other means" of doing so, which means were left conveniently unspecified. A month later, as if on cue, the Chelyabinsk Meteor appeared.

Then there were those strange tweets and remarks from President Trump about the USA not needing nuclear weapons anymore to wreak wholesale regional destruction. And oh, yea, we need "another space force." Another??!? You mean, the one we have now isn't adequate? And then came that strange tweet about "invisible" weapons. "Energetic domes" might fit that bill. And while we're flaying away in midair with our speculations, let's not forget that now-famous NASA Space shuttle video (number 48), showing nice UFOs moving in strange patterns, until something on the Earth's surface shoots at one of them, which little dot of light then executes a nifty right angle turn and shoots off into space.

All this, we were told, was "ice crystals" from a urine dump, until Dr. Jack Krasher, a physicist with the University of Nebraska, quickly and deftly disposed of that explanation.

So what are we looking at here? Well, if it's not a fake, then I don't know. Except I'm willing to wager that it's not "evidence" of firmaments or flat earth, and more likely a test of some sort. Of an energy shield, possibly. A little "demonstration" to someone by someone...

But this may be a case of You Tell Me...

See you on the flip side...

 

MORE TROUBLE IN CALIFORNIA, BUT THIS TIME NOT FOR PG&E

As most regular readers of this site know, I've been both fascinated and alarmed at the burning of California, as thousands of victims have lost their homes, and darkly fascinated by the response (such as it is) by the state government, and even more so by the "response" of the power utilities in their new policy of rolling blackouts to protect themselves from further lawsuits. As with the previous fires there have been anomalies already spotted by the ever-vigilant alternative research field.

But today I don't want to focus on those anomalies, nor on the crazy policies that in my opinion have led to all of this, but rather on a new story that casts yet another long shadow over the state:

Is California's Second Biggest Utility On Verge Of Collapse Next: Edison Plunges After Saying It May Be Responsible For Deadly 2018 Fire

The crux of the matter is the California's  other main power utility, Southern California Edison is now also in the crosshairs:

With California's largest utility, PG&E,  now bankrupt after starting the deadliest fire in California history, and cutting power to its customers at the mere hint of a windstorm that could leave it exposed to more multi-billion lawsuits, leaving millions in the dark, California's second largest utility, Edison, may soon be insolvent too.

The stock of Edison International, which is California's second biggest electricity provider through its Southern California Edison subsidiary, which distributes electricity to 5.1 million customers in central, coastal, and southern California, collapsed after the close when the company reported in its earnings call that California investigators concluded equipment owned by Edison International’s utility caused one of the most destructive fires in state history, which killed three people and burned down entire sections of Malibu.

California county fire officials said that the Woolsey Fire, which raged for weeks in Los Angeles and Ventura counties in November 2018, was sparked by the utility’s electrical equipment, Edison CEO Pedro Pizarro said in a call with investors on Tuesday.

EIX shares plunged as much as 19% to $52.75 in after-hours trading before modestly recovering some losses to trade at $62.95. Edison investors had expected the company would be blamed for the fire.

In a previous blog, I speculated on the possibility that the practice of what appears to be disaster capitalism in full swing in California may not be limited just to driving people from their homes through engineered disasters in order to pick up property on the cheap. Additionally, I mused, the target may be the power utility - in this case, PG&E - itself, which has already experienced one bankruptcy because of it. Now, it seems, one might add Southern California Edison to the list.

And that brings me to today's high octane speculation. What if... what if the goal is to create such conditions of chaos in the state, that the whole scenario we see playing out is to drive a situation where - as was alleged in the fires of the immediately previous years - the US military was seen to be present? Admittedly, this scenario is a wild one, right off the end of the speculation twig, as it were. But recently, in an unprecedented move for any leader in his party, Governor Gavin Newsom actually tweeted a think you to Mr. Trump for sending federal disaster funds in the state. And he did so without the usual "digs" that usually accompany such remarks from leaders in his party. Equally strangely, Mr. Newsom was not met with the usual chorus of whining and complaining from the other leaders of his party. His remarks passed almost completely unnoticed.

Perhaps he knows that when any federal monies flow to a state, they usually come with major strings attached, and I'm betting some of those strings might be an overall not only of state environmental policy, but of its two major power utilities.

If I'm right, then we might watch for the presence of federal representatives on the boards of those companies, after the usual purchase of significant enough amounts of equity to warrant it.

And that's a very clever way to bypass Sacramento's lunacy.

I know, I know... it's a really wild high octane speculation, but after all, it's what we do here.

See you on the flip side...

THE US ARMY’S PROPOSED SUPER-CANNON

Ok, the house-cleaning first: I want to thank everyone for your patience, and for continuing to send articles, this past week in my absence. It is much appreciated.

Ok, with that said, let's dive back in. Judging by the amount of people that sent me some version of this story, I suspect that my well-known fascination with artillery, and particularly artillery systems that "push the envelope", was the reason why. But I also suspect that many of you who passed along some version of this story also were noticing a few "weird" things in the article, and their correspondingly "weird" implications. So with thanks to everyone who saw and shared the story, here's one version of the story:

The Army Is Building a Cannon Capable of Firing From Nashville to NYC

There are a number of interesting things to note about this:

However, advances in the military-technical field by U.S. rivals like China and Russia—who have each developed advanced hypersonic deterrent weapons—have gripped U.S. war-planners with a feeling of insecurity over the state of the U.S. military’s overstocked arsenals, as well as a nagging sense that U.S. power is on the long-term decline.

With that in mind, the U.S. Army set about developing a brand-new weapon: a powerful cannon that can fire a projectile over a distance of more than 1,150 nautical miles—or the same distance between Nashville, Tennessee and New York City.

...

The Army hopes that the new cannon can offer an edge on U.S. adversaries who have their own formidable defensive and deterrent capabilities. Rafferty believes that a U.S. strategy imbued with long-range air defense systems and artillery and coastal defense seamlessly integrated with long-range, over-the-horizon radars will be difficult to counter for U.S. foes.

...

In a recent interview, Army Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville told Defense News:

A lot of that comes down to cost.

If we are able to develop the strategic, long-range cannon system, the rounds may be only $400,000 or $500,000 compared to multimillion-dollar rounds.  Cost does matter, and we are concerned about cost.

There are some, definitely, physics challenges in doing these types of things, and that is the trade-off.(emphases added)

In other words, the US Army is looking for a "super-cannon" that (1) has a range of around one thousand miles, (2) can be integrated into a strategic posture with other systems for continental defense (and notably, particularly with over the horizon radars), and (3) whose operational cost of building, maintaining, and bombarding, is relatively low; a low-cost artillery projectile, versus a multi-million dollar missile.

But exactly in what role does the Army expect this cannon to function? This is a crucial question, for reasons we'll see in a moment when I flesh out today's high octane speculation. The answer to that question might be implied by the sentence in the above quotation, "The Army hopes that the new cannon can offer an edge on U.S. adversaries who have their own formidable defensive and deterrent capabilities." In other words, this cannon us being envisioned as a kind of penultimate stand-off weapon, capable of offensive strategic bombardment, or alternatively taking out targets - large naval vessels for instance, as the article notes also its integration into coastal defense.

These are all important clues as to what type of weapon we may be looking at. And I don't think we're looking at a conventional artillery piece, with a barrel, propellant, breech, recoil and recuperator cylinders, equilibrators, trunion, cradle, carriage and so on. Indeed, there have been only three such long-range conventional cannon systems, and only one of them was ever operational. These were (1) the Germans' World War One "Paris Gun", with which they shelled Paris (mostly ineffectively, incidentally) from over 70 miles away; (2) the post-war French experiments with a similar gun conducted by the French firm of Schneider-Cruesot, and Canadian-American ballistics expert Dr. Gerald Bull's "super-gun" of the 1980s which he was building for Saddam Hussein, with a reputed range of about 1000 miles, and capable (allegedly) of firing small satellites into orbit. In the case of the German and French efforts, the guns were at least semi-mobile, and could be moved around, but their operational range was nowhere near that suitable for "strategic" purposes. In the case of Dr. Bull's gun, this had to be permanently emplaced on the side of a mountain(!), and was more or less a fixed target. Dr. Bull's gun was never completed, as he was assassinated shortly after returning from Iraq, by whom no one knows, but the conventional wisdom is that the Israeli Mossad took him out. It is worth mentioning, however, that Dr. Bull's thoughts on ballistics were inspired by the Germans' "Paris Gun," and were fleshed out during a long-term research project he was doing for the US army in the 1960s and 1970s called project HARP (not to be confused with the Air Force's ionospheric heater in Alaska, Project HAARP).

But I suspect that here we're looking at something completely different, something that can be used to target accurately and that can be used in both offensive and defensive roles. To achieve that, and to avoid the problems of a very large, but still very conventional type of system such as Dr. Bull was developing for Saddam Hussein's Iraq, a weapon forever wedded to a mountainside, I suspect that if this story be true, then what the US Army might be trying to develop is a very large, but mobile, electromagnetic rail gun. Rail guns are simply weapons that replace the standard barrel of an artillery piece with a "track" or "rail" along which a projectile is propelled to extreme velocities not by chemical propellant but by the force of electromagnets. As such, they could conceivably be used as "rod of God" kinetic weapons based on the ground, and capable of doing enormous strategic damage (Tianjin chemical plant, anyone?), and possibly capable of being used as anti-satellite weapons, coastal defense, you name it. Indeed, during the era of Reagan's "Star wars" strategic defense initiative, a railgun system firing many small bullets like a shot gun was proposed called Brilliant Pebbles. Many in the alternative research field think that some such system is evident on the famous NASA STS 48 space shuttle video, where "something" on the earth's surface appears to be shooting "something" at UFOs visible on the space shuttle's camera system.

The problem with rail guns - which incidentally were first proposed before World War One - is not to much the concept, but the limitations of technology, for they require massive amounts of electrical power. In World War One, that's a problem...

... today, it isn't so much.

That's what I think they're up to... and there's one more disturbing thing that the article mentions. In mentioning the alleged range of the weapon, it indicates that it would have a range from New York City to Nashville (or conversely, Nashville to New York City). They could just as easily have said "Seoul to Beijing" or "Warsaw to Moscow".

But they didn't.

See you on the flip side...

 

UPDATE: OPTICAL PHASE CONJUGATION, BIOLOGICAL TISSUE, AND THERANOS

A few weeks ago I blogged about a story that fascinates me, that of Elizabeth Holmes and her one-time rocking-and-rolling multi-billion-dollar Silicon Valley start-up biotech company, Theranos. Her company managed to get several big names on her board before her fall from "grace" and indictment for various types of fraudulent activity. The names included George Schultz, General Mattis, and Riley Bechtel, among many others. So how did someone like Elizabeth Holmes - allegedly a charlatan - manage to con some of the biggest names in the country?

That is, indeed, the question. And thus far, I'm not buying the public narrative, particularly when one compares what Holmes claimed to be up to, and some recent papers. What Holmes wanted to do was to place a unit no bigger than a desktop computer into every home, and into retail outlets, to do on the spot blood analysis able to test for the widest possible panel of diseases, say from blood cholesterol measurements to leukemia and so on, and all this from a very small sample of blood, a couple of drops, and not the endless syringes used now.  As I noted in a recent blog (see https://gizadeathstar.com/2019/09/update-that-strange-theranos-story-and-its-optical-patents/), my curiosity was piqued by this claim, for it meant that to be successful, Holmes would have to have in mind a whole new electromagnetic or optical means of spectroscopy to pull off this feat. The device which she claimed to be developing to do this was called the "Edison", and though Theranos took out a number of intriguing patents, what was inside it was described in vague and general terms, remaining essentially a "black box." Ultimately, she could not deliver on her idea, and the rest is history.

But as I noted in the previous blog on this subject linked above, the idea itself was probably responsible for attracting the likes of the Bechtel corporation (Riley Bechtel and George Schultz), and the U.S. military (General Mattis). Imagine, for a moment, being able to do quick and accurate triage on the battlefield using the device, and obviously, the whole concept of a new kind of optical spectroscopy for blood paneling also implied more sinister uses. As I noted in that previous blog, a recent paper in optics had discovered a new kind of light wave that emerges when light is traveling from a crystal to a liquid, and emerges in the boundary transition between the two mediums. Interestingly enough, one of the patents Theranos took out involved the use of a prism in its Edison device.

Well, there may me more to this story, because one of this site's regular readers, T.M., spotted this very intriguing paper:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2688902/

Notably, this paper appeared in 2009, approximately five years after Holmes founded Theranos. What the abstract says is quite intriguing for our purposes:

Elastic optical scattering, the dominant light interaction process in biological tissues, prevents tissues from being transparent. While scattering may appear stochastic, it is in fact deterministic in nature. We show that, despite experimental imperfections, optical phase conjugation (λ = 532 nm) can force a transmitted light field to retrace its trajectory through a biological target and recover the original light field. For a 0.69 mm thick chicken breast tissue section, we can enhance point source light return by ∼5×103 times and achieve a light transmission enhancement factor of 3.8 within a collection angle of 29°. Additionally, we find that the reconstruction's quality, measured by the width of the reconstructed point source, is independent of tissue thickness (up to 0.69 mm thick). This phenomenon may be used to enhance light transmission through tissue, enable measurement of small tissue movements, and form the basis of new tissue imaging techniques. (Emphasis added)

In other words, as cells move the movement itself distorts the light they emit, but this original signature may be recovered through the phenomenon of phase conjugation. The latter bears a little explanation. Phase conjugation emerged as a major phenomenon of interest from the super-secret work being done in the 1980s during the Reagan administration's Strategic Defense Initiative or "Star Wars" program, and as we shall see in a moment, emerged in quite a different context in the secret Soviet biophysics research of the 1960s and 1970s. Simply put, as a light wave moves through a medium such as the atmosphere, it undergoes scattering that distorts the original "shape" it had when emitted from its source. Thus, pointing a laser at, say, a missile or an aircraft moving through the atmosphere meant that the cohered beam of laser light would be subject to scattering, and lose much of the energy coming from the source of the emission. A way had to be found to mitigate this effect, and the means was phase conjugation, which (to be very crude about it) took a "picture" of the distortion or scattering effects themselves, and then used that distortion itself as a template to reconfigure the laser beam at the source in the opposite pattern or phase, thus allowing the beam to maintain its coherence and energy over much greater distances.  In some cases in the literature, this phase conjugation effect was even called "time reserved waves" because the effect of phase conjugation was to reverse the normal inverse square law of light scattering. Theoretically, the phenomenon meant that energy could be concentrated at the target, since the inverse square law was "reversed."

Thus, in this paper, the claim is to have used the same phenomenon to view the the light emitted from cells. This in itself is very intriguing, because if you've been following the work of U.S. Army Lt. Col. Tom Bearden (retired) over the years, you'll recall that the Soviet Union did a great deal of very classified research in biophysics, trying to discover the electromagnetic "templates" of specific diseases in cells, and of healthy "templates" in cells, and then allegedly used those templates to irradiate biological tissue to create, or cure, various diseases including cancer. And there as well, the phenomenon of phase conjugation entered the picture, though as in the above paper, in a biological rather than missile defense context.

Could this phenomenon be coupled to that of the recent discovery of a new kind of light wave emerging in the boundary transition between crystals and liquids that I blogged about in the above-linked blog? My high octane speculative guess is yes, and that those light waves will differ depending on the relative health of the liquid they transition into. But even if that is not the case, I strongly suspect that this paper about bio-optical phase conjugation is yet another indicator that Holmes was on to something, and something very big at that, and that we have not heard the last of the story.

See you on the ...

... oh, one more thought. Imagine applying such procedures to compare and contrast the signatures of GMO crops, versus their natural counterparts. What do you suppose they'll find? My bet is that they'll find subtle and important differences.

Ok, speculation over.

See you on the flip side...

 

TIDBITS: THIS WEEKS HONORABLE MENTIONS

Many thanks to all of you who once again shared your time, the articles you found, and your thoughts about them. This week's honorable mentions were submitted by R.M., C.M., V.T., J.K., R.D., G.B., and K.M.:

German probe opens into suspected internal spying at Airbus

“Our duty is to obey the United Nations,” Says Pope Francis — What Kind Of New World Order Thinking Is That?

Robopriest: Catholic church could ordain sophisticated AI ROBOTS as priests, Franciscan Sister proposes, with the church moving towards a 'post-human priesthood'

The Pope proudly says that the Koran is a book of peace because Islam is not a violent religion

Terrorist Groups, Artificial Intelligence, and Killer Drones

Saudi Arabia executes 134 people including six kids as brutal crucifixions spike'

SURPRISE! The Official Escort for 16-Year-Old Global Warming ‘Expert’ Greta Thunberg Is a Leftist Hack Funded by George Soros Org.

Mysterious magnetic pulses discovered on Mars

Same media that once deemed chemtrails a conspiracy theory now openly promotes chemtrailing the entire planet to “end climate change”

C. S. Lewis Warned of Globalist Endgame 70 Years Ago, Spiritual Battle Gripping the Planet

 

MORE EXPLOSIONS IN RUSSIA, THIS TIME AT A BIOTECH LAB

OK folks, there's clearly something going on, at least in Russia. Over the past few weeks, we've seen (1) two munitions plant explosions, (2) the explosion of a nuclear test rocket, (3) the sinking of a Russian submarine somewhere off of Alaska, with the cryptic announcement from the Russian Defense Ministry that the crew died heroes. If one wants, throw in those fires in Siberia too. Well, there's been another explosion, this time at a Russian biotech laboratory in Novosibirsk, a major city along the Trans-Siberian railway. In fact, many of you noticed this story, and many of you are wondering the same thing as I.  Here's RT's and Zero Hedge's versions:

Blast & fire hits major virus lab in Russia, where HIV, Ebola & anthrax strains are stored

Explosion Hits Russia's Largest Virus Lab Which Houses Plague, Smallpox, Ebola And Other Deadly Viruses

Both articles are essentially the same, with Zero Hedge echoing and copying the RT article, but on something like this it doesn't hurt to check. The RT article states that the explosion occurred at a major Russian virology research facility called the Vector Institute. It's what it was researching that's rather intriguing:

The laboratory is known for having developed vaccines for Ebola and hepatitis, as well as for studying epidemics and general issues surrounding immunology. During the Cold War, it was thought to be part of now-defunct Soviet biological weapons program, meaning that some of the most dangerous strains – including that of smallpox, Ebola, anthrax and certain plagues – are still being kept inside the Institute’s building.

So we're led to believe that the Vector Institute had once been a bioweapons laboratory, which was converted to an immunology facility. But it doesn't take much imagination to see that the two are intimately related, and that the bioweapons component may still have been going on. But then there's an even more curious statement. At the beginning of the article we're informed that the facility we engulfed in flames after an explosion. Then, after being informed that the facility was once a bioweapons laboratory, we're told this:

The fire was located and quickly extinguished on the fourth floor where some “construction works” were being carried out.

...

Reports by local authorities were conspicuously light on detail, with various sources suggesting it was a gas blast that had triggered a fire at the construction site. One construction worker suffered burns to his legs and was taken to hospital for trauma care.

Most of you who shared this story expressed some skepticism about the mundane speculation, and frankly, I share it too. If the story were standing alone, all by itself, the explanation would be plausible. It was just an unfortunate accident perhaps caused by human error, or an undetected accident due to the construction. But put into the context of two munitions plant explosions (both in Siberia, incidentally), a nuclear test rocket explosion, and the curious submarine incident, the complexion and character of the incident changes completely, for it would appear that someone seems to be targeting Russian research facilities or research institutions. If this were the sole potential context from which to view these incidents, then the culprits would seem to be rather obvious: someone in the West, or its allies.  Then there were those strange Chinese chemical plant explosions, beginning with the one in Tianjin that left the suspiciously narrow and deep crater. To my mind, there's simply been too much of these types of events lately to write them all off to human error, accident or any other mundane explanation.

But cast the net of suspicion a bit wider, and the picture becomes puzzling. Consider the anomalies associated with the California fires, and one has a confusing picture, for "someone" would clearly seem to be targeting real estate in the USA as well. Perhaps one may even add the fires in Saudi Arabia's oil production facilities; perhaps that event was some sort of "pay back". If one assumes that all these things are related - and that's a big assumption - then the question of who, why, and how becomes both crucial and pressing.

But even without that context, we've now seen no less than five major incidents involving Russian defense or research facilities, and if one counts the Chinese chemical plant explosions, two additional incidents. And if we can at least suspect that there may be more pattern than coincidence in all this, you can bet the Russian and Chinese intelligence services are all over it.

See you on the flip side...

 

THOSE “SUPERWEAPONS” AND WHAT I’M NOT TALKING ABOUT

There's something in the news that I'm not going to talk about, because quite frankly, I'm sick of politics. And that's the attack on the oilfield in the (out)House of Saud. I'm not going to talk about it because while driving around yesterday morning and listening to the news, most of the consensus emerging was pointing the finger to Iran. Now, I'm not surprised, but I'm not going to talk about the nut cases running that country, nor about how I wouldn't put it past them. Nor am I going to talk about my profound distrust of the American creep state, which would do just about anything to create false flags to get us into another war, nor am I going to talk about the problems of such a strike raising the price of oil, and therefore not only putting the West in a crimp, but also Tehran's close ally China.  I'm not going to talk about that being a reason to question the "logic" behind the attack. As I say, I put nothing past the nutcases in Tehran, nor in Swampington, D.C. Yosemite Sam Bolton (and thanks to K.M. for that comparision!) may be gone, but there's plenty more cartoon characters to draw from in the neocon stable of cartoon characters.

What I do want to talk about is that strange comment Mr. Trump made recently (on the anniversary of 9/11, in fact, a little point of timing that may be significant) about the USA having some sort of "superweapons" in its arsenal that means we don't even need to use nukes to wreak nuclear-level destruction on an opponent. This story was shared by a lot of people, so thank you to all who passed it along:

Trump says the US military has super weapons that are even bigger and better than its nuclear arsenal

Now, before I crawl once again to the end of the twig of high octane speculation, I want to pose a question, or rather, a difficulty for what I'm not talking about. Suppose, for the sake of argument, that Mr. Trump's statement is true. Personally, I think it probably is true; after all, a missing $21,000,000,000,000 dollars can by a lot of exotic toys. But even if one is inclined not to believe it, the President's statement pose a difficulty for this whole Iran attacking the (out)House of Saud thing that seems to be the latest in the push for some sort of direct action against Tehran: if, indeed, such capabilities exist, then why are we so exercised over Iran getting nuclear weapons? Recently, the President tweeted his "condolences" to Tehran after satellite photos showed a burned out Iranian rocket launch site. The message was "clear:, namely, that the site had been "taken out" somehow. There are, of course, other ways to deliver nuclear weapons than rockets: breifcases, cargo containers, packages, ships, and so on will do. The problem with such methods is that they're even more subject to interdiction than rockets, and hence riskier to a country with relatively few warheads to spare. Then there was that strange comment made some months back when an American general was asked, in regard to North Korea, if "all the options" that were being considered included "kinetic weapons". The reporter who asked this asked it very loudly, so that the question could not be missed. And the general's answer was "Yes."

In reading the article, however, the possibility of kinetic "rod of God" weapons is not even mentioned, and the narrative is steered once again to conventional weapons:

Nuclear arms control expert Jon Wolfsthal, who served as a special assistant to former President Barack Obama from 2014 to 2017, raised the possibility that Trump does not know what he is talking about.

"Nuclear weapons remain the most powerful weapons in the US military arsenal," Wolfsthal told Task & Purpose on Wednesday. "While we have a vast array of conventional military weapons and many means of delivery, none come even close to the explosive or destructive power associated with our nuclear arsenal."

"I will assume that this is consistent with the president consistent effort to say anything he does is better, smarter, stronger, bigger than anyone else, but is not based on any facts or real world assessment," Wolfstahl continued.

Trump has been known for making bellicose statements. Before his rapprochement with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, the president had threatened to subject the rogue communist regime to "fire and fury."

So we can all relax: there's no such thing as other kinds of weapons. It's all Mr. Trump just sounding off once again.

But I doubt that very much; it wasn't just Mr. Trump hinting at "something else", it was also that general in response to the reporter. And that raises another possibility that I'm not going to talk about, namely, the possibility that Mr. Wolfsthal is telling the truth, at least as far as he (and possibly President Obama) were made aware of it: no such things existed in the US arsenal. And that might mean that they were kept deliberately out of the loop, while Mr. Trump was kept in that loop. And let's not forget the Chinese chemical plant explosion at Tianjin, and the suspiciously narrow and deep crater left by that event, which led me and others to speculate that perhaps one was looking at a "rod of God" attack.

Oh, and while we're not talking about stuff, I also don't want to talk about other means of interference, like some sort of possible electro-acoustic means of detonating all those ammo dumps and munitions works that seem to be exploding lately (along with the Iranian rocket site). And, while we're not talking about stuff, there's always the possibility that they're bluffing, too.

They simply don't exist. After all, someone in the government said so. But wait, they do, because someone in the government said so.

See you on the flip side...