Heads Up! Julian Assange to Appear Tomorrow on Ron Paul Liberty Report!

EXCLUSIVE! Julian Assange to Appear on Ron Paul Liberty Report


Dear Friends of the Ron Paul Institute:

Yesterday I told you we had something really special coming — one of our most important Liberty Report broadcasts to date. And boy what a show! We will have Wikileaks Founder and Editor-in-Chief as our very special guest on tomorrow’s (4/28) episode of the Ron Paul Liberty Report!

Due to the technical challenges of communicating with Julian Assange as he is forced to remain in asylum inside the Embassy of Ecuador, we were forced to pre-record the program. But I can tell you that Julian is really at the top of his game. He knows exactly what he and other truth-tellers are facing from a US government that is determined to avoid transparency. He knows very well the seriousness of the threat posed by Trump Administration promises to seek his arrest and extradition to the US to, bizarrely, face charges under the Espionage Act. And he understands the First Amendment far better than CIA Director Mike Pompeo.

Please don’t forget to tune in to tomorrow’s program at noon, eastern time, at the Ron Paul Liberty Report.




Source: Heads Up! Julian Assange to Appear Tomorrow on Ron Paul Liberty Report!


The founder of Wikipedia is building a community-run news website

wikki new site.PNG

Back in 2001, Jimmy Wales co-founded Wikipedia with the mission of “empowering and engaging people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain.”
Today he announced he’s creating a news website called WikiTribune. The site says: “We want to make sure that you read fact-based articles that have a real impact in both local and global events. And that stories can be easily verified and improved.”
WikiTribune is a “living, breathing tool that’ll present accurate information with real evidence, so that you can confidently make up your own mind.”
The website heavily emphasizes the role of a community of peers, instead of the traditional separation between journalists and their readers. “Articles are authored, fact-checked, and verified by professional journalists and community members working side by side as equals, and supported not primarily by advertisers, but by readers who care about good journalism enough to become monthly supporters.”
Over the next 30 days, WikiTribune will try to raise enough donations to hire its initial team of 10 full-time journalists. You can check out their full WikiTribune website and contribute here.



A new kind of news platform.

Wikitribune is a news platform that brings journalists and a community 
of volunteers together.

We want to make sure that you read fact-based articles that have a real impact in both local and global events. And that stories can be easily verified and improved.

The news is broken and we can fix it.

The news is broken and we can fix it. We’re bringing genuine community control to our news with unrestricted access for all. We’re developing a living, breathing tool that’ll present accurate information with real evidence, so that you can confidently make up your own mind.

Great, but what will set WikiTribune apart from other news platforms?

1. See the source.

Facts can be presented with bias, taken out of context and most recently a lot of facts are just plain…made-up. Supporting Wikitribune means ensuring that that journalists only write articles based on facts that they can verify. Oh, and that you can see their sources. That way you can make up your own mind.

2. Free and ad-free.

WikiTribune is 100% ad-free, no one’s relying on clicks to appease advertisers; no one’s got a vested interest in anything other than giving you real news. There’s no paywall, so anyone can read Wikitribune. Anyone can flag or fix an article and submit it for review.

3. Community and journalists are equals.

In most news sites, the community tends to hang at the bottom of articles in comments that serve little purpose. We believe the community can play a more important role in news. Wikitribune puts community at the top, literally.

Articles are authored, fact-checked, and verified by professional journalists and community members working side by side as equals, and supported not primarily by advertisers, but by readers who care about good journalism enough to become monthly supporters.

4. Full transparency – know where your money goes.

Wikitribune is transparent about the way it operates and will publish its financials regularly. With Wikitribune your support will have more impact as most of the funds are used for paying journalists rather than expensive offices.

On that note, if we don’t reach our goal, of 10 journalists hired, we will refund all our supporters (minus transaction fees).

You are the editor. Radical idea?

Wikitribune takes professional, standards-based journalism and incorporates the radical idea from the world of Wiki that a community of volunteers can and will reliably protect and improve articles.

Monthly subscriptions

In order to deliver on our promise, we need people who care about good journalism. People like you. Support us in our mission to bring you transparent facts and we’ll build something constructive, something which outwits the prevalence of untrustworthy news sources.

By donating to our campaign, you’ll play a critical part in an energetic surge towards media honesty. It’s a movement that we believe will eventually obliterate low-rent, unreliable news for good. We want to raise enough money up front to get us started – but we need your regular commitment to make sure we can keep improving and delivering on giving you real news.

“A news site with a
sense of community.”

Jimmy Wales, founder of Wikipedia

Wikitribune is led by Jimmy Wales who has surrounded himself with an amazing group of people to bring Wikitribune to life.






Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution License

Source: https://www.wikitribune.com/

The Unholy Trinity of Globalist Control: The Vatican, The City of London & Washington D.C.

Why is Washington D.C. not a State and legally a separate city-state entity apart from the United States of America?

Why is the one square mile of the City of London, which has all the banks, with its own Mayor, a separate city-sate entity from all other England?

Why does the Vatican have its own country code, where the entire city-state entity is guarded by Swiss Guards and shares no laws with Italy?

Where Switzerland has never been involved in wars, where ‘banksters’ go for secret accounts to hide their wealth?

The aforementioned city-states listed above are sovereign, corporate entities not connected to the nations they appear to be part of.

In other words, the City of London (that is the square mile within Greater London) is not technically part of Greater London or England, just as Vatican City is not part of Rome or Italy. Likewise, Washington DC is not part of the United States that it controls.

These sovereign, corporate entities have their own laws and their own identities.

They also have their own flags. Seen below is the flag of Washington DC. Note the three stars, representing the trinity of these three city-states, also known as the Empire of the City. (There is also high esoteric significance to the number 3.)

So how are these three cities ultimately connected? We must first go back to the Knights Templar and their initial 200-year reign of power.

The Knights Templar were first called, “the Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and the Temple of Solomon.”

This is a blatantly misleading title, considering the immense wealth and power of the Templars, who operated 9,000 manors across Europe and owned all the mills and markets.

It was the Templars that issued the first paper money for public use in Europe, establishing the fiat banking system we know today.

In England, the Templars established their headquarters at a London temple, which still exists today and is called Temple Bar.

This is located in the City of London, between Fleet Street and Victoria Embankment. The aforementioned “Crown,” to be exact, is the Knights Templar church, also known as the Crown Temple.

It is the Crown Temple that controls the legal/court system of the U.S., Canada and many other countries. All bar associations are directly linked to the International Bar Association and the Inns of Court at Crown Temple in the City of London.

Anytime you hear somebody refer to the Bar Association, they are talking about a British/Masonic system that has nothing to do with a country’s sovereignty or the constitutional rights of its people.

This is why, when you go to court in the U.S., you see the U.S. flag with a gold fringe, denoting international rule.

The government of the United States, Canada and Britain are all subsidiaries of the crown, as is the Federal Reserve in the U.S.. The ruling Monarch in England is also subordinate to the Crown. The global financial and legal system is controlled from the City of London by the Crown.

The square mile making up the center of Greater London is the global seat of power, at least at the visible level.

Washington DC was established as a city-state in 1871 with the passage of the Act of 1871, which officially established the United States as a corporation under the rule of Washington, which itself is subservient to the City of London.

Corporations are run by presidents, which is why we call the person perceived to hold the highest seat of power in the land “the president.”

The fact is the president is nothing more than a figurehead for the central bankers and transnational corporations (both of which themselves are controlled by High Ecclesiastic Freemasonry) that really control this country and ultimately call the shots.

Washington DC operates under a system of Roman Law and outside of the limitations established by the U.S. Constitution.

Therefore, it should not be a surprise that the name Capitol Hill derives from Capitoline Hill, which was the seat of government for the Roman Empire.

If you look at the wall behind the podium in the House of Representatives, you will notice that on either side of the U.S. flag is the depiction of bundles of sticks tied together with an axe.

These are called fasci, hence the root word of fascism. This was the symbol of fascism in the Roman Empire, as it was under the Nazis and still is today. It is not a coincidence that these symbols are featured on the floor of Congress.

Most U.S. citizens believe the United States is a country and the president is its leader, but the U.S. is not a country, it is a corporation, and the president is not our leader, he is the president of the corporation of the U.S.

The president, along his elected officials work for the corporation, not for the American People.

So, who owns the giant U.S. corporation?

Like Canada and Australia, whose leaders are prime ministers of the queen, and whose land is called crowned land, the U.S. is just another crowned colony. Crowned colonies are controlled by the empire of the three city states.

Thus, the U.S. is controlled by the three city states.

“There exists a shadowy government with its own Air Force, its own Navy, its own fundraising mechanism, and the ability to pursue its own ideas of national interest, free from all checks and balances, and free from the law itself.” – Daniel K. Inouye, U.S. Senator from Hawaii, testimony at the Iran Contra Hearings, 1986

These 3 City-States belong to no Nation and pay no taxes.

They have their own separate laws, own police, mayors, post offices. Their own separate flags and their own separate identities. There is no court of law that can keep them in check or prosecute them if that may be the case.

Basically, these 3 states rule the world from the shadows. More importantly, these 13 “elite” families are stealthily controlling the Trinity of Globalist Control.

Reference: TabuBlog.com

Source: The Unholy Trinity of Globalist Control: The Vatican, The City of London & Washington D.C. | Humans Are Free

How Did Adam Weishaupt and Albert Pike Fit In The Scheme ?

In Frankfurt, Germany Rothschild informed his friends that Adam Weishaupt was going to lead the organization he had planned.  Weishaupt formed the “Order of Perfectibilists” on May 1, 1776 and to this day it is celebrated as “May Day” in the West.  The Perfectibilists became known as the Illuminati with the express aim to abolish Christianity and overturn all civil government.

Weishaupt brought in an Italian, Giusseppe Mazzini, a 33rd degree Mason who was selected to head the worldwide operations in 1834.  He also founded the Mafia in 1860.  While leading, Mazzini brought in Pike, who was fascinated by the idea of a one world government, to head the American chapter.

In 1871 Pike published an 861 page Masonic Handbook called “Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry“, Mazzini died March 11, 1872 and Pike appointed Adriano Lemmi, a 33rd degree Mason and banker from Florence, Italy to run subversive activities in Europe.

It’s said that Pike worked on and completed a military blueprint for three world wars and revolutions which were meant to bring the conspiracy to its final stages in the 20th century.


These three wars were planned by Pike in a letter he allegedly wrote to Mazzini.  Albert Pike and Three World Warspike3a

While it is not clear if Pike was the letter’s author, the first two wars played out almost exactly to plan and the third war appears to be moving ahead full steam.

The letter was never produced, at least not to the public, and many scholars debate the authorship of the letter.  I find most information regarding authorship fails to take into account the accuracy of the plan and focus their attempt at “debunking” on the one fact that authorship cannot be verified, and a handful of scattered fragments of sentences appearing in occult literature.  Some categorize this as a “prediction” and discount the history of Pike, Mazzani and Rothschild in contriving this enterprise.

On June 6, 2011 Keelan Balderson, an active writer and journalist, published an article Albert Pike’s 3 World Wars Letter Hoax  in which she  looks into this in some depth scrutinizing the origin of the letter but not denying it’s content which is currently playing out in real time.


Source: How Did Adam Weishaupt and Albert Pike Fit In The Scheme ?

The Apocalypse is Near: Silicon Valley Super-Rich Get Ready for Nuclear War

With Donald Trump taking control of nuclear weapons capable of wiping out all of humanity on our planet, United States’ paranoid tech billionaires have started preparing for the apocalypse by buying island properties; stockpiling guns and gold coins; and investing in luxury underground bunkers.

On January 26, the members of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Science and Security Board moved the iconic ‘Doomsday Clock’ closer to midnight, from three minutes to two and a half minutes. The Doomsday Clock was last reset on January 22, 2015, at 3 minutes to midnight, when its minute-hand moved up two minutes; the clock then stood at 11:57 pm. This year,  humanity moved 30 seconds closer to global calamity thanks to nuclear threats, cyber threats, artificial-intelligence arms race, climate change, biosecurity, and bioterrorism.

With Donald Trump taking control of nuclear weapons capable of wiping out all of humanity on our planet, United States’ paranoid tech billionaires have started preparing for the apocalypse by buying island properties; stockpiling guns, gold coins, spare passports, motorcycles, helicopters and food; investing in luxury underground bunkers; taking archery classes; and undergoing corrective laser eye surgeries.

Steve Huffman, co-founder and CEO of the social networking website Reddit, is one of the super-rich who are getting ready for the day when civilization falls apart. Huffman, who recently underwent a laser eye surgery to improve his odds of surviving a natural or man-made disaster, told The New Yorker:

“If the world ends — and not even if the world ends, but if we have trouble—getting contacts or glasses is going to be a huge pain in the ass. Without them, I’m fucked… I own a couple of motorcycles. I have a bunch of guns and ammo. Food. I figure that, with that, I can hole up in my house for some amount of time.”

Huffman is not the only richest of the rich survivalist prepper preparing for doomsday, former Facebook product manager Antonio García Martínez has bought a homestead piece of property on an island in the Pacific Northwest and has stocked it with generators, solar panels and thousands of rounds of ammunition.

“When society loses a healthy founding myth, it descends into chaos. All these dudes think that one guy alone could somehow withstand the roving mob. No, you’re going to need to form a local militia. You just need so many things to actually ride out the apocalypse. I think people who are particularly attuned to the levers by which society actually works understand that we are skating on really thin cultural ice right now.”

Larry Hall, CEO of the Survival Condo Project – a fifteen-story luxury apartment complex built in an underground Atlas missile silo north of Kansas, says he has erected a defense against the fears of a new Cold War-era that can withstand a nuclear strike.

“It has enough food and fuel for five years off the grid; by raising tilapia in fish tanks, and hydroponic vegetables under grow lamps, with renewable power, it could function indefinitely. In a crisis, the SWAT-team-style trucks will pick up any owner within four hundred miles. Residents with private planes can land in Salina, about thirty miles away. You can send all the bullets you want into this place. If necessary, his guards would return fire. We’ve got a sniper post.”

A record number of Americans reportedly bought property in New Zealand, one of the most popular places in the world for tech moguls to buy ‘apocalypse insurance’, after Donald Trump’s shock election win in November 2016. Reid Hoffman, LinkedIn co-founder, who is planning to buy a property in New Zealand, observed:

“Saying you’re ‘buying a house in New Zealand’ is kind of a wink, wink, say no more. Once you’ve done the Masonic handshake, they’ll be, like, ‘Oh, you know, I have a broker who sells old ICBM silos, and they’re nuclear-hardened, and they kind of look like they would be interesting to live in’. ”

Late January, Ron Paul, former Congressman from Texas, warned the Economic Doomsday is nearer than expected. He predicted the second financial bubble is going to burst in the next two years, and there’s nothing anyone can do about it; even Donald Trump can’t stop it. How are financial experts readying to safeguard themselves against the impending financial ruin and protect their future?

Tim Chang, managing director at venture-capital firm Mayfield Fund, notes:

“There’s a bunch of us in the Valley. We meet up and have these financial-hacking dinners and talk about backup plans people are doing. It runs the gamut from a lot of people stocking up on Bitcoin and cryptocurrency, to figuring out how to get second passports if they need it, to having vacation homes in other countries that could be escape havens.

“I’ll be candid: I’m stockpiling now on real estate to generate passive income but also to have havens to go to. I kind of have this terror scenario: ‘Oh, my God, if there is a civil war or a giant earthquake that cleaves off part of California, we want to be ready’.”

This article (The Apocalypse is Near: Silicon Valley Super-Rich Get Ready for Nuclear War) is a free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to the author and AnonHQ.com.

Supporting Anonymous’ Independent & Investigative News is important to us. Please, follow us on Twitter: 

Source: The Apocalypse is Near: Silicon Valley Super-Rich Get Ready for Nuclear War

US Army could add ‘devastating’ weapon to its arsenal

US Army is considering resurrecting ‘devastating’ weapon that moves at three times the speed of sound and destroys EVERYTHING in its path

  • Kinetic Energy Projectile tested in 2013 and the US Army could bring it onboard
  • Tungsten-based weapon is capable of  moving at speeds of Mach 3 to Mach 6
  • Missile bursts into flaming metal fragments that can penatrate most armor 

The US Army has considered arming itself with a ‘devastating’ weapon in a bid to counteract Russia‘s nuclear technology.

Called Kinetic Energy Projectile (KEP), this tungsten-based warhead is capable of moving three times the speed of sound, while destroying everything in its path.

Once launched, the missile bursts into flaming metal fragments that can pierce through most armor – such as that used in tanks.

Scroll down for videos 

The US Army could arm itself with a 'devastating' weapon in a bid to counteract Russia's nuclear technology. Called Kinetic Energy Projectile (KEP), this tungsten-based warhead is capable of moving three times the speed of sound, while destroying everything in its path

The US Army could arm itself with a ‘devastating’ weapon in a bid to counteract Russia’s nuclear technology. Called Kinetic Energy Projectile (KEP), this tungsten-based warhead is capable of moving three times the speed of sound, while destroying everything in its path

Reports have noted that the Russian president is hording weapons four times more powerful than the US’s `Mother Of All Bombs´ that killed 36 ISIS militants in Afghanistan last week.

With this knowledge, the Army on the hunt to find its own ‘super-weapon’ –  which has lead them to KEP.


The Kinetic Energy Projectile (KEP) is a tungsten-based warhead is capable of moving three times the speed of sound, while destroying everything in its path.

Once launched, the missile bursts into flaming metal fragments that can pierce through most armor such as that used in tanks.

During the warhead’s first test run in 2013, the sled train it was attached to exceeded 3,500 feet-per-second – speeds of Mach 3 to Mach 6.

Officials said ‘not much can survive’ once KEP is released. 

‘Think of it as a big shotgun shell,’ Major General William Hix, the Army’s director of strategy, plans & policy, said at the Booz Allen Hamilton Direct Energy Summit, Patrick Tucker with DefenseOne reports.

However unlike a shell, Hix said, the KEP travels at unbelievable speeds of ‘Mach 3 to Mach 6.’

During the warhead’s first test run in 2013, the sled train it was attached to exceeded 3,500 feet-per-second – three times the speed of sound.

Hix also revealed details to DefenseOne regarding the level of devastation this weapon would cause.

‘Not much can survive it. If you are in a main battle tank, if you’re a crew member, you might survive but the vehicle will be non-mission capable, and everything below that will level of protection will be dead,’ he said.

The Army has suggested attaching the KEP to its existing launch platforms, as they are able to take the brunt when the weapon is fired.

Once launched, the missile bursts into flaming metal fragments that can pierce through most armor such as that used in tanks. The Army has suggested attaching the KEP to its existing launch platforms, as they are able to take the brunt when the weapon is fired

The warhead was first tested in 2013 at Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico, which the Defense Department deemed a success.

During an interview with American Forces Press Service following the testing, Susan Hurd, special assistant to the director of strategic warfare, called the test a significant technology development advancement.

‘The successful execution of this high-speed sled test of a Kinetic Energy Projectile warhead was a necessary step in the progression to a conventional prompt strike capability,’ she said.

The warhead was first tested in 2013 at Holloman Air Force Base (pictured) in New Mexico, which the Defense Department deemed a success

The warhead was first tested in 2013 at Holloman Air Force Base (pictured) in New Mexico, which the Defense Department deemed a success

‘Now that we’ve demonstrated that the warhead functions in a flight representative environment we’re one important step closer to that goal.’

‘High performance computer modeling and simulation as well as a series of small scale and static tests have already been done on this warhead.’

‘But in order to assess its performance in flight conditions you have to do the dynamic test – you have to do the sled test.


The Russian version of the US’s ‘Mother Of All Bombs’ (MOAB)- called the Father Of All Bombs – weighs just 15,560lbs and is packed with the equivalent to 44 tons of explosive TNT.

This is four times more than the US’ model which obliterates anything in its blast zone, which is twice that of the MOAB.

Putin’s monster explosive is known officially as the Aviation Thermobaric Bomb of Increased Power and is reportedly four times bigger than MOAB.

It carries 44 tons of TNT and explodes in the same way as its American counterpart, obliterating anything within the blast zone, collapsing buildings and producing huge blasts and aftershocks.

Although – like the MOAB – it is not nuclear, the aftermath of the bomb could be comparable to a nuke being deployed.

It was test-fired by the Russians in 2007 where the temperature produced by the blast was also twice as high as that in the MOAB.

The Russian FOAB’s blast zone has been predicted as twice that of the US bomb and even though it is smaller in size, because of the temperature it explodes at and the fact there are four times more explosives crammed inside, it is much more powerful.

Although the figures relating to the FOAB have been widely circulated by the Russians, there are no public pictures of it, which has led US Defense analysts to question the claims of its power and size.

Hurd emphasized this test was ‘critical’ in order to subject the warhead to the ‘dynamic environment it would see in flight.’

‘The sled test was designed to be representative of conditions of flight and target engagement for the warhead.’

Currently, the KEP is still in the conceptual phase, as the US military has yet to take over the project, a U.S. Army spokesperson told Newsweek.


Source: US Army could add ‘devastating’ weapon to its arsenal | Daily Mail Online

Turning a Blind Eye To Armageddon: U.S. Leaders Reject Nuclear Winter Studies

TLB Note: This article is based on a presentation made by Mr. Starr at the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation Symposium in Santa Barbara, CA on October 24-25, 2016 just prior to the election of Donald Trump. Today we seem no closer to global peace than we did during the last administration, indeed in some ways (Syria, North Korea, South China Sea) we seem to be rushing even headlong towards the cataclysm we all hope would be, could be, avoided with the passing of the baton. Only time will tell, but in the interim here is what the world faces if we do step over the line into the realm of … Armageddon …

Turning a Blind Eye Towards Armageddon — U.S. Leaders Reject Nuclear Winter Studies


Now 10 years ago, several of the world’s leading climatologists and physicists chose to reinvestigate the long-term environmental impacts of nuclear war. The peer-reviewed studies they produced are considered to be the most authoritative type of scientific research, which is subjected to criticism by the international scientific community before final publication in scholarly journals. No serious errors were found in these studies and their findings remain unchallenged.

Alan Robock et al., “Nuclear winter revisited with a modern climate model and current nuclear arsenals: Still catastrophic consequences,” Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres 112 (2007).

Owen Brian Toon et al., “Atmospheric effects and societal consequences of regional scale nuclear conflicts and acts of individual nuclear terrorism,” Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics 7 (2007).

Michael Mills et al., “Massive global ozone loss predicted following regional nuclear conflict,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 105, no. 14 (2008).

Michael Mills et al., “Multidecadal global cooling and unprecedented ozone loss following a regional nuclear conflict,” Earth’s Future 2.

Alan Robock et al., “Climatic consequences of regional nuclear conflicts,” Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics 7 (2007).

Working at the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics at the University of Colorado-Boulder, the Department of Environmental Sciences at Rutgers, and the Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at UCLA, these scientists used state-of-the-art computer modeling to evaluate the consequences of a range of possible nuclear conflicts. They began with a hypothetical war in Southeast Asia, in which a total of 100 Hiroshima-size atomic bombs were detonated in the cities of India and Pakistan. Please consider the following images of Hiroshima, before and after the detonation of the atomic bomb, which had an explosive power of 15,000 tons of TNT.



The detonation of an atomic bomb with this explosive power will instantly ignite fires over a surface area of three to five square miles. In the recent studies, the scientists calculated that the blast, fire, and radiation from a war fought with 100 atomic bombs could produce direct fatalities comparable to all of those worldwide in World War II, or to those once estimated for a “counterforce” nuclear war between the superpowers. However, the long-term environmental effects of the war could significantly disrupt the global weather for at least a decade, which would likely result in a vast global famine.

The scientists predicted that nuclear firestorms in the burning cities would cause at least five million tons of black carbon smoke to quickly rise above cloud level into the stratosphere, where it could not be rained out. The smoke would circle the Earth in less than two weeks and would form a global stratospheric smoke layer that would remain for more than a decade. The smoke would absorb warming sunlight, which would heat the smoke to temperatures near the boiling point of water, producing ozone losses of 20 to 50 percent over populated areas. This would almost double the amount of UV-B reaching the most populated regions of the mid-latitudes, and it would create UV-B indices unprecedented in human history. In North America and Central Europe, the time required to get a painful sunburn at mid-day in June could decrease to as little as six minutes for fair-skinned individuals.

As the smoke layer blocked warming sunlight from reaching the Earth’s surface, it would produce the coldest average surface temperatures in the last 1,000 years. The scientists calculated that global food production would decrease by 20 to 40 percent during a five-year period following such a war. Medical experts have predicted that the shortening of growing seasons and corresponding decreases in agricultural production could cause up to two billion people to perish from famine.

The climatologists also investigated the effects of a nuclear war fought with the vastly more powerful modern thermonuclear weapons possessed by the United States, Russia, China, France, and England. Some of the thermonuclear weapons constructed during the 1950s and 1960s were 1,000 times more powerful than an atomic bomb.


During the last 30 years, the average size of thermonuclear or “strategic” nuclear weapons has decreased. Yet today, each of the approximately 3,540 strategic weapons deployed by the United States and Russia is seven to 80 times more powerful than the atomic bombs modeled in the India-Pakistan study. The smallest strategic nuclear weapon has an explosive power of 100,000 tons of TNT, compared to an atomic bomb with an average explosive power of 15,000 tons of TNT.

Strategic nuclear weapons produce much larger nuclear firestorms than do atomic bombs. For example, a standard Russian 800-kiloton warhead, on an average day, will ignite fires covering a surface area of 90 to 152 square miles.

A war fought with hundreds or thousands of U.S. and Russian strategic nuclear weapons would ignite immense nuclear firestorms covering land surface areas of many thousands or tens of thousands of square miles. The scientists calculated that these fires would produce up to 180 million tons of black carbon soot and smokewhich would form a dense, global stratospheric smoke layer. The smoke would remain in the stratosphere for 10 to 20 years, and it would block as much as 70 percent of sunlight from reaching the surface of the Northern Hemisphere and 35 percent from the Southern Hemisphere. So much sunlight would be blocked by the smoke that the noonday sun would resemble a full moon at midnight.

Under such conditions, it would only require a matter of days or weeks for daily minimum temperatures to fall below freezing in the largest agricultural areas of the Northern Hemisphere, where freezing temperatures would occur every day for a period of between one to more than two years. Average surface temperatures would become colder than those experienced 18,000 years ago at the height of the last Ice Age, and the prolonged cold would cause average rainfall to decrease by up to 90%. Growing seasons would be completely eliminated for more than a decade; it would be too cold and dark to grow food crops, which would doom the majority of the human population.


The profound cold and darkness following nuclear war became known as nuclear winter and was first predicted in 1983 by a group of NASA scientists led by Carl Sagan. During the mid-1980s, a large body of research was done by such groups as the Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment (SCOPE), the World Meteorological Organization, and the U.S. National Research Council of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences; their work essentially supported the initial findings of the 1983 studies.

The idea of nuclear winter, published and supported by prominent scientists, generated extensive public alarm and put political pressure on the United States and Soviet Union to reverse a runaway nuclear arms race, which, by 1986, had created a global nuclear arsenal of more than 65,000 nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, this created a backlash among many powerful military and industrial interests, who undertook an extensive media campaign to brand nuclear winter as “bad science” and the scientists who discovered it as “irresponsible.”

Critics used various uncertainties in the studies and the first climate models (which are primitive by today’s standards) as a basis to criticize and reject the concept of nuclear winter. In 1986, the Council on Foreign Relations published an article by scientists from the National Center for Atmospheric Research, who predicted drops in global cooling about half as large as those first predicted by the 1983 studies and described this as a “nuclear autumn.” The nuclear autumn studies were later shown to be deeply flawed, but the proof came too late to stop a massive smear campaign that effectively discredited the initial studies.

Nuclear winter was subject to criticism and damning articles in the Wall Street Journal and Time magazine. In 1987, the National Review called nuclear winter a “fraud.” In 2000, Discover Magazine published an article that described nuclear winter as one of “The Twenty Greatest Scientific Blunders in History.” The endless smear campaign was successful; the general public, and even most anti-nuclear activists, were left with the idea that nuclear winter had been scientifically disproved.


Yet the scientists did not give up. In 2006, they returned to their labs to perform the research I have previously described. Their new research not only upheld the previous findings but also found that the earlier studies actually underestimated the environmental effects of nuclear war.

Dr. Robock of Rutgers and Dr. Toon of the University of Colorado have spent years attempting to bring official attention to their work and get follow-up research studies done by appropriate agencies in the federal government. In a recent (2016) interview, Dr. Toon stated:

The Department of Energy and the Department of Defense, which should be investigating this problem, have done absolutely nothing. They have not published a single paper, in the open literature, analyzing this problem … We have made a list of where we think the important issues are, and we have gone to every [federal] agency we can think of with these lists, and said “Don’t you think someone should study this?” Basically, everyone we have tried so far has said, “Well that’s not my job.”

In the same interview, Dr. Robock also noted:

The Department of Homeland Security really should fund this. They will fund you to study one terrorist bomb in New York City. When you explain to them that a war between India and Pakistan is a much greater threat to the U.S. homeland than one terrorist bomb, as horrible as that is, they respond with “Oh, well that’s not my job, go talk to some other program manager” — who, of course, doesn’t exist.

After the more recent series of studies were published in 2007 and 2008, Drs. Robock and Toon also made a number of requests to meet with members of the Obama administration. The scientists offered to brief Cabinet members and the White House staff about their findings, which they assumed would have a great impact upon nuclear weapons policy. Their offers were met with indifference.

Finally, after several years of trying, Drs. Robock and Toon were allowed an audience with John Holdren, Senior Advisor to President Barack Obama on Science and Technology. Dr. Robock also eventually met with Rose Gottemoeller, then Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security. Dr. Robock has written to me that, after these meetings, he and Dr. Toon were left with the impression that neither Holdren nor Gottemoeller think the nuclear winter research “is correct.”

But it is not only Holdren and Gottemoeller who reject the nuclear winter research. Greg Mello, of the Los Alamos Study Group, cites a source who confirms that the group that determines the “full range of activities related to the development, production, maintenance (upkeep) and elimination (retirement, disassembly and disposal) of all United States nuclear weapons — the members of the U.S. Nuclear Weapons Council — have stated that “the predictions of nuclear winter were disproved years ago.”

The members of the U.S. Nuclear Weapons Council include:

  • Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
  • Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
  • Under Secretary for Nuclear Security of the Department of Energy
  • Under Secretary of Defense for Policy
  • Commander of the United States Strategic Command

It is important to understand that some members of this group — especially the Commander of the U.S. Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM) — also develop the policies that guide the use of nuclear weapons.

Perhaps General John Hyten, Head of USSTRATCOM, who is in charge of the U.S. nuclear triad, and General Paul Selva, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the second highest ranking officer in the United States, have never seen or heard of the 21st century nuclear winter studies. Perhaps when they hear a question about “nuclear winter,” they only remember the smear campaigns done against the early studies. Or, maybe, they just choose not to accept the new scientific research on nuclear winter, despite the fact that it has withstood the criticism of the global scientific community.

Regardless, the rejection of nuclear winter research by the top leaders of the United States raises some profoundly important questions: Do U.S. military and political leaders fully understand the consequences of nuclear war? Do they realize that even a “successful” nuclear first-strike against Russia could cause most Americans to die from nuclear famine?

In 2010, Drs. Toon and Robock wrote in Physics Today:

We estimate that the direct effects of using the 2012 arsenals would lead to hundreds of millions of fatalities. The indirect effects would likely eliminate the majority of the human population.

In 2013, Drs. Toon and Robock wrote in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists that:

A nuclear war between Russia and the United States, even after the arsenal reductions planned under New START, could produce a nuclear winter. Hence, an attack by either side could be suicidal, resulting in Self-Assured Destruction.


Although president-elect Trump appears to favor a return to the policy of détente with Russia, many if not most U.S. political leaders appear to support the Obama administration’s policies of direct confrontation with Putin’s Russia. Mainstream corporate media, including the editorial boards of The New York Times and The Washington Post, routinely engage in anti-Russian and anti-Putin rhetoric that surpasses the hate speech of the McCarthy era. Under President Obama, the United States has renewed the Cold War with Russia, with little or no debate or protest, and has subsequently engaged in proxy wars with Russia in Ukraine and Syria, as well as threatening military action against China in the South China Sea.

In response to what NATO leaders describe as Russia’s “dangerous and aggressive actions,” NATO has built up a “rapid-response force” of 40,000 troops on the Russian border in the Baltic States and Poland. This force includes hundreds of tanks, armored vehicles, and heavy artillery. NATO troops stationed in Estonia are within artillery range of St. Petersburg, the second largest city of Russia.

The United States has deployed its Aegis Ashore Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) system in Romania and is constructing another such BMD system in Poland. The Mark 41 launch system used in the Aegis Ashore systems can be used to launch a variety of missiles, including long-range nuclear-armed cruise missiles.

In other words, the United States has built and is building launch sites for nuclear missiles on the Russian border. This fact has been widely reported on Russian TV and has infuriated the Russian public. In June, Russian President Putin specifically warned that Russia would be forced to retaliate against this threat.

While Russian officials maintain that its actions are normal and routine, Russia now appears to be preparing for war. On October 5, 2016, Russia conducted a nation-wide civil defense drill that included 40 million of its people being directed to fallout sheltersReuters reported two days later that Russia had moved its Iskander nuclear-capable missiles to Kaliningrad, which borders Poland.

While the United States ignores the danger of nuclear war, Russian scholar Stephen Cohen reports that the danger of war with the United States is the leading news story in Russia. Cohen states:

Just as there is no discussion of the most existential question of our time, in the American political class — the possibility of war with Russia — it is the only thing being discussed in the Russian political class . . . These are two different political universes. In Russia, all the discussion in the newspapers, and there is plenty of free discussion on talk show TV, which echoes what the Kremlin is thinking, online, in the elite newspapers, and in the popular broadcasts, the number 1, 2, 3, and 4 topics of the day are the possibility of war with the United States.

Cohen goes on to say:

I conclude from this that the leadership of Russia actually believes now, in reaction to what the United States and NATO have said and done over the last two years, and particularly in reaction to the breakdown of the proposed cooperation in Syria, and the rhetoric coming out of Washington, that war is a real possibility. I can’t remember when, since the Cuban Missile Crisis, that the Moscow leadership came to this conclusion in its collective head.

Perhaps this narrative will change under president-elect Trump. However, he is inheriting a situation fraught with danger, which retains the possibility of direct military conflict with Russia in Ukraine and Syria, as well as increasingly militarized confrontation with China in the South China Sea.

My own personal assessment of the state of the nuclear danger today is that it is profound. The United States is sleepwalking towards nuclear war. Our leaders have turned a blind eye to the scientifically predicted consequences of nuclear war, and our military appears to be intent on making “Russia back down.” This is a recipe for unlimited human disaster.

It is still not too late to seek dialogue, diplomacy, and détente with Russia and China, and to create a global dialogue about the existential dangers of nuclear war. We must return to the understanding that nuclear war cannot be won and must not be fought. This can be achieved if our political and military leaders listen to the warnings from the scientific community about the long-term global environmental consequences of nuclear war.

President Trump and President Putin must publically acknowledge and discuss the peer-reviewed studies that predict a U.S.-Russian nuclear war will likely wipe out most of the human race. All nations and peoples have a vested interest in eliminating the nuclear arsenals that continue to threaten their existence.

This article (Turning a Blind Eye Towards Armageddon — U.S. Leaders Reject Nuclear Winter Studies) was originally created and published by Federation Of American Scientists and is republished here under “Fair Use” (see disclaimer below) with attribution to author and Federation Of American Scientists.



Source: Turning a Blind Eye To Armageddon: U.S. Leaders Reject Nuclear Winter Studies – The Liberty Beacon