http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/mass-suicide-fears-as-french-worry-end-of-world-is-approaching/story-e6frf7jx-1226076302428

http://radar.weather.gov/Conus/Loop/NatLoop.gif

Tornado rips train off tracks in Nebraska

http://news.yahoo.com/video/us-15749625/fierce-tornados-caught-on-tape-in-midwest-25695965

 http://youtu.be/hb1aIWhabtE

Severe wobble is said to be the cause of three or more days of darkness.  Rotation stoppage will cause days of darkness on the opposite of Earth.  Now another reason for another set of days of darkness?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Afhmhfzjiho

From the Comments:

"SEPTEMBER 26, 2011, at 05:22:28 DST THE SUN GOES DARK AS ELENIN BLOCKS THE SUN FROM THE EARTH!! NOW TELL ME THIS IS A SMALL COMET!! FOR 3 DAYS NO SUN AT ALL!! The sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood.
Sun disappears from the Earth's view!
Analysis of SpaceObs video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLIvMwxLZUQ

From Weiynala.  The entrance to her labyrinth was set to be opposite the setting sun, in 1998.  Here is more proof that the sun is now north of west.

TERRAL'S 7-7-11 Warning Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9qRdT1rFi0&feature=player_embedded
("See More" on youtube for more links)

Quick Notes on the 7-7 warning video here:  https://earthchanges.ning.com/profiles/blog/show?id=6126809%3ABlogPost%3A95262&commentId=6126809%3AComment%3A100261&xg_source=activity

TERRAL's ELE THREAT ASSESSMENT:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-NA2pVs9xM

EVERYONE:  SEE ALESIAH'S BLOG @ https://earthchanges.ning.com/profiles/blogs/watch-dutchsince-tracked-a.  SHE HAS PUT TOGETHER AN EXCELLENT PRESENTATION OF INFORMATION. 

Its a C7 Class solar flare andm a full halo.

(http://www.spaceweather.com/)

http://theintelhub.com/2011/06/18/no-fly-zones-appear-across-u-s-at-unprecedented-pace-as-events-ramp-up/

 Dutchsinse tracked a HAARP RING to it's source..

Mark, a moderator from poleshift.ning and staunch ZetaTalk devotee, posed this question:  

His original question and my original response is located at:  https://earthchanges.ning.com/profiles/blogs/china-mirageswhats-the-truth.

Of course, Mark, I don't claim to have come up with the concept of a trench shelter covered with a metal or sod roof, but neither is the concept original with Troubled Times/Zetatalk. Trench shelters have been used in many wars because they are relatively quick to construct and provide protection.  This article is based on source materials dating back to French military operations in 1914-1918.  See http://www.151ril.com/content/history/french-army/15.  For your convenience, here are some relevant quotes: 

This article is about: "The subject of French army shelters and dugouts (along with trench construction in general)...."

The materials used to construct trench shelters: "The primary materials used in shelter construction in the French army were logs or wood poles, rocks and dirt. To a lesser degree, planks, sandbags, corrugated sheets of metal, steel rails and iron sheets were used."

Trenches for higher ranking officers is then discussed before coming to the lesser quality trenches for the common man's, the foot soldiers', trench shelters: "Last on the pecking order were the foot-soldiers. The conditions of their shelters varied, but in general they proved woefully inadequate for most of the war. Improvements only started coming about in the fall of 1917 to meet the demands of rebellious, discontent soldiers. Materials used in the construction of the foot-soldiers' shelter normally included sticks, wattles, gabions, and sheets of corrugated metal. To a lesser degree, sandbags, small logs, and planks might be employed. Universally, these shelters were dark, dank, filthy, vermin-infested holes or shacks that brought misery to every soldier."

How sturdy are trench shelters? "Inclement conditions such as heavy rains and mud, often lead to the shelters collapsing."

On sod/metal roofs: "Alternately, a section of covered trench could be used as shelter, consisting of a simple roof of light logs or poles laid across the top of the trench, covered over with a layer of sandbags or earth up to a foot thick. However, abundant examples exist of less reinforced covered trenches that consisted only of a layer of light logs or a panel of corrugated metal straddling the trench."

On the subject of sod (contrasted to just plain dirt): "Shelters for soldiers in the rear were often just as inadequate and miserable as those up at the front.... A crossbeam pole rested between these, which supported the roof of poles or light logs, covered over with hay, straw and/or sod."

Now, imagine lying in a shallow trench with such a roof with winds and rain at the high end of this demonstration:  http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_national/hurricanesHistoryNew/index.html?SITE=FLPAP&SECTION=HOME.  How safe would you really be?

This is a fascinating article which everyone should read in its entirety for more ideas on how to build a trench shelter, plans that have been field tested.

Prof. McCanney says a lot of water will be coming in during the passage, lots of hydrocarbons mixed in (meaning polluted water), and ancient texts and geologic records confirm the same. As the French learned from experience, trench shelters turn into mud and collapse. So, Mark, the solution Zetatalk proposes not only did not originate with them, but is being disseminated as a solution, when in fact it is neither a solution, nor is it safe in the context of the extremes that will be generated by the object following behind Comet Elenin. Because I care about people, I am going to great lengths to try and make the trench shelter concept safer and healthier, as well as more comfortable as well as possible.

Also, please pause to consider that if you had posted at poleshift.ning what you posted here, except praising this ning, you would have been banned from poleshift.ning in a heartbeat.  But you weren't.  You were able to enjoy freedom of speech, which this ning promotes.  It's such a more pleasant atmosphere here.  And, look, you learned something.  Why?  Because you were able to ask questions, even though in a bit of an aggressive manner.  Education is important here.  What if we had just banned you.  You wouldn't have learned that your solution (if you are electing the trench shelter option) is fatally defective.  Think of all the people who will be relying on the ZT solution.  Most are going to die when their shelters disintegrate into a puddle of mud.  Now do you understand why I analyze?  Banning questions is just deflection because the material does not stand up under scrutiny. 

Think about it, Mark.  You are one of the few that has come here and can see we are not what she says we are.  Did you know I have run an earthchanges website and yahoogroup since 2003 (and continue to do so)?  I don't need any help.  I was sent to help Gerard.  Did you know Nancy and I were Gerard's first admins?  When I came on board in early January 2010, the membership was under 300; when I left, it was over 1,600?  I know Nancy drew a lot of attention because of her longevity on the internet, but did you know that during the time I was there that I referred over 700 members of my yahoogroup to poleshift.ning?  Did they tell you that poleshift ning's rules were written by me, in concert with discussions with Nancy and Gerard?  And why do you think Nancy bemoaned the loss of all my blogs?  They were substantial.  Did you know Nancy encouraged any poleshift ning member to commit theft by recovering one of my blogs and downloading two others without my permission and that they lost three copyright infringement claims because of their theft?  Who's copying whom?  I have documentation for all of this.  And do I sound crazy, post-nervous-breakdown, weak, and all the false ZT she's proclaimed on me.  Not hardly.  I've been here almost every day since I left poleshift.ning.  If you didn't know any of this, then you are only getting one side of the picture. 

UPDATE 6/30/2011:  Also realize that rolling would be caused by slip faults, which create a sideways motion and may not be the only type of earthquake.  I lived through the Northridge Earthquake, five miles from epicenter, and it was a thruster, which creates an up and down motion--a more violent earthquake--which causes your body to fly up into the air and then gravity brings you back down, and this would be a repetitive motion, thus more potential for damage.  Mountain building is a thruster-type earthquake.  The power at play would be like throwing a rag doll into the air and letting it land where it will, but with much more mass and breakable objects in the human body than a rag doll.  A better analogy would be throwing a carton of eggs into the air and see how many don't break after it lands a few times.

UPDATE 8/28/3011:  See http://www.oism.org/nwss/s73p916.htm for information on how to construct a pole-covered trench that would shield from radiation.

A re-post TheIntelHub

The best sign of "Clear & Present Danger"

Trading Of Over The Counter Gold And Silver To Be Illegal Beginning July 15

Related: New Metals Trading Restrictions

Zero Hedge
June 18th, 2011

http://theintelhub.com/2011/06/18/trading-of-over-the-counter-gold-and-silver-to-be-illegal-beginning-july-15/ 

One small step toward Executive Order 6102 part 2, and one giant leap for corruptcongressmankind.

From: FOREX.com <info@forex.com>
Date: Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 6:11 PM
Subject: Important Account Notice Re: Metals Trading
To: xxx

Important Account Notice Re: Metals Trading

We wanted to make you aware of some upcoming changes to FOREX.com’s product offering. As a result of the Dodd-Frank Act enacted by US Congress, a new regulation prohibiting US residents from trading over the counter precious metals, including gold and silver, will go into effect on Friday, July 15, 2011.

In conjunction with this new regulation, FOREX.com must discontinue metals trading for US residents on Friday, July 15, 2011 at the close of trading at 5pm ET. As a result, all open metals positions must be closed by July 15, 2011 at 5pm ET.

We encourage you to wind down your trading activity in these products over the next month in anticipation of the new rule, as any open XAU or XAG positions that remain open prior to July 15, 2011 at approximately 5:00 pm ET will be automatically liquidated.

We sincerely regret any inconvenience complying with the new U.S. regulation may cause you. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact our customer service team.

Sincerely,
The Team at FOREX.com

So far we have only received this warning from Forex.com. We are waiting to see which other dealers inform their customers that trading gold and silver over the counter will soon be illegal.

It appears that Forex.com’s interpretation of the law stems primarily from Section 742(a) of the Dodd-Frank act which “prohibits any person [which again includes companies]from entering into, or offering to enter into, a transaction in any commodity with a person that is not an eligible contract participant or an eligible commercial entity, on a leveraged or margined basis.”

Link to H.R. 4173  http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr4173ih/pdf/BILLS-111hr4173ih.pdf   Warning over 1,279 pages

Some prehistory from Hedge Fund Law Blog:

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Act”) has changed a number of laws in all of the securities acts including the Commodity Exchange Act.  Two specific changes deal with certain transactions in commodities on the spot market.  Specifically, Section 742 of the Act deals with retail commodity transactions.  In this section, the text of the Commodity Exchange Act is amended to include new Section 2(c)(2)(D) (dealing with retail commodity transactions) and new Section 2(c)(2)(E) (prohibiting trading in spot forex with retail investors unless the trader is subject to regulations by a Federal regulatory agency, i.e. CFTC, SEC, etc.).  According to a congressional rulemaking spreadsheet, these are effective 180 days from the date of enactment.

We provide an overview of the new sections and have reprinted them in full below.

New CEA Section 2(c)(2)(D) – Concerning Spot Commodities (Metals)

The central import of new CEA Section 2(c)(2)(D) is to broaden the CFTC’s power with respect to retail commodity transactions.  Essentially any spot commodities transaction (i.e. spot metals) will be subject to CFTC jurisdiction and rulemaking authority.  There is an exemption for commodities which are actually delivered within 28 days.  While the CFTC wanted an exemption in which commodities would need to be delivered within 2 days, various coin collectors were able to lobby congress for a longer delivery period (see here).

It is likely we will see the CFTC propose regulations under this new section and we will keep you updated on any regulatory pronouncements with respect to this new section.

New CEA Section 2(c)(2)(E) – Concerning Spot Forex

The central import of new CEA Section 2(c)(2)(E) is to regulate the spot forex markets.  While the section requires the CFTC to finalize regulations with respect to spot forex (which were proposed earlier in January), it also, interestingly, provides  oversight of the markets to other federal regulatory agencies such as the CFTC.  This means that in the future, different market participants may be subject to different regulatory regimes with respect to trading in same underlying instruments.  A Wall Street Journal article discusses the impact of this with respect to firms which engage in other activities in addition to retail forex transactions.  The CFTC’s proposed rules establish certain compliance parameters for retail forex transactions, requires registration of retail forex managers and requires such managers to pass a new regulatory exam called the Series 34 exam.  We do not yet know whether the other regulatory agencies will adopt rules similar to the CFTC or if they will write rules from scratch.

Next, from Henderson & Lyman:

The prohibition of Section 742(a) does not apply, however, if such a transaction results in actual delivery within 28 days, or creates an enforceable obligation to deliver between a seller and a buyer that have the ability to deliver, and accept delivery of, the commodity in connection with their lines of business. This may be problematic as in most spot metals trading virtually all contracts fail to meet these requirements. As a result, although the courts’ interpretation of Section 742(a) is unknown, Section 742(a) is likely to have a significantly negative impact on the OTC cash precious metals industry. Here too, it is essential that those who offer to be a counterparty to OTC metals transactions seek professional help to discuss possible operational and regulatory contingency plans.

The actual rule language exempts a transaction if it “results in actual delivery within 28 days or such other period as the Commission may determine by rule or regulation based upon the longer period as the Commission may determine by rule or regulation based upon the typical commercial practice in cash or spot markets for the commodity involved;”

Alas, the commission has decided not to intervene and keep the exemption status window so small as to affect virtually all exchanges which transact in the gold and silver spot market.

More here:

Elimination of OTC Forex

Effective 90 days from its inception, the Dodd-Frank Act bans most retail OTC forex transactions. Section 742(c) of the Act states as follows:

…A person [which includes companies] shall not offer to, or enter into with, a person that is not an eligible contract participant, any agreement, contract, or transaction in foreign currency except pursuant to a rule or regulation of a Federal regulatory agency allowing the agreement, contract, or transaction under such terms and conditions as the Federal regulatory agency shall prescribe…

This provision will not come into effect, however, if the CFTC or another eligible federal body issues guidelines relating to the regulation of foreign currency within 90 days of its enactment.

Registrants and the public are currently being encouraged by the CFTC to provide insight into how the Act should be enforced. See CFTC Rulemakings regarding OTC Derivatives located at the following website address, under Section XX – Foreign Currency (Retail Off Exchange). It is essential that OTC forex participants seek professional help to discuss possible operational and regulatory contingency plans.

Elimination of OTC Metals

As for OTC precious metals such as gold or silver, Section 742(a) of the Act prohibits any person [which again includes companies]from entering into, or offering to enter into, a transaction in any commodity with a person that is not an eligible contract participant or an eligible commercial entity, on a leveraged or margined basis.

This provision intends to expand the narrow so called “Zelener fix” in the Farm Bill previously ratified by congress in 2008. The Farm Bill empowered the CFTC to pursue anti-fraud actions involving rolling spot transactions and/or other leveraged forex transactions without the need to prove that they are futures contracts.

The Dodd-Frank Act now expands this authority to include virtually all retail cash commodity market products that involve leverage or margin – in other words OTC precious metals.

The prohibition of Section 742(a) does not apply, however, if such a transaction results in actual delivery within 28 days, or creates an enforceable obligation to deliver between a seller and a buyer that have the ability to deliver, and accept delivery of, the commodity in connection with their lines of business.

This may be problematic as in most spot metals trading virtually all contracts fail to meet these requirements. As a result, although the courts’ interpretation of Section 742(a) is unknown, Section 742(a) is likely to have a significantly negative impact on the OTC cash precious metals industry. Here too, it is essential that those who offer to be a counterparty to OTC metals transactions seek professional help to discuss possible operational and regulatory contingency plans.

Small Pool Exemption Eliminated

Pursuant to Section 403 of Act, the “privateadviser” exemption, namelySection 203(b)(3) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”), will be eliminated within one year of the Act’s effective date (July 21, 2011). Historically, many unregistered U.S. fund managers had relied on this exemption to avoid registration where they:

(1) had fewer than 15 clients in the past 12 months;

(2) do not hold themselves out generally to the public as investment advisers; and

(3) do not act as investment advisers to a registered investment company or business development company.

At present, advisers can treat the unregistered funds that they advise, rather than the investors in those funds, as their clients for purposes of this exemption.

A common practice has thus evolved whereby certain advisers manage up to 14 unregistered funds without having to register under the Advisers Act. Accordingly, the removal of this exemption represents a significant shift in the regulatory landscape, as this practice will no longer be allowable in approximately one year.

Also an important consideration, the Dodd-Frank Act mandates new federal registration and regulation thresholds based on the amount of assets a manager has under management (“AUM”). Although not yet underway, it is possible that various states may enact legislation designed to create a similar registration framework for managers whose AUM fall beneath the new federal levels.

Accredited Investor Qualifications

Section 413(a) of the Act alters the financial qualifications of who can be considered an accredited investor, and thus a qualified as eligible participant (“QEP”). Specifically, the revised accredited investor standard includes only the following types of individuals:

1) A natural person whose individual net worth, or joint net worth with spouse, is at least $1,000,000, excluding the value of such investor’s primary residence;

2) A natural person who had individual income in excess of $200,000 in each of the two most recent years or joint income with spouse in excess of $300,000 in each of those years and a reasonable expectation of reaching the same income level in the current year; or

3) A director, executive officer, or general partner of the issuer of the securities being offered or sold, or a director, executive officer, or general partner of a general partner of that issuer.

Based on this language, it is important to note that the revised accredited investor standard only applies to new investors and does not cover existing investors. However, additional subscriptions from existing investors are generally treated as requiring confirmation of continuing investor eligibility.

On July 27th, 2010, the SEC provided additional clarity regarding the valuation of an individual’s primary residence when calculating net worth. In particular, the SEC has interpreted this provision as follows:

Section 413(a) of the Dodd-Frank Act does not define the term “value,” nor does it address the treatment of mortgage and other indebtedness secured by the residence for purposes of the net worth calculation…Pending implementation of the changes to the Commission’s rules required by the Act, the related amount of indebtedness secured by the primary residence up to its fair market value may also be excluded. Indebtedness secured by the residence in excess of the value of the home should be considered a liability and deducted from the investor’s net worth.

Original Article: http://www.zerohedge.com/article/trading-over-counter-gold-and-silver-be-illegal-beginning-july-15?page=1

Download  Free Google Earth Nuclear  Power Radiation Plume Maps

http://nuclearpowerdanger.com/google-earth-radiation-plume-free-download.php

I am working on a new site nuclearpowerdanger.com I  have created some radioactive plume maps  based  solely on wind. Working  on more specific map methodology.

http://www.nuclearpowerdanger.com/plume-maps/sitemap-nuclear-power-plant-plumes-25mi.php 

These are existing plumes of radiation caused by "normal" releases. 
My methodology is outlined here 
http://www.nuclearpowerdanger.com/plume-maps/methodology.php

Jorn