Weapons DACloud Seeding cannot be targeted to one area. Seeding in one country can negatively impact other countries. This triggers international conflict Mirfendereski 13 (Guive Mirfendereski P.H.d; Public and Private International Law. International Trade and Investment. Corporate and Business Law. Privatization of State-owned Enterprises. International Relations. Foreign Policy of the United States in the Middle East. Caspian Sea and Persian Gulf Regional Studies. Asiatic Scythian (Saka) History. Toponymy. "An International Law of Weather Modification. Revisited" vol i pg 41-64)INTERNATIONAL LAW AND WEATHER MODIFICATION The question must be raised as to why weather modification should be a subject of international law. The answer can be explored on two levels: on the one hand, issues raised by weather modification are of international character. By 1974, some sixty States had experimented with it.23 On the other hand, dispute arising from weather modification

must be resolved by recourse to international law. No State can modify the weather for its own purposes without affecting other States. The role of international law, as addressed in this article, is to settle one of two kinds of situations of immediate concern to States. First, a State may undertake weather modification within its jurisdiction or control, in the res communis, or in the res nullius, that would prove to have effects in another State. Second, a State may undertake weather modification within its jurisdiction or control, or in the res communis, that would prove to have effects in the res communis in which other States nevertheless have a vested interest. This article will restrict itself to the legal framework within which transboundary effects of weather modification, undertaken by one State and felt in another, can be settled. Having espoused the belief that "no country can afford to be indifferent to extensive weather control activities, no matter where or by whom they are undertaken,"2 4 it is incumbent upon public international law not only to regulate the standards of weather modification, whatever the activity and the extent of such activity, but also to provide legal principles capable of resolving future disputes. Although weather modification is currently more a concern of municipal law, public or private in a limited number of States, it cannot be denied that many matters presently

reserved to municipal law "will become proper subjects of international law which may gradually come to encompass the whole range of regulated human activities. "2 Weather modification has already entered the domain of international concern. It appears highly appropriate to give examples of disputes which could arise in international law as a result of weather modification: Cloud Y that naturally passes through States A and B is seeded by A while passing through A's airspace, for example, enhancing precipitation on A. State B, the natural recipient of Cloud Y's rain, is precluded from receiving its normal rainfall. State A seeds a hurricane that is believed to cause damage in State A. The hurricane changes course and, moving through State B, causes damage in State B. State A suppresses a hailstorm. Flash floods occur in A, cross the border, and cause damage in State B. State A begins hail suppression. The storm accelerates entering State B, causing flash floods. The above permutations may be labeled acts of commission. There are, however, acts of omission, for example: Hurricanes occur in a consistent pattern through States A and B. State A decides, for its own purposes, to divert, or disperse, them so as to minimize their damaging potential along the path located in its jurisdiction. State B, the lower riparian, relying on A's consistent behavior, realizes that the area that was once on the path of the hurricanes can now be made habitable and cultivated. State A, for its own purposes, abandons the hurricane project. Hurricanes resume their original

path, causing extensive damage to the new settlement in State B. There have been several situations where weather modifications undertaken by one State have been objected to by downwind States. Israel and Rhodesia have been accused of rain-rustling by their hostile neighbours. In 1973, Honduras and El Salvador accused the US of stealing their rain by seeding hurricanes off the coast of Florida. Several wars have followed.27 It must be noted that the extent of dispute over weather modification is not confined to cases of deprivation of or unwanted subjugation to weather activity. The agents used for modification may become the center of a dispute, with aggrieved parties objecting to polluting affects of those agents. In matters involving weather modification, proving cause and effect is practically impossible.28 It is advanced that the major limitation in all cloud modification activities is "the inability to maintain controlled conditions and isolate artifically generated results from the naturally occurring fluctuations."29 The scientific inability to establish cause and effect poses serious legal questions of causation and proof. In the late 1940's, science was thought to have created a legal vacuum. It is submitted that the vacuum is not in the law, but rather in the very same science that created that vacuum. In bridging the gap between an act of a modifier, and the loss suffered by those injured, one cannot expect law to prove a connection between acts done and consequences suffered. Science must demonstrate such a connection. Only then would law step in to provide remedy to a victim. That is not only desirable as a basis for assessing damages after the fact, but also for predicting irreparable or unacceptable damage for injunctive purposes.

The bare fact is, Clouds move and weather is not entirely predictable. History and science shows that seeding in one state or even country, can have disastrous after shocks in other areas. And as history proves once again, this could be a potential flashpoint, as nations go to war over accusations of stealing rain, or sending hurricanes.

However, governments use this to their advantage. Cloud Seeding can and has been used as a weapon of mass destruction. Rejection is best before its too late. Mirfendereski 13 (Guive Mirfendereski P.H.d; Public and Private International Law. International Trade and Investment. Corporate and Business Law. Privatization of State-owned Enterprises. International Relations. Foreign Policy of the United States in the Middle East. Caspian Sea and Persian Gulf Regional Studies. Asiatic Scythian (Saka) History. Toponymy. "An International Law of Weather Modification.

Revisited" vol i pg 41-64)Weapon-of- War Uses. The fundamental objective of the peaceful application of weather modification techniques is to abate or to avoid loss of life or property

resulting from the weather. It can , however, be applied as a weapon of war , 17 and such uses are hardly dependent on future technological developments. During the Vietnam War, the US Department of Defense spent some $40 million on a seven-year cloud-seeding program, in an attempt to waterlog the Ho Chi Minh trail as a revenge plot for a supposed cloud seeding scheme from the Vietnamese to render the US airspace immobile.18 The prohibition of weather modification as a weapon of war has become a concern of the US, the USSR, and the United Nations. For now, it is very easy to obtain and deploy silver iodide based seeding technologies . We must do everything in our power to shut down these programs before its too late or in the not too distant future, modern society will become the battleground for environmental warfare.. 19

So as our evidence indicates, nations are now taking advantage of the fact that seeding in one area can affect another. They are working with weather modification and using it as a weapon of mass destrucrtion, a weapon that could put nuclear technology to shame. Mirfendereski warns that we must do everything to reject cloud seeding, or in the not too distant future, weather wars will become the norm with potentially disastrous outcomes.

Despite international treaties, the US continues to explore the military capabilities of Cloud Seeding. This risks Russian action that could lead to extinction. We must be working to downsize any development in cloud seeding. The Daily Express 05 (Global Research Organization 1/8/05; “Weather War: New evidence suggests US & Russia are embroiled in an illegal race to harness the power of hurricanes & earthquakes “ http://www.globalresearch.ca/weather-war/1061)The huge mushroom cloud soared skywards, the captain was gripped by fear, believing his plane was about to be engulfed by the fallout from a nuclear explosion. After declaring mayday and ordering his crew to don oxygen masks, the experienced pilot had the presence of mind to record that the cloud measured an estimated 200 miles in diameter and was tipped by an eerie light, like nothing he had seen before. Eventually, it soared harmlessly into the atmosphere, leaving the passenger jet to continue safely on its journey from Anchorage, in Alaska, to Tokyo. But far below, a fleet of fishing boats trawling the sea between Japan and the Soviet Union was drenched by a violent but short-lived downpour before the weather suddenly cleared. Nuclear tests and volcanic activity were later ruled out but scientists concluded that this was not a natural phenomenon. More than two decades later suspicion still exists that the stunned airline crew and fishermen in 1973 were witnessing a sinister Cold War experiment, in which water from the Sea of Japan was blown into the air to create clouds and rain. British government papers, just released by the National Archives, show that throughout the Seventies there was deep mistrust between the two superpowers over environmental warfare. The documents reveal that both the US, which led the field, and the Soviet Union had secret military programmes with the goal of controlling

the world’s climate. “By the year 2025 the United States will own the weather, ” one scientist is said to have boasted. Since then, a United Nations treaty has been signed which bans environmental warfare, such as causing earthquakes, melting the polar ice caps and altering climate. However work to create the ultimate weapon of mass destruction continues by the US Department of Defense. These claims are dismissed by sceptics as wild conspiracy theories and the stuff of James Bond movies but there is growing evidence that the boundaries between science fiction and fact are becoming

increasingly blurred. The Americans now admit that they invested over 40 Million over five years during the Vietnam war on “cloud seeding” – deliberately creating heavy rainfall to wash away enemy crops and destroy supply routes on the Ho Chi Minh trail, in an operation codenamed Project Popeye. It is claimed that rainfall was increased by a third in targeted areas, making the weather-manipulation weapon a success. At the time, government officials said the region was prone to heavy rain. However this sort of rain-making experiment was nothing new. In Britain, it has been alleged that before the devastating Lynmouth floods in Devon in 1952, the RAF had been conducting secret rain-making tests. Aircraft showered clouds with silver iodide, on which water droplets formed, became heavy and eventually fell to the ground as rain. In the next 12 hours nine inches of rain fell – 250 times the normal amount for August – and 35 people were killed. Former North Devon MP Tony Speller, then a 22-year-old soldier who helped in the relief effort, sought answers from the MoD. “I have no doubt they were seeding in the area because there were RAF log books to prove it, ” he says now. “Of course the MoD denied any knowledge but that is not to say it did not happen.” Speller, now 76,

adds: “I doubt we'll ever know the truth.” Early work on climate control was crude and unpredictable but evidence suggests that the Americans continued to experiment behind closed doors even after the UN ban in the mid-Eighties, and now in the 21st century possess sophisticated systems which are capable of controlling the weather – with potentially devastating results. In the US, the technology was developed under the high-frequency active auroral research programme ( HAARP) – originally part of Ronald Reagan’s controversial Star Wars defence system. Based in Gokoma, Alaska, the weapon operates by beaming powerful radio waves into the upper atmosphere to alter weather patterns. Some experts claim the system is already

up and running, while others say it won’t be ready for another 20 years. Michel Chossudovsky, professor of economics at the University of Ottawa in Canada, who has studied official US military documents about HAARP, is in no doubt that the weapon is ready. “There are very clear statements by the US Air Force to the effect that weather modification technology is available. HAARP will be fully operational by next year and could be used in actual military

situations, ” he says. “To claim this system has any nonmilitary purposes is twisting the truth. I don’t think there are any peaceful applications – The only reason the US would invest in such a program is it is a weapon of mass destruction, capable of major climatic disturbance. Evidence proves no practical application for water or environmental issues. Part of the advantage is that the enemy might never know that a weapon had been used. I believe the UN agreement is certainly being violated.” He claims that at least one British firm has been involved in its development. “It is time people began focusing on these weapons instead of concentrating solely on global warming, ” Chossudovsky adds. “Both are a serious threat.” The Americans are thought to have their own “weather steering” system, called Woodpecker, involving the transmission of low-frequency waves which are capable of disrupting the atmosphere and altering the path of the jet stream. It is claimed that a prolonged drought in California in the Eighties was caused by the blocking of warm, moist air for many weeks. According to Damian Wilson, a physicist with the Met Office, controlling climate is a reality but not a precise science. “Clearing fog by dropping dry ice into clouds is a proven technique which has been around for decades, ” he says. “Large amounts of research have been invested in seeding clouds to generate rain and it is done in countries where there are water shortages. The problem is that it is unpredictable and you need clouds to start with. The technology does not exist to make rain fall from clear blue skies so it cannot be used in the desert to end droughts and

famines.” WILSON believes it is possible to alter the course of a hurricane, which could have enormous life-saving potential. The current mayhem in the Caribbean and America’s Eastern seaboard also shows what a destructive weapon a well-targeted storm could prove. The Americans used cloud seeding to try to control a hurricane in 1947 but the tactic backfired when it picked up strength and hit Savannah, Georgia. It is known that the US carried out further hurricane-manipulation experiments between 1962 and 1983, under the codename Project Stormfury, after it was calculated that a single hurricane contained as much energy as all the world’s power stations combined. More recent projects have involved pouring tens of thousands of gallons of vegetable oil on to the sea. “Hurricanes gather their strength from the warm sea surface, ” says Wilson. “By spreading a large film of oil on the sea it would reduce the intensity by cooling the surface. In theory it is possible to change the path

of the hurricane this way. Russia has acknowledged US research in weather modification and says it will not be scared to create a weather weapon arsenal of its own if provoked or a threat is seen. It would be wise for the US to back down in further weather modification ventures or the resulting war could be disastrous and serve an existential threat.t would not surprise me if military research into controlling the weather goes on. As we suffer more summer droughts in the south-east of England I would also expect to see pressure for cloud seeding to be introduced in this country.” It is not just the weather that has attracted the attention of the military. Scientists have also researched ways of triggering earthquakes. By setting off small quakes, pressure could be released and a disaster averted. But military scientists believe it is also possible to direct powerful energy beams into vulnerable fault zones, causing the Earth’s plates to shift, creating a massive earthquake. Along fault lines beneath the oceans, the same technology could be used to launch devastating tsunamis. Part of the problem in banning experiments involves agreeing a definition of what environmental

warfare is. It has been argued that the famous Dambusters mission during the Second World War, when bouncing bombs were used to flood the German industrial heartland, were a form of environmental warfare. Half a century later, the threat is still being taken sufficiently seriously.

So, despite signing a UN treaty in the 80’s, the US continues to secretly develop cloud seeding for the sole purpose of military. Not only is further development not legal but, Research concludes that there are no practical applications for cloud seeding (in terms of water scarcity or the environment), but the only “useful” application that the USFG is interested in is for weapons. Russia, now aware of US secret development has issued threats that it too will create weather weapons. WE MUST END ALL DEVELOPMENT OF CLOUD SEEDING TECHNOLOGIES OR AS BOTH OUR MIRFENDERESKI AND DAILY EXPRESS EVIDENCE INDICATE, WE COULD SEE DISASTROUS OUTCOMES AND RISK EXTINCTION.

This turns their entire nuclear war/extinction impact. Using clouds seeding will only increase the chance of warfare and extinction.