Louisiana Republican Points to 'Big White Lines' From Planes as Proof Government Is Manipulating Weather
A bill aimed at banning so-called "chemtrails" advanced in the Louisiana House of Representatives on May 29, with State Rep. Kimberly Landry Coates (R-Ponchatoula) citing the appearance of "big white lines" in the sky as evidence of government-led weather manipulation.
Coates defended the bill, SB46, by claiming that aircraft are dispersing chemicals that she said alter weather patterns, WVUE reported.
"This bill is to prevent any chemicals above us in the air, specifically to modify the weather," she said on the House floor. Reuters
Despite overwhelming scientific consensus that these lines — condensation trails, commonly known as contrails — are harmless byproducts of aircraft exhaust interacting with cold air, Coates and other lawmakers insist they are evidence of a broader government conspiracy.
"I've seen the documents with at least nine federal agencies," Coates claimed, when asked who she believes is responsible. She did not offer additional details on the nature of the documents or name the federal agencies.
As to which chemicals are being dispersed, Coates cited nanoparticles or aluminum and barium, along with "some with long words I can't pronounce."
Contrary to Coates' assertions, the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) have repeatedly denied use of weather modification programs or chemical agents in the sky.
The bill passed with a 58-32 vote, along with amendments requiring the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality to log resident complaints about "chemtrails" and share the data with the Louisiana Air National Guard. Penalties for violators were removed from the bill, with Coates saying enforcement should wait until state agencies "understand chemtrails better."
"When you look up in the air, you watch for the big white lines across the sky," Coates told Democratic Rep. C. Denise Marcelle (D-Baton-Rouge), saying she sees them on a weekly basis.
The bill now heads back to the Senate for concurrence on the House amendments.
Florida, Alabama, and Tennessee have also brought forward legislation based on similar unsubstantiated conspiracy theories involving chemtrails, geoengineering, and weather modification.
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy applauded the efforts of states "to ban geoengineering our climate by dousing our citizens, our waterways and landscapes with toxins."
"This is a movement every MAHA needs to support," Kennedy wrote on X. "HHS will do its part."
Originally published on Latin Times
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Int'l Business Times
18 hours ago
- Int'l Business Times
Democrat 'Briefed on Intelligence' Says 'Iran Posed No Imminent Threat,' Was Not on Verge of Nuclear Weapon as Claimed by Netanyahu and Trump
Connecticut Rep. Chris Murphy denounced Trump's attack on Iran on Sunday. Fallout continues from the Trump administration's surprise bombing of three Iranian nuclear sites early Sunday, as a Democratic lawmaker refutes claims that Iran was close to developing a "deliverable nuclear weapon." Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy is the latest lawmaker to condemn President Trump's unilateral decision to strike Iran early Sunday. He also challenged claims by the Trump administration and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has made similar assertions for decades, that Iran was on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon. "I was briefed on the intelligence last week," Murphy wrote in an X post shared late Saturday evening. "Iran posed no imminent threat of attack to the United States. Iran was not close to building a deliverable nuclear weapon." "The negotiations Israel scuttled with their strikes held the potential for success," he added, referring to the sixth round of talks between Iran and the U.S., which was scheduled for June 15, just two days before Israel launched its unprovoked attack on Iran. I was briefed on the intelligence last week. Iran posed no imminent threat of attack to the United States. Iran was not close to building a deliverable nuclear weapon. The negotiations Israel scuttled with their strikes held the potential for success. — Chris Murphy 🟧 (@ChrisMurphyCT) June 22, 2025 In a follow-up X post, Murphy reiterated that Iran was at the negotiating table, "which makes this attack—with all its enormous risks—so reckless." "The context matter. We know—for certain—there is a diplomatic path to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. The Obama agreement was working. And as late as a week ago, Iran was back at the table again," Murphy wrote. The context matters. We know - for certain - there is a diplomatic path to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. The Obama agreement was working. And as late as a week ago, Iran was back at the table again. Which makes this attack - with all its enormous risks - so reckless. — Chris Murphy 🟧 (@ChrisMurphyCT) June 22, 2025 In addition to U.S. lawmakers, including Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene and Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Ortiz, speaking out against Trump's attack on Iran, leaders from around the world denounced the escalation in the Israel-Iran war, Al Jazeera reported. "I am gravely alarmed by the use of force by the United States against Iran today," United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said. "This is a dangerous escalation in a region already on the edge – and a direct threat to international peace and security." Russia's foreign ministry strongly condemned the attack. In a statement released Sunday, the ministry stated the attack was an "irresponsible decision to subject the territory of a sovereign state to missile and bomb attacks, whatever the arguments it may be presented with, flagrantly violates international law, the Charter of the United Nations and the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council." UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer showed his support for Trumps' attack, writing in a statement that "Iran's nuclear programme is a grave threat to international security." "Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon and the US has taken action to alleviate that threat," Starmer said in a statement, echoing Trump and Netanyahu's unverified claim. Originally published on Latin Times Nuclear weapons Donald trump © Latin Times. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.
Int'l Business Times
19 hours ago
- Int'l Business Times
Democrats Assail 'Erratic' Trump Over Iran Strikes
Democrats bristled Sunday over US President Donald Trump's decision to launch air strikes on Iran without seeking authorization from Congress, accusing the Republican of violating the constitution and demanding a vote to rein in his war powers. Members of the Senate and House of Representatives argued that US intelligence had not shown an imminent threat from the Middle Eastern country that justified Trump's unilateral action. "President Trump's actions in bombing Iran puts the US on the brink of a wider war in the Middle East, all without constitutionally required Congressional approval," Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin said in a statement. Democrats were divided between those demanding a vote on a war powers resolution to constrain Trump's authority to launch further action and a smaller group, who maintained that the strikes were grounds for the Republican leader's impeachment. They included Illinois moderate Sean Casten and New York leftist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who accused the president of having "impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations." Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic leaders in the Senate and House respectively, said Trump had "dramatically increased" America's risk of becoming embroiled in a new Middle Eastern conflagration. "No president should be allowed to unilaterally march this nation into something as consequential as war with erratic threats and no strategy," Schumer said. The Democrats have foreign policy hawks in their ranks and many were quick to point to the threat that a nuclear-armed Iran would pose --- while still upbraiding Trump for acting without consulting lawmakers. "The Constitution makes clear that the power to authorize war lies with Congress... The American people deserve more than vague rhetoric and unilateral decisions that could set off a wider war," said Mark Warner, vice chairman of the Senate intelligence committee. The loudest Democratic voice in support of the strikes was staunchly pro-Israel Senator John Fetterman, who singled out Trump for praise -- something even party colleagues who support the strikes have avoided. "As I've long maintained, this was the correct move by (Trump)," the Pennsylvania centrist posted on X. "Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities." Republicans have been lining up since the strikes to praise Trump and endorse his decision to hit three Iranian nuclear facilities -- with little dissent among the ranks. But Kentucky conservative Thomas Massie accused Trump of escalating the conflict between Israel and Iran. "When two countries are bombing each other daily in a hot war, and a third country joins the bombing, that's an act of war," said Massie, who introduced a bipartisan resolution earlier this month to require any military action to be approved by lawmakers. "I'm amazed at the mental gymnastics being undertaken by neocons in DC (and their social media bots) to say we aren't at war... so they can make war."
Int'l Business Times
a day ago
- Int'l Business Times
Bombing Iran, Trump Gambles On Force Over Diplomacy
For nearly a half-century the United States has squabbled with Iran's Islamic republic but the conflict has largely been left in the shadows, with US policymakers believing, often reluctantly, that diplomacy was preferable. With President Donald Trump's order of strikes on Iran's nuclear sites, the United States -- like Israel, which encouraged him -- has brought the conflict into the open, and the consequences may not be clear for some time to come. "We will only know if it succeeded if we can get through the next three to five years without the Iranian regime acquiring nuclear weapons, which they now have compelling reasons to want," said Kenneth Pollack, a former CIA analyst and supporter of the 2003 Iraq war who is now vice president for policy at the Middle East Institute. US intelligence had not concluded that Iran was building a nuclear bomb, with Tehran's sensitive atomic work largely seen as a means of leverage, and Iran can be presumed to have taken precautions in anticipation of strikes. Trita Parsi, an outspoken critic of military action, said Trump "has now made it more likely that Iran will be a nuclear weapons state in the next five to 10 years." "We should be careful not to confuse tactical success with strategic success," said Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. "The Iraq war was also successful in the first few weeks but President Bush's declaration of 'Mission Accomplished' did not age well," he said. Yet Trump's attack -- a week after Israel began a major military campaign -- came as the cleric-run state is at one of its weakest points since the 1979 Islamic revolution toppled the pro-Western shah. Since the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel by Hamas, which enjoys Iran's support, Israel -- besides obliterating much of Gaza -- has decimated Lebanon's Hezbollah, a militant group that would once reliably strike Israel as Tehran's proxy. Iran's main ally among Arab leaders, Syria's Bashar al-Assad, was also toppled in December. Supporters of Trump's strike argued that diplomacy was not working, with Iran standing firm on its right to enrich uranium. "Contrary to what some will say in the days to come, the US administration did not rush to war. In fact, it gave diplomacy a real chance," said Ted Deutch, a former Democratic congressman who now heads the American Jewish Committee. "The murderous Iranian regime refused to make a deal," he said. Top Senate Republican John Thune pointed to Tehran's threats to Israel and language against the United States and said that the state had "rejected all diplomatic pathways to peace." Trump's attack comes almost exactly a decade after former president Barack Obama sealed a deal in which Iran drastically scaled back its nuclear work -- which Trump pulled out of in 2018 after coming into office for his first term. Most of Trump's Republican Party and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has long seen Iran as an existential threat, attacked Obama's deal because it allowed Tehran to enrich uranium at levels well beneath weapons grade and the key clauses had an end date. But Trump, billing himself a peacemaker, just a month ago said on a visit to Gulf Arab monarchies that he was hopeful for a new deal with Iran, and his administration was preparing new talks when Netanyahu attacked Iran. This prompted an abrupt U-turn from Trump. "Trump's decision to cut short his own efforts for diplomacy will also make it much harder to get a deal in the medium and long runs," said Jennifer Kavanagh, director of military analysis at Defense Priorities, which advocates restraint. "Iran now has no incentive to trust Trump's word or to believe that striking a compromise will advance Iran's interests." Iran's religious rulers also face opposition internally. Major protests erupted in 2022 after the death in custody of Mahsa Amini, who was detained for defying the regime's rules on covering hair. Karim Sadjadpour, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, wrote on social media that Trump's strikes could either entrench the Islamic Republic or hasten its downfall. "The US bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities is an unprecedented event that may prove to be transformational for Iran, the Middle East, US foreign policy, global non-proliferation and potentially even the global order," he said. "Its impact will be measured for decades to come."
