The rectangles represent active war game zones. In U.S. military history, this massive of a war game is unprecedented both in length and scope.
In the last article, I presented this map and posed the question, why would the military make a decided effort to keep our Navy in a permanent state of readiness by conducting unprecedented and an unparalleled set of war games continuously going on off of our three coastlines and several of our overseas territories? Guesses ranged from positioning the Navy, Marines and a fair amount of the Air Force off the coast to keep Americans from running if they are put in harms way when martial law is declared. Some believe that this has to do with preparing to begin World War III. These are all interesting guesses, however, they are not correct and the answer will surprise everyone as I know it surprised me.
These ongoing war games have angered much of the Congressional delegations of California, Oregon and Washington. When these representatives got wind of what was coming back in 2009, prior to the Environmental Impact Statement, they organized. In the Appendix section, listed below, I have included one of the letters of congressional protest. Ask yourself, one question, with several members of Congress opposing these massive ongoing war games that have now lasted for years, why wasn’t this been reported on in the mainstream media? By the end of this article, you will be able to answer that question. In response to Congressional requests, NOAA was unwilling to intervene and stop the war games from going forward and these Congressman, now joined by Senators Boxer and Feinstein, approached the Secretary of the Navy, B. J. Penn, and he rejected their request out of hand as well.
The United States has the bulk of its land-based fighting units in Afghanistan which totals about 165,000 troops. Now we see a significant part of our Air Force and Navy engaged in this massive off shore exercise. Why? And another important question to be asking is whether or not, the ships and their subsequent military maneuvers are facing toward our coastlines or primarily away from them? We have some answers to these questions. First from the Congressional letter to NOAA, it is clear that their primary concern of these Congressmen is the presence of sonar based exercises:
“The sonar exercises at issue would take place off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, Hawaii,
Alaska and in the Gulf of Mexico – affecting literally every coastal state. In many
regions, the Navy plans to increase the number of training exercises or expand the areas
in which they may occur. Of particular concern are biologically sensitive marine habitats…”
Sonar exercises? The U.S. Navy is not conducting sonar exercises beneath the ocean in preparing to fight “sensitive marine” inhabitants, at least they are not unless the Navy is preparing to fight sensitive marine inhabitants that contain submarines armed with nuclear weapons. The launch and detonation of a small number of nuclear weapons over the United States would unleash an EMP which would take down some, most or all of the grid. Most of the military’s assets, save the nuclear weapons, are not hardened against an EMP attack of this nature. It was at this point that I had an “AHA” moment and I realized that the military was engaged in an act of self-preservation. The military is not preparing to kill whales, but they are prepared to thwart an EMP attack and at a minimum have enough of their fighting force offshore to be able to survive such an attack should it prove successful.The prime directive of any organization is survival and this is what we are seeing here.
In research, there is what you know and what you can prove. I have felt certain that I have known for over 20 months why these exercises are occurring. However, at best what I previously had was circumstantial speculation and two very well placed informants telling me that this is what is going on. Therefore, the rest of this article will piece together a significant amount of evidence, both direct and circumstantial, which confirms my belief that an EMP attack is coming.
Not everyone in the military is on board with this course of action and we have to look no further than to Benghazi, for the proof that much of our military leadership is not working hand in hand with this administration.
This Administration Survives Mutiny and a Possible Coup In a Potential War Zone
The Middle East command structure of the American military is not presently, and was not on board with President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and then Defense Secretary Leon Panetta at the time of Benghazi.
In the aftermath of the Benghazi massacre, two senior level command officers, General Carter Ham, the former commander of AFRICOM and Admiral Charles M. Gayouette, the Commander of Carrier Task Force 3, were removed from the command positions and arrested by their CIA Obama, embedded executive officers. They were arrested for disobeying a Presidential directive regarding the abandonment of Stevens at Benghazi as both military leaders were in the process of executing a coordinated rescue effort when they were arrested. The operational details can be read about here.
It is common knowledge that Obama has been embedding CIA operatives into the number two command positions in key military commands around the world. When Hamm was in the process of launching a rescue mission to save Stevens, General Rodriguez promptly arrested Hamm and assumed his position as the head of AFRICOM. The same happened to Gayouette. Why were these two military commanders so willing to risk their careers and lives to rescue Stevens? Because after Stevens was rescued and he had full knowledge that he was being set up to cover up the drug running, gun running and child sex trafficking, being used to financially support regime change activities in Libya and Syria. If rescued, Stevens might have publicly talked about what he knew and the factions running this country into the ground, might have been on their way to prison.
What are the odds that two senior military officers, whose positions are so sensitive that their replacements had to be approved of by the Senate, operating in a war zone, committing mutiny against the President of the United States and that their actions were confined to just the two sacked officers? The answer is that the chances were zero that they were working only concert with each other. It would be easier to defy the odds in winning the lottery than to believe that. There were others involved as well. Satellites had to be redirected as well as providing relevant intelligence information to the intended rescue. So, is it surprising that Obama has sacked over 260 senior command officers during his tenure? The Benghazi rescue was a military coup that failed. And let’s not be naive enough to think that these two senior officers loved Chris Stevens enough to risk their careers to do what they did. This was about regime change and the top levels of military know what is coming and have deployed their assets accordingly.
My insider sources tell me that the only reason that the military has not gone from a condition mutiny to a military coup is that they do not feel that they have the popular support of the dumbed down population, at least for now. This is why we are seeing a gluttony of insider sources speaking to the alternative media in this critical information war where the belief system of the country, as a whole, is at stake.
There are more Obama moves which strengthen the validity of these observations. Within two months after the Benghazi attack, four very senior U.S. military officers were purged by Obama:
- Gen. Hamm, on October 18, 2012.
- Adm. Gayouette, on October 18, 2012.
- Gen. Petraeus, on November 9, 2012.
- General Allen, on November 13, 2012.
This event reminds me of when Hitler discovered he had been betrayed by General Irwin Rommel and other senior level German officers who attempted to assassinate Hitler. The Nazis killed these Generals and covered it up as war casualties. Obama politely retired our offending officers in disgrace. The deposed military senior command officer body count has reached over 260 officers removed by Obama.
GridEX II
On November 13th and 14th of last year, several of the alphabet soup agencies engaged in a war game in which the power grid was taken down by high altitude nuclear missile detonations in an exercise known as Grid EX II. On the surface, the drill seems like a great idea until one realizes that our two arch enemies, Russia and China were invited to participate, which made no sense.
We have been moving towards war with Russia and their ally China over Syria and Iran for two years in which both the Russians and Chinese have threatened to nuke us if we attack either nation. We are also seeing Doug Hagmann’sconfidential source stating that the path to war with these entities lies in the Ukraine. This is what MH-17 is about. It’s about war with Russia and we are letting them in the backdoor.
Considering these facts, it makes no sense as to why Russian troops were allowed into the previous Grid EX II EMP attack drill, they have been used to police major events on American soil. This is martial law desensitization training in which the Russians are trained to interact with American citizens. FEMA signed a bilateral agreement with the Russian military to permit a minimum of 15,000 Russian soldiers to train on American soil and this is at a time when both Russia and China threatened to nuke the United States if we dared to invade Syria or Iran.
The following is a quote from the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry:
“The Russian Emergency Situations Ministry and the USA FederalEmergency Management Agency (FEMA) are going to exchange experts during joint rescue operations in major disasters. This is provided by a protocol of the fourth meeting of the U.S.-Russia Bilateral Presidential Commission Working Group on Emergency Situations and seventeenth meeting of Joint U.S.-Russia Cooperation Committee on Emergency Situations, which took place in Washington on 25 June.The document provides for expert cooperation in disaster response operations and to study the latest practices. In addition, the parties approved of U.S.-Russian cooperation in this field in 2013-2014, which envisages exchange of experience including in monitoring and forecasting emergency situations, training of rescuers, development of mine-rescuing and provision of security at mass events.”
This is followed by letting the Russians and Chinese into the Grid EX II drill as well as the RIMPAC war games. Don’t forget about the BLM document which introduces America to a new Agenda 21 land designation and it is called a “Solar Energy Zone”..These zones are being handed over to the Chinese and has provided a means from which to bring in the future policing force of the United Nations.
An occupation force is being mobilized.
Let’s not forget the backdrop of our present environment. The United Nations is establishing a foothold on our Southern border with Mexico. This administration is allowing a Fifth Column insurgency force (i.e. MS-13, the Sinaloa and Los Zetas drug cartels) into the country along with millions of unscreened immigrants who could be bringing large numbers of horrific diseases and viruses.
If this is not enough proof about what is coming, we must realize that every false flag event must have a beta test, and we have that as well.
Yemen
Yemen was the beta test
On June 9th, Israel National News Arutz Sheva reported that for the first time in history, a terrorist attack on the electric power grid has blacked-out an entire nation by taking down the grid. This was a beta test for what is coming to the United States.
The attack on Yemen’s grid was brought to my attention by Dr. Peter Pry, a former CIA Intelligence Officer who has written and lectured extensively on the topic of threats to the U.S. power grid. Pry stated that he believed that this attack was a portend for what is coming to the United States. Remember Pry is CIA, and will always be CIA. So let’s look at this as just another Operation Northwoods. This was a beta test for what is coming to the U.S. and what I have been told is that the military has prepared to survive this coming event. And we should all be saying thanks as the future UN occupation troops would have free reign if the military were to be totally taken down in such an attack.
In the Wall Street Journal, FERC chairman John Wellinghoff stated that a similar attack would “Destroy nine interconnection substations and a transformer manufacturer and the entire United States grid would be down for at least 18 months, probably longer.”
Where is this headed? What are the available operational details? This will be the topic of the next part in this series.
APPENDIX
March 12, 2009
Protect Whales During Navy Training Exercises
Deadline April 3, 2009
Dear Colleague:
Protect Whales During Navy Training Exercises
Deadline April 3, 2009
Dear Colleague:
Please join us in sending the attached letter to Jane Lubchenco, Undersecretary for
Oceans and Atmosphere for the Department of Commerce, expressing support for the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s review of measures that could
reduce harm to whales and other marine mammals from the Navy’s use of mid-range
sonar.
Oceans and Atmosphere for the Department of Commerce, expressing support for the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s review of measures that could
reduce harm to whales and other marine mammals from the Navy’s use of mid-range
sonar.
The Navy estimates that its sonar training activities will “take” marine mammals more
than 11.7 million times over the course of a five-year permit. The scale of these exercises
and the vulnerability of protected species to sonar make it imperative that NOAA
prescribe mitigation measures that will best protect marine mammals while still allowing
the Navy to train effectively.
than 11.7 million times over the course of a five-year permit. The scale of these exercises
and the vulnerability of protected species to sonar make it imperative that NOAA
prescribe mitigation measures that will best protect marine mammals while still allowing
the Navy to train effectively.
For more information, or to co-sign the letter, please contact Jeb Berman (Rep.
Thompson, 53311) or Rob Cobbs (Rep. Waxman, 54407).
Thompson, 53311) or Rob Cobbs (Rep. Waxman, 54407).
Sincerely,
MIKE THOMPSON
MIKE THOMPSON
Member of Congress
HENRY A. WAXMAN
Member of Congress
March 12, 2009
Dr. Jane Lubchenco
Undersecretary for Oceans and Atmosphere
Department of Commerce
14th and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Room 5128
Washington, DC 20230
Dear Undersecretary Lubchenco:
Undersecretary for Oceans and Atmosphere
Department of Commerce
14th and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Room 5128
Washington, DC 20230
Dear Undersecretary Lubchenco:
On January 23, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
announced that it would conduct a comprehensive, 120-day review of measures to reduce
environmental harm from the Navy’s use of mid-frequency sonar in training exercises
and then report the results to the Council on Environmental Quality. We are writing to
encourage and express our strong support for this review process.
announced that it would conduct a comprehensive, 120-day review of measures to reduce
environmental harm from the Navy’s use of mid-frequency sonar in training exercises
and then report the results to the Council on Environmental Quality. We are writing to
encourage and express our strong support for this review process.
The sonar exercises at issue would take place off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, Hawaii,
Alaska and in the Gulf of Mexico – affecting literally every coastal state. In many
regions, the Navy plans to increase the number of training exercises or expand the areas
in which they may occur. Of particular concern are biologically sensitive marine habitats
off our coasts, such as National Marine Sanctuaries and breeding habitat for the
endangered North Atlantic right whale. In all, the Navy anticipates that its sonar
exercises will “take” marine mammals more than 2.3 million times per year, or 11.7
million times over the course of a 5-year permit.
Under these circumstances, it is essential that NOAA prescribe mitigation measures that
substantially reduce impacts on marine wildlife and habitat while allowing the Navy to
train effectively.
Alaska and in the Gulf of Mexico – affecting literally every coastal state. In many
regions, the Navy plans to increase the number of training exercises or expand the areas
in which they may occur. Of particular concern are biologically sensitive marine habitats
off our coasts, such as National Marine Sanctuaries and breeding habitat for the
endangered North Atlantic right whale. In all, the Navy anticipates that its sonar
exercises will “take” marine mammals more than 2.3 million times per year, or 11.7
million times over the course of a 5-year permit.
Under these circumstances, it is essential that NOAA prescribe mitigation measures that
substantially reduce impacts on marine wildlife and habitat while allowing the Navy to
train effectively.
We are confident that NOAA’s review will identify the mitigation measures necessary to
minimize environmental impacts and improve monitoring of affected populations,
including the establishment of seasonal or geographic sonar exclusion areas that scientists
have identified as the most effective available means of protecting vulnerable species and
habitat.
We appreciate your consideration of this important matter, and your efforts to improve
the health of our oceans.
minimize environmental impacts and improve monitoring of affected populations,
including the establishment of seasonal or geographic sonar exclusion areas that scientists
have identified as the most effective available means of protecting vulnerable species and
habitat.
We appreciate your consideration of this important matter, and your efforts to improve
the health of our oceans.
Sincerely,
MIKE THOMPSON
Member of Congress
Member of Congress
HENRY A. WAXMAN
Member of Congress
Credit to Common Sense
