Chemtrail Lawsuit

Had a search further down the group and found this
"Wis Chemtrails Who do we sue?11 June at 21:56

Al DiCicco not aliens or ET's haha. Most likely federal Government and related agencies that are involved and contracted and those that are supposed to "protect" but fail; EPA, State environmental agencies, ...that is why that question is to be asked to the attorney. If you like call our attorney if you have evidence.11 June at 22:00 · 2"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I love it...you must first send a sample of something you collect at ground level, and assume came from the trails in the sky, before you can register.

I just can't understand why these people can't see how odd these assumptions are. To look up, see a trail, and then assume what you capture in a jar came from the trail is just plain silly!

Not true. I have registered and haven't sent in any samples. It's incredible the amount of disinfo you guys spew. But then, we know what your agenda truly is.
 
Sounds more like post you were responding to was accurate, and the Chemtrail Lawsuit web site description was inaccurate.

That's just trivia though. What about the key issues? The persistence of contrails? The normal levels of barium in blood? What's the truth there?
 
I think that Robert Forgette is actually advocating participation of skeptics in the FB groups, provided they show willingness to help with the lawsuit (and be careful with "attacks" like trying to actually debunk chemtrails ...). Input about toxic limits and flight identification was welcome so far.

He showed exasperation on several occations because fellow chemmies would keep posting chemtrail videos, pictures and links, but failed to contribute solid data, including better shots of airplanes or flight IDs.

He may show a slight paranoia and mood changes from time to time, but he is really trying get this thing flying.

Speaking of that, right now he is looking for a pilot to conduct a contrail sampling flight. They know now about the bleed air process and how easy it is to take a sample from the cabin air.
 
He stopped talking to me after I tried to explain the Arizona air test results (where they tested dirt, but used the levels for air). I'm not sure why - he did seem quite nice when I showed him some references for levels of barium in blood. But now:



Robert, I'm not debunking things with my qualifications. I'm debunking them with facts and reasoning that you can check for yourself. By all means don't trust me. In fact don't trust anyone on the internet. Check to see if what they say is correct.
 
Last edited:
Yes, and these people don't understand Cointelpro at all. That program used people inside the group to disinform, disrupt, and discredit the group.

For instance, they would place an agent who acted in all respects like one of the group, even as one of their best assets.

For example, the agent would seem like a trusted active member, even a leader, but would proceed to spread disruptive rumors,
give the members inaccurate information, and eventally act to discredit the group.

Or, the agent would spread rumors of disruption to increase the paranoia of the group inducing fear and inaction, delete their messages and claim someone else did it, or spread inaccurate information to discredit the group.


Come to think of it, direct refutatation wasn't the Modus Operandi of Cointelpro at all, but the above listed actions are.
Hmmmm.......?
 
He seems eminently reasonable and scientific in this video:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=4214861129733

I see one problem with his scientism. He doesn't speak of obtaining a 'control' sample outside of the chemtrail. If they only sample a "chemtrail", and pick up ordinary mineral dust containing crustal material such as aluminum, they will say it was from the chemtrail. They need to also sample during a "chemtrail"-free period for a control. However, when they do that, they will also see the crustal material, and then switch their claim to say that the atmosphere is so saturated with "chemtrail" pollution that they cannot distinguish between ordinary air and the output from a "chemtrail".

How many times have we seen the goalposts 'shifted' so that they can make it seem like they scored?

Even so, just learning that the "chemtrail" they are sampling comes from an ordinary commercial airliner will be a step in the right direction....maybe..... if they are willing to admit it like G. Edward Griffin has.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
To be fair that of course applies to everyone - including the believers themselves if they attempt to do anything to witnesses they do not like!

Here's the link for those who woudl liek to read the provision - http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1512

However it is part of 18 USC Part 1, which is labelled "Crimes", and that seems to be mainly about crimes agaisnt the "state" - eg assault, theft, etc (which are against people, but the state has the tright to prosecute or somethign like that), so I am not sure it would be applicable to this one, which is a civil suit isn't it??
 
Here's the only section that might apply to an overzealous debunker if you twisted the intent of the law into something unrecognizable:

(d) Whoever intentionally harasses another person and thereby hinders, delays, prevents, or dissuades any person from—
(1) attending or testifying in an official proceeding;
(2) reporting to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense or a violation of conditions of probation [1] supervised release,, [1] parole, or release pending judicial proceedings;
(3) arresting or seeking the arrest of another person in connection with a Federal offense; or
(4) causing a criminal prosecution, or a parole or probation revocation proceeding, to be sought or instituted, or assisting in such prosecution or proceeding;
or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 3 years, or both.

However the next section describes a valid recognized defense which would apply directly to 99.999% of debunkers:

(e) In a prosecution for an offense under this section, it is an affirmative defense, as to which the defendant has the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence, that the conduct consisted solely of lawful conduct and that the defendant’s sole intention was to encourage, induce, or cause the other person to testify truthfully.

Isn't that at the heart of what debunkers are doing, simply encouraging the other people (chemtrail conspiracists) to be truthful in presenting facts and scientific evidence as well as spoon feeding them said facts and scientific evidence? No judge or jury would ever convict a debunker of "tampering with a witness".

On the other hand, a good case could be made for a charge of witness tampering against some of the leaders of the chemtrail lawsuit, to wit:

(b) Whoever knowingly uses intimidation, threatens, or corruptly persuades another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to—
(1) influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding;
(2) cause or induce any person to—
(A) withhold testimony, or withhold a record, document, or other object, from an official proceeding;
(B) alter, destroy, mutilate, or conceal an object with intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding;
(C) evade legal process summoning that person to appear as a witness, or to produce a record, document, or other object, in an official proceeding; or
(D) be absent from an official proceeding to which such person has been summoned by legal process;
 
(e) In a prosecution for an offense under this section, it is an affirmative defense, as to which the defendant has the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence, that the conduct consisted solely of lawful conduct and that the defendant’s sole intention was to encourage, induce, or cause the other person to testify truthfully.

This is an affirmative defense. In other words, you don't have the right to remain silent (seems to run afoul of the 5th amendment, no?). You must prove you are innocent. Either way, "preponderance of the evidence" is a very low burden of proof. It means "more likely than not." I used to deal with this burden of proof on my last job. When used against you (civil cases) it's scary as hell, as it only requires a being 51% persuasive. But as a defendant, it's the best case scenario.

Here is a link discussing the seeming conflict between an affirmative defense versus the 5th amendment: Protection of Government Processes -- Constitutionality -- 18 U.S.C. § 1512(d)

I think these dingbats are referring to this language in the law (18 USC § 1512 - Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant):

Whoever knowingly uses intimidation, threatens, or corruptly persuades another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to—

Corruptly Persuades is generally interpreted to mean, “knowingly and dishonestly with the specific intent to subvert or undermine the integrity or truth-seeking ability of an investigation by a federal law enforcement officer”, "motivated by an improper purpose.” “It does not prohibit constitutionally protected speech, even if such conduct has the effect of hindering an investigation.” (source: Supreme Court of the United States (PDF))

You basically must have some ulterior, nefarious, illegal motive or you're encouraging the witness to do something illegal, like lying under oath.

Misleading Conduct is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 1515:
(A) knowingly making a false statement;
(B) intentionally omitting information from a statement and thereby causing a portionof such statement to be misleading, or intentionally concealing a material fact, and thereby creating a false impression by such statement;
(C) with intent to mislead, knowingly submitting or inviting reliance on a writing or recording that is false, forged, altered, or otherwise lacking in authenticity;
(D) with intent to mislead, knowingly submitting or inviting reliance on a sample, specimen, map, photograph, boundary mark, or other object that is misleading in a material respect; or
(E) knowingly using a trick, scheme, or device with intent to mislead;

:cool:
 


I see Al is still at it. He has been fully informed of the false claims he has been making.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/128-High-barium-levels-in-blood-(-Mohave-AZ-)?highlight=mojave

Be sure to go to page 2 of the above thread to see Big Al's buddy Gianluca Zanna taking a sample of chicken poop in water and calling it rainwater.

His lawsuit, if initiated, will be deemed frivolous and dismissed. He will waste many people's money and time once again. [...]



Which faction of the military-industrial complex pays you? What facts do you have? What say you?!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't work for any military, I am a merchant marine Chief Engineer who works on ships in the Gulf Of Mexico. Ask Al, he knows all about it.

As for the facts of the matter, I linked to them on page 1 of this thread, right here.

Don't bother to confront Al about those facts, he will silence you and ban you from his group if you question him about those facts.

However, those facts will eventually get aired if he ever files a lawsuit, and will be the reason he fails.

Rather strange he doesn't want to speak about it now, don't you think, when he knows it will all come out sooner or later?

Maybe he is fooling himself.

Or maybe he is fooling you, too.

Either way, you are being played for a fool if you follow his path.

If you disagree with anything here, feel free to discuss it.

What say you?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
They have apparently submitted a FOIA request to the NOAA:

http://www.facebook.com/groups/chemtrailgeoengineeringlawsuitsocialgroup/doc/392009634193289/


National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
1401 Constitution Avenue, NW Room 5128
Washington, DC 20230

Re: Freedom of Information Act Request – Chemical spraying from jets of Aluminum, Strontium and Barium

Dear Gentlepersons:
This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 552.I request that a copy of the following documents [or documents containing the following information] be provided to me:


  1. All documents concerning “Chemical Trails”, or “Chem Trails”, which is meant to include the spraying of aluminum, strontium or barium into the atmosphere from jets.
  2. All documents concerning “geo-engineering” by chemical spraying into the atmosphere from jets, which is meant to include the spraying of aluminum, strontium or barium in the airways from jets in the government’s experiments or efforts to modify the weather.
  3. All documents concerning climate modification programs or weather modification programs conducted by way of spraying the chemicals aluminum, strontium or barium into the atmosphere by jets.
  4. All documents concerning aerosol spraying of the chemicals aluminum, strontium or barium by jets into the atmosphere to modify weather.
  5. All documents concerning studies of attempts to alter weather by spraying the chemicals aluminum, strontium or barium into the atmosphere from jets.
  6. All documents concerning governmental programs and attempts to utilize HAARP (High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program) to modify the weather by sending high altitude radio frequency signals off of the materials aluminum, strontium or barium sprayed into the atmosphere by jets.
  7. All documents regarding instructions to pilots of jets regarding them spraying the elements aluminum, strontium or barium into the atmosphere by jets.
  8. All documents which discuss or refer to the use of Barium being sprayed into the atmosphere to aid in weather modification.
  9. All documents which discuss or refer to the use of Strontium being sprayed into the atmosphere to aid in weather modification.
  10. All documents which discuss or refer to the use of Aluminum being sprayed into the atmosphere to aid in weather modification.


In order to help to determine my status to assess fees, you should know that I am a single attorney in a sole proprietorship, and have minimal money to pay for any photocopying costs. I am working for non-profit environmental organizations. This request is made for a scholarly or scientific purpose and not for a commercial use. I request a waiver of all fees for this request. Disclosure of the requested information to me is in the public interest because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the government and is not for any commercial interest.Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Very truly yours,

Joseph H. Marman
Content from External Source
I wonder how they will handle what they actually get.
 
They have apparently submitted a FOIA request to the NOAA:

http://www.facebook.com/groups/chemtrailgeoengineeringlawsuitsocialgroup/doc/392009634193289/


National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
1401 Constitution Avenue, NW Room 5128
Washington, DC 20230

Re: Freedom of Information Act Request – Chemical spraying from jets of Aluminum, Strontium and Barium

Dear Gentlepersons:
This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 552.I request that a copy of the following documents [or documents containing the following information] be provided to me:

./.

1. All documents which discuss or refer to the use of Aluminum being sprayed into the atmosphere to aid in weather modification.


Content from External Source
I wonder how they will handle what they actually get.

They won't get much back - which they'll use to scream "coverup!" As any good conspiracy monger will tell you, no evidence IS evidence of a conspiracy!

If i was NOAA, i'd respond to requests like "All documents which discuss or refer to the use of Aluminum being sprayed into the atmosphere to aid in weather modification" by sending them screen shots of their own web page. Just for laughs. :D
 
Another one,further down the GEO I page
" Here is a template i copied and sent myself! A Letter Requesting Action from the Congress of the
United States and The Governor:
I, as a concerned citizen of The United States, demand
immediate action from you and Congress as follows:

1. Full public disclosure explaining the truth behind
the ongoing chemical, biological or other toxic aerial
sprayings occurring over the United States and other
countries.
2. Cessation of aerial spraying upon U.S. citizens.
3. Enforcement of existing Federal law which prohibits
experimentation upon U.S. citizens without informed
consent and permission.

I attest to one or more of the following: I have directly
witnessed these sprayings. I have experienced adverse
health effects from these sprayings. I have reviewed
the latest material from responsible and knowledgeable
researchers, journalists and Internet sources on the
subject. Furthermore, any so-called "official" responses
to date, claiming that these aerial sprayings are "normal"
contrails, are not satisfactory."
I wonder who the " responsible and knowledgeable
researchers, journalists and Internet sources" are?
 
Despite claims that our government has "stonewalled" against releasing any information regarding what people see in the sky coming out of airplanes (contrails) twelve years ago the NOAA, EPA, NASA, and FAA did release a full accounting. I have yet to see any chemtrail website dispute the information in a rational way. I challenge this lawsuit group and Joe Marman to take it on and try to disprove any of it.

They won't address the issue at all, in any way.
They are the ones stonewalling.

"Contrails Fact Sheet(2000)"
 
Despite claims that our government has "stonewalled" against releasing any information regarding what people see in the sky coming out of airplanes (contrails) twelve years ago the NOAA, EPA, NASA, and FAA did release a full accounting. I have yet to see any chemtrail website dispute the information in a rational way. I challenge this lawsuit group and Joe Marman to take it on and try to disprove any of it.

They won't address the issue at all, in any way.
They are the ones stonewalling.

"Contrails Fact Sheet(2000)"

I'm trying to figure their true motive. They can't go to court, they know this. So what is the motive? It must be money. Somewhere, somehow they are making (or will make) money off this hoax. It's like the guy who keeps putting out videos ("Why are they spraying?") -

From “Why in the World are They Spraying?”:
View attachment 597
He asks his duped followers for money to make his next video. In his fine print he clearly says he can't (or won't) share any of the profits from the movie. So he collects (possibly) tens of thousands of dollars from his dupes, makes his little movie on his laptop and pockets the rest. With the kind of money he's collecting, if he was serious about his "cause", he would put that money towards seeking real, tangible, direct evidence and proving his case once and for all rather than regurgitating the same, useless information for profit. :confused:
 
I don't think this group is trying to make money. I think they actually believe they are being sprayed and poisoned, and they want it to stop. But I think they allow lapses in science and reason because "the end justifies the means".

MJM on the other hand is getting financially entrenched in chemtrail promotion - much like Richard Gage from the 9/11 truth movement. Perhaps not setting out to make a living from it, but that's the way it ended up, so now they can't back down, as they have nothing else they can do.
 
And now they are writing to the DOD:

http://www.facebook.com/groups/chemtrailgeoengineeringlawsuitsocialgroup/doc/392323484161904/

Law Offices of

Joseph H. Marman, Esq.
Attorney at Law
8421 Auburn Blvd., Suite 145
Citrus Heights, CA 95610-0394
(916) 721-3324
E-mail: marmanla@localnet.com
Fax (916) 721-3633
Member: California Consumer Attorneys, Capitol City Trial Lawyers Association, Sacramento County Bar Assn., Placer County Bar Assn.


July 12, 2012

TO DEPT OF DEFENSE
Leon E. Panetta
Secretary of Defense
1000 Defense Pentagon
Washington, DC 20301-1000
James N. Miller
Under Secretary of Defense (Policy)
2000 Defense Pentagon
Washington, DC 20301-2000
General Norton A. Schwartz
Air Force Chief of Staff
1670 Air Force Pentagon
Washington, DC 20330-1670

Re: CHEMICAL SPRAYING of BARIUM, STRONTIUM AND ALUMINUM FROM JETS ONTO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC FOR WEATHER MODIFICATION

Dear SECRETARY OF DEFENSE and AIR FORCE CHIEF OF STAFF:

I want to know about your agencies’ involvement in the chemical spraying of the US population in what we believe is the government’s efforts to control or modify the weather. This is the spray emanating from jets flying overhead where the white plumes expand and drip and cover the sky, rather than evaporate like what were formerly “condensation” trails.

I would like to remind you of this prohibition of experimenting on the American public.

50 USC 1520a.

(a) PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES.—The Secretary of Defense may not conduct (directly or by contract)—
(1) any test or experiment involving the use of a chemical agent or biological agent on a civilian population; or (2) any other testing of a chemical agent or biological
agent on human subjects.

If you are claiming there is an exception for your activities of spraying the American public with aluminum, strontium and barium, may I remind you of the requirement to obtain the consent of the people you are experimenting on.

Department of Defense
July 12, 2012
P. 2

50 USC 1520a. (c) INFORMED CONSENT REQUIRED.—The Secretary of Defense may conduct a test or experiment described in subsection (b) only if
informed consent to the testing was obtained from each human subject in advance of the testing on that subject.

May I inquire also whether you made you reported to Congress of these activities as required under the following sub-section (d) to 50 USC 1520a.

(d) PRIOR NOTICE TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 30 days after
the date of final approval within the Department of Defense of
plans for any experiment or study to be conducted by the Department
of Defense (whether directly or under contract) involving
the use of human subjects for the testing of a chemical agent
or a biological agent, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to
the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee
on National Security of the House of Representatives a report
setting forth a full accounting of those plans, and the experiment
or study may then be conducted only after the end of the 30-
day period beginning on the date such report is received by those
committees.

I will also be following up with my request with a Freedom of Information letter to inquire and obtain all documents that relate to the US Government’s programs to modify the weather by what is commonly called geo-engineering or weather modification, or Chem Trails.

Our movement is gaining momentum and we have thousands of people becoming more vocal daily about these questionable activities of your agencies.

Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.


Very truly yours,

Joseph H. Marman

JHM
Content from External Source
 
I don't worry much about typos in my message board postings, and even have some on my website, but for an attorney to make those sorts of typos in a legal document and put it out over the web is a sign of very poor work.
 
Not hyperlinkied descriptions mind you, just the raw youtube addresses. He hasn't even taken off the extraneous '&abc' from his links, just slapped them on his site copied straight from the address bar.

The act of placing these video links at the very top of one of his main pages demonstrates and advertises this fellow's poor judgement to any other less credulous clients, and unfortunately also his professional piers.

After seeing those priorities, I certainly wouldn't hire him, would you?
 
"Birds of a feather flock together", just as the old proverb states, succinctly describes the chemtrails crowd.

The odd bunch. Looking deeply into most of them you find some indications of inadequacies, incompetencies and petty personal motives behind what they do.
 
Some more news from this lawsuit. Al is now asking all members to send an additional $25 each (there are over 2000 members). $50,000 does not seem very "pro bono". I think either Al or more likely the lawyer is taking everyone for a ride.
  • [h=6]Al DiCicco

    [/h][h=6] We have over 2000 people in this group. Our attorney, Joe Marman, is moving right along with freedom of information letters to DoD, NOAA, and other government agencies. That is how it is done in California. Although the case is originating in California, our goal is the federal courts after that. Our attorney Joe Marman is working pro bono, that means for free, because he is also sick of chemtrails. He does have expenses. If we don't help, or find people with some money that can help with a significant amount of funds for expenses, experts witnesses, etc., we will move slowly. I am asking all of you 2000 of you to send Joe Marman some money if you have not done so. $25 or more. Thanks.[/h]Like · · 20 minutes ago
      • Al DiCicco ‎1000 people sending in $25 is $25,000. That will get the case moving fast I assure you. If you are not serious and willing to help, why are you in this lawsuit group?18 minutes ago · Like


      • Al DiCiccoRobert M Forgette I think we should start deleting people from this group that refuse to help. We do not need dead weight and this is NOT a spectator sport or for entertainment.16 minutes ago · Like






This is happening after Al has accused Michael J Murphy, Roxy, Rosalind of being in it for the ego and money.



  • Al DiCicco when will Alex Jones, Roseanne Barr, Michael Murphy, Roxy Lopez and so many other socalled activists get tested for heavy metal toxicity and join this lawsuit? I think it's time many of us demand a valid answer to this question. If you agree, start asking them. My current opinion is, some are in this for ego and money and nothing more. I hope I am proved wrong. I have asked only to get replies as I did from Rosalind Peterson, who now says she has no evidence of chemtrails.
    Yesterday at 10:02am · Like


 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sounds like this Joseph Marman is just a typical Ambulance Chaser sort of personal injury lawyer. According to the website Avvo, 50% of Marman's cases are auto accident related.

He even has one of those cheesy, low budget commercials.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRg1UoQ9RcE

Here is his listing at the California State Bar. He has been suspended a couple of times.

Here are the details of those suspensions (bold emphasis mine):

California Bar Journal Discipline Summaries

Summaries from the California Bar Journal are based on discipline orders but are not the official records. Not all discipline actions have associated CBJ summaries. Copies of official attorney discipline records are available upon request.

September 7, 2000

JOSEPH HENRY MARMAN [#129517], 44, of Citrus Heights was suspended for 90 days, stayed, placed on one year of probation with an actual 30-day suspension and was ordered to take the MPRE within one year. The order took effect Sept. 7, 2000.

Marman stipulated that he did not comply with probation conditions attached to a 1995 disciplinary order by failing to pay restitution to two creditors.
In mitigation, he cooperated with the bar’s investigation and he had serious financial problems.

April 25, 1998

JOSEPH HENRY MARMAN [#129517], 42, of Citrus Heights was suspended for 14 days, stayed, and placed on one year of probation. The order took effect April 25, 1998.

Marman practiced law while suspended in 1995.
As part of his probation in that matter, he was ordered to make restitution to nine parties over a four-year period. He submitted proof of restitution for three payments and claimed he made seven additional payments, but did not submit satisfactory proof. He indicated he was financially unable to continue making the payments.
Marman cooperated with the bar's investigation and harmed no clients by his misconduct.
The 1995 discipline was the result of client trust account violations and failing to properly supervise his staff.

Would you trust a lawyer like that enough to send them even a dime? Is this joker the best lawyer the chemtrail crowd can come up with?

I think either Al or more likely the lawyer is taking everyone for a ride.

I second that motion on the lawyer taking them for a ride.
 
Apparently Al DiCicco has left the Lawsuit Group..... again

"[h=6]Robert M Forgette
[/h][h=6]Apparently, Al DiCicco's left the group... Means I'm left holding the bag. :-/ I just discovered he's removed himself from both groups. I dunno if I can handle this without his help... Being honest. This was never my intent to be left in charge of this groups fate. Please tell me what you all would like to see happen here. Anything you have to say is welcomed. Please respond and give your opinions. Thanks"[/h]
 
Apparently Al DiCicco has left the Lawsuit Group..... again

"Robert M Forgette


Apparently, Al DiCicco's left the group... Means I'm left holding the bag. :-/ I just discovered he's removed himself from both groups. I dunno if I can handle this without his help... Being honest. This was never my intent to be left in charge of this groups fate. Please tell me what you all would like to see happen here. Anything you have to say is welcomed. Please respond and give your opinions. Thanks"

I'm deeply saddened by this news.
 
I'm saddened as well. It means he'll have more time to spend writing letters to our local papers and appearing at the County Supervisors meetings.
 
My impression is that Al DiCicco is seriously troubled. He seems to be convinced that "people are dying" from the toxic stuff sprayed by planes (as he urgently stated in the Roxy Lopez Show recording).

I wonder how someone in that state can be reached by reason.

I also think it is possible that he did not approve of Robert Forgette's group admission policy which made it possible for some skeptics to participate with carefully worded posts.
 
The "people are dying" from chemtrails idea goes back to the original hoax with William Thomas, see this 7-26-2000 article:

http://rense.com/general2/clar.htm
Over the past two years - and possibly longer - one of the biggest covert operations ever undertaken by a military in peacetime has caused illness and consternation across America as positively identified U.S. Air Force aerial tankers continue to spread broad white plumes in patterns that defy civil air regulations, public health and air pollution laws - and the physics of normal contrail formation.

As hundreds of thousands of North Americans jam hospital emergency rooms in a nearly year-round epidemic of sometimes fatal "flu-like" illness, it has been difficult not to believe that some kind of population cull is underway.
Content from External Source
So it's not too unusual in chemtrail circles to believe things like this. I'm sure Michael J. Murphy and Roxy Lopez also think the same thing.

Of course there's no evidence to back it up. People are doing just fine.
 
It's great that the Chemtrails lawsuit people have this document shwoing that their members aluminum reports are no larger than those from fifty years ago!

https://www.facebook.com/download/118227851656490/PRELIMINARY%20STUDY%20OF%20THE%20COMPOSITION%20OF%20PRECIPITATION%20IN%20S.E.%20ONTARIO%20e67-077.pdf

But how to get them to read it :)

I'm sure their lawyer would find it useful though, so he could eliminate test results that just show normal levels of aluminum.
 
Back
Top