Sunday, May 29, 2011

Strauss-Kahn falls in Olympian brawl over bailout—go with Glass-Steagall!

Commentary from CEC Australia and Lyndon LaRouche on the world financial system meltdown. I have been waiting for things to reach this boiling point for some time. It seems to me that the whole mess will probably become visible to the general public within the next 3 to 6 months as it unravels more...

A vicious brawl has erupted in the boardrooms of central banks and government treasuries over whether to respond to the new wave of global meltdown with another round of hyperinflationary bailout—or not—which is why Dominique Strauss-Kahn has lost his job as the IMF’s “Third World-rapist-in-chief”.
Dominique Strauss-Kahn’s antics in his hotel suite are not why he was arrested and thrown in the clink: he led the faction of financiers pushing for a last hurrah bailout before the whole system implodes, and thus has now been removed from the picture by those opposed to that suicidal lunacy.
U.S. physical economist Lyndon LaRouche, the world’s leading economic forecaster and originator of the call for a global Glass-Steagall banking reorganisation to replace the bailouts, declared on 21st May that Strauss-Kahn’s downfall changes the course of history:
“We’re now having a general collapse, of the entire international financial-monetary system. It is an absolutely assured collapse … if certain changes are not made now, and they seem to become likely because of what happened to Strauss-Kahn in New York City, which has changed the course of history in a very significant degree. Because he was supposed to be setting into motion the effort to save [U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben] Bernanke, [U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy] Geithner, and Obama, from delivery to Hell, by pushing through another round of bailout in the international system. Now, what happened to him in New York, was simply an attempt to ensure that there would not be another bailout of this global financial system …”
LaRouche continued, “The entire system is now going to crash in one of two ways: Either by some unlikely prospect, the backers of Obama, Geithner, and Bernanke will survive this—in which case all Hell busts loose, or they won’t survive it, in which the situation becomes much more interesting. And what happened to Strauss-Kahn, is an absolutely crucial part of this turning point which has been reached in the past two weeks … Now, there are two kinds of collapses: There’s either the collapse of the international speculative system, or there’s the collapse of the world economy, and a general genocidal collapse of civilisation globally. Those are your two options, and we’re at the point where that decision, and only that decision, has any significance.”

source:  Citizens Electoral Council of Australia, Media Release 27th of May 2011

Friday, May 27, 2011

Ron Paul House Floor Speech: Republic Almost Completely Dead

The Defense Authorization Act or H.R. 1540, aka The Forever War Act of 2012, was overwhelmingly approved by the House of Representatives earlier today on a vote of 322 to 96.
The Senate will now vote on its own version and then the two bills will need to be reconciled before going to Barry Obama for his signature into law.
The law authorizes the United States to use military force anywhere it says there are terrorists, including within the borders of our own country. It represents the largest hand-over of unchecked war authority from Congress to the executive branch in modern American history.

Full story at

USA DEMOCRAT'S LETTER TO CONGRESS : 'Vortex Spiral' RADAR Rings - out of North Carolina and Central Midwest

Many of us have heard about, and are concernmed about HAARP. Have you researched? Read lots of articles? Well someone significant in the USA is asking questions of congress. About time!
Representative Heath Shuler (D-NC 11th)
3rd-term Democrat from North Carolina.

Photo: Representative Shuler

Bio & Contact Info

Send Message

Member Staff

Letters To Leaders

· More Letters to
  Rep. Shuler

· Search All

Letters To Leaders

All messages are published with permission of the sender. The general topic of this message is Environment:

Subject: 'Vortex Spiral' RADAR Rings - out of North Carolina and Central Midwest

Sen. Richard Burr
Rep. Heath Shuler
Sen. Kay Hagan

May 26, 2011


I phoned yesterday about this issue of severe WX. Please look at these URL sites and tell me the man is wrong in the forecasts he makes.

If believable, why is our government making this WX?

in the first video of the reference to "Vortex Spiral Radar Rings" in 2004 over New Orleans.....

'Vortex Spiral' RADAR Rings - out of North Carolina and Central Midwest

HAARP rings appear @ WA, OR, ID, MO, TN, LA, TX, AL, KY, NY = severe in 24-48

To date; many folks have died, flood waters have devastated the mid-west. Why?

Now they may be targeting NC & SC? Again why?

Serious damage has happened in the past " Katrina" and is still happening in the form of floods and severe storms.
If above information is to be believed ( and I do ) still more serious damage to this country is in the near future due to HAARP operations.

At the very least, damage that has happened already caused many deaths, scores of displaced residents, unbelievable damage to property, due to floods & tornadoes, that were possibly Man Made.
All leading to shortages and higher Food prices.

I am requesting a Senate Hearing/Investigation into the Operations of HAARP as to any intentional or un-intentional damage to the US.

Please turn a spot light on HAARP and those who are controlling it.

Weather modification I should think is serious business.

HAARP has that ability.

Has HAARP gotten out of control?

Perhaps it should be shut down until that investigation is completed.....

I would like to hear back on this issue.

Please tell me I am wrong to think our government is causing severe WX conditions.

Cullowhee , NC

Thursday, May 26, 2011

The Severity of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Disaster: Comparing Chernobyl and Fukushima

by Prof. Matthew Penney and Prof. Mark Selden, Global Research

On April 12, 2011 the Japanese government officially announced that the severity of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster had reached level 7, the highest on the International Nuclear Event Scale. Before Fukushima, the only level 7 case was the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, whose 25th anniversary was marked on April 26. Two and a half months after the 3.11 catastrophe, the first to affect multiple reactors, TEPCO and the Japanese government continue to struggle to bring the reactors at Fukushima Daiichi under control. TEPCO estimates that the problems could be solved in six to nine months now appearing extraordinarily optimistic and plans have been announced to close nuclear power plants deemed of particularly high risk such as the Hamaoka facility.
Fukushima explosion

Following the upgrade to level 7, Japan’s Prime Minister’s Office released a statement comparing Fukushima and Chernobyl. (Source)
The Japanese government argues that apart from children who contracted thyroid cancer from drinking contaminated milk, there have been no health effects among ordinary citizens as a result of Chernobyl radiation. Is this really the case? Given the Japanese government’s precautions against thyroid cancer in children, is there reason to believe that the Fukushima accident will take no lives except those exposed to the highest dangers in the plant clean-up? (Source)
On April 15, Kyodo, Japan’s major news service, ran an English language piece by Russian scientist Alexey V. Yablokov (source).  Yablokov’s stern warnings about the threat of even low levels of radiation had been ignored by the major media but was reported in Japanese in the Nishi Nippon Shimbun. (Source)
The English only Kyodo piece, however, ties Yablokov’s extensive Chernobyl research with the unfolding Fukushima crisis. Under the headline “How to minimize consequences of the Fukushima catastrophe,” Yablokov observed that
The analysis of the health impact of radioactive land contamination by the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, made by Professor Chris Busby (the European Committee of Radiation Risk) based on official Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology data, has shown that over the next 50 years it would be possible to have around 400,000 additional cancer patients within a 200-kilometer radius of the plant.
This number can be lower and can be even higher, depending on strategies to minimize the consequences. Underestimation is more dangerous for the people and for the country than overestimation.
Based on the Chernobyl experience, he made the following recommendations:
1. Enlarge the exclusion zone [from 20 kilometers] to at least about a 50-km radius of the plant;
2. Distribute detailed instructions on effective ways to protect the health of individuals while avoiding the additional contamination of food. Organize regular measurements of all people by individual dose counters (for overall radionuclides) at least once a week. Distribute radioprotectors and decontaminants (substances which provide the body protection against harmful effects of radiation) of radionuclides. . .
3. Develop recommendations for safe agriculture on the contaminated territories: reprocessing of milk, decontamination of meat, turning agriculture into production of technical cultures (e.g. biofuels etc.). Such ''radionuclide-resistant'' agriculture will be costly (it may be up to 30-40 percent compared with conventional agriculture) and needs to be subsidized;
4. It is necessary to urgently improve existing medical centers -- and possibly create new ones -- to deal with the immediate and long-term consequences of the irradiated peoples (including medical-genetic consultations on the basis of chromosome analysis etc.);
5. The most effective way to help organize post-Fukushima life in the contaminated territories (from Chernobyl lessons) is to create a special powerful interagency state body (ministry or committee) to handle the problems of contaminated territories during the first most complicated years.
Yablokov is one of the primary architects of the 2006 Greenpeace report “The Chernobyl Catastrophe: Consequences on Human Health” and an extensive 2010 follow-up study Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment published by the New York Academy of Sciences, which makes the startling claim that 985,000 deaths can be attributed to the 1986 disaster.
This claim is startling because it differs so dramatically from a 600 page 2005 study by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the WHO, and the UN Development Programme, which claimed that fewer than 50 deaths can be attributed directly to Chernobyl and fewer than 4000 likely from Chernobyl-related cancers in the future. Indeed, the two works continue to frame much of the public controversy, with little progress toward resolution. Attempts to assess the consequences of the 1986 Chernobyl disaster remain the subject of fierce debate over widely different estimates in both the scientific and policy communities. In the months since the Fukushima disaster, scores of reports have uncritically passed on the results of the IAEA/WHO or the Yablokov study published by the New York Academy of Sciences without seriously engaging the conflicting conclusions or moving the debate forward. Here we present the major findings of major studies across the divide that may help to clarify the likely outcomes of the Fukushima disaster. (1, 2)
Yablokov and colleagues assessed thousands of studies of the localities and people affected by the Chernobyl disaster in Russian and other Eastern European languages. They argue that these studies have been ignored by the Anglophone scientific community.
Critics, such as the British science journalist George Monbiot, have criticized Yablokov and his colleagues for attributing any increase in cancer occurrence in regions affected by Chernobyl to the radiation released in the disaster. Emphasizing the multiplicity of factors that may affect cancer rates, Monbiot states, for example, that none of the hardest hit areas subjected to Chernobyl radiation,show as dramatic a cancer increase in the 1986-2000 period as does Japan. The impact of Chernobyl radiation in Japan was negligible, yet the cancer rate there has nearly doubled since the disaster. In the wake of the Fukushima disaster, at a time when many have moved to reject the nuclear power option, Monbiot announced that he had abandoned his former criticism to embrace nuclear power as a responsible component of a green energy policy.
Japanese government statistics in fact show large increases in screening rates for cancer during this period and this is one possible explanation for the increase in the number of cases reported. (1, 2, 3, 4)
Monty Charles of the School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, reviewed Yablokov’s work in the journal Radiation Protection Dosimetry (Volume 141, Issue 1, 2010, pp. 101-104) and found the statistical conclusions far from clear and even contradictory:
Numerous facts and figures are given with a range of references but with little explanation and little critical evaluation. Apparently related tables, figures and statements, which refer to particular publications often disagree with one another. The section on oncological diseases (cancer) was of most interest to me. A section abstract indicated that on the basis of doses from 131I and137Cs; a comparison of cancer mortality in the heavily and less contaminated territories; and pre- and post-Chernobyl cancer levels, the predicted radiation-related cancer deaths in Europe would be 212 000–245 000 and 19 000 in the remainder of the world. I could not however find any specific discussion within the section to support these numbers. The section ends with an endorsement of the work of Malko who has estimated 10 000–40 000 additional deaths from thyroid cancer, 40 000–120 000 deaths from the other malignant tumours and 5000–14 000 deaths from leukaemia—a total of 55 000–174 000 deaths from 1986 to 2056 in the whole of Europe, including Belarus, Ukraine and Russia. These numbers confusingly, do not agree with a table (6.21) from the same author. The final section on overall mortality contains a table (7.11), which includes an estimate of 212 000 additional deaths in highly contaminated regions of Russia, Belarus and Ukraine. This figure is for the period of 1990–2004, and is based on an assumption that 3.8–4.0% of all deaths in the contaminated territories being due to the Chernobyl accident. One is left unsure about the meaning of many of these numbers and which is preferred.
If his work has been subject to trenchant critiques, Yablokov has offered a few of his own concerning the WHO/IAEA study discussed above. Yablokov’s work forms a major part of a document, “Health Effects of Chernobyl: 25 Years after the Reactor Catastrophe”, released by the German Affiliate of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War on the occasion of an international conference on Chernobyl held in Berlin between April 8 - 10, 2011. (Source)
The report contains a devastating critique of the low WHO and IAEA Chernobyl death toll estimates: 
Note on the unreliability of official data published by WHO and IAEA
At the “Chernobyl Forum of the United Nations” organised in September 2005 by the International Atomic Energy Agency and the World Health Organisation, the presentation of the results of work on the effects of Chernobyl showed serious inconsistencies. For example: the press release of the WHO and IAEA stated that in the future, at most, 4000 surplus fatalities due to cancer and leukaemia amongst the most severely affected groups of people might be expected. In the WHO report on which this was based however, the actual number of deaths is given as 8,930. These deaths were not mentioned in any newspaper articles. When one examines the source quoted in the WHO report, one arrives at a number betwen 10,000 and 25,000 additional fatalities due to cancer and leukaemia.
Given this it can be rationally concluded that the official statements of the IAEA and the WHO have manipulated their own data. Their representation of the effects of Chernobyl has little to do with reality.
The report continues:
S. Pflugbeil pointed out already in 2005 that there were discrepancies between press releases, the WHO report and the source quoted in it (Cardis et al.). Up until now neither the Chernobyl Forum, IAEA nor the WHO have deemed it necessary to let the public know that, on the basis of their own analysis, a two to five-fold higher number of deaths due to cancer and leukaemia are to be expected as the figures they have published.
Even in 2011 – some 5 years on - no official UN organisation has as yet corrected these figures. The latest UNSCEAR publication on the health effects of Chernobyl does not take into account any of the numerous results of research into the effects of Chernobyl from the three countries affected. Only one figure – that of 6,000 cases of thyroid cancer among children and juveniles, and leukaemia and cataracts in liquidators – was included in their recent information to the media. Thus, in 2011 the UNSCEAR committee declared: On the basis of studies carried out during the last 20 years, as well as of previous UNSCEAR reports, UNSCEAR has come to the conclusion that the large majority of the population has no reason to fear that serious health risks will arise from the Chernobyl accident. The only exception applies to those exposed to radioiodine during childhood or youth and to liquidators who were exposed to a high dose of radiation and therefore had to reckon with a higher radiation induced risk.
Even if Yablokov’s estimates for Chernobyl deaths are high, the WHO and IAEA numbers are almost certainly too low.
One area of continuing debate is the fate of the “liquidators” at Chernobyl. A major difference between Fukushima and Chernobyl is government handling of the aftermath. While the Japanese government can be criticized for the speed of evacuation and the limited evacuation radius, the seriousness of the issues was immediately recognized and efforts made to send people away from the stricken plant. In the case of Chernobyl, even as the state suppressed information about the catastrophe, between 600,000 and 1,000,000 people termed “liquidators” were sent to the most heavily irradiated zone to work to contain the effects of the meltdown, many with limited protection and unaware of the risks.
Some research, such as the article “Thyroid Cancer among ‘Liquidators’ of the Chernobyl Accident” published in the British Journal of Radiology (70, 1997, pp. 937-941), suggests relatively limited health effects (fewer than 50 cases of thyroid cancer in a group of over 150,000 liquidators followed in the study). (Source)
The article “Chernobyl Liquidators – The People and the Doses”, published by the International Radiation Protection Association, likewise concludes that across the majority of the liquidator group, “The health consequences from these radiation doses are too small to be identifiable in any epidemiological study, which does not target specific sub-groups with potentially higher exposure.” (Source)
Support groups for liquidators, however, claim that 25,000 have died and over 70,000 are disabled. (Source)
The issue cannot be limited to fatalities. The German Affiliate of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War “Health Effects of Chernobyl” report presents extensive evidence of widespread crippling disability among liquidators. As in the case of the Chernobyl death toll, the plight of liquidators is a hotly contested topic with radically different figures emerging from different quarters.
Some commentators have presented data that suggests a way out of the deadlock over the health and death consequences of Chernobyl. Peter Karamoskos, a Nuclear Radiologist and public representative on the Radiation Health Committee of the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency argues in “Do we know the Chernobyl death toll?” that despite uncertainties about the numbers, “The weight of scientific opinion holds that there is no threshold below which ionising radiation poses no risk and that the risk is proportional to the dose: the "linear no-threshold" (LNT) model.”
Drawing on the 2006 report of the Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionising Radiation (BEIR) of the US National Academy of Sciences. Karamoskos points out: “The … view that low-level radiation is harmless, is restricted to a small number of scientists whose voice is greatly amplified by the nuclear industry (in much the same way as corporate greenhouse polluters amplify the voices of climate science sceptics).”
He continues:
There is general agreement that about 50 people died in the immediate aftermath of the Chernobyl accident. Beyond that, studies generally don't indicate a significant increase in cancer incidence in populations exposed to Chernobyl fallout. Nor would anyone expect them to because of the data gaps and methodological problems mentioned above, and because the main part of the problem concerns the exposure of millions of people to very low doses of radiation from Chernobyl fallout.
For a few marginal scientists and nuclear industry spruikers, that's the end of the matter - the statistical evidence is lacking and thus the death toll from Chernobyl was just 50. Full stop. But for those of us who prefer mainstream science, we can still arrive at a scientifically defensible estimate of the Chernobyl death toll by using estimates of the total radiation exposure, and multiplying by a standard risk estimate.
The International Atomic Energy Agency estimates a total collective dose of 600,000 Sieverts over 50 years from Chernobyl fallout. A standard risk estimate from the International Commission on Radiological Protection is 0.05 fatal cancers per Sievert. Multiply those figures and we get an estimated 30,000 fatal cancers.
A number of studies apply that basic method - based on collective radiation doses and risk estimates - and come up with estimates of the death toll varying from 9000 (in the most contaminated parts of the former Soviet Union) to 93,000 deaths (across Europe).
Those are the credible estimates of the likely eventual death toll from Chernobyl. Claims that the death toll was just 50 should be rejected as dishonest spin from the nuclear industry and some of its most strident and scientifically-illiterate supporters.
Karamaskos then turns to Fukushima, observing that
Nuclear industry spruikers will insist that no-one is at risk from low-level radiation exposure from Fukushima. The rest of us will need to wait some months or years before we have a plausible estimate of total human radiation exposure upon which to base an estimate of the death toll. To date, radiation releases from Fukushima are estimated by the Japanese government to be 10 per cent of the total Chernobyl release.
Needless to say, the view that low-level radiation is harmless is completely at odds with the current situation in Japan - the 20 km evacuation zone around the Fukushima nuclear plant, restrictions on food and water consumption in Japan and restrictions on the importation of food from Japan. (Source)

A joint survey conducted by the Japanese and U.S. governments has produced a detailed map of ground surface radioactive contamination within an 80-kilometer radius of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.

Yablokov’s Chernobyl research and the dire prediction of as many as 400,000 radiation-related cancers in the Fukushima region if wider evacuation is not considered, deserves consideration, scrutiny, and debate as the Japanese government deals with radiation releases from Fukushima Daiichi. The same is true of alternative methodologies, particularly as the “linear no-threshold model” described by Peter Karamoskos. Despite recent efforts to evacuate people from high radiation areas outside of the 20 km evacuation zone, however, Japanese newspapers reported on April 20 that at the same time, the Japanese government had increased the permissible hourly radiation dose at schools in Fukushima Prefecture to 3.8 microsieverts. The Mainichi describes this as  “a level that would see students absorb the internationally recognized maximum of 20 millisieverts per year.” See “Save the Children: Radiation Exposure of Fukushima Students,” link.
What are the risks of such doses? Thomas L. Slovis of the Society for Pediatric Radiology  writes in Pediatr Radiol (2002:32:225-227)
… the risk of cancer from radiation is 5% per sievert… That’s an average number; but an average is almost meaningless.  If you are a mature, late middle-aged individual, it is maybe 1% per sievert. But if you are a child, it is maybe 15% per sievert, with a clear gender difference too at these early ages. So children are very, very sensitive compared to adults." For an adult the acceptable risk for any activity for emergency workers is 50 mSv. For a child the equivalent risk is (50 mSv /250 mSv)*66 mSv=13 mSv. The standard suggested by Japan for children is twice this value. The change in standard to 20 mSv corresponds to a change to 0.3% risk in cancer later on in life.
Uncertainty about the long-term health effects of even low levels of radiation was further highlighted by David J. Brenner in the April 5 issue of Nature. (Source)
In recent weeks, the issue of radiation and the 300,000 children of Fukushima has moved to the center of debate in assessing Japanese government handling of the Fukushima meltdown, even as the seriousness of radiation issues has grown with the belated disclosure by TEPCO of the multiple disasters experienced at the outset, and still far from under control, in Fukushima Daiichi.
On April 28, Kosako Toshiso, a radiation specialist at Tokyo University, resigned his position as Special Advisor to the Cabinet. Kosako had earlier gained notoriety for his role in helping to deny the extension of benefits to some radiation victims of the atomic bombs in a 2003 court case. After Fukushima, however, Kosako made an impassioned and courageous stand against what he saw as a government taking the potential health effects of long-term radiation exposure too lightly. In a press conference, Kosako castigated the Kan cabinet for its decision to increase permissible radiation exposure for Fukushima children:
At times of emergency, we cannot do without exceptions to standard rules and we are indeed capable of setting them up, but in any case, international common sense ought to be respected. It is wrong to forcibly push through conclusions that happen to be convenient only for the administrative authorities but which are utterly unacceptable by international standards. Such conclusions are bound to draw criticism from the international community. 
This time, upon discussing the acceptable level of radiation exposure for playgrounds in primary schools in Fukushima, they have calculated, guided and determined a level of "3.8╬╝Sv per hour" on the basis of "20mSv per year". It is completely wrong to use such a standard for schools that are going to run a normal school curriculum, in which case a standard similar to usual radiation protection measurement (1mSv per year, or even in exceptional cases, 5mSv) ought to be applied, and not the one used in cases of exceptional or urgent circumstances (for two to three days, or at the most, one to two weeks). It is not impossible to use a standard, perhaps for a few months, of 10mSv per year at the maximum, if the public is rightly notified of the necessity of taking caution, and also if special measures are to be taken. But normally it is better to avoid such a thing. We have to note that it is very rare even among occupationally exposed persons (84,000 in total) to be exposed to radiation of 20mSv per year. I cannot possibly accept such a level to be applied to babies, infants and primary school students, not only from my scholarly viewpoint but also from my humanistic beliefs.
You rarely come across a level of 10mSv per year on the covering soil if you measure the leftover soil at a disposal site in any uranium mine (it would be about a few mSv per year at the most), so one needs to have utmost caution when using such a level. Therefore, I strongly protest the decision to use the standard of 20mSv per year for school playgrounds, and ask for revision.
(Translation by Tanaka Izumi) Complete translation available here.
On April 29, the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War appealed to the Japanese government to recognize the risk that students of Fukushima would be exposed to, citing widely accepted scientific principles for radiation effects:
The U.S. National Academy of Sciences BEIR VII report estimates that each 1 mSv of radiation is associated with an increased risk of solid cancer (cancers other than leukemia) of about 1 in 10,000; an increased risk of leukemia of about 1 in 100,000; and a 1 in 17,500 increased risk of dying from cancer. But a critical factor is that not everyone faces the same level of risk. For infants (under 1 year of age) the radiation-related cancer risk is 3 to 4 times higher than for adults; and female infants are twice as susceptible as male infants. 
On May 12, the Japan Medical Association, in the wake of the Kosako resignation, criticized government indifference to the exposure of Fukushima children to radiation. (Source)
The Mainichi also reports protests from various corners.
Indeed, coverage has spread to corners of the mass media hardly known for political critique. Journalist Hirokawa Ryuichi, known for his coverage of the plight of Palestinian children, Unit 731, and Chernobyl, takes on the 20mSv issue in the May 26 issue of Josei Seven (Women’s Seven), a weekly known mostly for paparazzi-style star stalking, but now including more political criticism as mothers nationwide consider the implications of the government’s 20mSv for children decision. (Source)
Hirokawa argues that while the Soviet government may have been irresponsible in its initial approach to the Chernobyl radiation release, it undertook a massive effort to evacuate children from Kiev, 120 kilometers away from the crisis zone, between May and September 1986. Fukushima City is just over 50 kilometers away from Fukushima Daiichi. At the currently approved 20mSv, Hirokawa points out, Japanese children could be exposed to four times the radiation of children in Ukraine in 1986. He writes, “… an hourly rate of 3.8 microsieverts is a number not all that different from readings at the dead ruins of Pripyat. I don’t want to imagine Japanese children running and playing in this ruined shell of a city.” Pripyat, built originally to house Chernobyl workers, is the abandoned city at the heart of Ukraine’s “Zone of Alienation”. 
While comparisons between Chernobyl and Fukushima abound, there are many who point to the contrasts. In the latest issue of the Journal of Radiological Protection, radiation, Professor Richard Wakeford of the University of Manchester’s Dalton Nuclear Institute points out flaws in the International Nuclear Event Scale, "Since Level 7 is the highest rating on INES there can be no distinction between the Fukushima and Chernobyl accidents, leading many to proclaim the Fukushima accident as 'another Chernobyl', which it is not….” He asserts that as of early April, Fukushima had released but one tenth of the amount of radiation expelled in the Chernobyl disaster and praises Japan’s official response,
“Given the difficult background circumstances pertaining in Fukushima Prefecture as problems mounted at the Fukushima Dai-ichi NPS, the organisational abilities of the Japanese authorities in dealing with the evacuation, monitoring and protection of the public has to be admired. In particular, the heroic efforts of the emergency workers, battling under conditions that were often atrocious, should not pass without respect and praise. I for one bow to their courage.” (Source)
We have, likewise, noted important differences in the handling of the disasters at Chernobyl and Fukushima. Yet it is important to note that Wakeford’s praise ignores the most important revelations of TEPCO’s and the Japanese governments cover-ups and recklessness, as in its decisions to expose Fukushima children to 20 mSv of radiation on a long-term basis.
As the nature of the Fukushima crisis relative to Chernobyl continues to be contested, the important issue of radiation exposure of Fukushima school children remains at the center of public debate. To date, the Japanese government has failed to respond effectively to critics of policies that pose long-term risks to the nation’s children. 

Revising Marriage?

Posted by ACL Team on May 20th, 2011 A number of theologians from a variety of church backgrounds have put together a paper arguing against revising marriage away from the current definition of a union between a man and woman.
The paper entitled “Revising Marriage? Why Marriage is the Union of Man and Woman” explores a number of issues including that marriage protects the rights of the child and links the child to a mother and father. It argues what would happen if marriage was revised.
There’s a short version of the paper available here or a longer version of the paper here.

Courtesy ACL at

Commercialising surrogacy commercialises children

Media Release
For release: Monday May 23, 2011
The Australian Christian Lobby has rejected a call by an ACT fertility specialist to commercialise fertility treatments in the territory.
Commercialising surrogacy and egg donation would take advantage of vulnerable women and would also add to the increasing “genetic bewilderment” of donor-conceived children, thereby putting the rights of adults above the rights of the child.
ACT Director Nick Jensen said in response to comments by Doctor Stafford-Bell in The Canberra Times that the idea of commercialised surrogacy is one which is fraught with ethical, legal and medical complexities.
“It would not only create a situation where vulnerable young women could feel pressured to sell their eggs and wombs in order to the cover cost of living, but also fails to recognise the pain and hurt that would continue to be caused to donor-conceived children,” he said.
“We recognise the strong desire for people to have children if they are unable to for whatever reason, but this is not a good enough reason to commercialise it into an industry,” Mr Jensen said.
“Children are not pets to be bought and sold as part of a consumer culture, and the rights and desires of adults should not trump those of children.
“Calls to commercialise the reproductive industry do not take into account that procuring human beings is not a capitalist venture.
“The idea that a rich couple would be able to offer a poverty-stricken woman money to use her body as an incubator is not an ethical one. Even if the woman agrees we would be creating a society where money can even buy people, and equality is being removed.
“Fertility treatment has been a major breakthrough, but we should still keep at the forefront of these laws a child’s right to grow up with their natural mother and father if at all possible, as stated in article 7 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
“We call on the ACT government as they consider legislation around reproductive technology to follow the recommendations given by the Senate on Donor Conception practices in Australia, which prohibits payments on sperm, oocyte and embryo donations, discourages overseas donations, and puts a prohibition on donor anonymity,” Mr Jensen said.

Monday, May 23, 2011

Frogs first, people second

Good on you Barnaby!

 Senator Barnaby Joyce
Shadow Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Water
Leader of The Nationals in the Senate
LNP Senator for Queensland

18th May 2011
Frogs first, people second
The CEO of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority, Rob Freeman, confirmed today that economic, social and environmental factors are not given equal treatment under the Water Act in evidence given to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee today.
      SENATOR BARNETT:  Is it your understanding that the Water Act does not, I repeat does not, require the consideration of environment, social and economic considerations but only allows for the consideration of the environment, social and economic considerations?
      MR FREEMAN:  The Act requires the consideration of economic and social factors as well as environmental.
      SENATOR BARNETT:  But not on an equal basis?
      MR FREEMAN:  That’s correct.
“Both the former Chairman and the Chief Executive Officer of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority have confirmed that the Act cannot deliver a Basin plan that compromises environmental outcomes based on social, economic or other considerations. That runs completely counter to the commitment by Labor and the Coalition to deliver a triple bottom line” said Senator Barnaby Joyce today.
“It’s abundantly clear that the Act as it stands determines environmental water flows first and then looks after people later. Last year the Guide produced a plan on that basis and there was a virtual riot. If we don’t change the Act, we won’t change the outcome. If we don’t change the map, we won’t change our destination.
“Barrister Josephine Kelly summed this up most succinctly when she gave a straight answer:
      SENATOR JOYCE: What happens if there was a town, let’s say there was an environmental asset, I don’t know let’s call it a swamp and in the swamp there is a precious frog and just before the swamp with the precious frog is a town that has a rice mill. You say well the water that has to go to that swamp is 10 GL but that’s the amount of water unfortunately that we need for the rice mill. So now we have got a choice between the rice mill or the Ramsar convention area with the frogs. Who is going to win, the rice mill or the frogs?
      MS KELLY: Under the Act, the frogs.
“While Labor won’t come clean with their legal advice, it’s clear now anyway that the Act needs to be rebalanced.
“If Labor won’t commit to make a serious effort to fix the problem, how can the 2 million people of the Basin trust them?”
More Information - Matthew Canavan 0458 709 433

Saturday, May 21, 2011

U.S. Predator Drones Patrol Canadian Border

Our Canadian And American “friendly border” is not feeling so friendly these days! Following suit with the recently announced common security perimeter deal between Canada and the United States, American officials show off their new world order toys that are currently patrolling what once was touted as, “the world’s longest undefended border”- we can call it that no longer.
U.S. Senator, Joseph LIEberman states to media that the terrorist threat is actually far greater at the Northern border then it is at its Southern border. I’m not sure where LIEberman gets his information from, but last time we checked, Canadians were not slaughtering Americans, killing border officials or taking over American land. Last time we checked, the so called 9/11 terrorists were trained and fostered in America not in Canada. As a matter of fact, with a war mongering southern neighbour setting off shirt storms all over the globe, perhaps it should be Canada that is paranoid!
This excuse that the Northern border with Canada is a greater potential threat then its southern border implies that Mexican authorities are better capable of keep out “the undesirables” from entering their country then Canada is? Are we to assume then that the Canadian government should look at Mexican immigration polices and border security techniques as a model for Canada? Would this relax the fears of the American government about Canada so they may go back to focusing on other things? This is ludicrous!
What this is really about is the creation of a common security perimeter around the continent of North America, controlled mainly by the United States. It’s about getting this infrastructure in place and up and fully operational. It is with these types of technologies they will accomplish the globalists goal to “thin the physical borders”.
This is also about the deeper military integration between Canada and the United States! A good case study to look at is a program they created called “ShipRider“. This program announced to be official back in 2009 by Peter Van Loan, Minister of Public Safety for Canada and U.S. Homeland Security which paved the way for American Officials to police well inside the Canadian border and vice versa. It also paved the way for the inland port system or “NAFTA Superhighway” project which is currently underway. One major hurdle they had to overcome was the ability for American officials to make arrests deep inside Canada, a requirement if you are to have a pre-clearance inland port system, the policing and security of an inland port would be similar to what we see at airports. Being without precedence for this type of arrangement (inland ports), incremental steps have had to be taken on their behalf to bury it all under the banner of “Homeland Security”, “The War On Drugs and “fighting terrorism”.
The Predator Drones have been in use for a couple of years now but with one major difference, traditionally the U.S. controlled drones have been restricted from entering within 16km’s of the Canadian border, this has now changed and they are able to patrol right up to the line!
Back in July 2009, Canadians protested in Sarnia Ontario, in opposition to a 50-foot surveillance balloon launched that was patrolling close to their borders with many protesters stating how the intrusion shows a lack of respect for Canadian sovereignty which is what this is really all about; our national sovereignty.
Special Thanks To:,, CBC News

North American Union / NAFTA Emerging Reality: Wikileaks Cable Confirms North American Union In The Works

A very disturbing cable was released last month by Wikileaks that highlights some of the inside communications between our governments on the issue of consolidating North America into one common trade union complete with a “common security perimeter” around the whole of the continent (NAU/NAI). Once again 9/11, the financial crisis and our calculated economic downturn seem to be the catalyzing events they are using to justify the incremental steps being taken toward a full-out merger of the three sovereign nations and its being done under the guise of greater “Security and Prosperity”.
This most recent cable demonstrates the American efforts to market the plan to the population by maintaining the focus on only the perceived and estimated benefits of the merger and selling those potential benefits to mostly individual firms, industries, travelers and especially to north american consumers. The author of the cable Paul Cellucci, goes as far as to warn insides on how to proceed with the NAU marketing spin while maintaining a low profile to the general population and even to the lieks of Congress and the Parliament of Canada.
“There is little basis on which to estimate the size of the “upside” gains from an integration initiative concentrating on non-tariff barriers of the kind contained in NAI. For this reason, we cannot make claims about how large the benefits might be on a national or continental scale. When advocating NAI, it would be better to highlight specific gains to individual firms, industries or travelers, and especially consumers.” -Cellucci
If you are an avid reader of this website this agenda and the way its being implemented will not be anything new for you. The document does give some credit and confirmation to those that spoke out on these semi-secret “arrangements” and those who tried to warn Americans and Canadians about the ramifications of such a merger back in the SPP days and that their concerns were justified. In fact, what Paul Cellucci and people like Senator Segal are advocating here is really just a restrategized and highly polished version of an old CFR/CCCE agenda. This rehashed idea was already presented to the leaders of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) back in 2005. It goes along with the common security perimeter/new border vision” deal which is being implemented right this very moment. What we are witnessing today is the full implementation of what can be found in a documented entitled “Building A North American Community” which is supported and backed by the largest corporations in Canada, the United States and Mexico.
By: 0NAU

West funds full-blown genocide in Ethiopia

ASMARA, Eritrea—As the UN famine warning center issues urgent reports that millions of Ethiopians are once again starving in the Somali populated Ogaden, the International Committee of the Red Cross publishes a statement that the Ethiopian government has denied the Red Cross an operating permit to carry out relief work in the region. Blocking the Red Cross from relief work somewhere is almost unheard of, yet, when it comes to Ethiopia, headed by the G-20 “statesman” Meles Zenawi, this is business as usual.
For the past four years all aid agencies, including the Red Cross, Doctors Without Borders and UN relief agencies have been blocked by the Ethiopian military from feeding starving people in Ogaden. Millions of starving people, maybe as many as 6 million, though no can say for sure because . . . no one is allowed into the region.
Why is this? Why is there no outcry against this enormous crime against humanity, the blocking of food aid to millions of starving people?
The answer lies at the doorstep of those “humanitarian interventionists,” the Western countries and their puppets in the U.N. who pump billions of dollars a year into propping up the Meles Zenawi regime in Ethiopia. Ethiopia has for several years now surpassed Egypt as the largest recipient of cash from the West in the entire continent of Africa. While the exact amount is hidden deep inside the opaque reports gathering dust in the offices of the international financial cartels, the IMF reported that in 2010 Ethiopia’s import bill was $8.7 billion while it exported only $1.7 billion. $7 billion a year, in direct cash grants, loans that are inevitably forgiven (the bulk of so called African debt relief) or various methods involving financial chicanery, the bill has to be paid or the West knows all to well how quickly their East African henchman Meles Zenawi’s followers will abandon him. If Meles Zenawi goes, who will be the Western enforcer in East Africa, the one who does the dirty work so the West can show the world how clean its hands really are?
Drought, famine and an increasingly brutal counterinsurgency carried out by the Ethiopian military, the largest in Africa, the people of the Ogaden are forgotten by the world, thanks in no small part to the Western media as well as the “human rights” corporations. In one moment of desperation I sent an e-mail about this to a reporter for the L.A. Times based in the Ethiopian capital of Addis Ababa , only to receive a reply that they could not cover this matter due to “access and logistic difficulties.” At least they cant say they didn’t know.
Yet in all this darkness there is light, for the people of Ogadenia have been increasingly effective in armed self defense, and have begun to go on the offensive against the Ethiopian military and their local paramilitary death squads. Still, it remains far beyond the means of the several thousand fighters in the Ogaden National Liberation Front to feed millions of their people, all the while fighting some very desperate battles against their Western armed and funded enemies in the Ethiopian military.
The Horn of Africa has been one of, if not the most, war and starvation plagued regions in the world, and these ongoing calamities can all be traced back to the Western overlords footing the bill.
The West, especially the Obama White House, may pretend ignorance of this crime, but the fact remains that a senior Obama advisor, Gayle Smith, in her pre-Obama, opposition to George Bush day job at the so called Enough Project wrote about this back in 2007 and 2008.
So the powers that be know, all to well, that they are directly responsible for the forced starvation of millions, but don’t expect any action from them. The mandate of the leaders of the Western “democracies” is not to save lives, far from it, it is to protect their empire. So what does it matter if their capos in East Africa cause hundreds of thousands, maybe a million people to die of starvation?
International Law is really the Law of the Jungle, where only the strong survive, and the long suffering people of the Ethiopian Ogaden are the latest victims. The people of the the Ogaden have little choice but to fight for their lives, at least until the gangster, genocidal regime of Meles Zenawi is sent packing, with Meles fleeing to his palace in London and his ill gotten billions. Until then don’t expect anything better than crocodile tears from the “humanitarian interventionists” in the West.
Stay tuned to Intrepid Report for more news the so-called free press in the West refuses to cover.
Thomas C. Mountain is the only independent Western journalist in the Horn of Africa, living and reporting from Eritrea since 2006.

Courtesy Intrepid Report

China asks US to respect Pak's sovereignty, independence

May 20, 2011, 04.59am IST

BEIJING/ISLAMABAD: China on Thursday said the international community "must respect" Pakistan's sovereignty, tacitly confirming reports that it has asked the US not to violate Islamabad's territorial integrity, following the killing of Osama bin Laden.
Asked about reports that China has asked US during its recently concluded strategic dialogue with Washington to respect Pakistan's sovereignty as Islamabad came under heavy pressure after bin Laden's killing, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Jiang Yu told media here that "sovereignty and territorial integrity of Pakistan must be respected."
"We believe that Pakistan has made great contribution to international counter-terrorism efforts, as well as huge sacrifices. The international community should understand and support Pakistan's efforts to restore national stability and develop its economy," she said.
According to Pakistan's state run APP news agency, Gilani told Pakistan media here last night after his meeting with Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao that "China supported Pakistan's cause on its own."
Gilani said the Chinese conveyed a clear message to the US that "there should be no harm to the Pakistani sovereignty and the US should understand and appreciate concerns of Pakistan."
China asked the US to work with Pakistan in improving their bilateral relations in view of the present scenario, he said.
Chinese leadership conveyed to the US that Pakistan should be helped and its honour should be upheld keeping in view its sacrifices in war on terror, he said.
He quoted Wen as saying that Pakistan faced challenges in the wake of killing of bin Laden and Chinese leadership was categorical in supporting Pakistan's stance as well as its concerns over national honour and sovereignty.
China has "warned in unequivocal terms that any attack on Pakistan would be construed as an attack on China", The News daily quoted diplomatic sources as saying.
The warning was formally conveyed by the Chinese foreign minister at last week's China-US strategic dialogue and economic talks in Washington, it said.
For his part, Gilani reiterated Pakistan's support for its policy of 'One China' and said his country fully supports China on the issues of Taiwan and Tibet.
During her briefing today Jiang skirted questions about Pakistan-China signing new defence agreements. Asked about assertions by Pakistan's Ambassador to China Masood Khan before Gilani's arrival that new defence deals would be signed, she said the two sides signed agreements in economy, technology, finance and energy resources.
"As to specific cooperation, please refer to relevant companies," she said, adding that China is actively implementing pledges to help pro-disaster reconstruction and exerting utmost to help tide over difficulties."

Courtesy Economic Times


By Mark Anderson

An influential legislator from Switzerland’s largest political party has issued a strongly worded letter to the head of the Swiss Federal Department of Justice and Police, saying that the globalist Bilderberg group’s planned meeting in Switzerland June 9-12 threatens the nation’s deep-seated traditions of populist rule and neutrality as well as bringing many disreputable participants, some of whom are accused war criminals, to the traditionally neutral country.

The legislator, Dominique Baettig of the Swiss People’s Party (SVP), was interviewed by this AFP writer last December and soon made headlines when he called for George W. Bush’s arrest for war crimes if he ever set foot in Switzerland. Bush canceled a Feb. 12 visit to Geneva.

Regarding Bilderberg’s pending visit, Baettig informed top cop Mrs. Simonetta Sommaruga: “I wish to draw your attention to . . . the discreet but influential Bilderberg group [meeting] in a hotel in St. Moritz [June 9-12].”

The group is a “global elite of bankers, industrialists, diplomats, U.S. and European NATO brass, crowned heads, media groups, their moguls and editors, as well as heads of state, whether retired or not, which coordinates, exchanges, organizes and structures, out of all democratic control, the major guidelines toward economic globalization.”

To convey the danger of Bilderberg’s influence, his letter adds, “Independence, private property and the private sphere are reduced by the usage of electronic virtual money and by . . . the control of all individuals in a biometric global gulag. . . . Higher debts of the [world’s] countries are encouraged . . . and they become the debtors of supranational private banks.

“Military and police tasks are privatized and military actions to dismantle independent states are planned and coordinated (Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, Libya; tomorrow Iran and Syria). The worst being the fact that they prepare the programmed end of traditional democracy, with a power shift from all states to the benefit of non-elected governance entities. . . .”

His letter also notes that this “discreet group develops an ultra-liberal, free-trade society model, with a . . . world currency and the IMF as treasurer.”

Baettig noted that he’s especially troubled after “consulting the [Bilderberg] participants lists of [recent] years” and seeing “the undesirable presence” in Switzerland of certain “personalities” including Henry Kissinger, Dick Cheney and others implicated in war crimes, torture and those “who are under investigation by the courts in The Hague, etc.”

Baettig asks Mrs. Sommaruga: “Are your services informed of the participants’ identities? As NATO is actually engaged in war actions (Libya, Afghanistan, targeted assassinations), the participation of NATO brass . . . does represent a major risk of a terrorist action in St. Moritz and, therefore, a serious danger for its inhabitants and neighbors. Not mentioning the . . .image loss for a sovereign and democratic nation which stands for an armed and integral neutrality. . . .”

He added that if “politicians, businessmen and media group owners sharing [globalist] motivations represents ‘crimes against the state,’ then that could undermine Swiss independence with ‘diplomatic treason.’”

The End Of The Eurozone? — Stiglitz At European Zeitgeist 2011 -

The End Of The Eurozone? — Stiglitz At European Zeitgeist 2011 -

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

The Globalists Plan for a New World Currency

I have recently heard from some sources supposedly close to the USA President that the USA and Russia have been working on a new world currency supposedly based on special drawing rights against the IMF. Whilst this places the currency smack bang in the lap of the NWO characters who own the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the Central Banks, as the following article points out, there are some problems with this. Certainly whilst the sources I have heard quoted elude to the currency going live by 3rd quarter 2011, if the release of the euro is anything to judge by, it would not surprise me if the enormity of such a project were to delay the release by as much as easily another six months.

Steve Barnes

Mark Matheny
Sic Semper Tyrannis
September 23, 2010

What used to be talked about as “conspiracy theory” is now being discussed openly among the nations of the world. A global currency called the “Bancor” may soon be the global currency, and along with it a global central bank.


Calls for a global currency began to come about after WWII, when John Maynard Keynes and the British government proposed the “Bancor” as a world reserve currency.

“Give me control of a nation’s money and I care not who makes her laws.”
Those were the words of Mayer Amscel Rothschild of the Elite Rothschild Banking Family of Europe. And it is apparent that those in power hope to gain control of not only a single nation’s money, but of all nations’ monetary systems into a single Central Bank with a Global Currency. In that instance, whoever controls the monetary system of the world, will in effect control the policies and laws globally as well.
One of the priliminary measures of incorporating a global currency, however, seems to be the destruction of currencies around the globe in order to justify its inception.
Steps for bringing about this New World Order currency have been in the works for a long time, and the proponents are patient and deliberate. Calls for a global currency began to come about after WWII, when John Maynard Keynes and the British government proposed the “Bancor” as a world reserve currency.
Although it has taken time and effort, it looks as though the current economic crisis has set the stage for the demise of the dollar as a world reserve currency to make way for the proposed Bancor.
The Federal Reserve and our government are also in on the plan apparently, as the Fed continues to devalue the dollar through “easing” as they call it, or printing more and more of it. Our government then continues to grow and spend more and more as well, only to exasterbate the problem.
Of course, Secretary of Treasury Timothy Geithner said back in 2009 that the U.S. would be open to a world currency as well!
In this video Geithner was at a Council on Foreign Relations conference, and was asked about a proposal from China’s Central Bank Governor to expand the role of the IMF’s use of SDRs (Special Drawing Rights), whereupon Geithner said ” ..We’re actually quite open to that suggestion.”

Geithner then went on further to say however, that ” ..But you should think of it as rather evolutionary building on the current architecture, rather than to moving us to a global monetary union.” Geithner obviously knows that increasing the use of SDRs to the IMF will eventually make way for “a global monetary union” as he puts it.
How do I know this? In a recent document by the International Monetary Fund, drafted on April 13, 2010 titled Reserve Accumulation and International Monetary Stability , the report shows that while there are benefits to the use of SDRs, there are also some limitations and drawbacks.
One of those drawbacks stated in the same document is the fact that the SDR is not a currency:
From SDR to Bancor. A limitation of the SDR as discussed previously is that it is not a currency. Both the SDR and SDR-denominated instruments need to be converted eventually to a national currency for most payments or interventions in foreign exchange markets, which adds to cumbersome use in transactions. and though an SDR-based system would move away from a dominant currency, the SDR’r value remains heavily linked to conditions and performance of the major component countries.A more ambitious reform option would be to build on the previous ideas and develop, over time, a global currency. Pg 26. (emphasis mine)
Also to be noticed is the latter portion of the video, where Geithner says these very pertinent words:
“It is very important just to underscore that… the future evolution of the dollar’s role in the system, depends really primarilly on how effective we are here in the United States, in getting not just  recovery back on track, our financial system repaired, but we get our fiscal position back to the point where people will judge it as sustainable..”
If these are the parameters for avoiding a global currency, then we are in serious trouble. It looks as though we may see the bancor soon.

In an article by James Turk on, he states clearly that the Fed is printing too much money and rapidly devaluating the dollar. He states in the article that commodity prices are rising not because of good economic activity, but because of what the Fed calls “quantitative easing“. He states two reasons for this:
1. Because too much money has been printed for years, not just over the past three months, which can be illustrated by comparing M3 to the total US population. In 2000 there were $26,977 in circulation, as measured by M3, for every man, woman and child in the United States. That amount has ballooned to $46,538, a 7.1% annual rate of growth, which is more than 7-times the 0.9% annual rate of population growth during this period.
2. Demand for money is usually ignored, but it is an important part of the equation.  Unfortunately, demand cannot be measured, so we again need to rely on observations of market prices to determine the prevailing trend in the demand for dollars at any moment. So, for example, let’s look at the US Dollar Index, which measures the dollar’s rate of exchange against a basket of currencies. While commodities have been rising since June 4th, the Dollar Index has been falling.  It is down 7.9% over this period, a 27.6% annualized rate of decline.  Given that people are opting to hold other currencies in preference to the dollar, as evidenced by the dollar’s falling exchange rate, it is clear that the demand for the dollar is falling.
In 2009 on CNBC, Stephen Gallo essentially spoke of the same reasons for the current crisis, and the possibility of a global currency and world bank as a result of it :
Carrol Quigely stated a similar development of a world bank in collaboration with central banks around the world, but with far more sinister motives and not the rosy picture Mr. Stephen Gallo is painting:
“The powers of financial capitalism had another far reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements, arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the worlds central banks which were themselves private corporations. The growth of financial capitalism made possible a centralization of world economic control and use of this power for the direct benefit of financiers and the indirect injury of all other economic groups.”
Tragedy and Hope: A History of The World in Our Time (Macmillan Company, 1966,) Professor Carroll Quigley of Georgetown University
The housing market collapse, auto industry government takover, Wall Street and Banker bailouts, as well as the reduction in manufacturing here in the United States among other things, are all contrived events by the Elites in order to systematically crush our economy and our currency, in order to make way for this ominous takeover of the world’s monetary systems and the completion of a New World Order Feudalistic Dictatorship.

Meet The New Boss: China Owns The United States

Have you ever wondered why so many multinationals are establishing a very solid presence in China? It's quite apparent they work and don't complain, the labour is cheap, the country is politically stable, and the masses will be unlikely to succeed in changing the status quo! At this stage (May 2011), I believe China as refused to accept USA Treasury Bonds, and has bargained for more substantial ownership of what the people of the USA believe to be their country's assets, possibly including what was sovereign land! read on to see what Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones have to say...

Steve Barnes
19 may 2011
January 19, 2011

Meet The New Boss: China Owns The United States redflag
The flags along Constitution Avenue tell you everything you need to know – America has been sold out and our new Chinese slavemasters are now leading the sheep to slaughter. Even as Barack Obama bows and fawns to President Hu Jintao, the globalists for whom he fronts are sharpening the knives and preparing to unleash the bloodletting as the dying carcass of America is dragged into line to facilitate the global management of the planet.

Not satisfied with a hemorrhaging trade deficit with China that continues to bleed American jobs at a rate of millions, a crumbling manufacturing base being replaced by the endless import of cheap slave goods from the Communist state, and a stunted economy being rapidly outpaced by the Red Dragon, the Obama administration wanted to further drill it in to Americans who the new boss is yesterday, by placing Chinese flags throughout Washington DC before Obama’s fawning meeting with unelected President Hu Jintao.

Everyone is painfully aware of the fact that China now owns the United States economically, with the Chinese central bank being the largest debt holder at approaching $1 trillion dollars. The average American family with two children collectively owes around $12,000 dollars to China. The Communist state’s ownership of long term U.S. Treasury Securities means the United States pays upwards of $100 million dollars a day to China in terms of interest alone.
China’s huge accumulation of US dollars gives it the sway to lead the United States by the nose like a sheep to slaughter, holding in its hands the power to decide the economic destiny of the now collapsing American empire. The culmination of this process moved a step closer this week when Hu Jintao made it clear that China was preparing to sharpen the knife for the bloodletting to begin, by deriding the dollar as a “product of the past” and signaling its replacement with a new global monetary system based around the Chinese yuan.

This transition is only becoming more obvious with the continuing fire sale of crucial infrastructure to the Red Dragon. Alex Jones’ first documentary film America: Destroyed By Design, made in 1997, warned Americans that the sell-out to the Chinese was the first step on the road to the sacking of the American economy and pulling the plug on key US infrastructure in the move towards global management of the planet.

The figures don’t lie – after a 20 year process of gradual sellout overseen by Clinton, Bush and now Obama – China owns America.However, to have that notion aggressively reinforced by the plethora of Chinese flags that invaded DC this week goes beyond mere pomp and ceremony. This is meant to send a message to Americans that the United States is being hollowed out and swallowed up by the globalists, and that the center of the new world order empire will be transferred to Communist China in a bloodless coup.

And at the center of it all is a fawning, obedient, bowing Barack Obama, who ironically in the same week as Martin Luther King was remembered, played his role diligently as the house slave for his globalist masters, lavishing Jintao with a private dinner in a stunt that the Associated Press admits was designed to “soften the American public’s suspicions about China,” a nation that detains and tortures individuals for exercising their rights to freedom of association, freedom of religion and freedom of expression, while abducting, beating and performing forced abortions on women who refuse to submit to the country’s brutal one child policy.

The sickening worship and fealty displayed towards Jintao and China this week is all about training Americans to recognize who their new slavemasters are – the globalists who have exalted the Communist state as a model country for the new world order – a world in which antiquated ideas about freedom of the individual, prosperity, self-determination, family and happiness will be abolished.

Taiwanese animators got it right with the following cartoon, with depicts Obama’s subservience to America’s new boss, unelected dictator Hu Jintao.

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show. Watson has been interviewed by many publications and radio shows, including Vanity Fair and Coast to Coast AM, America’s most listened to late night talk show.


I have had countless surprises and many shocks as I have lifted the stone and seen what horrors lie beneath, but few more than the scale of child abuse and Satanism.

And that's the  word - scale. The fact that it is happening is one thing, but to realise how widespread and fundamental it is to establishment power all over the world was truly shocking.

I have talked with people in the best part of 50 countries in my research of this subject, the abused, the insiders who know the abusers, and those who have dedicated their lives to exposing this evil.

Put it all together and the situation is as clear as can be: paedophilia and Satanism are the cement that hold the establishment control structure together in every country, and these 'national' networks connect together to form a global network of paedophiles and Satanists all watching each others' backs - while they continue to serve the Control System.

If anyone wants to get out or refuses to take orders they know the consequences - 'suicide' or exposure.

Governments around the world are being controlled by the bloodline cabal via paedophile and Satanist politicians and 'leaders' who dare not resist the demands of the Shadow People who have the evidence that would destroy them.

A few weeks ago a document came to light in Australia purporting to be a 'death bed confession' by a leading Satanist from the 'top' coven/lodge in Sydney. It certainly rang true because what it said is supported by my 15 years research into these matters. It said:

'Politicians are introduced by a carefully graded set of criteria and situations that enable them to accept that their victims will be, "Our little secret". Young children sexually molested and physically abused by politicians worldwide are quickly used as sacrifices. In Australia the bodies are hardly ever discovered, for Australia is still a wilderness.'

See the full article at

Regarding high freemasonry, government officials and child abuse / pedophilia

Ever wondered about the connection between prostitution and government officials? Canberra is Australia is filthy with porn and prostitution.

How about government officials, legal people and pedophilia?

THE SCUM is an interesting read regarding high freemasonry, government officials and child abuse / pedophilia...

The SCUM | Archive | Lord Cullen

Burke won’t say how many Aussies will be eliminated

When Sustainable Population Minister Tony Burke released his government’s Sustainable Population Strategy for Australia on 13th May, it disappointed Dick Smith, who told ABC radio, “If you want to have a sustainable Australia, I think Tim Flannery is correct—it’s about nine million people.”

Smith was unhappy that the Strategy didn’t come right out and set a population target, not a target for population growth, but a target for population reduction.
Unlike Smith, Burke is a politician, who knows it would be too controversial to declare a population reduction target—even though his government is allied with Smith in that intention. 

The fixation on population control in Australia exemplified by Dick Smith is entirely orchestrated by the British Crown and its Australian assets in the green movement:
  • In 1961, Prince Philip, eugenicist Julian Huxley and Nazi Prince Bernhard founded the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) to “cull” the world’s population, as Prince Philip puts it.
  • In 1963, Philip ordered the establishment of the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF), which he personally oversaw.
  • In 1988, the ACF spun off Sustainable Population Australia (SPA), which promotes itself as the only environmental organisation in Australia openly campaigning for “population reduction”, and advocates a Chinese-style one child policy, and a racist immigration program that excludes immigrants from developing nations.
  • In 1994, Tim Flannery, who is now a patron of SPA and a Trustee of Prince Philip’s WWF, declared Australia’s population carrying capacity to be 6-12 million; that same year, Barry Jones’ parliamentary inquiry recommended the creation of a Population Ministry, and that population be managed in accordance with the WWF’s principles of “ecologically sustainable development”, under which Australia should contemplate as a “realistic option”, a scenario of population reduction to as few as five million people.
  • In 2002, the WWF reacted to the CEC’s landmark Special Report entitled “The Infrastructure Road to Recovery” which laid out a vision of 50 million people by 2050, by setting up the Wentworth Group of so-called Concerned Scientists under Tim Flannery, which immediately set out to smash Australia’s food bowl, the Murray-Darling Basin.
  • In 2009, Dick Smith, a member of Prince Philip’s 1001 Club of benefactors of the WWF, paid to distribute Overloading Australia by SPA founder Mark O’Connor, and William Lines, to every politician in Australia; the Fabian Society’s Kelvin Thomson, backed by Smith, acted on the mass depopulation fantasies of the Fabian Society’s 19th Century British founders such as H.G. Wells by spearheading a campaign to tie the cooked up climate change scare in with population growth, declaring that we can’t reduce our carbon footprint without reducing the number of footprints.
  • In 2010, Dick Smith took credit in his Population Puzzle documentary aired on the ABC for Kevin Rudd’s announcement of a Minister for Population; when the Fabian Society’s Julia Gillard took over from Rudd her first act was to tip her hat to the racist baby-haters at Sustainable Population Australia by renaming it the Ministry for Sustainable Population, and handing it to Environment Minister Tony Burke, himself a radical greenie from the Wilderness Society, and already at work on the shutdown of the Murray-Darling Basin food bowl. Burke set up the Sustainable Population Strategy inquiry, and appointed the “Malthus of Maroubra”, former NSW Premier Bob Carr, the noted Fabian, as its co-chair.
  • In 2011, Gillard appointed Tim Flannery to chair her Climate Commission, to sell her carbon tax/ETS, which by design will suppress energy production and consumption, and kill off countless Australians in heat waves, cold snaps, and epidemics of respiratory disease and diseases of poverty, and will achieve Flannery’s 6-12 million target.
Despite Dick Smith and Kelvin Thomson expressing their unhappiness that the Sustainable Population Strategy didn’t state a depopulation target, fellow depopulator and Strategy co-chair Bob Carr heaped praise on it for abandoning the idea of a “Big Australia”.

For his part, Dick Smith gave the game away, by admitting the connection—long charged by the CEC—between the British Crown policy of population control, and the British Crown’s other imperial policy of global free trade, under which Australia’s economy has been smashed, reduced from being an industrial powerhouse to a colonial-style raw materials quarry: “We make our money from agriculture and digging bits and pieces out of the ground”, he told the ABC. “You don’t actually need too many people to do that.” 

Citizens Electoral Council leader Craig Isherwood today challenged Smith: “If you want the government to reduce Australia’s population to nine million, are you volunteering to be part of the 14 million who will be eliminated? Keep spouting off Dick—you’re confirming everything the CEC says.”

Click here to watch the latest CEC Weekly Report featuring Craig Isherwood and Robert Barwick discussing the Queen’s personal role in pushing depopulation.

Citizens Electoral Council of Australia
Media Release  18th of May 2011