What do we do when all branches of the military, government agencies, departments, officials and offices exist in a d’facto status in NAME ONLY?
The United States Federal Government was dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat.1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt. The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy were the International Bankers via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
We the people, are the enemy. See Senate Report #93-549.
The Government exists today, in name ONLY!
Geoengineering (Weather Weapons) is the “Deliberate” large-scale manipulation of the Earth’s climate that is creating the Climate Changes and the reason behind ALL the Climate Action Plans and Resilient Plans adopted in EVERY city, town, village, state, country and nation throughout the WORLD!
An illusion has been created which appears to be real, it’s not real! An extremely dangerous reality has been engineered using the power and force of economic and weather weapons and consensus run policies that YOUR countries and YOUR cities have agreed to. All our cities and government agencies have signed and accepted “grants” to finance these criminal plans. The very creation of cyber cities run by Google (Resilient Cities) is now forming and shaping into human settlement zones. This massive global relocation of populations is “within” the requirements of the Climate Action Plans. People who reside outside city urban growth boundaries are considered to live in unsustainable rural areas and creating sprawl. The Climate Action Plans REQUIRE we ALL reduce our GHG Green House Gas Emissions to near ZERO or below by 2050. There is NO life at these reductions goals.
Recently, in a electric utility bill from Edison International (Southern California), which is run by Rothschild, the Edison CEO Pedro Pizarro said, the current structure is unsustainable and new approaches are needed to mitigate climate risks. He told us that fire season is all-year round and is now our “new normal”. He said, “There must be a sharing of the increasing risk of climate change impacts across society.”
In short, populations are being condensed into highly populated locations with complete monitoring and without cars. Vast wireless networks with multiple layers of frequencies, will direct the thoughts and minds of all people. The use of weather weapons is rapidly forcing implementation of the transformations we are all being conscripted into. All resources will be rationed and EVERY aspect of everyone and everything will be tracked and monitored. There is much more to discuss on the social engineering of entire populations and we cover that in the various documents posted onStopTheCrime.net.
Sea level rise is being created artificially as you will read in the insider comment below.
There is MUCH more to discuss and expose and we suggest you sign up for the email blasts and regularly go to StopTheCrime.net and view our YouTube video’s to listen to the latest documents we are exposing . . .
Definition of CONSENSUS – CONSENSUS depends on participants having shared values and goals, and on having broad agreement on specific issues and overall direction. Consensus implies that everyone accepts and supports the decisions, and understands the reasons for making those decisions. These advisory meetings, as they are often called, are facilitated and manipulated by trained leaders that create the illusion that your ideas are being crafted into policies for your community. These meetings employ the DELPHI technique which is a format of manipulation and control and promotes the CONsensus plot. Tightly monitored control of those citizens in attendance is the manipulation necessary to create the illusion that we the people are creating these policies. We are NOT creating these polices! ALL these agendas (policies) have already been created and are being stealthily agreed and accepted by your incorporated governments, officials and ALL departments.
These policies are being conceived through CONsensus and insidiously implemented without the publics knowledge and informed consent based upon REAL SCIENCE.
Remember, OUR governments are d’facto and exist, TODAY, in name ONLY . . .
Those in attendance at advisory meetings or public meetings will typically be broken up into small groups and seated at “separate” round tables thinking they have been given an opportunity to provide input that will be considered into the final decisions in the plans. The trained leader manipulating the discussion will ask pre-scripted questions that have already been decided upon before the meeting. These answers will often be noted on a large easel with paper. The citizens are separated into small groups to prevent the likelihood of the those in attendance coming together in dissent and opposition of their plan. This is NOT science we have been TRICKED into agreeing on vast economic and far reaching agendas that are hidden behind population reduction policies, worldwide. This is about GENOCIDE!
This is the military report excerpt – The U.S. military’s numerous military installations live in that changing landscape, it will have to adapt, and adapt quickly. To use military parlance, the theater is, in essence, flooding. Adjusting to that rapidly changing theater will be absolutely critical for the U.S. military to maintain its ability to fulfill its mission, and for the United States to adequately pursue its national security interests. At the center of this adjustment are coastal military installations – their infrastructure and the adjacent supporting communities – that form the backbone of this global military force.
By the end of the 21st century, the climate, sea levels, and the shape of many of the coastlines from which the military builds, trains and launches its operations, will likely be significantly different. Already, on the global scale, “sea level has risen by about 8 inches since the late 1880s”.7 By 2100, projections show an average global mean sea level rise of up to 1 meter (3.3 feet), with upper projections toward 6.6 feet (2 meters)8 should marine-based sectors of the Antarctic ice sheet collapse.9 Given that around 10 percent of U.S. military installations and training grounds are located along low-lying and exposed coastlines,10 the long-term effects in terms of flooding will be significant.
As the U.S. implements its Asia-Pacific Rebalance strategy, it will need to strongly consider how climate change will complicate that strategic objective – including its growing humanitarian assistance/ disaster relief (HA/DR) role.
Evidence suggests that climate change may make cyclones and other tropical storms more intense.
In short, the physical landscape in which the U.S. military operates is no longer a fixed “given.” Since the U.S. military’s numerous coastal military installations lie in a rapidly changing landscape, it will have to adapt, and adapt quickly. Adjusting to that unstable environment will be essential for the U.S. military to be able to maintain its ability to fulfill its core mission. At the center of this adjustment lies a fundamental need to build a resilient military infrastructure that supports the “global military force”. Time is an important factor. As noted in the 2016 SERDP report on managing uncertainty for coastal risk management, “Uncertainty is not a reason for inaction, because taking no action is a decision in itself.”14 SERDP’s 2013 report on climate impacts and coastal military installations also noted that the decisions, or lack of decisions, that are being made today will drive how vulnerable the military’s “assets and capabilities” will be, in the face of climatic risks, for “many decades to come.”15
If it is to meet the goals of protecting the American people, U.S. allies, and national interests, the defense community does not have the luxury of waiting until events transpire to prepare for, respond to, and mitigate these risks. With a number of new efforts complete or underway, the security community now has sufficient understanding of the risks of climate change and sea level rise to justify comprehensive action – especially for coastal bases and their surrounding communities that are already feeling the effects (and incurring the damage).
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) has recognized the security implications of a changing climate as far back as 2003.17 Recognition of the risk, and action to address it, has grown with each passing year18 – culminating in a “DoD Directive on Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience” in 2016,19 that provides policy guidance and assigns responsibilities on managing the risks associated with climate change. It directs DoD components to assess the effects of climate change on the department’s mission and to take into account those effects when developing plans and implementing them. It also concludes that climate change will be a constant consideration in how the DoD goes about its war mission, acquisition programs, readiness plans, construction projects and security. As noted in the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review:
“Climate change will affect DoD in two broad ways: First, climate change will shape the operating environment, roles and missions that we undertake. Second, DoD will need to adjust to the impacts of climate change on our facilities and military capabilities.”20
The first category includes consideration of climate change as a strategic risk, given the possibility that it will as an “accelerant of instability or conflict, placing a burden to respond on civilian institutions and militaries around the world.” The second category includes consideration of the “30 U.S. military installations that were already facing elevated levels of risk from rising sea levels,” along with a much larger group of military sites that will face elevated risks throughout the 21st century.21 As with its treatment of other security risks, the DoD has based its assessment of climate change risks on the best available science.
New modeling conducted by the US Geological Survey as part of a study on DoD installations uses techniques that consider the interaction of higher sea levels with storm- induced “wave-driven” flooding. The results indicate that low-lying atolls may experience more severe inundation sooner than previously estimated, with “wave-driven water levels” causing twice as much land area to be flooded than currently predicted.3
INSIDER COMMENT – NOT part of the military report excerpt:
This is an excerpt from the military report – Infrastructure at coastal installations is in need of upgrade or replacement. Integrating already planned or forecast construction planning and execution with efforts that will be required to deal with sea level rise will eliminate project duplication or conflicts in project execution and will permit development of realistic long-term infrastructure programming.
There is a growing “consensus” that planners and policy makers must consider a range of projections of coastal impacts to inform their decisions. This is a concerted shift that has taken root in the past few years, and shows a new mindset regarding how to plan for the coastal impacts the country can expect for defense installations.
Analytical efforts conducted since 2015 show a distinct move toward including worst-case, best-case, and extreme-event projections in advice provided to decision makers, who can then act on projections that will account for a broader range of possibilities. In terms of planning and investing in ways that leave the DoD more prepared for the full range of possibilities, accounting for a range of possible outcomes is optimal.
The research to date paints a picture of increasing military installation exposure to sea level rise along the coastlines of the United States and around the world. Low-lying and exposed areas of coastal bases around the world will be very significantly – if differentially – affected throughout the course of this century. As early as 2050, the low-lying parts of some bases along the East and Gulf coasts of the United States could be underwater for “10 to 25 percent of the year”33which would have an enormous impact on the ability to support military operations.34 According to the SERDP 2016 report, under scenarios projecting a global average sea level rise of 3.3 feet (1 meter) or higher in 2065 and 2100, some DoD sites, including many in the northeastern U.S., will experience an additional 0.7 to 1.6 feet (0.2 to 0.5 meters) over the global average. In 2011 and 2014, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers produced a report also using a “multiple- scenario approach,” and suggested that a global mean sea level rise scenario of “1.5 meters by 2100” be used for planners (4.9 feet), but that “2.0 meters,” or 6.6 feet, “is a credible upper bound”.35These multiple- scenario exercises do not give us perfect information about risks to specific installations, but coupled with the recent SERDP study (2016), they tell us enough to drive planning against both the worst and best cases. Another common thread is the importance of not overlooking the less severe but more frequent “slow- onset” events, such as so-called “nuisance flooding” – which presents consistent and sustained risks for military installations domestically and around the world.