DEEP SHIELD
What started out as a simple question soon turned into a dream which can
be seen as a nightmare. My initial question was about the validity of
‘chemtrails’ in our skies. I came across the subject through a day of
boredom and surfing the net. Going to somebody who I thought could explain away
the ‘conspiracy theory’ led to my initial contact with the man who was to
become known as ‘Deep Shield’. In
a few days I was transported into a world of science fiction, with my first
experience a confrontation with the statement that ‘the Earth is dying.’
In the years following my first meeting with ‘Deep Shield’
I have developed ever greater awareness of the issues facing our species.
Having explored the subjects he pointed out I have come to the conclusion that
we are facing a period of time that is a challenge if not a threat. As history
unfolds and we see greater signs of climate change I am reminded of his emphasis
on how the ‘Shield Project’ is nothing more than a stopgap measure designed
to slow down the processes at work to provide our civilization and planet with
more time to adapt to the changes that are geologically if not historically
taking place too fast.
‘Deep Shield’ struck me as a man who was at war with himself. On the
one hand he understood the necessity for such a project, but on the other he was
appealing to the responsibility of all humans not just to know what is going on
but to take a hand and commit themselves to positive changes. Time and again he
appeared to be resigned to an end of civilization as we know it and thus an end
to human history as it has been. My last face-to-face meeting was with a man, if
not an organization, that was desperate and resigned to a dark fate.
I am neither surprised nor anguished by the silence of the governments. If the
circumstances suggested by ‘Deep Shield’ are the only motivators for such a
project, it makes perfect sense when we look at later events such as
the flooding of New Orleans, the hurricane season of 2005, the billions
of dollars in damage; the economic loss, the devastating human toll. We caught a
glimpse of a world torn apart by storm and of the failure of civilization for
closed communities of survivors who had been too long isolated from the rest of
the world.
If this is a trend in climate and weather patterns that is leading us toward
failures of our civilization, bankruptcy of our banks and insurers and continual
loss of life, with the attendant horrors of humanity’s worst aspects, then the
silence on ‘what is to come’ makes sense. Although I do have my doubts
about ‘Deep Shield’ being what he claimed to me, I
cannot dismiss the developing environmental and climatological issues we
face.
There is no doubt in my mind that there is a concerted effort to downplay if not
hide what is going on over our heads. It is perhaps less criminal than the way
the US government handled Katrina. The lack of response to that devastation
makes me wonder if the government is not attempting to get us accustomed to slow
responses in the face of catastrophe. Or worse, if the response was deliberately
slowed to enable monitoring of the human reaction to large-scale catastrophe in
preparation for similar catastrophes
to follow in the years and decades to come. The slow response, indeed absence of
response, to Katrina, while at the same time the media was on the scene
reporting the events as they unfolded, was uncharacteristic of how we used to
imagine the USA would react to the loss of an American city in a storm of such
magnitude.
As this book indicates, the United States government apparently has no qualms
about experimenting on its citizens, testing to see how the public acts and
reacts in given situations. The Federal Government’s management of one of the
greatest disasters ever to hit the USA provides an insight into its mindset. It
suggests that a spray program of national and global proportions for the
purposes outlined by ‘Deep Shield’ is highly probable.
‘Deep Shield’ stressed to me that he wanted people to compare what they saw
with the information he was revealing and draw their own conclusions. My account
of what he said is not a complete report (there were later meetings I did not
mention or touched on only generally). It is not a scientific paper. It was
initially meant only for one person and then for a few people looking for
answers to specific questions. And above all there is the fact that
‘Deep Shield’ committed suicide, testifying to instability of mind.
None of these factors should be overlooked in the conclusions each reader will
draw.
I never shared
everything ‘Deep Shield’ told me. There
are pretty darn good reasons for my silence. There are pretty darn good reasons
why I have placed as much distance as I can
between myself and the ‘Shield Letters’. I am no longer naïve
about the total impact of what is coming down the road. I am no longer ignorant
of the crisis that is approaching.
David Stewart
27th October 2005