Odd but it makes so much sense, that you never heard of Lifedrop before. It is so heartbreaking (yet necessary) to say that we had all the information at our disposal, but we decided not to look. Now, you know. They knew and they kept us in our ignorance. Now, we take on all our responsibilities. Now, we make them accountable for everything they’ve done, for everything the didn’t tell us. Now, we act. (This is a first recap of the REPORT folder. Further digging is necessary. This post is for sharing and to prompt a discussion between all of us. What did they know? What do they know?)
#What will it happen when it explodes
Our story begins in the ‘90s. Back there, a military commission for the CANUKUS forces (Canada-Uk-Us) addressed the problem of chemical contamination and its drawbacks for military missions. The commission (ITF-25, standing for International Task Force 25) found 98 different chemicals meeting their toxicity criterion, that is which are produced in quantities exceeding 30 tonnes per year at a single facility and have LCt50 value by inhalation in any mammalian species of less than 100,000 mg.min/m3 and with an appreciable vapour pressure at 20°C. This list did not include pesticides.
The danger for CANUKUS forces was taken as seriously as to deploy international research efforts during Bosnian civil war. They realised that deploying troops in a developed or semi-developed country could run into chemicals used for military purpose. Especially, documents point at chlorine. The problem was that industrial chemicals are legitimate articles of commerce which are traded in very large volumes and are not subjected to the same regulations or export controls as are chemical warfare agents. Products not listed in the CWC (Chemical Weapons Convention) could be used nonetheless as weapons.
In 2004, we see how their greatest concern was small-scale terrorist attacks using chemical a/o biological agents. While terrorists using C/B weapons was regarded as being unlikely, there was no doubt the danger was real. Chemical and biological weapons had already been used by major participants in WW1 and WW2. Pretty much any European country had them during World War One. Japan allegedly used them against China, Soviet Union in Vietnam, Laos and Afghanistan. Iran and Iraq reportedly used them against each other during the 1980-88 Iraq-Iran war. They say Osho’s disciples used them in 1984 on US territory and Shoko Asahara was sentenced to death penalty after using them in Tokyo. Some experts stated that the menace was to be taken into serious consideration due to how easy it is to manufacture some chemical agents. Other experts pointed out how difficult it was for major powers to develop chemical and biological weapons, but the flaw in this reasoning is that it is much easier to produce small-scale chemical weapons.
Some of the chemicals listed above kill exposed people. Others are so-called choking agents, not lethal in the short term, but might be if not cured. There are also the so-called vesicants, causing damage by contact and not needing to be inhaled. Chemicals can be dispersed as a gas or a liquid. Documents goes on to biological agents.
While chemicals disseminate through air or liquids, biological agents are generally grown suspended in liquid solutions. It is a fairly advanced technique to dry and disseminate them as aerosols. We’re not done. Let’s take a minute to consider toxin agents (poisonous substances that are produced by living organisms, including plants, animals, algae, and bacteria).
A report for U.S. Congress from 2007 states clearly that chemical weapons were disposed in ocean waters by U.S. military. Eventually, in 1972, they passed a law ruling out this measure, but weapons already dumped in ocean waters remained and it was acknowledged later on that they were much more than reported before. They don’t have exact locations for all of them and the report doesn’t exclude that some of them could be damaged by dredging or trawl fishing. A similar problem was reported in 2008. Underground storage tanks, most of them containing petroleum, were reported to be leaking. That could lead to ground water contamination. The Congress took action to lessen the effects of the leak, but a clear report on the damages already done isn’t at our disposal. In 2009, another report informs the Congress that approximately 95,000 lakes and 544,000 river miles in the United States are under fish-consumption advisories (including 100% of the Great Lakes and their connecting waters), due to chemical contaminants in lakes, rivers, and coastal waters, and one third of shellfishing beds are closed or restricted, due to toxic pollutant contamination. Mercury is a contaminant of growing concern—as of 2003, 45 states had issued partial or statewide fish or shellfish consumption advisories because of elevated mercury levels.
Documents move on to China, especially to the Huai river, considered the most polluted river in the country. Water situation in China is far beyond control: 70 percent of China’s rivers and lakes are polluted to some extent, and 28 percent are too polluted even for irrigation or industrial use. Approximately 90 percent of the water in Chinese cities is too polluted to drink without extensive treatment. Along the Huai river, the existence of the so-called cancer villages is reported. Media coverage over this situation is kept under wrap by the Chinese government.
Water shortage in dry regions is a further problem. Documents underline Syrian situation, its poor water management and Turkey-Syria deals for the usage of the Euphrates. In Syria, the problem is not so much water contamination as water agriculture usage and private consumption. The report points at illegal wells, shortening ground water supply. Big cities such as Damascus create an overwhelming demand for potable water and that makes a huge water distribution infrastructure necessary. Every damage to that poor-builded infrastructure entails a gargantuan waste of water. Diplomatic relations between countries like Syria, Turkey and Lebanon rely upon water supplies. There is a political factor in water distribution which we shouldn’t have forgotten while discussing high-tension areas.
It’s now possible to compare their database with the reports, find out which water sources are contaminated by C/B agents and which are not. Their list of safe water supplies has to be decrypted yet, but we should all check water sources in our coutries to inform as many as we can not to take water from those sites – we now know for sure that water contamination is real. If there is a conspiracy, it’s of another kind. Information is key and we start having some, in the end.