8/26/19: TURN LEFT AT GREENLAND

TURN LEFT AT GREENLAND

MONOLOGUE WRITTEN BY CLYDE LEWIS

There have been times when I have been told that the media has a tendency to focus on stories as distractions to stories that need more attention. This was especially apparent during the Epstein death. While news stories, of course, must go on, there are people who want to hear more about a certain story and when it finally fades, there is a tendency to think that all stories afterward are distractions.

However, I have been in the news business and I can tell you that there are times when stories reach dead ends and thus there is a need to move on while some have staying power.

I was noticing today that there were still stories spinning out from the El Paso/Dayton shootings. The media will not let go of these stories because they still generate the political gun debate.

Sometimes a story wears out its welcome and sometimes you wish that there is a story that can put a nail in the coffin of an overblown story.

Most news is nothing but a distraction in some form or fashion anyway. Either it is reported in a way that distracts from the important facts of the story itself, which is almost always the case, or often the only reason it is even being reported is to distract from a story that is too complex and is gagged by editors.

The most important editorial decision any propagandist makes is what news to “cover.” The people in charge control the “national conversation”, and therefore the people’s thinking in a large way, by making certain stories “big deals.” Most of the time if you stop and look at it, the facts of the story don’t seem to warrant it being such a “big story.”

But even more importantly, when they do this, they make sure that stories that might actually be important do not become big deals. And you can be sure that if they do slip through the net and become a slightly bigger story that the “facts” and the spin given to it will do the job of distracting from whatever is important in the story. And when all else fails, well, bring in a “new story” to push the other off the top of mind awareness.

One of the biggest distracting stories as of late is the Amazon fires and the overreaction to them.

The increase in fires burning in Brazil set off a storm of international outrage last week. Celebrities, environmentalists, and political leaders blame Brazilian president, Jair Bolsonaro, for destroying the world’s largest rainforest, the Amazon, which they say is the “lungs of the world.”

The lungs of the world claim – is all hype. Again, there is no science to back up that claim at all. The Amazon produces a lot of oxygen but it uses the same amount of oxygen through respiration.

Plants use respiration to convert nutrients from the soil into energy. They use photosynthesis to convert light into chemical energy, which can later be used in respiration.

The New York Times reported that once the rainforest burns it cannot be restored – that is also a myth. We know that the complex system always restores itself due to previous fires in the area.

But the “lungs” myth is just the tip of the iceberg. Consider that CNN ran a long segment with the banner, “Fires Burning at Record Rate in Amazon Forest” while a leading climate reporter claimed, and “The current fires are without precedent in the past 20,000 years.”

While the number of fires in 2019 is indeed 80% higher than in 2018, it’s just 7% higher than the average over the last 10 years ago.

While local farmers in the area set the blazes, there seems to be this overwhelming hysteria about the fires even though there have been fires in that region before.

In fact, the photos of the fires that have been used by the media and celebrities like Madonna and Leonardo DiCaprio weren’t actually of the fires and many weren’t even of the Amazon.

One of the photos was from 2013 – far from the Amazon and the other making the rounds is from the Amazon taken 30 years ago.

Emanuel Macron, Ricky Martin and Leonardo DiCaprio shared a picture from 1989.

There are other examples of photos misleadingly used to raise awareness. Some feature an elephant, which is not native to the Americas, in apparent distress, its back feet in flames.

This does not mean there are no fires – it just appears that the media and celebrities are overreacting because of their agenda to push Climate Change.

Brazil’s leading environmental journalists agree that media coverage of the fires has been misleading.

Amazon forest fires are hidden by the tree canopy and only increase during drought years.

This is not a global crisis by any means.

There is nothing abnormal about the climate this year or the rainfall in the Amazon region, which is just a little below average,” Alberto Setzer, a researcher at Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research (INPE), told Reuters. “The dry season creates favorable conditions for the use and spread of fire, but starting a fire is the work of humans, either deliberately or by accident.”

The Amazon blazes are being exploited for the Climate Change agenda and yet there is something far more important to talk about and that is how the Climate ends justify the climate means.

However as we reported on Ground Zero, the fires burning in the Arctic since June are the most concerning, however, no one is willing to report what is really happening.

More than 21,000 square miles of forest have gone up in flames in Siberia this month, putting Russia on track for its worst year on record for wildfires. The smoke from these blazes shrouded large parts of the country, including major cities like Novosibirsk, and has crossed the Pacific Ocean into the United States.

On Monday, a wildfire in the Canary Islands forced more than 8,000 people to flee. Over the weekend, new fires ignited in Alaska, extending what’s already been an unusually long fire season for the state.

Last week, Denmark dispatched firefighters to Greenland combat a wildfire approaching inhabited areas. If not extinguished, officials are worried the blaze would burn through the winter, further driving up the already massive ice melt Greenland has experienced this year amid record heat.

The IPCC and the Climate zealots will tell you that this is all due to fossil fuel usage and the warming at the poles.

Greenland, of course, was in the spotlight just last week because President Donald Trump was actually seriously interested in buying the country. However his offer was shut down and while the media saw it like some crazed power grab of real estate by the President – there is a really important reason why President Trump is interested in the spoils of the northernmost part of the globe and they have nothing to do with greedy real estate plan to build a Trump Tower for the polar bears.

Trump wants Greenland to be an outpost for the American Military and he also wants it wide open for American businesses to compete with aggressive Russian ambitions for control of the Arctic.

In a provocative move, in 2007 a Russian submarine managed to plant the national flag on the seabed under the North Pole, and a year later the Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, declared: “Our first and main task is to turn the Arctic into Russia’s resource base of the 21st century.”

They had a plan in place to open shipping lanes that would compete with the Suez canal — it is called the Transpolar Passage.

For journeys between Europe and Asia, the Northern Sea Route can already be two to three weeks faster than the Suez Canal. By cutting straight across the Arctic, the Transpolar Passage could save a further two days. It might even make sailing through Arctic straits (the Northern Sea Route and Northwest Passage) “obsolete.”

Russia and China can’t wait for this to happen and so they have employed geoengineering to the arctic and setting blazes is helping in the melting process along with weather manipulation that pulls the colder air into the Midwest leaving the polls unseasonably mild.

In 2010, Russia joined with Japan in an attempt to water down a resolution to restrict research into geoengineering at a meeting of the Convention on Biological Diversity.

In pursuing the climate engineering agenda, a Russian government is likely to face fewer domestic constraints than more developed democracies. Pro-geoengineering analysts writing for a US conservative think-tank have argued that nations with weak environmental lobbies (meaning China and Russia) will be able to deploy “solar radiation management” with muted internal opposition.

This, they wrote, is one of its advantages. If true, solar radiation management is the dictator’s technology of choice. China, increasingly fearful of environmental catastrophe, has recently included geoengineering among its earth sciences research priorities.

There is a long history of attempted weather modification in Russia, especially as part of the cold war arms race. In 1960, in a book titled Man versus Climate, two Russian meteorologists matched American technological hubris when they wrote:

“Today we are merely on the threshold of the conquest of nature. But if … the reader is convinced that man can really be the master of this planet and that the future is in his hands, then the authors will consider that they have fulfilled their purpose.”

Geoengineers have also stated that the people of Siberia would not mind a few more degrees of warming and so what we are seeing are various attempts at warming the area for both military and commercial purposes.

Sea ice around the North Pole covers the largest area at the end of the winter in March and thaws to an annual minimum in September.

Russia is already prepared to hire nuclear Icebreakers to go in and create a passage that would allow for year-round navigation in 2020.

Civilian research could support a strengthened Chinese military presence in the Arctic Ocean, which could include deploying submarines to the region as a deterrent against nuclear attack.

Beijing laid out ambitions in January 2018 to form a “Polar Silk Road” by developing shipping lanes opened up by the ice thaw and encouraging enterprises to build infrastructure in the Arctic.

This poses an economic threat to the United States as Russia and China get to benefit from North Pole booty while the United States is left out.

Greenland is an advantageous location for the U.S. Armed Forces. The U.S. and Greenland have had an agreement since World War II to house American military assets on the island.

Thule Air Base, America’s northernmost Air Force base, has operated since 1943 in Greenland and has a ballistic missile early warning system and satellite tracking system.

Greenland’s largest economic drivers are fishing and tourism, but the island has drawn rising interest due to its vast natural resources, including coal, zinc, copper, iron ore and rare minerals. There have been expeditions to assess the extent of the nation’s resources, but the true quantity is unknown.

Not only that but the United States could lose population as the geoengineering of the North may mean cold and severe weather leading to crop loss in the United States.

We have already seen what has happened with weather manipulation this year as severe flooding and cold has decimated the growing season for farmers.

Europe may have had a heat spike but as you know, the scarcity that is coming to the United States has been ignored as the IPCC and Climate Change advocates have overlooked the heavier than normal snowfall – the growth in glacier ice and that how the intentional warming of the Arctic could trigger a mini Ice Age in the United States.

It has also been reported that scientists are raising alarm bells after two studies found that the Gulf Stream, which is key to regulating Earth’s climate, is the weakest it’s been in 1,600 years.

If the stream dies, scientists say, its equatorial heat would stop reaching the North Atlantic, plunging Europe into bone-numbing winters and affecting weather worldwide. Even subtler changes “could wreak havoc” on the Atlantic Ocean’s “delicate ecosystems.

This will trigger a very cold future for us and parts of Europe.

And what area will be warmer? That’s right, the Arctic.

The ice age threat is the most serious threat. However, it is a long-range threat and arguably what we saw this past winter and spring with Bombogenesis and severe cyclone bombs is only the beginning.

In order to prevent this, there would have to be some sort of weather manipulation through counter geoengineering and the place where it would crucial is Greenland.

Greenland’s weather often influences weather patterns in Europe and has had some influence in Atlantic weather systems.

Weather Data from Greenland is crucial from a strategic standpoint.

Can you imagine that a future weather war would have to happen over Greenland to save the Gulf Steam and to prevent an Ice Age?

Well, it certainly wasn’t the first time this was attempted.

In Greenland during World War II, a struggle about weather data was fought out. In the years 1942-44, the Danish Sledge Patrol detected two secret German weather stations on the uninhabited Northeast coast, and after the first encounters, a small-scale war was unfolding.

The desolate coast of Northeast Greenland became the arena of a series of military clashes.

Meteorological expeditions sent out by the German Wehrmacht regularly attempted to establish secret weather stations on the long, uninhabited coast. Not all of these operations were successful, but two of them actually succeeded in establishing a station and wintering undetected, sending the valuable weather data home by radio on a daily basis.

The German activities in Greenland, nevertheless, were counteracted by the Northeast Greenland Sledge Patrol, a small defense unit of 10-12 men under Danish leadership – the predecessor of the Sirius Patrol, which still today secures Denmark’s sovereignty in those remote areas.

The ruins of the German and Danish wintering stations are still visible in the High Arctic landscape, and they have proved to be exceptionally well-preserved.

As far back as 1867, Secretary of State William Seward explored the acquisition of Greenland around the time that he negotiated the purchase of Alaska from the Russians.

Harry Truman tried to buy Greenland in 1946 for $100 million in Gold.

Greenland might not be for sale, but could there be a war waged in order to control it?

Washington’s short-term defense interests in the Arctic, however, are very clear. In response to China and Russia, the Pentagon is relearning how to fight in the cold.

NATO forces held a military exercise called Trident Juncture last year in and near Norway with 50,000 participants, giving troops a taste of what Arctic combat might be like. The Marine Corps has also sent a rotating contingent of forces to Norway, where Marines are pre-positioning vehicles, weapons, and ammunition in massive caves and learning to fight on skis.

Noting the region’s importance, Air Force Gen. Terrence O’Shaughnessy, head of U.S. Northern Command and North American Aerospace Defense Command, has said, “The Arctic is the first line of defense.”

So if there is a war – it will literally be a cold one.

So while celebrities and Climate Change cultists are demanding that something be done about the rain forest, the real action is happening up North.

The burning of the forests and tundra is releasing astounding quantities of carbon, stored for centuries in the wood and the permanently frozen subsoil. Melting permafrost releases methane, a greenhouse gas many times more destructive of the world’s climate than carbon dioxide. The fires are in fact a feedback mechanism, accelerating climate change as Climate Change accelerates them.

They could be extinguished immediately but the local authorities failed to do so, and now we know why.

The Russians I guess believe that they have a method to their madness of utter neglect the Arctic, a large portion of which is controlled or claimed by Russia, is a new carbon “gold mine”, holding up to a quarter of the globe’s undiscovered oil and gas reserves.

Russia believes that if they change the climate through geoengineering there would be rapid change and development as exploration, production and infrastructure will have an inevitable, irreversible impact.

The question is who is going to call out Russia for committing crimes against the environment?

This is obviously a conspiracy that is in plain sight.

Those who laughed at the ambitions of buying Greenland need to know that both Russia and Beijing have already looked into the possibility as well.

The United States and its allies have a major interest in not allowing the newly proposed Arctic sea lanes to fall under Russian or Chinese control and Russia is still allowing for the burning of the Arctic in order to heat up the prospect of making these lanes operational by next year.

SHARE

RELATED CONTENT

9/20/19: JEFFREY EPSTEIN – BIG BROTHER GOLDSTEIN 9/19/19: U.A.P. – IT’S STILL U.F.O. TO ME W/ DAVE ALTMAN, WALTER BOSLEY AND GARY VOORHIS 9/18/19: IN LOCO PARENTIS – CHILDREN OF THE FAILED APOCALYPSE 9/17/19: OPERATION OBLIVION 9/16/19: GOD OF CHAOS W/ MARSHALL MASTERS 9/13/19: UFO: SECURITY STATE W/ DAN WRIGHT
Comments