March 29, 2012
By Andrew Puhanic
“The globalists must be stopped. we cannot allow them to take over the world.” –KTRN
The Globalists have officially infiltrated the Australian Government and have now admitted on record that they want Australia to lead the world to introduce global government and the new world order.
Australian Globalist, Greens Party leader and unofficial leader of the Australian Labor Party, Senator Bob Brown, has been quoted as saying that the “world should be ruled by a new global parliament under the auspices of the United Nations”
Senator Bob Brown then went on the say that “Australia should to take the lead in establishing a global parliament to govern issues such as nuclear proliferation, international financial transactions and poverty.”
These comments made by Globalist Senator Bob Brown prove that the government is now actively seeking global government and the new world order. Senator Bob Brown even went as far to describe how a global government will function. He was quoted as saying “a global government should consist of a bicameral (two houses) parliament with equal representation from every nation.”
This is not the first time Senator Bob Brown has declared that we should all accept global government and the new world order. In June 2011, Senator Bob Brown was quoted as saying “the issue of a global parliament was “conceptual” at the moment. He then went on to say that “why should Australia not be at the centre of what is inevitably going to be a global parliamentary governance down the line – if we human beings are going to live with each other on this marvellous planet of ours as we go on our joy ride of the future? Of course we are going to have to make consensus decisions.”
As concerning as the above statements made by Senator Bob Brown are, what’s even more concerning is that at the moment he has the influence, power and political mandate to direct Australian foreign public policy. As a result of the close nature of the last Australian federal election, the Greens Party and the Labor party in Australia have joined forces to form government with the help of three independent senators.
February 16, 2012
By Natalie Nicol
“Talk about a government that is out control. The only reason that want to censor on-line material is because they are scared the truth will finally reach the masses.” –KTRN
In a report published last week, members of the United Kingdom Parliament concluded that the Internet plays a major role in the radicalization of terrorists and called on the government to pressure Internet Service Providers in Britain and abroad to censor online speech. The Roots of Violent Radicalisation places the Internet ahead of prisons, universities, and religious establishments in propagating radical beliefs and ultimately recommends that the government “develop a code of practice for the removal of material which promotes violent extremism” binding ISPs.
While the Terrorism Act 2006 authorizes British law enforcement agencies to order certain material to be removed from websites, lawmakers on the Home Affairs Committee stated that “service providers themselves should be more active in monitoring the material they host.” Their report raises serious concerns that political and religious speech will be suppressed. Security expert Peter Neumann who testified before the Committee asked why websites like YouTube and Facebook can’t be as “effective at removing . . . extremist Islamist or extremist right-wing content” as they are at removing sexually explicit content or copyrighted material that violates their own terms of service.
Citing “persuasive evidence about the potential threat from extreme far-right terrorism” and lauding the recent conviction of four London men who used the Internet to plot a bombing of the London Stock Exchange, Parliament Members commended the report saying, “[it] tackles the threat from home-grown terrorism on and off line.” A spokesman for the House of Commons Home Office stated that the Committee would continue to “work closely with police and internet service providers to take Internet hate off the web.”
In an interview with the International Business Times, Trend Micro security director Rik Ferguson criticized the Committee’s recommendations and argued that making ISPs “judge, jury and executioner” imposes responsibilities on ISPs that rightfully belong to law enforcement. “Material of a political or religious nature is by definition much more difficult to define and much more difficult to police without crossing the line to impact on freedom of expression,” Ferguson stated.
The Committee issued its recommendations in the midst of reports that Google India had taken down online content deemed offensive to Indian political and religious leaders in response to a lawsuit. The Washington Post points out that Google Transparency Reports indicate that the UK removed nearly as much content as India from January to June 2011. Google complied with more than 80% of requests from the UK to remove content from its services.
August 11th, 2011
Los Angeles Times
By: Janet Stobart
Reporting from London— Facing a full house at an emergency meeting of Parliament Prime Minister David Cameron promised “robust and uncompromising measures” in response to the riots that have plagued Britain since Saturday.
Facing a full house at an emergency meeting of Parliament on Thursday, Prime Minister David Cameron promised “robust and uncompromising measures” in response to the riots that have plagued Britain since Saturday.
“To the lawless minority, the criminals who have taken what they could, we will hunt you. … We will punish you,” he said.
He vowed stronger police powers including the ability to unmask rioters, greater coordination between police and the community, and compensation funds for victims of violence and arson.
Speaking to a packed house of lawmakers called back from vacation, Cameron said police admitted that they were initially unprepared for and outnumbered during the flash riots, but he praised officers and community workers who struggled to protect neighborhoods.
To victims of the violence, Cameron pledged damage compensation, even for the uninsured. “We will help you repair the damage, get your businesses back up and running, and support your communities,” he said. Claims are expected to reach over $300 million.
However, budget cuts in police services, part of the government’s overall plan to reduce a huge deficit, would not be lifted, Cameron said, answering opposition questions to defer the measures.
Police would receive any “funds they need to meet the cost of any legitimate aims,” but plans to reduce their overall budget by 6% over the next four years would go ahead, he said.
Among their new powers, the prime minister said, would be the ability “under any circumstances” to demand that crime suspects remove face coverings. Many looters who ransacked shops during the riots wore masks to avoid being identified.
Crowd-dispersal and curfew regulations would also be reviewed, Cameron said.
He described what he sees as the underlying causes of the recent violence: a culture of disrespect for authority, gang culture, and children growing up in dysfunctional families.
Gang injunctions would be used across the whole country for children and for adults, he said. Other sanctions are already in place — local authorities, for exampled, can evict perpetrators of violence and disorder from subsidized housing — but they could be strengthened, he said.
“We can go further with getting to grips with gangs,” he said, noting the efforts of people such as William J. Bratton, who headed police forces in New York and Los Angeles.
Bratton is said to have been suggested as a possible outside candidate for the now-vacant post of chief commissioner for Scotland Yard.
As Cameron spoke, courts around the country were struggling to handle riot-linked cases that are pouring in, some conducting around-the-clock sessions. By Thursday, the number of arrests stood at about 922, police said, but the figure was increasing hourly.
July 20th, 2011
By: Kraig Becker
A new bill found it’s way onto the political docket in Hungary earlier this week, that if passed would create the world’s first “fat tax.” The Eastern European country’s parliament will now consider the bill, which would raise the price of foods that are deemed as unhealthy. Proceeds from the new law would then be used to cover the rising costs of state-funded health care.
When the bill was originally drafted a few months back, it was immediately dubbed as “the hamburger tax,” but later the Hungarian government decided that fast food restaurants would not be subject to the new tax. Instead, they’ve chosen to levy the tariff on items found in grocery and convenience stores that are deemed to have too much salt, sugar, or fat. If the law goes into effect, those items would go up in price by 3.7 eurocents or roughly 5¢. There will also be a 10% increase in the price of liquor and soft drinks as well.
The bill will be debated by the Hungarian Parliament later this summer, but is expected to easily pass into law, making the country the first to actually institute higher fees on unhealthy foods. It is estimated that the law would generate as much as 111 million Euros or approximately $157.6 million. Those funds that are sorely needed to help keep Hungary’s cash-strapped health care system afloat.
What are your thoughts on this so-called fat tax? Would you pay a little more for foods you love that might be deemed as unhealthy? Is this any different than the so called “sin tax” on cigarettes or alcohol?
July 19th, 2011
By: Eric W. Dolan
News Corporation owner Rupert Murdoch might be replaced by Chief Operating Officer Chase Carey as CEO of the company, but still remain chairman, according to Bloomberg.
People with knowledge of the situation said that whether or not the 80-year-old Australian media mogul steps down as CEO depends in part on his performance before U.K.’s parliament.
Murdoch became embroiled in the phone hacking scandal thanks to his U.K. newspaper News of the World.
The tabloid closed down after an investigation revealed it had participated in the phone hacking of celebrities, British politicians, the families of terrorist attack victims, dead soldiers and others.
Rupert, his son James and former CEO of News International Rebekah Brooks are scheduled to give testimony before the House of Commons Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport on Tuesday.
News Corp. executives who watched Murdoch rehearse for his Parliament appearance were reportedly concerned with how he answered questions.
So far, 10 people have been arrested in connection to the News International phone hacking scandals.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Justice have launched their own investigations into whether News Corp. participated in the hacking of 9/11 victims or U.S. officials.
Michael Wolff, author of the Rupert Murdoch biography “The Man Who Owns the News,” has predicted that the phone hacking scandals that have shaken News Corp. in recent weeks will ultimately lead to the resignation of Murdoch and his son.
Afshin Rattansi, a Middle Eastern affairs journalist even suggested that “Fox News is finished” if U.S. authorities can prove that News Corp. employees attempted to hack into the voicemails of terror attack victims killed on Sept. 11, 2001.
July 18th, 2011
The New Yorker
By: Ken Auletta
For nearly two weeks, Rupert Murdoch and his people have claimed that the newspaper scandal in London was caused by a few rotten apples. Now that a very large apple, Rebekah Brooks, has been arrested, it is clear that it is the entire barrel that is rotten. Since many editors had to have known of the illegal hacking, and many people on the business side would have had to sign off on large, illegal payments to the police for information, more apples will drop in coming days. And not only at News Corp.: Sir Paul Stephenson, commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, resigned Sunday. The best public-relations advice in the world will not help contain what is, for Murdoch, a spreading contagion that is no longer confined to London.
In the United Kingdom, Murdoch and his son James will have to tell a Parliamentary committee on Tuesday what they knew and when they knew it. More than that, they will have to try to rescue their company from multiple government onslaughts and criminal investigations from members of Parliament who think they must impose curbs on News Corp.’s ownership of newspapers and television and sports in England, and from shareholders who claim they have been cheated.
In the United States, News Corp., as an American company, will, among other things, have to explain why it has not violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which makes it unlawful to pay bribes to government officials overseas—a proscription that includes the London police; whether the New York Post (or any of the company’s British newspapers) hacked into the mail or phone calls of celebrities in this country or of the families of 9/11 victims; and why their unethical behavior does not disqualify them under F.C.C. rules that require that those who license TV stations must be of solid moral character. Les Hinton, the head of Dow Jones and one of Murdoch’s senior executives in this country, has already resigned. (I wrote about Hinton’s departure on Friday.)
Murdoch’s influence with government officials here and abroad will not help him escape this time. In the current environment, will politicians, even those who courted him in the past, want be seen at his side, or risk their careers to come to his aid? The dam has sprung multiple leaks, and Rupert Murdoch doesn’t have enough fingers to stop the gushing water.
November 17th, 2010
By: Theunis Bates
A group of former Guantanamo Bay inmates who claim British spies helped torture them will receive millions of dollars in payouts from the U.K. government.
The 10 men — some of whom are British nationals, while others arrived in the U.K. as asylum seekers — have filed a range of allegations against the British government, including that U.K. officials knew they were being illegally transferred to Guantanamo Bay but failed to prevent it. There are also allegations that British security and intelligence agents colluded in their torture and abuse while the men were held abroad.
It’s thought that ministers decided to settle after intelligence agencies warned that national security could be put at risk if secret documents detailing U.K.-U.S. cooperation on the so-called “extraordinary rendition” of terrorist suspects were disclosed in court. Such a case would likely have taken years and cost the government tens of millions of dollars in legal fees.
Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke will give a statement to Parliament on the payouts, which he is expected to simply say are in the national interest, according to The Guardian. The exact amounts handed over to the suspects — some of whom are alleged to have links with the Afghan Taliban — will likely never be officially announced. But according to U.K. TV news station ITN, at least one of the men is set to receive more than $1.6 million.
Binyam Mohamed — who arrived in Britain as a refugee from Ethiopia in 1994 and converted to Islam in 2000 — is expected to receive one of the largest payments. Pakistani authorities arrested him in 2002 on suspicion of terrorism, and he claims that he was ferried between U.S.-approved torture centers in Morocco and Afghanistan before eventually arriving in Guantanamo.
He was freed in 2009, but on his return to the U.K. he alleged that British agents had interviewed him between torture sessions, making them complicit in his mistreatment. And in February, a U.K. court released a top-secret U.S. intelligence report detailing the “cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment” the British resident had allegedly suffered while in American custody.
Other ex-inmates in line for settlements include Bisher al-Rawi, Jamil el-Banna, Richard Belmar, Omar Deghayes, Moazzam Begg and Martin Mubanga, according to The Guardian.
The payments are sure to prove controversial in the U.K., as some of the former Guantanamo inmates have allegedly called for the destruction of the British state previously. However, Shami Chakrabarti — the director of U.K. human rights organization Liberty — said, “It’s not very palatable, but there is a price to be paid for lawlessness and torture in freedom’s name. There are torture victims who were entitled to expect protection from their country,” reported the London Times.
John Sawers, head of Britain’s foreign spy service MI6, said last month that torture was “illegal and abhorrent under any circumstances, and we have nothing whatsoever to do with it.” But he added that his organization faced “dilemmas” to avoid using foreign intelligence obtained through torture.
May 24, 2010
by Howard Schneider & Neil Irwin
If the trouble starts — and it remains an “if” — the trigger may well be obscure to the concerns of most Americans: a missed budget projection by the Spanish government, the failure of Greece to hit a deficit-reduction target, a drop in Ireland’s economic output.
But the knife-edge psychology currently governing global markets has put the future of the U.S. economic recovery in the hands of politicians in an assortment of European capitals. If one or more fail to make the expected progress on cutting budgets, restructuring economies or boosting growth, it could drain confidence in a broad and unsettling way. Credit markets worldwide could lock up and throw the global economy back into recession.
For the average American, that seemingly distant sequence of events could translate into another hit on the 401(k) plan, a lost factory shift if exports to Europe decline and another shock to the banking system that might make it harder to borrow.
“If what happened in Greece were to happen in a large country, it could fundamentally mark our times,” Angelos Pangratis, head of the European Union delegation to the United States, said Friday after a panel discussion on the crisis in Greece sponsored by the Greater Washington Board of Trade.
That local economic development boards are sponsoring panels on government debt in Greece is perhaps proof enough that Europe’s problems are the world’s. That the dominoes can tumble fast was shown Thursday when a new and narrowly drawn stock-trading policy in Germany helped trigger a sell-off on Wall Street.
It marks a change, Barclays Capital chief European economist Julian Callow wrote in a Friday analysis, from a situation in which the bonds of European countries were considered to carry virtually zero risk to a “brave new world” where sovereign default in one of the world’s core economic areas is a tangible threat. Bank holdings of European debt are now being studied with the same focus given to holdings of U.S. mortgage-backed securities as the global financial crisis unfolded in 2008 — and with the same suspicion that problems in one part of the world could wreck others.
The most vulnerable European countries — Greece, Spain, Portugal and Ireland — may represent only about 4 percent of world economic activity, but “the debt crisis and its ripple effects are bad news for all corners of the world,” said Cornell University economist Eswar Prasad.
The risk of a worst-case scenario is still considered remote. European countries have pledged hundreds of billions of dollars to aid indebted neighbors that run into trouble, and they say they are committed to fixing the continent’s larger economic problems. The euro and U.S. markets were both higher Friday after the German Parliament approved a key piece of that support program. A renewed effort by the U.S. Federal Reserve to ensure that European banks have adequate access to dollars has generated little demand — a sign that a feared shortage of cash is not in the offing.
U.S. banks are not heavily exposed to the weaker European countries, Fed governor Daniel K. Tarullo said in testimony on Capitol Hill last week. Banks are in better shape overall, after fresh infusions of capital. Meanwhile, the U.S. economic recovery has been strengthening through the year, with jobs added in five of the last six months, and recent consumer spending and industrial output stronger than most forecasts.
But the fallout from Europe could still be widely felt. U.S. trade officials, hoping the country can dramatically boost its exports, are dismayed at the steep drop in the value of the euro — which is around $1.25, down from more than $1.50 in November. The decline makes American goods more expensive compared with those produced in Europe. The slide in the common European currency could also change the way China and a host of Asian countries approach their currency policies, possibly making them less likely to agree with U.S. demands to raise the value of their money. If they raised it, Asian goods would become more expensive in world markets, making it easier for U.S. products to compete.
The connections are being closely watched. Analysts are studying how the involvement of Greek financial institutions in Eastern Europe, or Spanish banks in Latin America, could affect those economies. The International Monetary Fund and E.U. officials are doing biweekly checks on Greece’s progress to ensure its economic reform program stays on track, according to Vassilis Kaskarelis, Greece’s ambassador to the United States.
Inside the euro zone, banks are intimately linked, with a web of investments and cross-country bond holdings that could be a main vector for financial “contagion,” with a default in one country weakening banks elsewhere.
There are some positive impacts in all this for the United States.
For one, uncertainty about European government debt has driven global investors toward U.S. government bonds, which in turn is pushing down long-term interest rates. The 10-year Treasury bond had a rate of 3.2 percent Friday compared with nearly 4 percent last month. Those lower rates should flow through to private borrowing, helping Americans getting mortgages or businesses looking to grow.
The European panic is also lowering the price of oil and other commodities on global markets, potentially making it cheaper for Americans to fuel their cars and heat their homes. A barrel of oil went for about $70 on Friday, down from almost $87 on April 6.
A final positive for the U.S. economy is that the stronger dollar will help keep inflation in check by reducing the cost of imports. That, combined with renewed worry about the strength of the recovery, is likely to give the Fed some leeway to delay raising interest rates above their current extremely low levels longer than it would have otherwise.
The most precise comparison is to the East Asian financial crisis that enveloped Thailand, Indonesia, South Korea and other nations in 1997 and 1998. There were widespread fears that the crisis would damage the U.S. economy, including through a financial contagion effect. The Fed even cut interest rates in the fall of 1998 to try to forestall a weakening in U.S. growth.
But there was little obvious impact on the U.S. economy, which grew 4.5 percent in 1997, 4.4 percent in 1998, and 4.8 percent in 1999.
May 6, 2010
By Paul Joseph Watson
A man arrested in Pakistan in connection with the Times Square car bombing attempt who had traveled with accused bomber Faisal Shahzad is a member of a terrorist organization that is controlled by British MI6 and the CIA.
Sheik Mohammed Rehan, who was arrested on Tuesday in Karachi, “Allegedly drove with Shahzad from Karachi to Peshawar on July 7, 2009, in a pickup truck, authorities said. They returned to Karachi July 22. It is not known why they went to Peshawar and whether they met with anyone there,” reports the L.A. Times.
Rehan is a member of the militant group Jaish-e-Muhammad, a terrorist organization that came to prominence in the mid-1990’s and has been involved in attacks in the disputed Kashmir border region between India and Pakistan. The group also helped carry out the December 2001 attack on the Indian Parliament which brought India and Pakistan to the brink of nuclear war, tensions that proved very lucrative for British and American arms manufacturers who sold weapons to both sides.
“The December 2001 terrorist attacks on the Indian parliament — which contributed to pushing India and Pakistan to the brink of war — were conducted by two Pakistan-based rebel groups, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad, both of which are covertly supported by Pakistan’s ISI,” writes Michel Chossudovsky. “Needless to say, these ISI-supported terrorist attacks serve the geopolitical interests of the US. They not only contribute to weakening and fracturing the Indian Union, they also create conditions which favor the outbreak of a regional war between Pakistan and India.”
Jaish-e-Muhammad, the group now emerging in connection with the Times Square incident, was founded by Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, the 9/11 bagman who delivered $100,000 from the United Arab Emirates to Mohammed Atta at the behest of General Mahmud Ahmed, then head of the ISI. Mahmud Ahmed, the man who ordered Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh to bankroll the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, was meeting with Republican Congressman Porter Goss and Democratic Senator Bob Graham in Washington DC on the morning of 9/11. In the days before and after the attack, Ahmed also met with CIA Head George Tenet as well as current Vice-President Joe Biden, then Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
In a report on Jaish-e-Muhammad’s involvement in the murder of Daniel Pearl, who was investigating the ISI, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reported that the Pakistani government, “Believe that Saeed Sheikh’s power comes not from the ISI, but from his connections with our own CIA.”
April 9, 2010
By: Steve Watson
A draconian Internet censorship bill that has been long looming on the horizon finally passed the house of commons in the UK yesterday, legislating for government powers to restrict and filter any website that is deemed to be undesirable for public consumption.
The “Digital Economy Bill” was rushed through parliament in a late night session last night after a third reading.
In the wake of the announcement of a general election on May 6, the government has taken advantage of what is known as the “wash-up process”, allowing the legislative process to be speeded up between an election being called and Parliament being dissolved.
Only a pitiful handful of MPs (pictured below) were present to debate the bill, which was fully supported by the “opposition” Conservative party, and passed by 189 votes to 47 keeping the majority of its original clauses intact.
The bill will now go back to the House of Lords, where it originated, for a final formal approval.
The government removed a proposal in clause 18 of the bill, which openly stated that it could block any website, however it was replaced with an amendment to clause 8 of the bill which essentially legislates for the same powers.
The new clause allows the unelected secretary of state for business, currently Lord Mandelson, to order the blocking of “a location on the internet which the court is satisfied has been, is being or is likely to be used for or in connection with an activity that infringes copyright”.
Opposing MPs argued that the clause was too broad and open ended, arguing that the phrase “likely to be used” could be used to block websites without them ever having been used for “activity that infringes copyright”. Other MPs argued that under the bill, whistleblower websites, such as Wikileaks, could be targeted.
The legislation will also allow the Home Secretary to place “a technical obligation on internet service providers” to block whichever sites it wishes.
Under clause 11 of the proposed legislation “technical obligation” is defined as follows:
A “technical obligation”, in relation to an internet service provider, is an obligation for the provider to take a technical measure against particular subscribers to its service.
A “technical measure” is a measure that — (a) limits the speed or other capacity of the service provided to a subscriber; (b) prevents a subscriber from using the service to gain access to particular material, or limits such use; (c) suspends the service provided to a subscriber; or (d) limits the service provided to a subscriber in another way.
In other words, the government will have the power to force ISPs to downgrade and even block your internet access to certain websites or altogether if it wishes.
The legislation is part of an amplified effort by the government to seize more power over the internet and those who use it.
For months now unelected “Secretary of State” Lord Mandelson has overseen government efforts to challenge the independence of the of UK’s internet infrastructure.
The Digital Economy Bill will also see users’ broadband access cut off indefinitely, in addition to a fine of up to £50,000 without evidence or trial, if they download copyrighted music and films. The plan has been identified as “potentially illegal” by experts.