Forensic Arborist Robert Brame: How Could They be “Forest Fires” if the Forests Weren’t on Fire?

By Mark Crispin Miller

What happened time and time again in California (as, no doubt, in Canada last week) certainly did not result from lightning, or excessive heat, or free-lance arson, but some kind of military program that incinerated houses, but left trees standing; that burned “water-loving” trees from the inside, leaving their needles and leaves intact; that burned hot enough to melt glass (which natural firestorms cannot do); that burned rubber tires with metal rims, but not plastics; and that were followed by the quiet replacement of underground metal pipes with others made of plastic or concrete, and by the impoundment of certain plastic items from the rubble of incinerated homes.

Was it energy-directed weapons (DEWs) that did this? We don’t know what was used to do it, but we can reasonably speculate as to why it was done: as usual, to stoke mass fear (of “climate change”); to kill the soil, in furtherance of food shortages; to thwart the self-sufficiency of those living in the stricken areas; and, relatedly, to drive America’s rural population into the “smart cities” planned by the WEF, UN, Bill Gates et al.

Scroll down for three pieces that shed more light on such elite arson. (Thanks to Elze van Hamelen, my friend in the Netherlands, for sending me the links.)


Martin Armstrong,

by Martin Armstrong

There is something strange in the air. Are we to believe that what is occurring is simply the result of wildfires in Canada all occurring simultaneously? Official reports claim that droughts caused the conditions for the fires. Quebec said that the fires were ignited by lightning, Alberta admitted the cause of their fires is still unknown. Other provinces also blame lightning and dry conditions, but no one seems to have a clear answer for why over 9.4 million acres in Canada have burned….

Bomb Cyclones and Atmospheric Rivers: Is Someone Messing with the Weather?

F. William Engdahl, January 16, 2023


In recent months the world is hearing unusual terms to describe extreme weather events. Now terms like Bomb Cyclone or Atmospheric Rivers are used in the daily TV weather reports to describe dumping of record volumes of rain or snow in regions of the world in an extremely destructive way. The Green Mafia claims, without a shred of factual proof, that it is all because of man’s too-large “carbon footprint.” They use it as an excuse to double down on phasing out oil, gas, coal as well as nuclear energy in favor of unworkable, taxpayer-subsidized “green energy”– unreliable wind or solar. Could it be that these freak weather calamities are indeed “manmade,” but not from CO2 emissions?

“Manipulating the Weather is Part of the Military Arsenal, It should be Part of the Climate Discussion”: Prof. Michel Chossudovsky

Interview by Elze van Hamelen, September 24, 2022


Despite the existence of an extensive literature on weather modification techniques for military purposes, the subject is considered taboo. “The U.S. military states in its documents that it can influence the weather, and both the UN and the EU were concerned about this issue,” explains Canadian emeritus professor Michel Chossudovsky in an interview with De Andere Krant.

“Weather modification techniques should at least be part of the discussion on climate change.” The 1977 UN ‘ENMOD’ convention, on the prohibition of applying weather modification techniques for military purposes, provides a starting point for this.

Michel Chossudovsky, Professor of Economics (emeritus) at the University of Ottawa, is the author of thirteen books, including “The Globalization of Poverty and The New World Order,” “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War,” and “The Globalization of War, America’s Long War against Humanity. He is the founder of the Center for Research on Globalization, and editor-in-chief of the highly informative site Over the years, he has published several articles that demonstrate, using documents from the US government, EU and UN, that the application of weather modification techniques is not an urban legend.


Elze van Hamelen (Der Andere Krant): In several articles you point out the literature on ‘ENMOD’ – Environmental Modification Techniques for military purposes. Can you give an example?

Michel Chossudovsky: One of the most important documents is titled Weather as a Force Multiplier. Owning the Weather in 2025. The document is significant because the U.S. Air Force here recognizes that owning the weather as a weapon is a military strategy.

Owning the Weather was written in 1996, and they state very clearly, I’ll give a literal quote:

“Modification of the weather will most likely become part of national security policy, with national as well as international applications. Our government will pursue this policy at various levels, including unilateral action, participation in the framework of NATO, within the membership of the UN or through participation in another coalition. It can have offensive and defensive applications, as well as being used as a deterrent”.

Weather modification gives the possibility of generating precipitation, or fog or influencing ‘space weather’ (electromagnetic disturbances, ed.).

The paper distinguishes between suppression or intensification of existing weather patterns, and in extreme cases, the creation of totally new patterns, control of storms and even climate change.

Climate scientists make a distinction between weather patterns and the climate, and that changes in the latter are long-term processes. But the moment you start intervening directly in weather processes, of course that also has an effect on climate. They talk about a set of technologies that can create artificial weather. What’s important is that they indicate that the advantage of influencing the weather is that they can intervene in a hostile country without the enemy realizing it….


One Reply to “Forensic Arborist Robert Brame: How Could They be “Forest Fires” if the Forests Weren’t on Fire?”

  1. Andrea

    We are in a clear and present danger from pure evil. How do we fight against this, or at a minimum, protect ourselves?