Fetele Morgana de la Cotroceni   iunie 11th, 2014

SRSNaluci de tot felul isi fac efemera aparitie la ferestrele Palatului Cotroceni. Sunt persoane sau chiar personalitati travestite in Fata Morgana, care ne dau de inteles, uneori ne informeaza in clar, ca vor candida pentru functia prezidentiala. Romania anului 2014 se afla intr-o situatie stranie. Spre deosebire de anii anteriori, cand exista un candidat batut in cuie al celei mai puternice coalitii de partide creata in Romania dupa decembrie 1989, acum, cu cateva luni inainte de batalia finala, iata, terenul a devenit extrem de alunecos. Practic, candidatii sunt necunoscuti. In aceste conditii, nu este de mirare ca sunt vehiculate fel de fel de nume si sunt invocate surprize de tot felul. Cetateanul care se va prezenta la urne va avea extrem de putin timp sa se dumireasca. Si sa decida cu cine va vota in cele din urma.

Crin Antonescu a iesit din schema. Definitiv. Mai intai, usor,usor, in mod implicit, apoi brutal si cat se poate de explicit. El a fost tras in jos, dupa parerea mea, in buna masura, de propriul partid, dar, evident, si de adversarii sai politici, care au stiut sa-i organizeze o anti-campanie de PR. Din care nu au lipsit nici sondajele otravite. Dar important, pana la urma, a fost partidul. Care a decis sa paraseasca, intr-un moment nepotrivit si fara o comunicare publica adecvata, Uniunea Social-Liberala. Cand putea, foarte bine, sa mai astepte putin, pentru a fi dat afara. Si apoi, tot partidul l-a lasat singur pe Antonescu, sa dea explicatii in stanga si in dreapta. Sa raspunda personal tuturor atacurilor. Iar, in final, multi dintre liderii PNL au refuzat sa transpire, pentru a obtine un scor de 20 la suta la europarlamentare, care nu ar fi fost greu de atins. In final, lovit si din exterior si din interior, Crin Antonescu s-a comportat ca un om de onoare, renuntand la toate functiile de conducere si, evident, la candidatura.

Abia din momentul in care Crin Antonescu a anuntat in mod ferm ca nu va candida, PSD a intrat in fibrilatie. Pentru ca Victor Ponta nu-l mai voia de mult pe Antonescu. Si decisese, cu multa vreme in urma, sa nu sustina, pentru functia prezidentiala, vreun candidat al altui partid. Numai ca spera sa-si cumpere inca mult timp pana in momentul anuntarii intentiilor reale ale celui mai mare partid din Romania. Acum, se poate observa cu ochiul liber ca, tot amanand o decizie, PSD nu are inca o strategie privind functia prezidentiala. De ce?

Victor Ponta a intepenit in toate cercetarile de piata, care acum nu mai are niciun sens sa fie trucate, la un scor de 40 la suta. Mai mult nu duce. Stie ca are nevoie de inca un milion cinci sute de mii-doua milioane de voturi. Pe care, oricate semnale ar da catre diversele bazine electorale, altele decat marele bazin PSD, nu are de unde sa le obtina. Pur si simplu atat are stanga. Un 40 la suta. Iar el, indiferent de fenomenala campanie de PR pe care a pus-o la punct, nu poate trece, asa cum se vede cu ochiul liber, de scorul partidului. In plus, puterea executiva ii ofera nu numai avantaje, cum sunt cele financiare, prin care poate pune in miscare, in favoarea sa, o buna parte dintre autoritatile locale, ci si dezavantaje, generate de fireasca erodare intr-o guvernare care, cinstit vorbind, nu prea le-a adus mari satisfactii romanilor. Ci mai degraba deziluzii.

In aceste conditii, daca Victor Ponta candideaza, riscul unui esec este urias. Iar esecul il elimina practic de la conducerea PSD. Ceea ce atrage, aproape instantaneu, si pierderea suportului politic pentru a mai ramane premier. Lui Victor Ponta ii este literalmente groaza de un asemenea scenariu si acesta este motivul pentru care a  amanat si amana in continuare luarea unei decizii. Devine astfel prima Fata Morgana. Adica o tinta difuza. Ipotetica. Iluzorie.

Dar care este solutia de avarie a PSD? Cum ar putea PSD, cel mai mare partid din Romania, aflat pe cai mari la guvernare si conducand, cu o puternica majoritate parlamentara, sa renunte la sansa de a-si promova la prezidentiale un candidat propriu? Ca Victor Ponta iese prost nu numai daca va candida si va pierde, ci si daca nu va candida este una. Dar, pentru PSD, neasumarea unui candidat propriu ar reprezenta o veritabila catastrofa. Un candidat propriu poate fi din afara partidului sau din partid. Din afara partidului, ar putea fi identificat, asa cum a si facut-o de altfel Victor Ponta, doctorul Sorin Oprescu. Acesta vrea. Pentru ca, vorbind fara ocolisuri, el sta foarte confortabil pe o pozitie consolidata ca primar general al capitalei si la butoanele unui urias buget. Ce interes ar avea Sorin Oprescu sa candideze la prezidentiale, cu toate sansele de a pierde, pentru ca nici el nu ar putea sa obtina altceva decat beneficiile bazinului electoral, limitat la 40 la suta, al stangii. Motiv pentru care si Sorin Oprescu este tot o Fata Morgana.

A doua solutie este George Maior, seful Serviciului Roman de Informatii. Un nume extrem de vehiculat in underground-ul politicii romanesti. Un om al americanilor. Sustinut probabil si de Traian Basescu si electoratul sau. Dar refuzat totusi de o buna parte din PSD. Si, in consecinta, de o parte din electoratul PSD. Nu pentru ca el conduce un serviciu de informatii si ar fi periculos pentru democratie ca, intr-o lupta electorala, sa fie tarat, implicit sau explicit, direct sau indirect, cel mai puternic serviciu secret al Romaniei. Ci, pur si simplu, pentru ca George Maior nu mai este de mult perceput ca fiind un reprezentant cat de cat credibil al stangii socialiste. Asa ca si George Maior este tot o Fata Morgana.

Din propriul partid, PSD l-ar putea extrage, la limita, pe Mircea Geoana. Numai ca staff-ul acestui partid, care l-a abandonat in 2009 si in 2010, nu are incredere in Mircea Geoana. Si cu atat mai putin Victor Ponta si puternicul si influentul sau socru, Ilie Sarbu. Mircea Geoana este, asadar, a patra fata Morgana. Ar mai fi, de la Cluj, Ioan Rus. Si el vehiculat uneori pe post de sperietoare prezidentiala. Dar sparge acest om sticla? Este el oare capabil sa fie mai mult decat un iepuras prezidential? Am toate motivele sa ma indoiesc. De aceea Ioan Rus este a cincea Fata Morgana.

Opozitia a lansat pana acum o singura provocare ferma, Cristian Diaconescu. Pana mai ieri consilier prezidential. Inainte, mare PSD-ist. Si apoi unul dintre liderii altui partid de stanga, UNPR. Diaconescu ar trebui, in acest scenariu propus de noul partid al Elenei Udrea, Miscarea Populara, sa joace rolul unui puternic candidat al dreptei. Este o contradictie in termeni. Si oricum vehicului sau electoral este prea slab. In plus, persista banuiala ca este folosit pe post de iepuras de Elena Udrea care, in final, ar putea decide sa candideze cu binecuvantarea lui Traian Basescu. Cristian Diaconescu este a sasea Fata Morgana. Iar a saptea este insasi Elena Udrea, care nu si-a anunta intentia de a candida, ci dimpotriva, dar cocheteaza al naibi de mult cu ideea.

Partidul Democrat Liberal l-a nominalizat, in urma unei competitii si dispute interne, pe Catalin Predoiu. Fost liberal si ministru de Justitie atat in Guvernul PNL condus de Tariceanu, cat si in toate Guvernele PDL conduse de Emil Boc. Este, de altfel, dupa Crin Antonescu care a iesit din schema, cel mai vechi si singurul prezidentiabil oficial. Iar in atat de mult timp de cand beneficiaza de acest statut, domnul Catalin Predoiu nu a reusit sa sparga sticla. Nu creste in procente nici macar putin peste nivelul partidului. Si oricum va avea loc o fuziune cu PNL, la capatul careia nu mai e foarte clar daca Predoiu isi va mai mentine sau nu statutul de prezidentiabil. El este a opta Fata Morgana de la Cotroceni.

Iar liberalii il au pe Iohannis. Klaus Iohannis a parcurs o ascensiune fulminanta. Primar al Sibiului, prim-vicepresedinte PNL, apoi presedinte interimar si, iata, posibil candidat prezidential al dreptei fuzionate. Dar si Klaus Iohannis, pana una-alta, indiferent cat de mult ar vrea liberalii ca lucrurile sa stea altfel, este tot doar o ipoteza de lucru. A noua Fata Morgana de la Cotroceni.

Cred ca, din aceasta perspectiva, ne aflam, ca stat european si democratic, intr-o situatie unica in felul ei. Ce se va intampla in mentalul colectiv cand, prin septembrie, cu foarte putin timp inaintea alegerilor, aceste naluci, pe care le numesc Fete Morgana, vor disparea de la ferestrele Palatului Cotroceni, lasand loc unor candidati vii? In carne si oase. Palpabili. Vulnerabili. Atacabili. Va avea romanul suficient timp sa se dumireasca? Si sa stie ce voteaza? Sau va fi victima  campaniilor de propaganda?

Sursa: CorectNews

Atat comentariile, cat si ping-urile sunt inchise.

4 comentarii

iunie 11th, 2014 at 20:12
Marian Nicolae spune:

Domnule senator, dar stiti la fel de bine ca si mine ca nu candidatul la briza Cotroceniului este important.

Ideea principala este faptul de a sti ca cineva va locui acolo…

Dava acel cineva chiar va conduce Romania, este prea putin relevant.

Oricum in caz de face greseli la timona…Cotroceniului, vor fi intotdeauna persoana binevoitoare care sa-i arate CALEA si sa-l fereasca de erorile de navigatie inerente oricarui capitan, pardon, conducator de tara……

iunie 12th, 2014 at 10:03
Marian Nicolae spune:

Plus fetele Morgana de la…Washington sau Lisabona, la alegere…
——————————————————————

55% DES FRANÇAIS ONT REJETÉ LA « CONSTITUTION EUROPÉENNE ».

http://www.francoisasselineau.fr/2014/05/29-mai-2014-il-y-9-ans-jour-pour-jour.html

Il y a 9 ans jour pour jour, le 29 mai 2005, 55% des électeurs français votaient non au référendum sur le projet de constitution européenne. En ce 9ème anniversaire, il est intéressant – et poignant – de revoir l’annonce faite à la télévision française de cette victoire sans appel du Non et les scènes de liesse qui s’ensuivirent chez les partisans du Non :

LA MASCARADE DU « TRAITÉ DE LISBONNE ».
Comme on le sait, ce Non massif fut ensuite considéré comme nul et non avenu par les dictateurs de la prétendue « construction européenne ». Nicolas Sarkozy, en pleine connivence avec François Hollande et les principaux dirigeants du PS, du MODEM et de EELV, décidèrent de soutenir et de signer le traité de Lisbonne qui reprend la quasi-intégralité du projet de « Constitution européenne » rejeté par le peuple souverain. Dans un article du journal Le Monde intitulé “La boîte à outils du traité de Lisbonne” et daté du 26 octobre 2007, Valéry Giscard d’Estaing résuma en effet le traité de Lisbonne en ces termes :

« Les juristes n’ont pas proposé d’innovations. Ils sont partis du texte du traité constitutionnel, dont ils ont fait éclater les éléments, un par un, en les renvoyant, par voie d’amendements aux deux traités existants de Rome (1957) et de Maastricht (1992). Le traité de Lisbonne se présente ainsi comme un catalogue d’amendements aux traités antérieurs. Il est illisible pour les citoyens, qui doivent constamment se reporter aux textes des traités de Rome et de Maastricht, auxquels s’appliquent ces amendements. Voilà pour la forme.
Si l’on en vient maintenant au contenu, le résultat est que les propositions institutionnelles du traité constitutionnel — les seules qui comptaient pour les conventionnels — se retrouvent intégralement dans le traité de Lisbonne, mais dans un ordre différent, et insérés dans les traités antérieurs.
(…) La conclusion vient d’elle-même à l’esprit. Dans le traité de Lisbonne, rédigé exclusivement à partir du projet de traité constitutionnel, les outils sont exactement les mêmes. Seul l’ordre a été changé dans la boîte à outils. La boîte, elle-même, a été redécorée, en utilisant un modèle ancien, qui comporte trois casiers dans lesquels il faut fouiller pour trouver ce que l’on cherche. »

Cette mascarade ayant été conçue et approuvée par Nicolas Sarkozy et les principaux dirigeants de l’UMP, François Hollande et les principaux dirigeants du PS, du MODEM et de EELV, ceux-ci firent ainsi ratifier ce traité de Lisbonne dans le dos des Français. La révision de la Constitution française, rendue nécessaire par la ratification de ce traité, fut effectuée par la voie du Congrès, réuni à Versailles, le 4 février 2008. La ratification du traité lui-même fut ensuite adoptée par la voie parlementaire le 8 février 2008.
UNE PROCÉDURE CONSTITUTIONNELLEMENT LICITE, MAIS UNE FORFAITURE POLITIQUE.
La procédure utilisée par l’UMP, le PS, le MODEM et EELV pour faire ratifier un traité que le peuple français avait rejeté à 55% n’a pas formellement violé la Constitution française puisque notre Loi fondamentale n’interdit pas, hélas, qu’un texte rejeté par référendum puisse ensuite être adopté par les parlementaires. Cependant, si la procédure utilisée ne fut pas juridiquement et constitutionnellement illégale, elle fut une véritable forfaiture d’un point de vue politique et moral. Depuis le 8 février 2008, les européistes français ont jeté le masque et sont apparus en pleine lumière pour ce qu’ils sont : des collabos de l’empire euro-atlantiste, des apprentis dictateurs qui conduisent la France à la ruine et à la soumission à l’étranger, et cela contre la volonté profonde du peuple français. Du reste, ils ont décidé de ne plus modifier les traités, sauf contrainte réellement insurmontable, et de tout faire pour ne plus organiser de référendums sur la question européenne. Depuis le 8 février 2008, la prétendue « construction européenne » a ainsi perdu toute légitimité. Depuis ce jour, la France est devenue un bateau ivre, dirigé par des dictateurs qui osent se présenter comme des démocrates, mais qui violent continûment la volonté populaire, et qui nous conduisent collectivement au désastre.
CONCLUSION : LES EURODICTATEURS SERONT BALAYÉS PAR L’HISTOIRE

Mais, comme le dit la sagesse populaire, ceux qui commettent le Mal « ne l’emportent pas au Paradis ». Il y a une justice immanente. L’Histoire nous enseigne que les forfaitures politiques et le viol du souhait profond des peuples ne résistent jamais à l’épreuve du temps. En violant le vote de 55% des Français, les européistes ont cru triompher ? Ils ont en fait signé l’arrêt de mort inéluctable de la prétendue « construction européenne ». Car le divorce entre les européistes et le peuple français est désormais irrémédiable et consommé. Que ce soit dans 1 an, 5 ans ou 20 ans, le projet de « construction européenne » s’effondrera. C’est à coup sûr ce qu’enseigneront les historiens d’ici un siècle ou deux, lorsque le tumulte des événements et la fureur des passions auront été dissipés par le flot implacable et majestueux de l’Histoire.

iunie 12th, 2014 at 11:17
Marian Nicolae spune:

THE ASIAN TSUNAMI
ANOTHER MANMADE DISASTER

By: Cindy-Lou Dale
http://www.etherzone.com/2005/dale040805.shtml

I find the conspiracy theorists of this world somewhat tiresome. Even more so, I am disbelieving of the feeble, highly processed and refined news stream that television provides. One such rhetoric is the recent tsunami tragedy of December 2004.

Compelled to find the truth I set out to write an article detailing the natural causes surrounding this disaster (and indirectly disprove the other theories doing the rounds). My findings however, were somewhat startling and as such, I am compelled to detail them below and ask that you draw your own conclusions.

Between November and December 2004 Reuters reported that 189 whales and dolphins beached themselves in Tasmania. An Australian senator spoke with the press and advised that sound bombings or seismic tests were being conducted on the ocean floor, testing for oil and gas, near the beaching site in Tasmania.

The sound pulses created by the release of air from up to 24 air-guns create low frequency sound waves potent enough to penetrate up to 24 miles below the seafloor. These underwater soundings generate more than 200dB, which roughly equates to a sound blast of around 155dB in the air.

Whales and dolphins communicate over immense distances and navigate by way of their sensitive sonar systems and are particularly sensitive to high intensity sonic vibrations.

According to the Australian Conservation Foundation, these 200dB blasts are fired every 10 seconds or so, from 10 meters below the surface, 24 hours a day, for two week periods of time.

At this juncture, allow me to briefly explain a little about resonance. Resonance is the frequency at which a material will vibrate. Once a material starts to resonate (however small the resonance), it moves up and down, and if it is brittle or unstable, the movement can become quite violent or the material can even shatter. An example would be the constant high pitched tone of a soprano opera singer shattering crystal. Another more relevant example is that in areas hit by earthquakes, some tall buildings simply collapse, whilst others remain standing. This was initially thought to be caused purely by poor construction or poor quality materials, but it was later proven that it was often caused by resonance, as every building has a resonant frequency at which it will vibrate. Vibration is manifestation of the absorption of resonant energy which then causes the building to shatter. Furthermore, one tectonic plate resonating against an adjacent stationary one can also have catastrophic consequences at the meeting point.

On December 24th, near the meeting point of the Australian, Indian and Burmese tectonic plates, a subterranean earthquake, measuring 8.9 on the Richter scale, occurred. Two days later, in Indonesia, the Indian and Burmese tectonic plates slipped by fifty feet along a 750 mile fault-line resulting in an earthquake, the fourth largest since 1900, measuring 9.0. The ocean floor above the fault-line was raised by several feet, forcing a massive convulsion of displaced water. The earthquake rocked Sumatra and moved the entire island approximately 100 feet south west and even disturbed the Earth’s rotation. Within ten minutes this vertical disturbance of the overlying seawater triggered a tsunami. Ten minutes later it had claimed its first victims in Sumatra. Within seven hours the tsunami’s death toll exceeded 226,000 — which roughly equates to the number of people killed in the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atom bomb explosions of WW2.

Is there a possible connection between the tsunami earthquake and deep-sea seismic testing for oil off the coast of Australia? Could the constant barrage of high dB sound waves have been the catalyst of this quake? Or are we witnessing the repercussion of decades of environmental exploitation in mans’ never ending search for natural resources, like oil.

A relationship between these two earthquakes is considered quite possible by some seismologists saying that „the former one might have been a catalyst to the Indian Ocean earthquake, as the two quakes happened on opposite sides of the Indo-Australian tectonic plate.”

According to one such seismologist, tsunamis could be caused by one of two occurrences — landslides or explosions, such as underwater nuclear testing.

This statement guided my research to another theory.

There have been similar earthquakes to the South East of Tasmania. In 1998 an earthquake occurred south of Australia and New Zealand, between Macquarie Island and Antarctica. This quake triggered a tsunami which generated large surface waves for several hours. I asked a seismologist, who asked not to be named, what would cause such a seismic disturbance. „Landslides or more probably, underground explosions, such as nuclear testing.”

I looked a little further into the effects of nuclear test and discovered the following:

The U.S. has conducted 1,054 nuclear tests between 1945 and 1992. Before 1962, all the tests were atmospheric (on land or in the Pacific or Atlantic oceans), since then some 839 nuclear were carried out underground.

Between 1966 and 1990, the French conducted 167 nuclear tests on two atolls in French Polynesia — Morurua and Fangataua, of which 44 tests were atmospheric but since 1974 France carried out only underground tests. New nuclear warheads for France’s ‘Triompahnt’ class submarines were among these subterranean tests, which required shafts of between 1,600-4,000 feet to be bored into the basalt core of the atolls. At first, these shafts were drilled into the outer rim but in 1981, the tests with higher impact were moved to shafts drilled under the lagoon itself — most likely due to destabilization of that rim.

An independent health study of the people of French Polynesia has never been undertaken and the military records of the health of personnel from the site have not been released. There also appears to be no follow-up program to monitor workers’ health once they have left the site.

In 1963, the French Governor of Tahiti claimed „Not a single particle of radioactive fallout will ever reach an inhabited island.” But immediately after the first atmospheric tests, contaminated fish rained and radiation spread throughout the region.

According to the U.S. Department of Energy and the office of Science & Technical Information, French Polynesia’s soil has become so poisoned this once near self-sufficient colony now imports 80% of its food.

According to testimony from people affected by the tests, higher rates of cancer and birth abnormalities have been experienced by those living in French Polynesia.

The environmental safety of testing nuclear weapons underground at Mururoa has been the subject of major controversy and concern. Mururoa and its sister test site at Fangataufa now contain several Chernobyls worth of radioactivity. Testing threatens the geological stability of these fragile and vulnerable environments and makes leakage of large quantities of radionuclides into the marine environment an ever present threat.

Since 1975, more than 130 nuclear warheads have been detonated in deep shafts in the atoll, resulting in huge cavities that fill with molten rock and radioactive debris.

While the French authorities have argued that testing is safe, several scientific missions to the atoll (all of which have had severely limited access to the site) have raised serious concerns about its ability to contain the radioactivity released by underground tests.

In 1995, three French Polynesians, all residing in Tahiti, brought a legal case against the French government (Case T-219/95 R), Court transcripts reveal: „Short-term effects include geological damage and the venting of gaseous and volatile fission products into the biosphere. Nuclear tests can cause landslides and did indeed cause a major underwater landslide at Mururoa in 1979, when a nuclear device was exploded after jamming half-way down its shaft. Since the geology of Mururoa is already unstable due to large-scale fracturing caused by previous tests, further major landslides are likely.”

In the past, such landslides gave rise to tsunamis causing coastal damage in areas as far away as Pitcairn and Tahiti.

Continuing with court testimony: „Landslides can also release radioactive material into the sea. This would have a catastrophic effect on the food chain in French Polynesia, where fish is an important part of the diet.”

The court document also revealed that the Mururoa landslide shifted approximately one million cubic meters of coral and rock and created a cavity estimated at 460 feet in diameter. It produced a major tidal wave comparable to a tsunami, which spread through the Tuamotu Archipelago and injured people on the southern part of the Mururoa Atoll. French authorities initially denied that any mishap had occurred and declared that the tidal wave was of natural origin, but in a subsequent publication they did acknowledged the Mururoa ‘accident’.

In 1981 a mission led by French geologist Haroun Tazieff issued a warning about the geological stability of the atoll in the long-term if nuclear weapons testing continued.

In 1983, a New Zealand-Australia-Papua New Guinea mission found elevated levels of tritium, and severe fissuring of the atoll and subsidence by more than three feet in parts of the atoll.

In 1987, Commandant Jacques Cousteau found short-lived radionuclides such as caesium 134 and iodine 131 in the Mururoa lagoon, indicating leakage from test explosions was already occurring. He filmed spectacular cracks and fissures in the atoll as well as submarine slides and subsidence, which explains to a great extent, the move in 1988 of the largest nuclear tests to Fangataufa atoll.

In 1990, a Greenpeace team found radioactivity in plankton 12 miles off the coast of Mururoa. The following year, an International Atomic Energy Agency mission, invited by the French military to counter Greenpeace’s findings, found elevated levels of plutonium in samples taken 12 miles from the atoll.

Apart from its nuclear depository, there has been speculation for some time that the U.S. has a military installation in the Antarctic, conducting such tests, in collaboration with other nations. Research surrounding nuclear test sites and the fall-out of nuclear testing is so highly classified that little could be verified. However, one may draw conclusions from the fact that the U.S. has not endorsed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, leaving the door open to future U.S. testing.

The International Atomic Energy Agency commissioned a study which revealed a significant threat. In the event of a major rock slide, on the north side of Mururoa, the nuclear test cavities previously drilled would become exposed and potentially cause a sudden release of radioactive materials into the southern oceans, affecting Australia and South America.

Scientists from the Institute of Dynamics of Geospheres at the Russian Academy of Sciences have observed that earthquakes can be triggered by human action. „Induced seismicity, or seismic activity caused directly by human involvement, has been detected as a result of water filing large surface reservoirs, development of mineral, geothermal and hydrocarbon resources, waste injection, underground nuclear explosions and large-scale construction projects. If the stress change is big enough, it can cause an earthquake, either by fracturing the rock mass — in the case of mining or underground explosions — or by causing rock to slip along existing zones of weakness.”

One of Europe’s largest research institutes, Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia, whose main research fields are in geophysics, seismology and volcanology, are rapidly accumulating and investigating evidence that seismicity is influenced by exogenous factors previously considered insignificant, such as strong distant earthquakes, nuclear explosions, earth tides, changes in the earth’s rotation speed, etc.

According to declassified New Zealand government files, tidal waves have featured in weapons research since WW2. Secret wartime experiments were conducted off the New Zealand coast to create a bomb that would trigger tidal waves. However, the tsunami bomb was never fully tested and the war ended before the project was completed.

Its mastermind was Thomas Leech, the Dean of Engineering at Auckland University (1940-1950). He set off a series of underwater explosions that caused mini tidal waves at Whangaparaoa, north of Auckland, in 1944 and 1945. Details of the research, known as Project Seal, are contained in documents (some six decades old) released by the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

Based on these facts we could draw one of three conclusions.

Either induced seismic activity triggered the first quake, experienced off southern Australia on December 24th, which directly caused the changes that led to the Sumatra quake and the Asian tsunami; or
Repeated nuclear testing could have induced changes that indirectly led to the earthquake; or
Mother-earth retaliated in anger at the constant assaults on her and the tsunami was indeed an act of nature.

Will we ever really know?

The main sources when researching this article have been based on documentational evidence
contained in:

International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (Australia),

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty

Greenpeace

Annals of Geophysics (Vol 46, N5, 2003)

„Earthquakes Induced by Nuclear Explosions” (by Rodolfo Console and Alexei Nikolaev)

SpaceDaily (Jan 2005)

Sound Waves Monthly (Jan 2005)

„Inventory of Conflict and Environment”, Case Study No. 4 (Mururoa, French Nuclear Test in South Pacific).

New Zealand Herald, June 30th, 2000 – „Tsunami bomb, NZ devastating war secret”.

International Atomic Energy Agency, public information document (Mururoa)

Istituto Nazionale Di Geofisica e Vulcanologia – „Generated Electromagnetic Discharges on the Seismic Regime”.

Dept. Applied Geophysics, University of Berlin

„Earthquakes Induced by Underground Nuclear Explosions” by I Pasechnik

Extracts from a report to the US Environmental Protection Agency entitled „Earthquake Hazard Associated with Deep Well Injection” by C Nicholson and RL Wesson,

„Seismicity in the Oil Field” as published in Oilfield Review (Spring 2000) — a project report compiled by Schlumberger and the Institute of Dynamics of Geospheres at the Russian Academy of Sciences for the Ministry of Fuel and Energy of the Russian Federation.

Atomic Scientist (Nov/Dec 1998)

Reuters (Jan 2005) – „Global Tsuami”

Australian Government – Geoscience Australia

The Independent (Sep 9, 1995) – Interview with Director of the Institute of Oceanographic Sciences (UK).

Reuters (Nov 2004) – „Beachings in Tasmania”

New York Times, March 2005 – „Senate votes on drilling in Arctic”

Acoustic Ecology Institute

17 Hours of recorded television news highlights and interviews between December 26 and January 10 following tsunami.

In closing, I need to add a footnote: As a published writer and journalist I was somewhat taken aback at the media’s response when I initially approached them with this article in early February this year. London’s press felt it was pure speculation, American media said it was sensationalist paparazzi style trash – regardless of the documentation evidence.

iunie 12th, 2014 at 21:46
Paul Snaider spune:

Aloooooooo scriitorule, ziaristule, senatorule. ,, Fata Morgana ” nu este o fata este o iluzie optica. Nu are nici pluralul: fetele…..
FÁTA MORGÁNA loc. s. f. Fenomen optic frecvent în regiunile calde, datorită căruia imaginile obiectelor aflate la (sau dincolo de) orizont apar ca și cum s-ar reflecta într-o apă. ♦ Fig. Apariție înșelătoare, iluzie trecătoare. — Cuv. it