T W A W K I

The world as we know it

McTernans rant

Says it all

20121130-000205.jpg

Gillards advisor McTernan doesn’t like being taken to task on how protecting union rorting Gillard is destroying his fathers Labor & Union legacy. Hit a nerve John? The truth hurts. Funny, you don’t mind sliming innocent people!

And no John it wasn’t about your fathers behaviour but yours! Nothing like expletives from your mouth to further prove my point.

Update 6 – this is the original tweet that McTernan now seems to have deleted;

——————–
Update 7 application to have McTernand visa revoked

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2012/11/dont-moan-about-it-do-something.html

Update 5 on McTernan & how he rips off the Australian taxpayers like Gillard n her union mates did of union memers;

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2012/11/jamie-briggs-the-member-for-mayo-tells-it-like-it-is-about-mcternan.html

Update 1 – Do the feelings of the corrupt in power matter? Of late there has been indignation at Alan Jones comment about Julia Gillards father ‘dying of shame’. Yet Gillard is allowed to stonewall parliament & the Australian people about her previous involvement in AWU fraud involving ripping off union members funds & also convincing the Goldfield Fatal Accident & Death Fund to invest over a million dollars in her boyfriends fraudulent scams. When after 2 decades & millions of union members money still remains unrecovered & Howes & Shorten refuse to pursue it shows that the welfare of the ‘little people’ is inconsequential to those in power, yet somehow the feelings of the corrupt are meant to take pre-eminence. Furthermore through Gillard the lives of ordinary Australians are further impoverished through a fraudulent carbon tax that treasonously enriches a foreign power – the UN, who by the day creates new laws to undemocratically enslave us & remove our sovereign rights.

Hypocritically Gillard & her ALP have no problem smearing anyone with false accusations who try and hold them to account. Gillard smears happily married Abbott as a mysogynist when her own past is a train wreck of affairs, ruining marriages, boyfriends who are crooks, defending the indefensible Thomson etc. Emerson, Gillards ex has no problems with the vilest of rants. Roxon trashes the position of Attorney General with Abuse of process protecting Slipper whilst accusing his accuser. Anna Bourke the speaker this week demonstrated the most appalling bias of any speaker ever to sit in the chair of parliament. And yet while they trash our country, trash our esteemed positions meant for the most credible, the most honest and the most fair of us, we are meant to tip toe around their feelings. Give me a break.

If McTernan wants to publicly make out on twitter how proud he is to follow in his fathers footsteps who was a ALP & Union man, then it is fair game to hold McTernan to account & ask how can that be so when as Gillard’s Communication Manager he constantly spins smear to protect Gillard’s corrupt behaviour. The same Gillard who is accused of ripping off union members, who’s bare faced lies are seen daily in the media by the electorate, the same Gillard who refuses to be accountable to the people, who trashes the Westminster system of government, who said there will be no carbon tax under a government I lead and most appallingly the same Gillard who still sits on her throne after over 1000 boat people have been lured to their deaths by her own policies. Yet the same Gillard is the despot who ‘proud union & labor man’ Mcternan voraciously protects.

The wash up of all this is what is more important – the feelings of a corrupt leader or that leader being held accountable to the public they have a sacred duty to serve? I will always say, emphatically the latter. Gillard has the most powerful position in the nation, she is hardly a victim and she, like McTernan both need to get a spine, somehow find some morality & grow up. Neither are they celebrities, they are public servants who are meant to serve the public not rule over the public with every abuse of process they can find.

And for the record, yes Alan Jones I agree with you, even more so after the Gillard’s increasingly hysterical & sociopathic behavior this week – her behavior is utterly, utterly, utterly shameful. That the pack of ALP cowards she leads can’t produce a single MP who would put the well being of this great nation ahead of the corruption of their party shows that not a single one deserves re-election.

—————————–

Update 2 Yes Andrew Bolt I get your point, but no I don’t agree with you. On many things I do, but if you defend freedom of the press yet somehow think that a persons feelings means they are above criticism then isn’t that a ‘slippery slope’.

20121130-085351.jpg

—————————–

Update 3 The fake moral outrage at Alan Jones comment was spurious. This is because Alan assumed Gillard’s father was an honorable man, like I assume McTernans father was the same. It was the appalling behavior of their children that was and is the issue.

—————————–

The benevolent despot who sees herself as a shepherd of the people still demands from others the submissiveness of sheep” Eric Hoffer

Filed under: Governance, , ,

Tale of the little red hen

MODERN VERSION from attitude adjustment

Once upon a time, there was a little red hen who scratched about the barnyard until she uncovered some grains of wheat.

She called her neighbors and said, “If we plant this wheat, we shall have bread to eat. Who will help me plant it?”

“Not I,” said the cow.
“Not I,” said the duck.
“Not I,” said the pig.
“Not I,” said the goose.

“Then I will,” said the little red hen, and she did.

The wheat grew tall and ripened into golden grain. “Who will help me reap my wheat?” asked the little red hen.

“Not I,” said the duck.
“Out of my classification,” said the pig.
“I’d lose my seniority,” said the cow.
“I’d lose my unemployment compensation,” said the goose.

“Then I will,” said the little red hen, and she did.

At last it came time to bake the bread. “Who will help me bake the bread?” asked the little red hen.

“That would be overtime for me,” said the cow.
“I’d lose my welfare benefits,” said the duck.
“I’m a dropout and never learned how,” said the pig.
“If I’m to be the only helper, that’s discrimination,” said the goose.

“Then I will,” said the little red hen.

She baked five loaves and held them up for her neighbors to see. They wanted some and, in fact, demanded a share.

But the little red hen said, “No, I can eat the five loaves.”

“Excess profits!” cried the cow.
“Capitalist leech!” screamed the duck.
“I demand equal rights!” yelled the goose.
And the pig just grunted.

And they painted “unfair” picket signs and marched around and around the little red hen, shouting obscenities.

When the government agent came, he said to the little red hen, “You must not be greedy.”

“But I earned the bread,” said the little red hen.

“Exactly,” said the agent. “That is the wonderful free enterprise system. Anyone in the barnyard can earn as much as he wants. But under our modern government regulations, the productive workers must divide their product with the idle.”

And they lived happily ever after, including the little red hen, who smiled and clucked, “I am grateful. I am grateful.”

But her neighbors wondered why she never again baked any more bread.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

That is the wonder of our globalists climate communism.

Oh and dont forget as globalist socialist puppet Obama said ‘you didnt build that

Meanwhile the other climate communists Gillard & Cameron keep building the bankster dreams of carbon taxes.

As BIR says of the carbon tax derivative time bomb ….

Don’t forget banking is both the most immoral as well as the most unnecessary institution.

Filed under: Governance, , , ,

Be sure of this, the Globalists refuse accountability

The arts of power and its minions are the same in all countries and in all ages. It marks its victim, denounces it, and excites the public odium and public hatred, to conceal its own abuses and encroachments.–Henry Clay

To be governed is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, legislated at, regulated, docketed, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, assessed, weighed, censored, ordered about, by men who have neither the right, nor the knowledge, nor the virtue.–Peirre-Joseph Proudhon

Everywhere you turn the globalists and the puppet governments refuse to be accountable, act with impunity and believe they are above the law. Just watching the Gillard ALP in Australia where the government that has presided over more than 700 deaths, hundreds of house fires, tens of billions squandered, corruption at every turn and yet remains in power, refusing to be transparent or accountable to the people. This week has been replete with examples of that as Gillards past corruption comes to light whilst she stonewalls & refuses answers. Her fraud & all the appointments to positions of power she has made for accomplices and mates are finally being laid bare but she refuses to budge.

Then there is Australia’s carbon tax legislation which Gillard ensured to the people pre election she wouldn’t bring in, and yet had every intent on doing so and deceptively did so and that in a manner that defied every democratic process and made a mockery of representational government. To be true we are no longer governed by and for the people but simply ruled by elitists believing themselves to be above the ‘little people’. To Gillard the end justifies the means and has no problem with lying as long as she accomplishes her fabian (creeping) socialist ideals – the pinnacle of which is the carbon tax. Keep in mind that the carbon taxes are nothing but wealth redistribution – historically one of Gillards favorite socialist endeavors, and one that conveniently funds the UN and its global governance as well. The carbon tax is nothing but centralised power & where that power is shifting from a national/Australian level to an international/UN level. All the rules and laws of the carbon tax come from the UN, not from the Australian people and allegiance to the UN is nothing short of allegiance to a foreign power – or treason as our constitution would define it, tyrannical treason.

The accumulation of all power, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.–James Madison

Also keep in mind the most expensive carbon tax in the world will only go up. Also keep in mind that ex Goldman Sachs bankster Turncoat Turnbull is another globalist puppet waiting ready in the wings to replace Abbott who vows to repeal this law of enslavement. No we the people don’t want Turnbull but what we the people think doesnt seem to matter anymore.

There is no democracy under globalism. The UN is the least accountable bureaucracy in the world. It is also the least democratic as we the people have no say, it has no elections and does as it pleases. Is it any wonder that its socialist puppets behave in the same manner – Gillard & Obama in particular refuse transparency, accountability or scrutiny. The more centralised the power, the less voice that the people have. We would head the wise words;

Necessity is the plea of every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.–William Pitt, the Younger

No where has the impingement of human freedom been more obvious than the fabricated global warming alarmism, where all the free things we hold dear are being removed by the lying excuse of saving the planet. The planet isnt dying, the world does not have a fever, extreme weather events are not increasing – all lies to push a lie. Our green tyrants are turning us into nothing more than slaves. And if the UN’s Agenda 21 gets fully implemented then tragically in comparison the holocaust will look like a picnic in the park.

UN has absolute immunity in sexual harassment ;

Fear is what is needed in a despotism. Virtue is not at all necessary, and honor would be dangerous.–Charles-Louis de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu

Filed under: Governance, , , , , , , ,

Joke of the day – hilarious

Seems the ALP has a sense of humour after all!

Check it out yourself at ;

http://www.pm.gov.au/contact-your-pm

Some questions you might like to ask her;

With previous work for Slater & Gordon with regards her ex boyfriend;

Why no client identification?

Why no deed of incorporation on file?

Why no client risk & objective profile?

Why no authorisation from the AWU Trustee?

Why done in secret from partners?

Why couldnt you rule out to your partners that you hadn’t personally profited from the situation?

And lots more

Filed under: Governance, , ,

Climate shifting to little ice age conditions

As forecast by Piers Corbyn recently the jet streams are shifting to mini ice age conditions, both in the NH and SH.US national weather service reports;

During tonight’s weather balloon launch, we observed an anomalously strong jet stream at the top of the troposphere (where the majority of weather happens). Winds were measured at 148 mph at approximately 36,000 and 41,000 feet. The jet stream has dipped far south over the last few days and has created a deep trough over the eastern U.S“.

Little ice age conditions are where the jet streams strengthen and move closer to the equator. As the jet streams head towards the equator polar air reaches closer to the equator also bringing more cold and snow to the regions in between. The jet stream shifts are because of a quiet sun with low sunspot activity like the little ice age in the 1700s.

Also with a low sunspot count according to Svensmark theory we get more cloudiness and further cold as the earth is shaded. With the magnetic field of the earth dropping this exacerbates the problem, allowing more cosmic rays in as the atmosphere cracks. Increasing volcanism which can also happen during magnetic field & solar declines can add significant amounts of sulphur to the atmosphere which has a further shielding effect of the sun.

Despite the predictions by the global warming protagonists )mostly who profit from the false scare), the snowline in Australia is not climbing, and snow isnt becoming extinct – in fact the opposite is happening. This year marks good snowfalls, often to low levels with last week the resorts getting up to a metre of snow with more on the way this week.

So while we have Gillards socialist wealth redistribution program under the false guise of a warming tax, there is a deepening deadly cold ahead. As the ALP government induced electricity prices skyrocket lets be thankful summer is on the way for Australians. For the northern hemisphere as winter approaches many innocent people wont be so lucky to escape the deadly cold.

Filed under: Governance, , , , , , , , ,

ALP shutting down free speech and online blogs

Update; Pickering Post now confirm they are under attack with DOS attacks as well. Read here as well as the latest about Is our Prime Minister a crook? Please link, facebook & retweet – we need to get word out as our freedoms come under direct attack.

From Wikipedia;

One common method of attack involves saturating the target machine with external communications requests, such that it cannot respond to legitimate traffic, or responds so slowly as to be rendered effectively unavailable. Such attacks usually lead to a server overload. In general terms, DoS attacks are implemented by either forcing the targeted computer(s) to reset, or consuming its resources so that it can no longer provide its intended service or obstructing the communication media between the intended users and the victim so that they can no longer communicate adequately.

Denial-of-service attacks are considered violations of the IAB‘s Internet proper use policy, and also violate the acceptable use policies of virtually all Internet service providers. They also commonly constitute violations of the laws of individual nations

From the Australian Federal Police website;

High tech crime offences are defined in Commonwealth legislation within Part 10.7 – Computer Offences of the Criminal Code Act 1995 and include:

Each State and Territory in Australia has its own legislated computer-related offences which are similar to the Commonwealth legislation.

If the Finkelstein inquiry by Gillard’s ALP wasnt enough where those critical of the government could be jailed, then came the ALP’s internet freedom attack requiring all our passwords etc to be provided to a corrupt government. At the same time there is the ALPs attack on the free press (from Andrew Bolt’s blog);

- a media inquiry called into the alleged “bias” of newspapers, following Greens complaints about the “hate media” attacking its policies.

- proposals for a media supercop, able to jail journalists, being considered by the Government.

- proposals for new restrictions on media owners being considered by the Government.

- campaigning by Government against Gina Rinehart’s move on Fairfax.

- two journalists sacked last year over coverage of Julia Gillard’s past amid Government pressure on newspapers..

- expansion of state-funded ABC into internet, competing against private media.

- refusal to remove restrictions on legitimate public debate in the Racial Discrimination Act.

- interference in tender process to knock out News Ltd’s winning bid for Australia Network as apparent punishment.

So in every way we now have a government that acts like the North Korean Communist Party and destroys the once great democracy of this country. Now we are seeing the ongoing shutting down of websites critical of the government. This week JoanneNovas site was shut down & Larry Pickering has also had problems (though he claims they were simply increased traffic).

Reminds me of the night before the carbon tax was to be launched, and being highly critical of it & the government on my blog I was shocked to see that my blog was shut down completely and that without warning. The host Bluehost said it was a DOS attack from Australia through Telstra. As I tried to pursue the matter with both of them Telstra requested the IP address of the attack which Bluehost claimed it didn’t have and so I hit a brick wall.

On a similiar issue of free speech I have had a complaint with the human rights commission regarding Gillards ALP giving we the people a mere week to provide comment on over 11,000 pages of information on the carbon tax. The ALPs arrogant response to my complaint was they can do what they like and are unaccountable for it. The Human Rights Commission subsequently refused to pursue the matter & closed it. It seems we the people of Australia under this government have lost our rights.

And finally when you consider over 700 people are dead from Rudd & Gillard boat people policies, as well as those death from the insulation debacle, as well as the billion dollar burning of the people’s taxes by fraudulent policies  – it is criminal that this excuse for a government remains in power.

Is Gillard a crook? ; What is Gillard trying to hide? ; Gillard beyond redemption ; JuLIAR Gillard must stand down ;

Filed under: Governance, , , , , , , ,

Destroying the ANZAC liberties

Guest post by Graham Williamson. You can read more of Graham’s research here

As we celebrate the hard won freedoms we enjoy on Anzac day, please pay attention to moves outlined below to remove those freedoms under the guise of concern for climate change. Though hard to believe, Australian lawyers and politicians are currently, as we celebrate Anzac day, looking for ways to ensure Australia can be forced to surrender control and massive amounts of money to the UN and poorer countries using climate change as an excuse. These will be enforced changes, NOT democratic changes.

Enjoy Anzac day and remember. Enjoy your freedoms and protect them.

Graham Williamson

 

Explaining the debt and why we owe climate compensation

http://uk.oneworld.net/guides/climatechange

“The concept of climate justice seeks to restore equity in two ways. Firstly, that richer countries should repay their climate debt by undertaking severe cuts in emissions, reserving “atmospheric space” for the growing emissions of poorer countries. Secondly, that they should provide financial support for low carbon transition and adaptation to the damaging effects of climate change.

These principles of climate justice are firmly enshrined in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). This treaty was agreed at the Rio de Janeiro “Earth Summit” in 1992 with the ultimate objective of “stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere.” (NOTE: The UNFCC was enforced in Australia under Part 1 Section 3a of the Clean Energy Act)

The Convention demands application of the precautionary principle and that the scale of emission reductions should be assessed “in the light of the best available scientific information.” And international climate change laws must observe the Convention’s commitment to “common but differentiated responsibilities” between richer and poorer countries………….Desperately slow implementation of the UNFCCC vision has driven climate justice campaigners to refer increasingly to human rights law and to the legal principle of reparations for damages.

 

In 2010…..
http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/poverty-matters/2010/nov/12/dhaka-climate-court-criminals
“Imagine an international court (1718 ) where the poorest people in the world could sue countries such as the US or Britain for failing to keep to agreements to reduce climate emissions or for knowingly causing devastatingclimate change. It’s some way off, but this week has seen an extraordinary tribunal being held in Dhaka, the capital of Bangladesh, with more than 1,200 people including British lawyers, politicians and economists, listening to the testimonies of villagers living at the frontline of climate change.”

 

In 2011 Durban UN conference promotes International Climate Court
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/12/10/un-floats-global-climate-court-to-enforce-emissions-rules/
U.N. Floats Global ‘Climate Court’ to Enforce Emissions Rules
United Nations climate envoys have proposed the creation of a global “climate court” that would be responsible for enforcing a sprawling set of rules requiring developed countries to cut emissions while compensating poorer countries in order to pay off a “historical climate debt.”……….. The proposal is meant to “guarantee the compliance of Annex I Parties with all the provisions of this decision.” Annex I countries are mostly developed countries, covering the United StatesBritainAustraliaCanada and much of Europe — including countries that are struggling financially such as Greece and Portugal. The rules of the road the court would presumably enforce are based on the view that these developed countries owe developing countries a “debt” over climate change, and must provide financial aid in addition to taking major steps toward cutting emissions.  In one section, the document calls for developed countries to help poorer countries with “finance, technology and capacity building” so they can “adapt to and mitigate climate change” while helping eliminate poverty. Another section provides that developing countries should receive an amount of money equal to the amount “developed countries spend on defense, security and warfare.” Yet the document also calls for a guaranteed end to warfare altogether — for the sake of curbing climate change. One section, noting that “conflict-related activities emit significant greenhouse gas emissions,” calls on all parties to “cease destructive activities” like warfare — and then channel the money that would have been spent on war and other defense projects toward “a common enemy: climate change.” The document also asserts the “rights of mother earth,” a concept that environmental activists have been pushing for.”

But according to Gunter (1), the Kyoto Protocol, which the Gillard government legislated to enforce in Australia through Part 1, Section 3a of the Clean Energy Act, is a sham when it comes to controlling climate (1):

Kyoto is now mostly about punishing rich countries for being rich and forcing them to pay vast sums — up to $1.6-trillion a year — to the UN for redistribution to poorer nations (after, of course, the UN has taken a healthy cut off the top to support its own wasteful bureaucracy, nepotism, cronyism, incompetence and corruption)…….. Whereas the original Kyoto Protocol laid out how much each developed country was to reduce its carbon emissions — Canada agreed to reduce its CO2 emissions to 6% below 1990s levels — the Durban agreement (which is effectively an amendment to Kyoto) concentrates mostly on blaming the developed world for climate change and dictating how much guilt money it should pay. The implication is that somehow all this money — at least $100-billion a year, rising to as much as $1.6-trillion — will buy an end to global warming.”

Australian government supports Durban moves to force Australians to pay their climate debt
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/durban-fine-print-shows-we-will-lose-our-autonomy/story-fn558imw-1226221278321
“CLIMATE Change Minister Greg Combet fully supports the decisions made at the Durban climate talks. These include binding Australia to take action. We are going to commit ourselves to an offshore body that can make binding decisions on our economy. We are gradually losing the ability to govern ourselves and to retain control of our destiny. A new international climate court will have the power to compel Western nations to pay ever-larger sums to Third World countries in the name of making reparation for supposed climate debt.”

The Australian government even described the Durban outcome as a (2) “remarkable step forward”, a (345) “significant breakthrough”, and (6) “a massively historic step.”

But what do the lawyers say?

British environmental lawyer Polly Higgins has long supported an International Climate Court (171819).

AUSTRALIAN LEGAL EXPERTS PREPARE FOR CLIMATE COURT CASES

In Australia, the Australian Climate Justice Program and environmental and animal rights lawyer Keely Boom (2021222324) are at the forefront of proceedings (25). In a recent article entitled “See you in court: the rising tide of international climate litigation”  Keely explains (25):

“The Pacific Island State of Palau recently announced it will seek an Advisory Opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ), asking whether countries have a responsibility to avoid their emissions causing climate change damage elsewhere. This will be the world’s first international climate change case and it has been a long time coming………Palau’s announcement reveals that it intends to ask the ICJ to provide guidance on how the “no harm rule” (more on this below) and the United Nations’ Law of the Sea Convention (LOSC) apply to climate change damage………Climate change is not the result of a deliberate act to cause damage, but rather the cumulative effect of routine social and economic activities such as burning coal, driving cars and grazing livestock. None of these acts are crimes at either national or international law. So how could Palau have a claim?

Breaching the golden (environmental) rule

The “no harm rule” is a rule of customary international law that declares a State has a duty to prevent, reduce and control the risk of environmental harm to other States……..It is not necessary to show actual harm in order to demonstrate a breach of this rule. An increase in risk of harm is sufficient although the increase needs to be significant. Thus, the no harm rule is particularly well suited to the problem of climate change damage.

It could be argued that Australia has breached the “no harm rule” on the basis that:

1) Australia has had an opportunity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions

2) climate change damage was foreseeable, at least since 1992 when Australia signed the United NationsFramework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)

3) Australia has not taken proportionate measures to mitigate its emissions.”

“From the air to the sea

On another front, article 194(2) of the LOSC declares that States are obliged to take all measures necessary to ensure activities under their jurisdiction or control do not cause “damage by pollution” to the marine environment of other States.

The LOSC contains a wide definition of pollution, and greenhouse gases from human sources could fit within it.

Australia may also be breaching the LOSC through failing to cut emissions and failing to prevent pollution to the marine environment. But the LOSC lacks specificity, potentially providing Australia with enough wiggle room to evade responsibility.

The causation hurdle

The 2007 Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) found “warming of the climate system is unequivocal” and most of the observed warming since the mid 20th century is due to human activity.

But can one State’s emissions be linked to another’s climate change damage? The “but-for test” asks “but for the defendant’s act, would the harm have occurred?” Admittedly, this test is poorly suited to climate change, where the process is cumulative.

The but for test would require proof that without the defendant State’s emissions, the damage would not have occurred. But no one State is responsible for climate change and climate change science is fraught with uncertainties. That said, the fact multiple States have contributed to climate change does not necessarily limit application of international law to the problem.

The Nuclear Tests Cases concerned alleged damage caused to Australia and New Zealand by France’s testing of nuclear weapons in the Pacific. In this case, Australia argued that any additional exposure to radioactive contamination, no matter how small, substantially contributed to the risk of radiation-related injuries.

The ICJ did not decide on this point in the Nuclear Tests Case, yet Australia’s argument is clearly relevant to Palau’s predicament. Therefore, the appropriate test may be whether a State’s contribution has caused additional exposure to climate change damage.

Turning the tide

An Advisory Opinion from the ICJ may help Pacific Island States such as Palau turn the tide in the international climate negotiations. Arguably, a credible case can be made. A ruling by the ICJ could help provide a new impetus for Australia and the world community to find an international solution to climate change.”

And in 2012 Bob Carr announces his desire to give evidence against Australia in the International Court to assist Palau (789101112)

Foreign Minister Bob Carr assured the UN of Australia’s support for (7) “international legal action on climate change” to support a UN “resolution seeking an opinion from the International Court of Justice that would mean nations had to take action on climate change under existing treaties.”

http://andrewmcintyre.org/2012/04/13/carr-wants-to-give-evidence-against-australia/
This is either self-destructive madness or cynical tokenism to buy into the UN Security Council. Not content with attempting to undermine Australia with the introduction of a carbon tax — a deeply unpopular policy — the Gillard government is wanting us to be hauled before the International Court of Justice to shame her own country. This is quite insane and irresponsible and clearly not in Australia’s national interest. It shows the Prime Minister is prepared to betray Australia for her own policy goals.  FOREIGN Minister Bob Carr has volunteeredAustralia to give evidence on behalf of poor nations that want the United Nations to investigate if big emitters – potentially including Australia – have a legal responsibility to keep their greenhouse gases from hurting other countries. Australia would give evidence supporting a push led by Palau for a UN resolution asking the International Court of Justice to assess how much countries were responsible for the damage their emissions did overseas.”

And more………

http://m.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/carr-to-help-fight-emitters-australia-among-them-20120413-1wz13.html
FOREIGN Minister Bob Carr has volunteered Australia to give evidence on behalf of poor nations that want the United Nations to investigate if big emitters – potentially including Australia – have a legal responsibility to keep their greenhouse gases from hurting other countries. In an interview with The Saturday Age in New York, Mr Carr said he had told UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon Australia would give evidence supporting a push led by Palau for a UN resolution asking the International Court of Justice to assess how much countries were responsible for the damage their emissions did overseas. Climate law experts said that if the resolution was successful, it could be the first step by worst-affected nations in seeking reparations from countries such as the US, China and Australia.”

But the Australian government, BOM, and CSIRO have been compiling ‘evidence’ and issuing grave predictions about climate change in Palau (1314), though how much of this is alleged to be caused by humans and reversible by humans is not clear (1314). So Australian tax payers are funding research into scaring the Palauian government about the consequences of (human caused???) climate change and now Bob Carr will assist them to obtain compensation from all Australians?

But how much money do we owe?

According to Gideon Polya (1516) Australia owes a climate debt to poorer countries and the “Net Per Capita Climate Debt (US$ per person)” of Australia is “$23,900 or $24,265, if including the effect of its huge GHG Exports on its Climate Credits” while the “Net Climate Debt” for Australia is $0.5 trillion. Polya concludes (16): it is apparent that the greedy climate criminals (notably the US, Australia and Canada) and the other Climate Debtors will not repay their debt nor indeed stop polluting the atmosphere……… The Climate Debtors are stealing from the poor Climate Creditors and should be held to account by the Climate Creditors at the ICJ and the ICC.”

See here to calculate our debt http://sites.google.com/site/climatedebtclimatecredit/net-climate-debt

Filed under: Governance, , , , , , , , ,

Gillard and Co. killing the freedoms our ANZACs died for

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff. – Carl Sagan”

To see the full letter from the government click here; Carbontax

The ALP’s Carbon Tax is a terrible assault on the freedoms and prosperity of our great nation. Not only has it been brought in by an illegitimate minority government who lyingly promised prior to the election that it wouldnt bring it in, but the way it is being implemented is;

1. against the constitution (illegal for Feds to tax State owned assets such as power companies),

2. is being set up so the Gillard Government has no accountability for it and full immunity from it’s repurcussions, and

3. has been written so it will be as hard and as expensive as possible for the Australian people to repeal, even with a referendum on the issue.

In summary the ALP have lied to you, refuse any accountability for their actions and are making sure its punitive consequences are as far reaching as possible whilst denying the people as many rights as possible to remove what they didn’t approve of in the first place. Worse still the claimed reason for the carbon tax – to lower global temperatures – will not be achieved. Government’s own modelling has shown the carbon tax will not reduce global temperatures. Furthermore contrary to what the ALP has claimed the rest of the world is not following this carbon tax folly but backing off as the globe cools.

Worse yet there has been no due diligence by the ALP government in checking the data for the whole global warming alarmism with actual temperature records invalidating the whole global warming theory and ongoing scientific developments showing rationally, as common sense says, that it is the sun drives the climate not CO2. Furthermore the IPCC who the government deflects to has shown to be a biased, corrupt rabble of vested interests who cannot be relied upon for truth about the climate.

It is not just the deceit of the carbon tax that is appalling, but the way in which it has been implemented, rushed through without due process and with no duty of care to the people.

Due process is the idea that laws and legal proceedings must be fair. The Constitution should guarantees that the government cannot take away the people’s basic rights to ‘life, liberty or property. Yet in every way the carbon tax has flouted the basic rights of the Australian people to life – by artificially inflating the cost of keeping warm so many can no longer afford life saving heat; to liberty – by failing to give Australian citizens a fair and reasonable say whether they want this tax or not and to property by squandering billions of dollars of citizens taxes on an unsubstantiated global warming theory that is now at odds with science and fact.

Duty of care is a legal obligation to avoid causing harm or injury to others. Yet with the carbon tax the ALP government will impoverish the nation unfairly all because it rammed through without consent a fraudulent tax based on a fraudulent lie which will punitively injure the public.

To have a look at just one part of the whole corrupt process – all the Australian people were given by the Gillard Government was 7 days to comment on 18 bills and 11,000 pages of documentation. Not enough time for a citizen to read let alone formulate a judgement and then articulate a reply. As such I made a complaint to the Human Rights Commission against the government. My human rights, in accordance with Article 25(a) of the ICCPR (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) like all Australians had been denied by the rushed process of implementing the carbon tax.  True to form was the appalling response from the ALP government (from Joanne Towner, Clerk Assistant, Department of the house of representatives) is in part as follows;

On the broader issue of jurisdiction regarding this complaint, I draw your attention to S.50 of the Constitution which provides that each house of parliament may make rules regarding the conduct of it’s business and proceedings. All of the above procedures were in accord with the Standing Orders of both Houses and the joint resolution establishing the committee which gave the committee the authority to determine it’s own processes within the standing orders.

There is a long standing immunity asserted by both Houses from the impeachment and questioning of parliamentary proceedings in Parliament by the courts or tribunals …

It is our contention that the activity of the committee were in accord with the procedures of the two Houses and that the committee had the full authority to determine the processes and procedures it considered were appropriate to the circumstances it faced. These processes and procedures are not subject to external review.

In other words Gillard’s minority government has this message to we, the people of Australia – piss off, we will do what we want and we wont be accountable to the people for our actions.

About sums up this corrupt government doesn’t it. So much for it’s sacred duty to represent the people. We are no longer governed but illegally ruled! The legal obligation of the government to the people have been ignored and the standards of Government decision making have failed. We now have those in power who are causing worse damage to this country than any foreign army ever has! Under the ALP we no longer live in freedom but oppression! 

Constitutional problems for the carbon tax ;

Filed under: Governance, , , , , , , ,

The culture of lying environmentalism

It seems anything is fair game with environmentalism and the end justifies the means. In the article Lies damned lies and Enviro Fraud anything, and I mean anything is manipulated for the global warming liars – it get’s to the point where you wonder if there is ANY truth in what they do. It has become such an insidious culture . But then there’s a history, culture and belief system there.

From Climategate 2;

The trick may be to decide on the main message and use that to guide what’s included and what is left out.’ Overpeck

Then there’s the BOM, repeatedly caught out adjusting the data, falsifying the message and this week;

The hottest months by mean max have all been changed. Every single one“.

But then in the Global Warming theology departments this is common practice. Eg the CSIRO;

Can the CSIRO explain how is it that an applied science research institution that is supposed to be serving Australians through independence and integrity in science suddenly be politically active in the Rudd Cabinet’s Socialist fraud and participate in making Australians obey it, and use Lysenkoism to break down opposition and to convince Australians it is good for them?

Noteworthy that most of CSIRO directors tend to be … BANKERS!

And what does one of the leading scientists in the world say about global warming?

“I think it is such ablatant falsification”.

Sums it up really, doesnt it.

But when you look at the history of the IPCC could you really expect any different!

it is long overdue that the IPCC was called for what it is, an activist eco-political body driven not by the dangerous manmade warming evidence that it pretends exists, but by the beliefs and philosophies of its sponsor, the UNEP, and by key individuals at the time the IPCC was established“.

And even more damaging exposure of the IPCC;

Climategate 2.0 is helping filling some knowledge gaps, for example in the way the IPCC has been slowing killing itself, and several thousands humans to“.

As is now being rumored the IPCC is going to get the boot;

Could it be that the UNFCCC has decided that its dependency on the “science” produced by this, well, Delinquent Teenager who was Mistaken for the World’s Top Climate Expert is no longer appropriate – or required?!

Perhaps the UNFCCC is in the process of throwing the IPCC under the proverbial bus – in the hopes of saving its own skin? And don’t forget that the IPCC’s younger sibling, the IPBES, is still waiting in the wings.

Who is the IPBES?

IPBES stands for “intergovernmental science-policy platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services”. IPBES will be an interface between the scientific community and policymakers that aims at building capacity for and strengthen the use of science in policymaking“.

The IPBES to replace the IPCC. Same game of musical chairs by the UN – just different players. No backing down on the fraud, scares, or thieving of billions under false pretense. And the UN thinks it is safe because it has deemed itself to be above the law. The Earth Government that is going to replace the UN probably elevate itself in the same manner.

Who will be stuck with the global warming time bomb when the people make the police come?

Filed under: Governance, , , , , , , , , , ,

The subterfuge of controlling the global warming narrative

This is not science the way we were told it works. This is not independent scientists working without conflicts of interest focusing on the data, submitting their results for independent assessment, being at arms length to the assessors and publishers. No this is real life story of the control of the press (Nature, Science and others), control of the editors and attacks on the non compliant ones, control of peer review, vilification of opponents work, manipulating political processes and controlling the narrative. This is a process where more of the ‘scientists’ energy is put into controlling their positions than seems is ever put into the science. And keep in mind these guys are on the government payroll and should be open and transparent in all their dealings.

This is also a story of a select group of individuals in positions of power paid for by the taxpayers, believing they are above reproach and cannot be wrong. This is about the religious fervor with which these global warming scientists banded together on group think to meet, plot and enact compliant acts of vilification against scientists whose studies threatened their work. There are few degrees of separation, if any between these so called scientists and the highest powers in many of the worlds nations. Additionally there is the menace of those in global governance aiding and abetting them. The following emails are almost a script for a movie on global warming eco elite’s subterfuge.

Bold mine, comments in red mine

Formatting removed to make it easier to read. You can read the original file here

Phil Jones, Mike Hulme, Keith Briffa, James Hansen, Danny Harvey, Ben Santer, Kevin Trenberth, Robert wilby, Tom Karl , Steve Schneider, Tom Crowley, jto , “simon.shackley” , “tim.carter”, “p.martens”, “peter.whetton”, “c.goodess” , “a.minns” , Wolfgang Cramer , “j.salinger” , “simon.torok” , Scott Rutherford, Neville Nicholls, Ray Bradley, Mike MacCracken , Barrie Pittock, Ellen Mosley-Thompson, “Greg.Ayers”

date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 12:39:14 -0400
from: “Michael E. Mann”
subject: Re: My turn
to:

HI Mark,

Thanks for your comments, and sorry to any of you who don’t wish to receive these correspondances…

Indeed, I have provided David Halpern with a written set of comments on the offending paper(s) for internal use, so that he was armed w/ specifics as he confronts the issue within OSTP. He may have gotten additional comments from other individuals as well–I’m not sure. I believe that the matter is in good hands with Dave, but we have to wait and see what happens. In any case, I’d be happy to provide my comments to anyone who is interested.

I think that a response to “Climate Research” is not a good idea. Phil and I discussed this, and agreed that it would be largely unread, and would tend to legitimize a paper which many of us don’t view as having passed peer review in a legitimate manner. On the other hand, the in prep. review articles by Jones and Mann (Rev. Geophys.), and Bradley/Hughes/Diaz (Science) should go along way towards clarification of the issues (and, at least tangentially, refutation of the worst of the claims of Baliunas and co). Both should be good resources for the FAR as well…

cheers,

mike

p.s. note the corrections to some of the emails in the original distribution list.

At 09:27 AM 4/24/Mark Eakin wrote: At this point the question is what to do about the Soon and Baliunas
paper. Would Bradley, Mann, Hughes et al. be willing to develop and appropriate rebuttal? If so, the question at hand is where it would be best to direct such a response. Some options are:

1) A rebuttal in Climate Research
2) A rebuttal article in a journal of higher reputation
3) A letter to OSTP

The first is a good approach, as it keeps the argument to the level of the current publication. The second would be appropriate if the Soon and Baliunas paper were gaining attention at a more general level, but it is not. Therefore, a rebuttal someplace like Science or Nature would probably do the opposite of what is desired here by raising the attention to the paper. The best way to take care of getting better science out in a widely read journal is the piece that Bradley et al. are preparing for Nature. This leaves the idea of a rebuttal in Climate Research as the best published approach.

A letter to OSTP is probably in order here. Since the White House has shown interest in this paper, OSTP really does need to receive a measured, critical discussion of flaws in Soon and Baliunas’ methods. I agree with Tom that a noted group from the detection and attribution effort such as Mann, Crowley, Briffa, Bradley, Jones and Hughes should spearhead such a letter. Many others of us could sign on in support. This would provide Dave Halpern with the ammunition he needs to provide the White House with the needed documentation that hopefully will dismiss this paper for the slipshod work that it is. Such a letter could be developed in parallel with a rebuttal article.

I have not received all of the earlier e-mails, so my apologies if I am rehashing parts of the discussion that might have taken place elsewhere.

Cheers,
Mark

Michael E. Mann wrote:

Dear Tom et al,

Thanks for comments–I see we’ve built up an impressive distribution list here!

This seemed like an appropriate point for me to chime in here. By in large, I agree w/ Tom’s comments (and those of Barrie’s as well). A number of us have written reviews and overviews of this topic during the past couple years. There has been a lot of significant scientific process in this area (both with regard to empirical “climate reconstruction” and in the area of model/data comparison), including, in fact, detection studies along the lines of what Barrie Pittock asked about in a previous email (see. e.g. Tom Crowley’s Science article from 2000). Phil Jones and I are in the process of writing a review article for /Reviews of Geophysics/ which will, among other things, dispel the most severe of the myths that some of these folks are perpetuating regarding past climate change in past centuries. My understanding is that Ray Bradley, Malcolm Hughes, and Henry Diaz are working, independently, on a solicited piece for /Science/ on the “Medieval Warm Period”. Many have simply dismissed the Baliunas et al pieces because, from a scientific point of view, they are awful–that is certainly true. For example, Neville has pointed out in a previous email, that the standard they applied for finding “a Medieval Warm Period” was that a particular proxy record exhibit a 50 year interval during the period that was anomalously *warm*, *wet*, or *dry* relative to the “20th century” (many of the proxy records don’t really even resolve the late 20th century!) could be used to define an “MWP” anywhere one might like to find one. This was the basis for their press release arguing for a “MWP” that was “warmer than the 20th century” (a non-sequitur even from their awful paper!) (it is worth noting that …) and for their bashing of IPCC and scientists who contributed to IPCC (which, I understand, has been particularly viscious and ad hominem inside closed rooms in Washington DC where their words don’t make it into the public record). This might all seem laughable, it weren’t the case that they’ve gotten the (Bush) White House Office of Science & Technology taking it as a serious matter (fortunately, Dave Halpern is in charge of this project, and he is likely to handle this appropriately, but without some external pressure).

So while our careful efforts to debunk the myths perpetuated by these folks may be useful in the FAR, they will be of limited use in fighting the disinformation campaign that is already underway in Washington DC. Here, I tend to concur at least in sprit w/ Jim Salinger, that other approaches may be necessary. I would emphasize that there are indeed, as Tom notes, some unique aspects of this latest assault by the skeptics which are cause for special concern. This latest assault uses a compromised peer-review process as a vehicle for launching a scientific disinformation campaign (often viscious and ad hominem) under the guise of apparently legitimately reviewed science, allowing them to make use of the “Harvard” moniker in the process. Fortunately, the mainstream media never touched the story (mostly it has appeared in papers owned by Murdoch and his crowd (the demonising of Murdoch begins, which is still being pursued by Gillard) , and dubious fringe on-line outlets). Much like a server which has been compromised as a launching point for computer viruses, I fear that “Climate Research” has become a hopelessly compromised vehicle in the skeptics’ (can we find a better word?) (yes denier was what they chose). disinformation campaign, and some of the discussion that I’ve seen (e.g. a potential threat of mass resignation among the legitimate members of the CR editorial board) seems, in my opinion, to have some potential merit.

This should be justified not on the basis of the publication of science we may not like of course, but based on the evidence (e.g. as provided by Tom and Danny Harvey and I’m sure there is much more) that a legitimate peer-review process has not been followed by at least one particular editor. Incidentally, the problems alluded to at GRL are of a different nature–there are simply too many papers, and too few editors w/ appropriate disciplinary expertise, to get many of the papers submitted there properly reviewed. Its simply hit or miss with respect to whom the chosen editor is. While it was easy to make sure that the worst papers, perhaps including certain ones Tom refers to, didn’t see the light of the day at /J. Climate/, it was inevitable that such papers might slip through the cracks at e.g. GRL–there is probably little that can be done here, other than making sure that some qualified and responsible climate scientists step up to the plate and take on editorial positions at GRL.

best regards,

Mike

At 11:53 PM 4/23/Tom Wigley wrote:

Dear friends,

[Apologies to those I have missed who have been part of this email exchange -- although they may be glad to have been missed]

I think Barrie Pittock has the right idea — although there are some unique things about this situation. Barrie says ….

(1) There are lots of bad papers out there
(2) The best response is probably to write a ‘rebuttal’

to which I add ….

(3) A published rebuttal will help IPCC authors in the 4AR.

____________________

Let me give you an example. There was a paper a few years ago by Legates and Davis in GRL (vol. 24, ppREDACTED 1997) that was nothing more than a direct and pointed criticism of some work by Santer and me — yet neither of us was asked to review the paper. We complained, and GRL admitted it was poor judgment on the part of the editor. Eventually (> 2 years later) we wrote a response (GRLREDACTEDREDACTEDHowever, our response was more that just a rebuttal, it was an attempt to clarify some issues on detection. In doing things this way we tried to make it clear that the original Legates/Davis paper was an example of bad science (more bluntly, either sophomoric ignorance or deliberate misrepresentation).

Any rebuttal must point out very clearly the flaws in the original paper. If some new science (or explanations) can be added — as we did in the above example — then this is an advantage.

_____________________________

There is some personal judgment involved in deciding whether to rebut. Correcting bad science is the first concern. Responding to unfair personal criticisms is next. Third is the possible misrepresentation of the results by persons with ideological or political agendas. On the basis of these I think the Baliunas paper should be rebutted by persons with appropriate expertise. Names like Mann, Crowley, Briffa, Bradley, Jones, Hughes come to mind. Are these people willing to spend time on this?

_______________________________

There are two other examples that I know of where I will probably be involved in writing a response.

The first is a paper by Douglass and Clader in GRL (vol. 29, no. 16, 10.1029/2002GLREDACTED). I refereed a virtually identical paper for J. Climate, recommending rejection. All the other referees recommended rejection too. The paper is truly appalling — but somehow it must have been poorly reviewed by GRL and slipped through the net. I have no
reason to believe that this was anything more than chance. Nevertheless, my judgment is that the science is so bad that a response is necessary.

The second is the paper by Michaels et al. that was in Climate Research (vol. 23, ppREDACTED Danny Harvey and I refereed this and said it should be rejected. We questioned the editor (deFreitas again!) and he responded saying …

The MS was reviewed initially by five referees. … The other three referees, all reputable atmospheric scientists, agreed it should be published subject to minor revision. Even then I used a sixth person to help me decide. I took his advice and that of the three other referees and sent the MS back for revision. It was later accepted for publication. The refereeing process was more rigorous than usual.

On the surface this looks to be above board — although, as referees who advised rejection it is clear that Danny and I should have been kept in the loop and seen how our criticisms were responded to.

It is possible that Danny and I might write a response to this paper — deFreitas has offered us this possibility.

______________________________

This second case gets to the crux of the matter. I suspect that deFreitas deliberately chose other referees who are members of the skeptics camp. I also suspect that he has done this on other occasions. How to deal with this is unclear, since there are a number of individuals with bona fide scientific credentials who could be used by an unscrupulous editor to ensure that ‘anti-greenhouse’ science can get through the peer review process (Legates, Balling, Lindzen, Baliunas,
Soon, and so on).

The peer review process is being abused, but proving this would be difficult.

The best response is, I strongly believe, to rebut the bad science that does get through.

_______________________________

Jim Salinger raises the more personal issue of deFreitas. He is clearly giving good science a bad name, but I do not think a barrage of ad hominem attacks or letters is the best way to counter this.

If Jim wishes to write a letter with multiple authors, I may be willing to sign it, but I would not write such a letter myself.

In this case, deFreitas is such a poor scientist that he may simply disappear. I saw some work from his PhD, and it was awful (Pat Michaels’ PhD is at the same level).
______________________________

Best wishes to all,
Tom.
______________________________________________________________
Professor Michael E. Mann
Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, VA 22903
_______________________________________________________________________
e-mail:  Phone:770 FAX:137

http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml

C. Mark Eakin, Ph.D.
Chief of NOAA Paleoclimatology Program and
Director of the World Data Center for Paleoclimatology

NOAA/National Climatic Data Center
325 Broadway E/CC23
_______________________________________________________________________
Professor Michael E. Mann
Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, VA 22903
_______________________________________________________________________

It is worth noting on the science that far from being bad science

Who is who in the above emails – a cast of ….

Michael Mann – inventor or should one say the fabricator of the discredited hockey stick. Previously employed by Penn State. Currently under investigation for use of grants.

Mark Eakin – Chief of NOAA Paleoclimatology Program and Director of the World Data Center for Paleoclimatology

Phil Jones – UAE chief concedes “all our models are wrong“, refuses FOI requests, and has acknowledged there has been no statistically significant global warming since 1995.

Mike Hulme – Professor of Climate Change in the School of Environmental Sciences at the University of East Anglia (UEA)

Keith Briffa, Professor at the Climatic Research Unit, University of East Anglia asks colleagues to delete emails, discusses manipulating the data,

James Hansen, NASA astronomer turned climate ‘guru’ who is current financial scandal is how he is making over $1.5 million dollars of undeclared income on top of his government paid position,

Danny Harvey,

Ben Santer, Research scientist on climate models angry that climate skeptics arnt silenced, keeps moving the climate goalposts to suit his failed theories,

Kevin Trenberth, Senior Scientist NCAR. who said in October 2009 ” The fact that we can not account for what is happening in the climate system makes any consideration of geoengineering quite hopeless as we will never be able to tell if it is successful or not! It is a travesty!

Robert Wilby, Professor of Hydroclimatic Modelling

Tom Karl ,

Steve Schneider, Professor of Environmental Biology and Global Change at Stanford University

Tom Crowley, Simon Shackley,  Tim Carter,  P Marten,  Peter Whetton,  C Goodes,  A Minn,  Wolfgang Crame,  Jim Salinger CRSNZ NIWA,  Simon Toro,  Scott Rutherfor,  Neville Nicholl,  Ray Bradle,  Mike MacCracke,  Barrie Pittoc,  Ellen Mosley-Thompso,  Greg Ayers

Climategate ; Biased BBC ;

CSIRO clanger – “which representation of the results is appropriate to giving the best advice on what changes to expect”

Filed under: Governance, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A climate of corruption

The last 24 hours has seen the second leaking of emails of ‘scientists’ from the ‘hallowed halls’ of governments (state, federal and global) and it is much more of the same as climategate 1. Corruption, lies, fraud, deception, unaccountability, refusal of transparency etc You would have thought those in power learnt their lesson after climategate pt 1 but no there were the repeated whitewashes, repeated cover ups, repeated spin, repeated attacks on and vilification of skeptics and the hellish push to get the climate cash through via a massive social re-engineering trojan carbon tax.

An example of how those in government positions and in the UN refuse to be accountable to the public;

<2440> Jones: “I’ve been told that IPCC is above national FOI Acts. One way to cover yourself and all those working in AR5 would be to delete all emails at the end of the process

And;

<2884> Wigley: Mike, The Figure you sent is very deceptive [...] there have been a number of dishonest presentations of model results by individual authors and by IPCC [...]

Says it all doesn’t it. Don’t forget the UN is non democratic and now we learn they are also above the law. Is this the sort of global government you want our UN puppet governments to parrot! Or how about this one of Mann’s hockey stick that Al Gore paraded to the world;

<3373> Bradley: I’m sure you agree–the Mann/Jones GRL paper was truly pathetic and should never have been published. I don’t want to be associated with that 2000 year “reconstruction”.

Or if you want to follow the money;

<1577> Jones: [FOI, temperature data] Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden. I’ve discussed this with the main funder (US Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.

Or this one which is actually close to the truth especially as we are over a decade now into a cooling trend;

Wils: What if climate change appears to be just mainly a multidecadal natural fluctuation? They’ll kill us probably [...]

And this one hits the nail on the head;

<5131> Shukla/IGES: ["Future of the IPCC", 2008] It is inconceivable that policymakers will be willing to make billion-and trillion-dollar decisions for adaptation to the projected regional climate change based on models that do not even describe and simulate the processes that are the building blocks of climate variability.

Well they did, and that knowingly!

Should we expect the climate communists at the ALP, Gillard, Brown and their comrades to put the brakes on a carbon tax now the whole global warming fraud has been blown to bits – again! Nup, Gillard will continue to trample Australia’s democracy till it’s totally dead in the mud. Socialist Gillard wants her way and nothing not even the sacred will of the Australian people wont stop her let alone exposure of fraudulent global warming climate change junk science (Gillard has refused to listen so far).

How about this clanger from today’s paper;

SWISS banking giant UBS says the European Union’s emissions trading scheme has cost the continent’s consumers $287 billion for “almost zero impact” on cutting carbon emissions, and has warned that the EU’s carbon pricing market is on the verge of a crash next year“.

Gillard’s carbon tax will do the same. We already know that with Gillard’s carbon tax Australia wont reduce global temps, wont reduce emissions, will fund the UN’s opulence, will impoverish Australians, will cause fuel poverty and cold related deaths to skyrocket. Unabated Gillard’s Gulag against Australia continues. The ALP definitely are the most un Australian party ever. Just like the socialists ruined Spain look at how the socialist ALP are ruining Australia.

As one of the emails warn;

<3066> Thorne: I also think the science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run.

He guessed right. The guillotine is about to fall. The climate criminals have deceived and robbed the world and now deserve to be jailed. Oh and it’s a bit late for this;

Phil, thanks for your thoughts – guarantee there will be no dirty laundry in the open. <2095> Steig:

The Global Warming loons ; Worse than we thought ; The Eurorich are still spending big ; How politics manufactured the man made global warming agenda ;

Pic via Soylent Green – a parody of the typical leftist abuse

Oh and the Church has well and truly been deceived;

My work is as Director of the national centre for climate change research, a job which requires me to translate my Christian belief about stewardship of God’s planet into research and action. <3653> Hulme:

Oh and dont forget;

<4141> Minns/Tyndall Centre:

In my experience, global warming freezing is already a bit of a public relations problem with the media

Kjellen:

I agree with Nick that climate change might be a better labelling than global warming

And finally some common sense;

No one can really forecast weather, much less climate, at this point’

Warm has always been better than Cold for humanity. Think about it.

Filed under: Governance, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Minority government committment is to a foreign power & not to Australians

On the Australian Government website, under the title of a ‘message from the PM’, Gillard makes the astonishing claim that “Commitment to the United Nations is one of the three pillars of Australia’s foreign policy“. The Age reports;

GREENS leader Bob Brown – whose party assumes sole balance of power in the Senate tomorrow – wants Australia to join an international push for a global parliament“.

Yet the UN is not democratic, those in positions of power are not voted there by the public and it’s policies are not voted on by the Australian people.

Yet the constitution states that any Federal politician is illegible to stand for or remain in federal office if;

(i) Is under any acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of a foreign power:

Gillard, Brown, Rudd all acknowledge allegiance to the UN. Does the UN qualify as a foreign power?

interpretation of ‘ foreign power (p7)’ in both limbs of s 44(i) appears to be any polity or state recognised under international law other than the Commonwealth of Australia“.

and;

Subsection 44(i) expresses the principle that members of parliament must have a clear and undivided loyalty to Australia and must not be subject to the influence of foreign governments“.

The UN is a polity though not a state it now calls countries states of its own power.

pol·i·ty [pol-i-tee] 

noun, plural -ties.

1. particular form or system of government: civil polity; ecclesiastical polity.
2.the condition of being constituted as a state or other organized community or body: The polity of ancient Athens became a standard for later governments.
3.government or administrative regulation: The colonists demanded independence in matters of internal polity.
4.a state or other organized community or body.
The UN is a system of government both in definition and action. The UN is an organised committee and body. The UN has government and administrative regulation. The UN classifies itself as a GGO – Global Governance Organisation. Governance = government and is now calling countries States – as though they now have deference to it.

The Australia Act in 1986 transforming Australia into a sovereign independent nation even made the UK and the countries of the commonwealth a foreign power.

Gillard and her UN feigning associates have no qualms acknowledging publicly their allegiance, by their words and actions in implementing foreign UN policy without the consent of Australian people. This clearly shows obedience and adherence to the UN. Both Gillard and Rudd seek the rights and privileges of the UN both wanting a seat on global governance – like Clinton, Blair, Clarke and the other ex national leaders of other countries.

It has to be asked what mandate does Gillard and her UN cronies have to implement what they said they wouldn’t. Gillard has become an imperial Prime Minister who instead of representing Australian constituents increasingly acts independently of the Australian people & Australian democracy at home and abroad instead governing and ruling Australia for the UN..

The constitution clearly says allegiance to a foreign power makes a federal politician ineligible for office. When the rights of all Australians are subjugated to the direction and empowerment of the UN then the PM, Bob Brown and all the global governance elitists have breached the constitution and are no longer legally fit or eligible for office and should be removed from office immediately..

Foreign Allegiance – grounds for parliamentary disqualification

It has to be stated that when most do not believe in the green fairytale of global warming, that the globe hasn’t warmed for over a decade, that many have exposed the global warming lie as simply a cover for climate communism – using the climate as a cover to bring in a socialist global redistribution of wealth, and that the whole global warming fraud is a fabrication that has it’s origins in the UN, that the biggest financial beneficiary of the global warming scare will be the UN that how could Gillard, or the ALP or the Greens in any way support this destructive and fraudulent action against Australians.

Furthermore the Act of Settlement 1701 (Imp) which disqualified those born outside the Kingdoms of England, Scotland and Ireland and the Dominions from holding office in the Privy Council or the Parliament, and from holding any office of trust under the Crown. Gillard was not born in Australia and has not been transparent or forthcoming to prove she legally renounced her citizenship from her country of birth (Wales) prior to becoming a federal politician.

Under article 61 of Magna Carta 1215 (the founding document of our Constitution) we have a right to enter into lawful rebellion if we feel we are being governed unjustly. Contrary to common belief our Sovereign and her government are only there to govern us and not to rule us and this must be done within the constraint of our Common Law and the freedoms asserted to us by such Law, nothing can become law in this country if it falls outside of this simple constraint.

Meanwhile the global warming fraud is exposed by nothing other than the climate; Judith Curry notes that so far we have had ; “a 12-year pause in rises in surface air and sea surface temperatures, and a nine-year pause in rises of ocean heat content“. But don’t let reality stop this treasonous minority government push ahead with the global warming fraud!

Filed under: Governance, , , ,

Lest We Forget – it is time to remember!

I was an Army private… a Naval commander… an Air Force bombardier.  no man knows me… no name marks my tomb, for I am every Australian serviceman… I am the Unknown Soldier.

I died for a cause I held just in the service of my land… that you and yours may say in freedom… I am proud to be an Australian.

As we witness the daily destruction of our freedoms, our rights and our country by a socialist government that has lied to and betrayed the people we are reminded that like those before us “the price of freedom is eternal vigilance“.

We have let liars and crooks run and now ruin this great nation, and day by day they continue in their evil intent. Socialist and fabian Gillard and her ALP comrades refuse their sacred duty to govern by and for the people and instead have utter allegiance to the UN a foreign power – and that against our constitution. Today is a time where we must remember that if we are to have freedom we must fight for it, against the crooks and liars – currently those who think they know better than the rest of us and have used their representative positions to represent no one but themselves.

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.- Benjamin Franklin

Lest we forget the liars in government, the refusal of the GG to protect Australians, the control of our great country now by a foreign power, green socialism and the destruction of our prosperity, the unelected, undemocratic UN’s 0.7% of gdp cash cow;

Lest we forget the lies of the IPCC, the lies of the BOM, the lies of the CSIRO, the lies of the Union of Concerned Scientists, the lies of the climate commissioner, the lies of Al Gore,

Lest we forget the fraud of global warming, the fraud of the socialists, the fraud of the watermelons, the fraud of green money

Lest we forget – unless we stand up and fight then our country will no longer be prosperous, no longer be free and no longer belong to all Auatralians.

Lest we forget the destruction climate communism is wreaking upon our great nation!

It’s better to die fighting for freedom than to live life in chains

They went with songs to the battle, they were young.
Straight of limb, true of eyes, steady and aglow.
They were staunch to the end against odds uncounted,
They fell with their faces to the foe.
They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old:
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning,
We will remember them.
Don’t let the sacrifice of those who gave their lives be in vain! We owe it to them, to ourselves and to our fellow Australians to stand up and fight for what it right in this country!

All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing! Edmund Burke

Filed under: Governance, , , , , , , ,

ALP – Australia Losers Party

It seems the ALP despots and dictators in power have refused to govern Australia and instead have chosen to unconstitutionally rule the country for the UN.

UN socialist puppet Gillard couldn’t give a rat’s a** about the Australia, between her and comrade KRudd they are sending our wealth overseas as fast as they can. Andrew Bolt reports;

Already the Gillard Government is committed to:

- doubling our foreign aid over the next five years to more than $8 billion.

- introducing an emissions trading system that will send $57 billion a year overseas by 2050 to buy permits.

- AUSTRALIA should contribute between $1.9 billion and $2.7 billion a year by 2020 to meet international commitments to help poor countries cope with climate change

And don’t forget that foreign power the UN gets 10% of all this – they must be rubbing their hands in glee. Oh and the other thing to remember is the world isn’t warming, the carbon tax with not reduce global temperatures or emissions, and the carbon tax will increase poverty and fuel poverty for many Australians.

In the meantime Bob Hawke has been doing the rounds selling the country to the middle east. Farmlandgrab reports;

FORMER Prime Minister, Bob Hawke, is leading a push to get Arabs to invest in Australian farmland as part of a long term food security strategy for oil-rich Gulf States

Don’t worry Bob about the long term food security strategy for Australia – as an ex PM of this country it’s really not your concern!

But then Labor does have a record of building infrastructure for our neighbours whilst ignoring Australia’s needs;

Paul Keating’s Mekong Bridge,

Gillard funds $500m for Islamic schools in Indonesia,

Meanwhile Australia infrastructure is crumbling. But don’t worry JuLIAR Gillard and KRudd are overseas pledging to save Europe. With the ALP charlatans of power Australia comes last.

Oh and don’t forget KRudd’s expensive bid for a UN seat.

Then there is also the issue of how boat people get privileges that most Australian’s now could only dream of. Freestatevoice reports the inequality in how the ALP treats Australian’s as trash and those overseas as princes;

BENEFITS               AGED PENSIONER                            ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS/REFUGEES

Weekly allowance   $253.00                                                       $472.50
Weekly Spouse allowance   $56.00                                          $472.50
Additional weekly hardship allowance   $0.00                   $145.00

TOTAL YEARLY BENEFIT $16,068.00                      $56,680.00

I might add and don’t forget the other benefits – free smokes, mobile phones, airfares, chefs, medicare. They can even now get reward points for other luxuries, simply by attending free lifestyle courses. I have one friend who came here under asylum and was also given a full household full of brand new furniture and appliances as well. Then there is the issue of asylum seeker violence that gets rewarded, but if you are an Australian step out of line and it’s jail for you.

Oh and then there’s Gillard constant bungling Malaysian deal! Whats another $5 million down the drain when billions have been squandered already.

Meanwhile the “OECD recently warned that Australia’s unemployment benefit was so low as to ”raise issues about its effectiveness” in enabling people to find work or study

Then there are the middle class Australians who do work hard but whose disposable income is lower than the unemployed because they get little benefits and often cannot afford holidays or new clothes. It seems fabian Gillard’s socialist dreams for this country are coming true. Penalise the hard workers and pay those who are neither workers nor Australian.

If there is anything about the Australian Labor Party it is the most un-Australian Party we have ever seen in this country’s history. Though come to think of it the ALP is probably not as un-Australian as the Greens but since these two are now joined at the hip now there’s probably no difference anyway.

Under the ALP we are seeing our wealth being transferred overseas at an ever increasing rate whilst our own get increasing neglect and fraudulent taxes. We see those in other countries enriched whilst our own are impoverished. And if you think this is bad – it is just the beginning under the ALP.

What’s next? Gillard’s gulag – as she and her comrades set up the green police to ensure you pay your green penances on time and in full to the government – otherwise excpect fines and jail. And to think many of us once voted for this failure of democracy called the ALP! Don’t worry JuLIAR and her gang of thieves will promise you anything and everything at the next election only to take it away again once they regain power. History shows the ALP rule not for Australia but for a foreign power – the UN. And if you thought there was a decent politician in the ALP – think again – not a single one of them has either the credibility or guts to cross the floor, stand up for Australian’s, get rid of this betrayer of the Australian people and give the Australian people a voice once again. Not a single Labor politician deserves to be ever re-elected again!

Filed under: Governance, , , , , , , , ,

Seeing government clearly

Ht to Frank

To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.” Thomas Jefferson


“When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe .” — Thomas Jefferson“The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.” Thomas Jefferson

“It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world.” Thomas Jefferson

“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.” Thomas Jefferson

“My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.” — Thomas Jefferson

“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” Thomas Jefferson

“The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” Thomas Jefferson

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” Thomas Jefferson

“To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.” Thomas Jefferson

Thomas Jefferson said in 1802: “I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property – until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”

Thomas Jefferson was a very remarkable man who started learning very early in life and never stopped.

At 5, began studying under his cousin’s tutor.

At 9, studied Latin, Greek and French.

At 14, studied classical literature and additional languages.

At 16, entered the College of William and Mary.

At 19, studied Law for 5 years starting under George Wythe.

At 23, started his own law practice.

At 25, was elected to the Virginia House of Burgesses.

At 31, wrote the widely circulated “Summary View of the Rights of British America ” and retired from his law practice.

At 32, was a Delegate to the Second Continental Congress.

At 33, wrote the Declaration of Independence ..

At 33, took three years to revise Virginia ‘s legal code and wrote a Public Education bill and a statute for Religious Freedom.

At 36, was elected the second Governor of Virginia , succeeding Patrick Henry.

At 40, served in Congress for two years.

At 41, was the American minister to France , and negotiated commercial treaties with European nations along with Ben Franklin and John Adams.

At 46, served as the first Secretary of State under George Washington.

At 53, served as Vice President and was elected president of the American Philosophical Society.

At 55, drafted the Kentucky Resolutions, and became the active head of Republican Party.

At 57, was elected the third president of the United States ..

At 60, obtained the Louisiana Purchase , doubling the nation’s size.

At 61, was elected to a second term as President.

At 65, retired to Monticello ..

At 80, helped President Monroe shape the Monroe Doctrine.

At 81, almost single-handedly created the University of Virginia , and served as its first president.

At 83, died on the 50th anniversary of the Signing of the Declaration of Independence, along with John Adams

Thomas Jefferson knew because he himself studied the previous failed attempts at government. He understood actual history, the nature of God, his laws and the nature of man. That happens to be way more than what most understand today. Jefferson really knew his stuff. A voice from the past to lead us in the future:

John F. Kennedy held a dinner in the white House for a group of the brightest minds in the nation at that time. He made this statement: “This is perhaps the assembly of the most intelligence ever to gather at one time in the White House with the exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone.

Filed under: Governance, , , , , , , , ,

The ALP about to be frozen in hell!

Well, depending where you live what currently needs to be taken into consideration is a massive La Nina looks like it is building. With the SOI back up into La Nina territory of  above +8, and oceans cooling in the eastern pacific there are predictions that this La Nina could be the strongest in almost a century, (don’t worry the government funded Bureau of Meteorology wont predict this).

This strong La Nina is not unexpected. As we are now in a cold PDO (pacific decadel oscillation) then stronger, longer lasting and more frequent La Ninas are the norm and to be expected. Governments should be expecting these cyclical changes in the weather and climate as they are known, recorded and discussed. Yet like with the Brisbane the green madness of global warming overrode sensible government policy and massive destruction resulted. With a cold PDO the cold and wet is to be the norm for at least the next few decades if not longer. In Australia we are out of the drought cycle and into the flood cycle – as our poets, artists, farmers and scientists repeatedly attest to, but as our climate commissioner Flannery deliberately ignored when he predicted permanent droughts. Our full dams and expensive, useless desalination plants attest to his stupidity.

As this cold PDO also coincides with low sunspot activity with solar cycle 24 going into solar minimum and solar cycle 25 looking at being lower then we could be in for very cold times indeed. As the sun has reduced sunspots and radiation we get less heat storage in our oceans (the driver of our climate) and more cosmic rays hitting our atmosphere which causes more clouds (svensmarks theory). The increase in cloudiness further blocks the suns heat hitting the oceans and further increases the ocean cooling. Again our Governments have all the data available on the sun and what it is doing, and there are also many clear historical records that show a correlation between low sunspot count and a cooling world. Think little ice age, middle ages, frozen rivers in London and New York, massive famines from crops being wiped out, pandemics and countries collapsing. Unlike the global warming fraud which was fabricated fear on a baseless green religious view of a temporarily warming climate (reality – the warm periods in earths history are the golden eras when life flourishes) – history tells us the cold does and will kill – there is no doubt about that and kills in massively increased numbers over what the warmth ever could do. And how are our global warming governments protecting people from the cold? Making heating so expensive that many can no longer afford to keep warm!

With volcanic eruptions also on the rise globally, Katla is also getting more threatening by the day, then the predictions of an ice age winter in the northern hemisphere this year could prove to be devastatingly true. This is because the dust and soot volcanoes eject into the atmosphere further block the suns rays on hitting the earth and ocean adding another cooling signal.

With the bitter cold forecasts are for a drop in temperatures of around 0.15d c globally by mid march 2012 which sort of makes the whole global warming frauds scaremongering of 0.6d f rise a century look pretty lame. Many are predicting the return of ice age conditions to much of the northern hemisphere this christmas.

When it is the cold that kills our global warming governments should be hauled before the courts as they waste billions on the AGW fraud whilst putting people at maximum risk of dying from the cold. Nowhere is this stupidity and absolute disdain for the peoples welfare more evident than with the Australian Labor Party who deceptively, fraudulently and corruptly has been implementing a global warming tax on the Australian people whilst the globe begins to freeze. And the ALP have done that against the peoples wishes and well being, promising not to bring in the carbin tax fraud and then persistently implementing it. By March 2012 the record cold and devastation that this period of natural climate and sun cycles could bring will leave the likes of the ALP hated and despised so incredibly more than they are now.

As we reported recently the ALP’s delight at bringing in their global warming fraud against the peoples will, whilst the world is cooling is akin to the ALP dancing on their own graves. The ALP are on the wrong side of truth and history and every day the climate cools will make that blatantly obvious. As people die in their homes from the cold unable to afford to keep warm then a draconian and punitive warming tax will highlight the absolute corruption and deception of the left’s political class. When Gillard and KRudd’s ALP  start their global warming carbon tax fraud in Australia in mid 2012 the northern hemisphere could be reeling from one of the worst winters in living history and the southern hemisphere entering their own freezing hell. A perfect recipe for constituent contempt.

Like everything the ALP does it seems disconnected from reality, the result of their fortress mentality and group think and their inability to consider anyone but their own party’s selfish welfare. When many have warned the ALP of their climate stupidity and only got vilification in return, the ALP are about to be frozen in hell and they have no one to blame but themselves. As is becoming common attitude the criminals who run this party should be in jail – with any luck by this time next year they will be!

Long range weather forecast for Europe 2011/2012,

The appalling history of the Australian Labor Parties deception

Filed under: Governance, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Gillard’s Labor now dancing on their own grave

Gillard and Labor are now dancing on their own grave. The smugness and delight that they expressed yesterday at forcing and bribing the carbon tax policy through was watched by millions and millions of Australians utterly disgusted at Labor’s behaviour and trashing of our democracy. This treasonous action by Labor will forever be remembered as the day Labor betrayed the Australian people.

This was the tax Gillard promised prior to the last election she would never bring in under her leadership, the warming tax that will not reduce global temperatures, the emissions tax that wont cut emissions, the punitive and draconian trillion dollar tax that will rob Australians of over $40,000 each whilst it enriches the UN and big green government.

This is the tax that has seen and will see fuel poverty soar where many Australians will not be able to afford to keep warm in a cooling world. This is the tax that will see many Australians lose their houses, their jobs, their businesses and their freedoms progressively removed. Where Labor will implement a  new level of police against the people  – where green police will audit and fine ordinary and innocent Australians for their infringements against Labor’s socialist green religion. This is the warming tax that will enrage the populace against the government, especially as the world freezes.

This is the lying, fraudulent carbon tax that is simply a socialist exercise in wealth distribution. A lying, fraudulent tax that will do very little for the environment and is based on lies about the climate, lies about the great barrier reef, lies about the poles, lies about future snow cover. A lying fraudulent, warming tax that the rest of the world is sensibly backing away from as science exposes it’s corruption but the lying, fraudulent Labor politicians claimed to the populace the world was embracing. Every lie, on record, exposed will be another nail in Labor’s coffin – this is the tax that will bury Labor alive.

This is the tax that Labor has outed themselves as political representatives demonstrating clearly and once for all that they have absolutely no interest in democracy or the will of the Australian people. Where the people were silenced, given insufficient time to comment, where over 90% of Australian’s comments were disregarded, and it was brutally rushed through to avoid any challenge by … Australians.  This is the tax that will ensure Labor are forever seen as traitors to the common good of Australians and that will utterly destroy them as a party, as individuals, never to rise again. And this is the tax that Labor have structured so it is almost impossible to repeal and so it will become a noose around Labor’s neck, tightening every day, this carbon tax is Labor’s suicide note that will kill them at every single electoral opportunity. This is the tax that has so enraged Australians they have taken to the streets, marched on Canberra coming from all over Australia, set up blogs, tweets, facebook, internet sites, and united Australians against Labor as a political party. This is the tax Labor has then used as a reason to vilify, falsely accuse and attack ordinary Australians as enemies of their green crusade. This is the tax Labor have refused the people a voice and election over. This is the tax that labor have refused to be transparent or accountable over, the tax that has been refused due diligence, due process and a duty of care to Australians. This is the tax that has solidified Labor as an enemy of most Australians..

When a single Labor politician could have crossed the floor, changed the vote from 74/72 and put an end to this tax, then this is the tax that will damn, so completely, so repeatedly, so extensively every single Labor politician and condemn them – and that for a long, long time to come!

Labor’s contempt for Australians ; Labor jumps the shark and exposes their hypocrisy ; Labor’s grand deception and ultimate betrayal ; Labor has brought tyranny to Australia this day ; Labors death sealed with a kiss ; Climate committee corruption ; Labors lies and corruption ;

Filed under: Governance, , , , ,

Work from home

Join 2,978 other followers

TWAWKI Twitter

RSS TWAWKI RSS

  • Free energy, LENR & cold fusion
    Chiefio has a great article on low energy nuclear reactions (LENR) with the possibility of very very cheap electricity http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2014/06/04/lenr-year-of-answers/ worth while getting up to speed on what could be an incredible revolutionFiled under: Governance
  • Great apps for knowing what’s in your food
    All you have to do is walk in a supermarket to see the utter, abysmal failure of our food authorities in protecting big business while failing the health of the populace. Row after row of sugary, salty, fatty chemical experiments full of artificial flavours and sweeteners, preservatives etc while raw milk and cheese, and labelling […]
  • Teslas quantum energy generator
    CLICK HERE FOR QEG OPEN SOURCE DOCUMENTS FOR QUANTUM ENERGY GENERATOR Article from hopegirl anyone who has got this machine to work, would love to hear. An average modern household requires 5-10KW of power to operate. A conventional generator needs 15KW to produce 10KW of power. To produce these 15KW of power we rely on […]

Story archives

Categories

%d bloggers like this: