by Linda Moulton Howe

from NancyRedStar Website

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/exopolitica/esp_exopolitics_ZCb.htm 

Bombshell Interview with Dr Carol Rosin about

her work with the late German Scientist Dr Werner von Braun.
Von Braun anticipated terrorists, asteroids and ETs on America's 'enemies list!'
Foresaw and warned of 'war in space' as an eventuality!

 

Werner von Braun, Ph.D., rocket physicist from Germany

who lead American space development after WWII.

Carol Rosin founded, and is President of,

the Institute for Cooperation in Space and Space Preservation Trust Foundation, Ventura, California.

Ventura, California

June 20, 2004

 

One of the most famous names from the beginning of the American rocket and missile programs after World War II is Wernher von Braun.

 

With the defeat of Germany and Japan in 1945 after the United States dropped the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Dr. von Braun and 126 other German rocket scientists were brought to the United States under a government project called "Paperclip."

 

They were based at Fort Bliss, Texas and their work was focused at the White Sands Missile Range north of Ft. Bliss in southern New Mexico. Dr. von Braun became famous for his expertise and his visionary goal to expand man's knowledge through the exploration of space.

 

His pioneering work led to the development of,

• the Explorer satellites
• the Jupiter and Jupiter-C rockets
• Pershing
• the Redstone rocket
• Saturn rockets
• Skylab, the world's first space station

Additionally, his determination to "go where no man has gone before" led America's first landing on the moon in 1969 during the John F. Kennedy administration.

In 1970, NASA asked Dr. von Braun to move to Washington, D.C., to head up the strategic planning effort for the government space agency. But in less than two years he decided to retire from NASA and and went to work for Fairchild Industries of Germantown, Maryland, where he met a 6^th grade school teacher named Carol Rosin.

 

She was famous for producing a "Students Studying on Spaceship Earth" project for her school classes. Dr. von Braun asked Carol to join him at Fairchild Industries to help him create a ban of weapons in space.

As President Eisenhower had warned about the threat of the "military-industrial complex" to America's future, Dr. Werner warned that space should be kept free from intrusion by that same military-industrial power.

 

Carol left her teaching and went to work for Dr. von Braun in 1974. He was her mentor until he died in Alexandria, Virginia on June 16, 1977.

Afterward, Carol Rosin has persisted for nearly thirty years in trying to carry out Dr. von Braun's request to get weapons banned from space. She is now President of the Institute for Cooperation in Space and of the Space Preservation Trust Foundation.

 

Last year on December 8, 2003, her U. S. Space Preservation Act was placed by Representative Dennis Kucinich as House Bill 3657 in the 108^th Congress.

 

Its statement of purpose:

"To preserve the cooperative, peaceful uses of space for the benefit of all humankind by prohibiting the basing of weapons in space and (by prohibiting) the use of weapons to destroy or damage objects in space that are in orbit, and for other purposes."

Listen excerpts of some Dr. Carol Rosin declarations:

 

 http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/exopolitica/esp_exopolitics_ZCb.htm

 

 

 

Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) introduced Carol Rosin's U. S. Space Preservation Act as House Bill 3657 on December 8, 2003.

 

Further, she has written a Space Preservation Treaty to be introduced to nations of the world for signing through the United Nations to permanently ban basing of weapons in space.

In the past 30 years as Carol has worked hard to carry out Dr. von Braun's challenge to her, she has often thought of his warnings about the misuse of space and an "Enemy's List" that he said the American government was using to keep the media and public in support of Pentagon budgets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

– INTERVIEW –
 

Carol Rosin, President, Institute for Cooperation in Space and Space Preservation Trust Foundation, Ventura, California:

"The message that he (Werner von Braun) was giving me continually was that we must prevent the weaponization of space from happening because otherwise the truth would never be officially acknowledged about who we were, who we are, as a human species in the universes."

 

 

 

Part B

Q: YOU SAID 'UNIVERSES,' PLURAL?

'Universes,' is the way he put it to me. I had never heard that term before. I thought we lived in (the only) galaxy solar system universe. But he always used the word 'universes.'
 

Q: AS IF HE HAD KNOWLEDGE OF OTHER UNIVERSES?

Exactly.
 

Q: DID HE TALK WITH YOU SPECIFICALLY ABOUT KNOWLEDGE OF EXTRATERRESTRIAL BIOLOGICAL ENTITIES?

Dr. von Braun would have tears in his eyes every time - and he repeated this continuously to me when he talked about us in the galaxy - he would say 'with a hundred billion stars in our galaxy alone. What would make us think that we are the only life form?'

That was a very typical, repeated quote.

The other one that he would say is that he knew that we must have peace in space in order to bring the truth in. The only time he used the word, 'extraterrestrial' and 'alien' - and he did this repeatedly as well - was when he spoke to me about the formula for war. That included the fact that when I entered the industry, we were in a supposed Cold War with Russia.

He would say,

'Let's start here where you are.'

There are continuous wars and enemies identified in order to perpetuate these wars, always with the ultimate goal of seizing the high ground of outer space to dominate and control the minds of people on Earth so they would not be given the truth, truthful information about who we really are in the universes.
 

Q: WHAT WAS HIS DEFINITION OF WHAT WE REALLY ARE IN THE UNIVERSES?

Well, this is what he did not describe. I believe what was happening is that he was under threat.
 

– American "Enemy's List" to Sustain War Mode and Pentagon Budgets –

• Soviet Union
• Terrorists
• Asteroids
• Extraterrestrials

Q: THAT IS WHY HE GAVE YOU AN ENEMY'S LIST THAT WOULD BE PERPETUATED?

That's right. He repeated this continuously. He would say that starting where I entered the industry with the supposed Russian threat, but never actually existed ­ the Russians were made to be the enemy. Then there would be terrorists, Third World country threats, there would be an asteroid threat.

They might even say to us to try to influence the public into believing that there are many reasons for why we should put weapons in space. There might be a reason to protect our assets in space.

But, the real one that he was always holding off on and would say again with tears filling his eyes every time he said this to me repeatedly was that the last card they are holding is the 'alien card,' the extraterrestrial card and none of them are hostile.

 

In any way he could say those words, the intonation was always on,

'None of them are hostile. It's all a lie.'

So, in other words, all the enemies that have been presented to us along the way ­ it's a lie with always the intention of seizing the high ground to keep the truth from us.
 

Q: MEANING THE IMPLICATION IS THAT THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT, PERHAPS EVEN IN COOPERATION WITH AUTHORITIES IN RUSSIA, HAVE PLAYED A GAME OF PERPETUATING ENEMIES IN ORDER TO KEEP THE MONEY FLOWING INTO THE WAR MACHINES?

Actually he (von Braun) never implied that the Russians were part of this.

He implied to me that the kernel of it was in the United States and that this had to be stopped and he thought that I, as a woman in those days with curly hair and short skirts, could get into any meeting where a man could probably never say the things that I could.

At that time, he gave me the assignment of preventing the weaponization of space.

 

He also mentioned that when he and the other scientists came here (Project Paper Clip) ­ so many rumors were spread about them, that they were Nazis and were horrible people and that was all lies.
 

Q: THAT WAS GERMANY AND PROJECT PAPER CLIP.

Yes, of course. I notice that even some people in the peace movement refer to von Braun and the scientists as people who started the Star Wars program (under Reagan). That's just not true. It's a lie.

They were purely scientists who came here to be space and rocket scientists, but they were always sucked up into this system that has been existing in the old, obsolete earth-bound paradigm. At least that's as much intelligence as the population is given to keep us in the earth-bound paradigm.

 

But these men were far ahead. These were space age people.
 

Q: DID HE GIVE YOU ANY SPECIFICS ABOUT WHO IN THE UNITED STATES WOULD STAND TO GAIN THE MOST FROM PERPETUATING A GAME OF WAR FOR MONEY AND POWER?

Yes, he described it not as a blame on just a certain group.

He described it as the inexorably linked military-industrial-lab-university-NASA and other space agencies-intelligence community-government complex ­ that it was intertwined, but there was a group that knew all of it. He did not act as if he knew who it was.
 

– ET Threat to Perpetuate Military-Industrial-Corporate-Academic Complex –
 

Q: FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, THE GREATEST SECRET THAT WERNER VON BRAUN WOULD BE HIDING WOULD BE THE FACT THAT THE EXTRATERRESTRIAL BIOLOGICAL ENTITY IS A REALITY.

BUT HIS CONCERN WAS THAT INSTEAD OF BEING HONEST ABOUT ITS MOTIVATION, THAT THE U. S. WOULD ULTIMATELY USE ETs AS ANOTHER THREAT IN ORDER TO PERPETUATE BUDGETS FOR THE PENTAGON?

Not just for the Pentagon, but aerospace industries, labs, universities and anyone else who has a job and makes a profit from keeping this a secret.

 

Although most of the people in the industry don't even know there is this big secret of all time - and yes, you have articulated this very beautifully.

You are not at all putting words in my mouth - that's exactly what I'm saying.

Except that it's not the influence of just people in the Pentagon. This is some how, as he would put it, inexorably linked to all the facets of profit-making, of so-called security and defense mechanisms, of people who just need a job to survive and pay for their kids' college education and also to keep the public stupid.

I have felt that since this happened, since I learned from the heart of von Braun, that this huge secret is being kept ­ it has to have something to do with the 'off-planet culture,' that I call OPC phenomenon ­ that in fact, it was so real that this man could hardly talk about this big secret and did not because of the threats to his life and probably to the lives of others who worked with him who might or might not have known.

But he certainly did.
 

Q: WHY DOESN'T CHINA SPEAK OUT ABOUT ETs?

I did not put all this together for many years. I was one of the people in a state of denial myself.

I was a high paid woman executive in an aerospace company who had been given an assignment from Werner von Braun, but always thought of myself as just an educator, a school teacher, to keep weapons out of space so that as he would repeat continuously, 'The truth would not only be revealed, disclosed' - that official acknowledgement has happened in different parts of the world, but not in the United States.

I'm an official adviser to China. I've talked with a lot of people over there and I feel they know the secret, but being what they consider to be the Middle Kingdom, they wait for other countries ­ including the United States to come forward. They are not what I would call initiators of something so powerful.

But they are very much seekers of the truth and working on these issues.
 

Q: MEANING THEY ARE WAITING FOR THE UNITED STATES TO HOLD THAT GLOBAL PRESS CONFERENCE OF ALL CENTURIES TO SAY WE'RE NOT ALONE IN THE UNIVERSE, AND NOW WE ARE GOING TO INTRODUCE YOU TO EXTRATERRESTRIAL BIOLOGICAL ENTITIES?

I actually had years ago one of the (Chinese) scientists at a university tell me that that is what they were waiting for. And I said, 'Well, if you know the truth, why don't you go public with it?'

They said,

'Well we wait because we consider ourselves to be of the Middle Kingdom and we don't want to be aggressive in any way', even though (China) has been identified as one of the potential enemies against the United States.

But they are not. And neither are the Russians or any other country that I know of except for the individuals or parts of cultures that we have antagonized so much that they are so angry with us at this time.

So, I think Werner von Braun saw this back in the 1970s. He died in 1977.

Back into the 1940s and 1950s was when he started to become aware of what the potential benefits of outer space were to humanity.
 

– Must Prevent Weaponization of Space –
 

But what he always added on to his talks with me - that for years I did not say because of the ridicule factor - was this message that we must prevent the weaponization of space from happening and that the big lie is that none of them are hostile, talking about this list of potential enemies against whom we have been taught to fear and even hate - that none of them are hostile.

We are all essence and none of them are hostile haunted me for years until the early 2000s I started to learn about high level military intelligence, corporate people, who had already gone public by saying things like that, but also by emphasizing the fact that we must keep weapons out of space and that there is other life in the universe.

I'm just tuning into it myself and it has caused me to work with people around the world who want to get a Space Preservation Treaty signed and we do have a companion bill in the Congress that was introduced even before the treaty came forward by Congressman Dennis Kucinich (Dem-10^th Congressional District, Ohio) and others who co-sponsored it to call for a ban on ALL space-based weapons.

We don't have to study which ones. It would also prevent the destruction or damage of anything in space that is in orbit.

In other words, our satellites that we need to verify what is in space coming in (toward Earth) and what is on Earth so we can see the Earth to reduce and eliminate missiles and nuclear weapons and other dangerous and polluting technologies on the planet.

This must be done - we must protect those satellites and they should NOT be used as 'force multipliers' in war games which is the old scenario.

But that is happening.
 

Q: WHY DO YOU THINK ADVANCED INTELLIGENCE - ONE OR MORE OF THEM - WOULD EVEN ALLOW THE UNITED STATES OR ANY COUNTRY ON THIS PLANET TO DEVELOP WEAPONS IN SPACE?

WHY WOULDN'T THEY INTERFERE BECAUSE IT IS TOO DANGEROUS?

From my information, they do not interfere. They will not, however, allow us to take our weapons and toxins into space. They will, however, let the human species do whatever it does to itself.

That's the information I've been given and that's what I see happening. I have no evidence myself for this, but I've read that OPCs (Off-Planet Cultures) have shut down the attempt to put operational weapons in space. I have also been given information that they will not interfere with what we do.

However, there is a possibility that they would leave if we set off nuclear bombs, nuclear technology, and/or continue with the space-based weapons program. I am moving to Ecuador now, but we have an office still in Vancouver, B. C., Canada and people I'm working with here will continue in the United States. I'll be doing it from Ecuador.

But I'm 60 years old now and I've gone through this issue for 30 years now day and night, holding as von Braun did this piece of information about this big lie that's being told - this canopy of lies that especially in the U.S. and because we keep it such a big secret here - has been kept over our heads. It's like we live behind this veil of secrecy and so many of us who know pieces of it - whether it's intuitively or by experience or by a learning process - we keep way under the radar.

We talk about it at dinner from a non-believing state to a giggle to an 'Oh, my God! This is real!'
 

Q: BUT, CAROL, IF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA HAS ALREADY MILITARIZED SPACE OF THIS PLANET, HOW COULD WE POSSIBLY ACHIEVE A TREATY NOW TO ELIMINATE SPACE-BASED WEAPONS?

Because we have not weaponized space.

There are not operational weapons in space patrolling us at this time. We have just enough time - that's how - to get a Space Preservation Treaty signed into law. You can see the companion Space Preservation Act now in 2004 ­ the number is H. R. 3615 that's been introduced into the Congress (by Rep. Dennis Kucinich).

Congress in the U. S. and this Administration are not going to produce a ban on space-based weapons. In fact, the next administration might not either, UNLESS we get world leaders to sign the Space Preservation Treaty.

That treaty getting signed would put the necessary pressure that we need on the U. S. Congress and Administration. So, the answer is now available to us, we have the bill in Congress and a real treaty to be signed.
 

Q: AND IF THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN, CAROL, WHAT IS THE WORST CASE SCENARIO IN YOUR MIND?

In my mind, it's inevitable obliteration of the human species. I believe that is a very possible reality. I think we are very close to it, we are in grave danger from any one of a number of manmade or natural disasters that could occur.
 

Q: BUT CHINA, FOR EXAMPLE, IS GOING TO BE GOING TO THE MOON SHORTLY AND THE U. S. IS CONCERNED ABOUT CHINA AS A POLITICAL FORCE ON THE EARTH.

I CAN'T HELP BUT WONDER IF WE ARE HEADED TOWARD TERRITORIAL CONFLICTS ALREADY IN THE NEXT 5 OR 6 YEARS ABOUT WHO IS ON THE MOON.

We are headed toward territorial conflicts in space and on the moon. That's the whole point of this in the earth-bound context and paradigm. But China does not want weapons in space.

Their leaders have said that for many decades. So has Russia said that. These are the two main space super powers with the United States.
 

Q: THAT'S WHY THE WERNER VON BRAUN STATEMENT THAT THE UNITED STATES WOULD USE AS AN ENEMY'S LIST EXTRATERRESTRIALS IS SIGNIFICANT HERE, BECAUSE WE WOULD THEN JUSTIFY SPACE-BASED WEAPONRY AGAINST EXTRATERRESTRIALS?

That we would justify space-based weapons against any country that the U. S. population and government leaders will buy into as long as that scenario holds.

By the way, everything that I've just said to you has already been proven to come true.

In 1977, I was talking about the fact that there was going to be a Gulf War because I was in a meeting when it was being planned. In 1977! It's one of the reasons I woke up and resigned from my cushy position in the industry.

I couldn't believe there was a chart on the wall of potential enemies against which we were going to build space-based weapons that I and most people in the room had never even heard of. This is how these wars are planned and I went forward with that story for years.

And then three months before the first Gulf War started, my husband as my witness will tell you that I sat down watching TV waiting for the war with even my husband saying, 'Carol, you've flipped out.' You've gone over the top. No one is talking about a war in the Gulf.'

Because there was a certain amount of money in the space-based weapons program that I was told would be in it when they were ready to pulling space-based weapons to test the next phase of weapons.

By the way, part of the formula that I didn't mention earlier that is part of the creating the scenario of enemies and wars leading to the potential extraterrestrial threat is that they have to have these wars in order to dump the old weapons, test the new weapons, and rationalize the budgets for the next set of weapons.

This is what they educate the public and the leaders about in order to get their next enormous budgets. Notice how in each war, if you track the weapon systems that have been used, they are aiming toward the most advanced weaponry, the most horrific weaponry, that the human species has mostly yet to imagine.

But that's what is being tested in each war, aiming at always seizing the high ground and putting these weapons up in space.

Because if you put these weapons up in geosynchronous orbit just 22,300 miles above the earth in just three spots in geosynchronous orbit, you hit the whole footprint of the entire Earth.

You can control the Earth from that location in just three spots.

Imagine what they could do with the highest forms of weapons technology.

 

– 2012? –

Q: DID DR. VON BRAUN EVER SAY ANYTHING TO YOU ABOUT THE YEAR 2012 AS BEING SOME KIND OF END YEAR?

THAT THERE WOULD BE DANGER IF SOMETHING WAS NOT ACCOMPLISHED BY THAT YEAR?

No, he did not ever mention that to me, but what he did say about the timing is that the timing was critical to keep weapons out of space.

His timing was with a sense of urgency that,

'Before the momentum of funding vested interests and technology is put into place that is as dangerous as is the deployment of operational weapons themselves, we must achieve a ban on all space-based weapons on this planet.'

Evidence Is Now Conclusive: Two Ukrainian Government Fighter-Jets Shot Down Malaysian Airlines MH17. It was Not a ‘Buk’ Surface to Air Missile

By Eric Zuesse

Global Research, August 04, 2014

We’ll go considerably farther than has yet been revealed by the professional intelligence community, to provide the actual evidence that conclusively shows that (and how) the Ukrainian Government shot down the Malaysian airliner, MH-17, on July 17th.

The latest report from the intelligence community was headlined on August 3rd by Robert Parry, “Flight 17 Shoot-Down Scenario Shifts,” and he revealed there that,

“Contrary to the Obama administration’s public claims blaming eastern Ukrainian rebels and Russia for the shoot-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, some U.S. intelligence analysts have concluded that the rebels and Russia were likely not at fault and that it appears Ukrainian government forces were to blame, according to a source briefed on these findings. This judgment — at odds with what President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry have expressed publicly — is based largely on the absence of U.S. government evidence that Russia supplied the rebels with a Buk anti-aircraft missile system that would be needed to hit a civilian jetliner flying at 33,000 feet, said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity.”

It’s actually based on lots more than that; it’s based not on an absence of evidence, but on positive proof that the Ukrainian Government shot the plane down, and even proving how it was done. You will see this proof, right here, laid out in detail, for the first time.

The reader-comments to my July 31st article, “First Examination of Malaysian MH-17 Cockpit Photo Shows Ukraine Government Shot that Plane Down,” provided links and leads to independent additional confirmatory evidence backing up that account, of retired Lufthansa pilot Peter Haisenko’s reconstruction of this event, to such an extent that, after exploring the matter further, I now feel confident enough to say that the evidence on this matter is, indeed, “conclusive,” that Haisenko is right.

Here is all of that evidence, which collectively convinces me that Haisenko’s conclusion there, is, indeed, the only one that can even possibly explain this wreckage:

“There have been two or three pieces of fuselage that have been really pockmarked with what almost looks like machine-gun fire, very very strong machine-gun fire.”

This remarkable statement comes not from Haisenko, but from one of the first OSCE investigators who arrived at the scene of the disaster.
Go to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ze9BNGDyk4 and you will see it.

That youtube snippet in an interview with Michael Bociurkiw, comes from a man who is

“a Ukrainian-Canadian monitor with the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), [who] has seen up close … the crash site of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17. Bociurkiw and one other colleague were the first international monitors to reach the wreckage after the jet was shot down over a rebel-held region of eastern Ukraine July 17.”

That description of him is from the lead-in to the full interview with him, at the 29 July 2014 CBC news article, “Malaysia Airlines MH17: Michael Bociurkiw talks about being first at the crash site.” The far briefer youtube clip shows only what’s presented on 6:10-6:24 of this CBC interview with Bociurkiw. The CBC reporter in the video precedes the interview by announcing, “The wreckage was still smoldering when a small team from the OSCE got there.” So: he had to have been there really fast. “No other officials arrived for days,” she said.

So: one of the two first international monitors on-site saw conclusive evidence that the Malaysian plane had been hit by “very very strong machine-gun fire,” not by ground-based missile-fire.

Peter Haisenko’s reconstruction of the downing of that airliner, was here being essentially confirmed on-site by one of the two first OSCE international monitors to arrive on-site, while the wreckage was still smoldering. That’s as close to virgin, untouched evidence and testimony as we’ll ever get. Unlike a black-box interpretation-analysis long afterward by the Russian Government, or by the British Government, or by the Ukrainian Government, each of which governments has a horse in this race, this testimony from Bociurkiw is raw, independent, and comes from one of the two earliest witnesses to the physical evidence. That’s powerfully authoritative testimony, and it happens to confirm pilot Peter Haisenko’s theory of what happened. Bociurkiw arrived there fast because he negotiated with the locals for the rest of the OSCE team, who were organizing to come later: Bociurkiw speaks the local languages there — Ukrainian and Russian.

Furthermore, this is hardly testimony from someone who is supportive of the anti-Government rebels. Earlier, there had been this, http://pressimus.com/Interpreter_Mag/press/3492, which transcribed the BBC’s interview with Bociurkiw on July 22nd. He said then: “We’re observing that major pieces, and I’m looking at the tail fin as I said, and then there’s also the rear cone section of the aircraft, they do look different than when we first saw them, … two days ago.” So, he had arrived on-scene July 20th at the latest. (Neither the BBC nor the CBC, both of which interviewed him, were sufficiently professional to have reported the specific date at which Bociurkiw had actually arrived on-scene, but, from this, it couldn’t have been after July 20th. The downing had occurred July 17th. If some of the debris was still “smoldering” as the CBC journalist said, then maybe he had arrived there even earlier.)

The youtube snippet of Bociurkiw came to me via a reader-comment to my article, from Bill Johnson, after which I web-searched the youtube clip for its source and arrived then at the 29 July 2014 CBC news article and its accompanying video.

Further, there’s this crucial 21 July photo-reconstruction of that cockpit-fragment positioned into place on the aircraft as it had originally been in that intact-airliner:  https://twitter.com/EzraBraam. (Sometimes that doesn’t work, so here’s another screen of it from someone who copied it.) Looking at that photo-reconstruction, one can easily tell that the SU-25 or other fighter-jet that was firing into the cockpit from the pilot’s left side didn’t just riddle the area surrounding the pilot with bullets, but that it then targeted-in specifically onto the pilot himself, producing at his location a huge gaping hole in the side of the plane precisely at the place where the pilot was seated. Furthermore, this gaping hole was produced by shooting into the plane, precisely at the pilot, from below and to the pilot’s left, which is where that fighter-jet was located — not from above the airliner, and not from beside it, and also not from below it.

In other words: this was precise and closely-targeted firing against the pilot himself, not a blast directed broadly against, and aiming to hit, the plane anywhere, to bring it down.

Haisenko explained how this penetration of the plane, though it was targeted specifically at the pilot, caused immediately a breaking-apart of the entire aircraft.

Other readers have responded to my news-report about Haisenko’s article, by saying that shrapnel from a Buk missile could similarly have caused those holes into the side of the cockpit. However, that objection ignores another key feature of Haisenko’s analysis. Haisenko said there: “You can see the entry and exit holes. The edge of a portion of the holes is bent inwards. These are the smaller holes, round and clean, showing the entry points most likeley that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile. The edge of the other, the larger and slightly frayed exit holes showing shreds of metal pointing produced by the same caliber projectiles. Moreover, it is evident that … these exit holes of the outer layer of the double aluminum reinforced structure are shredded or bent — outwardly!”

What this means is that in order to have some of those holes frayed inwardly and the other holes frayed outwardly, there had to have been a second fighter-jet firing into the cockpit from the airliner’s right-hand side.

That’s critically important, because no ground-based missile (or shrapnel therefrom) hitting the airliner could possibly have produced firing into the cockpit from both  sides of the plane. It had to have been a hail of bullets from both sides, that brought the plane down, in that circumstance. This is Haisenko’s main discovery, by his pointing that out. You can’t have projectiles going in both directions — into the left-hand-side fuselage panel from both its left and right sides — unless they are coming at the panel from different directions. Nobody before Haisenko had noticed that the projectiles had ripped through that panel from both its left side and its right side. This is what rules out any  ground-fired missile.

Peter Haisenko posted an extremely high-resolution image from that photo which he used, and it shows unequivocally that some of the bullet-holes were inbound while others of them were outbound: Here it is, viewed very close-up.

Although the fighter jets that were said to have been escorting the Malaysian plane into the war-zone were alleged to be SU-25 planes, a different type might have been used. SU-25s are designed to be flown up to 23,000 feet without an oxygen-mask, but can go much higher if the pilot does wear that mask, which was probably the case here. Of course, an airliner itself is fully pressurized. That pressurization inside the airliner is, moreover, a key part of Haisenko’s reconstruction of this airliner’s downing. Basically, Haisenko reconstructs the airliner’s breaking apart as soon as that hail of bullets opened and released the plane’s pressurization.

The specific photo of that cockpit-fragment, which Haisenko had downloaded immediately after the disaster, was removed from the Internet, but other photos of this fragment were posted elsewhere, such as at the British publication (which, like the rest of the Western “news” media is slanted pro-Obama, anti-Putin), on July 21st, headlining their anti-Putin missile-theory bias, “MH17 crash: FT photo shows signs of damage from missile strike.” Their “reporters” opened with their blatant anti-Russian prejudice:

“The first apparent hard evidence that Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 was brought down by a surface-to-air missile is emerging from the crash site in eastern Ukraine, after experts confirmed on Monday there were signs of shrapnel damage to the aircraft.”

Although they didn’t say in their opener that the “surface-to-air missile” was from the rebels, they made clear their pro-Ukrainian-Government anti-Russian bias by saying, “Over the weekend, western intelligence agencies pointed to mounting evidence that backs Ukraine’s claim that the aircraft with 298 people on board was shot down by mistake by pro-Russian separatists and Russian military personnel with an SA-11 missile launched from a Buk-M1 SAM battery.” Their stenographers (or as they would say “reporters”) stenographed (“reported”) that, “Douglas Barrie of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said the photographic evidence ‘was consistent with the kind of damage you would expect to see from the detonation of a high explosive fragmentation warhead of the type commonly used in a SAM system’.” No analyst from the pro-Putin camp  was interviewed by their “reporters.” For example, Russia’s Interfax News Service headlined on July 29th, the same day as the FT’s  article, “Boeing’s downing by Buk missile system unlikely — military expert,” and they stenographed their  “expert,” as follows:

Chief of the Russian Land Forces’ tactical air defense troops Maj. Gen. Mikhail Krush said he doubts that the Malaysian passenger liner was brought down by a Buk surface-to-air missile system. “No one observed a Buk engaging targets in that region on that day, which provides 95 percent proof that Buk systems were not used in this concrete case,” the general said in an interview with the Voyenno-Promyshlenny Kuryer military weekly to be published on Wednesday [July 30th]. ”This is no more than a theory for now. However, a guided missile launched by a Buk missile system leaves behind a specific smoke trail as it flies, like a comet. In daylight this trail can be clearly seen within a radius of 20-25 kilometers from the missile system. It cannot remain unnoticed. There are no eyewitnesses to confirm there was any. No one reported a launch. This is one thing,” he said. “Second. The holes left by the strike elements on the Boeing’s outer skin indicate that the warhead blew up from below and sideways. A Buk missile strikes the target from above,” he said. “The damage done to the plane suggests that a different missile was used. Our guidance method is a zoom, when the missile strikes the target from above covering it with a thick cloud of fragments” the general said. “I cannot state categorically, guided by this data, but I can suggest, using my experience, that it was not a Buk missile that hit the Boeing,” the expert said.

General Krush’s statement can fit with Haisenko’s and with Bociurkiw’s, but not with FT’s  or the rest of the “reporters” (just consider them as rank propagandists) in the West.

U.S. President Barack Obama has been saying all along that Russia – against which he is actually systematically building toward war – and not Ukraine (which he’s using as his chief vehicle to do that), is to blame for this airliner-downing. Previously, he had said that the snipers who in February had killed many people at the Maidan demonstrations against the pro-Russian Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych came from Yanukovych’s State Security Service and not from the far-right political parties that were trying to bring Yanukovych down and that Obama’s agent Victoria Nuland selected to run the new Ukrainian government. But that too was an Obama lie. He lies a lot, and it’s just about the only type of statement he ever makes about Russia, and about Ukraine: lies.

If someone wants to verify how rabidly the U.S. Government lies, and has lied since at least the time of George W. Bush’s Presidency, just look at this video, by starting at 16:00 on it and going to 42:00 on it, and you will be shocked. (It pertains to lies by Bush that are still being covered up by Obama.) And when you further consider the many obvious questions it points out, which U.S. “news” media refused to ask and still refuse to ask about the matter, you’ll recognize that we are being lied to systematically and with utter contempt of the public, and with no respect for the public’s right to know the truth, even regarding massive history like that. It’s really brutal.

Ignorant “reporters” sometimes slip-up and include, in their stenography, facts that actually support the opposite side’s narrative of events and that discredit their own story-line. Such has been the case, for example, in the Financial Times  piece, which included the statement that, “Anti-aircraft missiles are not designed to score a direct hit as they are targeted to destroy fast, agile fighter jets. Instead, they are designed to explode within about 20m of their target, sending out a cloud of red hot metal to increase the chances of inflicting as much damage as possible.”

But rather than merely “a cloud of red hot metal,” what actually brought down this plane was what Haisenko has said brought it down: magazines-full of carefully targeted rapid-fire machine-gun bullets pouring forth from below the plane, at both its left and right.

This was a Ukrainian Government job. It was close-in. (No missile fired from the distance more than 30,000 feet down to the ground could have been that precise to target the pilot rather than the far larger target of the plane’s entire body.) It came from the Government that Obama installed there in February and that’s now carrying out an ethnic-cleansing campaign against the residents in Ukraine’s southeast, the places where Yanukovych’s voters live (to the extent that they still can and do live).Compare that picture with the following one, which I take from a propaganda-site for the U.S. regime, and so which is intended instead to support the Administration’s line on this, certainly not Haisenko’s explanation of how the airliner was downed, though it actually supports Haisenko’s case:

As you can see there, a plane that’s hit by a ground-fired missile, instead of by bullets fired from an attack-plane only a few yards away, has the damage spread rather widely over its body, not concentrated into a tiny area, such as to where the plane’s pilot is seated. Certainly, the contrast between that photo and this one is enormous.

Furthermore, note also that the shrapnel damage to that plane comes from above it, which is where missiles usually hit a plane from, releasing their shrapnel from above, down onto the plane. By contrast, the hail of bullets to the Malaysian plane’s pilot came from below the plane, aiming upward at the cockpit, from both sides of the cockpit.

As regards whether there were actually two fighter jets firing into the Malaysian airliner or only one, a proponent of the single-jet hypothesis, Bill Johnson, posted as a reader-comment to my article on August 4th, a series of extreme close-ups of the side-panel, in which he inferred that the explanation of the apparent left-side (pilot-side) bullets was probably the shape of the bullets. I then asked him why he declined to accept the possible existence of two jets. He said,

“from what I could find Russian military radar detected only one Ukrainian fighter jet, not two. I have looked and looked for any type of radar confirmation of a second fighter jet and can not find it.”

However, the most virginal, earliest, online evidence concerning the matter was on July 17th, within moments of the downing, headlined in the subsequent English translation, “Spanish Air Controller @ Kiev Borispol Airport: Ukraine Military Shot Down Boeing #MH17,” and it included, “@spainbuca’s TWITTER FEED,” which included his observation, only minutes after the downing, “2 jet fighters flew very close” to the plane. Furthermore, immediately before that, he had tweeted, “The B777 plane flew escorted by Ukraine jet fighter until 2 minutes before disappearing from the radar.” So, perhaps the second jet appeared distinct to him only immediately prior to the downing.
The accompanying news-report, also on July 17th, said:

“This Kiev air traffic controller is a citizen of Spain and was working in the Ukraine. He was taken off duty as a civil air-traffic controller along with other foreigners immediately after a Malaysia Airlines passenger aircraft was shot down over the Eastern Ukraine killing 295 passengers and crew on board. The air traffic controller suggested in a private evaluation and basing it on military sources in Kiev, that the Ukrainian military was behind this shoot down. Radar records were immediately confiscated after it became clear a passenger jet was shot down.” If this is true, then the radar-records upon the basis of which those tweets had been sent were “confiscated.”

The best evidence is consistent that those bullet-holes came from two directions not from one. What is virtually certain, however, is that at least one jet fighter was close up and shot down the Malaysian plane. The rest of the tweets from @spainbucca, there, described the immediate hostility of the Kiev authorities toward him on the occasion, and his speculations as to who was behind it all.

And the European Union has been playing along with this hoax. (If you still have any further doubts that it’s a hoax, just click onto that link and look.) And the mass of suckers in the West believe that hoax: it’s succeeding to stir a fever for war, instead of a fever to get rid of our own leaders who are lying us into a war that will benefit only the West’s aristocrats, while it inflicts massive physical and economic harms against everyone else – as if it were the invasion of Iraq except multiplied in this case a thousand-fold, especially with nuclear weapons possibly at the end of it.

If we had a free press, the news media would be ceaselessly asking President Obama why he doesn’t demand accountability against the Ukrainian Government for their massacre perpetrated on May 2nd inside the Trade Unions Building in Odessa, where that newly Obama-installed regime’s peaceful opponents were systematically trapped and then burned alive, which the Obama-installed Ukrainian Government has refused to investigate (much less to prosecute). Basically: Obama had sponsored the massacre. So, our “news” media ignore it, even though it started this civil war on Russia’s doorstep, and thereby re-started the Cold War, as Obama had intended that massacre (his  massacre, and his  subsequent ethnic cleansing) to do. (Similarly, the “news” media, though all of them receive my articles by email, virtually all refuse to publish them, because I won’t let them control what I find and report.)

And while Obama leads this Republican policy, and Vice President Dick Cheney’s top foreign-policy advisor Victoria Nuland actually runs it for Obama, congressional Democrats are just silent about it, and do not introduce impeachment of this fake “Democratic” hyper-George W. Bush neo-conservative President, who’s a “Democrat” in rhetoric only – and though Obama’s policy in this key matter threatens the entire world.

A reader-comment to an earlier version of this news report and analysis objected to my identifying Obama as a Republican-in-”Democratic”-sheep’s clothing, and said:

“They may be rethug policies in origin but they are decidedly BI-PARTISAN to anyone who wants to admit FACTS. The democratic party you all think still exists is DEAD and only exists in your brain (the part that doesn’t accept reality).”

However, U.S. Senate bill 2277, which invites Obama to provide direct U.S. military support to the Obama-installed Ukrainian regime, has 26 sponsors, and all of them are Republican U.S. Senators. Democratic Senators, by contrast, are just silent on Obama’s turn toward nazism (or racist — in this case anti-ethnic-Russian racist –  fascism); the Senate’s Democrats aren’t seeking for it to be stepped up.
This is a Republican policy, which congressional Democrats are simply afraid to oppose. Any realistic person knows that however far right Obama turns, the overt  Republican Party will turn even farther to the right, because they have to be to his right in order for them to be able to win Republican primaries and retain their own  Party’s nomination. Just because Obama’s game of moving the American political center as far to the right as he can move it is succeeding, doesn’t mean that the Democratic Party itself should end. It instead means that progressives need to take the Democratic Party over, just like conservatives took the Republican Party over with Reagan. There is no other hope.
If a Democrat in the U.S. House will simply introduce an impeachment resolution against Barack Obama, then the right-wing takeover of the Democratic Party might finally end, and the world might yet be saved, because the Democratic Party itself could then reject Obama as being a fake “Democrat,” a Democrat-in-rhetoric-only. It could transform American politics — and American politics needs such a transformation, which would move the Democratic Party back to progressivism, more like the FDR Democratic Party was, so that Republican politicians would no longer need to be so fascist as they now have become (and as they now need to be  in order to be able to win their own  Party’s nomination). If Democrats fail to renounce the conservatism of Obama and of the Clintons, then the Party will end, and needs to be replaced, just like the Republican Party replaced the Whig Party immediately before the Civil War. Nazism has become today’s slavery-type issue – it’s beyond the pale, and Obama’s installation and endorsement of it in Ukraine is like James Buchanan’s endorsement of slavery was during the 1850s: either the Democratic Party will become the progressive party, or else the Democratic Party is over.

But that’s just my own theory of how Obama’s frauds might yet be able to be overcome and defeated, if they still can be; it’s not part of my presentation of the explanation of what brought down the Malaysian airliner, which has been an open case since July 17th, and which is now a closed case. This is past history, not future.

The present news story is being circulated free of charge or copyright to all “news” media in the English-speaking world, in the perhaps vain hope that the cover-ups of our leaders’ constant lies will cease soon enough to avoid a World War III, even though communism is long since gone from Russia and so the ideological excuse wouldn’t make any sense here.

This insanity is actually all about aristocratic conquest, like World War I was. It’s not for the benefit of the public anywhere. Silence about it (by “Democrats,” and the “news” media) is a scandal, which needs to stop. The real Democratic Party (the Party of FDR, who loathed and despised nazis — and even mere fascists — yet today Obama installs nazis into Power in Ukraine) must be restored, and a real news media needs to become established in America. Even Republicans need it, because the very idea of “victory” in a nuclear war is a vicious fantasy. It is a dangerous lie, though there are some people who find it a very profitable one. And time might be short — let’s hope not already too  short.

After all, Obama’s hoax of having won from Europe the stepped-up economic sanctions against Russia after the government that Obama had installed in Ukraine downed the Malaysian plane and successfully blamed it on “Russian aggression,” is very encouraging to him. And European leaders know that Obama’s entire operation is a very bloody fraud (read the phone-transcript there — it’s a stunner). So, they certainly won’t save the world from it. It’s up to us.

The Monsanto Sponsored Ebola Vaccine Will Kill More People Than Ebola Itself

Posted on August 4, 2014 by Dave Hodges

Image Credit: Natural News, from the article Why does the CDC own a patent on Ebola ‘invention?’

Monsanto, or Monsatan as many call them, has partnered with the Department of Defense to use a proxy third party company to develop a vaccine against Ebola. The seed money began at $1.5 million. The value of the deal could grow to an estimated $86 million dollars. The company’s name is Tekmira Pharmaceuticals Corporation (TKMR) (TKM.TO), a leading developer of RNA interference (RNAi) therapeutics. “TKM-Ebola, an anti-Ebola virus RNAi therapeutic, is being developed under a $140 million contract with the U.S. Department of Defense’s Medical Countermeasure Systems BioDefense Therapeutics (MCS-BDTX) Joint Product Management Office”.  As breaking and shocking of a news story as this has the potential to be, the real story is that this is not the most important part of the Ebola threat which has invaded the United States.

The most three evil corporations, in no particular order are Standard Oil, Goldman Sachs and Monsanto. So, has this announcement raised eyebrows? Of course it has. Everything Monsanto touches has a distinct trail of greed, corruption and influence peddling.

On last night’s broadcast of The Common Sense Show, I hosted Joe Hagmann of the Hagmann and Hagmann Report. Joe expressed the view that the real threat to our citizens may not come from the Ebola itself, but it likely would come from the resulting vaccine. In a mid-afternoon phone conversation  I had with Joe Hagmann, prior to the show, I asked him if he had heard about Monsanto being given control of the development of an Ebola vaccine with DOD seed money. Subsequently, the News Director of my show, Annie De Riso discovered that this was the case and the information was less than 48 hours old.

Will the Threat Be In the Form of Ebola Or Will It Come From the Vaccine?

Late last week, I reported the following:

“A desperate search is on to find the hundreds of passengers who flew on the same jets as Sawyer (i.e. Patient Zero). A total of 59 passengers and crew are estimated to have come into contact with Sawyer and effort is being made to track each individual down. There is an inherent problem with this “track down.  Presumably, some of the passengers connected to other flights, which known to be the case. Let’s just say for the sake of argument that only 20 people, a low estimate given the nature of the airports that Sawyer was traveling in, were connecting to other flights, the spread of the virus would quickly expand beyond any possibility of containment because in less than a half a day, nearly a half a million people would be potentially exposed. Within a matter of a couple of hours, Sawyer’s infected fellow travelers would each have made contact with 200 other passengers and crew. Hours later, these flights would land and these people would go home to the friends, families and coworkers across several continents”.

I believe that as many have reported in the past 48 hours, Ebola has broken any possibility of containment and has now been unleashed on every continent. Many of my medical sources are telling me that modern medicine really does not know what the potential is for Ebola to spread from a significant, regionalized threat to a threat to become a global pandemic which would be as bad or worse than the 1918 Spanish Flu.

On last night’s show, Joe Hagmann expressed the opinion that perhaps the threat would be from the Ebola but from the vaccine. However, I am aware of 100,000 West Africans that are coming into this country, primarily acting as drug couriers. These men come from the seven country region in West Africa where the Ebola outbreak is raging out of control. And course, as I have stated many times, this has led even prominent physicians (e.g. Dr. Jane Orient) to state that it is not a matter of if, but when Ebola is spread throughout America and the world.

The UN Has Been Preparing to Assist with Health Crisis

Since the knowledge that UN military vehicles were being transported around the United States back in May, I have developed two sources from the DEA. One source is newly retired and maintains frequent contact with me. The other source has gone dark for the past 10 days and the covert communication method we were to use does is not working.

At the moment that I was signing off of my show last night, the retired DEA agent called me. He told me that the friendly debate over Ebola that I was having with Joe Hagmann was a meaningless conversation. He said that one of the five strains of Ebola has been weaponized and was developed at Ft. Detrick. He further stated, that this strain of Ebola was released 8 months ago.  What he described is the classic Hegelian Dialectic in which the problem is created and a desired solution is enacted. Joe Hagmann may have been correct  in that the goal is to develop a vaccine. That is where the money is and that is where the future power over the people lies.

History Speaks Will America Listen?

During the H1n1 scare of a few years ago, we know that law enforcement officials in several states practiced a DUI roadblock kind of scenario in states in which they were equipped with mock vaccine testing equipment to tell whether someone, or not, had been given the new vaccine against the virus. The roadblock consisted of a large van for processing, a couple of buses and chase cars on the flanks to run down people who tried to avoid the checkpoint. According to my well-placed sources in Colorado, this was rehearsed over and over. These law enforcement officers were told that their families would be collected by DHS and protected in isolation against the spread of the pathogen and any resulting rioting. Former and highly decorated State Trooper from Kansas, Greg Evensen, stated on my show that these families would be not held for safekeeping, they were to be held hostage to force the law enforcement officials to do the bidding of the powers that be.

The bidding that Greg Evensen was speaking of was the fact that if you did not demonstrate that you had the vaccine, you would be given two choices, immediate injection with the vaccine or your car would be impounded and you would be sent to a medical FEMA camp by one of the busses present at the scene.

At one point during the H1N1 scare, I thought the public’s reaction to forced vaccinations, which began in many hospitals, forced the government to abandon its plans to launch the program. In the present time, I think that this was a beta test designed to put the mechanisms into place and to condition the public that this will someday happen.

I am presently traveling and I contacted two of my sources in law enforcement to ask them if they had done any drills with regard to the outbreak of Ebola. I was told that they had not. However, one source stated that a recent DHS memo reminded the officials that they were to remain current on their containment and interdiction procedures with regard to any virulent outbreaks.

The sum total of what we are looking is this. The short-term goal according to my DEA source is to make money off of the vaccine. The long-term goal is to begin to lockdown the country by using fear and the natural course of Ebola spreading. He stated that once people see communities being exposed, we will accept any restriction including mandatory vaccinations. I told him that no vaccine could be developed, tested and effectively used in a short time. He responded by stating that that the public is too stupid to know the difference. He has a point because that was what the government had done with the vaccine related to the H1N1 scare.

I have real concerns over the safety of such a vaccine. First, there is the Monsanto reputation issue in which they repeatedly proven that they cannot be trusted. Second, producing a vaccine in such a short amount of time is fraught with problems. Third, the use of the infamous adjuvants will no doubt resurface. During the H1N1 scare, it is was discovered that the vaccine was using MF59 and Squaylene in the vaccine to increase the volume of an existing batch. The adjuvants were linked to serious central nervous system damage.

There is another concern that I have as well. In December of 2012, I reported that I had a contact from a FEMA employee who retired and “bugged out” to a communal safe haven with like minded officials from DHS and FEMA. His primary fear was the spread of a pandemic which he expected to happen within two years. His expertise was in counter-bioterrorism. You can read these stories at this link.

In San Diego, in October  31, 2012, DHS ran a Zombie preparedness drill and of all things the drill centered around shooting “crazed zombies”. I was told that the new weaponized strain temporarily turns people into people who act like they are on PCP.  The drill was participated in by Navy special forces and the Marines. The drill was later repeated in Idaho by the same entities. And let’s not forget that the homeless are being collected across the country and forcibly detained in makeshift shelters. I would submit that this is another dry run.

Conclusion

What does it all mean? The trend curve of information is pointing to the fact that Ebola is spreading but that the greater threat to the most people will not come from the Ebola but for the treatment of Ebola.  Monsanto needs to watched very carefully because my DEA source states that  vaccine will be on the market by year’s end.

Dave Hodges is the Editor and Host of The Common Sense Show.