120809 News As Talked About On The Harry Thomas Show - week in review main page

Core reading on one of the greatest scandals in modern history. How prominent scientists skewed the data on global warming

On Thursday 19th November 2009 news began to circulate that hacked documents and communications from the University of East Anglia’s Hadley Climate Research Unit (aka CRU) had been published to the internet.

The information revealed how top scientists conspired to falsify data in the face of declining global temperatures in order to prop up the premise that man-made factors are driving climate change.

The documents and emails illustrated how prominent climatologists, affiliated with the UN’s International Panel on Climate Change, embarked on a venomous and coordinated campaign to ostracize climate skeptics and use their influence to keep dissenting reports from appearing in peer-reviewed journals, as well as using cronyism to avoid compliance with Freedom of Information Act requests.

Here follows a compendium of articles and videos on what was quickly dubbed as “ClimateGate”.

New Zealand Climate Data Shows Clear Evidence Of Fraud

Uh, oh – raw data in New Zealand tells a different story than the “official” one.

Obama’s Science Czar John Holdren involved in unwinding “Climategate” scandal

Lift up a rock and another snake comes slithering out from the ongoing University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit (CRU) scandal, now riding as “Climategate”.

Obama Science Czar John Holdren is directly involved in CRU’s unfolding Climategate scandal. In fact, according to files released by a CEU hacker or whistleblower, Holdren is involved in what Canada Free Press (CFP) columnist Canadian climatologist Dr. Tim Ball terms “a truculent and nasty manner that provides a brief demonstration of his lack of understanding, commitment on faith and willingness to ridicule and bully people”.

“The files contain so much material that it is going to take some time t o put it all in context,” says Ball. “However, enough is already known to underscore their explosive nature. It is already clear the entire claims and positions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are based on falsified manipulated material and is therefore completely compromised.

“The fallout will be extensive as material continues to emerge. Reputations of the scientists involved are already destroyed, however fringe players will continue to be identified and their reputations destroyed or sullied.”

While the mainstream media is bending into pretzels to keep the scandal under the rug, Climategate is already the biggest scientific scandal in history because of the global policy implications.

A throwback to the intro of the television series Dragnet, “Ladies and Gentlemen: “The story you are about to hear is true, only the names have been changed to protect the innocent”, the innocent in Climategate have already been thrown to the ravening wolves.

“There is a multitude of small but frightening stories in the massive files,” Ball writes. “For example I’ve known solar physicists Sallie Baliunas and Willie Soon for a long time. I’ve published articles with Willie and enjoyed extensive communication. I was on advisory committees with them when Sallie suddenly and politely withdrew from the fray. I don’t know if the following events were contributing factors but it is likely.

“Baliunas and Soon were authors of excellent work confirming the existence of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) from a multitude of sources. Their work challenged attempts to get rid of the MWP because it contradicted the claim by the proponents of anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Several scientists challenged the claim that the latter part of the 20^th century was the warmest ever. They knew the claim was false, many warmer periods occurred in the past. Michael Mann ‘got rid’ of the MWP with his production of the hockey stick, but Soon and Baliunas were problematic. What better than have a powerful academic destroy their credibility for you? Sadly, there are always people who will do the dirty work.”

Indeed, Holdren’s emails show how sincere scientists would be made into raw “entertainment”.

How the deed was done

“A perfect person and opportunity appeared. On 16^th October 2003 Michael Mann, infamous for his lead in the ‘hockey stick’ that dominated the 2001 IPCC Report, sent an email to people involved in the CRU scandal; “

““In an email on October16, 2003 from John Holdren to Michael Mann and Tom Wigley we are told:

The Wednesday Breakfast Group

“The exchange Holdren refers to is a challenge by Nick Schulz editor of Tech Central Station (TCS). On August 9, 2003 Schulz wrote;

“Holdren provides lengthy responses on October 13, 14, and 16 but comments fail to answer Schulz’s questions. After the first response Schulz replies, “I guess my problem concerns what lawyers call the burden of proof. The burden weighs heavily, much more heavily, given the claims on Mann et.al. than it does on Soon/Baliunas. Would you agree?” Of course, Holdren doesn’t agree. He replies, “But, in practice, burden of proof is an evolving thing-it evolves as the amount of evidence relevant to a particular proposition grows.” No it doesn’t evolve; it is either on one side or the other. This argument is in line with what has happened with AGW. He then demonstrates his lack of understanding of science and climate science by opting for Mann and his hockey stick over Soon and Baliunas. His entire defense and position devolves to a political position. His attempt to belittle Soon and Baliunas in front of colleagues is a measure of the man’s blindness and political opportunism that pervades everything he says or does.

“Schulz provides a solid summary when he writes, “I’ll close by saying I’m willing to admit that, as someone lacking a PhD, I could be punching above my weight. But I will ask you a different but related question. How much hope is there for reaching reasonable public policy decisions that affect the lives of millions if the science upon which those decisions must be made is said to be by definition beyond the reach of those people?”

“We now know it was deliberately placed beyond the reach of the people by the group that he used to ridicule Soon and Baliunas. Holdren was blinded by his political views, which as his record shows are frightening. One web site synthesizes his position on over-population as follows, “Forced abortions. Mass sterilization. A “Planetary Regime” with the power of life and death over American citizens.”

“Holdren has a long history of seeking total government control. He was involved in the Club of Rome providing Paul Ehrlich with the scientific data in his bet with Julian Simon. Ehrlich lost the bet. Holdren’s behavior in this sorry episode with Soon and Baliunas is too true to form and shows the leopard never changes his spots,” Ball concludes.

Meanwhile, even with an AWOL mainstream media, the Climategate snakes continue to slither out from under the rocks.

Al Gore to Speak at November Allstream Marquee Event

Changes in the global economy continue to shape the world and the environment in which we live. Guests of the 2009 Allstream Global Forum will be the first in Canada to hear former U.S. Vice-President Al Gore share his new and compelling vision of how business can play a pivotal role in ensuring these changes are for the better through innovation and investment in new technology. Proceeds from the event, which will take place on November 24, 2009, at the Allstream Centre at Exhibition Place in Toronto, will go to the David Suzuki Foundation and its efforts to help transform the Canadian economy in ways that are consistent with a sustainable future. Co-founded by award-winning scientist, environmentalist and broadcaster Dr. David Suzuki, the David Suzuki Foundation is a world-renowned organization committed to helping Canadians achieve sustainability within a generation.

Emails that rocked climate change campaign leaked from Siberian ‘closed city’ university built by KGB

Suspicions were growing last night that Russian security services were behind the leaking of the notorious British ‘Climategate’ emails which threaten to undermine tomorrow’s Copenhagen global warming summit.

An investigation by The Mail on Sunday has discovered that the explosive hacked emails from the University of East Anglia were leaked via a small web server in the formerly closed city of Tomsk in Siberia.

The leaks scandal has left the scientific community in disarray after claims that key climate change data was manipulated in the run-up to the climate change summit of world leaders.

The row erupted when hundreds of messages between scientists at the university’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) and their colleagues around the world were placed on the internet along with other documents.

The CRU is internationally recognised as one of the most important sources of information on the rise in global temperatures.

A civil servant who is a member of one of the most vehemently pro man-made global warming advocacy organizations in Europe which also has direct ties to the IPCC has been handed the job of whitewashing the investigation into the University of East Anglia, while absurdly billing himself as impartial and unconnected to climate science.

Meanwhile, the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has ludicrously announced that it will conduct its own investigation into the climategate scandal, despite the fact that the suspects involved have intimate ties to the IPCC, with one of the primary scientists accused of manipulating climate data being a lead author of the 1995, 2001, and 2007 IPCC reports.

Having the IPCC investigate climategate would be like Ken Lay heading up the Enron enquiry.

One of the primary climategate suspects, Kevin Trenberth, is a lead IPCC author, having been influential in crafting the 1995, 2001, and 2007 IPCC reports.

Professor Phil Jones, who infamously wrote of the need to “hide the decline” in global warming, is also a primary IPCC contributor, having been in charge of the two key sets of data used by the IPCC to draw up its reports.

In addition, another climategate suspect, Michael Mann, was the creator of the debunked “hockey stick” graph, which was “Given star billing by the IPCC, not least for the way it appeared to eliminate the long-accepted Mediaeval Warm Period when temperatures were higher than they are today.”

There is little pretense about the fact that the UN will merely absolve its own scientists of blame, the larger scam is the notion that civil servant Sir (Alastair) Muir Russell, who has been picked to head the investigation into East Anglia University, after an earlier trial balloon to have the inquiry headed by warmist advocate Lord Rees was shot down, is impartial, when he is a member of The Royal Society of Edinburgh, a vehemently pro-man made global warming organization.

“As a measure of how out of touch UEA is, they apparently have little idea that the title “former civil servant” does not inspire much confidence from skeptics, since it has been “civil servants” who have been blocking access to the data and procedures all along,” writes Anthony Watts.

Russell has pitched himself as someone with “no links to either the university or the climate science community,” yet he is firmly a member of the academic establishment, being the former Principal and Vice-Chancellor of the University of Glasgow.

Russell is the quintessential establishment lackey, having been appointed a Knight Commander of the Order of the Bath in the Queen’s Birthday Honours in 2001.

There’s little doubt that Russell is an establishment insider who has been tasked with whitewashing the whole affair. He is a member of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, an offshoot of the same organization that Lord Rees is a part of. The Royal Society of Edinburgh “provides annual grants totaling over half a million pounds for research” in Scottish universities, a sizeable portion of which goes to research attempting to validify claims about man-made global warming.

The RSE has thrown its weight behind the global warming movement, lending its absolute support for legislation aimed at reducing carbon emissions by 80%, a process that will devastate the global economy and living standards.

This organization has been even more vehement than national governments in its advocacy of the man-made cause of global warming, calling for such drastic CO2 cuts to be made in the short term, not even by the usual target date of 2050.

A February 2009 response to the Climate Change (Scotland) Bill outlines the organization’s staunch advocacy for the hypothesis of anthropogenic (man-made) global warming.

Earlier this year, The Royal Society of Edinburgh elected Professor Peter Smith to become one of its members. Smith just happens to be the Convening Lead Author of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report. He has also been a lead author for numerous other IPCC reports over the past thirteen years.

How can a proud member of an organization that is aggressively pushing measures to cut CO2 in the name of halting alleged man-made global warming, while also having a direct relationship with the UN IPCC, bill himself as being totally impartial and unconnected to climate science?

The climategate scandal has grown wings and taken flight. This is a scandal within a scandal, the notion that the very crooks caught manipulating data can appoint their own allies to “investigate” their wrongdoing and think nothing of it, while claiming that such individuals are impartial and independent, is beyond belief.

The only real investigation of climategate has to occur at the congressional or parliamentary level, preferably both, and it has to be completely open and transparent – not sneakily wrapped up behind closed doors by organizations like the IPCC and members of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, both of whom have a massive stake in protecting and upholding the entire climate change fraud.

A fantastic article written by Christopher Brooker of the London Telegraph exposing the climate change fraud rocketed to the very top of a Google News search for “global warming,” only to disappear hours later.

“It’s still the most-read article of the Telegraph’s entire online operation – 430 comments and counting – yet mysteriously when you try the same search now it doesn’t even feature. Instead, the top-featured item is a blogger pushing Al Gore’s AGW agenda. Perhaps there’s nothing sinister in this. Perhaps some Google-savvy reader can enlighten me.”

Another blogger noted how other versions of the article appeared, but the original had been “disappeared,” despite the fact that other London Telegraph articles showed up as the top ranked result when entering their headline.

“That is using the search string: “Climate change: this is the worst scientific scandal of our generation” – which is the full headline of the piece. It shows up where it has been quoted in full by other sites, but of the Booker column there is no sign,” writes Richard North.

In addition, searches for previous Christopher Brooker articles show up as top links – it’s only this particular article that has seemingly been targeted for censorship.

The same de-listing of the article is evident on other major search engine websites like Bing and Yahoo.

It appears as if one of the editors at the Telegraph has gone into the backend of the Telegraph content management system and checked an option that prevents search engines from indexing a particular article.

“My guess is that this isn’t a Google issue. The problem probably lies closer to home – there looks to be an enemy in the camp, who has probably been using this, or something like it,” writes North, referring to a code that is inserted into a web page in order to block it from being ’spidered’. This is sometimes done to prevent site ripping and other hacks, but it also has the effect of barring search engines from being able to list the page in their results.

The fact that this has been applied to just this one article suggests that some higher-up at the Telegraph from the warmist camp was concerned about how the article had gone viral and wanted to contain its spread.

The fact that this attempt at sabotage has become a story within itself will probably only mean Brooker’s article will be read by more people, so the whole ruse has backfired.

Developing countries react furiously to leaked draft agreement that would hand more power to rich nations, sideline the UN's negotiating role and abandon the Kyoto protocol

• Read the 'Danish text'
• In pictures: Copenhagen day two

The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN's role in all future climate change negotiations.

The document is also being interpreted by developing countries as setting unequal limits on per capita carbon emissions for developed and developing countries in 2050; meaning that people in rich countries would be permitted to emit nearly twice as much under the proposals.

The so-called Danish text, a secret draft agreement worked on by a group of individuals known as "the circle of commitment" – but understood to include the UK, US and Denmark – has only been shown to a handful of countries since it was finalised this week.

The agreement, leaked to the Guardian, is a departure from the Kyoto protocol's principle that rich nations, which have emitted the bulk of the CO2, should take on firm and binding commitments to reduce greenhouse gases, while poorer nations were not compelled to act. The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank; would abandon the Kyoto protocol – the only legally binding treaty that the world has on emissions reductions; and would make any money to help poor countries adapt to climate change dependent on them taking a range of actions.

The document was described last night by one senior diplomat as "a very dangerous document for developing countries. It is a fundamental reworking of the UN balance of obligations. It is to be superimposed without discussion on the talks".

A confidential analysis of the text by developing countries also seen by the Guardian shows deep unease over details of the text. In particular, it is understood to:

• Force developing countries to agree to specific emission cuts and measures that were not part of the original UN agreement;

• Divide poor countries further by creating a new category of developing countries called "the most vulnerable";

• Not allow poor countries to emit more than 1.44 tonnes of carbon per person by 2050, while allowing rich countries to emit 2.67 tonnes.

Developing countries that have seen the text are understood to be furious that it is being promoted by rich countries without their knowledge and without discussion in the negotiations.

"It is being done in secret. Clearly the intention is to get [Barack] Obama and the leaders of other rich countries to muscle it through when they arrive next week. It effectively is the end of the UN process," said one diplomat, who asked to remain nameless.

Antonio Hill, climate policy adviser for Oxfam International, said: "This is only a draft but it highlights the risk that when the big countries come together, the small ones get hurting. On every count the emission cuts need to be scaled up. It allows too many loopholes and does not suggest anything like the 40% cuts that science is saying is needed."

Hill continued: "It proposes a green fund to be run by a board but the big risk is that it will run by the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility [a partnership of 10 agencies including the World Bank and the UN Environment Programme] and not the UN. That would be a step backwards, and it tries to put constraints on developing countries when none were negotiated in earlier UN climate talks."

The text was intended by Denmark and rich countries to be a working framework, which would be adapted by countries over the next week. It is particularly inflammatory because it sidelines the UN negotiating process and suggests that rich countries are desperate for world leaders to have a text to work from when they arrive next week.

Few numbers or figures are included in the text because these would be filled in later by world leaders. However, it seeks to hold temperature rises to 2C and mentions the sum of $10bn a year to help poor countries adapt to climate change from 2012-15.

Exclusive: World's pre-eminent climate expert says any agreement would be so flawed that deal would be a disaster

===============================================================================

Who Will Stand Up Against the Coming Global Climate Tyranny?

Adam Murdock, M.D.
Infowars
December 6, 2009

This week, President Obama and the leaders of the world are to meet to determine the fate of humanity. This meeting, to be held in Copenhagen, has as its’ mission to bind the nations of the world under a climatocracy, or rather a climate regulatory scheme devised and operated by bureaucrats and elitists. The members of this climatocracy will profit while the rest of humanity will sink into darkness. There will be nowhere to hide; no oasis to be found in the desert. Indeed, after the discussions have concluded will our freedoms also be concluded? Will humanity be plunged into a global tyranny governed by a state of climate fear or will we be able to stop them before it is too late? There have never been greater stakes for the freedom of mankind.




Al Gore and Maurice Strong have used the cloak of pseudo climate science as their veil.

Over the past couple decades globalists like Al Gore and Maurice Strong have used the cloak of pseudo climate science as their veil. Now that ‘climategate’ has removed the curtain and shone the light on the slithering cockroaches within the backrooms of climate cookbookery, there is no longer any debate about the science. The only thing that now exists is laid bare before our eyes – a deliberate attempt to subjugate the people of the earth to global governance under the guise of science.

As the newly ‘elected’ EU President Von Rompuy puts it:

“2009 is also the first year of global governance, with the establishment of the G20 in the middle of the financial crisis. The climate conference in Copenhagen is another step towards the global management of our planet.”

This goal as stated by the EU President was made prior to the recent revelations about the padding of the climate data by key climate scientists. Yet, what has been the response of the very leaders now proceeding on with the conference? Have they toned down their rhetoric or better yet admitted the charade that the conference represents? Unfortunately, they have done the exact opposite. They have continued their relentless course toward the “global management” of our planet as if nothing has happened. It is as if they are willing to deny that the sun is shining at noonday when it is clearly visible. I can fathom no other reason for these leaders to do this, unless climate change is not really the goal but only a means to an end. Now that their desired end is so close it appears that they are not about to let some emails or real science get in the way of global progress.

It appears that although the fraud has been revealed, the deck may have been stacked against humanity. Indeed, the stacked deck may have already been dealt. My only hope is that the clock has not already struck midnight on our freedoms.

Now is the time to make your collective voices heard. Once the treaties have been signed and freedom has been lost there will be very little we can do to rescind such agreements. Call your local, state, and federal representatives wherever you live. Do it for your children, do it for your country, do it for your freedom to live and breathe as you see fit.

A life of regret will not make up for inaction at this time. Let us hold up a flag of liberty to everyone around us and rally them to the cause of freedom at this crucial moment in our history.

Adam Murdock, M.D. is founder of The Freemen Institute, www.freemeninstitute.com.

===============================================================================

Dictatorial UN Crushes Media Freedom Before Copenhagen

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, December 1, 2009

Dictatorial UN Crushes Media Freedom Before Copenhagen 011209top

Betraying its dictatorial and anti-free speech agenda, the United Nations has blocked two-time New York Times number one bestseller and World Net Daily senior staff writer Jerome Corsi from attending the Copenhagen climate conference next week.

Establishment propaganda organs like the Associated Press, who have dutifully echoed the UN’s hokey science on global warming, in spite of the recent climategate scandal which proved that top academics associated with the UN IPCC manipulated data to “hide the decline” in global temperatures, have been graciously invited to attend the summit, but any media outlet that has questioned the United Nations’ monopoly on universal truth is not welcome.

Despite the fact that Corsi was previously accredited for coverage at the UN, namely for speeches given by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and George W. Bush, he has been banned from attending next week’s Copenhagen confab.

“Axel Wuestenhagen, media coordinator for the event, admitted in his response that, after two weeks of deliberation on the matter, he consulted with U.N. officials in New York to make a decision about WND’s request,” reports World Net Daily.

“Having now reviewed the application and in consultation with the Media and Accreditation Unit in New York, regrettably, we are not in a position to grant accreditation in this instance,” he wrote. “As a for-profit subsidiary of the nonprofit Western Journalism Center, we follow the U.N. guidelines on accreditation which specifies that advocacy publications of nongovernmental or nonprofit organizations do not qualify for media accreditation. Please note that the organization is under no obligation to accept your request if it does not meet U.N. standards and requirements for press accreditation.”

As WND editor Joseph Farah points out, WND has no present affiliation whatsoever with the Western Journalism Center, so the ban has been implemented on a completely false pretext. Despite this, even if WND was affiliated with the Western Journalism Center, what gives the United Nations the right to block media coverage of an event that has global ramifications? This isnt a private function, this is a major summit at which decisions which intimately affect the lives of U.S. citizens will be made by unelected bureaucrats.

Of course, the real reason why Corsi and WND were banned from the event is because they have not prostrated themselves in front of the UN as a servile echo chamber for global warming brainwashing and propaganda, unlike organizations like the Associated Press who have profusely dothed their cap in support of the UN’s ceaseless drive to convince the world that the “debate is over” on global warming, despite the fact that temperatures have been falling for over 10 years.

The Copenhagen event is also being billed as a great leap forward for the implementation of a global government. Since Corsi and World Net Daily have consistently highlighted the anti-democratic nature of the march towards a new world order, their skepticism is obviously something the UN is trying to neutralize.

Top globalists routinely let slip damning statements about the real agenda behind the march towards global governance at these kind of events, yet establishment media outlets habitually fail to report on them. Corsi would have seized upon and reported these sort of statements, which is precisely why the UN has barred him from attending.

This is the model for freedom of the press in the new world order once global institutions completely seize control of national legislative bodies. As is also the case with the European Union, which passed a tyrannical ruling that made it an illegal offense to criticize the EU, dissent in the era of global governance will not be tolerated and those who attempt to exercise freedom of speech in opposing our new rulers will be summarily silenced and gagged.

===============================================================================

Police Get “Pre-emptive” Arrest Powers Ahead Of Copenhagen

Felicity Carus
London Guardian
Friday, November 27, 2009

The Danish parliament today passed legislation which will give police sweeping powers of “pre-emptive” arrest and extend custodial sentences for acts of civil disobedience. The “deeply worrying” law comes ahead of the UN climate talks which start on 7 December and are expected to attract thousands of activists from next week.

Under the new powers, Danish police will be able to detain people for up to 12 hours whom they suspect might break the law in the near future. Protesters could also be jailed for 40 days under the hurriedly drafted legislation dubbed by activists as the “turmoil and riot” law. The law was first announced on 18 October.

The Danish ministry of justice said that the new powers of “pre-emptive” detention would increase from 6 to 12 hours and apply to international activists. If protesters are charged with hindering the police, the penalty will increase from a fine to 40 days in prison. Protesters can also be fined an increased amount of 5,000 krona (671 Euros) for breach of the peace, disorderly behaviour and remaining after the police have broken up a demonstration.

The Danish police also separately issued a statement in August (pdf) applying new rules and regulations for protests at the climate conference, warning that “gatherings that may disturb the public order must not take place”.

Earlier this month, the Guardian published a letter by environmental activists that described the new law as “deeply worrying” and called for the Danish government to uphold their right to legitimate protest.

Tannie Nyboe, a spokewoman from campaigning group Climate Justice Action in Denmark, said the new law was designed to control civil disobedience during the summit. “These laws are a big restraint in people’s freedom of speech and it will increase the police repression for anyone coming to Copenhagen to protest. Denmark normally boasts of how open and democratic a country we are. With this law we can’t boast about this anymore.

Full story here.

===============================================================================

Lord Monckton: Shut Down The UN, Arrest The Warmist Criminals

Anti-climate cult crusader calls for world to rise up against communistic killers behind global warming fraud

Lord Monckton: Shut Down The UN, Arrest The Warmist Criminals 281109top

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Saturday, November 28, 2009

Appearing on The Alex Jones Show yesterday, Lord Christopher Monckton went further than ever before in his vehement opposition to the elitists running the climate change scam, calling for the UN to be shut down and for fraudulent peddlers of global warming propaganda like Al Gore to be arrested and criminally prosecuted.

Monckton said that those who are threatening to shut down economies, bankrupt nations, and deepen the problems of the third world by implementing draconian policies in the name of global warming should be indicted, prosecuted and imprisoned “for a very long time”.

“The fraudsters and racketeers from Al Gore to the people at the University of East Anglia who have been making their fortune at the expense of taxpayers and the little guy,” should be criminally charged, said Monckton, in response to the climategate scandal.

“We the people have got to rise up worldwide, found a party in every country which stands for freedom and make sure we fight this bureaucratic communistic world government monster to a standstill – they shall not pass,” he added.

Monckton said that the United Nations should be “closed down,” adding that he talked to a senior UN ambassador in Canada who told him that he no longer saw any purpose in the UN and it exists “only to enrich itself at the expense of the nations it claims to serve, it’s time it was brought to an end.”

“We would all save billions if we shut down the UN and just about all of its hideous bureaucracy,” said Monckton.

Lord Monckton emphasized how the emails released as a result of climategate prove that global warming alarmism was still prevalent in public but behind closed doors, warmist scientist are admitting that the “deniers” as they label people like Monckton are correct.

“Publicly they’re saying the science is settled, we’re all doomed unless you close down the economies of the west, whereas privately they’re saying to each other ‘we’ve got it wrong, none of this adds up and it’s a travesty that we can’t explain it’.”

Monckton also slammed Obama’s science czar John P. Holdren, who in his 1977 book Ecoscience called for draconian population measures to be enforced by a “planetary regime” in the name of saving the earth, as an “openly admitted communist”.

Monckton pointed out how Holdren had been once of the most prominent alarmists in the 70’s warning about the onset of rapid “global cooling”.

“Now with seamless mendacity he says that what we’re now facing is global warming,” said Monckton.

“How can anyone like Holdren stand up with a straight face and expect anyone to believe it,” he added.

Monckton said that the agenda behind the global warming movement was to set up a communistic world government which will be run by people who “do not care how many people they kill with their policies” and that their goal is to “do away with democracy forever by stealth using the excuse to save the planet.”

Monckton said that the people running the scam had a “deliberate desire to control population by killing people in large numbers deliberately if necessary.”

The former advisor to Margaret Thatcher said that the warmists were sounding more and more desperate and knew that they had been rumbled as a result of climategate, which would only make it more urgent for them to try and force through a binding treaty in Copenhagen.

Monckton said that the answer to combating the move towards neo-feudalism and global government was to form a worldwide “freedom party” that would operate nationally in every country in order to defend freedom, democracy and prosperity while routing out every aspect of the communistic takeover.

“Every time these people try to take it away, we in the freedom party will stop them, and I think now is the time,” said Monckton.

Watch the interview in full below.

VIDEO LINK 1

VIDEO LINK 2

VIDEO LINK 3

VIDEO LINK 4

VIDEO LINK 5

===============================================================================

Lord Monckton on Copenhagen and the Fabricated Climate Scare

Russia Today
December 7, 2009

VIDEO LINK

The United Nations Climate change conference has opened in the Danish capital Copenhagen. RT’s Laura Emmet has talked to one man who’ll be there – who’s also one of the most outspoken critics of global warming theory.

===============================================================================

Meteorologist suggests NOAA manipulates data to support climate claims and political goals

Marc Morano
Climate Depot
December 5, 2009

Below is a guest essay by Meteorologist Joe D’Aleo, the first Director of Meteorology at The Weather Channel and former chairman of the American Meteorological Society’s (AMS) Committee on Weather Analysis and Forecasting. D’Aleo publishes www.IceCap.US




NOAA chose to remove satellite input into their global ocean estimation.

D’Aleo comments on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) claim that global sea-surface temperatures (SST’s) were recently the hottest since 1880.

D’Aleo comments on NOAA’s claim of ‘record’ sea surface temps: To enable them to make the case the oceans are warming, NOAA chose to remove satellite input into their global ocean estimation and not make any attempt to operationally use NASA’s Argo data in the process. This resulted in a jump of 0.2C or more and ‘a new ocean warmth record’ in July. ARGO tells us this is another example of NOAA’s inexplicable decision to corrupt data to support political agendas.

D’Aleo on NOAA global temperature claims: What can I say. Between the station dropout (80% of the world’s stations, mostly rural), removal in US or absence globally of any UHI (Urban Heat Island) adjustment, bad siting for 90% of the climate stations and the recent removal of satellite input into the ocean temperature assessments, NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) has ensured that each and every month and season will rank and ‘validate’ their piece of excrement called CCSPand support the government’s argument for Cap-and-Tax, carbon regulations and global actions at Copenhagen.

This is not an indictment of the hard-working and honest rank-and-file NOAA employees at the local offices and even behind the scenes at NCDC. It is the fault of higher ups and managers whose jobs and reputations rely on perpetrating the global warming hoax long enough so the governments can have their way to control virtually every aspect of our lives and keep the funding at the highest possible level for those who have abused the science to their benefit. See also here, here and here.

===============================================================================

Obama to attend beginning of U.N. climate meeting

By Jeff Mason

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Barack Obama will go to Copenhagen for a U.N. climate change meeting on December 9, hoping to add momentum to an international process despite slow progress on a domestic bill to cut carbon emissions.

Obama planned to make a visit at the beginning of the climate negotiations in Denmark, an administration official told Reuters on Wednesday, before picking up the Nobel Peace Prize at a ceremony in neighboring Oslo.

Obama did not plan to return for the end of the December 7-18 meeting, when roughly 65 other heads of state and government are expected to attend, the official said.

Obama has made climate change a top priority of his administration, but a bill to cut U.S. emissions is bogged down in the U.S. Senate. The U.S. House of Representatives has passed its version of climate change legislation.

Most nations have given up hopes of agreeing to a binding legal treaty text in Copenhagen, partly because of uncertainty about what the United States will be able to offer.

Environmentalists had hoped Obama would be present for the leaders meeting at the end of the talks to give legitimacy to a "politically binding" agreement that host Denmark still hopes to achieve.

In such an agreement, developed nations would set goals for cutting emissions by 2020, developing nations would agree to slow the rise of their emissions, and the rich would come up with new aid and clean technology to help the poor cope with climate change.

===============================================================================

U_S_ makes first move at Copenhagen - The Globe and Mail

EPA declares greenhouse gases a health risk

===============================================================================

Copenhagen climate summit: 1,200 limos, 140 private planes and caviar wedges

Andrew Gilligan
London Telegraph
Monday, Dec 7th, 2009

Copenhagen is preparing for the climate change summit that will produce as much carbon dioxide as a town the size of Middlesbrough.

On a normal day, Majken Friss Jorgensen, managing director of Copenhagen’s biggest limousine company, says her firm has twelve vehicles on the road. During the “summit to save the world”, which opens here tomorrow, she will have 200.

“We thought they were not going to have many cars, due to it being a climate convention,” she says. “But it seems that somebody last week looked at the weather report.”

Ms Jorgensen reckons that between her and her rivals the total number of limos in Copenhagen next week has already broken the 1,200 barrier. The French alone rang up on Thursday and ordered another 42. “We haven’t got enough limos in the country to fulfil the demand,” she says. “We’re having to drive them in hundreds of miles from Germany and Sweden.”

Full article here

===============================================================================

Globalist Hypocrites Arrive In Copenhagen for Summit

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, December 7, 2009

Caviar Scoffing, CO2 Belching, Prostitute Molesting Climate Crooks Convene For The Mass Raping 071209top

Record numbers of stretch limos and private jets are descending on Copenhagen as thousands of CO2 belching, caviar scoffing, prostitute molesting, hypocritical climate crooks prepare to orchestrate the next round of mass raping in pursuit of their much cherished world government and its handmaiden, a global tax on carbon emissions.

In another stark reminder that these globalists couldn’t give a damn about CO2 emissions, only eviscerating economies and the middle class, their own behavior is completely at odds with how they are indignantly demanding other people live their lives.

A London Telegraph report reveals how the combined CO2 footprint of the conference will amount to no less than 41,000 tons, equal to that produced by an African country over the same period.

Despite the fact that the climate crooks constantly berate and browbeat Joe Public about not driving hybrid vehicles and taking two holidays a year via commercial airliners, the Copenhagen criminals are arriving in luxurious private jets before whizzing around town in gas-guzzling stretch limos.

“We thought they were not going to have many cars, due to it being a climate convention,” Majken Friss Jorgensen, managing director of Copenhagen’s biggest limousine company told the Telegraph. “But it seems that somebody last week looked at the weather report.”

“Ms Jorgensen reckons that between her and her rivals the total number of limos in Copenhagen next week has already broken the 1,200 barrier. The French alone rang up on Thursday and ordered another 42. “We haven’t got enough limos in the country to fulfil the demand,” she says. “We’re having to drive them in hundreds of miles from Germany and Sweden.”

“And the total number of electric cars or hybrids among that number? “Five,” says Ms Jorgensen.”

While readying speeches about how the middle class will be forced to lower their living standards, pay higher taxes on all forms of travel, and make personal sacrifices in order to save the planet from the alleged menace of CO2, Copenhagen globalists will be relaxing on the 140 extra private jets that are being forced to drop off attendees in Copenhagen and then fly back to other airports and even other countries just to park due to the lack of spaces.

Elitists will scoff scallops, foie gras and sculpted caviar wedges, while lecturing the general public about how eating meat is harming the earth.

And while the climate crooks wag their finger at you for having the audacity to own an SUV, they will be running up a bill of over $200 million dollars, and guess who is going to be picking up the tab?

“According to an analysis by the Taxpayer’s Alliance, a conservative cost of Copenhagen is £130million.

It includes £6.3million on flights, £20million on hotels and £3.3million on food,” reports the Daily Mail.

“The figure also includes the salaries for delegates and the contribution from the Danish government of £37 million. Most of the money will come from taxpayers.”

Meanwhile, eco-fascism has proven it’s still very much alive and well with the news that “56 major newspapers in 45 countries are today publishing a shared editorial calling on politicians and negotiators gathering in Copenhagen to strike an ambitious deal on combating climate change.”

Of course, behind the contrived grandstanding on behalf of such publications that they are somehow speaking with one united voice in the interests of humankind, all this really shows is that the same establishment attempting to bang the last few nails in the coffin of freedom, by taxing carbon dioxide, the life-giving gas that humans exhale and trees absorb, also happen to own and control the vast majority of the global media.

Far from being an upstanding act of benign advocacy, as it is being framed, the fact that 56 major world newspapers are all spewing the same propaganda, especially in light of the Climategate scandal that most of them have failed to even acknowledge in any depth whatsoever, smacks of the kind of editorial control the Nazis exercised in 1930’s Germany or Joseph Stalin enjoyed in Communist Russia.

Meanwhile, according to an article in Spiegel Online, prostitutes are preparing for globalists to descend on Copenhagen by offering free sex. The Mayor of Copenhagen attempted to limit the expected deluge of summit attendees enjoying the use of prostitutes by sending a letter to hotels across the city urging delegates and guests at the conference, “Be sustainable, don’t buy sex.” Prostitutes responded by offering free sex to any Copenhagen attendee who produces the Mayor’s letter.

Summits of this size are routinely accompanied by a huge spike in the sex trade in whatever city they happen to be taking place. While servants of the global elite and their masters lecture us about our moral imperatives, half of them are out committing adultery on a nightly basis during the same global conferences at which they habitually pose with righteous indignation.

Make sure you have plenty of vomit bags on standby over the next couple of weeks, because you are going to be endlessly lectured by a gaggle of amoral, money-grubbing, control freak thugs who couldn’t care less about the environment unless they can invoke it as a pretext for taxing you out of existence while declaring the very particles that you breathe to be a deadly poison.

A London Telegraph report reveals how the combined CO2 footprint of the conference will amount to no less than 41,000 tons, equal to that produced by an African country over the same period.

“Ms Jorgensen reckons that between her and her rivals the total number of limos in Copenhagen next week has already broken the 1,200 barrier. The French alone rang up on Thursday and ordered another 42. “We haven’t got enough limos in the country to fulfil the demand,” she says. “We’re having to drive them in hundreds of miles from Germany and Sweden.”

“And the total number of electric cars or hybrids among that number? “Five,” says Ms Jorgensen.”

Elitists will scoff scallops, foie gras and sculpted caviar wedges, while lecturing the general public about how eating meat is harming the earth.

“According to an analysis by the Taxpayer’s Alliance, a conservative cost of Copenhagen is £130million.

It includes £6.3million on flights, £20million on hotels and £3.3million on food,” reports the Daily Mail.

“The figure also includes the salaries for delegates and the contribution from the Danish government of £37 million. Most of the money will come from taxpayers.”

===============================================================================

Copenhagen, Carbon and Control

Genevieve Moore
Infowars
November 30, 2009

From scrapped cars to bloated NGOs, funded by those who aim to profit from carbon, one need only look to the European Union and the UK to see what’s planned for America. It’s no surprise that the US government, and associated institutions, plan to support “low carbon” strategies for a new world. It takes only a few clicks of the mouse to discover the tentacle-like, death hold the green revolutionaries possess throughout the USA and the world.




While American consumers were gladly handing over their “clunkers”, so too, was Canada, the UK, South Africa, Germany, France, Italy and now China.

A myriad of tentacles have been developed which appear to be innocuous non-profits like Transition US, Post Carbon Institute, Carbon Trust, or the Chicago Climate Exchange. Examples of relevant government entities include the US Bureau of Economic Geology, the United Nations Environment Programme, the Global Environment Facility and the Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel, along with their board members’ dubious affiliations. Let’s not forget the universities who receive research dollars from power hungry, carbon over-lords to develop foundational, and intricately designed systems-modeling data in order to validate the next level of global control, while mystifying most of us with complicated jargon and mathematics.

It’s interesting to note that while American consumers were gladly handing over their “clunkers”, so too, was Canada, the UK, South Africa, Germany, France, Italy and now China is announcing a similar move. Proponents of this scheme say it will boost sluggish auto sales. So, is this about climate change, or another back door bailout?

Look a little deeper, however, and we find that scrappage schemes really don’t work to reduce much of anything. In fact, the United Kingdom Energy Research Centre (UKERC) published findings in June of 2009 specifically addressing vehicle scrappage programs. For clarity’s sake the UKERC is a government appointed consortium of academia from 15, UK academic institutions. In their research and data study they find that vehicle scrappage does nothing to reduce carbon emissions; has little impact on sustaining vehicle efficiency and may actually have the reverse impact by increasing miles driven because people now have new cars. See their findings at this web location: http://www.ukerc.ac.uk/support/tiki-index.php?page=VSS-Detail

Yet despite the UK’s own scientific information, the scrappage program which began April 22, 2009, was extended on September 28, 2009: The Government today announced a £100M increase to the vehicle scrappage scheme to build on the success of the scheme in boosting consumer demand. http://www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/sectors/automotive/scrappage/page51068.html

If these programs are found to be questionable, especially without the acquisition of real data, then this futile exercise begs the question: What is this about? The author will hypothesize that this particular program and the implementation thereof, is a piloted demonstration of governments acting as one, single, global entity.

Scrapping vehicles is a hyped sell to consumers to accomplish several things: create a precedent for a united, carbon-guised, global effort; line the pockets of the automakers, shareholders and data makers; bolster the image of environmental concern, securing a healthy, well-indoctrinated voting block. Perhaps most importantly, to set a “carbon budget precedent” as a local and individual control mechanism.

What does this have to do with Copenhagen? Since our president has already demonstrated his willingness to align himself with the UK, and ultimately the EU/UN by ushering in his “cash for clunkers” program, let’s look at other items on his agenda. This from ABC’s Z. Byron Wolf: “While not originally expected to attend the event, Mr. Obama will take the opportunity in an international venue to lay out his road map to achieving the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emission 83 percent by 2050, with benchmarks of achieving a 30 percent reduction from 2005 emission levels in 2025 and a 42 percent reduction off those levels by 2030, according to officials and a memo released by the White House”.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/11/obama-to-lay-out-emissions-goals-in-copenhagen.html

This same article quotes, “Sen. Barbara Boxer’s Environment and Public Works committee passed a more ambitious bill that would seek to cut emissions 20 percent by 2020. The White House seems to endorse the more modest House approach by saying the President will announce reducing emissions “in the range of 17% below 2005 levels.”

Interestingly, our government proposals are taken directly from, “UK’s National Strategy for Climate and Energy: Transition to a Low Carbon Society”. This document specifically states, “The UK is calling for an ambitious global agreement at UN talks in Copenhagen in December 2009″. The plans shared in this document include: To drive this transition the government has put in place the world’s first ever legally binding target to cut emissions at least 80% by the year 2050 and a set of 5 year carbon budgets to 2022 to keep the UK on track”.

What else should we be expecting in America? How about Smart Meters, Personal Carbon Allowances, and other quite shocking programs designed to thwart our freedoms. The real business of carbon regulation is a matter of global sychronicity while controlling our mobility and freedom without actually have to expose themselves to challenge, or debate. After all, the science has been purchased, as have the politicians and the corporations.

Confoundedly, proponents of programs and policies geared toward carbon budgeting are presented as good stewards of this planet and they may even believe they are. The disarming aspect of “carbon-nation” is that no one seems to notice the evolution of this slow, seemingly painless, asphyxiation which the carbon paradigm presents to our sovereignty as a nation.

===============================================================================

Copenhagen’s Hidden Agenda: The Multibillion Trade in Carbon Derivatives

Washington’s Blog
December 8, 2009

As I have previously shown, speculative derivatives (especially credit default swaps) are a primary cause of the economic crisis.

And I have pointed out that (1) the giant banks will make a killing on carbon trading, (2) while the leading scientist crusading against global warming says it won’t work, and (3) there is a very high probability of massive fraud and insider trading in the carbon trading markets.

Now, Bloomberg notes that the carbon trading scheme will be centered around derivatives:

The banks are preparing to do with carbon what they’ve done before: design and market derivatives contracts that will help client companies hedge their price risk over the long term. They’re also ready to sell carbon-related financial products to outside investors.

[Blythe] Masters says banks must be allowed to lead the way if a mandatory carbon-trading system is going to help save the planet at the lowest possible cost. And derivatives related to carbon must be part of the mix, she says. Derivatives are securities whose value is derived from the value of an underlying commodity — in this case, CO2 and other greenhouse gases…

Who is Blythe Masters?

She is the JP Morgan employee who invented credit default swaps, and is now heading JPM’s carbon trading efforts. As Bloomberg notes (this and all remaining quotes are from the above-linked Bloomberg article):

Masters, 40, oversees the New York bank’s environmental businesses as the firm’s global head of commodities…

As a young London banker in the early 1990s, Masters was part of JPMorgan’s team developing ideas for transferring risk to third parties. She went on to manage credit risk for JPMorgan’s investment bank.

Among the credit derivatives that grew from the bank’s early efforts was the credit-default swap.

Some in congress are fighting against carbon derivatives:

“People are going to be cutting up carbon futures, and we’ll be in trouble,” says Maria Cantwell, a Democratic senator from Washington state. “You can’t stay ahead of the next tool they’re going to create.”

Cantwell, 51, proposed in November that U.S. state governments be given the right to ban unregulated financial products. “The derivatives market has done so much damage to our economy and is nothing more than a very-high-stakes casino — except that casinos have to abide by regulations,” she wrote in a press release…

However, Congress may cave in to industry pressure to let carbon derivatives trade over-the-counter:

The House cap-and-trade bill bans OTC derivatives, requiring that all carbon trading be done on exchanges…The bankers say such a ban would be a mistake…The banks and companies may get their way on carbon derivatives in separate legislation now being worked out in Congress…

Financial experts are also opposed to cap and trade:

Even George Soros, the billionaire hedge fund operator, says money managers would find ways to manipulate cap-and-trade markets. “The system can be gamed,” Soros, 79, remarked at a London School of Economics seminar in July. “That’s why financial types like me like it — because there are financial opportunities”…

Hedge fund manager Michael Masters, founder of Masters Capital Management LLC, based in St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands [and unrelated to Blythe Masters] says speculators will end up controlling U.S. carbon prices, and their participation could trigger the same type of boom-and-bust cycles that have buffeted other commodities…

The hedge fund manager says that banks will attempt to inflate the carbon market by recruiting investors from hedge funds and pension funds.

“Wall Street is going to sell it as an investment product to people that have nothing to do with carbon,” he says. “Then suddenly investment managers are dominating the asset class, and nothing is related to actual supply and demand. We have seen this movie before.”

Indeed, as I have previously pointed out, many environmentalists are opposed to cap and trade as well. For example:

Michelle Chan, a senior policy analyst in San Francisco for Friends of the Earth, isn’t convinced.

“Should we really create a new $2 trillion market when we haven’t yet finished the job of revamping and testing new financial regulation?” she asks. Chan says that, given their recent history, the banks’ ability to turn climate change into a new commodities market should be curbed…

“What we have just been woken up to in the credit crisis — to a jarring and shocking degree — is what happens in the real world,” she says…

Friends of the Earth’s Chan is working hard to prevent the banks from adding carbon to their repertoire. She titled a March FOE report “Subprime Carbon?” In testimony on Capitol Hill, she warned, “Wall Street won’t just be brokering in plain carbon derivatives — they’ll get creative.”

Yes, they’ll get “creative”, and we have seen this movie before …an inadequately-regulated carbon derivatives boom will destabilize the economy and lead to another crash.

===============================================================================

Gore’s mountain of misinformation

Permalink

Andrew Bolt

Friday, December 04, 2009 at 02:06pm

Holland’s Elsevier reports on new research that once more shows Al Gore faked his findings in An Inconvenient Truth:

Former American vice president and Nobel Prize winner Gore has for years used the melting snow on Africa’s highest mountain (5892 metres) for his climate propaganda. The snow cover is shrinking and that is caused by man and his greenhouse gases!

The Dutch scientist Jaap Sinninghe Damsté debunks this story of climate guru Gore in the leading periodical Nature.

A natural process of large climate shifts seems to be the true cause, says the Dutch Organisation for Scientific Research on Thursday....

The researcher and European colleagues discovered that Kilimanjaro underwent successive periods of heavy monsoons and extreme dryness. Ice and snow retreat from the top in dry periods and return in the very wet ones....

Al Gore must find another symbol for his climate problem. Kilimanjaro does now have little snow on the peak, but that seems to be completely natural.

(My translation.)

No doubt a correction of this and all the other errors and exaggerations in Gore’s film, which made much of Kilimanjaro’s snow cover, will be sent to the millions of students forced to watch it as a lesson in “science”.

Oh, and what did the CSIRO top expert in global warming effects, Penny Whetton, say of this farrago of exaggerations, distortions and untruths upon its release - when even a mere journalist then could see through the bunkum?

“I was really quite moved, and given that this film was about a topic I deal with every day, this says something about how powerfully it communicates its message. Its scientific basis is very sound.” 4.75 out of 5

Retraction, please, Ms Whetton.

UPDATE

I’m not sure even The Australian’s journalists have quite caught up with the public’s sudden revolt against scaremongers like Al Gore. Check the readers’ comments to its latest report on the Great Green Gore’s pronouncements.

(Thanks to readers Fiona and John.)

===============================================================================

World Health Organization ‘Manufactured’ The Global Swine Flu Scare — Suspected Of Corruption

Novye Izvestija
November 26, 2009

Translated from Russian by Infowars Ireland

The Swine Flu Pandemic which Novye Izvestija has written about many times, may be the most ambitious scam and corruption of our time. In any case, the enormous commercial aspect of the “swine flu scare” is already evident.




The main cause of the hysterical response to the swine flu epidemic is a strong public relations campaign by experts from WHO. Photo: Margaret Chan, Director-General of the World Health Organization.

The same conclusion was reached by Danish journalists who expertly examined the links between the World Health Organization (WHO) and the world’s leading pharmaceutical companies, who gained wealth by selling drugs to counter the disease. It turns out, for example, that many scientists who sit on various committees of WHO, carefully concealed the fact that they receive money from the giant pharmaceutical companies of the world.

According to the international investment bank JP Morgan, the pharmaceutical industry will make more than 7 Billion Euros this year on the sale of A/H1N1 vaccines. Leading western countries have ordered enough doses to vaccinate either their entire population (such as Australia) or one third (Germany and several other EU member States). Factories making the vaccines and pills are working around the clock, in four shift rotations, with a backlog of orders …they are not experiencing the global economic crisis as others might.

For the first time in many years flu pandemic ‘panic’ has affected the EU. The vaccine has been produced without a sufficient number of clinical and laboratory tests.

Is such a panic justified? a growing number of specialists are examining the issue by comparing the mortality statistics from the swine flu virus and it’s ‘conventional’ varieties, each Autumn they begin their march across the planet. So far, according to WHO, six thousand people have fallen victim to A/H1N1, while the average annual death rate during epidemics of ‘traditional’ varieties of flu reaches half a million.

The main cause of the hysterical response to the swine flu epidemic, according to reporters from the Danish newspaper ‘Information’, is not because it is so dangerous, but because of a strong public relations campaign by experts from WHO. Some of them [WHO experts] are literally in the service of the vaccine manufacturers.

“It is disturbing that many of the scientists who sit on various committees of WHO, are presented as ‘independent experts’, but they carefully conceal the fact that they receive money from pharmaceutical companies”, Professor of epidemiology, Tom Jefferson, who works at the Cochrane Center in Rome, told reporters.

WHO announced the swine flu pandemic under pressure from a panel of advisers, headed by a Dutch doctor, Albert Ostenhaus, nicknamed ‘Dr. Flu’ (from the name ‘Tamiflu’) because he was active in promoting mass vaccination of the population through WHO and the Western media. Now the government of the Netherlands is conducting an emergency investigation into the activities of ‘Doctor Flu’, as it became known that he receives a salary from several vaccine manufacturing companies. Many other WHO advisers sit ‘on two chairs’ (conflict of interest) like Ostenhaus, and while dealing with the swine flu pandemic on behalf of WHO, they do not like to advertise that they are paid advisers to pharmaceutical giants Roche, RW Johnson, SmithKline and Beecham Glaxo Wellcome, who have received the lion’s share of orders for manufacturing of vaccines. The result of pressure from these experts was the resolution of WHO on 7th July this year, which called for an unprecedented campaign of mass vaccination.

“The WHO is biased in their recommendations – says Professor Tom Jefferson. – Normal hygiene measures provide much greater effect than these little-studied vaccines, and at the same time WHO refers to the use of masks and hand-washing as a means to combat swine flu only twice in their documents. Vaccines and other medications are referred to 42 times!” Dr. Jefferson and several of his colleagues believe that paid advisers of the pharmaceutical companies should be removed from their positions and not allowed to give recommendations to the WHO, but the organization itself is in no hurry to carry out such a reform. WHO spokesperson, Gregory Hertl, commenting on the article in ‘Information’ (Danish newspaper) said it is impossible to deny the services of the world’s leading experts on the sole ground that they have a financial interest in the promotion of a strategy to combat various diseases.

It should be noted that this is not the first year that ’scope for corruption’ in pharmacology has been the focus of the Western media. The New England Journal of Medicine published ‘The Whistleblower’ several years ago. In a series of articles the Whistleblower showed the inside life of the ‘medical mafia’. According to them, only 11-14% of pharmaceutical companies budgets are spent on research, but 36% of funds are spent on PR. Much of the money ends up in the pockets of doctors, scientists, and the accounts of various organizations working in health care.

===============================================================================

Scientist Repeats Swine Flu Lab-Escape Claim in Published Study

Simeon Bennett
Bloomberg
Wednesday, Nov 25th, 2009

Adrian Gibbs, the virologist who said in May that swine flu may have escaped from a laboratory, published his findings today, renewing discussion about the origins of the pandemic virus.

The new H1N1 strain, which was discovered in Mexico and the U.S. in April, may be the product of three strains from three continents that swapped genes in a lab or a vaccine-making plant, Gibbs, and fellow Australian scientists wrote in Virology Journal. The authors analyzed the genetic makeup of the virus and found its origin could be more simply explained by human involvement than a coincidence of nature.

Their study, published in a free, online journal reviewed by other scientists, follows debate among researchers six months ago, when Gibbs asked the World Health Organization to consider the hypothesis. After reviewing Gibbs’ initial three-page paper, WHO and other organizations concluded the pandemic strain was a naturally occurring virus and not laboratory-derived.

“It is important that the source of the new virus be found if we wish to avoid future pandemics rather than just trying to minimize the consequences after they have emerged,” Gibbs and colleagues John Armstrong and Jean Downie said in today’s eight- page study.

Full article here

===============================================================================

Reactions to Glaxo Flu Vaccine Under Investigation in Canada

Trista Kelley and Alexandre Deslongchamps
Bloomberg
Thursday, Nov 26th, 2009

Canada is still investigating an unusually high rate of a side effect known as anaphylaxis from a batch of GlaxoSmithKline Plc’s swine flu vaccine, health officials said today.

Anaphylaxis occurred at a rate of about 4 per 100,000 shots in one lot of 172,000 doses of the vaccine, David Butler-Jones, Canada’s chief public health officer, said at an Ottawa news conference. Typically, about 1 person in 100,000 will suffer such a reaction. Anaphylaxis is an acute allergic reaction that includes swollen tongues, throats and respiratory distress.

Glaxo, the sole supplier of swine flu shots to Canada, has shipped 7.5 million doses of the Arepanrix vaccine to the country, the company said this week. For all batches, the rate of side effects is 0.32 per 100,000, health officials said today.

The higher rate from one batch may be a statistical anomaly, Butler-Jones said. About 15,000 shots from the batch that still haven’t been used are being held back while investigators look into the matter, officials said. There were no obvious glitches in the manufacturing process, Butler-Jones said.

Full article here

===============================================================================

ABC’s V Series Plays On Vaccine Fears

Plot features alien conspiracy to inject humans with biological weapon disguised as flu shot

Art imitating life or revelation of the method? ABC’s popular remake of the 1980’s drama “V” called a hiatus on its first season this week with an interesting plot – a conspiracy on behalf of the evil alien rulers to inject humans with a biological weapon disguised as a flu vaccine.

“The resistance uncovered a Visitor plot to inject the humans with a strange chemical compound,” summarizes an LA Times write-up of the latest episode.

“Mistakenly believing that the vitamin supplement that Anna announces on television is the likely target of Peter Combs’ plot (it is said to fight cancer and even stave off aging), Erica, Jack and Ryan make a shocking discovery at a warehouse that is even more insidious. Uncovering evidence of experimentation on human subjects, they soon realize that the vitamin supplements are smokescreen to divert attention from the real threat: the flu vaccine. The warehouse is overflowing with vaccine that has been tampered with and is intended to be shipped the following day.”

Or as another write-up describes it, “Erica, Ryan, Georgie and Father Jack spent some time getting to know each other in this episode. Their plan is to expose the V’s for what they are and they start with trying to crack down on their new Healthcare initiative. Long story short, they invade a warehouse and find out that the V’s have been experimenting with some drugs on humans and killing them. They are planning to distribute their lethal injections by mixing it with Flu Vaccines. Erica realizes that Anna is exploiting the predictability of humans knowing that any health scare will cause them to get their flu shots in mass numbers.”

The fact that script writers of such a major prime time show chose to run with this particular a plot at the same time as governments in the real world attempt to overcome mass rejection of the swine flu shot due to fears over its safety is a fascinating synthesis.

As we have highlighted, health authorities have been desperately pushing the notion that the vaccine is safe as part of a gargantuan PR campaign, without explaining why well-connected members of the elite have had special access to an additive-free version of the shot that doesn’t contain ingredients like mercury and squalene that are contained in the public version.

The rollout of the vaccine has been limited to far fewer people than the government originally intended, partly due to a supply shortage and partly because more than half of Americans have refused to take the shot. The government’s efforts to dismiss concerns about side-effects will likely kick into high gear when more batches of the vaccine become available.

Some cynics would even suggest that the “V” scriptwriters playing on the vaccine meme is an exercise in revelation of the method, in the vein of the Lone Gunmen episode aired six months before 9/11 that featured a storyline about rogue elements within the government crashing a commercial plane into the World Trade Center by remote control in order to launch a new war in the middle east.

Jesse takes questions from viewers about upcoming episodes of ‘Conspiracy Theory’ his new TruTV show which debuted last night. The first episode covered the secretive HAARP project and aspects of weather manipulation.

By now, most readers are familiar with the story of how a Virginia couple, Michaele and Tareq Salahi, crashed the White House State Dinner last Tuesday evening. President and Mrs. Obama were entertaining Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in the first official State Dinner of the new administration. The Salahis were not on the invited guest list, but were still allowed to walk right into the White House. They even had face-to-face conversations with both President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden. Photographs of the Salahis with the President and Vice President have been published in numerous newspapers and on hundreds of web sites.

I wonder if the American people are thinking this episode through? Think of it: in the post-9/11 world, a world that has invented the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), body scanners, retina readers, the Patriot Act, hundreds of laws and regulations restricting the freedoms and liberties of the American people, thousands of cameras photographing our public movements, and satellite spy devices, a couple can walk right into the White House and meet the President and Vice President without being invited!

I well remember what I had to go through when I was an invited guest of then-Vice President George H. W. Bush at the White House. My wife and I joined several others for a luncheon with Vice President Bush and his wife, Barbara. Later that day, we were in a crowd of several hundred who got to meet President Ronald Reagan. Needless to say, security was tight.

Upon arriving, we had to show the proper credentials to White House security, along with a photo ID and the personal invitation that had been sent to us ahead of time. I remember how some of the folks who had actually received invitations were denied entrance due to bureaucratic mix-ups or unintentional lapses in proper protocols. And these were people who really did have an invitation to be there. I can tell you this: there was absolutely no way that an uninvited person could have gained access to the White House that day. And remember: that was nearly two decades BEFORE 9/11!

That an uninvited couple could be granted access to the President and Vice President in this day and time is more than a “fluke.” It betrays something much deeper.

For the last 8 years, the American people have been told they must sacrifice certain liberties in order that the federal government might protect them. And for the most part, the American people have been happy to accommodate this incessant intrusion into their personal liberties. They know the feds are monitoring their emails, personal phone conversations, and even their personal letters when received from overseas. They have sat silently as their banking institutions have monitored and reported virtually any and all financial transactions to the federal government. In today’s super-security world, one cannot even cash a check without showing the bank teller his or her driver’s license, which is recorded and made available to the feds. Sometimes, we are even required to provide our thumbprints. Beyond that, even certain service personnel that must come into our homes to provide in-home repair services, home inspections, or general services are often required to report what they see to various law enforcement authorities. All of this is done in the name of “national security.”

In the name of “national security,” veterans who have been accused of some kind of domestic disturbance or who have affirmatively answered an ambiguous question on a VA form regarding whether they have feelings of “anger” or “depression” are having their right to keep and bear arms stripped away. That’s right, in the name of “homeland security,” some of the very men who were entrusted with lethal weapons to fight America’s wars are now being told they are not fit to purchase or possess their own firearms.

Yet, in spite of all of the above, an uninvited couple is allowed to calmly walk right past Secret Service personnel and have personal audiences with the President and Vice President of the United States in what is ostensibly the most heavily-guarded, tightly secured building in the country: the White House.

Furthermore, this story comes on the heels of the mass shooting on what one would think would be a rather secure location: the US Army base at Fort Hood, Texas. And, have we forgotten the fellow who brought a gun into the Capitol Building (the home of the US Congress) in Washington, D.C., a few years ago and killed two police officers?

Dear Reader, ask yourself this question, Do you really think those schmucks in Washington, D.C., actually believe that protecting you and me is more important than protecting American soldiers, US congressmen, and especially the President of the United States? “Are you serious?” (To quote Nancy Pelosi.) The truth is, to the elites in DC, you and I are expendable commodities. In fact, to some of the soulless creatures running things, you and I are worth more dead than alive (but that’s a topic better discussed at a later date).

The point is, all this talk about “national security” is simply a ruse for Big Government elitists to steal our liberties and make slaves out of us. They don’t care about security; all they care about is POWER.

So, the next time you are required to be strip-searched by an airport screener, or to surrender your pocketknife at your local county commissioner’s office, or to show your driver’s license to your bank teller, or to submit to a random police checkpoint; the next time you make a phone call that you know is monitored by a federal agent (and they all are), or drive under a video camera, or visit these castle-esque federal buildings, remember Michaele and Tareq Salahi. And, if you are old enough, remember the time in America when we really were the “land of the free.” And also remember that it’s not security they seek–it’s the abolition of our liberty.

In an article published in the February, 2010, issue of Guns & Weapons for Law Enforcement (a print magazine not available online), Donald J. Mihalek argues that suspected criminals in the United States should be treated the same way “insurgents” are in Iraq.

“With violent crime increasing in many American cities,” writes Mihalek, “it is easy to think of criminals as an ‘insurgency’…. This growing insurgent behavior includes shootings of civilians, a growing trend of gang violence and an increase in narcotics related kidnapping. The trends point to a need for a renewed strategy to fight violent crime.”

Mihalek suggests cops borrow from General David Petraeus, who formulated an eight point counterinsurgency plan to deal with elements in Iraq opposed to the occupation of their country. Petraeus’ FM 3-24 is a final draft on counterinsurgency and spans nearly 250 pages.

Petraeus’ COIN (the popular acronym for counterinsurgency) doctrine is an extension on the Pentagon’s “full spectrum dominance” as devised by the neocons prior to and during George W. Bush’s tenure in the White House. Full-spectrum dominance is a military concept whereby a joint military structure achieves control over all elements of the “battlespace” using land, air, maritime and space based assets.

“It’s important to recognize the most important overarching doctrinal concept that our Army, in particular, has adopted — the concept of ‘full spectrum operations.’ This concept holds that all military operations are some mix of offensive, defensive, and stability and support operations. In other words, you’ve always got to be thinking not just about the conventional forms of combat — offensive and defensive operations — but also about the stability and support component,” Petraeus told Foreign Policy, a a bimonthly magazine founded by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and subsequently purchased by The Washington Post Company.

In FM 3-24’s overview, Petraeus and his coauthor write that the Iraq COIN doctrine contains both new and old elements. Traditional COIN tactics used in the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaya, Northern Ireland, Algeria, and much of the third world include population control (relocation of the population), “oil spot” (concentration of counter-insurgent forces into an expanding, secured zone), population monitoring (checkpoints and national identity cards), and cordon and search.

The U.S. COIN doctrine includes psychological warfare (planned use of propaganda and other psychological actions) and information warfare (spreading of propaganda or disinformation to demoralize the enemy and the public). Psychological and information warfare are currently used against the American public (for instance, the US Army 4th Psychological Operations Group was active at both NPR and CNN, while the CIA’s Operation Mockingbird compromised a large segment of the corporate media beginning in the early 1950s).

In Instruments of Statecraft: U.S. Guerilla Warfare, Counterinsurgency, and Counterterrorism, 1940-1990, Michael McClintock writes about the change in COIN after World War II, particularly during the Kennedy administration. “As terror was seen as integral to guerrilla tactics, the counterguerrilla would apply counterterror; guerilla organization (e.g., recruitment surveillance) would be mimicked by counterorganization. Counterorganization, taken to its entail, could (and often did) entail placing hundreds of thousands of people under virtual totalitarian control. Which combined with the psychological warfare technique of ideological indoctrination, totalitarian potential could become reality.”

For COIN to work as Mihalek suggests the United States will necessarily become a totalitarian military dictatorship (a process already well underway, as evidenced by the the passage of the Patriot Act — now used against suspected criminals in lieu of actual terrorists — violations of Posse Comitatus, the increasing presence of military troops on the streets in collaboration with law enforcement, and the ever-encroaching high-tech surveillance grid intruding on many aspects of public and private life).

It should be noted that terrorism is part of the COIN doctrine and it was advocated by so-called terrorism experts and the defense establishment in the 1980s. Pentagon legal consultant William V. O’Brien, for instance, writing on special operations, has justified wholesale terrorism as a way to win “low-intensity” conflicts. O’Brien has advocated “exceptions to the normal moral and legal constraints” on military action. Murder and terrorism “may be presumed to be justified by a high and urgent necessity that may require sacrifice of other values such as some of the normal moral — legal constraints.”

“The suggestion that war crimes are acceptable in small doses, the selective ideal of special warfare, recalls the 1967 army manual’s warning that only selective counterterror is legitimate (’i.e. genocide is not an alternative’),” writes McClintock. “O’Brien’s warning not to go too far bears the same double message — that war crimes are to be expected but should not be excessive in number.”

Donald J. Mihalek argues that these horrendous and illegal techniques (although he does not mention them specifically) should be brought to the United States and practiced by police against “civilians” who may or may not be guilty of a crime.

That this disturbing article was published in a trade journal tailored for law enforcement is another indication that police around the country — increasingly federalized and militarized — are being indoctrinated to believe police work is related to the activities of the military.

On November 30, 2009, the Bloomington Herald-Times made the following announcement:

“This week, HeraldTimesOnline.com will launch its new gun permit database. You’ll be able to search gun permit records by county, city or town and street.”

The Herald-Times has begun receiving calls and emails, and their response is a defiant defense of their online gun permit database.

Anyone who visits the newspaper website will be able to search the number of permits on a given street or neighborhood. Although at this point the names and house numbers are not listed, the newspaper’s website treats law-abiding Indiana gun owners like sex offenders on a searchable database.

Please contact the Bloomington Herald-Times to respectfully voice your displeasure at the irresponsible action the newspaper has made.

A sweeping international treaty to regulate how knowledge and creativity may flow on the Internet is now being negotiated. Haven’t heard of it? Funny thing, that’s exactly what the backers of the treaty want. The film, music, publishing and information industries don’t want a public debate about the issues or an open debate in Congress. So they have been working hand-in-glove with the U.S. Trade Representative to move U.S. policymaking offshore and throw a dark cloak of secrecy around everything. The next stop: draconian penalties for anyone who is accused of violating copyright law.

Details about the treaty are murky. But the latest draft, according to a leak summarized on the Boing Boing website, would require:

Who would have guessed that such nasty stuff was embedded in a treaty called the “Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)”? That title was presumably meant to reassure people that it’s a non-controversial measure. But fighting counterfeits seems to be just the cover story. The real goal is to win a backdoor expansion of copyright law, much stronger enforcement powers and greater corporate control of the Internet — all without having to go through that pesky process known as democracy.

If the first subterfuge was the misleading title, the second subterfuge was to call ACTA a “trade agreement” rather than a multilateral intellectual property treaty. A trade agreement can be implemented by the Executive Branch on its own, and does not require congressional approval. An intellectual property treaty would require a congressional vote.

This could turn out to be a fatal legal maneuver, Eddan Katz of the Electronic Frontier Foundation points out in a recent blog post, because an executive agreement like ACTA must “color within the lines of U.S. law.” Yet the U.S. Trade Representative has been quoted as saying that the treatment will “stick as closely to U.S. law as possible.”

Oh, that’s reassuring. As Katz asks: “How can the USTR negotiate an international agreement that sets new global IP enforcement norms requiring changes to U.S. law and policy as an Executive Agreement, without the knowledge or involvement of Congress?” (For more on this point, see Katz’s law review article in the Yale Journal of International Law .)

The bad faith only gets worse. Beyond the misleading title and backdoor legal maneuvers is Very Deep Secrecy. Or more accurately, selective Very Deep Secrecy. Key Washington insiders and corporate players have been granted full access to the draft treaty — but we the little people have been excluded. Wanna read the draft? You can’t. The official rationale is that such disclosures would jeopardize national security. Seriously.

When I blogged about the so-called ACTA treaty — Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement — in March 2009, Public Knowledge and others were trying to open up the treaty process through Freedom of Information Act requests and public pressure. As criticism mounted, the U.S. Trade Representative in September came up with an ingenious “solution” — let a handful of public-interest advocates read the ACTA draft — but only after signing a a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) that prohibits them from publicly discussing it.

NDAs are a standard tool among Silicon Valley tech companies to prevent proprietary secrets from circulating. Notwithstanding President Obama’s other laudable initiatives in open government, this NDA approach to citizen participation is worthy of Dick Cheney or George W. Bush.

Wait, there’s more! Even this form of restricted access is selectively granted. The U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) decided to pick and choose who would be invited to sign an NDA and thus be allowed to read the document (but not talk about it publicly).

This Orwellian farce prompted James Love of Knowledge Ecology International — a long-time critic of ACTA and the USTR — to prepare a petition that has garnered thousands of signatories. The petition reads in part:

The opportunity to see the ACTA documents under the NDA was offered to a large number of business interests, but very few public interest or consumer groups, and there were no opportunities for academic experts or the general public to review the documents.

We are opposed to this approach because it creates a small special class of citizens who have rights superior to the majority of the population, and because it gives the government too much discretion in deciding who can monitor and criticize its operations. We have no confidence in this new approach.

Some of the people who have signed such NDAs are grateful for the chance to have had special access to some information, but they also feel constrained by the inability to discuss the contents of the documents, and are confident that nothing they have seen constitutes information that in any way would prejudice the national security of the United States if it were in fact disclosed.

In our opinion, the ACTA negotiations would not exist without the support and engagement of the U.S. government, and they are too important to continue under such questionable practices.

The only rationale for keeping the proposed ACTA text from the public is to suppress criticism and critical thinking about the norms that are being proposed. It is Orwellian and an insult to our intelligence to claim that the secrecy of the ACTA text has anything to do with national security concerns, as the term is commonly understood.

A secret process of arbitrary access, conditioned upon signing non-disclosure agreements to block public debate, does not enhance openness and transparency, and does not inspire respect for the norms that will eventually emerge.

Public Knowledge also prepared a petition as well, which has been signed by the American Association of Law Libraries, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Electronic Privacy Information Center, Future of Music Coalition, Internet Archive and Sunlight Foundation, among others.

Even some Senators are getting upset about the USTR’s high-handed approach to democracy. Senators Sherrod Brown and Bernie Sanders have sent a letter to the USTR asking that the ACTA text be made public:

ACTA involves dozens if not hundreds of substantive aspects of intellectual property law and its enforcement, including those that have nothing to do with counterfeiting. . . . There are concerns about the impact of ACTA on the privacy and civil rights of individuals, on the supply of products under the first sale doctrine, on the markets for legitimate generic medicines, and on consumers and innovation in general.

The Motion Picture Association of America has no qualms about the secrecy. In its own letter to the USTR, the MPAA dismissed such concerns with a wave of the hand: “Outcries on the lack of transparency in the ACTA negotiations are a distraction. They distract from the substance and the ambition of the ACTA…”

You heard right: democratic process is a “distraction.” At a time when the U.S. is trying to rehabilitate its international image and show others how democracy works, the ACTA treaty is not a very good advertisement for the “American way.”

At this point, it’s unclear how the whole misbegotten mess will play out, but there is no doubt that the key players, including the U.S. Government, are trying to use international law to neuter the Internet, subvert the innovation and participation that open platforms enable, and violate people’s privacy and due process rights — all of this without meaningful public dialogue.

I don’t think the USTR or President Obama really want to go there. It would ignite a political and cultural explosion. If they are too frightened to have an open, honest debate at the draft proposal stage — it they are too frightened of the citizenry — imagine the political blowback that will occur if the treaty actually becomes enforceable law. Let’s face it: A public reckoning will have to occur at some point, and the sooner the USTR backs away from the ledge and opens up its deliberations, the better it will be for it, President Obama and the rest of us.

Joan Veon is an author, journalist and expert on globalization; she also hosted her own radio talk show and is a successful businesswoman. In these 2 videos she explains the mechanism by which corporations gain power over all levels of government: local, county, state, federal, foreign and the United Nations, thus creating corporate fascism, on a global level.

The public part of the Public- Private Partnership (PPP) is the government, which becomes corrupted and no longer represents the taxpayers, when it accepts funding from private interests. Further, the government becomes silent against abuses to the public when they have been compromised by PPP business arrangements, and, worse yet, may also sell off resources and utilities that were owned by the taxpayers. The government does this because they are broke and more taxation is unpopular.

The private stakeholder in the business arrangement always has profit as its goal, not service. Service was formerly the role of the representative government. The assets that once belonged to the taxpayers are then transferred to private interests, in a transfer of wealth through the assets, to private parties that seek profit at any price. Frequently, deceit, deception and distortion are used to fleece the taxpayer into this ’solution’ for governments that are broke.

American local, county, state and the federal governments have gone broke and are ripe for the sale of their assets to PPP’s because of deficit spending, and a lack of economic common sense. John Maynard Keynes promoted deficit spending to Roosevelt as a way to escape the Depression. This results in diluted government and loss of power.

For a wealth of information on PPP’s and other related topics, visit Joan Veon’s website at http://www.womensgroup.org/.

Appearing at the final date of Al Gore’s and others’ “Made in America Clean Energy Jobs Tour” which was held in Pittsburgh on September 23rd 2009, the President of the AFL-CIO and member of President Obama’s PERAB (President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board), Richard Trumka, calls for a “New Economic Order” and “New rules on carbon emissions.”

On the eve of the G20 Summit in Pittsburgh, the president of the AFL-CIO and appointed member of PERAB (President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board) delivered a speech at Al Gore’s et al “Made In America Clean Energy Jobs Tour.” See part 2 of the video.

During Trumka’s nearly 10-minute speech, he makes repeated calls for a “New Economic Order.” At one point during his speech, Trumka ties together both the New World Order and carbon taxes by saying, “We need new rules on carbon emissions, we need a new economic order that addresses the global job crisis that Wall Street keeps exporting and exploiting.”

Mr. Trumka is basically trying to deceive the people into believing that there is essentially a ‘good’ and ‘bad’ New World Order by saying that “Unregulated globalization” has lead to our current economic crises. While the latter part of the statement is true, having “New rules on carbon emissions” is the NWO’s agenda to get the United States and the rest of the western world on the hook for a “Carbon Debt” as seen in the Copenhagen Treaty.

Founder and Chairman of the “Alliance for Climate Protection” Al Gore, stated in a recorded message at the rally, “Our Made in America Clean Energy Jobs Tour was a critical effort to show the power and the benefits of a transition to a truly clean energy economy. It’s no secret our economic crisis and the climate crisis are linked, and so are their solutions.” Again, the latter part of the statement is truthful on its face, however, Gore isn’t telling us that the NWO deliberately destroyed the United States’ economy and is now pitching “Good green jobs” and “Cap and Trade” as the way for us to rebuild it.

It’s classic Hegelian Dialect at its best (worst). They create the problem, reaction, and then offer their solution. Let us not follow Richard Trumka, Al Gore, or President Obama down the rat-hole into an abyss of “Global Governance.”

Let us expose these people and their fraud of Anthropogenic Global Warming, which only seeks to bring the United States under the hammer of the New World Order’s one-world government!

MEP Reprimanded For Exposing EU Dictatorship

Farage chastised in Parliament for highlighting the fact that the European Union is an authoritarian tyranny, breaks crazy law that states it is illegal to criticize the EU

An astounding exchange took place in the European Union Parliament earlier this week when MEP Nigel Farage was reprimanded for daring to expose the fact that the EU is an authoritarian dictatorship ruled by unelected bureaucrats to the detriment of national sovereignty. Farage effectively broke a tyrannical 1999 law that states it is illegal to criticize the EU.

People like European Commission President Manuel Barroso squirmed and scowled as Farage openly savaged EU elitists for their lies and cronyism.

Farage wasted no time in going after the EU over their dictatorial policies, stating, “It’s taken you eight and a half years of bullying, of lying, of ignoring democratic referendums to get this treaty through (referring to the Lisbon Treaty)”.

Farage then attacked the appointment of Van Rompuy as the first EU President, highlighting that he was merely a pliable front man for Barroso.

“But at least he’s an elected politician unlike Baroness Ashton,” said Farage, referring to the woman who landed the job of High Representative for Foreign Affairs.

“In some ways she’s ideal isn’t she ,” said Farage, leader of the UK Independence Party. “She has never had a proper job, and has never been elected to anything in her life, so I guess she’s perfect for this European Union.”

As soon as Farage hit his stride in revealing the dictatorial nature of the EU, he was immediately reprimanded by President of the European Parliament, Jerzy Buzek, who said he would like to “put down” Farage and later warned him for the “tone” Mr. Farage used in criticizing”important EU people”.

As we have seen in the past, the EU is very sensitive about anyone discussing the fact that they represent a dictatorial body.

The Nazis killed people who spoke out against the Third Reich, whereas the EU has implemented an altogether more efficient solution – simply kill their free speech instead.

Earlier this year, a Dutch MP was refused entry to Britain because his political opinions were deemed offensive under EU laws. Euro MP’s have consistently attempted to ban the “dangerous and unregulated blogosphere” in an attempt to shut down free speech on the Internet. Under the 1999 ruling of the European Court Of Justice (case 274/99), it is illegal to criticize the EU and the EU is on a mission to outlaw any national political parties that do not pander to the European federal superstate agenda.

Farage continued by highlighting the fact that Ashton represented the EU’s agenda in a “post-democratic age,” where people are selected by the elite for high power positions rather than elected by the people.

“She married well, she married an advisor and a friend and a supporter of Tony Blair and got put in the House of Lords, when she was put in the House of Lords she was given one big job, and the job was to get the Lisbon Treaty through the House of Lords, and to do so pretending that it was entirely different to the EU Constitution…and she vigorously crushed any attempt in the House of Lords for the British people to have a referendum,” said Farage at which point EU bureaucrats, upset that their tyranny was being openly discussed in the EU Parliament, began attempting to silence Farage by shouting and clapping, as Barroso looked visibly shaken.

Farage responded to one heckler by stating, “Well at least I’ve been elected sir, unlike her, she’s not been elected and the people don’t have the power to remove her.”

As EU bureaucrats continued to heckle Farage, he explained how Ashton had taken large donations from a prominent member of the Communist Party in Great Britain in her role as Treasurer for the CND, demanding answers on why she had taken money from someone who represented an organization staunchly opposed to western democracy.

“Did she take money from enemies of the west, that question must be answered,” stated Farage.

Farage then accused MEP’s of “betraying their national democracies” in allowing Lisbon to pass and warned that an avalanche of new laws would follow, before calling for a national referendum in the UK to decide whether Britain should leave the EU. The camera then cut back to Barroso who looked like he was fuming at the fact that someone had dared stand up to the almighty European Union and expose their authoritarian and dictatorial nature.

After Buzek warned him again over “certain expressions” he was using, Farage attempted to find out what he had said that was so offensive, before a Socialist MEP babbled out some barely comprehensible globalist rhetoric in a lame attempt to counter Farage’s incisive speech.

“With respect I think you’ve completely missed the point,” responded Farage, “Because twice you said ‘the people that were elected last week’ – they have not been elected, that is the point that I am making and in the case of Baroness Ashton she has never been elected to public office in her entire life, she takes an enormously powerful job and the peoples of Europe do not have the power to hold her to account and to remove her and that fundamentally is what is wrong with this whole European Union, it’s all about bureaucracy versus democracy.”

The foundations for the EU and ultimately the Euro single currency were laid by the secretive Bilderberg Group in the mid-1950’s. Bilderberg’s owned leaked documents prove that the agenda to create a European common market and a single currency were formulated by Bilderberg in 1955. One of the group’s principle founders was H. Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, a former Nazi SS officer.

But the ideological framework for the European Union goes back even further, to the 1940’s when top Nazi economists and academics outlined the plan for a single European economic community, an agenda that was duly followed after the end of the second world war.

As we have highlighted in the past, Nazism and the EU have some very disturbing parallels. Indeed, the two are fundamentally intertwined and the origins of the EU can be traced directly back to the Nazis.

The fact that the EU was a brainchild of top Nazi economists and industrialists, formulated as a means of preserving dictatorial power and then implemented by a former Nazi working under the auspices of the Bilderberg Group in 1955, proves that the entire European Union system is poisoned with a legacy and a raison d’être of totalitarianism.

This is becoming increasingly obvious in the 21st century as popular social movements across Europe rise up to oppose the blatant power grab being undertaken by the EU via the Lisbon Treaty, which was forced through in Ireland earlier this year despite the population having already rejected it in a previous national referendum.

Just like Hitler repeatedly polled Germans of the 1930’s until he could intimidate them into delivering the result he wanted, the European Union has followed the same method. The ratification of the Lisbon Treaty was what enabled the EU to create the post of a European President in the first place, and there seems little doubt that Van Rompuy and Ashton will do everything in their power to accelerate the move towards Bilderberg’s ultimate goal – a dictatorial European federal superstate that completely swallows up what tattered shreds of sovereignty member states have left.

Klaus Töpfer, 1996 Bilderberg attendee and former Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) admitted in 2000 that there is an “international consensus” on worldwide population control. During a speech given in Berlin in the beginning of the new millennium, Töpfer stated:

“Most people and policymakers are unaware that there is an international consensus that grounds population policy in human rights and development, emphasizing building the capacities of women to manage their own lives.”

Here Töpfer admits not only that there is an international consensus to ground population policy in the concepts of “human rights and development”, but also that most people and policymakers are unaware of this consensus.

Töpfer should know. He visited a Bilderberg meeting back in 1989, organized in La Toja, Spain and the Bilderberg conference held near Toronto, Canada, from May 30 to June 2 1996. Besides being a Bilderberger and former UNEP-chieftain, Klaus Töpfer is also a member of the Club of Rome. In 2004 he contributed to the Club’s publication ‘Sustainability Creates New Prosperity: Basis for a New World Order, New Economics and Environmental Protection’.

“Policymakers rarely contemplate long time periods and connections between disparate sets of issues, especially controversial ones. Nonetheless, at the dawn of the new century the world faces a host of environmental and security risks strongly connected to the growing size of human population and the growing affluence of some, but not all, of that population.”

“Future changes in global population will contribute significantly to the need for such integrated, long-term approaches to environmental problems.”

On another occasion, the Executive Director of UNEP called for the creation of a new global religion:

“We have to develop the ecological, holistic wold view which connects us with the rest of Nature- both materially and spiritually. Religious traditions emphasize this connection. Our task should be to retrieve these basic symbols and doctrines within each tradition and translate them into clear prescription for public policy and behavior.”

This statement about the “international consensus” reaffirms that which we already know, namely that the global elite have their noses pointed in the same direction when it comes to the world’s human inhabitants and the “need” to curb their numbers.

WASHINGTON – December 3 – Following a speech on the Floor of the House of Representative, Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) made the following statement:

“America is in the fight of its life and that fight is not in Afghanistan — its here. We are deeply in debt. Our GDP is down. Our manufacturing is down. Our savings are down. The value of the dollar is down. Our trade deficit is up. Business failures are up. Bankruptcies are up.

“The war is a threat to our national security. We’ll spend over one $100 billion next year to bomb a nation of poor people while we reenergize the Taliban, destabilize Pakistan, deplete our army and put more of our soldiers’ lives on the line. Meanwhile, back here in the USA, 15 million people are out of work. People are losing their jobs, their health care, their savings, their investments, and their retirement security. $13 trillion in bailouts for Wall Street, trillions for war; when are we going to start taking care of things here at home?”

When Turkey in the late 1940s became a site of NATO and US forces its rank became cemented as the number one supplier of opium to the heroin markets of the US and Europe. This illegal opium market was primarily centered in Europe, where the final processing into heroin was done before going on to the market for the rest of the world. Its profits were therefore also made largely by Europeans. In 1968 research ordered by the Nixon Administration revealed that this Turkish opium crop supplied 80% of the opium destined to become heroin for the illegal markets of Europe and the US .(1)

The Nixon Administration, claiming a threat to the security of the Nation by this situation in the newly proclaimed “war on drugs”, began a multi-pronged effort to limit the amount of opium produced in Turkey from reaching the United States. (2) The foremost of these (and actually the only one that produced even a modicum of success) was a program to buy the crop from the farmers in Turkey (where they still grow it to this day) at outlandish figures that increased by the year, eventually reaching over $25 per kilogram the US taxpayer was forced to spend in an attempt to buy up the entire opium crop of Turkey. This decision was made, all the while seeming to ignore the fact that the illegal channels could pay even $100 a kilogram and it wouldn’t affect the price of a $5 New York City addict’s dose by any more than 1c.(3) It also ignored the fact that the crop can be grown virtually anywhere in the world, that when the entire crop in Turkey was then bought (at inflated prices and at the expense of taxpayers) that it would then leave the entire rest of the world to take its place. But by then Turkey’s prominence as the number one supplier of opium to be manufactured into heroin for US demand had already begun to get competition from South East Asia during the Vietnam War, a market which in turn receded after the US pulled out of Vietnam.

Now, most average, right-thinking Americans might think that the Nixon Administration’s goal in this effort was to raise the price of a dose of heroin by 1c, thereby making heroin addicts in the US finally realize that its just not worth it anymore. But in any case, that was not the effect. The effect was to hand a monopoly to the new opium market (now suddenly much cheaper!) that had been created as US military involvement in Vietnam ramped up. That was the effect, I’ll let you decide what the goal was.

The opium bound for the US heroin market in S.E. Asia was produced primarily in Laos, flown on the CIA’s Air America to Vietnam, where it was converted into heroin then smuggled into the States by US military couriers.(4)(5)

Now starting in 2002, its Afghanistan. And it has always been a part of the culture there to grow opium poppies, as is true of Turkey, where over 100,000 farmers grow it today legally.(6) However, the Taliban had all but wiped the crop out in Afghanistan in short order after they came to power until… the “war” in Afghanistan began. The year after the beginning of the occupation, (by both UN and US estimates) an over 3000% increase in the production of opium occurred over the Taliban days.(7) As it remains to this day. This opium crop, which as the US Military admits, soldiers now stand guard over… supplies 92% of the illegally produced opium in the world supplying the majority of the heroin for both the United States and Europe. Somehow yet again, a monopoly has been created.

The $39 billion that the US has spent in Afghanistan (allegedly) for reconstruction since 2002 must have gone into reconstructing the $65 billion a year opium industry. When you look at the size of the country, the number of people that live there and how desperately poor almost all of are you might tend to think that some of that money is being diverted elsewhere. Now, the corporate controlled media (if they were forced into talking about it, that is) would have you believe that all that money is being diverted to the people dressed in rags working the poppy fields. The same ones that have their schools and weddings blown up in drone attacks.

As for myself, I tend to think it might be getting diverted by the people that are entrusted to hand that money out and administrate the country. The same ones that guard over the opium fields…

1) Moynihan, Daniel P. (Assistant to the President) ‘Memorandum for Honorable John N. Mitchell, Attorney General’ (18 September 1969); in: Foreign Relations.

2) “The President is convinced that the problem of narcotics addiction in the U.S. has reached proportions constituting a threat to our national stability.” Henry A. Kissinger, ‘Memo: Study of Means to Stop International Traffic in Heroin(Sept 29, 1969): in Foreign Relations

4) Special Study Mission June ,1971 United States House of Representatives Special Study Mission June ,1971

5) Alfred McCoy The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia (Harper and Row, 1972)

In an editorial posted on the CAIVN (California Independent Voter Network), Chad Peace, a co-founder of the original Tea Party movement, blasts the establishment Republican takeover of the movement.

Inspired by Rick Sabtelli’s now legendary rant on CNBC, Peace and a business partner set-up a tea party website. “Within days, we received tens of thousands of e-mails and passionate pleas for government accountability. Our vision was to change the political debate focused on general divisions to one centered on specific solutions. We asked our supporters to question party-line politicians and demand that our leaders take a more independent and reasoned stance on the issues facing our country,” writes Peace.

It didn’t take long, however, for establishment Republicans to muscle in and hijack the idea. “Knowing we had neither the financial means nor man-power to out-publicize political perverts, I was never-the-less convinced that this independent movement would not be overrun by golden idols,” Peace explains. He wrote to supporters and asked them “to be weary of old Republican figureheads like Newt Gingrich and current political strategists Patrick Leahy, hiding their identity behind make-shift ‘grassroots’ websites. I was hopeful that the same talking heads, like Hannity and O’Reilly, that asked us to bend over blindly to past leaders would not have enough credibility to grandstand in front of an independent-minded movement.”

It wasn’t so much Hannity and O’Reilly that compromised the movement. It was mostly Glenn Beck. His 9.12 Project stole much of the thunder of the original tea party movement and channeled it into a Fox News segment complete with adverts from Big Oil and Big Pharma.

Beck declared he was formulating “a 100 year plan… a book that will provide specific policies, principles and, most importantly, action steps that each of us can take to play a role in this Refounding.” He announced that on August 28, 2010, he will gather patriotic Americans “at the feet of Abraham Lincoln on the National Mall for the unveiling of The Plan and the birthday of a new national movement to restore our great country.”

Few seemed to notice the obvious contradiction — a corporate media network calling for a restoration of American ideals while simultaneously working against those ideals. Fox News is owned and operated by a political player who supported the neocons and their murderous wars and then backed the political campaign of the wife of a former president who was “anointed” for the presidency by the Bilderberg Group. Rupert Murdoch has played both sides of the fence and now one of his hirelings is calling for a restoration of the republic.

“Propelled by the moving mouths on TV and the talking heads of such ironically named organizations such as the ‘American Family Association’ (one must agree that for an admitted adulterer with three ex-wives heading the AFA is ironic, right?), the movement lost its focus,” Peace continues. “No longer were tea partiers upset with the bipartisan corruption in Washington D.C., they are mad at the socialists communists Hitler-like Democrats. No longer did Constitutionalism mean respecting the rule of law, it meant Obama is not really our president. A movement founded on the principles of independent analysis, it has become a yelling fest for punch-drunk cynics armed with incoherent talking points.”

“Slowly, I’ve lost some of my unrealistic idealism,” Peace admits. “As I pull back the blinders, I try to look at the tea party from the eyes of an outsider, the average American. What I see is a bunch of people reciting partisan political sermons, coddling fears, and perpetuating a superficial battle between ‘left’ and ‘right’; drowning the well intentioned idealists that remain.”

The coup d’état will be complete in February when the establishment holds its 1st Annual Tea Party Convention in Nashville, Tennessee. “Minnesota 6th District Rep. Michele Bachmann will burnish her conservative standing when she appears,” reports MinnPost. The event “also will feature former Alaska Gov. and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin. City Pages says Bachmann will give a breakfast speech, while Palin is the keynote speaker at the Saturday evening main event Feb. 6.”

It will not be an event for ordinary Americans. “Tickets for the weekend convention are now on sale for $549 but don’t include accommodations at the Gaylord Opryland Hotel and Convention Center.” How many Americans — besieged by the bankers and witnessing their middle class lives slowly dissolving before their eyes — can afford to fork over several hundred dollars? More to the point, why would they want to spend that amount of money on a circus sideshow featuring a political hack groomed by the elite for higher political office?

“As the Tea Party Express makes its way across the country, Sarah Palin has emerged as a favorite daughter of the movement,” CNN reported in September. “So far, no politician has emerged as a leader of the Tea Party movement – and the question of just who might eventually take up the mantle is a hot topic on the bus. Nobody may be better positioned than Palin.”

“Palin is the ultimate small-town renegade rising from the frontier to do battle with the corrupt establishment. Her followers take pride in the way she has aroused fear, hatred and panic in the minds of the liberal elite,” writes David Brooks, who straddles both sides of the false right-left paradigm as a journalist for NPR and The Weekly Standard.

Palin is no such thing. She is merely a new face plastered on the Republican party as it struggles to regain power from the Democrats. Palin is more attractive than the old Republican stalwarts. But as they say, beauty is only skin-deep. Her “rogue” status is a carefully crafted establishment magic trick.

“As the battle rages, I have more faith than ever that an independent revolution will come,” Chad Peace concludes. “When the absurdity of our political process rises to the point where tea bags become a right wing rally cry and the left still manages to drop in the polls, there is a growing opportunity for the increasingly disenchanted to drive a stake right down the middle.”

We can only hope. However, before disenchantment can work in our favor, a few million Americans need to tune out Glenn Beck and Fox News. They need to see Sarah Palin for what she is — a creature groomed by the same global elite that sold us the Obama change mantra that turned out to be the same refried dogma offered up by the Bush administration.

FAIR USE NOTICE:
This site may contain copyrighted material, the use of which may not always have been specifically Authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for educational purposes, and as such this constitutes 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Act. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is available without profit to those who have expressed an interest in the included information for research and educational purposes.




	A scan of the article. Click the above image to download the article in PDF format.




The establishment is grooming Sarah Palin to lead a refashioned tea party movement.




ACTA will make YouTube, Flickr, and Blogger impossible.




	Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich.




Opium cultivation in Afghanistan.




	Afghanistan opium poppy cultivation, 1994-2007 (hectares).