The HAARP Program

The High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) based in Gokona, Alaska, has been in existence since 1992. It is part of a new generation of sophisticated weaponry under the US Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). Operated by the Air Force Research Laboratory’s Space Vehicles Directorate, HAARP constitutes a system of powerful antennas capable of creating “controlled local modifications of the ionosphere” [upper layer of the atmosphere]:

HAARP has been presented to the public as a program of scientific and academic research. US military documents seem to suggest, however, that HAARP’s main objective is to “exploit the ionosphere for Department of Defense purposes.” (See Michel Chossudovsky, The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Destruction: “Owning the Weather” for Military Use, Global Research, September 27, 2004

Without explicitly referring to the HAARP program, a US Air Force study points to the use of “induced ionospheric modifications” as a means of altering weather patterns as well as disrupting enemy communications and radar. (Ibid)

HAARP also has the ability of triggering blackouts and disrupting the electricity power system of entire regions:

“Rosalie Bertell, president of the International Institute of Concern for Public Health, says HAARP operates as ‘a gigantic heater that can cause major disruptions in the ionosphere, creating not just holes, but long incisions in the protective layer that keeps deadly radiation from bombarding the planet’.

Physicist Dr Bernard Eastlund called it ‘the largest ionospheric heater ever built’. HAARP is presented by the US Air Force as a research programme, but military documents confirm its main objective is to ‘induce ionospheric modifications’ with a view to altering weather patterns and disrupting communications and radar.

According to a report by the Russian State Duma: ‘The US plans to carry out large-scale experiments under the HAARP programme [and] create weapons capable of breaking radio communication lines and equipment installed on spaceships and rockets, provoke serious accidents in electricity networks and in oil and gas pipelines, and have a negative impact on the mental health of entire regions.’

Weather manipulation is the pre-emptive weapon par excellence. It can be directed against enemy countries or ‘friendly nations’ without their knowledge, used to destabilise economies, ecosystems and agriculture. It can also trigger havoc in financial and commodity markets. The disruption in agriculture creates a greater dependency on food aid and imported grain staples from the US and other Western countries.” (Michel Chossudovsky, Weather Warfare: Beware the US military’s experiments with climatic warfare, The Ecologist, December 2007)

An analysis of statements emanating from the US Air Force points to the unthinkable: the covert manipulation of weather patterns, communications systems and electric power as a weapon of global warfare, enabling the US to disrupt and dominate entire regions of the World. According to an official US Air force report

Weather-modification offers the war fighter a wide-range of possible options to defeat or coerce an adversary… In the United States, weather-modification will likely become a part of national security policy with both domestic and international applications. Our government will pursue such a policy, depending on its interests, at various levels.” (US Air Force, emphasis added. Air University of the US Air Force, AF 2025 Final Report, emphasis adde


There has been an obvious attempt to ridicule the use of the term ‘chemtrails’ while the term ‘geoengineering’ is apparently accepted with little comment. Why should ‘chemtrails’ present a problem then? After all Denis Kucinich, a former presidential candidate, referred to chemtrails some years ago. There is an online manual entitled ‘Chemtrails’.  A NASA scientist can be heard on Youtube openly referring to the chemtrails they produce. The US Government coined the term in the first place. Yet if you Google the word chemtrails Wikipedia will pop up somewhere near the top of the list. Wiki refers to conspiracy theories. Result? Many dismiss the topic as nonsense. Interestingly, Dane Wigington tells us that this reference is closely guarded and any modifications are quickly removed. We are intended to dismiss this term and look no further. Why?

It seems to me that references to chemtrails have been made primarily by the US Government and agencies. Yet civilian use of this term is ridiculed. What if there are various spray programmes in use? Chaff, geoengineering trials. weather modification etc. leaving one main form of spraying which is being carried out within a military framework. An exotic weapon. Chemtrails! The following article makes a good case for this being the actual situation. One thing is for sure: There is way too much aerial spraying going on and an apparent lack of accountability.

Correction: Chemtrails Are An “Exotic Weapon” Not Geoengineering for Global Warming.


cropped chemtrail

Christmas Morn. Sitting gazing out of the window, enjoying the peace and quiet, the last thing on my mind was the thought that pilots sometimes have to fly on Christmas Day. However, the cloudless blue sky was soon to change. An aircraft flew over, leaving a thick white trail. It was obvious that a portion of this white trail was separating and sinking to the ground – just like contrails would eh? (It was clearly visible that a portion of the plume was ‘running’ down – like water colour on wet paper) In a short time the sky had become now-standard murky.

It seems unlikely that this is chaff:

Also called window. Military . strips of metal foil dropped by an aircraft to confuse enemy radar by creating false blips.

Although the observation that heavy spraying is happening predominantly in NATO member countries does leave us to ponder whether the much-hyped threat of terrorism etc has provided an excuse to spray member countries. This would explain gagging. Those in the know telling themselves that their silence is for the common good, no doubt.

To what extent such spraying is regulated is obviously impossible to assess. What exactly is the composition of the particulate matter? Just a regular top-up of aluminium? We are assured that this is harmless for species and the environment. Really? It never fails to amaze me how the media blithely report phenomenal increases in certain illnesses without pursuing the question of why the incidence has increased. Alzheimers immediately comes to mind. Aluminium is known to be connected with the development of this disease. It appears to have reached epidemic proportions in recent years. Yet no one asks ‘why’.

Is it possible that the Open Skies policy permits more than we are aware of?

The coming year is a chance to take part in doing our bit to open up this topic for general discussion and to demand accountability from politicians. It is ludicrous that we are seemingly bound hand and foot by Health and Safety regulations at times – it’s all to keep us nice and safe they tell us – yet we are sprayed liberally with unknown substances, without our consent. Just supposing we could prove that someone was spraying us with toxins  – with tacit consent from the powers-that-be? I hope governments have sufficient liability insurance.

Awareness actions to increase in 2014. Please take part and help to protect the planet and ourselves from toxic attacks.


Things are hotting up on the chemtrail front. A member of the Social Democratic Party of Germany has written a blog post about the use of chemtrails which appears on the SPD site.

A rough translation follows:

The Destruction of the heavens by ‘chemtrails’

It sounds like an incredible horror-fantasy, and yet the latest revelations confirm that aircraft spray a dangerous aluminium mixture in the skies, In the framework of a US project. This also happens in Europe. The resulting chemical emissions supposedly cool the earth’s atmosphere and iron out the ozone issues. The side-effect: unknown damage to health and the environment.


The official climate research assumes that, simply put, because of the massive use of fossil fuel in the past 150 years the escape of warmth from the earth into outer space is being seriously hampered.. The prevented heat exchange leads to a world wide temperature increase, which has now taken on alarming proportions. The warming effect will ultimately bring the entire planet to a tipping point. Initially, the poles will melt. This will be followed by global drought, the extinction of many species and ultimately in 20 – 50 years time man will be unable to survive. In an attempt to counteract this development two Japanese scientists recommend that metal oxide (aluminium oxide and barium salts are being used) be dispersed in the stratosphere, changing heat into infra red waves which can be released in outer space. This would achieve the desired cooling effect.

The chemicals are obviously being sprayed unobtrusively into the condensation trails via the wings or the fins. The first trials were carried out by mixing the chemicals into the fuel. Because of technical problems even scheduled flight aircraft now have tanks on board to spray the air. Using this method it is possible to reverse the increasing climate warming (greenhouse effect) at very little cost – around a billion euros a year.

Effects on health

:In the USA where chemtrails are an open secret the following symptoms have been increasingly reported in statistics from sprayed areas.

  • Spontaneous nosebleeds from intensive spraying, breathing difficulties, headaches, balance problems and chronic fatigue
  • increased incidence of flu epidemics, asthma, eye infections and short term memory problems

Who profits from this?

Calculations show that global warming could be reduced by up to 85%. That would allow fossil fuel emissions to double within the next 50 years. This plan would permit the oil industry, pharmaceutical industry and military industry to profit from these measures. The Kyoto agreement, to drastically reduce CO2 emissions .by 2020, would not need to be ratified as the CO2 emissions would not present a problem. The US Air Force has stated a desire to own the weather by 2025. Reports of strange but fleeting weather situations in Kosovo in 1999 as well as in South Korea point to the successful use of military weather weaponry.

At what price?

Denis Kucinich (who has been a presidential candidate twice in the past) openly stated in 2003 in Santa Cruz, that chemtrails exist. According to Chris Harderer’s book (page 13) Kucinich, as a  high ranking politician who would have access to information regarding this topic, must be in the know.

Video counter 2:17 Preservation Act

Kucinich mentioned the term ‘chemtrails’ in this Congress presentation and makes references to an exotic weapon system. His attempts to introduce measures to control the implementation of chemtrails were rejected.

I have to ask myself why all the members I have mentioned this to block this topic and behave as if everything is perfectly all right. In a period of more than ten years why has no newspaper carried reports of experts’ opinions of the  ongoing crimes being carried out in the sky above?

The press is in fact censored:

What is the Copenhagen Climate Summit secret?

I believe every attentive reader of these blogs knows the answer already..

Don’t party members have children and grandchildren? Let’s assume we are talking about chaff, glass fibre splinters, (which is the least harmful of imaginable scenarios) are not good for the interstitial lung.

I expect an end to the dumbing down and a careful investigation


manxasthehills: Sadly, this makes sense to me. I have noticed a scratchy feeling in my upper airways when I spend any length of time outdoors. At present I am recovering from a virus and notice that coughing spasms also produce this painful scratchiness – nothing at all like normal congestion discomfort. I have commented that it feels like tiny glass particles. That was long before I read this article. There are simply too many coincidences and way too many in the know who do not have the courage to speak up. Is it classified? Were they compelled to sign the Official Secrets Act? If aerial spraying is endangering us all then there is a moral obligation to speak out.


The IPCC has a lot to say, it seems. Often quoted. Always accepted as best science (although we know that weather modification programmes have not been accounted for in their reports and forecasts). These guys wield enormous power. If members do end up advocating geoengineering i.e. spraying the planet and everything on it in a sustained attack, then we would assume that those in charge of this lunatic ‘solution’ to ‘man-made’ climate change must be of the highest calibre.The elite.The creme de la creme. They would have to be, wouldn’t they? Otherwise inexperienced people would be deciding the fate of the planet and all that dwell here.

So how qualified are members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change? Well it seems that a number of members are former Greenpeace activists, while others have very close contacts to the WWF.. Nothing wrong with that, but these are hardly unbiased individuals. There is even mention of established quotas for the selection of certain minorities, which have to be observed. Surely the main criteria in selection of members for these posts must be knowledge, experience and objectivity. Is this the case? They decide our fate.The discussion about the IPCC, decades of weather modification programmes and the effect of these on the climate has to be opened up and not accepted at face value.



Dane Wigington, ecologist, stopped giving his presentations about the benefits of solar energy when he realised that what he was telling people simply was not true. The aerial spraying had already had devastating effects on his own solar array. How could he recommend solar energy to others? His search for the cause of the problem first alerted him to geoengineering and now his talks contain very different material and information.

He tells us that if geoengineering had not been carried out for around the last five decades the planet would be in much better shape and he goes on to say that those responsible have no right to carry this out. Furthermore, there is no regulation, no oversight and no consensus. He calls it ‘The greatest crime in human history.’ and goes on to mention those who are in full knowledge of these programmes but who are too fearful to become whistleblowers.

This is undoubtedly a crime and those who have been informed about it and prefer to play games rather take action, for which they would be thanked by all normal people, need to ask themselves if their actions are morally correct. They are aware that a crime against humanity and the planet is being carried out and they do nothing to prevent it.

Do you have any understanding for this?


Press release from 7.10.2011
Con­cer­ned citi­zens demand action from Greenpeace

With a 16 square-metre ban­ner with the inscrip­tion “Why does Green­peace do not­hing about ura­nium muni­ti­ons and bombs, HAARP, chem­trails? – A Call for Action” (see pho­to­graph) and pla­cards with other slo­gans, the long-term chem­trails activist Wer­ner Alt­ni­ckel, toge­ther with con­cer­ned fel­low activists from the citi­zens’ initia­tive “Sau­be­rer Him­mel” (clean sky) (, demons­tra­ted in front of Greenpeace’s head­quar­ters in Ham­burg, deman­ding action from Greenpeace.

Greenpeace’s ear­lier slo­gan in Ger­man “Taten statt War­ten” (action instead of wait­ing) seems in the case of these sub­jects to have muta­ted into “wait­ing instead of action”. Green­peace has with­drawn to pas­sive posi­ti­ons, trus­ting blindly in state and pri­vate insti­tu­ti­ons and doing no rela­ted rese­arch its­elf. The “air mea­su­re­ment bus” has been sold, for example. Why? Is air pollu­tion a thing of the past? Or is the pro­blem that one might be embar­ras­sed to find some­thing in the air other than, say, die­sel exhaust?

Wer­ner Alt­ni­ckel also argues that the “Peace” in Greenpeace’s title years ago lost its justi­fi­ca­tion and should be remo­ved from the name, as Green­peace for a long time has taken no action against the wars star­ted by NATO, e.g. in Afgha­nis­tan, Iraq and now Libya. Hund­reds of thousands of civi­lian vic­tims and huge areas of ruined land seem to play no role any more for Green­peace. From Green­peace, the action group working with Wer­ner Alt­ni­ckel demands inde­pen­dent rese­arch and taboo-free invol­ve­ment on the fol­lo­wing subjects:

Ura­nium munitions

It is totally incom­pre­hen­si­ble that Green­peace should have remai­ned silent about the long-term geno­ci­dal app­li­ca­tion of (so far) more than 2,500 tons of ura­nium muni­ti­ons) appro­xi­mately one mil­li­ons pro­jec­tiles by US and NATO tro­ops. The micro­sco­pic ura­nium nano­dust leads to a mul­ti­tude of other ill­nes­ses from lung can­cer to birth defects in the child­ren of the popu­la­ti­ons under attack, as it con­ti­nues to radiate for hund­reds of thousands of years. (See the film: “Deadly Dust” by Frie­der Wag­ner). Accor­ding to a Bri­tish study, says the Sun­day Times of 19.2.2006, a pro­por­tion of this ura­nium dust is spread far and wide by storms, even­tually reaching Great Bri­tain. But Green­peace is ter­mi­na­ting its “Atom-free Seas” cam­paign. Cri­ti­que of the mili­tary seems to have become abso­lu­tely taboo for Greenpeace.


Ano­ther taboo sub­ject for Green­peace are elec­tro­ma­gne­tic wea­pons sys­tems such as, for example, the US HAARP trans­mit­ting faci­li­ties in Gakona (Alaska) on which the EU Par­lia­ment as early as 1999 pro­po­sed a ban, unfor­t­u­na­tely to no effect. The EU docu­ment calls HAARP “a wea­pons sys­tem which dis­rupts the cli­mate”, for example by mani­pu­la­ting glo­bal wea­t­her pat­terns. It cha­rac­te­ri­zes as unac­cep­ta­ble “mani­pu­la­tion of glo­bal wea­t­her pat­terns and pun­ching of holes in the iono­s­phere, in vio­la­tion of the Arc­tic Treaty”. The Euro­pean Par­lia­ment also cri­ti­ci­zed the “deve­lop­ment of wea­pons for the mani­pu­la­tion of the human brain”, cal­ling for them to be ban­ned. As early as 1994 the Inter­na­tio­nal Red Cross was warning of the poten­tial dan­ger to human health of the HAARP faci­lity and of its capa­city to influ­ence human men­tal functioning.

In April 1997 the then US Defense Secretary Wil­liam Cohen in a speech at an anti-terrorism con­fe­rence in Geor­gia said, among other things: “others are enga­ging even in an eco-type of ter­ro­rism whe­reby they can alter the cli­mate, set off earth­quakes, volca­noes remo­tely through the use of elec­tro­ma­gne­tic waves.”

The cele­bra­ted alter­na­tive Nobel-Prize-winning sci­en­tist Dr. Rosa­lie Ber­tell in her book “Pla­net Earth – The Latest Wea­pon of War” named all the geo­phy­si­cal wea­pons sys­tems and the tests that had at that time taken place. She said: “Elec­tro­ma­gne­tic wea­pons have the capa­city to induce effects such as earth­quakes over inter­con­ti­nen­tal dis­tan­ces at tar­gets of their choice any­where on earth, with a power equal to that of large ato­mic explo­si­ons.” She con­fir­med that US mili­tary sci­en­tists are working on wea­t­her sys­tems as a poten­tial wea­pon. “The methods include the inten­si­fi­ca­tion of storms and the diver­sion of vapour streams in the earth’s atmo­s­phere in order to pro­duce tar­ge­ted droughts or floods.” She takes a posi­tion vehe­mently against the con­duc­ting of environ­men­tal war­fare, exp­li­citly iden­ti­fy­ing pro­duc­tion of earth­quakes as a wea­pon of war in prac­tical application.

In 2005 the India Daily wrote that several other sta­tes pos­sess simi­lar instal­la­ti­ons for tec­to­nic and wea­t­her war­fare and more and more sta­tes are under­ta­king detec­tion of the mani­pu­la­ti­ons and devi­sing counter-measures.

Chem­trails / Geo-Engineering

The scat­te­ring of poly­mers and metal­lic or sulp­hate par­ti­cles from pla­nes over wide areas of the earth’s sur­face is also play­ing an import­ant role in glo­bal wea­t­her mani­pu­la­tion, which is offi­ci­ally descri­bed as “geo­en­gi­nee­ring”. The Inter­go­vern­men­tal Panel on Cli­mate Change, the planet’s “wea­t­her coun­cil” as early as 2001 favou­red the dis­tri­bu­tion of metal­lic par­ti­cles to reflect back into space the rays of the sun; albeit with the side-effect of pro­du­cing a “white sky” (IPCC 2001-S.333–334).

Defen­ding the atmo­s­phere in the US Con­gress in 2001, several-times would-be pre­si­den­tial can­di­date for the US Demo­crats Den­nis Kuci­nich cited the Space Pre­ser­va­tion Act, men­tio­ning chem­trails, tec­to­nic wea­pons sys­tems and mind control.

On 12.01.2011 the for­mer head of the FBI in Los Ange­les Ted Gun­der­son took a posi­tion on chem­trails, say­ing among other things: “The death dumps, other­wise known as che­mi­cal trails, are being drop­ped and sprayed throug­hout the United Sta­tes and Eng­land, Scot­land, Ire­land, and Nort­hern Europe. I have per­so­nally seen them not only in the United Sta­tes, but in Mexico and in Canada. Birds are dying around the world. Fish are dying by the hund­reds of thousands around the world. This is geno­cide. This is poi­son. This is mur­der by the United Nati­ons. This ele­ment wit­hin our society that is doing this must be stop­ped. I hap­pen to know of two of the loca­ti­ons where the air­planes are that dump this crap on us.

Four of the pla­nes are out of the Air Natio­nal Guard in Lin­coln, Nebraska. And, the other pla­nes are out of Fort Sill, Okla­homa. I per­so­nally have obser­ved the pla­nes that were stan­ding still in Nebraska – Lin­coln, Nebraska – at the Air Natio­nal Guard. They have no mar­kings on them. They are huge, bomber-like air­planes with no mar­kings. This is a crime: a crime against huma­nity, a crime against Ame­rica, a crime against the citi­zens of this great coun­try. The must be stop­ped. WHAT IS WRONG WITH CONGRESS? This has an effect on their popu­la­tion, and their people, and their fri­ends, and their rela­ti­ves, and them­sel­ves. What’s wrong with them? What’s wrong with the pilots who are fly­ing these air­planes and dum­ping this crap, this poi­son, on their own fami­lies? Some­body has to do some­thing about it. Some­body in Con­gress has to step for­ward and stop it now. Thank you. I’m Ted Gunderson.”

The above­men­tio­ned alter­na­tive Nobel Prize win­ner Dr. Rosa­lie Ber­tell on 3rd May 2005 said: “I think that chem­trails are also a vehi­cle for other forms of bio­lo­gi­cal and che­mi­cal warfare.”

Green­peace wants to know not­hing about all this:
When Wer­ner Alt­ni­ckel pre­sen­ted the sub­jects of “chem­trails” and “HAARP” to Green­peace, sub­mit­ting nume­rous docu­ments for fur­ther rese­arch, he was told in 2005 that “these mat­ters are not com­pa­ti­ble with the objec­tives of Greenpeace.”

It is beyond com­pre­hen­sion that a world-wide environ­men­tal orga­niza­tion such as Green­peace should remain silent about all these sub­jects, which rep­re­sent a mas­sive threat not only to human beings but to the planet’s living environ­ment in toto.

Wer­ner Alt­ni­ckel has reams of mate­rial in his pos­ses­sion on these sub­jects, and could pro­vide even more.

Action– fotos + videos on


Olden­burg, 07.10.2011
Wer­ner Alt­ni­ckel
Wilh. Kempinstr.55
26133 Olden­burg
T: 0441–46703



Inhaled or ingested DU particles are highly toxic, and DU has been classified as an illegal weapon of mass destruction by the United Nations.

“More than ten times the amount of radiation released during atmospheric testing [of nuclear bombs] has been released from DU weaponry since 1991,” said Leuren Moret, a U.S. nuclear scientist.

“The genetic future of the Iraqi people, for the most part, is destroyed. The environment now is completely radioactive.”

“Because DU has a half-life of 4.5 billion years, the Middle East will, for all practical purposes, be radioactive forever.”