Category Archives: India

Taliban reiterate vow to kill Pakistani girl if she survives

People hold candles and pictures of Malala Yousufzai, who was shot on Oct 9, 2012 by the Taliban for speaking out against the militants and promoting education for girls, at a school in Lahore October 12, 2012. (Reuters photo)
RAWALPINDI: The police said on Friday that they had made several arrests in connection with the Taliban’s shooting of Malala Yousafzai, a 14-year-old education activist who was critically injured, but militant commanders in northwestern Pakistan reiterated their intention to kill the schoolgirl or her father.

After Friday prayer, Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf visited Yousafzai’s family at a heavily guarded military hospital in the garrison city of Rawalpindi, where doctors were considering whether to send her abroad for treatment.

“The next 48 hours will be critical,” Ashraf told reporters. Extremists targeted Yousafzai, who was shot in the head while riding in a school bus on Tuesday in Mingora, because, he said, “they were scared of the power of her vision.”

“She is the true face of Pakistan,” he added.

Taliban reiterate vow to kill Pakistani girl if she survivesThe interior minister, Rehman Malik, said the authorities had  identified the two gunmen behind the shooting, but they had not been captured. Police officials in the Swat Valley, where the attack took place, said that they had rounded up about 70 people for questioning, including employees of Yousafzai’s school and the bus driver, and that some of them had been formally arrested.

Afzal Khan Afridi, the Mingora police chief, declined to specify the number of people arrested or what role they were suspected of playing in the shooting, saying he said he did not want to endanger the investigation.

A 15-year-old girl who was wounded alongside Yousafzai described how easily the Taliban had been able to attack the school bus. “A young man in his early 20s approached the bus and asked for Malala,” the girl, Kainat Riaz, said in an interview at her family’s home in Swat. “Then he started firing.”

The fate of Yousafzai, who has become a symbol of defiance of the Taliban’s extremist ideology, has gripped Pakistan. Television stations have provided intensive coverage of her medical treatment, and leaders from across the nation’s political and religious spectrums have united in condemning the attack.

A senior official from Jamaat-e-Islami, the country’s largest religious party, accompanied Ashraf to the hospital. So did the parliamentary leader of the secular Muttahida Qaumi Movement, which dominates Pakistan’s largest city, Karachi.

In an interview with CNN on Thursday, the foreign minister, Hina Rabbani Khar, described the attack as a traumatic “wake-up call” that could prove to be a turning point in Pakistan’s war against extremism.

The army is directing efforts to save Yousafzai, who is on a ventilator. Government officials have estimated her chances of survival at 50 to 70 per cent.

Some analysts have speculated that the army could leverage the unusually strong criticism of the Taliban in this case to begin a new military operation in the tribal belt, but others said the uproar would not ultimately lead to a crackdown.

The shooting embarrassed the army because it had claimed to have largely eliminated the Taliban from the Swat Valley after a major military operation in 2009. Yet Riaz described how the gunmen stopped their bus, which was carrying about 16 students, in the center of Mingora, which is the valley’s main town and is near a military checkpoint.

Riaz, contradicting earlier reports, she said that the attackers were not masked and that the gunmen did not board the bus, but opened fire from outside after identifying Yousafzai.

A third student who was wounded, Shazia Ramzan, is at a hospital in Peshawar. Riaz said that her family had left the valley but returned after the 2009 military operation, and that she had been studying for two years.

“We were feeling good because there was no sign of the Taliban,” she said as two police officers stood guard outside her home.

Sirajuddin Ahmad, the spokesman for the Taliban in the Swat Valley, said that Yousafzai became a target because she had been “brainwashed” into making anti-Taliban statements by her father, Ziauddin Yousafzai.

“We warned him several times to stop his daughter from using dirty language against us, but he didn’t listen and forced us to take this extreme step,” he said.

Both father and daughter remain on the Taliban’s list of intended victims, he said.

©2011 The New York Times News Service


Criminal Big Pharma: They Paid Off Your Doc To Poison You

New UK data finds prescription drugs 62,000 times more likely to kill than supplements

Wednesday, August 15, 2012 by: Tony Isaacs [source]


(NaturalNews) According to data just released by the UK-based Alliance for Natural Health International(ANH-Intl), pharmaceutical drugs are 62,000 times more likely to kill you than supplements. In fact, the data collected by ANH-Intl demonstrates that food supplements are the safest substances regularly consumed by UK citizens even though they are the target of increasingly restrictive European legislation aimed at ‘protecting consumers.’

The newly released data found that pharmaceutical drugs were also 7,750 times more likely to result in death than herbal remedies. Both food supplements and herbal remedies were placed in the ‘supersafe’ category of individual risk – with a less than one in ten million risk of death.

The stark contrast between the safety of supplements and mainstream medicine

By contrast, being admitted to a UK hospital or taking prescription drugs exposes a person to one of the greatest preventable risks in society. Overall, preventable medical injuries in UK hospitals expose patients to the same risk of death as being deployed on military service to Afghanistan – both of which are around 300,000 times greater than the risk of death from taking natural health products.

ANH-Intl executive and scientific director, Dr. Robert Verkerk, PhD, hailed the figures as shedding new light on the question of natural healthcare’s safety. “These figures tell us not only what activities an individual is most or least likely to die from, but also what the relative risks of various activities are to society as a whole. It puts some real perspective on the actual risk of death posed by food supplements and herbal remedies at a time when governments are clamping down because they tell us they’re dangerous.”

Verkerk added, “When compared with the risk of taking food supplements, an individual is around 900 times more likely to die from food poisoning and nearly 300,000 times more likely to die from a preventable medical injury during a spell in a UK hospital. The latter is on a par with the risk of death from active military service in Iraq or Afghanistan.”

According to Dr. Verkerk, the new figures should put pressure on UK and European authorities to reduce regulatory burdens on natural health products. “Governments justify the increasingly elaborate and restrictive new laws affecting natural health products on grounds of public safety,” said Verkerk. “They argue that reducing consumer access to food supplements and herbal remedies, with the consequent negative impacts on small businesses manufacturing, distributing and selling such products, is in society’s interest. But the evidence is simply not there – where are the bodies?”

Among other key points presented in the data were:

* Pharmaceutical drugs pose nearly double the risk of death than motorcycle accidents on UK roads

* While herbal medicines can both be regarded as ‘supersafe,’ preventable medical injuries in UK hospitals are in the ‘Dangerous’ category, with a risk of death greater than 1 in 1,000.

About that bone scan and the meds that follow…

Wednesday, August 15, 2012 by: Craig Stellpflug

(NaturalNews) Bone scans can be useful to find out bone density status, but most MD’s use bone scans to sell more bone scans and bone meds. Oh sure, they can tell you that your bones are thin with their technology, but what happens after the diagnosis is a real problem: prescriptions, procedures, worsening bone brittleness and more cancer. If we just assume that we need to be concerned about bone health and treat our bones naturally, there would be no need for bone scans.

The scoop on bone meds

Long-term use of bone meds like Actonel, Boniva, Fosamax and Reclast have been linked to femur fractures. One study found bones on these meds turning brittle at four years. Two studies found an increased risk of fracture at five years on these meds in healthy, active women. These bad drugs are linked to esophageal cancer, necrosis of the jaw, heartburn, abdominal pain, fever, bone and muscle pain, low energy and low levels of calcium in the blood.

The treatment with the drug Infuse for bone growth, causes the overall cancer risk (including pancreatic) to shoot up by more than 250 percent in one year and 500 percent by three years. Infuse also gives about 50 percent of patients the “side effects” of infection, male sterility, pain, bone loss, and unwanted bone growth.

The most damning vaccination study not publically disclosed to date

Wednesday, August 15, 2012 by: Paul Fassa

(NaturalNews) There have been reports from epidemiological studies confirming suspicions that those who are vaccinated often don’t do as well with long-term health as those who are vaccination free.Those epidemiological studies (statistical surveys) have shown that bad health is more common among the vaccinated who survive without serious injury than children not vaccinated.But how and why has not come under controlled animal lab studies until Japan’s Kobe Universityanimal lab study of 2009.This study was reported and peer reviewed in the PLOS One Open Journalat the end of 2009, but has not received much if any public attention. It was brought to public’s attention very recently by homoeopathist and health writer Heidi Stevenson’s article on her Gaia Health blog. (Source below)

Japanese study summary

Here’s the conclusion quoted from the Kobe University study’s journal report:

“Systemic autoimmunity appears to be the inevitable consequence of over-stimulating the host’s immune ‘system’ by repeated immunization with antigen, to the levels that surpass system’s self-organize criticality.” (Emphasis added.)

The initial purpose of this independently funded study was to understand how autoimmune diseases develop from autoimmunity. It was not an effort to prove vaccination safety or danger.

The researchers used mice that were bred to avoid autoimmune diseases and injected them with solutions that contain antigens. Antigens generate antibodies to protect against invading disease pathogens. Antibodies can turn against the host if they become self generated, causing autoimmune diseases.

A vaccination injects cultured vaccine antigens of weakened or dead viruses to create an immune response of antibodies to that antigen, supposedly for creating immunity to that particular disease.

It’s not very unusual for cytokine storms (immune system overreactions) to overwhelm one who has been vaccinated. Vaccine adverse reactions have caused injuries of permanent disability, autism spectrum disorders, or death more often than publicly disclosed.

The Kobe researchers injected the mice that were bred to not develop autoimmune diseases repeatedly with antigens, much like vaccinations are administered to infants and children, to study how an immune system could turn on itself to create autoimmune diseases.

They were pushing the mice’s immune systems to see if and when they would no longer bend, but break. They used Staphylococcus entertoxin B (SEB) as their injected antigens.

The study report did not mention including any toxic adjuvants or preservatives such as mercury, aluminum, or formaldehyde used in vaccines. Antigens were used without the toxic additives normally used in vaccinations.

After seven injections the mice recovered each time with their immune systems intact. But after the eighth injection, problems with key immunity cells began arising.

Damaged cells were observed microscopically and showed signs of early autoimmunity. Their immune systems had started to self generate antibodies for autoimmune reactions after repeated antigen inoculations. (Source below)

FDA drug reviewer: ‘one manager threatened my children’

Wednesday, August 15, 2012 by: Jon Rappoport

(NaturalNews) In a stunning interview with Truthout’s Martha Rosenberg, former FDA drug reviewer, Ronald Cavanaugh, exposes the FDA as a relentless criminal mafia protecting its client, Big Pharma, with a host of mob strategies.http://truth-out.orgCavanaugh: “…widespread racketeering, including witness tampering and witness retaliation.””I was threatened with prison.””One [FDA] manager threatened my children… I was afraid that I could be killed for talking to Congress and criminal investigators.”Cavanaugh reviewed new drug applications made to the FDA by pharmaceutical companies. He was one of the holdouts at the Agency who insisted that the drugs had to be safe and effective before being released to the public.

But honest appraisal wasn’t part of the FDA culture, and Cavanaugh swam against the tide, until he realized his life and the life of his children was on the line.

What was his secret task at the FDA? “Drug reviewers were clearly told not to question drug companies and that our job was to approve drugs.” In other words, rubber stamp them. Say the drugs were safe and effective when they were not.

Cavanaugh’s revelations are astonishing. He recalls a meeting where a drug-company representative flat-out stated that his company had paid the FDA for a new-drug approval. Paid for it. As in bribe.

He remarks that the drug pyridostigmine, given to US troops to prevent the later effects of nerve gas, “actually increased the lethality” of certain nerve agents.

Cavanaugh recalls being given records of safety data on a drug—and then his bosses told him which sections not to read. Obviously, they knew the drug was dangerous and they knew exactly where, in the reports, that fact would be revealed.

Read the entire landmark interview for yourself and see what the FDA really is. We are not dealing with isolated incidents of cheating and lying. We are not dealing with a few isolated bought-off FDA employees. The situation at the FDA isn’t correctable with a few firings. This is an ongoing criminal enterprise, and any government official, serving in any capacity, who has become aware of it and has not taken action, is an accessory to mass poisoning of the population.

Twelve years ago, the cat was let out of the bag. Dr. Barbara Starfield, writing in the Journal of the American Medical Association, on July 26, 2000, in a review titled, “Is US health really the best in the world,” exposed the fact that FDA-approved medical drugs kill 106,000 Americans per year.

Eli Lilly admits to more than $200 million dollars worth of doctor payoffs

Wednesday, August 15, 2012 by: Willow Tohi

(NaturalNews) Prozac. Cialis. Cymbalta. If you have a television or read magazines, you’ve heard of their drugs. Eli Lilly, out of Indiana, makes billions of dollars every year off the sale of their patented chemicals, which are used to suppress the symptoms of disease in the human body. Founded by a chemist in the late 19th century; today the pharmaceutical giant has offices in 18 countries, and its products are sold in 125 countries, with revenues exceeding $20 billion annually.Most of their arsenal is available in other countries for much less money than it is here in the United States, as is the case with most prescription medication. The reason, the pharmaceutical industry claims, is that the health care systems of other countries demands affordable medication, and they need somebody somewhere to foot the research bill, so they can get the next patents lined up before others expire, allowing generic versions of their drugs to become available on the market. That leaves us Americans, with our broken healthcare system, footing the bill of their continued financial success.We’re not only footing the bill, we have to deal with how the pharmaceutical machine warps the medical system. While historically a trade secret, it is standard operating procedure for pharmaceutical giants to pay doctors and other healthcare professionals to promote their drugs. Seducing doctors into becoming mouthpieces for a share of their bottom line is where it begins, but it ends up dictating your options.

A history of questionable ethics

Beginning in 2012, all drug and medical device companies will be required to report their promotional expenditure numbers to the federal government, but several companies started disclosing their information in 2009. According to the disclosed information, last year Eli Lilly paid out more than $200 million in payments to doctors and healthcare providers for promoting their drugs.’s Dollars for Docs database is tracking 11 other companies’ disclosures as well.

The reason this information has been disclosed in Eli Lilly’s case is because Eli Lilly was involved in a criminal settlement, and was ordered to disclose these payments, since 2009. They agreed to pay $1.4 billion to settle criminal and civil allegations of promoting drugs for unapproved uses. An official from the FDA testified in a court of law that Eli Lilly concealed the risks of its schizophrenia drug Zyprexa from U.S. officials, knowing the serious health risks it caused. They defrauded Medicare/Medicaid and blatantly put profit over the concern of the consumer.

The disclosure documents say the payments were for speaking, consulting, and research, as well as travel and meal reimbursement. You can look up the breakdown of the payments; how much was paid into your state, if your doctor was among those paid. The data provides insights into how firms adapt their strategies over time, even though complete analysis has proved challenging. So few companies report their data, and the data that is reported is inconsistent in both content and format. Its unclear exactly how much money is being spent where, and by whom. Needless to say, there will be more on this story in the future.

The transparency of the newly required disclosures has some companies reevaluating the current strategy. Most of the pharmaceutical giants have begun to reduce their promotional expenditures, since they started disclosing the figures. Most of them offer explanations such as, “normal year-to-year fluctuations.” Experts predict physicians will begin backing away from these arrangements as well, as the increased scrutiny of the pharmaceutical sales practices also exposes their names and pay. Some doctors are raking in a quarter of a million dollars, but actually claim they “wouldn’t want the appearance of being influenced by anything the company gave” them. Interesting choice of words, huh? [read more]


The IMF And Monsanto :How They Rape Humanity



Henk Ruyssenaars

October 13th 2010 – Zimbabwe is in the mainstream propaganda press again: president Mugabe named six ambassadors and did not inform his prime minister Tsvangirai, it says. That’s – according to Tsvangirai ‘illegal’ – so he sends letters protesting this to the United Nations, the European Union, South-Africa, Italy, Sweden and Switzerland. Asking those not to acknowledge the new ambassadors because they are supposed all to belong to Mugabe’s party, ZANU-PF.

Concerning ‘justice’ and Africa one has to read it on Internet too: in many articles Zimbabwe and Mugabe are by the MSM described as too bad and as lawless, but when, how and why did it start?

Personally I don’t think any info in the MSM is correct at all. The problems in Zimbabwe in full strength began when Mugabe told the multinationals, IMF, World Bank – and especially Monsanto and its vile products – that he was throwing them out of the country.

Any country or people – not fully complying with the criminal multinational industrial/financial clan’s usurers – is attacked, demonized like Mugabe, and possibly destroyed.

In Africa (I lived there for ten years too, as many know by now) the predators have already been at work a long time, and so have their ‘economic hit men’ and errand ‘secret’ services like the CIA/NED etc. As well as global criminal organisations like the International Murder Fund (IMF) and the World (robbing) Bank. – Url.:

And of course the compliant propagandists in the warmongers media don’t mention it, but Australian TV in 2002 showed Tsvangirai preparing to kill Mugabe with some (fake?) Canadians, which most probably was a CIA/Mossad killing team.*

“Mr. Tsvangirai has in fact, been plotting to kill President Robert Mugabe,” the SBS-TV presentation of its documentary said. Which – as I said – also is kept out of the mainstream propaganda/information as well:



Afrol News, 25 February – 2002 – Morgan Tsvangirai, favourite to Zimbabwean presidential elections on 9-10 March and leader of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), today was informed he would face charges of high of treason when he was questioned at Central Harare Police Station. Tsvangirai today was brought to the police station and was interrogated for two hours, but later released.

The MDC leader’s lawyer, Innocent Chagonda, said his client was to face charges of high treason over his alleged plot to “eliminate” President Robert Mugabe. High treason is punishable by death in Zimbabwe. Tsvangirai however said he had reason to believe police would not proceed with a prosecution before the election.

A special edition last week of Australian SBS-TV’s program ‘Dateline’ titled ‘Killing Mugabe – The Tsvangirai Conspiracy,’ claimed to “present evidence that the opposition leader has had no intention of letting the electoral process take its course. While parading his supposed democratic credentials, Mr Tsvangirai has in fact, been plotting to kill President Robert Mugabe,” the SBS presentation of its documentary says. Tsvangirai rejected these accusations, claiming the video showing himself and several Canadian consultants discussing what is to happen in Zimbabwe after “the head of state has been eliminated” had been a trap set up by the Zimbabwean government.


Indeed, the Canadians suddenly “from nowhere introduced discussion around the issue of elimination,” moving him to “burst out of their meeting,” Tsvangirai declared last week. The MDC later found the Canadian company had contacts with ZANU-PF, Zimbabwe’s ruling party.” – [end excerpt] – You can read the rest, and make up your own mind about Zimbabwe and Africa at Url.:

The multinationals do in Africa what they’ve done – and are doing – elsewhere too: stealing and killing if they don’t immediately get what they want. – HR & Africa – Url.:



This is what president Mugabe and many other Africans are utterly angry about too: the inhuman Rothschild empire’s financial usury system does to countries and continents the worst in its quest for power and profit; at any cost to the others. No wonder they see red now and then.

The worst picture depicting African reality, symbolizing everything going on, is this picture of the vulture waiting for a child to die. No wonder photographer Kevin Carter committed suicide some time after taking the picture. For which he – while still alive – got a Pulitzer Prize as well. Then he killed himself. – Url.:

Look at what the day and night do to people all around the world, and in Africa too: according to a UNICEF report, which did not get any publicity and at first was hard to find:

Five million children die in Africa yearly, and more than 10 million children around the world: Nigeria – The Tide – Sunday, Jun 1, 2008 – More than 10 million children around the world die before their fifth birthday every year, according to a new report by UNICEF, the United Nations Children Fund.


The report, titled ‘The State of Africa’s Children 2008’ which was launched on May 28 at the Fourth Tokyo International Conference on African Development in Japan, which looked at the successes and failures of governments regarding the health and survival of the children of Africa, is complementary to a broader UNICEF report on the health of the world’s children.

Although Africa accounts for only 22 percent of births globally, half of the 10 million child deaths annually occur on the continent. Africa is the only continent that has seen rising numbers of deaths among children under five since the 1970s.

Many of these children die of preventable and curable diseases. UNICEF’s report says malaria is the cause of 18 percent of under-five deaths in Africa. Diarrheal diseases and pneumonia “both illnesses that thrive in poor communities where sanitation is severely compromised, and where residents are often undernourished and exposed to pollution” account for a further 40 percent of child deaths. Another major killer is AIDS.” – [end excerpt]

For those who don’t know yet about the ongoing infanticide, you can read the rest here at UNICEF – Url.:

The multinationals and their financial criminal cartel, rape humanity.

Empire you said? Vultures! That’s what they are!


Concerning Africa and many other continents, the US/UK junta and its financial cartel tries to take more and more, still via their propaganda lying it’s ‘helping’ people, or, a still worse threat: ”We want to come and spread democracy.”

They spread their brand of ‘democracy’ from the barrel of a gun, killing millions of human beings.

As an independent former Africa correspondent during ten years, I can only confirm that the multinational predators even try to get the last bit of meat on the cadavers. And globally the criminal banking cartel kills for profit and power. Until we people stop them.

Looks like we have to ‘neutralize’ them, before they kill us all.

Barbara H. Peterson

Farm Wars

We here at the ranch know how to deal with pests. Specifically, flies. Flies can be a major source of discomfort to both animals and humans, and the larger the fly population gets, the more miserable your existence around them. These insipid pests buzz around and bother you until you either get rid of them or simply give up and leave until they are gone.

Flies are not only pests, but they carry disease. They feed on just about any type of food, digested or not, and are so persistent that they quickly monopolize any food anywhere. They lay eggs in wounds, which hatch into maggots that eat necrotic flesh.  Think of Monsanto as just such a pest. The difference being that the maggots know when to stop, Monsanto does not.  Think of the times that Monsanto has destroyed organic farms, laid its genetically modified “eggs” in the field, then stuck around to feed on the desperation and devastation its products cause.

When flies become a serious problem, then eradication is necessary – not only for health’s sake, but sanity as well, and it’s high time we got out the flyswatter and started eradicating some pesky, disease-ridden flies aka Monsanto. How? At the ranch remove all things that they are attracted to –  clean out the stalls, rotate and drag the pastures, and keep the manure piles down to a minimum because that is where they like to hatch their eggs. You also starve them until they no longer come around by removing food sources. In the case of one of the biggest pests around, Monsanto, you clean out your cupboards, rid your house of all biotech products, and keep your contact with them at a minimum. You starve the company until it no longer can make a dime off of you.

A Monopoly is a Monopoly is a Monopoly…

All species that feed off of others want a monopoly, and Monsanto and Goldman Sachs are no different. They don’t like to share their food supply, and we are on the table, dressed up like Thanksgiving turkeys. They feed off our ignorance, and if we do not recognize the deceptions they use, we can run out of precious life blood in no time. Make no mistake about it, these bloodsuckers will drain you dry until you drop dead, with smiles on their faces.

Monsanto is doing to our food supply what Goldman Sachs is doing to finances. And just how is that working out for us so far? Not too well you say?

They both have monopolies – one on seeds, the other on finances, and they have joined forces. Together, they are working hard at monopolizing both our natural seeds and finances, taking us to the brink of genetic extinction and leaving us to climb up, sick and penniless, out of the primordial ooze created by a deadly combination of pseudo-science and greed and topped off with an unhealthy dose of pure narcissism. To put it bluntly, we are living in a cesspool of genetically engineered garbage, the long term effects of which are just now being exposed, and we are being force-fed these abominations through stealth. They are not labeled, and these corporations don’t want them to be. While Goldman Sachs strangles the economy, throwing more and more people into low-income food assistance programs, people who have received the brunt of these destructive agendas eat what they can get, and what they get is processed GMOs, courtesy of Monsanto and all the other biotech firms following closely on the heels of the swarm leader.

A More Profitable Union

Not only does it appear that Monsanto and Goldman Sachs have a similar business ethic or lack thereof, but Goldman Sachs is currently taking a big interest in corn as well as promoting Monsanto. A marriage made in…. well, you know.

All throughout the epic surge in corn prices, the big Kahoona, Goldman Sachs, where buy means sell, and sell means Goldman’s traders are buying everything its clients have to dump, was quiet. That is no longer the case: “we recommend a short May-13 CBOT wheat position vs. a long May-13 CBOT corn position.” In other words, Goldman will now be selling May 13 corn.

And just who has a monopoly on corn via its genetically modified (GMO) corn seed? Why, Monsanto, of course! And just how much of the corn grown in the U.S. is GMO?

More than 90 percent of all soybeans grown in the United States are genetically modified (GM) for herbicide resistance and are consequently sprayed with massive quantities of those toxic chemicals. Fully 85 percent of all corn grown in the country is also genetically engineered, either for herbicide resistance or to produce pesticides within its tissues. Since farmers sell their corn and soy to large distributors who mix the product together for processing, this essentially means that 100 percent of non-organic corn and soy products on the US market are GM.

Here is Monsanto’s presentation for the Goldman Sachs Agricultural Biotech Forum 2011.

I get all warm and fuzzy inside when I think of Monsanto and Goldman Sachs flying wing in wing to their next victim, don’t you? Just think of the possibilities…. Then get serious about getting out of the system and into a more independent lifestyle.

What’s It Gonna Take?

Many local community gardening projects are springing up all over. One such project is LA Green Grounds. Elon writes, “LA Green Grounds volunteers design and build the new gardens, generally in front yards, teaching volunteers along the way and fostering community”.[read more]




Company Profile: Exxon and the Ties to the Rockfellers


Web site:

Public Company
Incorporated: 1882 as Standard Oil Company of New Jersey
Employees: 79,000
Sales: $117.77 billion (1998)
Stock Exchanges: New York Boston Cincinnati Midwest Philadelphia Basel Dusseldorf Frankfurt Geneva Hamburg Paris Zurich
Ticker Symbol: XON
NAIC: 211111 Crude Petroleum & Natural Gas Extraction; 324110 Petroleum Refineries; 324191 Petroleum Lubricating Oil & Grease Manufacturing; 325110 Petrochemical Manufacturing; 447100 Gasoline Stations; 486110 Pipeline Transportation of Crude Oil; 486910 Pipeline Transportation of Refined Petroleum Products; 212110 Coal Mining; 212234 Copper Ore & Nickel Ore Mining; 212299 All Other Metal Ore Mining; 221112 Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation

As the earliest example of the trend toward gigantic size and power, Exxon Corporation and its Standard Oil forebears have earned vast amounts of money in the petroleum business. The brainchild of John D. Rockefeller, Standard Oil enjoyed the blessings and handicaps of overwhelming power—on the one hand, an early control of the oil business so complete that even its creators could not deny its monopolistic status; on the other, an unending series of journalistic and legal attacks upon its business ethics, profits, and very existence. Exxon became the object of much resentment during the 1970s for the huge profits it made from the OPEC-induced oil shocks. The uproar over the Exxon Valdez oil tanker spill in 1989 put the corporation once more in the position of embattled giant, as the largest U.S. oil company struggled to justify its actions before the public. At the end of the 1990s Exxon stood as the second largest of the world’s integrated petroleum powerhouses—trailing only the Royal Dutch/Shell Group. In addition to its oil and gas exploration, production, manufacturing, distribution, and marketing operations, Exxon was a leading producer and seller of petrochemicals and was involved in electric power generation and the mining of coal, copper, and other minerals. Exxon was also once again making history, through a proposed merger with Mobil Corporation, to create the largest petroleum firm in the world in one of the biggest mergers ever—and to reunite two of the offspring of the Standard Oil behemoth.
Prehistory of Standard Oil

The individual most responsible for the creation of Standard Oil, John D. Rockefeller, was born in 1839 to a family of modest means living in the Finger Lakes region of New York State. His father, William A. Rockefeller, was a sporadically successful merchant and part-time hawker of medicinal remedies. William Rockefeller moved his family to Cleveland, Ohio, when John D. Rockefeller was in his early teens, and it was there that the young man finished his schooling and began work as a bookkeeper in 1855. From a very young age John D. Rockefeller developed an interest in business. Before getting his first job with the merchant firm of Hewitt & Tuttle, Rockefeller had already demonstrated an innate affinity for business, later honed by a few months at business school.

Rockefeller worked at Hewitt & Tuttle for four years, studying large-scale trading in the United States. In 1859 the 19-year-old Rockefeller set himself up in a similar venture—Clark & Rockefeller, merchants handling the purchase and resale of grain, meat, farm implements, salt, and other basic commodities. Although still very young, Rockefeller had already impressed Maurice Clark and his other business associates as an unusually capable, cautious, and meticulous businessman. He was a reserved, undemonstrative individual, never allowing emotion to cloud his thinking. Bankers found that they could trust John D. Rockefeller, and his associates in the merchant business began looking to him for judgment and leadership.

Clark & Rockefeller’s already healthy business was given a boost by the Civil War economy, and by 1863 the firm’s two partners had put away a substantial amount of capital and were looking for new ventures. The most obvious and exciting candidate was oil. A few years before, the nation’s first oil well had been drilled at Titusville, in western Pennsylvania, and by 1863 Cleveland had become the refining and shipping center for a trail of newly opened oil fields in the so-called Oil Region. Activity in the oil fields, however, was extremely chaotic, a scene of unpredictable wildcatting, and John D. Rockefeller was a man who prized above all else the maintenance of order. He and Clark, therefore, decided to avoid drilling and instead go into the refining of oil, and in 1863 they formed Andrews, Clark & Company with an oil specialist named Samuel Andrews. Rockefeller, never given to publicity, was the “Company.”

With excellent railroad connections as well as the Great Lakes to draw upon for transportation, the city of Cleveland and the firm of Andrews, Clark & Company both did well. The discovery of oil wrought a revolution in U.S. methods of illumination. Kerosene soon replaced animal fat as the source of light across the country, and by 1865 Rockefeller was fully convinced that oil refining would be his life’s work. Unhappy with his Clark-family partners, Rockefeller bought them out for $72,000 in 1865 and created the new firm of Rockefeller & Andrews, already Cleveland’s largest oil refiners. It was a typically bold move by Rockefeller, who although innately conservative and methodical was never afraid to make difficult decisions. He thus found himself, at the age of 25, co-owner of one of the world’s leading oil concerns.

Talent, capital, and good timing combined to bless Rockefeller & Andrews. Cleveland handled the lion’s share of Pennsylvania crude and, as the demand for oil continued to explode, Rockefeller & Andrews soon dominated the Cleveland scene. By 1867, when a young man of exceptional talent named Henry Flagler became a third partner, the firm was already operating the world’s number one oil refinery; there was as yet little oil produced outside the United States. The year before, John Rockefeller’s brother, William Rockefeller, had opened a New York office to encourage the rapidly growing export of kerosene and oil byproducts, and it was not long before foreign sales became an important part of Rockefeller strength. In 1869 the young firm allocated $60,000 for plant improvements—an enormous sum of money for that day.
Creation of the Standard Oil Monopoly: 1870–92

The early years of the oil business were marked by tremendous swings in the production and price of both crude and refined oil. With a flood of newcomers entering the field every day, size and efficiency already had become critically important for survival. As the biggest refiner, Rockefeller was in a better position than anyone to weather the price storms. Rockefeller and Henry Flagler, with whom Rockefeller enjoyed a long and harmonious business relationship, decided to incorporate their firm to raise the capital needed to enlarge the company further. On January 10, 1870, the Standard Oil Company was formed, with the two Rockefellers, Flagler, and Andrews owning the great majority of stock, valued at $1 million. The new company was not only capable of refining approximately ten percent of the entire country’s oil, it also owned a barrel-making plant, dock facilities, a fleet of railroad tank cars, New York warehouses, and forest land for the cutting of lumber used to produce barrel staves. At a time when the term was yet unknown, Standard Oil had become a vertically integrated company.

One of the single advantages of Standard Oil’s size was the leverage it gave the company in railroad negotiations. Most of the oil refined at Standard made its way to New York and the Eastern Seaboard. Because of Standard’s great volume—60 carloads a day by 1869—it was able to win lucrative rebates from the warring railroads. In 1871 the various railroads concocted a plan whereby the nation’s oil refiners and railroads would agree to set and maintain prohibitively high freight rates while awarding large rebates and other special benefits to those refiners who were part of the scheme. The railroads would avoid disastrous price wars while the large refiners forced out of business those smaller companies who refused to join the cartel, known as the South Improvement Company.
Company Perspectives:

Ours is a long-term business, with today’s accomplishments a reflection of well-executed plans set in motion years ago. Likewise, Exxon’s success at building shareholder value in the future is dependent on plans we develop and implement today.

The following strategies have and will continue to guide Exxon as we strive to meet shareholder and customer expectations: identifying and implementing quality investment opportunities at a timely and appropriate pace, while maintaining a selective and disciplined approach; being the most efficient competitor in every aspect of our business; maintaining a high-quality portfolio of productive assets; developing and employing the best technology; ensuring safe, environmentally sound operations; continually improving an already high-quality work force; maintaining a strong financial position and ensuring that financial resources are employed wisely.

The plan was denounced immediately by Oil Region producers and many independent refiners, with near-riots breaking out in the oil fields. After a bitter war of words and a flood of press coverage, the oil refiners and the railroads abandoned their plan and announced the adoption of public, inflexible transport rates. In the meantime, however, Rockefeller and Flagler were already far advanced on a plan to combat the problems of excess capacity and dropping prices in the oil industry. To Rockefeller the remedy was obvious, though unprecedented: the eventual unification of all oil refiners in the United States into a single company. Rockefeller approached the Cleveland refiners and a number of important firms in New York and elsewhere with an offer of Standard Oil stock or cash in exchange for their often-ailing plants. By the end of 1872, all 34 refiners in the area had agreed to sell—some freely and for profit, and some, competitors alleged, under coercion. Because of Standard’s great size and the industry’s overbuilt capacity, Rockefeller and Flagler were in a position to make their competitors irresistible offers. All indications are that Standard regularly paid top dollar for viable companies.

By 1873 Standard Oil was refining more oil—10,000 barrels per day—than any other region of the country, employing 1,600 workers, and netting around $500,000 per year. With great confidence, Rockefeller proceeded to duplicate his Cleveland success throughout the rest of the country. By the end of 1874 he had absorbed the next three largest refiners in the nation, located in New York, Philadelphia, and Pittsburgh. Rockefeller also began moving into the field of distribution with the purchase of several of the new pipelines then being laid across the country. With each new acquisition it became more difficult for Rockefeller’s next target to refuse his cash. Standard interests rapidly grew so large that the threat of monopoly was clear. The years 1875 to 1879 saw Rockefeller push through his plan to its logical conclusion. In 1878, a mere six years after beginning its annexation campaign, Standard Oil controlled $33 million of the country’s $35 million annual refining capacity, as well as a significant proportion of the nation’s pipelines and oil tankers. At the age of 39, Rockefeller was one of the five wealthiest men in the country.

Standard’s involvement in the aborted South Improvement Company, however, had earned it lasting criticism. The company’s subsequent absorption of the refining industry did not mend its image among the few remaining independents and the mass of oil producers who found in Standard a natural target for their wrath when the price of crude dropped precipitously in the late 1870s. Although the causes of producers’ tailing fortunes are unclear, it is evident that given Standard’s extraordinary position in the oil industry it was fated to become the target of dissatisfactions. In 1879 nine Standard Oil officials were indicted by a Pennsylvania grand jury for violating state antimonopoly laws. Although the case was not pursued, it indicated the depth of feeling against Standard Oil, and was only the first in a long line of legal battles waged to curb the company’s power.

In 1882 Rockefeller and his associates reorganized their dominions, creating the first “trust” in U.S. business history. This move overcame state laws restricting the activity of a corporation to its home state. Henceforth the Standard Oil Trust, domiciled in New York City, held “in trust” all assets of the various Standard Oil companies. Of the Standard Oil Trust’s nine trustees, John D. Rockefeller held the largest number of shares. Together the trust’s 30 companies controlled 80 percent of the refineries and 90 percent of the oil pipelines in the United States, constituting the leading industrial organization in the world. The trust’s first year’s combined net earnings were $11.2 million, of which some $7 million was immediately plowed back into the companies for expansion. Almost lost in the flurry of big numbers was the 1882 creation of Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, one of the many regional corporations created to handle the trust’s activities in surrounding states. Barely worth mentioning at the time, Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, or “Jersey” as it came to be called, would soon become the dominant Standard company and, much later, rename itself Exxon.
Key Dates:

John D. Rockefeller and Henry Flagler incorporate the Standard Oil Company.
Standard controls $33 million of the country’s $35 million annual refining capacity.
Rockefeller reorganizes Standard Oil into a trust, creating Standard Oil Company of New Jersey as one of many regional corporations controlled by the trust.
Standard founds its first foreign affiliate, Anglo-American Oil Company, Limited.
The Sherman Antitrust Act is passed, in large part, in response to Standard’s oil monopoly.
The trust has secured a quarter of the total oil field production in the United States.
Lawsuit leads to dissolving of the trust; the renamed Standard Oil Company (New Jersey) becomes main vessel of the Standard holdings.
Jersey becomes the sole holding company for all of the Standard interests.
Federal government files suit against Jersey under the Sherman Antitrust Act, charging it with running a monopoly.
U.S. Supreme Court upholds lower court conviction of the company and orders that it be separated into 34 unrelated companies, one of which continues to be called Standard Oil Company (New Jersey).
The Esso brand is used for the first time on the company’s refined products.
A 30 percent interest in Arabian American Oil Company, and its vast Saudi Arabian oil concessions, is acquired.
Company gains seven percent stake in Iranian oil production consortium.
Standard Oil Company (New Jersey) changes its name to Exxon Corporation.
OPEC cuts off oil supplies to the United States.
Revenues exceed $100 billion because of the rapid increase in oil prices.
The crash of the Exxon Valdez in Prince William Sound off the port of Valdez, Alaska, releases about 260,000 barrels of crude oil.
Headquarters are moved from Rockefeller Center in New York City to Irving, Texas.
A federal jury in an Exxon Valdez civil action finds the company guilty of “recklessness” and orders it to pay $286.8 million in compensatory damages and $5 billion in punitive damages.
Company appeals the $5 billion punitive damage award; it reports profits of $8.46 billion on revenues of $120.28 billion for the year.
Company agrees to buy Mobil in one of the largest mergers in U.S. history, which would create the largest oil company in the world, Exxon Mobil Corporation.

The 1880s were a period of exponential growth for Standard. The trust not only maintained its lock on refining and distribution but also seriously entered the field of production. By 1891 the trust had secured a quarter of the country’ s total output, most of it in the new regions of Indiana and Illinois. Standard’s overseas business was also expanding rapidly, and in 1888 it founded its first foreign affiliate, London-based Anglo-American Oil Company, Limited (later known as Esso Petroleum Company, Limited). The overseas trade in kerosene was especially important to Jersey, which derived as much as threefourths of its sales from the export trade. Jersey’s Bayonne, New Jersey refinery was soon the third largest in the Standard family, putting out 10,000 to 12,000 barrels per day by 1886. In addition to producing and refining capacity, Standard also was extending gradually its distribution system from pipelines and bulk wholesalers toward the retailer and eventual end user of kerosene, the private consumer.
Jersey at Head of Standard Oil Empire: 1892–1911

The 1890 Sherman Antitrust Act, passed in large part in response to Standard’s oil monopoly, laid the groundwork for a second major legal assault against the company, an 1892 Ohio Supreme Court order forbidding the trust to operate Standard of Ohio. As a result, the trust was promptly dissolved, but taking advantage of newly liberalized state law in New Jersey, the Standard directors made Jersey the main vessel of their holdings. Standard Oil Company of New Jersey became Standard Oil Company (New Jersey) at this time. The new Standard Oil structure now consisted of only 20 much-enlarged companies, but effective control of the interests remained in the same few hands as before. Jersey added a number of important manufacturing plants to its already impressive refining capacity and was the leading Standard unit. It was not until 1899, however, that Jersey became the sole holding company for all of the Standard interests. At that time the entire organization’s assets were valued at about $300 million and it employed 35,000 people. John D. Rockefeller continued as nominal president, but the most powerful active member of Jersey’s board was probably John D. Archbold.

Rockefeller had retired from daily participation in Standard Oil in 1896 at the age of 56. Once Standard’s consolidation was complete Rockefeller spent his time reversing the process of accumulation, seeing to it that his staggering fortune—estimated at $900 million in 1913—was redistributed as efficiently as it had been made.

The general public was only dimly aware of Rockefeller’s philanthropy, however. More obvious were the frankly monopolistic policies of the company he had built. With its immense size and complete vertical integration, Standard Oil piled up huge profits ($830 million in the 12 years from 1899 to 1911). In relative terms, however, its domination of the U.S. industry was steadily decreasing. By 1911 its percentage of total refining was down to 66 percent from the 90 percent of a generation before, but in absolute terms Standard Oil had grown to monstrous proportions. Therefore, it was not surprising that in 1905 a U.S. congressman from Kansas launched an investigation of Standard Oil’s role in the falling price of crude in his state. The commissioner of the Bureau of Corporations, James R. Garfield, decided to widen the investigation into a study of the national oil industry—in effect, Standard Oil.

Garfield’s critical report prompted a barrage of state lawsuits against Standard Oil (New Jersey) and, in November 1906, a federal suit was filed charging the company, John D. Rockefeller, and others with running a monopoly. In 1911, after years of litigation, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a lower court’s conviction of Standard Oil for monopoly and restraint of trade under the Sherman Antitrust Act. The Court ordered the separation from Standard Oil Company (New Jersey) of 33 of the major Standard Oil subsidiaries, including those that subsequently kept the Standard name.
Independent Growth into a “Major”: 1911–72

Standard Oil Company (New Jersey) retained an equal number of smaller companies spread around the United States and overseas, representing $285 million of the former Jersey’s net value of $600 million. Notable among the remaining holdings were a group of large refineries, four medium-sized producing companies, and extensive foreign marketing affiliates. Absent were the pipelines needed to move oil from well to refinery, much of the former tanker fleet, and access to a number of important foreign markets, including Great Britain and the Far East.

John D. Archbold, a longtime intimate of the elder Rockefeller and whose Standard service had begun in 1879, remained president of Standard Oil (New Jersey). Archbold’s first problem was to secure sufficient supplies of crude oil for Jersey’s extensive refining and marketing capacity. Jersey’s former subsidiaries were more than happy to continue selling crude to Jersey; the dissolution decree had little immediate effect on the coordinated workings of the former Standard Oil group, but Jersey set about finding its own sources of crude. The company’s first halting steps toward foreign production met with little success; ventures in Romania, Peru, Mexico, and Canada suffered political or geological setbacks and were of no help. In 1919, however, Jersey made a domestic purchase that would prove to be of great long-term value. For $17 million Jersey acquired 50 percent of the Humble Oil & Refining Company of Houston, Texas, a young but rapidly growing network of Texas producers that immediately assumed first place among Jersey’s domestic suppliers. Although only the fifth leading producer in Texas at the time of its purchase, Humble would soon become the dominant drilling company in the United States and eventually was wholly purchased by Jersey. Humble, later known as Exxon Company U.S.A., remained one of the leading U.S. producers of crude oil and natural gas through the end of the century.

Despite initial disappointments in overseas production, Jersey remained a company oriented to foreign markets and supply sources. On the supply side, Jersey secured a number of valuable Latin American producing companies in the 1920s, especially several Venezuelan interests consolidated in 1943 into Creole Petroleum Corporation. By that time Creole was the largest and most profitable crude producer in the Jersey group. In 1946 Creole produced an average of 451,000 barrels per day, far more than the 309,000 by Humble and almost equal to all other Jersey drilling companies combined. Four years later, Creole generated $157 million of the Jersey group’s total net income of $408 million and did so on sales of only $517 million. Also in 1950, Jersey’s British affiliates showed sales of $283 million but a bottom line of about $2 million. In contrast to the industry’s early days, oil profits now lay in the production of crude, and the bulk of Jersey’s crude came from Latin America. The company’s growing Middle Eastern affiliates did not become significant resources until the early 1950s. Jersey’s Far East holdings, from 1933 to 1961 owned jointly with Socony-Vacuum Oil Company—formerly Standard Oil Company of New York and now Mobil Corporation—never provided sizable amounts of crude oil.

In marketing, Jersey’s income showed a similar preponderance of foreign sales. Jersey’s domestic market had been limited by the dissolution decree to a handful of mid-Atlantic states, whereas the company’s overseas affiliates were well entrenched and highly profitable. Jersey’s Canadian affiliate, Imperial Oil Ltd., had a monopolistic hold on that country’s market, while in Latin America and the Caribbean the West India Oil Company performed superbly during the second and third decades of the 20th century. Jersey had also incorporated eight major marketing companies in Europe by 1927, and these, too, sold a significant amount of refined products—most of them under the Esso brand name introduced the previous year (the name was derived from the initials for Standard Oil). Esso became Jersey’s best known and most widely used retail name both at home and abroad.

Jersey’s mix of refined products changed considerably over the years. As the use of kerosene for illumination gave way to electricity and the automobile continued to grow in popularity, Jersey’s sales reflected a shift away from kerosene and toward gasoline. Even as late as 1950, however, gasoline had not yet become the leading seller among Jersey products. That honor went to the group of residual fuel oils used as a substitute for coal to power ships and industrial plants. Distillates used for home heating and diesel engines were also strong performers. Even in 1991, when Exxon distributed its gasoline through a network of 12,000 U.S. and 26,000 international service stations, the earnings of all marketing and refining activities were barely one-third of those derived from the production of crude. In 1950 that proportion was about the same, indicating that regardless of the end products into which oil was refined, it was the production of crude that yielded the big profits.

Indeed, by mid-century the international oil business had become, in large part, a question of controlling crude oil at its source. With Standard Oil Company (New Jersey) and its multinational competitors having built fully vertically integrated organizations, the only leverage remained control of the oil as it came out of the ground. Although it was not yet widely known in the United States, production of crude was shifting rapidly from the United States and Latin America to the Middle East. As early as 1908 oil had been verified in present-day Iran, but it was not until 1928 that Jersey and Socony-Vacuum, prodded by chronic shortages of crude, joined three European companies in forming Iraq Petroleum Company. Also in 1928, Jersey, Shell, and Anglo-Persian secretly agreed to limit each company’s share of world production to their present relative amounts, attempting, by means of this “As Is” agreement, to limit competition and keep prices at comfortably high levels. As with Rockefeller’s similar tactics 50 years before, it was not clear in 1928 that the agreement was illegal, because its participants were located in a number of different countries each with its own set of trade laws. Already in 1928, Jersey and the other oil giants were stretching the very concept of nationality beyond any simple application.

Following World War II, Jersey was again in need of crude to supply the resurgent economies of Europe. Already the world’s largest producer, the company became interested in the vast oil concessions in Saudi Arabia recently won by Texaco and Socal. The latter companies, in need of both capital for expansion and world markets for exploitation, sold 30 percent of the newly formed Arabian American Oil Company (Aramco) to Jersey and ten percent to Socony-Vacuum in 1946. Eight years later, after Iran’s nationalization of Anglo-Persian’s holdings was squelched by a combination of CIA assistance and an effective worldwide boycott of Iranian oil by competitors, Jersey was able to take seven percent of the consortium formed to drill in that oil-rich country. With a number of significant tax advantages attached to foreign crude production, Jersey drew an increasing percentage of its oil from its holdings in all three of the major Middle Eastern fields—Iraq, Iran, and Saudi Arabia—and helped propel the 20-year postwar economic boom in the West. With oil prices exceptionally low, the United States and Europe busily shifted their economies to complete dependence on the automobile and on oil as the primary industrial fuel.
Exxon, Oil Shocks, and Diversification: 1972–89

Despite the growing strength of newcomers to the international market, such as Getty and Conoco, the big companies continued to exercise decisive control over the world oil supply and thus over the destinies of the Middle East producing countries. Growing nationalism and an increased awareness of the extraordinary power of the large oil companies led to the 1960 formation of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). Later, a series of increasingly bitter confrontations erupted between countries and companies concerned about control over the oil upon which the world had come to depend. The growing power of OPEC and the concomitant nationalization of oil assets by various producing countries prompted Jersey to seek alternative sources of crude. Exploration resulted in discoveries in Alaska’s Prudhoe Bay and the North Sea in the late 1960s. The Middle Eastern sources remained paramount, however, and when OPEC cut off oil supplies to the United States in 1973—in response to U.S. sponsorship of Israel—the resulting 400 percent price increase induced a prolonged recession and permanently changed the industrial world’s attitude to oil. Control of oil was, in large part, taken out of the hands of the oil companies, who began exploring new sources of energy and business opportunities in other fields.

For Standard Oil Company (New Jersey), which had changed its name to Exxon in 1972, the oil embargo had several major effects. Most obviously it increased corporate sales; the expensive oil allowed Exxon to double its 1972 revenue of $20 billion in only two years and then pushed that figure over the $100 billion mark by 1980. After a year of windfall profits made possible by the sale of inventoried oil bought at much lower prices, Exxon was able to make use of its extensive North Sea and Alaskan holdings to keep profits at a steady level. The company had suffered a strong blow to its confidence, however, and soon was investigating a number of diversification measures that eventually included office equipment, a purchase of Reliance Electric Company (the fifth largest holdings of coal in the United States), and an early 1980s venture into shale oil. With the partial exception of coal, all of these were expensive failures, costing Exxon approximately $6 billion to $7 billion.

By the early 1980s the world oil picture had eased considerably and Exxon felt less urgency about diversification. With the price of oil peaking around 1981 and then tumbling for most of the decade, Exxon’s sales dropped sharply. The company’s confidence rose, however, as OPEC’s grip on the marketplace proved to be weaker than advertised. Having abandoned its forays into other areas, Exxon refocused on the oil and gas business, cutting its assets and workforce substantially to accommodate the drop in revenue without losing profitability. In 1986 the company consolidated its oil and gas operations outside North America, which had been handled by several separate subsidiaries, into a new division called Exxon Company, International, with headquarters in New Jersey. Exxon Company, U.S.A. and Imperial Oil Ltd. continued to handle the company’s oil and gas operations in the United States and Canada, respectively.

Exxon also bought back a sizable number of its own shares to bolster per-share earnings, which reached excellent levels and won the approval of Wall Street. The stock buyback was partially in response to Exxon’s embarrassing failure to invest its excess billions profitably—the company was somewhat at a loss as to what to do with its money. It could not expand further into the oil business without running into antitrust difficulties at home, and investments outside of oil would have had to be mammoth to warrant the time and energy required.
The Exxon Valdez: 1989–98

In 1989 Exxon was no longer the world’s largest company, and soon it would not even be the largest oil group (Royal Dutch/Shell would take over that position in 1990), but with the help of the March 24, 1989, Exxon Valdez disaster the company heightened its notoriety. The crash of the Exxon Valdez in Prince William Sound off the port of Valdez, Alaska, released about 260,000 barrels, or 11.2 million gallons, of crude oil. The disaster cost Exxon $1.7 billion in 1989 alone, and the company and its subsidiaries were faced with more than 170 civil and criminal lawsuits brought by state and federal governments and individuals.

By late 1991 Exxon had paid $2.2 billion to clean up Prince William Sound and had reached a tentative settlement of civil and criminal charges that levied a $125 million criminal fine against the oil conglomerate. Fully $100 million of the fine was forgiven and the remaining amount was split between the North American Wetlands Conservation Fund (which received $12 million) and the U.S. Treasury (which received $13 million). Exxon and a subsidiary, Exxon Shipping Co., also were required to pay an additional $1 billion to restore the spill area.

Although the Valdez disaster was a costly public relations nightmare—a nightmare made worse by the company’s slow response to the disaster and by CEO Lawrence G. Rawl’s failure to visit the site in person—Exxon’s financial performance actually improved in the opening years of the last decade in the 20th century. The company enjoyed record profits in 1991, netting $5.6 billion and earning a special place in the Fortune 500. Of the annual list’s top ten companies, Exxon was the only one to post a profit increase over 1990. Business Week’s ranking of companies according to market value also found Exxon at the top of the list.

The company’s performance was especially dramatic when compared with the rest of the fuel industry: as a group the 44 fuel companies covered by Business Week’s survey lost $35 billion in value, or 11 percent, in 1991. That year, Exxon also scrambled to the top of the profits heap, according to Forbes magazine. With a profit increase of 12 percent over 1990, Exxon’s $5.6 billion in net income enabled the company to unseat IBM as the United States’ most profitable company. At 16.5 percent, Exxon’s return on equity was also higher than any other oil company. The company also significantly boosted the value of its stock through its long-term and massive stock buyback program, through which it spent about $15.5 billion to repurchase 518 million shares—or 30 percent of its outstanding shares—between 1983 and 1991.

Like many of its competitors, Exxon was forced to trim expenses to maintain such outstanding profitability. One of the favorite methods was to cut jobs. Citing the globally depressed economy and the need to streamline operations, Exxon eliminated 5,000 employees from its payrolls between 1990 and 1992. With oil prices in a decade-long slide, Exxon also cut spending on exploration from $1.7 billion in 1985 to $900 million in 1992. The company’s exploration budget constituted less than one percent of revenues and played a large part in Exxon’s good financial performance. Meantime, Exxon in 1990 abandoned its fancy headquarters at Rockefeller Center in New York City to reestablish its base in the heart of oil territory, in the Dallas suburb of Irving, Texas. In 1991 the company established a new Houston-based division, Exxon Exploration Company, to handle the company’s exploration operations everywhere in the world except for Canada.

At the end of 1993 Lee R. Raymond took over as CEO from the retiring Rawl. Raymond continued Exxon’s focus on cost-cutting, with the workforce falling to 79,000 employees by 1996, the lowest level since the breakup of Standard Oil in 1911. Other savings were wrung out by reengineering production, transportation, and marketing processes. Over a five-year period ending in 1996, Exxon had managed to reduce its operating costs by $1.3 billion annually. The result was increasing levels of profits. In 1996 the company reported net income of $7.51 billion, more than any other company on the Fortune 500. The following year it made $8.46 billion on revenues of $120.28 billion, a seven percent profit margin. The huge profits enabled Exxon in the middle to late 1990s to take some gambles, and it risked tens of billion of dollars on massive new oil and gas fields in Russia, Indonesia, and Africa. In addition, Exxon and Royal Dutch/Shell joined forces in a worldwide petroleum additives joint venture in 1996.

Exxon was unable—some said unwilling—to shake itself free of its Exxon Valdez legacy. Having already spent some $1.1 billion to settle state and federal criminal charges related to the spill, Exxon faced a civil trial in which the plaintiffs sought compensatory and punitive damages amounting to $16.5 billion. The 14,000 plaintiffs in the civil suit included fishermen, Alaskan natives, and others claiming harm from the spill. In June 1994 a federal jury found that the huge oil spill had been caused by “recklessness” on the part of Exxon. Two months later the same jury ruled that the company should pay $286.8 million in compensatory damages; then in August the panel ordered Exxon to pay $5 billion in punitive damages. Although Wall Street reacted positively to what could have been much larger damage amounts and Exxon’s huge profits placed it in a position to reach a final settlement and perhaps put the Exxon Valdez nightmare in its past, the company chose to continue to take a hard line. It vowed to exhaust all its legal avenues to having the verdict overturned—including seeking a mistrial and a new trial and filing appeals. In June 1997, in fact, Exxon formally appealed the $5 billion verdict. Exxon seemed to make another PR gaffe in the late 1990s when it attempted to reverse a federal ban on the return to Alaskan waters of the Exxon Valdez, which had by then been renamed the Sea-River Mediterranean. Environmentalists continued to berate the company for its refusal to operate double-hulled tankers, a ship design that may have prevented the oil spill in the first place. In addition, in an unrelated but equally embarrassing development, Exxon in 1997 reached a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission in which it agreed to run advertisements that refuted earlier ads claiming that its high-octane gasoline reduced automobile maintenance costs.
Nearing the Turn of the Century: Exxon Mobil

In December 1998 Exxon agreed to buy Mobil for about $75 billion in what promised to be one of the largest takeovers ever. The megamerger was one of a spate of petroleum industry deals brought about by an oil glut that forced down the price of a barrel of crude by late 1998 to about $11—the cheapest price in history with inflation factored in. Just one year earlier, the price had been about $23. The oil glut was caused by a number of factors, principally the Asian economic crisis and the sharp decline in oil consumption engendered by it, and the virtual collapse of OPEC, which was unable to curb production by its own members. In such an environment, pressure to cut costs was again exerted, and Exxon and Mobil cited projected savings of $2.8 billion per year as a prime factor behind the merger.

Based on 1998 results, the proposed Exxon Mobil Corporation would have combined revenues of $168.8 billion, making it the largest oil company in the world, and $8.1 billion in profits. Raymond would serve as chairman, CEO, and president of the Irving, Texas-based goliath, with the head of Mobil, Lucio A. Noto, acting as vice-chairman. Shareholders of both Exxon and Mobil approved the merger in May 1999. In September of that year the European Commission granted antitrust approval to the deal with the only major stipulation being that Mobil divest its share of a joint venture with BP Amoco p.l.c. in European refining and marketing. Approval from the Federal Trade Commission proved more difficult to come by, as the agency was concerned about major overlap between the two companies’ operations in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic region. The FTC was likely to force the companies to sell more than 1,000 gas stations in those regions as well as accede to other changes to gain U.S. antitrust approval.
Principal Subsidiaries

Ancon Insurance Company, Inc.; Esso Australia Resources Ltd.; Esso Eastern Inc.; Esso Hong Kong Limited; Esso Malaysia Berhad (65%); Esso Production Malaysia Inc.; Esso Sekiyu Kabushiki Kaisha (Japan); Esso Singapore Private Limited; Esso (Thailand) Public Company Limited (87.5%); Exxon Energy Limited (Hong Kong); Exxon Yemen Inc.; General Sekiyu K.K. (Japan; 50.1%); Esso Exploration and Production Chad Inc.; Esso Italiana S.p.A. (Italy); Esso Standard (Inter-America) Inc.; Esso Standard Oil S.A. Limited (Bahamas); Exxon Asset Management Company (75.5%); Exxon Capital Holdings Corporation; Exxon Chemical Asset Management Partnership; Exxon Chemical Eastern Inc.; Exxon Chemical HDPE Inc.; Exxon Chemical Interamerica Inc.; Exxon Credit Corporation; Exxon Holding Latin America Limited (Bahamas); Exxon International Holdings, Inc.; Esso Aktiengesellschaft (Germany); Esso Austria Aktiengesellschaft; Esso Exploration and Production Norway AS; Esso Holding Company Holland Inc.; Exxon Chemical Antwerp Ethylene N.V. (Belgium); Esso Nederland B.V. (Netherlands); Exxon Chemical Holland Inc.; Exxon Funding B.V. (Netherlands); Esso Holding Company U.K. Inc.; Esso UK pic; Esso Exploration and Production UK Limited; Esso Petroleum Company, Limited (U.K.); Exxon Chemical Limited (U.K.); Exxon Chemical Olefins Inc.; Esso Norge AS (Norway); Esso Sociedad Anonima Petrolera Argentina; Esso Societe Anonyme Francaise (France; 81.54%); Esso (Switzerland); Exxon Minerals International Inc.; Compania Minera Disputada de Las Condes Limitada (Chile); Exxon Overseas Corporation; Exxon Chemical Arabia Inc.; Exxon Equity Holding Company; Exxon Overseas Investment Corporation; Exxon Financial Services Company Limited (Bahamas); Exxon Ventures Inc.; Exxon Azerbaijan Limited (Bahamas); Mediterranean Standard Oil Co.; Esso Trading Company of Abu Dhabi; Exxon Pipeline Holdings, Inc.; Exxon Pipeline Company; Exxon Rio Holding Inc.; Esso Brasileira de Petroleo Limitada (Brazil); Exxon Sao Paulo Holding Inc.; Exxon Worldwide Trading Company; Imperial Oil Limited (Canada; 69.6%); International Colombia Resources Corporation; SeaRiver Maritime Financial Holdings, Inc.; SeaRiver Maritime, Inc.; Societe Francaise EXXON CHEMICAL (France; 99.35%); Exxon Chemical France; Exxon Chemical Poly meres SNC (France).
[read more]


If you practice Voo Doo you may stand a chance:Haarp VS Nature


Ask any western government official or geologist from the USGS if we can predict earthquakes, and they’ll say no. Well they are both right and wrong. Government and geologists will swear up and down that people can’t predict earthquakes (well actually that’s not quite true either) but biologists will tell you that animals can. Many animals can sense changes in Inaudible infra-wave sounds and electromagnetic pulses (EMP).

Predicting earthquakes-Knowldge is more dangerous then the earthquake.

The big secret is that scientists in Ukraine and Russia have known how to prediction earthquakes with fairly good proxy markers (ie excess radon gas above background levels , ionosphere disturbances etc) but governments around the world fears this new capability and the associated liability issues if they get it wrong or miss a large quake or don’t warn all people in time and can’t save them. (see model here)

Seismo Ionospheric Coupling Model

Maybe we should use animals in zoos across the country as not just a place of entertainment and destination for children’s’ outings, but as a network and early warning system for pending disasters.

If natural vibrations (the right resonance; like an opera singer shattering a crystal glass) and stress can produce EMP’s and earthquakes, then why can’t man-made sources do the same, as predicted and demonstrated by Nikola Tesla at the turn of the century? This principle can be used as stress relief to trigger mini-quakes on fault lines to prevent larger 7 or 8+ magnitude ones later

( …like triggering mountain avalanches or staging preventive forest fire burns or heaven forbid as offensive weapon of national destruction (WND) or weapon of mass destruction (WMD).

Some people speculate that DARPA’s HAARP project in Alaska surves that purpose…we’ll see if there just happens to be a “triggered earthquake” or some other natural disasters (weather modifications -drought, floods) in South Africa during the football World Cup in July 2010, or in Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Russia or Afghanistan as some conspiracy theorists are proposing.

UPDATE: Post Haiti earthquake.

An interesting thought, cognitive exercise would be to ask yourself the following speculative, hypothetical question:

“Who would benefit if there was a man-made, triggered earthquake in South Africa, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Venezuala or in the west coast of BC or Seattle during the Winter Olympics? Just look at who is benefiting from the Haiti quake (estimated at $10 billion to rebuild the Haiti capital city Port-Au-France) ) or from the Chineese quake recently and whose GDP will grow because of it? (Remember …both wars and disasters requires reconstruction which promotes GDP growth.”

A BEA/HAARP press release shows how much power can be triggered by HAARP:

In 1992, BAE was awarded a contract to design and build the Ionospheric Research Instrument (IRI), the HAARP program’s primary tool used to study ionospheric physics. The IRI is currently composed of 48 antenna elements and has a power capacity of 960,000 watts. When installed, the additional 132 transmitters will give HAARP a 3.6 mega-watt capacity. The HAARP build-out is jointly funded by the U.S. Air Force, the U. S. Navy and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).

Sensors could / should also be in place to detect EMP’s if they are produced naturally in the ground or from some remote artificial man-made source.

Wonder if anyone checked the Peurto Rico HAARP array to see if it was active before the Haiti earthquake ?

Here are two research paper abstracts from Japan that support the above “animal prediction” view


Walter Derzko

Reproduction of mimosa and clock anomalies before earthquakes Are they“Alice in the Wonderland Syndrome”? in Proceedings of the Japan Academy. Ser. B: Physical and Biological Sciences Vol.74 , No.4(1998)pp.60-64

Motoji IKEYA1), Tomonori MATSUDA1) and Chihiro YAMANAKA1)

1) Department of Earth and Space Science, Graduate School of Science, Osaka University

[Released: 2006/10/17]


Some earthquake precursor phenomena told as legends or reported retrospectively for the 1995 Kobe earthquake have been reproduced by laboratory experiments. Mimosa placed on the high voltage sphere of a Van de Graaff electrostatic generator closed its leaves and bowed on charging and air-gap discharging, presumably due to the current induced in its stem. Air-gap discharging caused sudden movements of eels in a nearby plastic aquarium. Eels moved also on applying a pulsed electric field of less than 0.5V/m, while catfish responded only at around 5V/m. The higher sensitivity of eels to electric field than that of catfish is consistent with the story in the Ansei Chronicle that a man could not find eels in a river but only catfish in violent movement before the earthquake. Eels might have already hidden themselves in panic. Rapid rotation and stopping of the second hand of a clock, which were observed before the Kobe Earthquake like in the“Alice in the Wonderland”, have also been reproduced by exposing clocks to electromagnetic waves generated by air-gap discharging. Reported malfunctioning of home electronic appliances before the earthquake would have been due to some natural electromagnetic disturbance at the epicenter.

Keywords: Catfish, clock, earthquake, Kobe, mimosa, precursor


Electromagnetic pulses generated by compression of granitic rocks and animal behavior

Compression experiments on granite, basalt and marbles were made using a 500-ton compression machine with simultaneous detection of acoustic emission, electromagnetic (EM) waves. Attempts were made to reproduce unusual animal behavior before major earthquakes depicted in folklores and reported retrospectively in the M7.2 Kobe earthquake in 1995. Unusual animal behavior was observed during stress loading with simultaneous detection of pulsed EM waves prior to the detection of AE, but the judgement has to be partially subjective when animal behavior is discussed.

Hence, hypothalamic chemicals in in-vivo brain and blood plasma of rats were analyzed before and after rock fractures. The enhanced noradrenaline and reduced adrenaline were observed, which was distinctively different from the reactions to other stresses but the same as that of exposures to EM waves. Unusual animal behavior would mostly be caused by pulsed EM waves.


Unusual animal behavior before earthquakes have long been studied in Asia (Abe, 1934; Biophysics Institute, 1977; Rikitake, 1976; Bushirk et al., 1981; Ikeya, 1998), but rarely believed by Western geophysicists. A large number of reports on unusual animal behavior before the Kobe earthquake in 1995, Japan, were collected retrospectively (Wadatsumi, 1995). Similar reports from citizens were collected after the Izmit earthquake in Turkey and 921-earthquake in Taiwan in 1999 (Ikeya and Ulusoy, 2000). The birds were said to have disappeared from the neighborhood a few days before the earthquakes and the sky was unusually starry in Turkey. Swarms of earthworms appeared and deep sea fish, Trachipterus ishikawae, called messenger of dragon palace and earthquake fish by Taiwanese people, were captured before the 921-earthquake and before its aftershocks.

I wonder if all the millions of spiritual people practising voodoo in Haiti, noticed any sudden changes in animal and bird behaviors just before the 7.0 earthquake hit Haiti last week…or what’s even more interesting..if they didn’t, does that prove that the quake was a man-made phenomenon?

Walter Derzko


Hyperdimensional Hurricanes Part I

The image at right is impossible. But… it appeared as an official hurricane promo for MSNBC last week – specifically, for the approach of “Crazy Ivan.”


The promo ran on the network most of the day and evening, Friday, September 10, 2004.

Then, after a few hours, it was mysteriously removed ….

What caught my eye (as I had the TV on in the background, tracking the storm) was the suddenly obvious, incredibly regular geometry in Ivan’s central “eye” – the core region containing the highest sustained winds, and around which the rest of the several hundred-mile-wide hurricane was organized (below).

I instantly realized that this startling “eye geometry” – spinning relentlessly across the screen as the MSNBC “loop” played again … and again … and again – was eerily familiar…

To the remarkable “hexagonal/pentagonal” cloud structures that the Voyager and Cassini spacecraft had captured circling the north poles of Saturn and Jupiter … during their brief fly-bys several years ago (below)!

These planetary examples have long been elegant confirmations of our Hyperdimensional Physics Model for the entire solar system: that rotating mass, by virtue of the nature of space and “multi-dimensional reality,” is able to “open a gate” into another, more energetic dimension … allowing that energy to cascade — in a highly organized and geometric form – “down” into our dimension.

But, in our Model, those “hyperdimensional signatures” — on the two most massive planets in the solar system — are formed across literally tens of thousands of miles… by the slow, ponderous rotation of an entire planet – “sucking” energy into the planet from the “surrounding” hyperspace, which subsequently appears as a large-scale organizing force in the planetary polar weather systems.

That the same hyperdimensional geometry could appear literally billions of miles closer to home – and in the center of a terrestrial hurricane – was startling … and immediately raised profound questions and fascinating further implications ….

Seeking the official Government source for this astonishing Ivan imagery, I naturally turned to NOAA (sometimes called “the wet NASA” – the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). NOAA displays the daily output on its dozens of websites of, among other spacecraft, a veritable “fleet” of “stationary” GOES weather satellites, watching our planet “24/7’ from 22,300 miles out …. If the network ran the promo all day on the 10th, I calculated, they must have used the most recent NOAA daylight imagery from the previous afternoon – as the “eye” was clearly under afternoon illumination in the “loop.” That meant the images had to have been collected on the afternoon of the 9th… or, from an earlier afternoon that same week.

As expected, when I looked, the striking Ivan “eye” geometry was NOT present on any geosynchronous archived NOAA imagery from the 10th. But, when I looked in the expected archive for the 9th, I was confronted with another puzzle: a conspicuous “gap” in the Ivan “special products” for that date. Close-up Ivan imagery from September 9th was curiously … missing.

At this point, confronted with amazing network hurricane images that seemed to have “no official source,” some of my colleagues at Enterprise (like David Sadler – representative of a growing number of Americans who, according to the polls, increasingly distrust “big media” …) began to mumble words like “fake” … and “fraud” – on the part of MSNBC!

Having once worked for a couple of television networks, and having colleagues still within the industry – such as Cheryll Jones, a former anchor at CNN, and the only women to hold that position and to have a degree in meteorology at the same time – I brought up our deepening “Ivan mystery” with Cheryll. After seeing the amazing Ivan video, she agreed with me that it was far more likely that the some nameless MSNBC producer had just “grabbed” this amazing footage from some official NOAA source … and simply slapped the network logos on it.

My daunting task was to find the original footage … “hiding” somewhere in plain sight … somewhere … in the highly complex and proliferating labyrinth of “government weather and environmental websites.”

Enter Kent Steadman’s website, “Orbit.”

Orbit is privately maintained by Steadman and his readers – a fascinating site which provides updates on a variety of unexpected environmental phenomena, including hurricanes. It was there, after an e-mail tip from one of our Enterprise associates, that we confirmed at least the physics behind Ivan’s remarkable geometry — in the form of a sourced previous NASA hurricane image (below — note URL, top left).

The photo was taken almost exactly one year before Ivan – on September 12, 2003 — and featured another Category 5 hurricane approaching the United States, named “Isabel.”

There, in the center of Isabel, was another pentagonal “eye”….

An Enterprise search quickly turned up additional official imagery of Isabel’s bizarre geometry – such as this one (below) from the NASA-Marshall Space Flight Center. Taken a few hours after the previous GOES image (above), the new view revealed “evolving eye geometry” – precisely what one would expect in a “fluid dynamics situation” if the forces involved in geometrically ordering the hurricane’s central thunderstorms was being created by some kind of “changing hyperdimensional influx” – which, remember (in the HD Model), cascades into our dimension in a highly structured form.

This flux could then be modulated by a Category 5 hurricane’s variable rotation rate, thus creating the changing regular interior geometry with time ….

Further digging turned up even more wondrous Isabel imagery, such as this shot taken at 12:45 Universal Time, on September 12, 2003 — from another NOAA “ special products site” (below).

There was no doubt now that a Category 5 hurricane could demonstrate stunning “hyperdimensional geometry”; Isabel had provided ample evidence. But—

Where was the official Ivan imagery – which, according to the promo run on MSNBC, had revealed the same HD geometry?!

As I continued my search through the complicated NOAA archives – bolstered now by the unquestionably official geometric evidence from Isabel – I suddenly noticed another item on the “Orbit” website. It was something totally unconnected to the search for imagery — a link to an international website tracking seismic activity (earthquakes) around the world — that no one probably would have even looked at twice. But, it suddenly demanded my attention, because—

During Ivan’s trek across the Caribbean, a Magnitude 6 earthquake had apparently taken place – at 16:33 Universal Time, September 9, 2004 – exactly the same timeframe in which I was seeking official visual evidence supporting Ivan’s hyperdimensional activity. The epicenter of the underwater quake was located at 17.86 degrees north, 81.55 west – near the Cayman Islands … with Ivan at the time only a few hundred miles away … and heading directly for the epicenter (image left)!

Could the two events have been connected?

If hurricanes above a certain rotational wind velocity (>155 mph – Category 5 — on the Saffir-Simpson scale) could exhibit the obvious “hyperdimensional signatures” officially now recorded in Isabel (and according to MSNBC, in Ivan a year later) – what would the geological effects be in their vicinity?

Could the approach of such a vast, rapidly rotating atmospheric system create “seismic side-effects” underground in already weak formations … through the same “hyperdimensional energy influx” which formed (in our hypothesis) the water vapor “signature geometry” seen in Isabel’s and Ivan’s clouds ..!?

How does a hurricane “work?”

In traditional meteorological theory, it is hot westward blowing winds coming off the Sahara Desert in northern Africa – after being “uplifted” over the mountains lying in Ethiopia – that subsequently flow out over the Atlas Mountains in Northern Morocco… and out over the warm, moist equatorial waters west of the “Dark Continent,” as a series of turbulent eddies and unstable atmospheric waves (below).

These unstable air currents subsequently spawn massive thunderstorms over the warm ocean waters west of Africa … which, if conditions are just right, fuel the creation of a “tropical depression.”

“Tropical depressions” form low pressure centers and begin to rotate slowly around these centers for two reasons:

1) the energetic convective activity (rising and falling air) in the vigorous tropical thunderstorms west of Africa creates a region of lower atmospheric pressure … which outside air rushes in to try to equalize

2) that inward rushing air inevitably spins faster as it approaches the low pressure center, due to so-called “Coriolis forces” (caused by the rotation of the Earth itself — below)

This is coupled with another physical effect called “conservation of angular momentum” (the same phenomenon exhibited by skaters when they pull in their arms, and thus spin faster) – the tighter the winds swirl around the center, the faster they must spin ….

This warm, upwardly rising ocean air leaves below it a region of increasingly low pressure … which more in rushing ocean air attempts to equalize. As the original water vapor-laden air rises higher, it also gets cooler … and eventually the moisture it contains condenses out and falls as massive rain. In the process of condensing, this rain releases “latent heat” into the surrounding air, heating it even more, so it rises faster, and more outside air has to rush in below to equalize the even more rapidly decreasing pressure.

This, in turn, accelerates the inward spin and upward motion of the rotating mass of air as more rising moisture condenses, releasing more rainfall … which releases more latent heat, etc., etc., etc. ….

This highly interrelated process – rising winds … buoyant air … lower surface pressure — rapidly becomes self-reinforcing … resulting in the by now unfortunately all-too-familiar picture (below)!

Eventually, the spin rate of this “organized,” moisture-laden air exceeds 39 mph (I wonder who picked THAT intriguing “magic” number …) and our unnamed “tropical depression” officially becomes a named “tropical storm.”

As this convective/spinning “positive feedback loop” continues, eventually the wind speeds around the circumference of the center “eye” – composed of monstrously towering thunderstorms and constantly condensing water – exceeds 74 miles per hour (below) … and our “tropical storm” at this point is officially declared a full-fledged hurricane.

The “Category” into which a hurricane is placed by the National Hurricane Center is rated according to the rotating sustained winds around the central “eye” (above).

“Category 5” is the maximum wind rating on the current “Saffir-Simpson” scale — although Hurricane Andrew was reported to have come ashore with sustained winds of over 200 miles per hour … before the anemometers at Homestead Air Force Base were destroyed.

Again, in conventional meteorological theory, since this immense power ultimately comes from warm, evaporating ocean water … once the storm hits (literally) “dry land,” it is deprived of its primary energy source and must inevitably wind down … but not before doing incalculable damage to lives and property ashore ….

So, where does our Hyperdimensional Model come into play in this scenario? Hyperdimensional Physics is essentially a physics of rotation.

In a Category 5 hurricane, a massive amount of air and water is being rotated at high velocity around a circumference ranging from a few hundred miles (for the highest Category 5 sustained winds around the “eyewall”), to over a thousand miles (the circumference in a Category 5 storm where the winds fall below a Category 1).

This is a volume (if the storm’s height is modeled as a flattened donut, stretching up to over 40,000 feet – below) totaling approximately two million cubic miles (!) of howling wind and water ….

In the Hyperdimensional Model, rotating masses act differently than masses which are not rotating; and this is especially true when their interactions take place in a gravitational field. These major dynamic anomalies – which completely contradict both Newtonian Mechanics and Einstein’s Relativity – have been confirmed in a series of remarkable laboratory experiments carried out over 30 years ago by the late physicist, Dr. Bruce DePalma.

The most classic of these, dubbed “DePalma’s Spinning Ball Experiment,” involved the simultaneous ejection, via an angled spring mechanism, of two steel “pinballs” – one non-rotating, and one spinning at ~27,000 rpm (below).

As DePalma himself described it:

“Basically, the spinning object going higher than the identical non-rotating control, with the same initial velocity, and then falling faster than the identical non-rotating control, presents a dilemma which can only be resolved or understood on the basis of radically new concepts in physics — concepts so radical that only the heretofore not-understood results of other experiments (the elastic collision of a rotating and an identical non-rotating object, et al.), and new conceptions of physics growing out of the many discussions and correspondence pertaining to rotation, inertia, gravity, and motion in general [can explain this effect]….”

Leaving aside, for the moment, the theoretical explanations for DePalma’s astonishing experimental results, it can be seen on the graph that the spinning mass flies higher, faster… and falls farther, faster … than the non-spinning mass. As DePalma noted – this completely violates the “normal” rules of all the physics we’ve been taught!

Again, this is not “theory”… this is the result of careful, repeated laboratory experiments – carried out by a world-class physicist from MIT and Harvard ….

So, how does this apply to spinning hurricanes?

As we have shown, the standard model for the enormous, rotating “engine” of a hurricane says that it is initiated by heated, rising air. This air, in turn, is lifted by its “hot air balloon-like” buoyancy against the force of gravity (the red “convective towers” – below right).

But, what if “heat” wasn’t the only way to lift that air? What if another “force” could intervene after the warm air was already rotating and rising … and resulted in the same accelerated upward motion of the rotating mass of air and water in the hurricane as DePalma repeatedly measured in his “spinning ball” laboratory data …?

If DePalma’s startling results are accurate, and “spinning masses” in fact rise higher (for a given upward force, and in the same gravitational field) compared to non-spinning masses – then in a vast, spinning hurricane – with horizontal howling winds approaching 200 miles per hour circling the “eye” – there should be a small but measurable additional upwardly directed force assisting the already present warm air “buoyancy effect.”

The higher the Category storm, the larger this “assisting force” should be … until, at some point on the Saffir-Simpson Scale, the added buoyancy from this mysterious “spin energy” approaches that same level of “lifting force” being liberated by the latent heat from the water condensation in the hurricane….

It is at that point – apparently at Category 5 – that a remarkable geometric control of this accelerated, rising air could become visible against the normal “entropic” background thermal motions of the storm … resulting in the remarkably geometric “eye” that NOAA photographed in Isabel, in 2003 (below).

It is this stunning “eye geometry,” impressed on the highly visible atmospheric “tracer” — the condensing clouds of water vapor in the very center of the storm – which confirms, like the impossibly regular geometry also seen around Jupiter’s and Saturn’s poles, that this can only be a hyperdimensional phenomenon….

Why does the US want access to U-Tapao for NASA? The Report [pdf]

By Bangkok Pundit Jun 26, 2012
The US Defence Department wants to use U-Tapao military airport in Rayong, Thailand for its Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief centre. NASA wants to use U-Tapao to conduct climate research flights in August and September 2012. These are two separate requests. The reason BP mentions that is one will definitely involve the US military and US military personnel and craft; whereas NASA is a civilan agency with their own aircraft. This post will mainly focus on the use by NASA.

From a NASA Planning Document dated September 29, 2010 entitled “Southeast Asia Composition, Cloud, Climate Coupling Regional Study (SEAC4RS) Planning Document”:*



Basing the aircraft in Thailand is optimal for achieving science objectives with a preferred base in Surat Thani, Thailand…, although options in Bangkok….are also under consideration

Deployment sites and flight space considerations: Figure 11 defines nominal operations from a deployment to Surat Thani, Thailand. Possible deployment to Bangkok would compromise as much as one-fourth of the flight hours should Myanmar deny overflight to reach the Bay of Bengal. Even if based in Surat Thani, successful science flights will require negotiation of airspace controlled by as many as 12 countries and 17 separate FIRs (Flight Information Regions). These requirements and priorities are presented in figure 12. The possible use of suitcase locations is also under consideration to extend the reach of aircraft across the Southeast Asian domain (e.g., Kathmandu and Manila). Given the need for three transit flights to reach Southeast Asia, a total of 154 flight hours is required for each aircraft to complete the deployment. This would be divided into roughly 10 hours of test flight, 24 hours of transit flight in each direction, and 96 hours of science flight which would allow for 12 science flights of 8 hour duration. The total length of the deployment would be 40 45 days across a yet to be determined window in the August-September timeframe.

BP: From the map, you can see why NASA choose Thailand as it is right in the center. The plane goes in the air and then returns to the base each day. Having Thailand as the base makes it possible to cover many more countries than say if it was the Philippines. Nevertheless, NASA later changed their preferred base. From the NASA site on the current project:

Southeast Asia Composition, Cloud, Climate Coupling Regional Study (SEAC4RS) will take place in August and September of 2012. This deployment will address key questions regarding the influence of Asian emissions on clouds, climate, and air quality as well as fundamental satellite observability of the system. Science observations will focus specifically on the role of the Asian monsoon circulation and convective redistribution in governing upper atmospheric composition and chemistry. Satellite observations suggest a strong impact of the Asian Summer Monsoon on Tropopause Transition Layer (TTL) composition and a direct relationship to surface sources including pollution, biogenic emissions, and biomass burning. Attention will also be given to the influence of biomass burning and pollution, their temporal evolution, and ultimately impacts on meteorological processes which in turn feed back into regional air quality. With respect to meteorological feedbacks, the opportunity to examine the impact of polluting aerosols on cloud properties and ultimately dynamics will be of particular interest.

To accomplish the goals of SEAC4RS, multiple aircraft are required. The NASA DC-8 will provide observations from near the surface to 12 km, and the NASA ER-2 will provide high altitude observations reaching into the lower stratosphere as well as important remote sensing observations connecting satellites with observations from lower flying aircraft and surface sites. A critical third aircraft needed to sample convective outflow and slow ascent of air above the main convective outflow level (~12 km) has been identified as the NSF/NCAR GV (HIAPER). Participation by the GV will be through a collaboration in which the DC-8 will participate in the NSF-sponsored DC3 mission.

Basing the aircraft in Thailand is optimal for achieving science objectives with a preferred base in U-Tapao, Thailand.

BP: One can imagine reasons for not being in the South – just imagine the paranoia about the Deep South – but more importantly also that U-Tapao has the facilities given it is already used by the US military and hence getting contractors to fuel planes and service planes would be significantly easier – see below for more on that. Having said that, there is no clear reason listed for the change.

U-Tapao is an airport, located close to Pattaya and Rayong, that is used by civilians and the military. Below is an excerpt from a 2005 WikiLeaks cable:

¶1. (C) The Royal Thai Naval Air Station at Utapao represents the most strategically significant location in Thailand, and one of considerable importance regionally. In the past several years Utapao has been used to support OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM, OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM and various smaller contingencies. Most recently, while serving as the regional hub for the U.S. led OPERATION UNIFIED ASSISTANCE (OUA), the value of our nearly unfettered access to the facility was once again clearly demonstrated.

¶2. (C) In addition to supporting contingency operations, approximately 30 U.S. military aircraft routinely transit Utapao monthly, and the base is central in supporting an average of 40 joint and combined exercises conducted between United States and Royal Thai Armed Forces (RTARF) annually. There are also commercial pressures on Utapao that will likely grow in the future, including booming business in the nearby Eastern-Seaboard industrial zone, international charter flights, the base’s use as a commercial aircraft diversion airfield, and civilian competition for control of airfield operations.

¶3. (C) Although successive Thai governments have been responsive to U.S. requests to use Utapao, we cannot take for granted the access we have enjoyed to date. Despite the high tempo of U.S. activity in Utapao, we have offered very little in the way of lasting facility improvements or maintenance that would provide mutual benefits and be supportive of our strategic objectives regarding expanded access and influence.

The Bangkok Post in an editorial:

There should be no hesitation about the Nasa missions. The US space agency’s climate studies are ongoing, and there is nothing new or sinister about the request to use U-tapao. Indeed, Nasa has a long-standing arrangement to use U-tapao. The naval air base was a standing alternate landing strip for the US space shuttles, now discontinued. U-tapao, improved to its current standards during the Vietnam War, remains the longest and most open airstrip anywhere on this side of the world.

In the event, no space shuttle ever used U-tapao. But Nasa’s standing contract with the government and the Royal Thai Navy was only one such deal between Washington and Bangkok.

It is difficult to think of more constructive projects than a disaster relief centre and a regional climate study _ whose results must be made public. For certain, opposition leader Abhisit Vejjajiva is correct that the proposed disaster centre should be put to parliament. But then, Mr Abhisit has not expressed opposition to either plan. Barring some unknown and troubling issue which could still arise, these proposals should sail through so authorities can get back to considering important national matters.

John Cole and Steve Sciacchitano for Asia Times Online in an article entitled “Baseless controversy over Thailand’s U-Tapao”:

In 1997, the US switched management of the U-Tapao fuel stocks from US government to Thai civilian contractors, a role currently served by Thai Airways International in concert with Thai state energy company PTT. The USAF enlisted refueler was also removed and replaced by Thai contractor personnel. For many years, a single US contractor working for the Thai Navy lived in a trailer on the flight line who acted as a trouble shooter and liaison for arriving US military air crews.

That said, there are currently no US military personnel stationed at the base, which only employs Thai civilian contract labor to provide refueling and other ground handling tasks to US military aircraft transiting the facility. Presently over 100 US Air Force aircraft transit the Thai Navy owned and operated facility each month after receiving landing clearances and approvals from Thai officials.

…There are currently no USAF maintenance or other support personnel or facilities stationed at U-Tapao.

Airy conspiracy theory
One of the concerns frequently mentioned in Thai press coverage is that the U-Tapao HA/DR [humanitarian assistance and disaster relief] initiative is actually cover for secret new US intelligence operations targeting China. If so, the suspected operations will be open to public scrutiny: U-Tapao now serves as a busy civilian airport, as well as a stopover for US military aircraft.

Charter flights from Asia, Eastern Europe and Russia frequently use the base. Three commercial Chinese airlines, namely China Airlines, China Eastern Airlines and China Southern Airlines, make regular use of U-Tapao’s facilities. Literally hundreds of tourists pass through the airport daily and it is no longer the semi-isolated, secure military facility it once was.

BP: Not wanting to get on topics in future posts, but actually it is not just the HA/DR centre which is linked with an intelligence gathering operation, it is NASA too. The idea that the NSA, the actual agency that collects foreign communications and foreign signals intelligence and operates spy planes, would allow their planes into such a non-secure facility and allow Thai officials to inspect the planes and the equipment on them is simply insane. NSA is not going to let them near the inside of any real spy planes.** If the planes don’t have specialized eavesdropping equipment then what use will they be? Google Earth already gets you satellite images and the Americans have many of their own satellites. The conspiracy theory is so thin it is laughable.

*In case, you are thinking that September 29, 2010 on why the timing. Well, the day before GISDTA, Seo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency, a public organization under the Ministry of Science & Technology, signed a letter of intent with NASA to cooperate on airborne missions.

**Just witness what happened with the American EP-3E Aries II reconnaissance plane on an eavesdropping mission that crashed in China in 2001 – see New Yorker article by Hersh- where the Americans wiped the software and were meant to destroy all the equipment with hammers, axes – which is the standard operating procedure – but after concerns that the Chinese may be reverse-engineer the operating system which may still have been able to be retrieved, the Americans replaced the operating system at a cost of hundreds of millions. Now, for the NASA flights to be part of some secret intelligence collection operation, NSA or a similar agency would have to secretly lend NASA spy planes and those planes will be able to be accessed by foreign nationals including all the university personnel from universities around the world including Thai academices. There is just no way it will be allowed as the risk of the Chinese gaining access to the plane is too high.

h/t to PPT for the Wikileaks cable

Autism & Oughtisms

Dealing with the endless "oughts" of parenting and autism.

Well Balanced Blog

Take Control of Your Own Health!

Έγκλημα και Τιμωρία/Crime and Punishment/Crime et Châtiment/Delitto e castigo/Преступление и наказание


BanTheBBC Blog

A constant reminder that life would be so much better without the BBC's TV Licence Gestapo

Healthy At Any Age

Welcome to June Rousso's Blog !


Thoughts of a recovering leftist

Scottish Gaelic

Word a Day



Talk of the Tail

"Tails" from pets searching for their forever home.


A great site

TBN Media

Alea Jacta Est

Watts Up With That?

The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change

Levi Quackenboss

Putting the boss in quack.

Unstrange Mind

Remapping My World


Wee Ginger Dug

Biting the hand of Project Fear


Quit Smoking & Take Your Freedom Back!

Guido Fawkes

Parliamentary plots and conspiracy

%d bloggers like this: