With the world gearing up for Mark Carney’s upcoming COP26 Climate Summit in the UK this October 31- September 12, 2021, it is worth asking: Will China and India collaborate with other nations of the multipolar alliance once more to save the world from a supranational world government?

You may be asking what I mean by “once more”?

The fact is that today’s efforts by an international financial elite to lock nation states into binding carbon reduction treaties is nothing new and was first attempted in December 2009. This was a period of profound instability as the world economy was trembling on a near meltdown of a $700 billion speculative bubble. We were also told that a new black plague was emerging with a novel influenza virus called H1N1. Back then, the Belt and Road Initiative was still four years from coming online, and Presidents Qaddafi, Assad, Mubarak and Bashir still could not guess what horrors they would yet face under the new regime change operation then still in its planning phase.

But just like today, the goals behind COP14 were clear: Create new supranational mechanisms capable of penalizing nations from breaking CO2 reduction targets between 2009 and 2050. This new order of governance would of course only function through the creation of 1) a new system of global technocratic controls to help nations adapt to the new era of scarcity and de-growth, and 2) a new post-nation state system enforcing a rules-based order which could trump the wishes of selfish sovereign nation states who might otherwise make decisions in defense of their people instead of “wise” computer models.

The 2009 summit was marketed as “historic”. World leaders walked into the event treating it like a gala of stars where Obama, Hollande, Brown, Merkel, Rudd and other trans Atlantic leaders hoped they would return to their home nations as heroic eco-warriors having saved the world.

But in the weeks before the summit signs of its inevitable failure were already visible. The name for this failure was “Climate-gate”.

Climate-Gate Derails a Dream

On November 17, 2009, a major scandal erupted when 61 MB of data comprising thousands of emails internally circulated among the directors and researchers at East Anglia University’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) were made public. To this day, it has not been verified if the scandal occurred via an internal leak or a hack, but what was verified throughout the hundreds of emails between director Phil Jones and the teams of climatologists staffing the CRU was that vast scales of fraud were committed. Jones himself was caught red handed demanding that data sets be ignored and massaged in order to justify the climate models (such as Michael Mann’s fraudulent “hockey stick” made famous by Al Gore) which had all been used to sell the idea that CO2 was the greatest threat to humanity.

Within the leaked emails, scientists were told to fudge data and cover up such problematic things as the medieval warming period which saw average temperatures far warmer than those seen in the 20^th century, yet with far lower rates of human-made CO2.

East Anglia’s CRU is the world’s foremost center of data set centralization and climate model generation which feeds directly into the UN’s Independent Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and which in turn feeds into every major NGO, school, corporation and government. The other central control point of data selection and model generation (for both climate change and covid-19 data sets) is an Oxford-based operation called “Our World In Data”, funded in large measure by the UK government and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

The results of Climate Gate sent shockwaves through the scientific community as even leading climate scientist and pro-COP14 supporter George Monbiot proclaimed:

“It’s no use pretending that this isn’t a major blow. The emails extracted by a hacker from the climatic research unit at the University of East Anglia could scarcely be more damaging. I am now convinced that they are genuine, and I’m dismayed and deeply shaken by them.

Yes, the messages were obtained illegally. Yes, all of us say things in emails that would be excruciating if made public. Yes, some of the comments have been taken out of context. But there are some messages that require no spin to make them look bad. There appears to be evidence here of attempts to prevent scientific data from being released, and even to destroy material that was subject to a freedom of information request.

Worse still, some of the emails suggest efforts to prevent the publication of work by climate sceptics, or to keep it out of a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. I believe that the head of the unit, Phil Jones, should now resign.”

The terrible publicity of Climate Gate essentially caused COP-14 to become a big goose egg, as Chinese and Indian delegates refused to play along, and ensured that all teeth were removed from any binding carbon caps.

China and India Break the Rules of the Game

London Guardian climate journalist Mark Lynas reported in horror:

“Copenhagen was a disaster. That much is agreed… China wrecked the talks, intentionally humiliated Barack Obama, and insisted on an awful “deal” so western leaders would walk away carrying the blame. How do I know this? Because I was in the room and saw it happen. China’s strategy was simple: block the open negotiations for two weeks, and then ensure that the closed-door deal made it look as if the west had failed the world’s poor once again.”

In case anyone was still uncertain about China’s role in derailing this event, Lynas wrote:

“To those who would blame Obama and rich countries in general, know this: it was China’s representative who insisted that industrialised country targets, previously agreed as an 80% cut by 2050, be taken out of the deal. “Why can’t we even mention our own targets?” demanded a furious Angela Merkel. Australia’s prime minister, Kevin Rudd, was annoyed enough to bang his microphone. Brazil’s representative too pointed out the illogicality of China’s position. Why should rich countries not announce even this unilateral cut? The Chinese delegate said no, and I watched, aghast, as Merkel threw up her hands in despair and conceded the point… China, backed at times by India, then proceeded to take out all the numbers that mattered. A 2020 peaking year in global emissions, essential to restrain temperatures to 2C°, was removed and replaced by woolly language suggesting that emissions should peak “as soon as possible”.

Not only did Chinese and Indian delegates lock themselves in a room alongside other nations of the global south (notably including Sudan), refusing entry of Hillary Clinton and other western puppets attempting to “help” reach a consensus, but the leaders of both nations blocked all binding agreements from being set in stone.

In December 2009, a former chief economic advisor to Putin stated that Russia had sent data to East Anglia’s CRU from 476 meteorological stations covering over 20% of the globe’s surface hosting a wide range of data from as far back as 1865 to 2005. Dr. Illarionov explained that he was dismayed to see that Phil Jones and the CRU entirely ignored the data from all but 121 stations. From those stations they did use, Jones and his team artificially cherry-picked data that gave off the false result that temperatures between 1860-1965 were 0.67 degrees colder than they truly were while temperatures from 1965-2005 were made artificially high. (1)

After being suspended for a few months, a UK review panel absolved Jones from his transgressions and re-installed him into his old position of carbon data gatekeeper at the CRU.

Twelve Years Later

Today, 12 years of propaganda have attempted to wipe Climate Gate from the internet and our collective memory as the same fallacious models and data sets have continued to be used to justify the sort of panicky fear-driven decisions to radically alter civilization forever.

Mark Carney has risen to great heights since his 2009 role steering Canada’s Central Bank through the storm of 2009 to become the head of the Bank of England (2013-2019), trustee of the World Economic Forum, co-founder of the Task Force on Climate Related Financial Disclosures alongside Michael Bloomberg and leading technocratic manager of the Great Reset program for global governance. His role as a high priest of green finance has been documented elsewhere, but the thing to keep in mind is that the Carney/WEF version of a green world differs drastically from the approach taken by China, India, Russia and the growing array of nations among the Multipolar alliance.

Two Opposing Paths to a Green Future

How do these approaches to green, sustainable policymaking differ?

Where one defines “sustainable development” as a euphemism for de-growth (and de-population) under a unipolar rules-based international order, the other looks towards “sustained development” as a driving force for long term growth, multipolarism and even population increases premised on large scale capital-intensive infrastructure building.

Where one system increases deserts by spreading solar panels across the face of the earth (and in turn increasing surface temperatures drastically), the other actually greens deserts by careful reclamation, desalination and water diversion programs such as China’s Move South Water North.

Yes, China and India are building a lot of green energy programs and they intend to lower their rates of CO2 output by 2060. However, unlike the post-modern basket cases in the west who are clamoring for a Fourth Industrial Revolution, Eurasian nations are not resting their entire development strategies on windmills and solar panels. Instead what we find are competent programs for hydropower, oil, coal, natural gas, hydrogen power and importantly next generation nuclear power (with pioneering work on Molten Salt thorium as well as fusion power in the works.

Looking to NASA’s recent surprise discovery that the world’s biomass has increased by over 5% due in large measure to India and China’s economic activity, the fact is slowly emerging into the zeitgeist that the apparent conflict between humanity’s aspirations to grow vs the health of ecosystems is a chimera. The obvious fact that carbon dioxide also happens to be considered by all chlorophyl-based life to be a delicious food should also not be lost in the rush to demonize CO2.

If we can simply break ourselves free from the imperial operating system attempting to herd the world into a slaughterhouse of a new technocratic feudalism and instead embrace our destiny as a species of creative reason capable of boundless self-perfectibility both on the earth and beyond into the cosmos, then not only could a war be averted in the short term, but a new multipolar cultural renaissance might even emerge.

The author can be reached at matt.ehret@tutamail.com

(1) The doctor’s later moral failures aside, this observation of the CRU fraudulent management of climate data should still horrify anyone concerned about truth.

75 years ago, Winston Churchill delivered a speech in Fulton Missouri announcing a new Iron Curtain that had descended upon the world with the free capitalist nations united under an Anglo-American alliance on the one side and authoritarian states organized under the control of the Kremlin. In the speech which put the nail into the coffin of FDR’s vision of a US-Russian-Chinese alliance of win-win cooperation, Churchill announced that:

“Neither the sure prevention of war, nor the continuous rise of world organization will be gained without what I have called the fraternal association of the English speaking peoples. This means a special relationship between the British Commonwealth and Empire and the United States.”

In the wake of this announcement, new mechanisms and operational procedures were brought online from the creation of the CIA after a purge of military intelligence which began with the dissolution of the OSS, to the establishment of a new security doctrine under NSC-75: ‘A Report to the NSC by the Executive Secretary on British Military Commitments’ which tied America’s destiny to the preservation of British territorial possessions to keep independent-minded nations from falling under Soviet influence.

The rules of game theory were thus elevated from perverse thoughts floating around the paranoid minds of statisticians like Oscar Morganstern, John Nash and John von Neumann, to governing levers defining international military policy in an age of intrigue, coups, espionage and assassinations. This system of controls would guarantee a peace shaped not by cooperation or the pursuit of large scale goals as FDR announced in his Four Freedoms speech of 1941, but rather by the terror of mutually assured annihilation. This geopolitical perversion of “peace” necessitated isolated arrays of small wars, hot and economic alike in the pursuit of an overall balance. This is a game that would only function to the degree that all players acted like selfish short sighted opportunists incapable of thinking outside the terms of the game itself.

As I outlined in my previous article, despite the darkness and bipolarity of the Cold War, efforts were made to break humanity free of the rigged game by connecting our economic sphere of influence to the infinite expanses of space. Sadly every time new revolutionary advances were made by saner forces among all sides of the Iron Curtain, those advances were soon sabotaged as humanity was pulled back into the closed-system geopolitical cage like the lab rats which certain influential Malthusians and technocrats wished to believe we were.

The Anglo-American Special Relationship in Space

Today, Churchill’s ghost has come to haunt the world once more as the vicious terms of the Cold War rules of conduct are again being forcefully revived under the priests of the “rules based international order” that have obsessively made it clear that they will not tolerate the existence of a multilateral system of governance challenging their perceived right to total hegemony.

The first sign of Churchill’s re-emergence was seen in June 10, 2021 as Biden and Boris Johnson signed the ‘New Atlantic Charter’ in London which re-committed both nations to their Cold Warrior identities in defense of NATO, the Rules Based Order, Open Society and democracy. The New Charter said that both nations “affirm our shared responsibility for maintaining our collective security and international stability and resilience against the full spectrum of modern threats, including cyber threats.”

On July 29, another joint US-UK alliance was solidified in the form of a statement published on the Telegraph by General James H. Dickenson (head of US Space Force) and Vice Marshall Paul Godfrey (the head of the UK’s new Space Command that went into operation the same day). The title of the statement read: ‘We Need a Special Relationship for Space’ and opened with a tribute to Churchill’s Iron Curtain speech where the duo stated: “Today, Churchill’s words are more resonant and relevant than ever as we look to adversaries threatening us not just from Earth but from space.”

Citing Russia explicitly and China implicitly as new threats to world peace which must be combatted in the new domain of space, the duo outlines the danger of space based warfare which threatens to takedown the entire western infrastructure system saying:

“Satellite constellations in low-earth orbit link almost every aspect of our daily lives whether it’s our transport networks, banking systems, mobile phones, the internet or television. Almost anything, or anyone, who is on the move benefits from the positioning, navigation and timing capabilities of our Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS). Militarily, space-based assets are critical for communication, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and navigation.”

Describing the apocalyptic effects of the takedown of the GNSS, which neither China or Russia are reliant upon having built their own alternative systems of GPS, the space duo said: “It would be a day of market volatility, of local blackouts, of delayed journeys and of malfunctioning emergency services. It would be a day of chaos… Make no mistake, our potential adversaries are working hard to make this nightmare a reality.”

There is undoubtedly an element of truth in these statements, since both China and Russia have been forced in recent years to respond to military encirclement of their nations by the expansion of new defensive military capabilities which involve space-based warfare including potentially new ICBM Silos in China, new anti-satellite weapons and powerful Peresvet laser trucks designed to blind any offensive attack.

However, it is important to recall that neither China nor Russia are the instigators of this new military agenda, nor are they acting on an offensive program. In fact, in recent years, both nations have only offered olive branches of cooperation in the face of aggressive policies which speak sweetly of freedom publicly while making every effort to destabilize target nations through asymmetric warfare, terror financing, economic warfare and outright military encirclement.

Additionally, these remarks could also be seen as a form of predictive programming as they echo earlier statements made by General Mark Milley who warned of a “new Pearl Harbor in space” when he said on December 3, 2020 that “there’s an argument to be made and many have made it in various unclassified writings that a country might try to seek a first move or advantage, for example to blind the United States… the Next Pearl Harbor could happen in space”. Milley pointed out that space warfare could takedown “the internet and electricity grids”.

Hold in mind that the World Economic Forum’s Cyber Polygon cyberwar game scenario exercises unfolded on July 9, 2021 with a specific focus on the takedown of western electricity grids, internet, medical and telecommunications support systems and banking systems. The WEF’s Klaus Schwab had referred to the “frightening scenario of a comprehensive cyberattack [that] could bring  a complete halt to the power supply, transportation, hospital services, our society as a whole… the COVID-19 crisis would be seen in this respect as a small disturbance in comparison to a major cyber attack”.

Anyone who paid attention to Event 201 should not be surprised to feel goosebumps emerge at this point.

The New York Times lost no time before amplifying the fear fest writing such evidence-free articles as “Russians Who Pose Electrion Threat Have Hacked Nuclear Plants and Power Grids”. Meanwhile on July 29, 2021, Biden revived the petard that China and Russia were responsible for cyberattacks on American companies and infrastructure warning of a shooting war, saying: “I think it’s more than likely we’re going to end up, if we end up in a war – a real shooting war with a major power — it’s going to be as a consequence of a cyberbreach of great consequence.”

The new US-UK space-based special relationship professes to expand upon the Five Eyes dominated Combined Space Operations (which involve the USA, Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand as well as France and Germany), and also the Olympic Defender exercises which featured US-UK collaboration on space-based warfare scenarios in 2020. The US and UK are joined by Japan which announced its own Space Operations Squadron in May 2020 and by working directly with the Anglo-American alliance, has managed to circumvent the post WW2 ban on acquiring a military program.

Space remains a trans geopolitical domain of new undiscovered principles that shape our weather systems, ice ages, the activation/de-activation of viruses and even the forces of evolution of living systems. Returning to a paradigm driven by creative discoveries in space would not only animate the best of humanity’s powers of creative reason, but also increase our standards of excellence in all fields to solve real problems and achieve real goals that not only serves to accomplish concrete tasks, but which offers the densest array of technological breakthroughs that we know will feed back into our earth-based economy in unimaginable ways. It is a fact that there is hardly a single branch of human activity from medicine, mining, chemistry, industrial production, telecommunications, or even entertainment that wasn’t revolutionized from the original space program put into motion by President Kennedy nearly 60 years ago.

Chinese and Russian policy makers have emphasized their desires to use this domain as the foundation for mutual cooperation between all nations in the defense of earth against asteroid threats, the development of new resources on the Moon, Mars and other celestial bodies. At different times, sane forces within Europe, and NASA have echoed this call for a new era of cooperation as outlined in the original spirit of the Artemis Accords and western opposition to the absurd block on US-Chinese space cooperation put into law with the 2011 Wolf Act.

However, despite this reality, smaller minds obviously see space as merely a extension of the fixed rules of imperial geopolitics that have been used for millenia to keep human beings locked like rats in a cage managed by oligarchs. Where the maritime choke points of yesterday took the form of the straights of Malacca, the Bosporous, or Panama Canal, today’s heirs to this Hobbesian worldview that animated Churchill’s life, are only capable of seeing space as yet another choke point in the Great Game.

The author can be reached on his Substack.

The world’s two wealthiest people are fighting over the moon, which just says so much about where our species is at right now.

Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are in a dispute with NASA over whose private spaace exploration corporation will get the $2.9 billion US government contract to return to the moon. I gleaned this annoying piece of information by way of an obnoxiously sycophantic Atlantic puff piece titled “Elon Musk Is Maybe, Actually, Strangely, Going to Do This Mars Thing”, subtitled “From his private Cape Canaveral, the billionaire is manifesting his own interplanetary reality — whatever the cost.”

The mainstream press cannot get enough of these two unfathomably wealthy plutocrats and their outspoken ambition to colonize space, with Musk advocating Mars colonization and Bezos preferring to ship us all offworld to live in giant Amazon space tubes. They love it for the same reason they love war and status quo politicians: it fits in beautifully with the capitalist world order.

Space colonization is largely a capitalist perception management op promoted by the likes of Musk and Bezos to strengthen the narrative that it’s okay to continue the world-raping global capitalist principle of infinite growth on a finite world because we can escape the catastrophic ecological consequences of that paradigm by fleeing to space.

“Ecocidal capitalism is fine, we’ll just go to space before it kills us!” is the message we’re all meant to absorb. And too many do. A large obstacle to waking people up to the existential crises we are facing as a species is the blind faith that technology will save us from the consequences of our mass-scale behavior, and therefore we don’t need to change. Which suits the world’s richest men perfectly.

But it’s a lie. Humanity will never colonize space. We are not separate or separable from this planet in that way.

Boca Chica, Texas, has changed so much since I visited in 2019. One big difference: Elon Musk has started calling it Starbase. https://t.co/HwGfs84J2U

— Marina Koren (@marinakoren) May 6, 2021

People believe we can just snip humans out of their ecosystemic context to colonize space for the same reason they believe in rugged individualism: they don’t grasp how inseparably interconnected each human is. With our ecosystem, and with our society. Separation is an illusion.

We are not separable from our ecosystem. We are our ecosystem. We’re so inseparably one with our ecosystem that we need to send astronauts into space with a little box full of it or they’ll die. Thinking a human can be snipped out of its ecosystemic context and permanently transported across the desert of space is like thinking you can snip a ripple out of a pond and place that ripple in a teacup on the other side of the world. The ripple is the pond. It’s not separate.

We know how to build rockets, and how to keep a human alive in space for a short time as long as they bring part of their ecosystem with them, but there’s no scientific evidence that we can live separately from our ecosystem, and we’ve barely begun exploring our ignorance here.

Many imagine we’ll have people living independently of Earth’s ecosystem within the next century or two, but there’s literally no basis for this assumption; we essentially know as much about how to keep a human being alive apart from Earth’s ecosystem as we knew ten thousand years ago. Our Biosphere attempts to create a closed-Earth system were as clueless and silly as monkeys poking around at a supercomputer, and that was right here on our home planet.

The myriad ways in which we are connected with the ecosystemic context in which we evolved boggle the mind. Science is barely even beginning to explore those connections. There are tons we know about, but that’s just scratching the surface. We don’t know how much we don’t know. We’re only barely beginning to understand our own gut bacteria, and how those mini-ecosystems relate to our health. Those mini-ecosystems have their own relationships with our greater ecosystem. We know next to nothing about any of this. Most of the picture is missing.

And Elon says he’s going to ship humans to live on Mars?? What, because we have the technology to get there? Our bodies might get there, sure, but the whole staying alive part is a riddle that science is not even the tiniest fraction of a percentile close to solving.

Musk likes to argue that we must become a “multi-planetary species” because if an asteroid strikes Earth or we wipe ourselves out in a nuclear war, that’s it for our species. Our survival as a species, he argues, depends on colonizing other planets.

This is false and toxic thinking, because it will not happen. Our survival does not depend on our becoming a multi-planetary species, our survival depends on collectively waking up and learning to collaborate with each other and with our ecosystem. We’ve got an infinitely better chance of developing the technology to deal with an asteroid than we do of developing technology that will allow us to colonize space, and if we can transcend our self-destructive patterning the threat of nuclear war will be neutralized by our no longer being crazy enough to keep weapons around that make it a possibility.

Some argue for the possibility of terraforming planets like Mars to give them Earth-like ecosystems, but terraforming runs into the same problem: not just humans but all organisms are dependent on Earth’s ecosystem for survival. You couldn’t begin creating an Earth-like ecosystem without snipping out all the organisms which give rise to it. This can’t be done. A tree can’t be snipped out of its unfathomably interconnected ecosystemic context any more than a human can. To terraform you need trees and a near-infinity of other ecosystemic building blocks, none of which are separable from their terrestrial ecosystemic context.

We’re just going to have to make this Earth thing work. People assume space colonization is part of our future primarily because science fiction takes this as a given. But science fiction is just that: fiction, written to entertain and appeal to the same ego which imagines it is separate from the rest of the world. It’s an illusory premise.

People think Capitalism is the best we can do, but I can’t think of any other form of society that would intentionally destroy the planet because it was more profitable to do so.

— Existential Comics (@existentialcoms) December 16, 2017

We’re not going to rocket ship our way out of this mess. We’re not going to be able to keep doing things the way we are doing them. The “growth for its own sake” ideology that Musk and Bezos have dedicated their lives to embodying is, as Edward Abbey put it, the ideology of a cancer cell. Such an ideology is unsustainable. We’re going to have to change.

“I must change” is always the first possibility that an ego rules out when evaluating a dilemma, and it’s the same ego which says we are separate individuals, and it’s the same ego which created our dilemma in the first place. But we must change. We must transcend the ego.

That’s always the last thing anyone wants to hear, that we need to change, but it’s true. We’ll either collectively change our minds in a way that enables us to drastically shift the way we operate on this planet, or we’ll go extinct. It is evolve or die time. We’ll either make it or we won’t.

Space will not save us, and we will never colonize it. We can explore space, but it will be done via satellites and other tech, not by living organisms. Our astronauts have up until this point been nothing more than glorified scuba divers, entirely dependent on boxes of Earth’s ecosystem, no more independent from that ecosystem than someone holding their breath. This will remain the case.

Hell, forget colonizing space, try colonizing part of the Sahara Desert. Get everything you need, then seal yourselves in a bubble completely separate from the rest of the ecosystem. Even on Earth, with many of the terrestrial connection factors still intact, you will fail relatively quickly.

Such a project isn’t even on Musk’s radar, which shows his pet space project is really about making money and justifying an economic/political paradigm which will necessarily destroy our ecosystem. It’s justifying his cancer cell ideology, proving Robert Heinlein correct when he said, “Man is not a rational animal, he is a rationalizing animal.”

They work to make it appear that we’ve got some other option than to end our ecocidal trajectory and all the systems which feed into it, because otherwise it just looks like they’re a bunch of psychopaths burning an entire world and throwing its ashes into a gaping hole their hearts that can never be filled. If space colonization isn’t possible, then the people who are destroying our environment for money are just deranged lunatics who must be stopped at all cost.

But they are. And we must.

This is our home. It is our only home. I really, really wish we could stop treating it like a womb we plan on leaving or our parents’ house we plan on moving out of. There is nowhere else to go. This is it.

The earth is not some temporary transit station. We – the earth. We are inseparable from it. We are all indigenous terrestrials. We need to stop trying to move out, and start moving in.

It’s so, so beautiful here. We should be willing to change to keep it alive, like we would if a loved one’s life depended on our changing our behavior. Because that really is the case. I hope we see this before it’s too late.

caityjohnstone.medium.com

A report advocating rocket propulsion by nuclear power for U.S. missions to Mars, written by a committee packed with individuals deeply involved in nuclear power, was issued last week by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine.

The 104-page report also lays out “synergies” in space nuclear activities between the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the U.S. military, something not advanced explicitly since the founding of NASA as a civilian agency supposedly in 1958.

The report states: “Space nuclear propulsion and power systems have the potential to provide the United States with military advantages…NASA could benefit programmatically by working with a DoD [Department of Defense] program having national security objectives.”’

The report was produced “by contract” with NASA, it states.

The National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NAS) describes itself as having been “created to advise the nation” with “independent, objective advice to inform policy.”

The 11 members of the committee that put together the report for the National Academy includes: Jonathan W. Cirtain, president of Advanced Technologies, “a subsidiary of BWX Technologies which is the sole manufacturer of nuclear reactors for the U.S. Navy,” the report states; Roger M. Myers, owner of R. Myers Consulting and who previously at Aerojet Rocketdyne “oversaw programs and strategic planning for next-generation in-space missions [that] included nuclear thermal propulsion and nuclear electric power systems; Shannon M. Bragg-Sitton, the “lead for integrated energy systems in the Nuclear Science and Technology Directorate at the Idaho National Laboratory:” Tabitha Dodson, who at the U.S. government’s Defense Advanced Research Project Agency is chief engineer of a program “that is developing a nuclear thermal propulsion system;” Joseph A. Sholtis, Jr., “owner and principal of Sholtis Engineering & Safety Consulting, providing expert nuclear, aerospace, and systems engineering services to government, national laboratories, industry, and academia since 1993.” And so on.

The NAS report is titled: “Space Nuclear Propulsion for Human Mars Exploration.” It is not classified and is available here.

Bruce Gagnon, coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, from its offices in Maine in the U.S., declared: “The nuclear industry views space as a new—and wide-open—market for their toxic product that has run its dirty course on Mother Earth.”

“During our campaigns in 1989, 1990, and 1997 to stop NASA’s Galileo, Ulysses and Cassini plutonium-fueled space probe launches, we learned that the nuclear industry positioned its agents inside NASA committees that made the decisions on what kinds of power sources would be placed on those deep space missions,” said Gagnon. “Now it appears that the nuclear industry has also infiltrated the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine that has been studying missions to Mars.  The recommendation, not any surprise, is that nuclear reactors are the best way to power a Mars mission.”

“It’s not the best for us Earthlings because the Department of Energy has a bad track record of human and environmental contamination as they fabricate nuclear devices. An accident at launch could have catastrophic consequences.”

Stated Gagnon: “We fought the DoE and NASA on those previous nuclear launches and are entering the battle again. The nuclear industry has its sights set on nuclear-powered mining colonies on an assortment of planetary bodies—all necessitating legions of nuclear devices being produced at DoE and then launched on rockets that blow up from time to time.”

“We urge the public to help us pressure NASA and DoE to say no to nukes in space. We’ve got to protect life here on this planet. We are in the middle of a pandemic and people have lost jobs, homes, health care and even food on their table.”

“Trips to Mars can wait,” said Gagnon.

There have been accidents in the history of the U.S.—and also the former Soviet Union and now Russia—using nuclear power in space.

And the NAS report, deep into it, does acknowledge how accidents can happen with its new scheme of using nuclear power on rockets for missions to Mars.

It says: “Safety assurance for nuclear systems is essential to protect operating personnel as well as the general public and Earth’s environment.” Thus under the report’s plan, the rockets with the nuclear reactors onboard would be launched “with fresh [uranium] fuel before they have operated at power to ensure that the amount of radioactivity on board remains as low as practicable.” The plans include “restricting reactor startup and operations in space until spacecraft are in nuclear safe orbits or trajectories that ensure safety of Earth’s population and environment” But, “Additional policies and practices need to be established to prevent unintended system reentry during return to Earth after reactors have been operated for extended periods of time.”

The worst U.S. accident involving the use of nuclear power in space came in 1964 when the U.S. satellite Transit 5BN-3, powered by a SNAP-9A plutonium-fueled radioisotope thermoelectric generator, failed to achieve orbit and fell from the sky, disintegrating as it burned up in the atmosphere, globally spreading plutonium—considering the deadliest of all radioactive substances. That accident was long linked to a spike in global lung cancer rates where the plutonium was spread, by Dr. John Gofman, an M.D. and Ph. D., a professor of medical physics at the University of California at Berkeley. He also had been involved in developing some of the first methods for isolating plutonium for the Manhattan Project.

NASA, after the SNAP-9A (SNAP for Systems Nuclear Auxiliary Power) accident became a pioneer in developing solar photovoltaic power. All U.S. satellites now are energized by solar power, as is the International Space Station.

The worst accident involving nuclear power in space in the Soviet/Russian space program occurred in 1978 when the Cosmos 954 satellite with a nuclear reactor aboard fell from orbit and spread radioactive debris over a 373-mile swath from Great Slave Lake to Baker Lake in Canada. There were 110 pounds of highly-enriched (nearly 90 percent) of uranium fuel on Cosmos 954.

Highly-enriched uranium—90 percent is atomic bomb-grade—would be used in one reactor design proposed in the NAS report. And thus there is a passage about it under “Proliferation and security.” It states that “HEU [highly enriched uranium] fuel, by virtue of the ease with which it could be diverted to the production of nuclear weapons, is a higher value target than HALEU [high assay low enriched uranium], especially during launch and reentry accidents away from the launch site. As a result, HEU is viewed by nonproliferation experts as requiring more security considerations. In addition, if the United States uses HEU for space reactors, it could become more difficult to convince other countries to reduce their use of HEU in civilian applications.”

As for rocket propulsion in the vacuum of space, it doesn’t take much conventional chemical propulsion to move a spacecraft—and fast.

And there was a comprehensive story in New Scientist magazine this past October on “The new age of sail,” as it was headlined. The subhead: “We are on the cusp of a new type of space travel that can take us to places no rocket could ever visit.”

The article began by relating 17^th Century astronomer Johanne Kepler observing comets and seeing “that their tails always pointed away from the sun, no matter which direction they were traveling. To Kepler, it meant only one thing: the comet tails were being blown from the sun.”

Indeed, “the sun produces a wind in space” and “it can be harnessed,” said the piece. “First, there are particles of light streaming from the sun constantly, each carrying a tiny bit of momentum. Second, there is a flow of charged particles, mostly protons and electrons, also moving outwards from the sun. We call the charged particles the solar wind, but both streams are blowing a gale”—that’s in the vacuum of space.

Japan launched its Ikaros spacecraft in 2010—sailing in space using the energy from the sun. The LightSail 2 mission of The Planetary Society was launched in 2019—and it’s still up in space, flying with the sun’s energy.

New systems using solar power are being developed – past the current use of thin-film such as Mylar for solar sails.

The New Scientist article spoke of scientists “who want to use these new techniques to set a course for worlds currently far beyond our reach—namely the planets orbiting our nearest star, Alpha Centauri.”

The NAS committee, however, was mainly interested in a choice between a “nuclear thermal propulsion” (NTP) or “nuclear electric propulsion” (NEP) for rocket propulsion.

The NAS report states: “Although NEP and NTP systems both use nuclear power, they convert this power into thrust in different ways based on difficult technologies.”

As the report explains NEP systems, they “convert heat from the fission reactor to electrical power, much like nuclear power plants on Earth. This electrical power is then used to produce thrust through the acceleration of an ionized propellant.” As for an NTP system, it “is conceptually similar to a chemical propulsion system, where the combustion chamber has been replaced by a nuclear reactor to heat the propellant.”

“Advanced nuclear propulsion systems (along or in combination with chemical propulsion systems) have the potential to substantially reduce trip time” to Mars “compared to fully non-nuclear approaches,” says the report.

An issue: radioactivity from either of the systems affecting human beings on the rockets with nuclear reactors propelling them. Back after World War II with the Cold War beginning, the U.S. began working on bombers propelled by onboard nuclear reactors—even built one. The idea was that such bombers could stay aloft for days ready to drop nuclear weapons on the Soviet Union. No crews would need to be scrambled and bombers then sent aloft.

But, as The Atlantic magazine noted in a 2019 article titled, “Why There Are No Nuclear Airplanes”:

“The problem of shielding pilots from the reactor’s radiation proved even more difficult. What good would a plane be that killed its own pilots? To protect the crew from radioactivity, the reactor needed thick and heavy layers of shielding. But to take off, the plane needed to be as light as possible. Adequate shielding seemed incompatible with flight. Still, engineers theorized that the weight saved from needing no fuel might be enough to offset the reactor and its shielding. The United States spent 16 years tinkering with the idea, to no avail…

The Eisenhower administration concluded that the program was unnecessary, dangerous, and too expensive. On March 28, 1961, the newly inaugurated President John F. Kennedy canceled the program. Proposals for nuclear-powered airplanes have popped up since then, but the fear of radiation and the lack of funding have kept all such ideas down.”

The NAS report says, “Space reactor shielding has been analyzed and designed for a range of power levels…To minimize mass, the shield for an NEP system is designed using a ‘shadow shield’ approach, taking the form of a conical or cylindrical barrier that attenuates radiation in a conical region extending behind the shield, within which the spacecraft and payload are located. For any spacecraft with a source of nuclear radiation, the dose rate is managed by a combination of (1) distance between the reactor (or another source) and the payload and (2) attenuation by the shield.”

The “synergies” in space nuclear activities between NASA and the U.S. military advanced in the NAS report mark a change in public acknowledgement. The agency was supposed to have a distinctly civilian orientation, encouraging peaceful applications in space science.

However, throughout the decades there have been numerous reports on its close relationship with the U.S. military—notably during the period of NASA Space Shuttle flights. As a 2018 piece in Smithsonian Magazine noted, “During the heyday of the space shuttle, NASA would routinely ferry classified payloads into orbit for the Department of Deense among other projects the agencies have collaborated on.”

With the formation of a U.S. Space Force by the Trump administration in 2019, the NASA-Pentagon link would appear to be coming out of the shadows, as indicated by the NAS report. The Biden administration is not intending to eliminate the Space Force, despite the landmark Outer Space Treaty of 1967 put together by the U.S., the then Soviet Union and the U.K, setting aside space for peaceful purposes. It is giving the new sixth branch of U.S. armed forces “full support,” according to his spokesperson Jen Psaki.

The NAS report says, “Areas of common interest include (1) fundamental questions about the development and testing of materials (such as reactor fuels and moderators) that can survive NTP conditions and (2) advancing modeling and simulation capabilities that are relevant to NTP.” And, “Additionally, a NASA NTP system could potentially use a scaled-up version of a DoD reactor, depending on the design.”

It declares: “Threats to U.S. space assets are increasing. They include anti-satellite weapons and counter-space activities. Crossing vast distances of space rapidly with a reasonably sized vehicle in response to these threats requires a propulsion system with high Isp [Specific Impulse] and thrust. This could be especially important in a high-tempo military conflict.”

Moreover, on December 19, just before he was to leave office, Trump signed Space Policy Directive-6, titled “National Strategy for Space Nuclear Propulsion.” Its provisions include: “DoD [Department of Defense] and NASA, in cooperation with DOE [Department of Energy}, and with other agencies and private-sector partners, as appropriate, should evaluate technology options and associated key technical challenges for an NTP [Nuclear Thermal Propulsion] system, including reactor designs, power conversion, and thermal management. DoD and NASA should work with their partners to evaluate and use opportunities for commonality with other SNPP [Space Nuclear Power and Propulsion] needs, terrestrial power needs, and reactor demonstration projects planned by agencies and the private sector.”

It continues: “DoD, in coordination with DOE and other agencies, and with private sector partners, as appropriate, should develop reactor and propulsion system technologies that will resolve the key technical challenges in areas such as reactor design and production, propulsion system and spacecraft design, and SNPP system integration.”

It’s going to take enormous grassroots action—and efforts by those in public office who understand the error of the space direction being taken—to stop it.

counterpunch.org

In July, Dmitry Rogozin, Director General of Roscosmos, cited the U.S. “retreat from principles of cooperation and mutual support” to justify Russia’s refusal to join the latest U.S. space initiative: to build lunar bases. Rogozin was likely referring to the U.S. refusal to renew the Intermediate-range Forces Treaty and its intention to back out of the Open Skies Treaty.

Russia responded by declaring that Venus is a “Russian planet.” The U.S. continues to reject Sino-Russian efforts to strengthen the Outer Space Treaty 1967, to prohibit the weaponization of space. Doing so would interfere with U.S. plans for “full spectrum dominance.”

MOON LANDING 2.0

Last week on 22 September, the National Aeronautical and Space Administration (NASA) signed a memorandum with the Department of Defense (DOD). The signers were NASA’s administrator, Jim Bridenstine, and the U.S. Space Force Chief of Operations General, John Raymond.

The signing of the memo took place in the broader context of NASA’s Artemis program. In December 2017, Donald Trump signed the Presidential Memorandum on Reinvigorating America’s Human Space Exploration Program. It was an update of Obama’s space policy, adding that the U.S. will: “Lead an innovative and sustainable program of exploration with commercial and international partners to enable human expansion across the solar system and to bring back to Earth new knowledge and opportunities.”

NASA’s Artemis program oversees the U.S. mission to exploit the moon, including the construction of the Artemis Base Camp at the lunar South Pole, probably near the Shackleton Crater. This will serve as a forerunner to building a base on Mars. It “builds on a half-century of experience and preparation to establish a robust human-robotic presence on and around the Moon,” says NASA. Artemis includes a Space Launch System and the Orion spacecraft. These operations will enable “U.S. commercial companies and international partners to further contribute to the exploration and development of the Moon.”

International partners, at present, include Canada, Japan, and the EU. Though, as we shall see, weaponization and competition remain serious threats to international peace and human survival. Other elements of the program include a Power and Propulsion Element (PPE) and the Habitation and Logistics Outpost (HALO), which Artemis hopes to finalize by 2023. The international efforts include deploying “science payloads” and CubeSats, as well as refueling the Gateway: an orbiting lunar outpost.

WEAPONIZED MOON

Contracts for the Human Landing System (HLS) have gone to Blue Origin, Dynetics (Leidos), and SpaceX. The HLS team includes Draper, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman. Draper will provide avionics, guidance, navigation, and software. The Integrated Lander Vehicle will launch on United Launch Alliance’s Vulcan heavy-lift rocket. Maxar Technologies will develop the PPE. HALO is an initial crew cabin for astronauts visiting the Gateway and will likely be built by Northrop. Pressurized and unpressurized cargo, including space instruments and food, will be delivered by SpaceX.

The recent NASA-DOD memorandum of understanding references the proposed lunar base and says that NASA and the Space Force “reaffirm and continue their rich legacy of collaboration in space launch, in-space operations, and space research activities, all of which contribute to the Parties’ separate and distinct civil and defense endeavors”—the latter are classified. The Space Force will act as the NASA’s guarantor. Space Force’s responsibilities “include developing military space systems and doctrine, as well as presenting space forces to support the warfighting Combatant Commands.” The memo reiterates common NASA-DOD interests.

The memo also seeks to establish a Foundation for Broad Collaboration. General Raymond says: “A secure, stable, and accessible space domain underpins our nation’s security, prosperity and scientific achievement. Space Force looks forward to future collaboration, as NASA pushes farther into the universe for the benefit of all.” The Space Force states that it “will secure the peaceful use of space, free for any who seek to expand their understanding of the universe, by organizing, training and equipping forces to protect U.S. and allied interests in space.” “Peace” means U.S. dominance unimpeded by commercial rivals, like China, India, and Russia.

NASA AS STIMULUS FOR HI-TECH

As the BBC acknowledges: “Many practical products developed by NASA during the Apollo years are well known: cordless drills, PV (solar) panels, freeze-dried food, thermal insulation material, heat coatings and so on.” Having learned their craft at the Fairchild Semiconductor company, NASA scientists formed Intel, which later worked on personal computers with Microsoft. The so-called Apollo Effect, in reference to the first moon landing, indirectly and reportedly inspired Tim Berners-Lee, who is credited with creating the World Wide Web, Jeff Bezos of Amazon, and Elon Musk of SpaceX, which is now contracted to work on the latest program.

NASA says of the future that taxpayer dollars will fund research and development for corporate, hi-tech innovation: “Space Technology investments will stimulate the economy and build our Nation’s global economic competitiveness through the creation of new products and services, new business and industries, and high-quality, sustainable jobs,” like those above. It notes more broadly:

“Knowledge provided by weather and navigational spacecraft, efficiency improvements in both ground and air transportation, super computers, solar- and wind-generated energy, the cameras found in many of today’s cell phones, improved biomedical applications including advanced medical imaging and even more nutritious infant formula, as well as the protective gear that keeps our military, firefighters and police safe, have all benefitted from our nation’s investments in aerospace technology.”

Colonel Eric Felt, Director of the Air Force Research Laboratory Space Vehicles Directorate, says: “The space renaissance happening on the commercial side is fantastic, there is innovation we can use.” Felt also notes the link between civilian-commercial and military technology: “We have limited funding in our budget for science and technology … We have to leverage dual-use technologies”—which means weaponized civilian and commercial products.

CONCLUSION

As pundits analyze what was arguably the lowest point of U.S. electoral politics in the mont of September, namely the “debate” between The Donald and Creepy Joe, Sky News reports on the Space Command’s first foreign deployment to Al Udeid Air Base, Qatar: “Their mission is to confront new threats in the region from Iran’s missile programme – as well as attempts to jam, hack and blind satellites.” Confront threats means maintain dominance.

The Space Force has also seen the transfer of Air Force personnel to the Marine Expeditionary Unit, indicating that the Force will integrate into all levels of the U.S. military, realizing the U.S. elite dream of “full spectrum dominance.”

counterpunch.org

Within that theme, the important issue of psy ops, false solutions and epistemological warfare which are a part of everyone’s’ daily life (whether they know it or not) arose as well. Recent events and announcements have caused me to tackle another aspect of psychological warfare in the modern age.

UFOs and You

What would you do if the American and British governments both revealed that their secret UFO programs would declassify material from each nations’ respective National Archives?

What if you found out that leading politicians like former House Majority speaker Harry Reid had allocated $22 millions of tax payer dollars to UFO research and that Obama’s former chief counsellor (and rampant pedophile) John Podesta has openly called for UFO disclosure on several public occasions since 2002 or that Hillary Clinton herself called for UFO disclosure during her presidential campaign pledges of 2015?

Would you believe these claims or would you remain skeptical? How would you decide what to do?

With the July 23 public statement from the Pentagon that “off world vehicles not made on this earth” have been kept secret for decades, this question has become extremely important.

Major opinion-shapers like Joe Rogan, Tucker Carlson, and even Russia Today have promoted the cause of alien disclosure for the past few years and with the most recent Pentagon announcement, fascination in little grey men has spread like wildfire.

Who’s Playing this Game?

For the past several decades, government-sponsored UFO research has largely been driven by the work of private subcontractors like Bigelow Aerospace which was founded by billionaire real estate speculator Robert Bigelow. Having recently joined the “new space movement” (ie: an anti-nation state trojan horse designed to promote privatized money driven model of space funding) alongside other billionaires like Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and Sir Richard Branson, Bigelow allocated large swaths of his fortunes to the creation of organizations like the National Institute for Discovery Science which have always worked in a private capacity with governments and academia. One of Bigelow’s biggest tools was Sen. Harry Reid who not only received generous campaign funds from the billionaire between 1998-2009 but also allocated tens of millions in national defense funds to his company starting in 2007.

In 2014, the creative force driving the “UFO-disclosure cause” has taken the form of a weird organization called To the Stars Academy of Arts and Science run by high level intelligence operatives and using a cardboard cut-out Tom Delonge  (former lead singer of the punk band Blink 182). To the Stars has poured millions of dollars into cultural/educational and lobbying projects driven by books, movies, film and documentaries in the cause of “elevating global consciousness” in preparation for a new age of UFO disclosure.

As Delonge says in his promotional video: “through a series of meetings I was soon connected to a large group of US government officials. From the CIA, to the Department of Defense to Lockheed Martin Skunkworks. These were the guys involved in the secretive government programs that dealt with these subjects.”

Some of the shadowy figures affiliated with To the Stars and featured on the group’s website include a former CIA director of operations, former Deputy Assistant secretary for Defense Intelligence, former Director of Information for White House Technology, and former chief of the CIA’s counter-biological weapons program. Both Podesta and Bigelow’s Aerospace have also worked closely with Delonge’s strange group over the past six years.

Bigelow is not the only billionaire who has allocated their vast fortunes to the cause of “UFO truth”.

The Rockefeller Project

In 1993, the Disclosure Initiative was created by none other than financier Laurence Rockefeller (4^th son of Standard Oil Founder John D. Rockefeller). The initiative had a two-fold purpose:

• Unite all of the largest UFO research organizations in America under one umbrella organization which was promptly accomplished within one year and
• Massively lobby the Clinton Administration to declassify millions of documents which was done in 1994, revealing little more than mountains of anecdotal testimonies and correspondences.

During the heyday of the Rockefeller UFO Disclosure Initiative, the Clintons stayed at the Laurence Rockefeller ranch in Wyoming, during which time an early recruit to the “disclosure mission” was Clinton Chief of Staff John Podesta. Podesta started going public with calls for UFO disclosure in 2002 and has continued to work with figures like Bigelow and To the Stars Academy over the next 18 years.

A fuller overview of Laurence Rockefeller’s “other” civilization-shifting programs from the 1950s-1990s can be seen here.

During the Clinton White House years, Laurence Rockefeller recruited a bodybuilding biologist named Stephen Greer to become the controller of the Disclosure Project which has provided his meal ticket to this very day. Greer has given thousands of interviews promoting the narrative that NASA’s Apollo Lunar projects were stopped in 1972 merely because the aliens who have been stationed on the Moon for eons didn’t want the truth to leak out (but were at least kind enough to let us keep the technology they gave us earlier in Roswell in the 1950s). If you believe in Greer’s narrative (which gets much crazier I promise), then human creative thought is actually not as special as “the shadowy forces controlling the government” wanted you to believe since space technology only exists because we stole stuff from ETs. Pretty much any inspired awe in universal creation and the power of the human mind to discover this creation with the effect of making life better through scientific and technological progress would easily be killed from this outlook.

From this mindset, the idea of advanced knowledge or technological progress just become another kind of “secret knowledge” for some gnostic-styled cult with a select few endowed with the powers of secret knowledge (in this case, those who are privy to communicate with aliens and use their tech.)

The questions an intelligent person should now ask are:

Why would a leading figure of the Rockefeller dynasty devote the last decades of his life to the cause of “UFO truth”? Did Laurence Rockefeller or those on his payroll or those in the CIA actually care about the right of the people to know hidden truths, or is the plan just designed to mis-direct the minds of credulous and jaded citizens into an invisible cage? Might such a mis-direction prevent people from dealing with issues of America’s lurch to fascism and accelerating disintegration?

Is it possible that these pedophiles, globalists, and Malthusian billionaires care less about the truth and more about inducing Americans to fixate on aliens while the republic is destroyed under economic collapse and war?

Squaring the Crop Circle

A large portion of the Disclosure Project’s work has gone into the investigation of crop circles which were first recorded in the early 1970s in Britain, and which have the peculiar characteristic of becoming increasingly well executed and complex over the course of five decades. Live Science reported that “the first real crop circles didn’t appear until the 1970s, when simple circles began appearing in the English countryside. The number and complexity of the circles increased dramatically, reaching a peak in the 1980s and 1990s when increasingly elaborate circles were produced”.

My question is: If transcendental alien races travelling at faster-than light speed, have been leaving encoded messages to us, then why would their artistic skills have improved so dramatically over a few years? Just a question.

MK Ultra & UFOs

Most people know of the CIA/MI6-funded mass brainwashing operation known as MK Ultra which was launched in 1953. Very few people have recognized the connection between MK Ultra and the rise of the UFO movement that grew in spades throughout the Cold War.

While US and UK government UFO investigations did occur in piece meal starting in 1947 under Project Sign (1947), and Project Grudge (1949), it wasn’t until 1950 that official tax payer-funded departments were created in both nations to pursue “UFO research”. These took the form of the USA’s Project Blue Book (1952) which itself was modelled on the work conducted by Britain’s 1950 “Flying Saucer Working Party” spear-headed by Sir Henry Tizard (Chief Science Advisor to the Ministry of Defense and Chairman of Britain’s Defense Research Policy Committee).

Journalist Naomi Klein stated in her book The Shock Doctrine that Tizard played a leading role in the creation and funding of MK Ultra during a high level meeting in Montreal and Tizard’s Wikipedia entry notes that:

“One of the most controversial meetings he had to attend in his capacity as chair of the National Research Commission would only emerge many years later with the de-classification of CIA documents, namely a meeting on June 1^st, 1951 at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Montreal Canada, between Tizard, Omond Solandt (chairman of Defence Research and Development Canada) and representatives of the CIA to discuss “brainwashing”.

This Ritz-Carleton meeting would lay the seeds for MK Ultra that was not only designed to deal with brainwashing, but created LSD, and explored the matter of breaking down a human mind into a blank slate with the explicit intention of reconstructing minds from scratch. As Klein’s book eloquently showcases, the intention was to use these discoveries on a national scale in order to conduct “shock therapy” on nations in order to break cultures and nations from their historic memories and traditions with the purpose of reconstructing them under a post-nation state (and post truth) neo liberal world order. While MK Ultra was funded and executed by the Americans, the guidance for this operation were always driven by London’s Tavistock Clinic. A bone chilling expose of this clinic was produced by EIR’s Jeffrey Steinberg in 1993 which may keep you up at night.

As one can imagine, the very act of providing government funds to investigate flying saucers was itself sufficient to legitimize the existence of aliens in the minds of millions of Europeans and Americans during the Cold War years. During these dark years, faith in honest government collapsed under the imperial wars of Korea, Vietnam abroad and the growth of the Military Industrial Complex and McCarthyism at home. The world of secret patents, secret weapons, secret R&D that developed during this period in facilities like Area 51 made the frequent sightings by civilians and even un-vetted military pilots of “unidentified flying aircraft” an expected occurrence.

Flying Saucers and Area 51

In her 2012 book Area 51 Uncensored, journalist Annie Jacobson provided lengthy detail of the Cold War experiments, aerospace technology and nuclear bomb testing that took place at Area 51 during this period which largely put the earlier social engineer experiment of H.G. Wells’ War of the Worlds emergency broadcast read aloud in 1938. The mass panic that ensued the broadcast provided an insight into the levers of mass psychology that certain social engineers drooled over.

What could account for observed UFO phenomena?

In an interview with NPR Radio, Jacobson stated: “The UFO craze began in the summer of 1947. Several months later, the G2 intelligence, which was the Army intelligence corps at the time, spent an enormous amount of time and treasure seeking out two former Third Reich aerospace designers named Walter and Reimar Horten who had allegedly created [a] flying disc. … American intelligence agents fanned out across Europe seeking the Horton brothers to find out if, in fact, they had made this flying disc.”

During WWII, the Horten brothers were associated with the Austrian scientist Viktor Shauberger whose innovative designs for implosion (vs explosion) flying technology utilized water currents, and electromagnetism to generate flying machines that by all surviving accounts flew faster than the speed of sound. While much of his research was confiscated and classified by victor nations after WWII, Schauberger was promised government sponsorship in America which induced the inventor to move across the ccean where Canada’s Avro Arrow program sought his designs for supersonic nuclear missile delivery aircraft. When he discovered that his work would only be used for military purposes, Schauberger pushed back and over the course of several months, his patents were essentially stolen, and he returned to Austria to die broke and depressed in 1958.

The Strategic Importance of Space

It was never a secret that the post-1971 globalized world order championed by the likes of Sir Henry Kissinger, David and Laurence Rockefeller and other Malthusians throughout the 20^th century was always designed to collapse. With the mass shock therapy that such a collapse would impose upon the world, it was believed that a deconstruction of the Abrahamic traditions that governed western society for 2000 years could be accomplished and a new society could be socially engineered in the image of the Brave New (depopulated) World that would live like happy sheep forever under the grip of a hereditary alpha class and their technocratic managers. The story of the Tavistock-led attack on scientific progress is told brilliantly in the 2010 Lpac film The Destruction of NASA.

The only problem these social engineers have encountered in recent years is the re-emergence of actual statesmen who are unwilling to sacrifice their people and traditions on the altar of a new global Gaia cult. Such defenders of humanity’s better traditions have launched the multipolar alliance and have driven a policy of long-term growth and advance scientific and technological progress which is embodied brilliantly by the New Silk Road, and its extensions to the Arctic. The most exciting aspect of this New Silk Road/Multipolar Paradigm is the leap into space exploration as the new frontier of human self-development which has not been seen since the days of President Kennedy.

With China and Russia signing a pact to jointly develop lunar bases and the NASA Artemis Accords calling for international cooperation on Lunar and Mars resource development/industrialization, the age of unlimited growth that was lost with the LSD-driven mass psychosis of 1968’s “live in the now” paradigm shift may finally be recaptured. Programs designed to put humanity’s focus on real objective threats like Asteroid collisions, and solar-induced new ice ages are seriously being discussed by leaders of Russia, China and the USA.

There are billions of suns and potentially billions of galaxies, and chances are there is indeed life on many of the planets orbiting some of the stars within our growing, creative universe… and there is also a fair chance that cognitive life has also emerged on some of those planets. The best way to find out is not to sit at home while the world economic system collapses under a controlled disintegration thinking about Rockefeller-funded conspiracy theories, but rather to fight to revive humanity’s open system destiny starting with a cooperative space program to extend human culture and economy to the Moon and Mars, and then onto other planetary bodies followed by missions to deep space.

If other civilizations exist, maybe it is our duty to take up the torch left to us by JFK and go find them.

The author can be reached at matt.ehret@tutamail.com

On July 17, 1975 the first international handshake was occurring in space between Russian Cosmonaut Alexei Leonov and American astronaut Thomas Stafford as the first official act kicking off the historic Apollo-Soyuz cooperative mission. Taking place during age of nuclear terror on Earth, the Apollo-Soyuz represented a great hope for humankind and was the first ever international space mission leading the way to the MIR-USA cooperation and later International Space Station. Starting on July 15 as both Russian and American capsules launched simultaneously and continuing until July 24^th, the Apollo-Soyuz cooperation saw astronauts and cosmonauts conducting joint experiments, exchanged gifts, and tree seeds later planted in each others’ nations.

As hope for a bright future of cooperation and co-discovery continued for the coming decades with mankind’s slow emergence as a space faring species, affairs on earth devolved in disturbing ways. A new era of regime change operations, Islamic terrorism and oil geopolitics took on new life in the 1980s and as globalization stripped formerly productive nations of their industrial/scientific potential, the Soviet Union collapsed by 1991. During this dark time, the consolidation of a corporatocracy under NAFTA and the European Maastricht Treaty occurred and transatlantic globalists gloated over the collapse of Russia and the rise of a utopian end-of-history, unipolar order.

In some ways, today’s world of 2020 is different from that of 1975 and in other ways it is disturbingly similar.

Today, a new generations of Cold Warriors has come to power in the Trans Atlantic Deep State who are willing to burn the earth under nuclear fire in defense of their utopian visions for world government which they see fast slipping away to the Multipolar alliance led by Russia and China. The clash of open vs closed system paradigms represented by the NATO/City of London cage on the one hand and the New Silk Road win-win paradigm of constant growth on the other has created a tension which is visceral and pregnant with potential for both good and evil.

This schism has also split American space policy between two opposing paradigms:

On the one hand a Deep State space vision for full spectrum dominance is defining Space Force (America’s newest branch of the military created in December 2019). Run out of the Pentagon and the most regressive neocon ideologues, this program calls for weaponizing space against the Russian Chinese alliance (and the rest of the world). Another, more sane vision for space is represented by leading NASA officials like Jim Bridenstine who have created NASA’s Artemis Accords calling for a framework for peaceful international cooperation in space. Bridenstine and other NASA officials have worked tirelessly to bring Russia and the USA into cooperative alliances on matters of space mining, asteroid defense and deep space exploration ever since President Trump’s 2017 directive to put mankind back on the moon for the first time since 1972 with plans to go to Mars following soon thereafter.

While U.S.-Russia space collaboration has moved at a snails pace even losing ground won in 1975, the Apollo-Soyuz spirit has expressed itself in another part of the world brilliantly, with the Russian-Chinese pact to jointly build a lunar base announced on July 23 by Roscosmos chief Dimitry Rogozin saying: “Recently, we have agreed that we will probably research the Moon and build a lunar research base together – Russia and China.”

This pact follows hot off the heals of the September 2019 agreement between both nations to jointly collaborate on Lunar activities over the coming decade which would begin with the Chang’e 7 lander and Luna 26 orbiter searching for lunar water in 2022. The Russia-China agreement also announced “creating and operating a joint Data Center for Lunar and Deep Space Research.”

On the same day that Rogozin announced the lunar research base, China’s Tianwen-1 (“Quest for Heavenly Truth”) launched on a Long March-5 carrier rocket from Hainan carrying an orbiter and rover scheduled to arrive in Mars’ orbit in February 2021. Once the rover lands on the surface of the red planet on May 2021, China will become the second nation to complete a successful soft landing after America (which has made 8 such landings since 1976, two of which are still operational). China’s orbiter will join the three American, two European and one Indian orbiters currently circling Mars.

Due to the fact that the Earth-Mars proximity is at it’s closest phase, several other important Mars launches have also occurred, with the United Arab Emirates launching the Arab world’s first interplanetary mission in history from Japan on Monday. This will be followed in short order by America’s Perseverance Mars Rover which will be launched from Cape Canaveral and will join the Curiosity rover that landed in 2012.

NASA has stated that Perseverance’s mission will involve seeking signs of microbial life, ancient life and subsurface water as well as “testing a method for producing oxygen from the Martian atmosphere, identifying other resources (such as subsurface water), improving landing techniques, and characterizing weather, dust, and other potential environmental conditions that could affect future astronauts living and working on Mars.”

What makes this Russia-China pact space pact additionally important is that it creates a potential flank in the anti-China space cooperation ban signed into law with the 2011 Wolf Act. By integrating into China’s advanced space program, Russia (which currently suffers from no similar bans to cooperation from western powers) may provide a lateral pathway for cooperation with China needed to bypass the ban. Russian-USA plans to cooperate on such programs as the Lunar Gateway station orbiting the moon still exists as well as other Soyuz-U.S. collaborative launches that have been planned through 2021 so hope on this level is not without foundation. Even though America has regained the capability to launch manned space craft with the Crew Dragon launch of this year, Bridenstine has said:

“We see a day when Russian cosmonauts can launch on American rockets, and American astronauts can launch on Russian rockets. Remember, half of the International Space Station is Russian, and if we’re going to make sure that we have continual access to it, and that they have continual access to it, then we’re going to need to be willing to launch on each other’s vehicles.”

Putin’s Strategic Open System Vision

We also know that since President Trump’s April 6, 2020 executive order making lunar and mars mining a priority of American space policy, he and President Putin have held four discussions in which space cooperation has arisen. While neocon war haws in the Pentagon and British military intelligence scream of Russian/Chinese aggression and accuse Russia of testing anti-satellite ballistic weapons, the first bilateral U.S.-Russia space security talks have restarted since 2013.

Four days after Trump’s executive order, Putin addressed American and Russian astronauts on board the ISS and said:

“We are pleased that our specialists are successfully working under the ISS program with their colleagues from the United States of America, one of the leading space powers. This is a clear example of an effective partnership between our countries in the interests of all mankind.”

Putin went on to say:

“I believe that even now, when the world is confronted with challenges, space activities will continue, including our cooperation with foreign partners, because mankind cannot stand still but will always try to move forward and join forces to advance the boundaries of knowledge… despite difficulties, people sought to make their dream of space travel come true, fearlessly entered the unknown and achieved success.”

The impending economic collapse has forced certain uncomfortable truths to the surface: 1) we will get a new global economic and security system soon, 2) that system will be of a closed system/unipolar nature or it will be an open system/multipolar character. If it is an open system then humanity will have learned that in order to successfully exist within a creative, evolving universe, we must tie our fates to becoming a self-consciously creative, evolving species locking our economic, cultural and political realities into this discoverable character of reality.

If the new system is of a closed/entropic order as certain advocates of the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset are proclaiming, then a much unhappier fate awaits our children and grandchildren which would make World War II look like a cake walk.

The author can be reached at matt.ehret@tutamail.com

The scale of chaos and death threatening humanity via the two-fold crises of economic collapse and war is beyond intolerable for anyone endowed with a brain and even a partially functioning conscience.

Since this crisis is caused in so many ways by geopolitical doctrines which presume that mankind is merely a selfish animal fighting over diminishing returns within closed systems, no solution can be found which is tainted with those very poisons killing the patient. It is for this very reason that all policy concepts which fall outside the box of “balance of power” thinking are so vitally important at this moment of history.

Sadly, since very few people who follow geopolitics with passion pay much attention to the importance of space diplomacy as a domain of “open system” cooperation for humanity, many of the exciting developments centering around the Artemis project have largely fallen “over the radar” so to speak.

The Artemis Accords in Brief

To be brief: On May 15, NASA released a new framework of 10 principles of diplomacy, resource development and safety designed to guide international cooperation in space exploration and development over the coming decades. Dubbed the Artemis Accords, this new protocol puts meat onto the bones of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty signed by 109 UN members but which has never evolved beyond the vaguest of generalities.

Upon announcing the accords, NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine stated optimistically:

“It’s a new dawn for space exploration! Today I’m honored to announce the Artemis Accords Agreements- establishing a shared vision and set of principles for all international partners that join in humanity’s return to the moon. We go, together!”

The pre-amble of the Artemis Accords, which is part of the broader Artemis Program signed into law by President Trump in 2017 stated the following:

“While NASA is leading the Artemis program, international partnerships will play a key role in achieving a sustainable and robust presence on the Moon while preparing to conduct a historic mission to Mars.”

The 10 accords deal with: 1) the primacy of peaceful purposes, 2) transparency, 3) interoperability of technologies, 4) emergency assistance between nations, 5) registration of space objects, 6) release and sharing of scientific data among nations, 7) protecting heritage sites such as the Apollo 11 site, 8) the development of space resources within the lunar regolith, 9) De-confliction of activities, and 10) orbital debris and space craft disposal.

These accords follow off of the earlier April 6, 2020 Executive Order signed by President Trump calling for an accelerated push towards lunar, mars and asteroid resource development. Three days after the Executive Order, the first of three phone calls were held between Presidents Trump and Putin which included lengthy discussion on space cooperation.

12 days after the last of the three calls, both presidents published a Joint Declaration on the 75th Anniversary of the Meeting on the Elbe on April 25 which is not unconnected to the developments on space diplomacy outlined here.

Thus far, the important and uncharacteristic nature of America’s Artemis Accords is its focus on openness to international participation, and open system economics.

Outer space, being intrinsically open and composed almost entirely of undiscovered processes is thus open to creative thought and unbounded potential for growth and discoveries. Imperialists who chose to put humanity’s causal nexus on such material conditions as genes or geography (rather than ideas and intentions), obviously hate this sort of thinking.

A Fresh Chance at Russia-U.S. Collaboration

While the western mainstream media has promoted the narrative that this policy has nothing to do with Russian cooperation, the reality is the opposite. One day after the May 15 accord, Russia Business Today published an article titled ‘Roscosmos Ready for Negotiations with NASA on Moon Exploration Projects’. In this article, Sergei Savalyev (deputy director general for Roscosmos on International Cooperation) stated:

“Ambitious projects connected to Moon colonization could become a serious factor for the interaction of the two countries in difficult times”.

Referring to the disturbing spread of misinformation promoting American “unwillingness to cooperate” with Russia, NASA’s spokesman Michael Gold stated:

“I think it’s unfortunate that there were a lot of media leaks that did not properly describe what the Artemis Accords were, so I’m surprised for some of those reactions… As we look at the Russian cooperation on Artemis, I expect a great deal of it. It may center around the gateway.”

In opposition to mainstream media narratives, Russia has not only has been asked to join the accords but has already begun cooperation on the Artemis program through its participation in the Lunar Gateway Project which will see Japan, Europe, the USA and Russia co-create the world’s first lunar orbiting space station. Before this, Roscosmos and NASA had already signed a joint statement to collaborate on deep space exploration on September 27, 2017 stating:

“This joint statement reflects the common vision for human exploration that NASA and Roscosmos share. Both agencies, as well as other International Space Station partners, see the gateway as a strategic component of human space exploration architecture that warrants additional study. NASA has already engaged industry partners in gateway concept studies. Roscosmos and other space station partner agencies are preparing to do the same.”

On a practical level, Russia supplies America with RD-180 and RD-181 rocket engines for American launch vehicles and plays a cooperative role with America not only on the International Space Station (ISS) but also getting American astronauts to the ISS since Obama killed the manned shuttle program in 2011.

Flanking the War Hawks and Playing the China Card

Several weeks before the July 2011 death of America’s manned shuttle program, Congress had passed the Wolf Act outlawing all American-China collaboration on space science and technology under the narrative that “China’s cyber-espionage was a threat to American democracy”.

This anti-China ban had the opposite effect than that anticipated by the geopolitical warmongers, as China was suddenly forced to rely on their own creative powers and leapt ahead of the space race landing the first robot on the moon in 40 years in 2013, followed by their historic landing on the far side of the moon with the January 3, 2019 Jade Rabbit and will soon have its own space station by 2021 named the “Harmony of the Heavens”. All three nations (Russia, China and the USA) have made space exploration, lunar development, asteroid defense and Mars colonization high priorities.

With Russia having signed a joint lunar cooperation treaty with China’s space agency in September 2019, Russia’s joining the Artemis Program (and hopeful signing of the Accords) puts all three nations into a very interesting conjunction of skills, and common interests which pose the greatest prospects for the long-term survival of the human species.

With this spirit of cooperation needed to avoid a new world war, I would like to end with a parting word from Presidents Trump and Putin’s joint Declaration of April 25:

“The ‘Spirit of the Elbe’ is an example of how our countries can put aside differences, build trust, and cooperate in pursuit of a greater cause. As we work today to confront the most important challenges of the 21st century, we pay tribute to the valor and courage of all those who fought together to defeat fascism. Their heroic feat will never be forgotten.”

The author can be reached at matt.ehret@tutamail.com

Amidst the confusion and fear driven by the global pandemic, President Trump passed a fascinating Executive Order on April 6 calling for the mining of asteroids and the Moon which may serve as the gateway to shaping a new system of economic relations, rules and values around a shared future for humankind. Trump’s Executive Order states in part that “successful long term exploration and scientific discoveries of the Moon, Mars and other celestial bodies will require partnerships with commercial entities to recover and use resources, including water and certain minerals in outer space.”

In stark opposition to those cynics who wish to analyse every event from the lens of simple geopolitics, the executive order goes onto reject unilateralism in space (promoted by the Space Force ideologues seeking to extend militarisation beyond earth) and rather calls for cooperation, stating that the USA “shall seek to negotiate joint statements, and bilateral and multilateral arrangements with foreign states regarding safe and sustainable operations for the public and private recovery and use of space resources.”

This potential for a shared future for global (and celestial) development stands in stark opposition to certain forces who would rather use the two-fold crisis of economic collapse and viral pandemics to usher in a new age of fascism and world government under a Global Green New Deal. As I wrote in an earlier paper, this clash is exemplified by the closed system thinking of Malthusians and neocons vs. the open system thinking of genuine patriots and world citizens.

How the Dream of Open System Economics Was Lost

It was once believed in the west that the future would be beautiful, just, and as plentiful as it was peaceful. Under John F. Kennedy’s bold leadership the idea of space exploration was more than a simple “space race” or plopping a human being on the moon “within the decade and returning him safely back home”. Far from this narrow view, JFK and many leading American scientists saw this goal as a springboard to a new age of creative growth for all humanity both on the Moon and beyond. These stirring forecasts of an age of reason can still be heard in recordings of Kennedy’s Rice University address of September 12, 1962.

Unbeknownst to many, JFK also called for a USA-Russia joint Moon landing in order to defuse the Cold War formula of MAD and had this plan not been derailed, the world would have found itself on a much different trajectory.

Unfortunately, history unfolded on a different course. After JFK’s murder (weeks after the above speech), his program to remove troops from Vietnam was reversed and the USA was plunged into the disastrous Vietnam war for over a decade. As the war grew, federal funds needed for science and exploration were increasingly absorbed by the military industrial complex.

By 1972, the last human mission on the Moon took place and by 1976, Russia’s last lunar project also occurred with Luna 6. Although small efforts to keep the dream alive continued in piecemeal form over the years, Apollo was scrapped and national support for long-term objectives slowly decayed and a generation of space scientists and engineers found themselves disillusioned by decades of broken promises and a lost dream. Russian scientists suffering the debilitating effects of Perestroika shared in this dismal experience and found themselves unemployed throughout the 1990s and in many cases forced to use their powerful mathematical skills in the financial services sector of London in order to make ends meet (giving rise to the age of quants and speculative high frequency derivatives trading).

During this period of disenchantment, China arose silently under the radar patiently building its capacities from scratch.

The Rise of China’s Space Program

Although its first satellite launch took place during the height of the Cultural Revolution in 1970, the Chinese space program grew much more slowly than its counterparts in Russia or the USA. Patiently learning from the best engineering feats of the west, under the wise guidance of Deng Xiaoping, China finally became the third nation to successfully send a human into orbit in 2003 and one decade later, became the first nation in 37 years to return to the Moon with the successful landing of the Chang’e-3 rover in December 2013. Lieutenant General Zhang Yulin called this program “the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation” and the world came to soon see what incredible plans were yet in store for China’s goals in space.

Soon China had launched the Tiangong 1 and 2 (Heavenly Palace) test space stations in preparation for the 2021 launching of the Large Modular Space Station named Tianhe (“Harmony of the Heavens”) which will be a vital platform for the earth-lunar economy for decades.

On January 3, 2019, China set a world milestone by becoming the first nation to successfully land a rover on the far side of the moon with Chang’e 4, which has begun topographical, resource and geological mappings of the lunar surface. Change’e 5, 6, and 7 will continue these explorations while adding the feature of returning samples to the earth and preparing the groundwork for a permanent lunar base by 2030. Chang’e-8 will be especially important as it will print the first ever 3D structures on the Moon by 2028.

Unfortunately, due to the Obama-era “Wolf Act” of 2011, American scientists could not participate in these achievements and had to watch from afar as China swiftly leapt to the forefront of space science dethroning America from the unchallenged stature she once enjoyed.

Asteroid Threats

Earlier in 2013, before Chang’e-3 landed on the Moon, another humbling event took place and served as a sort of divine slap in the face for many. This wake up call took the form of a 9000 ton asteroid which exploded 22 km over Chelyabinsk, Russia sending shock waves that shattered windows and injured over 2000 citizens. The Chelyabinsk incident served as a timely reminder that the universe offers enough existential challenges for humanity without the additional man-made calamities of regime change wars and fighting over diminishing returns of resources.

From this Russian incident, NASA’s Planetary Defense Coordination Office was created to begin to establish a plan for asteroid threats from space alongside similar departments in Roscosmos, and the European and Chinese Space Agencies. Ouyang Ziyan (the father of China’s lunar program) stated that asteroid defense “is worth attention while we are devoted to building a community with a shared future for humanity… Scientists around the world should cooperate to monitor near-Earth asteroids.”

In November 2019, Roscosmos Director of Science and Long Term Programs (Alexander Bloshenko) stated that Russia’s lunar development goals which included a base on the underside of the Moon within a decade were intertwined with asteroid defense stating: “There are plans to install equipment on this [lunar] base to study deep space and special telescopes to track asteroids and comets that pose a danger with their collision with earth.”

By Summer 2019, NASA’s administrator Jim Bridenstine also announced his intention for USA-Russian cooperation on asteroid defense- joining the earlier call made by Roscosmos’ head Dimitri Rogozin for a “Strategic Defense of Earth” which Rogozin described as a way to redirect nuclear weapons towards a common threat in space rather than towards each other. This call for cooperation dovetails the two-fold space strategy unveiled by President Trump in December 2017 with Space Policy Directive 1: Reinvigorating America’s Human Space Exploration Program, where he called for 1) The creation of the Lunar Gateway space station to orbit the Moon and 2) the launching of the Artemis Project that will “lead the return of humans to the Moon for long term exploration and utilisation, followed by human missions to Mars and other destinations.”

These developments were punctuated by Trump who took the time from his impeachment fiasco to call for an alliance that too many analysts have chosen to ignore saying on– : “Between Russia, China and us, we’re all making hundreds of billions of dollars worth of weapons, including nuclear, which is ridiculous… I think it’s much better if we all got together and didn’t make these weapons… those three countries I think can come together and stop the spending and spend on things that are more productive toward long term peace.”

Although the COVID-19 lock down has done major damage to the schedule for the Orion capsule and space launch system mega rocket needed to carry out the Artemis Project, the scheduled 2024 landing of a man and woman onto the moon’s surface is still on course.

A Revolution in Mining: Redefining “Resources”

But it doesn’t end there. Leading officials among all three Russian, Chinese and American space agencies have called for going beyond asteroid defense, and colonization with the call for lunar, mars and asteroid resource development strategies. These strategies require that humanity redefine the practice of “mining” as it has hitherto been known for thousands of years, but also re-define what a “resource” is, what “energy” is and what are the limits (if any) to human growth?

A helpful tool to conceptualize this revolution in thinking can be found in the 10 minute video All the World’s A Mine made in 2013:

In carefully mapping the lunar terrain with a focus on the far side of the moon, China wishes to come to a better understanding of the mineral distribution of vital resources like Titanium, Iron, silicon, aluminium, water, oxygen and hydrogen and especially Helium-3 which are abundant on the Lunar regolith. Helium-3, long called the “Philosophers’ Stone” of energy is the most efficient fuel source for fusion power when fused with deuterium or tritium in a plasma and though it is nearly non-existent on the earth exists in vast quantities on the moon due to the absence of a geomagnetic field. As the Moon’s far side never faces the earth or the earth’s magnetic field, there are far more abundant volumes of solar-produced Helium-3 that have accumulated there over millennia.

Ouyang Ziyuan stated clearly that Helium-3 could “solve humanity’s energy demand for 10 000 years at least” since “each year, three space shuttle missions could bring enough fuel for all human beings across the world.”

In 2013, Ziyuan stated “The Moon is full of resources- mainly rare Earth elements, titanium and uranium which the Earth is really short of, and these resources can be used without limitation… There are so many potential developments- it’s beautiful- so we hope we can fully utilize the Moon to support sustainable development for humans and society.”

China’s Premier Li Keqiang added his voice to the mix stating: “China’s manned space and lunar probe missions have a twofold purpose: first, to explore the origin of the universe and mystery of human life; and second, to make peaceful use of outer space… Peaceful use of outer space is conducive to China’s development. China’s manned space program has proceeded to the stage of building a space station and will move forward step by step.”

In September 2019, Russia and China signed a historical agreement to jointly collaborate on lunar development uniting the Chang’e-7 plans with Russia’s Lunar 26 Orbiter and lunar base development which both nations have on the agenda for 2030-2035.

A Word on the Moon Treaty of 1979

Donald Trump’s explicit rejection of the Moon Treaty of 1979 in his recent executive order, has garnered many angry criticisms which on closer inspection are completely unfounded. The 1979 Treaty requiring that all commercial activities in space must be defined by an international framework appears on the surface to be quite sensible. So is Trump’s rejection of any obedience to an “international framework” at this moment in history evidence of his selfish-nationalistic impulses to impose gangster capitalism onto the whole universe? Not at all.

As stated at the beginning of this report, President Trump’s order calls explicitly for “encouraging international support for the recovery and use of space resources” which is in no way characteristic of “narrow minded selfish nationalism” or “unilateral militarism” extolled by the many neocon ideologues struggling to take control of U.S. Space policy. Also when one considers that only 4 nations ratified that 1979 treaty (France, Guatemala, India and Romania), Trump’s refusal to obey it is not nearly as renegade and selfish as those critics make it appear.

Finally, when one considers who would define that “international framework” and considers the zero-growth paradigm currently dominant across the UN and European Union technocracy, then it quickly becomes clear that the Green New Deal agenda for shutting down industrial civilization is totally incompatible with the pro-growth, pro-space mining orientation of Russia, China and Trump’s USA alike.

The author can be reached at matt.ehret@tutamail.com

First the dollar was floated onto the international speculative markets on August 15, 1971 followed by the destruction of the Apollo program in 1975 and cancellation of most of the cutting edge projects that were meant to break humanity out of the closed system of geopolitics and finiteness of the earth’s limits for the first time in history.

Today, America has not only lost the capability to place a man on the moon, but cannot even send an astronaut into orbit without hitching a ride on a Russian Soyuz shuttle. While certain forces within America led by current NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine and the sitting President earnestly do wish to revive those capabilities, America’s 50 year visionless dance with monetarism have annihilated the memory of how such funding and long term planning occurred in the post war decades. Ironically, nations like China, Russia and India have discovered these modes of thought and economic practice to such an extent that China has quickly become a leader in Space technology, being the first nation to land a rover on the far side of the moon while all three Eurasian nations have unveiled ambitious programs for lunar-Mars development.

The fact that America put itself onto a course of action that has hollowed out its technological capabilities, and brought about the creation of the largest speculative bubble in history, can be largely accounted for by recognizing the existence of two worldviews at war. Only one of which will win.

Open vs Closed Systems

The idea that mankind is the only species that organizes itself around functions of MIND, will and ideas has been a point of battle going back to ancient records of Greece. Where other species regulate their existence based upon environmental and genetic impulses mediated (in the higher life forms) by pleasure/pain and impulses for survival, humanity is uniquely capable of CHOOSING which organizing principles it applies to its own self-regulation.

The question has always been: Do the CONCEPTS we allow to govern our laws adhere to the discoverable laws of the universe or not? Either way, how do we know?

To address those questions, it will be helpful to visit the minds of three anti-closed system leaders: economist Henry C. Carey (1793-1879), U.S. President John F. Kennedy (1917-1963) and the American economist/presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche (1923-2019).

Introducing Henry C. Carey

Abraham Lincoln’s senior economic advisor Henry C. Carey was a leading American Platonist who decried the British closed world view embodied by Thomas Malthus’s promotion of depopulation in his hundreds of books and essays. In his 1872 Unity of Law (which should be studied deeply by all truth seekers today) Carey attacked the British system of Malthus, Ricardo, Darwin, J.S. Mill which he said had the tendency of destroying man’s innate powers of creative reason while bringing the laws of matter into dominance over the life of humanity:

“Such was the state of things when the Rev. Mr. Malthus, minister, as he professed himself to be, of an all-wise and all-merciful God, gave to the world a theory by means of which he satisfied the rich and powerful that the misery and wretchedness by which they were everywhere surrounded were necessary results of error in divine laws; that population tended to increase faster than food; that all attempts at alleviating the miseries of the poor would prove to be sad mistakes; that rise in wages could have no effect other than that of stimulating the growth of numbers; that they themselves were free from responsibility for any and all these things; and that they might, therefore, properly and safely eat, drink and make merry, while closing their eyes to the fact that the condition of their fellow-men was deteriorating in the direct ratio of their own increased power for controlling the great forces that had been given by his Heavenly Master for man’s use and service.”

In opposition to this unjust closed system which divides to conquer, the American system as he then defined it, was premised upon a principle of raising standards of living and powers of mind through an unbounded commitment to discoveries and inventions. Carey described what effects a healthy society must strive to achieve in order to adhere to the truthful laws of the universe by saying: “the more his power of association, the greater is the tendency toward development of his various faculties; the greater becomes his control of the forces of nature, and the more perfect his own power for self-direction; mental force thus more and more obtaining control over that which is material, the labors of the present over the accumulations of the past…”

Carey’s open system thought expressed the best of America’s anti-imperial roots and tended to arise whenever a true nationalist took the helm (often at the expense of their lives) in Washington.  The American System which Carey led both in America and globally was premised upon the use of national banking, public credit for long term development and public works in obedience to the public good.

In the post-war era, the last representative of that spirit in high office was America’s 35^th president John F. Kennedy who launched the challenge to break out of the limits to existence which the new Malthusian revival was beginning to claim defined mankind’s absolute population limits.

JFK revives Carey’s Open System Thinking

Unleashing the space program in 1961, Henry C. Carey’s spirit can be heard in the mouth of the president as he said in his inaugural address:

“Man holds in his mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty and all forms of human life. And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe.”

After unveiling the challenge to go to the Moon “within the decade”, Kennedy demonstrated the powerful thinking which led his killers to assassinate him when he gave a speech at the UN on September 20, 1963 calling for US-Russia collaboration on the moon landing as the basis for an escape from the Cold War/closed system logic of Mutually Assured Destruction:

“I include among these possibilities [for great power cooperation] a joint expedition to the Moon… Why should man’s first flight to the Moon be a matter of national competition? Why should the United States and the Soviet Union become involved in immense duplications of research, construction, and expenditure? Surely we should explore whether the scientists and astronauts of our two countries—indeed of all the world— cannot work together in the conquest of space, sending someday in this decade to the Moon not the representatives of a single nation, but the representatives of all of our countries.”

Kennedy called not only for a new world of cooperation, but also unleashed funding for a nuclear rocket that was to drive mankind’s access to the broader solar system, making journeys that took months in a chemical rocket diminish to days in a nuclear engine. The space race was never meant to be a geopolitical “race against the reds” in Kennedy’s world view, but rather the rebirth of mankind into a new age of reason.

Kennedy vs. the Malthusian Revival

Kennedy recognized the reawakening of the same closed system ideology that Carey had done battle with a century earlier as he took on the Malthusian revival then underway with the origins of the World Wildlife Fund in September 11, 1961. This new ecological movement was created by a nest of eugenicists such as Prince Bernhardt of the Netherlands, Prince Philip Mountbatten and Sir Julian Huxley (founder of UNESCO and President of the British Eugenics Society). WWF Vice-Presidents over the years included Maurice Strong, and Sir Louis Mortimer Bloomfield, whose Permindex Bureau was banned from France for being caught attempting to kill Charles De Gaulle and which was discovered by U.S. District Attorney Jim Garrison to be at the heart of JFK’s assassination in 1963. All of these figures were devout neo-Malthusians who demanded that the world be as devoid of creative thought as their own minds.

Tackling Malthus head on, JFK said to the National Academy of Sciences on October 22, 1963:

“Malthus argued a century and a half ago that man, by using up all his available resources, would forever press on the limits of subsistence, thus condemning humanity to an indefinite future of misery and poverty. We can now begin to hope and, I believe, know that Malthus was expressing not a law of nature, but merely the limitation then of scientific and social wisdom.”

Within a month of this speech Kennedy was dead and a new green paradigm of adaption to limits grew like a virus in poisonous environment of LSD, cultural irrationalism and the Vietnam War.

The Figure of Lyndon LaRouche

Throughout the 47 years since the cancellation of Apollo and the descent into liberalism, America saw the unique figure of presidential candidate and economist Lyndon LaRouche rise to challenge the neo-Malthusian ethic forming a vast array of political, cultural and scientific organizations such as the Fusion Energy Foundation (1976-1987), and the International Schiller Institute (1984-present). Over the years, these organizations have sponsored thousands of conferences on renewing JFK’s vision, driving fusion power, and were even on record as the earliest western voices promoting the New Silk Road which has become China’s grand design today.

In his 1980 book There Are No Limits to Growth, Mr. LaRouche attacked the core of the Malthusian paradigm saying:

“No beast, or any other lower form of life could willfully increase in potential relative population density by even one order of magnitude. Man is fundamentally different from the beasts. Man is not merely a creature of instinctive potentialities, a mere creature of animal-like perceptions of pleasure and pain. Man is somehow very different. Man has the potential of Reason, the power to make creative discoveries which advance his scientific knowledge, and to convert such scientific advances into advances in technology. We are able to uncover, with increasing perfection, the lawful, universal principles which order universal creation, and to master nature with increasing power, through guiding ourselves to change our ways of behavior in accordance with universal laws.”

China has picked up the torch which had dropped with the death of JFK.

Soon China will have the only functional Space station as the ISS is decommissioned in 2024. China has plans for a manned lunar base by 2030, and has a stated intent to industrialize the moon as a springboard for broader interplanetary flight and mining of rare earth metals and especially Helium-3 (the Holy Grail for Fusion power). Russia is closely aligned with China under the framework of the Belt and Road Initiative with India joining into the process at a quicker rate every day. All three nations have ambitious lunar development plans and have offered America olive branches to join them in open system development.

Whether the America of Donald Trump accepts their offers and averts a military confrontation which could turn into WWIII is a question that has yet to be answered.