It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Project SHAD stands for Project Shipboard Hazard and Defense, a series of Cold War-era tests by the United States Department of Defense of biological weapons and chemical weapons. Exposures of uninformed and unwilling humans during the testing to the test substances, particularly the exposure to United States military personnel then in service, has added controversy to recent revelations of the project.
Project 112 was a biological and chemical weapons experimentation project conducted by the US Army from 1962 to 1973. The project started under John F. Kennedy's administration, and was authorized by his Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, as part of a total review of the US military. The name of the project refers to its number in the review process. Every branch of the armed services contributed funding and staff to the project.
Experiments were planned and conducted by the Deseret Test Center and Deseret Chemical Depot at Fort Douglas, Utah. They were designed to test the effects of biological weapons and chemical weapons on service personnel. They involved unknowing test subjects, and took place on land and at sea via tests conducted upon unwitting US Naval vessels. The existence of the project (along with the related Project SHAD) was categorically denied by the military until May 2000, when a CBS Evening News investigative report produced dramatic revelations about the tests. This report caused the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs to launch an extensive investigation of the experiments, and reveal to the affected personnel their exposure to toxins.
PUBLIC LAW 105—85—NOV. 18, 1997: USE OF HUMAN SUBJECTS FOR TESTING OF CHEMICAL OR BIOLOGICAL AGENTS
SEC. 1078. RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF HUMAN SUBJECTS FOR TESTING OF CHEMICAL OR BIOLOGICAL AGENTS.
(a) PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES.—The Secretary of Defense may not conduct (directly or by contract)
(1) any test or experiment involving the use of a chemical agent or biological agent on a civilian population; or
(2) any other testing of a chemical agent or biological agent on human subjects.
(b) EXCEPTIONS.—Subject to subsections (c), (d), and (e), the prohibition in subsection (a) does not apply to a test or experiment carried out for any of the following purposes:
(1) Any peaceful purpose that is related to a medical, therapeutic, pharmaceutical, agricultural, industrial, or research activity.
(2) Any purpose that is directly related to protection against toxic chemicals or biological weapons and agents.
(3) Any law enforcement purpose, including any purpose related to riot control.
(e) BIOLOGICAL AGENT DEFINED.—In this section, the term
‘‘biological agent’’ means any micro-organism (including bacteria,
viruses, fungi, rickettsiac, or protozoa), pathogen, or infectious substance,
and any naturally occurring, bioengineered, or synthesized
component of any such micro-organism, pathogen, or infectious substance,
whatever its origin or method of production, that is capable
(1) death, disease, or other biological malfunction in a
human, an animal, a plant, or another living organism;
(2) deterioration of food, water, equipment, supplies, or
materials of any kind; or
(3) deleterious alteration of the environment.
Some argue that none of this activity can be conducted without "informed consent", as stated in section (c), which reads:
Quotec) INFORMED CONSENT REQUIRED.—The Secretary of Defense
may conduct a test or experiment described in subsection (b) only if informed consent to the testing was obtained from each human subject in advance of the testing on that subject.
Although section (c) seems to provide some protection for us in that it requires us to be notified "in advance" if this "testing" is to take place, in reality, it does not provide any protection at all.
Because you've already been "informed in advance" and you've already given your "consent".
Because this "law" is publicly available for everyone to read, you have been "informed". Because you have not contested it (that's what the courts are for), you have provided your "consent".
This law is part of a contract between you and the government. When the terms of a contract are known and uncontested, it's called "acquiescence". Acquiescence essentially means that both parties are in agreement.
Acquiesce: "submit or comply silently or without protest"
So, when this law was published, you were "informed". Because you have not challenged it in court, you have "consented". By your own inaction, you have said, "Sure, go ahead and poison me, even if it causes death. I have no problem with it."
Because this contract meets the judicial requirements of "remedy" and "recourse", it is legally binding.
Judges like to say: "Ignorance of the law is no excuse". They say this because you are expected to know all of the "law" because it is publicly available for you to read (despite the fact that this is humanly impossible).
So, in reality, section (c) is legally useless. It does not provide any additional protection, it only "seems" to. Section (c)'s only purpose for being included in this law is deception, nothing more.
Section (c) of this "law" is very deceptive because most people don't understand the concepts of acquiescence in contract law, therefore, people mistakenly conclude that this "testing" will never happen to them unless they are informed about it.
The powers-that-be play upon public ignorance by inducing people into having a false sense of security. As a result, the public believes this activity could not be occurring because they believe that they would have personally heard about it. This false belief then provides insurance that this law will never be contested in court, and as long as this law remains uncontested, chemtrail spraying will continue unhindered.
The final result is that this craftily-written law has done its job. It has enabled chemtrail spraying to continue without being contested in court. Additionally, this law continually provides legal protection for those doing the spraying. After all, by your inaction you have given them your permission.
How Chemical Weapons Work
Chemical agents may be released as tiny droplets, similar to the action of a bug bomb used to release insecticide. For a chemical weapon to cause harm, it must come in contact with the skin or mucous membranes, be inhaled, or be ingested. The activity of the chemical agent depends on its concentration. In other words, below a certain level of exposure, the agent won't kill. Below a certain level of exposure, the agent won't cause harm.
The best protective measure you can take against chemical weapons is to become educated about them. Most of us don't have gas masks or atropine (an injectible used in cases of nerve agent exposure) and won't be on a battlefield, so the recommendations presented here are intended for the general public.
Yes, chemical weapons are more likely to be used in a terrorist scenario than nuclear or biological weapons. However, there are several steps you can take to minimize exposure and protect yourself in the event you encounter a chemical agent. Realistically speaking, you are more likely to witness an accidental chemical spill than a chemical attack. Your best defense is to face the situation with a level head.
2.Seek High Ground
Chemical agents are more dense than air. They sink to low-lying areas and will follow wind/weather patterns. Seek the highest storey of a building or the top of a natural land formation.
3.Seek Open Spaces or Seek a Self-Contained Air Supply
From the point of view of a terrorist, a heavily populated area is a more attractive target than a sparsely populated region. Therefore, the threat of a chemical attack is lessened in rural areas.
In the event of an attack, there is some sense in isolating your air supply. Most chemical agents disperse after a certain amount of time (a notable exception is VX, which is designed to persist), so refraining from contacting exposed air may be a good protective measure.
4.Use Your Senses
How do you know if you have been exposed to a chemical agent? You may not be able to see or smell one. In their pure forms, most chemical weapon agents are clear liquids. Impure chemicals may be yellowish liquids. Most are odorless and tasteless, but some have a slightly sweet or fruity smell. Skin irritation, respiratory distress, and gastrointestinal upset all may signal exposure to a chemical agent. However, if you don't die within minutes, you probably won't die at all. Therefore, if you believe you have been exposed to a chemical agent, wait until you feel secure before seeking out medical attention (but do seek it out).
Not all planes fly at high altitude leaving these onoing trails (most fly low, maybe not hundreds of feet up, but pretty darn low).
And many trails have diffrent patterns and loops, indicating possible adulterants other than vapor or exhaust (why would exhaust leave knots instead of smooth flow?).
Also, it's not about accuracy. It's about spraying areas all over affecting humans, vegetation, and weather.
It's common knowledge you can shoot silvernitrate and create rain......
"A more recent attempt to control aerosol particle size on target has been the use of aerodynamic dissemination and sprays as line sources. By modification of the rheological properties of the liquid, its breakup when subjected to aerodynamic stress can theoretically be controlled and an idealized particle distribution achieved. In practice, the task is more difficult, but it represents an area where a technological advance could result in major munition performance improvements. The altitude of dissemination must be controllable and the wind direction and velocity known for a disseminated liquid of a predetermined particle size to predictably reach the ground and reliably hit a target.
Thermal dissemination, wherein pyrotechnics are used to aerosolize the agent has been used particularly to generate fine, inhalable clouds of incapacitants. Most of the more complex agent molecules, however, are sensitive to high temperatures and can deteriorate if exposure is too lengthy. Solids are a notoriously difficult problem for dissemination, since they tend to agglomerate even when pre-ground to desired sizes.
Dispersion considers the relative placement of the chemical agent munition upon or adjacent to a target immediately before dissemination so that the material is most efficiently used. For example, the artillery rockets of the 1950's and early 1960's employed a multitude of submunitions so that a large number of small agent clouds would form directly on the target with minimal dependence on meteorology. Another variation of this is multiple "free" aerial sprays such as those achieved by the BLU 80/B Bigeye weapon and the multiple launch rocket system. While somewhat wind dependent, this technique is considerably more efficient in terms of agent quantities."
Perhaps these long lingering trails are tests for things to come? A different technology that we are unaware of?
The agent must be dispersed within the boundary layer (
Originally posted by donatellanator
I understand trying to hush to clamoring of people who are ignorant, but there is so much evidence that spraying in one form or another has occured
and still does to this day.
Maybe not every picture of a "chemtrail" is poison spray, but you almost have to give credence to this based on rational evidence and past history.