Truth News Australia

Subscribe to TNRA
Subscribe to TNRA

Latest LIVE show

Hereward Fenton

April 25, 2015
Climb aboard the ship of truth with Hereward Fenton at the helm, as we plough through uncharted waters of geo-politics, scandals, cover-ups, war and tyranny.

Listen Live or Call In !

Recent News & Podcasts

Cynthia McKinney exposes crimes against humanity committed in New Orleans

05 October 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

This is truly one of the scariest stories I've come across, and the bar has already been raised pretty high on scariness.

On 29th September 2008, former congress woman and leader of the US Greens, Cynthia Mckinney, made the astonishing claim, based on reliable inside information, that as many as 5,000 human beings were shot in the head then secretly dumped in swamps in Louisiana, in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. The burials were organised by the Department of Defence, and the data about those killed was entered into a Pentagon computer.

Those who participated in the burial of the bodies were sworn to secrecy.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nc-DouFzYM

From Oped News
1 October 2008
www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=9805

... McKinney not only relates what an informant has reported to her, but states that insiders in the Red Cross have confirmed to her that it is true. If this is indeed true, and I regretfully believe it, based on what I have heard and read (see below), then this is a damnable crime of massive proportions, in a word, a massacre of Americans, and must be brought to light.

Georgianne Nienaber, who has written for OpEdNews on the subject of extrajudicial slayings previously, booached this ghoulish topic in an article entitled Baghdad on the Bayou: Disaster Capitalism and the War on Equality, dated Dec 3, 2007. Here are some excerpts from this article, which was based on an interview with Cajun Blues artist Tab Benoit. In it Benoit is claiming that there were many more people slain by the authorities and Blackwater than is being told. In fact, he is alleging that Blackwater was blowing people (read Blacks basically) away left and right. Check out these quotes from Benoit, but first let me emphasize that this was written well beofre McKinney's above remarks and is in no way an endorsement of McKinney. The two peices stand apart in focus:

"This Katrina thing was handled as if it would have been Iraq. It was handled in a military way for resources; resources were the main focus, and the only difference is that the hurricane scattered people instead of bombs. There were people getting shot, there were bodies everywhere, there was destruction everywhere, and there's oil coming out of the ground like it never has before. Remind you of something else? The only difference is that we didn't have the equipment and the ability to fight back."

    "As soon as Homeland Security took over FEMA, people down here started paying attention. I can't say people in New Orleans were because they never had to deal with FEMA. Down here we flood every three or four years from a storm event. But New Orleans doesn't flood as often, you know, when we hear Homeland Security took over FEMA, it's like "Oh my god-now what?"

    "So I really started paying attention to things and how things were run. When Homeland Security is running it, that's a whole different agenda. It has nothing to do with rescuing people. Homeland Security is not a rescue operation.

    "I did an interview with more than one person from another country. One in particular was a guy from Canada... we [FEMA] had ordered 20,000 more body bags after Katrina, from Canada. Somebody was investigating. And because they were saying 1300 people died, and we had 20,000 body bags in New Orleans and they ran out, and had to reorder another 20,000 body bags." (2)

    Blackwater, Terrorism and Casualty Counts

    "They found out that Blackwater was killing people. Blackwater was just in there eradicating. If you didn't make it past the checkpoint and got to the dome or the convention center, or the bridge, or whatever, you were fair game.

    "They were claiming that they would deputize to confiscate guns. But they were told to shoot whenever they felt like it." (3)

    "Everybody here knows that there are more than 1300 people dead. Everybody that actually got into the city and was trying to help, saw bodies floating, saw bullet wounds. The coroner knows what's going on, and he ain't talking. But he knows. Because I know for a fact from some other sources that he was saying to somebody, probably on a private level, that those bullet wounds were military or highly powerful wounds. [Our investigation noted the same reports from multiple, unrelated sources.]

    Those were not 22 caliber pistols. Or 9-millimeter pistols. Let's face it; criminals want to save their lives too, in a situation like that. It's not some free-for-all. People are trying to get the hell out of there."

    Mass[ive] Media Cover-Up

    "The way it was portrayed [by media] was totally wrong. And from what I hear from outside of this country, which really is embarrassing to me, is that our media doesn't touch the stuff. I did an interview with a guy and he was blown away every time he opens a new door, it's a whole other big story that nobody is covering. He said that this thing is like the ten-headed snake. You grab one head and the other one is ready to bite you.

    "There is a story trying to go out on the Associated Press right now about oil and how that is why we're in the situation we're in right now, and the guy has submitted it, ready to go, and it's really a huge step, but it hasn't been out yet. This has been over a month that it's been submitted and it hasn't been out on the wire, so, is he gonna print it? That's a whole different thing. At least someone is willing to listen.

    "This Katrina thing was handled as if it would have been Iraq. It was handled in a military way for resources, resources were the main focus, and the only difference is that the hurricane scattered people instead of bombs. There were people getting shot, there were bodies everywhere, there was destruction everywhere, and there's oil coming out of the ground like it never has before. Remind you of something else? The only difference is that we didn't have the equipment and the ability to fight back. We didn't have suicide bombers and the things that other people have.

    "You get knocked out, and then you get killed. Look how easy this was to do. All the peoples' records were wiped out. Their city hall, their courthouses, their medical records, and their hospitals-all of that is gone. How easy is it to start taking people out at that point? That's the easiest thing in the world to be able to do.

    "You hide it from the media, you keep the media focused on the [super] dome and the convention center, and you keep giving opinionated stories about what this picture is, and then you pull the wool over everybody's eyes. I don't know what we're doing outside of this country, but I know what I saw right here."

    NOTES:

    (2) Reports of as many as 70,000 body bags have been published, but have since vanished from Internet archives. In September 2005, the Modesto, California Bee and the AP reported, "The federal government is trying to purchase an additional 50,000 body bags for use in the Hurricane Katrina cleanup and in Iraq,” according to John Hassapakis, manager of Central Valley Professional Services in Modesto. "Those were sent directly to New Orleans." Previously, the Federal Emergency Management Administration purchased 25,000 body bags and shipped them to New Orleans.

    (3) George W. Bush instituted a “zero tolerance” for looting in the aftermath of the flood, even if someone was “looting” “food or water.” Louisiana’s governor, Kathleen Blanco, added a “shoot to kill” order to Bush’s “zero tolerance” proclamation (see various media reports from BBC, ABC News, CNN et al). When National Guard troops from other states entered New Orleans five days after Katrina, troops aggressively pointed their rifles at black survivors who approached them while seeking aid (see People’s Hurricane Relief Fund www.peopleshurricane.org). The private military company Blackwater issued a press release stating they were in New Orleans: see www.blackwaterusa.com/press/katrina2.asp. Reporters Jeremy Scahill and Daniela Crespo quoted Blackwater operatives in September 2005: “They say they are on contract with the Department of Homeland Security and have been given the authority to use lethal force” (www.Truthout.org).

    Again, the full article, part of a series, is at www.opednews.com/..._baghdad_on_the_bayou.htm.

Free Energy - the open source energy movement

September 26, 2008, part 1 of 1.
Download mp3 » click here

03 October 2008 | Permalink | comments: 5

TNRA show 14,

In this weeks show we talk to Ashtweth Palise, Co-Founder of the panaceauniversity.org/ and panacea-bocaf.org and one of the most visible and vocal people of the Open Source Energy movement. He has worked diligently for years, tirelessly bringing us well-produced videos, presentations, and comprehensive documentation regarding free energy technology and energy-saving devices.

If you would like the Blue Print plans to make a geet converter for your self please see

www.teslatech.info/ttstore/articles/geet/geet.htm

Some more great links about geet are here

www.geetfriends.net/information_links/information_links.htm

Please be sure to support the open scorce energy movment by subscribing to the Panacea Bocaf newsletter. This news letter holds multible functions, it gives great information and breaking news on new discoveries aswell as helps protect the open scorce engineers by exposing thier work across the world.

To sign up simply go to

www.panacea-bocaf.org/newsletter/newsletter.htm

Currently Panacea finds the follwing devices the best practical do now applications and creditable introductory devices in the field of "free energy" devices.




Australia’s place in the New World Order

25 September 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

From WeAreChangeBrisbane

An Introduction to Australia's slide into a police state and New World Order.
http://www.myspace.com/wearechangebrisbane


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSj_rlWM7MY 

We Are Change is a citizens based grassroots peace and social justice movement working to reveal the truth behind the events of September 11th, as well as the lies of the government and corporate elite who remain suspect in this crime. In addition, we are here to aid the sick and dying first responders through fund-raising and social outreach programs in order to promote awareness of those who suffer from physical, emotional, and psychological traumas they received in the aftermath of 9-11. We also seek to meet other local citizens who are interested in educating the public while engaging in peaceful demonstration about the pertinent issues that are affecting our lives each and every day. Furthermore, We Are Change is a non-partisan independent media organisation comprised of patriot journalists working to hold those engaging in activities that do not represent the wishes of “We the People” - by asking the hard questions that the controlled mainstream media refuses to do.

We seek to expose the fraud of the left/right paradigm and reveal that the world truly functions on a top/down hierarchy that threatens to destroy free society as we know it. We Are Change works to educate, motivate, and activate those striving to uncover the truth behind the private banking cartel of the military industrial complex that is actively seeking to eliminate national sovereignty and replace it with a "one world order."

We Are Change also seek an uncompromising and independent investigation into the crimes of 9-11, with subpoena power granted to obtain a long-overdue resolution for the survivors and families of the deceased. We reject the official explanation of the events leading up to, during and after the attacks of September 11th, 2001 as well as the fear-based politics and state mandated propaganda being disseminated by the Corporate Media which has facilitated the cover-up of 9-11.

As we establish citizens groups throughout the country and world, we wish to inspire a community of truth-seekers and peacemakers through creative campaigns with a commitment of nonviolence. We Are Change is not so much a group but an idea, an idea that “We the People" are the vehicles of these "ideas" and of the freedoms, liberties, and truths we are seeking all across the globe. An idea that captures the spirits of our forefathers who just desired freedom; that together, as residents of this planet, we grow like a snowball of truth and justice rolling down a mountain of tyranny growing bigger and stronger, recognizing the beauty in our differences and the diverseness of each other, but at the same time strengthening our cause because we learn and grow from each others individuality. Then as we learn to come together, that as one, you, me, him, her, us…will realise that WE ARE CHANGE.

What kind of bomb can do this?

24 September 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

more photos here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/7627729.stm

Marriott Hotel Islamabad - Crater

According to news reports the Marriott Hotel blast was produced by 600kg of high quality explosives packed into a lorry. The crater is 6m deep and the devastation appears to cover a very wide area.

Although it is unusual for truck bombs to leave craters like this, the blast crater is reminiscent of a number of high profile bomb blasts over the past few years, such as the Bali Bombing and the Harriri assassination.

Looking at the size of the crater, this seems much larger than the massive Sari Night Club blast. The inside of the hotel is completely destroyed. It is hard to believe that anyone could have survived, which leads one to speculate that the death toll may be higher than the official 53. The attack is of course blamed on "Al Qaeda", but clearly there is advanced military technology at work here.

One suspects that the Cheney war camp is fed up with Pakistan's drift towards democracy.

Black propaganda targets 9/11 Truth

23 September 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

Black propaganda is false material where the source is disguised. It is propaganda that purports to be from a source on one side of a conflict, but is actually from the opposing side. It is typically used to vilify, embarrass or misrepresent the enemy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_propaganda

James Corbett
www.corbettreport.com/articles/20080921_youtube_crackdown.htm
21 September 2008

Internet censorship is once again in the news after legendary YouTube user Nuffrespect posted a new video detailing the latest online attack on 9/11 Truth: a user who is creating clones of respected user accounts and truth movement leaders in order to smear 9/11 Truth by posting racist comments. These have already led to the deletion of several well-known accounts in what has been revealed as a coordinated effort to eliminate 9/11 Truth from YouTube.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMcsqFZT98s

This is in addition to the news that YouTube deleted a number of videos and accounts last week at the behest of Senator Joe Lieberman.

That CNET admits these videos were removed as a direct result of Lieberman's staff's request is significant, as it was Lieberman who has been urging YouTube to take down "radicalizing" terrorist propaganda since May of this year to bring it into compliance with H.R. 1955, a bill that is currently awaiting approval by the Senate and which would criminalize all dissent of the government. That H.R. 1955 will specifically target the 9/11 Truth community is made obvious by a presentation made to the House Homeland Security Subcommittee in 2007 on "Terrorism and the Internet" which actually listed 9/11 Truth sites alongside terrorist jihad sites as examples of terrorist propaganda on the internet.

At first, YouTube executives made a show of standing up to Lieberman and his tyrannical dictates. "While we respect and understand his views, YouTube encourages free speech and defends everyone's right to express unpopular points of view," a message posted on YouTube said at the time.

Evidently that was mere PR and GooTube—bought out by Google last year—is now showing its roots as a spook-infested CIA front that functions as a virtual branch of government. Now with no warning and little fanfare, they have silently started implementing the government's agenda of taking 9/11 Truth and other forms of dissent off of the premiere video-sharing site.

All of this comes on the heels of numerous blows to free speech on the internet over the preceeding weeks. At the beginning of September, Comcast—America's second-largest internet provider—announced it would set a hard bandwidth limit on its customers in a move that will limit the ability of users to exchange large amounts of data. This of course sets the precedent for other providers to follow suit and it may not be long before the major internet providers are able to squeeze customers' ability to exchange information on the internet in the name of cutting down on bandwidth usage.

Also this month, reports emerged of a shadowy United Nations group known as "Q6/17" which is working with China and the NSA to develop a system to trace the source of all internet communications. Of course, as the linked article points out, such a feature would be useless as all serious hacking attempts these days rely on spoofed addresses in the first place and such traceback features are likely to be used by the very people they are designed to detect. But perhaps creating chaos on an internet that is increasingly becoming an overglorified wiretap is itself part of a much larger plan.

Indeed, the myriad ways in which the internet is under attack is too large to list in one article, but some more ideas of just how 9/11 Truth and free speech on the internet in general is being suppressed may be gleaned from the video below:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvX_TmAm7xM

Brussels 9/11 Truth March - Video

22 September 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

This is the Nuoviso Filmproduktion snippet from the Brussels march with englisch subtitles. The source is from http://www.frank-hoefer.blogspot.com/


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axyspJnTCK4

 

How terror cell “pre-crime” convictions subvert democracy

21 September 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a whimper.
- T.S. Eliot


by Hereward Fenton
Sydney, Australia
20 September, 2008

Abdul Nacer BenrikaThe conviction last week of Muslim cleric Abdul Nacer Benbrika and five other men on terrorism charges was widely covered in the Australian news. We were given a colourful story of plots to blow up sports stadiums and oaths of loyalty to terrorist leaders, but there is another aspect to all this which we did not hear on the news: these  convictions were the result of a police entrapment program. Members of the so-called terrorist group were coached by undercover police over months to make incriminating statements which were secretly recorded. The entire Crown case against the men is based on these recorded "confessions".

Benbrika's defence lawyers submitted that he was "a bumbling fool who thought it was possible to drive to Tasmania and could not lead ants to sugar". Indeed, none of the men has been found guilty of conspiring in or carrying out any specific crime - other than being members of a group which the Crown has deemed to be a "terrorist group".

Paradoxically, the group was closely monitored at all times by undercover police who collaborated with the accused in order to obtain incriminating statements. Even so, the police were not able to extract more than very generalised and vague statements from the accused.

Reminiscent of the science fiction film "Minority Report", the guilty are guilty not because of what they have done or even planned to do, but rather because of what they "might" do.

Here is an extract from one of the secretly recorded "confessions", presented as evidence of an "oath of loyalty to the organisation and to the cause":

AMER HADDARA (translated): What do I say?

ABDUL NACER BENBRIKA (translated): Yes, say I pledge you.

AMER HADDARA: I pledge you.

ABDUL NACER BENBRIKA: To obey Allah and his messenger.

AMER HADDARA: To obey Allah and his messenger.

ABDUL NACER BENBRIKA: And if I disobey Allah and his messenger, then there is no, I mean, I will disobey you.

AMER HADDARA: Then I will disobey you.

ABDUL NACER BENBRIKA: That's it, that's the one.

Such a pledge is common in terrorist cells around the world, according to terrorism expert David Wright-Neville from Monash University.

The following "evidence" was printed in The Australian:

In one conversation with an undercover police officer, Benbrika asked how much explosive would be needed to blow up a house or larger building. In another, with one of his followers, he talked about blasting buildings and doing something 'big'.

Here is a transcript of a police interview, recorded "at 4:00AM" on the day of the arrest:

DETECTIVE: If somebody asked you to undertake jihad, would you?

AMER HADDARA: If there is certain evidence that proves that it is allowed, then I would.

DETECTIVE: When is it allowed?

AMER HADDARA: It's allowed once the pressure is applied.

DETECTIVE: Do you think pressure is happening in this country at the moment?

AMER HADDARA: It is.

DETECTIVE: Are you happy enough to martyr yourself?

AMER HADDARA: I wish, as a wish I would love to go to paradise, and if, you know, if that's a way, if it's a way of doing so and there is such an avenue then I'll go down that path no problem.

DETECTIVE: What I would call a suicide bomber, the person who straps on a bomb vest, and runs into - well we'll use Iraq for example, that's my idea of a martyrdom operation. Would you go to that extent?

AMER HADDARA: If I had to and there was such extremes, yes.

The charges against the men were as follows:

1. Intentionally being a member of a terrorist organisation, knowing that it was a terrorist organisation.

2. Intentionally directing the activities of a terrorist organisation, knowing that it was a terrorist organisation

3. Intentionally providing resources to a terrorist organisation, knowing that it was a terrorist organisation 

Note that none of these charges relate to any specific terrorist plot. There was no actual conspiracy. There was no planned attack. This point is lost in media coverage of the convictions. If the prosecutors had been able, they would have certainly tried to get convictions on charges of conspiracy - but they could not make this stick. Instead they were forced to press charges based on anti-terror laws which are pre-emptive in nature.

Despite the lack of legally admissibale evidence, the mainstream media continues to push the idea that there was an actual plot of some kind:

The Herald Sun also reveals today that taped conversations indicated Benbrika's terrorist organisation may have been planning an attack on polling day during the 2004 federal election.

Note the phrase "may have been". By the same token, Benbrika's "terrorist organisation" may have been planning to fly to the moon. This blatant media spin has nothing to do with either legal process or consensual reality. The scenario depicted above is an invention of the media. It is, by any reasonable definition, fiction.

Why is there not a massive protest movement against this corruption of the legal framework of our society? Why can't people seem to understand the threat? Perhaps it is because those being persecuted are foreign types wearing funny hats. Maybe it's because we are more interested in Britney Spears' current hair style. Either way, this blinkered and self centered ignorance will ultimately be our undoing, allowing our would-be rulers to dismantle the remaining protections we have, after which protest will be futile because we will already effectively be prisoners in the new slave state.

Tragically, there is no meaningful resistance against this outrageous assault on our liberty. Our only protest is in blogs read by a handful of people.

Truth Action - September 11 - ABC Studios

21 September 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

Thanks to Dani for this well crafted video.

 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NS2nI6hpZn4

Page 87 of 109 pages ‹ First  < 85 86 87 88 89 >  Last ›

Listen Live

Recent Comments

Last Sunday in Athens we took an interview with the Cyriot Green parliamentarian Perdikis who made the point that under the precautionary principle the onus of proof is on those who say that chemtrails don’t exist, not on those who say that chemtrails exist.

The Cypriot Greens managed to get their government to carry out tests on the content of the spraying, but they haven’t managed to get them to reveal the results.

By Wayne Hall on 2012 11 16 - 16:19:55
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

theres plenty of evidence of spraying activity you gormless liar.

you say theres no such thing as as chemtrails. saying that contrails exist is not evidence against chemtrails you supercilious lumpen

put up or shut up.

By agin mee on 2012 11 16 - 10:46:28
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Skywatcher said:

“youre saying theres no such thing as chemtrails”

There is no evidence that any contrail is a chemtrail. As far as I know, no sample was ever taken from a trail for analysis by chemtrail promoters.

Atmospheric science explains contrails and their variations.

By Josh on 2012 11 16 - 10:16:43
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

still have nothing to show there has never been, or there are no geoengineering programs josh, still have nothing to show there is no such thing as aerosols ever being sprayed .. still have nothing except your stupid assertion that there can be no such thing as chemtrails, because sometimes, rarely, when conditions are conducive, contrails may sometimes linger.

are you just pretending to be so stupid as to believe you can win an argument on that basis, or are you really that stupid..

youre saying theres no such thing as chemtrails. put up or shut up.

By agin mee on 2012 11 16 - 09:02:11
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Leonard Clampett said:

“I have never insisted that no water is produced by combustion.”

You keep talking about water that is contained in tiny amounts in the fuel before combustion. That’s not relevant, as aren’t the water tests for fuel. The fuel is good enough as it is.

The water in the exhaust is produced from the Hydrogen in the fuel molecules and the Oxygen from the intake air.

“the only moisture emitted from an exhaust came from the intake air and minuscule amounts of hydrogen.”

Still a miss.

The molecule mass of water is around 18 g/mol. The molecule mass of kerosene (idealized) is a little over 170 g/mol. In the combustion equation we have two kerosene in, 26 water out. The mass equivalent:

2 x 170 = 340 in, 26 * 18 = 468 out. Or 1 ton in, 1.37 tons out.

So for every ton of kerosene, 1.37 tons of water are produced. This is anything but minuscule.

I have used this molecule mass calculator:
http://www.lenntech.com/calculators/molecular/molecular-weight-calculator.htm

By Josh on 2012 11 16 - 04:24:03
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

“documents prove that an unsuspecting public was indeed used in chemical experiments during the 1950s and 60s.  These documents disclosed experiments of chemical spraying from airplanes over several cities including Corpus Christi, Texas and fogging disbursement of chemicals targeted at Pruit-Igoe, a low cost housing project with over 10,000 occupants in St. Louis, Missouri. The government’s cover story for the experiments was using as fog as cover against communist air attack”
http://www.policymic.com/articles/18974/more-reasons-to-distrust-government-and-the-mainstream-media

http://millvalley.patch.com/articles/photo-weird-contrails-over-mill-valley#photo-12157350

By John Doe on 2012 11 15 - 23:23:29
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

i doubt the original post was meant to provoke anything other than controversy. the blatant insulting bias was a deliberate attempt to do nothing else but generate advertising hits. ( i dont get ads.. )

this dog and pony blog struggles for relevancy and credibility with its blatant misinformation, censorship and dictatorial hypocritical nonsensical administration.. 

threatening to close the thread? lol..  you wont… youre scared!

whatcha gonna do hereward? close ALL the threads?

i appreciate the informed sensible input from different views of wayne and leonard, ive learnt a few things.. im sure if you could trust fenton with an honest vote and a poll here, the consensus would show its not unreasonable to wonder why the skies appear as they do, and to seek legitimate answers..

for myself, as a layman, i can simply call things as i see them, joshs disingenuous hall monitor annoying attitude will get from me the disrespect it deserves..

herewards censorship will result in a repeat post, which simply brings the deleted post back to prominence again.. i can play that game as long as he wants.. his pathetic threats to continue to taunt me are as laughable as this whole site having anything to do with truth.

as for cyber violence.. i appreciate that as well.. because dishonesty and blatant BS should be called out for what it is.. and for the lulz..

mike glynn… the paranoid conspiracy theorist who thinks hes going to be taken out the air by some chemtrail alarmist-thug-brownshirt-fascist-blah-blah-blah.. with what? a rocket propelled boomerang? - otherwise known as the conspiracy within a conspiracy..

does quantas know such nutters are flying their planes?

none of them can offer any proof of anything they say.. 

they will call this post insulting, and abusive, simply because im critical and disagree..

it will most likely be deleted a few times, and my ip blocked again… for the umpteenth time.. 

so be it.

By agin mee on 2012 11 15 - 22:13:19
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Wayne, you should endeavour to make your posts clear.

Your post did seem to claim that I was claiming that chemtrails were not real “on the basis of “it isn’t being done” which seemed to be saying that I did not believe chemtrails were for real. A little difficult to follow that rather bland statement. I note you have expressed that you should have expressed your point more precisely. Miscommunication causes many problems all the time. Geo-engineering can be the only reason for the chemtrails as far as I can see, and I do not believe for good purposes. The wild theories I wrote of are those unaccompanied by good science or observation.

I have never insisted that no water is produced by combustion as I have made it clear how I understand combustion causes contrails. I presume you are using produced meaning to bring forth or yield. The very evidence of the making of contrails contradicts the claims about “contrails “spreading and manufacturing cloud quite simply because if there was more water than is contained in the air passing through the engine, tonnes and tonnes from one aircraft I recall reading in one post, it would certainly create large contrails rather than the thin wispy trails we see on any winter day as the upper atmosphere rarely has greater than about 70% humidity and is therefore relatively dry. There can never be more than 100% humidity in the atmosphere anyway, so those claims of supersaturation can be sorted and tossed out early.

Exhaust emissions are the same whether at ground level or high altitude because engines are manipulated, these days by computers, to produce required power at best and optimum performance for all settings under all conditions. For those who believe that there is water produced from the actual high temperature combustion process (about 700 degrees Celsius at ITT (Inter Turbine Temperature)), that is more than is contained in the intake air, I suggest talking to engineers who run jet engine test cells and ask how much water is emitted during their testing. It would be an experiment to capture the emissions and cool them to see how much water condenses out of it. Interesting. In addition it begs the question as to why we inject water methanol into the engine intake, on some aircraft, during take-off if there is water in the fuel.

Thanks for the exchange. I will sign off now as I have not been able to see anything of worth coming from this forum and argument has never achieved anything worthwhile. Only discussion will do that.

By Leonard Clampett on 2012 11 15 - 21:05:01
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Leonard, I have read all your posts, though I admit to having been disoriented by your first post and your reference to “wild theories about contrails and “chemtrails” so that I did not know initially where you were coming from. I also found myself in disagreement with your later statement that civilian airliners would not or could not be implicated in spraying. My reference to your arguing on the basis of “it isn’t being done” should have been more expressed more precisely. 

What I should have said is that you don’t seem to want to talk about geoengineering, or any of the other actual or proposed applications of spraying of particulates from aircraft, unlike me, for I entered the discussion on the basis of the argument that “the last way to understand what one is seeing in the skies is to become implicated in the contrails vs chemtrails discussion”.  That, I said, is because “the purpose of the contrails vs chemtrail discussion is to determine whether geoengineering (or some other deliberate atmospheric modification) activity is in progress .  This subject has always interested me more and my focus has always been on geoengineering and the applications of particulate spraying, along with the underlying politics. Not the physical science of contrails/chemtrails, which I cannot argue about.

The discussion you wished to have was/is precisely that proposed by Hereward and Josh: i.e. whether there can be “persistent” and/or spreading controls. What you have to say on the subject of “persistent” chemtrails seems persuasive to me. But your presumed expertise has not enabled you to be any more effective than I have been in securing what should be due acknowledgement from Hereward and Josh. What has been in progress here has been a dialogue of the deaf, whoever involves themselves with it. And the final result has been the intrusion of activists threatening cyber-“violence”.

Perhaps it is these activists’ devotion to the fetish of “freedom of speech” that leaves them with no option other than anonymous threats. They are evidently not willing to say that “freedom of speech” should be drawn into question.
 

By Wayne Hall on 2012 11 15 - 20:19:11
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Leonard Clampett,

I was not referring to chemtrails in my previous post. I was referring to your claim that no water is in a jet exhaust that was not there before in the intake air.

Michal Glynn, professional jet pilot, commented:

“The chemical equation given by Josh explains it all. Kerosene and ambient oxygen in=large amounts of water and CO2 out.”

See page 4 of comments, at the bottom, “2012 07 09 - 09:52:23”.
It’s obviously not my equation ...

Are you still insisting that there is no water produced by the combustion of fuel?

By Josh on 2012 11 15 - 20:06:54
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Categories