67 cial windfall backing to the cyber warfare crowd – the cyber terrorists. Some are freedom fighters, and some are just cyber terrorists. That is a way of getting them all organized as you go into the 2020 election and are ready to weaponize the population. They are now prepared. Farrell: I think so, too. We need to un- derstand that there are soft forms of mind manipulation. In other words, not all of these things are technologies; some of them are simply techniques, which bring us back to language. That is a technique of manipulating people’s perceptions and decision-making processes. We need to be aware that all of this does exist. There are certain people that I won’t even open emails from because I’m too suspicious of their ability to use these types of things. If people want to see neurolinguistics pro- gramming’s power, go online to YouTube and watch some of the programs that Derren Brown used to give in the United Kingdom. He made a career out of using those types of programming techniques on people and got them to do the strang- est things simply by basic programming techniques. It’s frightening and if you’re not familiar with it, add Derren Brown to your list along with the Kingsman. Fitts: That brings us to weather warfare because I have many subscribers that, a year ago, didn’t believe I made any sense saying that weather warfare existed. I dare say that the 3rd quarter of this year per- suaded them that weather warfare existed and helped them integrate emotionally that this is actually happening. Farrell: It’s real, and it exists. A friend by the name of Jerry Smith wrote a book for my publisher called Weather Warfare and it gets into the Pentagon documents and other studies. This is all part of full- spec- trum dominance, and the Pentagon has made it very clear that part of full-spec- trum dominance and force multiplier thinking is to be able to manipulate weather on the battlefield. The technologies exist. HAARP is the one that most people believe weather warfare exists. Fitts: William Cohen said that weather warfare exists. The Secretary of Defense publicly stated that this existed. Farrell: He said that in the famous 1998 quote. You can search the Pentagon’s website and look it up. It does exist. The real problem that I think people have is wrapping their head around, “How do we distinguish, then, between an act of God or an act of nature and an actual weather warfare or geotectonic event that has been deliberately designed?” This is where it gets dodgy because this is where you have to do a bit of thinking. Essentially, the template that you and I have decided is that you can begin to suspect weather warfare if such an act hap- pens within a time frame shortly after a major political event or shortly before one. This, I think, was the case with Harvey and the Texas bullion depository, which is a clear blow against the central bankers. Fitts: I think there are certain groups who will be able to clean out and redo Houston the way that they like, so there are going to be tremendous advantages to Harvey. Farrell: There is no doubt about it, but the template is what I’m getting at here. Is there a political event? Is there a financial event that follows or precedes within a narrow time frame of one of these major events? We saw this with Katrina. Does the weather system behave in an unusual, weird way that doesn’t seem natural? I believe Harvey clearly was unnatural in that it stalled over Houston. It hit the coast, and then it stopped. I’m sorry. Your average weather system doesn’t just stop somewhere and wreak havoc for several days. With Katrina, the case there was that you had a hurricane that was making a westward track through the Gulf of Mexico. It was south of New Orleans, and then it made a 90-degree turn and headed straight north. You have to watch the behavior of the system. Does it occur in a timeframe when there is a major political event? The Fukushima tsunami and earthquake was a similar incident, in my opinion. There were some politics happening in Ja- pan that was not acceptable to the United States. You’ve mentioned the Indonesian tsunami with the trading in sovereign securities. Fitts: That was the time when I had to face it was reality. Of course, the issue for me is: How do you manage money in a world where that can happen, and people can trade on inside information a week before and not say a word? Farrell: The other cases – the earthquakes in the Soviet Union prior to German reunification – those were very weird and they were major earthquakes. Fitts: There were major earthquakes in Switzerland before they went off the gold standard. Farrell: There is that, also, and all of these things. If you want to know what geo- tectonic or weather event may have been engineered, it is always going to be in a temporal context that has been preceded or is followed by some major shift of poli- cy. I think that is the telltale clue. Unfortunately, we don’t have people coordinating different databases like that close enough to make the case solid. Right now, that template is, at best, intuitive. However, as for the technology itself, it does exist. It doesn’t take much digging in the patents to see that it does – HAARP being the best example of this. It was there in the patents, “We might be able to steer weather systems with this.” So you have a planetary system here. The problem with these systems, I think, is not only do they have a geopolitical ramifica- tion, but they permit you to fight a war without looking like you’re doing so. I think that is really what is happening now. Fitts: I think that it has been happening for a very long time. Farrell: I agree with you but we don’t know who the actors are. Secretary Cohen made it very clear that some of these technologies have fallen into the hands of extraterritorial groups. Fitts: So the hurricanes could have been