Kucinich, Chemtrails and HR 2977
One of the more pervasive myths regarding “chemtrails” is that current presidential candidate Dennis Kuchinich tried to have them banned by an act of congress, but was pressured by the government to modify the act to remove the mention of “chemtrails”.
So what really happened? In a nutshell, Kucinich did not write the bill (or read it, until too late), the focus of the bill is nothing to do with chemtrails, it was written by UFO enthusiasts trying to:
- Nullify a vast conspiracy by the “military-industrial complex”
- Allow the use of suppressed alien technology for free energy
- Avoid accidentally shooting down (or scaring away) visiting aliens.
They listed a bunch of weird weapons, including mind control, tectonic weapons and (very briefly) chemtrails. The bill was re-written several time in less unusual language to give it chance of passing, but ultimately fizzled in committee.
The specific act was HR 2977, the “Space Preservation Act of 2001″, the stated goal of which was:
“To preserve the cooperative, peaceful uses of space for the benefit of all humankind by permanently prohibiting the basing of weapons in space by the United States, and to require the President to take action to adopt and implement a world treaty banning space-based weapons.”
The initial version of the act is the only one that makes mention of “exotic weapons systems”, listing several technologies that will be familiar to conspiracy theorists:
(i) electronic, psychotronic, or information weapons;
(ii) chemtrails;
(iii) high altitude ultra low frequency weapons systems;
(iv) plasma, electromagnetic, sonic, or ultrasonic weapons;
(v) laser weapons systems;
(vi) strategic, theater, tactical, or extraterrestrial weapons; and
(vii) chemical, biological, environmental, climate, or tectonic weapons.
Yes, it even includes “extraterrestrial weapons”, meaning weapons created by aliens (or created from alien technology from crashed flying saucers at Roswell), as well as psychotronic (mind control) weapons. Yet somehow “chemtrails” gets all the attention here.
Who wrote this? The original language for the bill was actually created by Alfred Webre and Carol Rosin. See, from Webre’s web site:
With Dr. Carol S. Rosin and many others, [Webre] is a co-architect of the Space Preservation Act and the Space Preservation Treaty introduced to the U.S. Congress by Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) to ban space-based weapons.
And also
http://www.exopoliticsinstitute.org/advisory-board-PP&M.htm#Webre
With others, Webre is a co-architect of the Space Preservation Treaty (www.peaceinspace.org ) and the Space Preservation Act that was introduced to the U.S. Congress by Congressman Dennis Kucinich and is endorsed by over 270 NGO’s worldwide.
Webre and Rosin started an organization called the “Institute For Cooperation In Space“, an organization whose primary purpose is to promote adoption of the Space Preservation Act. The ICIS states on its web site in part:
Humanity is on the threshold of a quantum leap in consciousness and endeavor.We must now take action to preserve this grand opportunity by preventing the weaponization of space.
We have a critical choice – to explore the great unknown of outer space or to risk continued suffering and disasters, devastation or obliteration. We can rise above different perspectives and actions that didn’t, don’t, and won’t cause second order change, actions that recognize our high consciousness and human potential applied with out-of-the-box thinking and intention to cause second order change, or we can continue the status quo of protesting the old and accepting the same that would only lead us to more violence instead of peace.
The whole site has a very “new-age” feel to it. Seemingly if only this act is passed, the military-industrial complex will turn from its warlike ways, and humanity will enter a new age of cooperation, progress and raised consciousness. The rationale for a weapons ban is never clearly explained. Nor is it explained why having weapons in space will prevent normal research and exploration of space. Obviously we would all like to see less deadly weapons floating over our heads, but is a total ban vital to the next stage of human evolution? ICIS seems to think so.
Indeed, when you talk about things in simple terms, an “international ban on weapons in space” sounds like a great idea. Like a ban on chemical weapons, it saves money and makes the world a safer place. So it’s not hard to get people to support such a ban.
The more well-known face of the ICIS, is Carol Rosin. Rosin claims that in 1974 rocket scientist Werner Von Braun told her “Carol, you will stop the weaponization of space”, and described to her a vast conspiracy by the military-industrial complex to raise a series of fears to justify space-based weapons. Since then, Rosin has dedicated her life to exposing this conspiracy, and allowing humanity to expand it’s consciousness into space. Here’s a video of her explaining this.
The video shows Rosin speaking at “The Disclosure Project“, an organization working to “disclose the facts about UFOs, extraterrestrial intelligence, and classified advanced energy and propulsion systems.” Rosin herself only briefly touches on this in her speech, but it is clear she believes that the government has alien technology, and is withholding it from the people.The other board members on the ICIS are co-founder Alfred Webre, Brian O’Leary and Daniel Sheehan, all of whom are deeply involved with The Disclosure Project.
Rosin commented on the “chemtrail” changes in the Bill here:
http://www.nwbotanicals.org/mediawatch/kucinich.htm
Comment
From Carol Rosin
rosin@west.net
1-28-2Perhaps I can help correct some fuzzy information that is being spread about H.R.3616, the Space Preservation Act of 2002, and Congressman Dennis Kucinich.
This bill will only ban space-based weapons and the use of weapons to destroy or damage objects in space that are in orbit. It is NOT a bill to ban chemtrails and/or psychotronics or mind control devises or any specific weapons listed in the category of definitions in the original bill.
I’m not sure where that rumor started, but in any case, those definitional were only listed on the original bill for definitional purposes…to exemplify what space-based weapons might be deployed in space if the space-based weapons bill isn’t passed. Frequently bills are revised, and things like definitions are removed. No big deal. The legislation is in no way compromised. This Congressman and his legislation maintain their integrity and commitment to ban space-based weapons. It was never a bill to ban chemtrails or mind control technologies.
So what’s Kucinich’s involvement in this? It’s difficult to say. Kucinich is anti-war, so perhaps that’s his motivation. He does have a lot of new-age, UFO-believing, friends, but he’s also running for president. When he was made aware of the nature of the “exotic weapons” language in the bill, it was re-written, and when questioned about it, he said
“I’m not into that. Understand me. When I found out that was in there, I said, ‘Look, I’m not interested in going there.’”
Kucinich’s motivations are perhaps revealed by his speech to the house on May 18th, 2005, introducing a newer version of the bill:
“What has happened to our country? Why are we projecting fear and paranoia to such heights? Have we so lost our way and our faith that we are prepared to transform the heavens into hell? If the kingdom and the will of God is to be done on earth as it is in heaven, what is to happen when the United States takes nuclear fire up to the gates of heaven?
“Such an offense against humanity could bring the wrath of God upon this nation.”
So Kucinich thinks that space based weapons will offend God, since space is close to heaven, and if you put nuclear weapons near heaven then God will be offended and bring his wrath against us.
If you actually ARE a conspiracy theorist, then all this will come as little surprise to you. You will already believe the government is covering up technology based on crashed UFOs. Yet HR2977 is constantly being mentioned solely to make the case that “chemtrails” are something the government is aware of. The reality is that they were simply given a passing mention in bill written by new-age UFO conspiracy theorists and sponsored by an eccentric politician, all of who believe in things that are far more unusual than “chemtrails”.
45 comments Saturday 19 May 2007 | Uncinus | contrails
45 Responses to “Kucinich, Chemtrails and HR 2977”
Leave a Reply
To quote someone, please use <blockquote> and </blockquote> tags, for example:
<blockquote>But surely the contrails would evaporate?
How do you explain that, given those facts?</blockquote>

Dude, I cannot believe you wrote this about a week ago. I am someone who has been {humbly} looking deep into chemtrails for about two years. Somehow I ended up at this same story, just after yourself. It’s funny, a few weeks ago I wrote a post that included chemtrail central discussion of Kucinich and the space preservation bill.
Sorry I don’t have more to say. I just started a new forum. If you check it out please don’t let what is there now scare you.
The scariest part for me is one link I just read said that for activists to succeed, they must stick to one issue until they win. The writer was saying that Rosin was an alphabet product. Actually, I found some old thread with a Jay Reynolds somehow posting at a place called Megasprayer. He led me to this story.
Anyway, my initial thought is this. Why would “chemtrails” be put into even a draft of a bill {not sure exactly what happened}, why do that if chemtrails is a crazy internet hoax, that chemtrails are contrails?
Thanks, I actually haven’t read your paper yet. It looks good. I am glad to have found this website and am looking forward to checking this place out.
Thanks for your time, “socrates”
Because it was a mistake. They were just listing exotic weapons, and that’s something they though was an exotic weapon.
Well, it has come home to roost now, as “Tell me then, if chemtrails don’t exist, why the US Senate mentions them in a Bill?”
This topic is PROOF of anti-gravity, one tug on the bootlaces, and up it comes… keep up the good work. JazzRoc
more government deciet and cover up ,there are CHEM TRAILS just as there are CON TRAILS the difference is con trails disapate and chem trails form clouds.
WHY DOESN’T SOMEONE TELL US THE TRUTH.
Contrails do not always dissipate. Look in the encyclopedia.
http://contrailscience.com/persisting-and-spreading-contrails/
In Encyclopædia Britannica.Retrieved May 4, 2007,from Encyclopædia Britannica Online: http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9074829
“WHY DOESN’T SOMEONE TELL US THE TRUTH?”
Here it is in a nutshell –
If the temperature at cruise altitude is cold enough, contrails will be formed; otherwise, not.
If the air is supersaturated with respect to ice, any contrails that are formed will be persistent; otherwise they will dissipate.
It’s as simple (and as complicated) as that.
did any of you read between the lines of Kucinich’s neo christian standings?
“What has happened to our country? Why are we projecting fear and paranoia to such heights? Have we so lost our way and our faith that we are prepared to transform the heavens into hell? If the kingdom and the will of God is to be done on earth as it is in heaven, what is to happen when the United States takes nuclear fire up to the gates of heaven?
“Such an offense against humanity could bring the wrath of God upon this nation.”
I have been doing research on ancient history and I am running into alot of holes. all of which are of course quite explainable, almost laughably deniable, and incredibly sound. I dont know about you but when a ship sinks and they find metal bond sealing the holes then it begs the question. how did it sink. What I mean is that LOOK at the information we are taught. READ between the lines. HEAR what they are trying to sell to us. KNOW that only truth sounds right. to many times we have been lied to and to many times we havent been told what is true and to many times our families havnt been able to give us answers becuase the questions where never asked. If we dont know to ask the question then who are they to be blamed for denying our answers.
I reiterate. what that man is saying if our minds are in the same place is this. What do you think your doing letting these people know this much. there will be a time when we dont have to hide ourselves and all will be under one rule. if we do this then when the time comes We are going to be in trouble not them. honestly tell me I am cracked and I will tell you that is a radioactive goo coming out. pay attention to the details not the words.
I’m afraid I don’t follow you. Why don’t you just tell me what it means?
Your above statement sounds worse than the chemtrail theories… I didn’t read any of the links you provided of course, but I have read the bill in it’s entirety. It seems rather benign to me. Reading the bill alone doesn’t give the sense of UFO enthusiasts. Instead, I get from it the tone of anti-war and the idea of a neutral and peaceful place outside of our own planet. I do agree that chemtrail theory is going a bit overboard on this one, as it proposes the ban be at altitudes of over 80km… significantly higher than most aircraft travel. It should also be noted that the UN has proposed similar resolutions banning space based weaponry, and each time (3 I believe) it was vetoed by the USA. For anyone who doesn’t know, an American veto kills any binding UN resolution no matter how many positive votes it gets. In fact, during the late 70’s and early 80’s a series of 6 resolutions were petitioned for the USA to end it’s humanitarian atrocities in Panama and Nicaragua. A US veto is strong enough to avoid such resolutions, as well as keeping us out of the International Court of Justice and any possibility of UN enforced sanctions (at least under the current UN laws.)
Well maybe you should read the links then. I’m just trying to explain where the word “chemtrails” came from in the bill. Chemtrail fans seem to suggest one word is a government admission of the entire theorized “chemtrails” theory.
It was simply one of a list of sci-fi weapons added in by Rosin and Webre – two UFO enthusiasts.
Indeed it can be interpreted differently with added information. I still think it is a good idea though
It never ceases to amaze me how many people use HR 2977 as “proof” that “chemtrails” exist. People are just so gullible!
Just a clarification…
When “extraterrestrial” is used in the bill. It’s NOT in reference to “aliens” or “alien technology”. It is a reference to spaced BASED weapons. Not based on the earth. Such as a rocket launching platform in space.
Extraterrestrial (or extra-terrestrial) may refer to any object or being beyond (extra-) the planet Earth (-terrestrial).
-wiki
Perhaps, but that simply points out how ridiculous the bill was – seeing as the bill specifically limits itself to “space based weapons”, and hence everything on the list would have to be extraterrestrial by detail.
If you look into the authors though, it’s quite clear that they believe there is alien technology in use on the Earth right now, by the governments.
I agree, the bill is completely ridiculous.
[...] my pal Jae recently posted this "dark chemtrail" photo, and I added a "tag cloud" to the sidebar], presumably compiled by exopoliticians Alfred Webre and Carol Rosin, not Kucinich, revised away in 2002), badmouthed the [...]
It hasn’t yet occurred to anyome that these are the “clouds of heaven” referred to in the Holy Bible. “He (Son of God) comes with the clouds. That’s all.
“It hasn’t yet occurred to anyome that these are the “clouds of heaven” referred to in the Holy Bible. “He (Son of God) comes with the clouds. That’s all.”
Oh great…now “The son of God” is in on the conspiracy….
Why would such a thing occur to anyone when science EASILY explains the lines in the sky as a result of combustion within varying atmospheric conditions. My car gives off “clouds”…Is it “normal” to assume that “the son of God” will be coming soon simply because water vapor is released from my automobile?!?
Sure you know what you’re rapping about, malaka. Representative Kucinich is so busy he does no even read his own bills prepared by some new-age freak, right! Or he reads them too late. Gimme a break. You must be so smart, I can feel it tremble all the way around the world. It is brain deads like you who infest this planet with war and duffering – not because you are evil, but because you are too smart.
Great writing, keep up brainwashing the nation. Good job, sob!
Zorba:
It’s all Greek to me…
(Sorry, couldn’t resist! I promise not to do it again.
)
This is a very useful website and it blows away some crucial mythology such as persistent contrails only appeared from about 1999. Myths and lies are unhelpful. I haven’t seen much stuff on HAARP however and the question of weather modification technology being used to alter the climate is still an open question.
But what we do see is that our atmosphere is affected by contrails. What I also observe is that upper atmosphere contrail cloud has a negative effect on advancing rain fronts. Why aren’t environmental groups or the EPA concerned about this? Instead we’re fed the nonsense about CO2 choking the planet.
Environmental groups are concerned about the effect of contrails on the climate. See:
http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/sres/aviation/040.htm
The CO2 concern has to do with radiative forcing, which is related to what happens with contrails. Most scientists agree that the contribution of CO2 is far greater than the contribution of contrails.
There is no evidence that contrails can affect advancing rain fronts. Contrails form at far higher altitudes than rain does.
Chemtrails are real, as stated in HR bill 2977,why else would it be presented before congress. I have been watching them spray in increasing increments over the past 2 1/2 year. I now see expanding contrails or chemtrails on a daily basis like clockwork, this is not possible as specific atmospheric conditions must be in place to support contrail formation.
Birdman-
What are the atmospheric conditions that must be in place to support contrail formation and persistence?
How do you know they are not present in the sky above you?
…is it really daily? Is it never cloudy where you live? How can you tell they are there when it is cloudy?
HR2977
HR2977 is creating a “buzz” in the Air Traffic Control community. Introduced last October by Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich, this bill called for the peaceful uses of space, and a ban on “exotic weapons”. Section 7 of the “Space Preservation Act of 2001” sought specifically to prohibit “chemtrails”.
Kucinich recently told the Columbus Alive newspaper (Jan. 24, 2002) that despite official denials, as head of the Armed Services oversight committee he is well acquainted with chemtrail projects. “The truth is there’s an entire program in the Department of Defense, ‘Vision for 2020,’ that’s developing these weapons,” Kucinich told reporter Bob Fitrakis. The U.S. Space Command’s 2020 vision calls for “dominance” of space, land, sea and air.
Though “section vii” naming chemtrails, HAARP and other planet-threatening weapons has since been removed in a substitute bill – “under pressure” according to Kucinich – the original bill remains intact and on-file in the congressional record.
CONTRAILS VS CHEMTRAILS
The unusual white plumes reported by Air Canada pilots, police officers and former military personnel over Canada and the U.S. during the past three years are often contrasted by brief, pencil-thin contrails left by commercial jets flying above them.
Contrails form when water vapor clumps around dirt particles acting as nuclei. According to NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, contrails can only form at temperatures below minus 76 degrees, and humidity levels of 70 percent or more. Even in ideal conditions, contrails rarely last more than 20 minutes.
But atmospheric studies by NASA and NOAA – including TARFOX, ACE-Asia, ACE-I and II, INDOEX and Project SUCCESS – confirm that artificial clouds and contrails can be manufactured under conditions of low humidity by dispensing particles from aircraft. The smaller the size of the nuclei introduced into the atmosphere, the greater the rate of artificial cloud formation.
Controllers across the United States know from their professional training that these chemicals fall to the ground. Without exception they expressed their concern to Deep Sky about possible risks to human health,
“They want to know what the heck is in there,” S.T. Brendt reported. “One of them said, ‘Aluminum or barium – that’s not something you want to be breathing.’”
Over the last few months, the controller have been told that the troubling aerial operations involve “climate experiments”. Deep Sky’s family continues to experience health problems, including his young son’s gushing nose bleeds and episodes Sudden Onset Acute Asthma in his wife.
Okay, let’s take that as read. Now, is there any actual evidence that contrails are different now?
Because, to the vast majority of people on the earth, including the scientists, they look EXACTLY THE SAME as they always have.
CTYF, you seem like an intelligent young man. Do you really think that a child having nosebleeds and a woman having Asthma is evidence of anything at all, let alone a different type of contrail?
What, exactly, is the evidence that shows contrail are different now?
What exaclty is the evidence which shows they are NOT different.
Lets see some time lapse video from the 80’s, c’mon..
I want to see a full white haze from “persistant contrails” in LA….
C’mon! where is it?! they had camcorders back than….
even a “half white” haze would work for me.
PROVE IT. c’mon enthusiasts!!! Lay it on me.
Well, you could check out this film from 1982 for time lapse of contrails
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koyaanisqatsi
But, have you read this?
http://contrailscience.com/persisting-and-spreading-contrails/
1970 quote:
Sorry- not every..ummm…concerned citizen…had a video camera and youtube to post too back in the 80s…does that mean it didn’t happen?
This isn’t a video…or even LA….but it is 1983- and I am sure the physics that apply to the skies above North Carolina apply equally well to the skies above LA:
http://www.1000plus.com/Imagic/8301sund.htm
Your problem was that that picture is in NORTH CAROLINA in the DEAD OF WINTER….
I was born in GA I know about humidity and NORTH CAROLINA IN THE WINTER sounds like a logical “persistant chemtrail” season.
that I could accept.
Never saw that phillip glass film, maybe i should one of these days.
Problem #1 Chemtrails/Persistant Contrails are also appear at night.
Problem #2 Boulder CO in the middle of December…this is NOT LOS ANGELES.
What do you know about humidity at 30,000 to 40,000 feet?
What about other aspects of weather aloft? Do you know, for example, that right now the wind at 30,000 feet is around 95 mph? And that the temperature is around -50F?
http://www.usairnet.com/cgi-bin/Winds/Aloft.cgi?location=WJF&Submit=Get+Forecast&hour=06&course=azimuth
CTY-
All your videos are from Oct, Nov, and Jan….prime contrail season in LA. Can you accept that?
#1 In 1969 there were far fewer flights in general, so what you are seeing is the morning commuter traffic. Watch this to see the daily patterns of flights.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPv8psZsvIU
This is also very cool, you can see the night pass over the earth, and the effect it has on flights
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-JGlSZPcOQ&feature=fvw
#2 They probably get more frequent contrail weather in Colorado. But you know this is the middle of winter here too? It’s -50F above 30,000 feet right now. And, (looks out of window, West LA) not a contrail in the sky? Maybe I had them turned off for you? Or maybe it’s the weather?
I strongly encourage you to correlate what you are seeing with the daily satellite photos available from NASA. Here’s yesterday’s
http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/subsets/?subset=USA5.2010033.terra.1km
Today’s is not fully downloaded yet, but when it does I’d bet they are rather different:
http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/subsets/?subset=USA5.2010034.terra.1km
No way Unicus, the SUN is quite a blazin today. Actually the sky from horizon to another is A VERY HAZY grey barely blue. This is not the effect of SMOG…I know because I lived in the same area in 87.
Whats the Humidity right now at 30, 000 ft?
Sure, the two images do look different. But on backtracking I am noticing a hell of a lot of “cloud cover” from days when the only “clouds” were of the “artificial variety”. I mean really…how is a weatherperson supposed to factor in for persistant aerosol trails?
Re: humidity at 30,000 feet
Nobody knows what the humidity is at 30,000 feet. Because it can only be measured by sending up a weather balloon. The last, and closest to LA, went up at 12Z today, that’s at 4AM this morning, and from Vandenberg AFB, 135 miles away. Back then, and over there, the humidity was 12% at 30000 feet (9144m). The temperature was -48C.
You can try to extrapolate that to a local reading, but as you can see from the satellite photos, the humidity can change drastically in a very short distance – basically in the distance the is the edge of a cloud. So a reading 100 miles away is not that useful.
See:
http://weather.uwyo.edu/upperair/sounding.html
Click on VBG or NKX
Looking at 15Z 02 Feb (yesterday at 7AM):
http://weather.uwyo.edu/cgi-bin/sounding?region=naconf&TYPE=TEXT%3ALIST&YEAR=2010&MONTH=02&FROM=0212&TO=0300&STNM=72393
The humidity was much higher, much more like a contrail day.
Re: “how is a weatherperson supposed to factor in for persistant aerosol trails?”. They do sometimes report them on weather forecasts, but mostly they’ll just say it’s “hazy”, or “some high level clouds”.
Do you have alot of photos to back this up?
Have a look at these nearby photos from the 1980s:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/terryviews/sets/72157618637307907/
I like this one from 1985 – looks just like a normal hazy sky like you sometimes get after a few contrails
http://www.flickr.com/photos/emd111/3639902491/sizes/o/
But, Unicus…You said that there should be NO CONTRAILS today?
How does a “non persistant contrail” condition create a “hazy day”.
Seems to be a contridiction.
Also those photos were
A) film then digitized
B) the sky today looked far more obscured, white and GLOWing.
Haze is a natural part of Los Angeles, due to geography. It’s been recorded since 1542
http://www.losangeles.com/history/
More details:
http://www.csun.edu/~hmc60533/CSUN_311/smog_and_inversions/Smog_main.htm
A) So? You know Kodachrome photos don’t show the actual colors? How do you know what filters are used? Do you have any photos that show how the sky “used to” look?
B) Than what? Than your memory? Than an idealized version of the based on summer snapshots?
Sigh.
Yes, I know the LA area was known as the “smoke bowl”.
Ha, I was born IN the 80’s.
Really, Unicus, you are
BOOOOOOORING.
Get a life.
talk to you later!