-Google’s top inventor says talking computers are the future.
Google’s top inventor says talking computers are the future.
23.12.2009
Future computing and mobile interfaces driven by artificial intelligence, speech recognition and machine vision are consuming the time of Google’s top inventor, he told siliconrepublic.com.
Google’s director of research Peter Norvig, who was in Ireland last week to give the prestigious Boole Lecture at the University of Cork, is the man behind the Google Search product we know and use today, driving the core web search algorithms in the world’s biggest internet company as well as leading the team that created Google Translate.
He joined Google in 2002 as director of search quality – a pivotal time in the company’s development where it enjoyed 10-fold growth, evolving from a curious start-up to the online advertising and software giant it is today. Prior to joining Google Norvig was NASA’s top computer scientist and would have worked on the Remote Agent and Mars Exploration Rovers.
Norvig co-wrote with Stuart Russell Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, a best-seller and considered the definitive book on the subject.
I asked Norvig how Google goes about invention and what fires up Google’s researchers to create and develop new technologies. “I think we are always reinventing things, which I think is good,” he says candidly. “You always try to attract the best people and you can’t attract a person whose job is to just maintain something that was built 10 years ago. The top people don’t want to do that, they want to invent their own.
“We’ve been lucky enough, the growth has been so fast that every couple of years we’ve had to throw out something and start from scratch. You have to tell someone:, for your first year work on this and next year we’ll need something 10 times bigger so why don’t you try that. And that’s a challenge.
“That’s the kind of thing people get excited about. We’ve been able to reinvent, throw out what we had before. In terms of size of the web and the number of documents we have, that’s been growing exponentially in terms of our users, it’s been growing and I guess also in terms of the speed of the response.
“When I started we created a new index of the web every month. And I thought that was a lot compared to a library card product which we had been thinking of ourselves as being like. They didn’t update and we thought we were pretty good. And then we said people started to search for news on Google and we said now we’re going to have to update every day and hour and now with tweets it’s every minute. We’re driven by the fact that we’ve got to have more users, more documents and more speed.”
I asked Norvig about the challenge of keeping a clean and simple search product at a time when it seems more information will be generated in the next year than during the entire history of mankind and when it seems that by next year 50pc of all traffic on the internet will be video and the next 1bn users of the web will be via mobile.
“We’ll do more with indexing the actual content of the video. We started out just searching the keywords of the video and now we’ve started doing speech recognition of the spoken word in the videos and over time we’ll start pulling out objects –this has a car in it that’s in a car chase. That’ll be a challenge.
-Microwave weapon will rain pain from the sky.
THE Pentagon’s enthusiasm for non-lethal crowd-control weapons appears to have stepped up a gear with its decision to develop a microwave pain-infliction system that can be fired from an aircraft.
The device is an extension of its controversial Active Denial System, which uses microwaves to heat the surface of the skin, creating a painful sensation without burning that strongly motivates the target to flee. The ADS was unveiled in 2001, but it has not been deployed owing to legal issues and safety fears.
Nevertheless, the Pentagon’s Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate (JNLWD) in Quantico, Virginia, has now called for it to be upgraded. The US air force, whose radar technology the ADS is based on, is increasing its annual funding of the system from $2 million to $10 million.
The transmitting antenna on the current system is 2 metres across, produces a single beam of similar width and is steered mechanically, making it cumbersome. At the heart of the new weapon will be a compact airborne antenna, which will be steered electronically and be capable of generating multiple beams, each of which can be aimed while on the move.
The ADS has been dogged by controversy. Jürgen Altmann, a physicist at Dortmund University in Germany, showed that the microwave beams can cause serious burns at levels not far above those required to repel people. This was verified when a US airman was hospitalised with second-degree burns during testing in April 2007.
The airborne version will not make it any less contentious. “Independent of the mode of production, with this size of antenna the beam will show variations of intensity with distance – not just a simple decrease – up to about 500 metres,” says Altmann. Shooting it on the move with any accuracy will be difficult, he adds.
Dave Law, head of the technology division of the JNLWD, says the new antenna will operate at the lowest possible effective power level and will have a sophisticated automated target-tracking system.
In a recent cost-benefit analysis, the US Government Accountability Office rated the ADS worst out of eight non-lethal weapons currently in development.
-How Airport Full Body Scanners Destroy DNA.
Terahertz wavelength radio waves can destroy DNA, and ‘airport full body scanners’ are akin to THz ‘cannons’. This may be a blow to this Orweillian technology, similar to how Verichips can cause cancer tumors. If you plan on flying I recommend you print out the articles related to this new issue.
How Terahertz Waves Tear Apart DNA
Great things are expected of terahertz waves, the radiation that fills the slot in the electromagnetic spectrum between microwaves and the infrared. Terahertz waves pass through non-conducting materials such as clothes , paper, wood and brick and so cameras sensitive to them can peer inside envelopes, into living rooms and “frisk” people at distance.
The way terahertz waves are absorbed and emitted can also be used to determine the chemical composition of a material. And even though they don’t travel far inside the body, there is great hope that the waves can be used to spot tumours near the surface of the skin.
With all that potential, it’s no wonder that research on terahertz waves has exploded in the last ten years or so.
But what of the health effects of terahertz waves? At first glance, it’s easy to dismiss any notion that they can be damaging. Terahertz photons are not energetic enough to break chemical bonds or ionise atoms or molecules, the chief reasons why higher energy photons such as x-rays and UV rays are so bad for us. But could there be another mechanism at work?
The evidence that terahertz radiation damages biological systems is mixed. “Some studies reported significant genetic damage while others, although similar, showed none,” say Boian Alexandrov at the Center for Nonlinear Studies at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and a few buddies. Now these guys think they know why.
Alexandrov and co have created a model to investigate how THz fields interact with double-stranded DNA and what they’ve found is remarkable. They say that although the forces generated are tiny, resonant effects allow THz waves to unzip double-stranded DNA, creating bubbles in the double strand that could significantly interfere with processes such as gene expression and DNA replication. That’s a jaw dropping conclusion.
And it also explains why the evidence has been so hard to garner. Ordinary resonant effects are not powerful enough to do do this kind of damage but nonlinear resonances can. These nonlinear instabilities are much less likely to form which explains why the character of THz genotoxic
effects are probabilistic rather than deterministic, say the team.
This should set the cat among the pigeons. Of course, terahertz waves are a natural part of environment, just like visible and infrared light. But a new generation of cameras are set to appear that not only record terahertz waves but also bombard us with them. And if our exposure is set to increase, the question that urgently needs answering is what level of terahertz exposure is safe.
Ref: arxiv.org/abs/0910.5294: DNA Breathing Dynamics in the Presence of a Terahertz Field
*The ‘Zeitgeist Movement’ = most hardcore NWO propaganda ever.
Recently I started a huge debate thread on this matter over at ATS. Of course many ZM’ers tred to step up and not only could they not quite extinguish really any of my talking points, but they also couldn’t answer the hard questions about setting up this system that arose later in the thread. Tonight I reworked the outline, and posted it over at the official ZM forums. Let’s see if they don’t delete it and ban me…
What I wrote in case they do delete it:
Hello. I’m here to challenge. When I look over the talking points of this movement I see the same old things I’ve been observing with the ‘NWO’ agenda. I figure since these critiques exist outside of here it’d be best to have you guys explain this (confusion?). Thing is this board seems to have a bad reputation for deleting critical posts and banning critical posters. I hope thats not the case, as it would seem to confirm the allegations I’m about to post.
Before my NWO list I’d like to highlight the questions I have for you all that will follow this…
The “Zeitgeist Movement” and cosponsor “Venus Project” are a most hardcore front in the New World Order / Neo-Communist / Neo-Eugenicist-Transhumanist agenda, whether witting or not.
They call for:
1. Global Government.
2. AI Automatons replacing humans as workers.
3. AGI (‘Skynet’) Supercomuters controlling most aspects of politics and society, including rationing global resources to global citizens. If they actually thought this out they’d know that soon enough machines will need more resources than humans.
4. A Utopian Agenda that “Peter” claims isn’t Utopian, yet the ‘research institute’ even describes itself as being Utopian / Futurist. History proves that all forced utopias become dystopias.
5. Selfish Transhumanist agenda.
6. Cashless (non-backed by Gold/etc) economic system. A ‘Resource Economy’ has been tried before… in the Soviet Union.
7. Population Control. To meet these targets as policy sounds like a slippery slope to me.
8. The global government run by a global ‘god-on-earth’ AGI computer network to replace all world religions.
QUESTIONS:
Even if you might dismiss the context of my outline above, please answer these questions:
A: How could the ZM be implemented without a totalitarian regime to enforce it? Don’t forget the idea of the ZM is that its to be global in scale.
B: How is it any different than Communism?
C: What about private property rights? What is PJ and JF’s views on this? What is yours?
D: Who will pay for it initially?
E: What about the jobs robots can’t replace? And who decides who gets the crappy jobs or the good jobs?
F: Are there ANY comparable historical examples of this system in history that worked?
G: What evidence exists to support the idea fo the Resource Economy, that is the “abundance” part that is crucial to the feasibility of the utopia.
H: Do you truly believe that there is any one size fits all approach to the entire globe and all of its social systems?
I: How can you have an all powerful, global scale system of the greatest power ever considered, totally centralized, and expect that this thing representing an elite cabal would ever give up said power, no matter what or who has this power? And please spare me, we’re talking about the global management of the entire earth and its resources. The ZM is no less subject to how things work out in practice historically, than is the USA, or am I mistaken??
[b]J: What about transition??
Explain to me the transition! My argument is that it would take tyranny just to maintain it. And how do you transition it in without dictatorial tyranny? How many decades would it take. What suffering is this goal worth to get there? Has anyone actually thought this experiment all the way thru? [/b]
K: Explain the transition to this idea that nobody will have to work anymore, please.
L: How can you promise that this system wouldnt calculate its numbers, in order for the utopia to work, and decide that major population numbers wouldnt need to be exterminated?
M: After handing all power over to the AI god global computer network, how can you promise that it wont decide that all humans wont need to be turned into compost?
N: How does PJ make the jump from the tyranny of the Federal Reserve system as being the problem, to money period as the problem to be eliminated?
O: Explain how we ‘get rid of’ ‘money’. Will there not be a ‘credits’ sort of system? If there is, how is this different than money? No ‘monetary units’ whatsoever? If not, please explain the model.
That should be all. I hope we get to discuss all of this, as it would have to be pretty embarrassing for you if this gets deleted. I mean, if you can’t openly address criticisms then it already proves this system is no different than Stalinism.
*Dear Alarmists, how far is too far to stop global warming??
Lets pretend that ‘Global Warming’ is everything they say. Despite the deterioration of Alarmist talking points, it seems Alarmists still push on. But here I’d like to skip all that and play along in the concept of Alarmist truth. Here we’ll overlook flaws in computer models that make all the predictions, and so on. How far is too far? What is is worth to stop what you believe is going to happen?
These questions may sound cynical, but Al Gore claims its pretty much already too late.
How many trillions of ‘monetary units’ is it worth?
What percentage of your annual income should be taxed for this?
What percentage of your annual income should you be required to personally invest in reducing your carbon footprint?
How high should energy prices be artificially increased in order to get you to use less energy?
How many vacations should we be allowed to take each year, if any?
Should we all be required to use laptop PC’s (or smaller) that use less energy?
What’s the largest TV screen we are allowed to have?
How much privacy do we need to lose, in order that the (world?) can be sure we’re not committing carbon/etc sins?
How many gallons of water per day total should we be allowed to use?
How much in price increases in all things used by humans is too much?
How many days in jail should we face for having a bonfire with friends?
How much jail time should we face for having more than one child?
How much human suffering in general is it worth?
Is it really worth having a communistic dictatorial global government take over the world?
How many humans can die now each year by diverting funds into global warming research and programs?
How many humans can suffer blight and blindness from lack of vitamins now each year by diverting funds into global warming research and programs?
How many humans should be exterminated right away in order to stop global warming?
What percentage of the population should serve as citizen snitch brigades? All?
Should all space travel be put to a halt?
Is Artificial Intelligence (i.e. ‘Skynet’) and the threats it poses to the total existence to humans worth stopping global warming? I ask because that is literally the case right now.
Is it worth near-abandoning the use of most modern plastics in order to stop using petroleum? I ask since we get our plastics at the same time we get our fuel.
What facets of our daily lives should be exempt from global warming policies, if any?
Should technological elitist scientists really be able to over-rule democracy?
Should wars be raged today in order to stop global warming?
Should the eating of ‘farting meat’ be outlawed? If so, what penalties should be imposed on the guilty?
Should large farting animals such as cattle be exterminated?
If beans replacing meat in human diet produces nearly as much methane, how many humans should be eliminated in order to curb methane emissions?
Should air conditioning and furnace units be outlawed? Or what is the highest or lowest temp deviation from the outside environment can be offset by such appliances?
Should we be forced to be strict vegetarians?
Should we only be allowed to buy local vegetables, which subjects us to seasonal availability issues? Dont forget, if we have to become vegetarians we’ll be desperate for variety.
How far should the industrialized world be deindustrialized?
Should we only be allowed to buy a certain amount of clothes, or other items (please list) per year?
What, if anything, shouldn’t be considered in all of this?
To what extent should other everyday real life environmental issues be ignored in order to stop this? It seems most already are with all of the focus in global warming.
While we’re at it, why don’t you scream as loud about mandating industrial hemp for all paper use, as loud as you scream about global warming?
What fine for getting caught using incandesant lightbulbs?
Should we not be allowed to upgrade our PC’s unless the parts actually break?
Should we not be allowed to waste electricity doing things like playing videos games and using our devices for other entertainment purposes?
What are the largest speakers we can have in our homes, our cars?
Are we allowed to drink pure reverse osmosis water? In the RO process, more water is rejected than allowed thru. Municipal water pumping stations use energy.
What are the maximum lumens (measurement of light), or wattage, per cubic foot allowed at night (or day) time inside dwellings?
What do you have against one having brothers, sisters, cousins, aunts or uncles?
How many grams of food per day should anyone be allowed to eat?
Arcades: a good thing?
What sports should be outlawed first? Last?
Are allowed to have a pool, a hot tub?
What should be closed first, waterparks or rollercoaster parks?
Argh. Thats all I have time for.
-CNN: The future of brain-controlled devices
(CNN) — In the shimmering fantasy realm of the hit movie “Avatar,” a paraplegic Marine leaves his wheelchair behind and finds his feet in a new virtual world thanks to “the link,” a sophisticated chamber that connects his brain to a surrogate alien, via computer.
This type of interface is a classic tool in gee-whiz science fiction. But the hard science behind it is even more wow-inducing.
Researchers are already using brain-computer interfaces to aid the disabled, treat diseases like Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s, and provide therapy for depression and post-traumatic stress disorder. Work is under way on devices that may eventually let you communicate with friends telepathically, give you superhuman hearing and vision or even let you download data directly into your brain, a la “The Matrix.”
Researchers are practically giddy over the prospects. “We don’t know what the limits are yet,” says Melody Moore Jackson, director of Georgia Tech University’s BrainLab.
Adds Emory University neuroscience professor Michael Crutcher, “Anything can happen.”
At the root of all this technology is the 3-pound generator we all carry in our head. It produces electricity at the microvolt level. But the signals are strong enough to move robots, wheelchairs and prosthetic limbs — with the help of an external processor.
Harnessing that power “opens up a whole new paradigm for us as human beings,” says neuroscientist Rajesh Rao of the University of Washington.
Brain-computer interfaces (BCI) come in two varieties. Noninvasive techniques use electrodes placed on the scalp to measure electrical activity. Invasive procedures implant electrodes directly into the brain. In both cases, the devices interact with a computer to produce a wide variety of applications, ranging from medical breakthroughs and military-tech advances to futuristic video games and toys.
Much of the research focuses on neuroprosthetics, which offer a way for the brain to compensate for injuries and illness. Jackson helped develop an intelligent wheelchair called the Aware Chair, which can be guided by neural activity.
She is also working on communication programs for people who have been paralyzed by strokes or spinal-cord injuries. Implanted electrodes allow “locked in” patients to spell out messages by manipulating a computer cursor with their thoughts alone.
Rao is tapping into that same concept to help paralyzed people manipulate robots to fetch items or move things around the house. With cameras to provide visual feedback, the patients and robots don’t even need to be in the same room, or the same city. Rao says the technology “frees the mind from the constraints of the body.”
Cochlear implants are the most common neuroprosthetic. They help the brain interpret sounds and are sometimes called “bionic ears” for the deaf. Other researchers are looking for similar ways to help blind people see. Neurobiologist Ed Boyden of MIT says miniature optical devices can be implanted to convert photoreceptors into workable cameras for the brain.
None of this comes cheap. Most research is funded by deep pockets such as the National Institutes of Health, the defense department and NASA.
But every breakthrough brings the most advanced BCI technologies closer to the mass market. Jackson says she foresees a day when people with disabilities can spend a few hundred dollars instead of $20,000 on a workable system.
Mainstreaming the technology raises some troubling issues for Crutcher, who teaches a course at Emory in neuro-ethics. He fears that expensive eye and ear implants could produce a computer-enhanced elite.
“If only the rich can afford it, it puts everyone else at a disadvantage,” says Crutcher, who believes many aspects of BCI are ripe for abuse. Just the idea of mucking about with a person’s brain “raises questions about safety and efficacy,” he says.
One of the more controversial uses under development is telepathy. It would require at least two people to be implanted with electrodes that send and receive signals back and forth.
DARPA, the Pentagon’s technology research division, is currently working on an initiative called “Silent Talk,” which would let soldiers on secret missions communicate with their thoughts alone. This stealth component is attractive, but naysayers fear that such soldiers could become manipulated for evil means.
Telepathy implants won’t replace Facebook and Twitter anytime soon, but that possibility is problematic as well.
“You can imagine communicating with your friends through the devices, and that opens up a lot of ethical issues,” Rao says. Would you want your friends and family to know everything you are thinking? Would little white lies become obsolete?
These questions of morality and liability are not a huge factor for the toy makers and video game developers who are already bringing the most basic BCI technology to consumers.
Games like Mindflex and the Star Wars Force Trainer use headsets with simple electrodes to monitor levels of concentration and relaxation. The signals trigger a fan that can move a ball up or down, depending on how hard you’re thinking. Jackson calls it a “fascinating application of a very sophisticated technology in a very cheap package.”
The headsets used in both games were designed by the California company Neurosky. Its corporate partners are working on games that help Alzheimer’s patients improve memory techniques, teach concentration skills to kids with ADHD and let stressed- out CEOs work on relaxing.
Software entrepreneurs and executives are streaming into Boyden’s neuro-ventures class at MIT, looking for ways to capitalize on the array of potential uses for brain-computer interfaces.
Some ventures are already up and running. NeuroVigil in California is working on iBrain, designed, in part, to help provide instant feedback to drivers who start falling asleep at the wheel. Eos Neuroscience is developing light-sensitive protein-based sensors that can treat blindness.
Numerous companies are developing video games based on direct brain-computer interfacing. Neurosky sells a wireless headset that connects to any computer for a series of brain-training games. NeuroBoy lets you set targets on fire just by concentrating on them. Relax, and your character levitates. Another application lets you see a colorful visualization of your brain-wave activity.
Boyden expects to see many more such products hitting shelves sooner rather than later. He says the possibilities are endless if just a “fraction of the business leaders” taking his class start “bringing the technology into the world.”
Jackson, of Georgia Tech, agrees: “Nothing is out of the realm of possibility.”
Do NOT buy Western Digital hard drives, ever!!!!!!
The Good News: I just invested a bunch of money into getting my video editing PC back to operational. A new CPU to replace the one that burnt out awhile back preventing me from using my killer motherboard/cpu/video card/6GB of RAM. Replaced buggy old (backup) sound card with a better one. Bought a new 60GB Solid State Hard Disk to replace my OS / program launch disk (ultra fast computation!!). Finally XP 64 Bit to fully utilize my dual core 64 Bit CPU. Sent both of my 22″ widescreen dual monitors off to be replaced (hopefully) one week before my 3 year warranty expired. I’m all fired up to get caught up and beyond in my endeavors.
And… I bought another 1TB hard disk…
The Bad News: A couple weeks ago I had another HD crash (DIE!!!), another damn Western Digital (WD). Read the title! I’ve been having these go down one about every 6 months for some time. This was the last of them! I run 8 HD’s, and had forgotten the important drive set I had on this one…
Usually I get some warning, and shift important stuff around off of the older POS WD junk. Not this time. I have several HD’s at all times. 2 are always dedicated to my film stuff (actual project files) not just data stores…
Well my ‘AUA’ film project drive completely died. What I once called ‘AUA’ is now more like many different films of different lengths and scales, but all loosely related. I do have the video editor project files backed up, and soundtrack, etc. But the media files themselves are gone, and a bunch of other stuff. I do have a lot of the media files on dvd all mixed up thru my extensive data archives, but not everything, let alone non-video files I had gathered for some time. NOT the script, NOT the editor project files, NOT some other irreplaceable stuff, but a LOT is gone. About 2 months of catch up it will take to have what I did. Might have to cut some corners eventually, like when you’re debating in a forums and writing out a huge argument and then the IE window crashes and you have to write it all over again.
Called around, $400 – $2400 to recover the data. Probably about $750. Cant afford it. If anyone knows anyone that works in data recovery and can help out shoot me a line. I might just have to fix the damn thing myself…
One of the data recovery specialists I spoke with said that WD disks are only meant to last about 18 months. And I can tell you this: they roll off the same assembly line as dirtbag brand Maxtor disks. WD used to be the name in HD’s, many years ago, but now they’re in the gutter.
*Kids Cartoon Depicts Merger of Transhumanism & Mysticism.
Ignorance Is Futile Exclusive:
A while back I was at a friends while out of town and he put the cartoon “Justice League Unlimited” on the TV. It’s not too often I see TV, but sure enough there it was. In the episode titled “The Return”, a nanotechnology based ‘android’ returns to earth to settle an old score with (the reformed) criminal mastermind Lex Luther.
The android is the ultimate god like being, able to ‘destroy’ planets (teleport them to different dimensions actually), communicate across outerspace using telepathy, absorb attacks by any superhero, and so on. The creature smashes through every line of defense of several worlds in its path to earth.
While at first it seems the being is on a war path, it ends up that it was on a sort of soul seeking quest to have Luther advise it what its purpose is. Meanwhile a mutant that embodies mysticism interjects against attempts to destroy the android, and in the end they teleport off to wherever via the mystics’ ‘ahnk’ symbol superpower.
Between the rhetoric and the symbolism the episode is obvious propaganda promoting Transhumanist ideals and New Age symbology. Aside from the obvious ahnk symbol (which stands for “eternal life”), it could also be argued that the end scene depicts a Masonic “point within a circle” symbol. While there are two characters inside the circle, the ahnk event happens in the middle of it. Therefore it’s still worthwhile to cover the meaning of this symbol. Freemason Albert Mackey describes the masonic ‘meaning’:
The point within a Circle is another symbol of great importance in Freemasonry, and commands peculiar attention in this connection with the ancient symbolism of the universe and the solar orb. Everybody who has read a masonic “Monitor” is well acquainted with the usual explanation of this symbol. We are told that the point represents an individual brother, the circle the boundary line of his duty to God and man, and the two perpendicular parallel lines the patron saints of the order–St. John the Baptist and St. John the Evangelist.
He continues on to explain the ancient meaning:
Perfectly to understand this symbol, I must refer, as a preliminary matter, to the worship of the Phallus, a peculiar modification of sun-worship, which prevailed to a great extent among the nations of antiquity.
The Phallus was a sculptured representation of the membrum virile, or male organ of generation, 76 and the worship of it is said to have originated in Egypt, where, after the murder of Osiris by Typhon, which is symbolically to be explained as the destruction or deprivation of the sun’s light by night, Isis, his wife, or the symbol of nature, in the search for his mutilated body, is said to have found all the parts except the organs of generation, which myth is simply symbolic of the fact, that the sun having set, its fecundating and invigorating power had ceased. The Phallus, therefore, as the symbol of the male generative principle, was very universally venerated among the ancients, 77 and that too as a religious rite, without the slightest reference to any impure or lascivious application. 78 He is supposed, by some commentators, to be the god mentioned under the name of Baal-peor, in the Book of Numbers, 79 as having been worshipped by the idolatrous Moabites. Among the eastern nations of India the same symbol was prevalent, under the name of “Lingam.” But the Phallus or Lingam was a representation of the male principle only. To perfect the circle of generation it is necessary to advance one step farther. Accordingly we find in the Cteis of the Greeks, and the Yoni of the Indians, a symbol of the female generative principle, of co-extensive prevalence with the Phallus. The Cteis was a circular and concave pedestal, or receptacle, on which the Phallus or column rested, and from the centre of which it sprang.
The union of the Phallus and Cteis, or the Lingam and Yoni, in one compound figure, as an object of adoration, was the most usual mode of representation. This was in strict accordance with the whole system of ancient mythology, which was founded upon a worship of the prolific powers of nature. All the deities of pagan antiquity, however numerous they may be, can always be reduced to the two different forms of the generative principle–the active, or male, and the passive, or female. Hence the gods were always arranged in pairs, as Jupiter and Juno, Bacchus and Venus, Osiris and Isis. But the ancients went farther. Believing that the procreative and productive powers of nature might be conceived to exist in the same individual, they made the older of their deities hermaphrodite, and used the term ἀῤῥενοθέλυς, or man-virgin, to denote the union of the two sexes in the same divine person
This symbol can be found in the Washington Monument that was built by Freemasons, and in front of their supposed enemies at the Vatican’s St. Peter’s Square.
In any case, I warned of this combinatorial idea in my video “They Want Your Soul”, that I made in 2006, back when I used to dabble in ideas of religion. It turns out that 2012 New Ager types often claim that in 2012 when the Mayan calendar “ends” there will be a “transformation of consciousness”, that will include ‘hive mind telepathy’. They make these claims without any evidence whatsoever, as there exists no Mayan artifacts that actually tell what 2012 means.
Meanwhile, my other findings back then included DARPA & NASA programs that had their Skynet’esque AI programs as being operational in 2012, and there already exists non-invasive brain-computer interfaces. So in my view, it would seem that these 2012 New Agers are unwitting self-fulfilling prophecizers of the Transhumanist goal of a technological transformation of consciousness.
*The Iron Law of Oligarchy.
The iron law of oligarchy is a political theory, first developed by Robert Michels in his 1911 book, Political Parties. It states that all organizations will eventually become an oligarchy of a handful of elites. All forms of organization, regardless of how democratic or autocratic they may be at the start, will eventually and inevitably develop oligarchic tendencies, thus making true democracy practically and theoretically impossible.
With governments it proves true whether it is capitalist or socialist-communist. The bigger the bureaucracy, and the more power it wields, the more inclined it is to become an oligarchy.
So today we have the makings of an unrivaled global government on the horizon. In light of this reality, we must consider what kind of oligarchy we’ll be sure to get. So what you have to ask yourself is which system will be worse when it reaches its oligarchical climax. As it turns out, we have 2 perfect examples in history: USSA & USSR. Ask yourself which was worse for its people during its reign, and which one lasted the longest before imploding (meaning actual functionality).
We all know these answers. The funny thing is, the Soviet system was inherently flawed on this scale, whereas its taken 95 years of Federal Reserve robbing the public to still not kill the system via its normal measures. It wasn’t until the Banksters went for the final death blow via engineered economic collapse and artificial tripling of fuel costs at the same time to still not completely kill us off.
Now I’m not condoning this cruel system, but if I had to choose between forms of oligarchy the choice is easy. Following the Iron Law, choosing a system should be the choice between what kind of oligarchy do you want to end up with. Therefore, the idea of an unrivaled communistic global government is absolute insanity.
“God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion.” -Thomas Jefferson
On my films that are in ‘development hell’.
So I have mentioned and even trumpeted several films in progress in the past that have never come to fruition. I have the tendency to get over-ambitious in my projects. For instance with Neocon Wars it was originally only to be a 2 minute spoof flick. I ended up having a hard time keeping it under 2 hours. But it was easy to make, merely mashing up hundreds of different segments extracted from hundreds of clips of primarily existent footage, and laying over an already prepared music score.
There was some custom created material in there to ‘compost’ it all together, but its not like trying to make a full production with a complete narrative. Getting over-ambitious in this sort of production gets out of hand. Long ago I had the idea to make and release lots of segments that eventually interlock into a greater and ever growing compilation. Tonight I recalled this concept, and that’s how I’m going to have to do it.
For instance, my most recent Climategate video went from idea to Youtube release in 48 hours. Now this would take longer, writing and solving narrating etc, but none the less the Climategate clip would take eons to make if trying to wrap an entire ‘new’ documentary around the entire climate issue. Despite the my recent burst of climate change noise, its far from my biggest focus, but it is a key facet in ushering the system I’m trying to warn of.
So I pledge to try to focus my efforts into this ‘new’ framework, and try to get stuff done in pieces to make up for lack of progress and for any I’ve disappointed in not following thru. One thing I’ve learned is to not even mention a project until its actually ready, so I wont say now what I intend to cover first. A year ago let on about a film that was in focus and in production.
I have a mostly complete script, although events since then alter it in many regards. Making a film of this nature is hard, as daily news only expands on or alters it. But the script is mainly composed of segments anyways. The project was called An Unholy Alliance, so now perhaps it will be an ever expanding compilation of separate segments, that combined build upon the ‘unholy alliance’ motif.
This will allow me to put better effort into each ’segment’, and not be pressed to cut corners due to duration constraints. After all, there are so many facets that to attempt to smash them into one films-length of a narrative would be to lose much perspective and reality. I figure I can tool each clip to interlock, ala a certain ‘tv emulator’ film concept my older readers might remember, and upload the segments individually to archive.org, allowing anyone interested to take my segments and combine them as desired into dvd’s or whatever. Even make your own segments and add them in perhaps.
*The Cold War Lives On: Gorbachev Exposes Global Communist Environmentalism Conspiracy.
The collapse of the Soviet Union didn’t mark the end of the Cold War. The Cold War never ended, and we’re losing this war. As the collapse became imminent, they were already enacting their final strategy. The case is rather simple, and Mikhail Gorbachev is the key.
“Gentlemen, comrades, do not be concerned about all you hear about Glasnost and Perestroika and democracy in the coming years. They are primarily for outward consumption. There will be no significant internal changes in the Soviet Union, other than for cosmetic purposes. Our purpose is to disarm the Americans and let them fall asleep.” -Mikhail Gorbachev, speech to the Soviet Politburo, November 1987
As the Soviet collapse became imminent in the final years, the Communist strategy became to infiltrate global environmental organizations. Gorbachev was active in this effort as early as 1990.
In 1992, the year following the Soviet collapse, the framework was already underway following the UN’s Earth Summit, after which he founded Green Cross International (GCI) officially in 1993. That same year, Gorbachev’s GCI was the fountainhead of the infamous Kyoto summit, during which he sat as the president of the proceedings. In the video above he actually ‘jokes’ about being the “dictator” of the conference.
The idea of Gorbachev legitimately being en environmentalist is even more absurd than the idea of Al Gore truly being ‘green’:
Formerly leader of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev is now one of the world’s most vocal global warming activists. This is an unlikely role indeed for a man who during his years in power showed no inclination to address environmental issues. This could not have been for lack of opportunity, given that he presided over a country which suffered from extensive ecological damage wrought by years of gross disregard and mismanagement. Had he had the inclination, there was much to do about the lamentable state of his country’s environmental condition. Gorbachev, however, not only did nothing, but brazenly continued the Soviet regime’s ecologically disastrous policies.
But nothing revealed his true attitudes more glaringly than the explosion of a nuclear reactor at Chernobyl. His first reaction was not to launch a clean-up operation, but to conceal the fact. Initially he denied that anything happened at all. Then, when radioactive clouds reached countries hundreds of kilometers away, he claimed that it was only a ‘minor’ accident. It was only under the pressure of growing evidence that Gorbachev finally admitted the truth. While mounting the cover-up, the time and energy that could have been used to contend with the unfolding ecological catastrophe were irretrievably lost. But that was not all, for Gorbachev also decided to sacrifice the lives of thousands whom he refused to evacuate or even notify of the danger. Scores died and countless others suffered from diseases caused by exposure to radiation. Many could have been saved had Gorbachev done the decent thing. Chernobyl thus stands as tragic evidence of Gorbachev’s disdain both for nature and human life which, sadly, is all too often found in those who espouse the communist worldview.
The idea to infiltrate environmentalist organizations was a smart move, as with the right propaganda and phony climate fraud environmentalists would be easy targets as unwitting minions. You see with an issue like Global Warming, the only way it could be solved, if it even could, assuming it were real, would be by a global government dictating and rationing the worlds resources.
As it turns out, that exact thing is being worked towards, as we speak, in Copenhagen. It’s no wonder they also have the head of the UN post op-eds calling for climate based global government, as this year the New York Times hired Mikhail as an op-ed columnist. His column from today is titled “We Have a Real Emergency“, and in it he urges the typical ‘we need a global government to stop catastrophic climate change’ type rhetoric. Similar words are found in another op-ed he wrote earlier this year:
The second question concerns the G-20’s place within the system of global institutions. What is this group: a “global politburo,” a “club of the powerful,” a prototype for a world government? How will it interact with the United Nations?
www.nytimes.com…
Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore eventually left the organization as after the ‘end of the Cold War’, communists hijacked the movement including the organization he helped create:
(After the Cold War ‘ended’) “suddenly, the international peace movement had a lot less to do. Pro-Soviet groups in the West were discredited. Many of their members moved into the environmental movement, bringing with them their eco-Marxism and pro-Sandinista sentiments.
“A lot of those in the peace movement were anti-American and, to an extent, pro-Soviet. By virtue of their anti-Americanism, they tended to sometimes favor the communist approach. A lot of those people, a lot of those social activists, moved into the environmental movement once the peace movement was no longer relevant.” Social activists, he suggests, “are now using the rhetoric of environmentalism to promote other collectivist agendas, such as class struggle — which I personally believe is a legitimate area, but I don’t believe it’s legitimate to mix it up with environmentalism.”
findarticles.com…
I argue that the UN and the co-opted Environmentalist movement are key facets in the “ruthless and monolithic conspiracy” that JFK warned us all about, as I showcased in my new short film exposing the Climategate UN-IPCC data manipulation scheme to trump up phony “Global Warming” hysteria, in the context of the “New World Order”:
At the end of the video, after all the leaked CRU emails, numerous Western world leaders are shown calling for global government, aka a “new world order” headed by the UN. As it turns out, Mikhail has been calling for the same thing for many decades:
“In October, 1917 we parted with the Old World, rejecting it once and for all. We are moving toward a New World, a world of Communism. We shall NEVER turn off that road.” -Mikhail Gorbachev at the Kremlin in Moscow, Nov. 2, 1987
“Further global progress is now possible only through a quest for universal consensus in the movement towards a New World Order.” – Mikhail Gorbachev, in an address to the United Nations, December 1988
Today, virtually all world leaders are openly calling for a UN headed “New World Order” global government as I chronicled here: *When all major world leaders openly call for global government.
Czech President, Vaclav Klaus, former ‘prisoner’ (hypothetically) of the Soviet system explain the parallels between Communism and modern Environmentalism:
Czech prez: Environmentalism is new communism:
As the House Energy and Commerce Committee prepares to question former Vice President Al Gore tomorrow morning about global warming, Czech President Vaclav Klaus is warning congressmen that environmental extremism is the modern equivalent of communism.
Responding yesterday to U.S. Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, and former House Speaker Denny Hastert, R-Ill., the Czech leader said: “It becomes evident that while discussing climate we are not witnessing a clash of views about the environment, but a clash of views about human freedom.”
“As someone who lived under communism for most of my life I feel obliged to say that the biggest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy and prosperity at the beginning of the 21st century is not communism or its various softer variants,” said Klaus, responding to questions posed by the two lawmakers. “Communism was replaced by the threat of ambitious environmentalism.”
The UN global government structure concept can be best compared to the European Union, to which Klaus also compares to the Soviet Union:
The Czech Republic’s leader has long been one of the most strident critics of the European Union, blasting the bloc with withering attacks at every opportunity. Now he has inherited the ideal pulpit to air his views: The EU presidency itself.
In a startling diatribe before EU legislators Thursday, Czech President Vaclav Klaus, whose country assumed the rotating EU helm in January from France, branded the club an undemocratic and elitist project comparable to Soviet-era dictatorships that forbade free thought.
Despite the uproar, this is hardly uncharacteristic of a deeply Euroskeptic leader who has refused to fly the EU flag over his official seat in Prague during the Czech presidency, saying the country is not an EU province.
“Not so long ago,” Klaus thundered, “in our part of Europe we lived in a political system that permitted no alternatives and therefore also no parliamentary opposition. We learned the bitter lesson that with no opposition, there is no freedom.”
And here a famous Soviet dissident also outlines the ways the European Union is the new Soviet Union:
The UK’s Nigel Farage speaking truth to power in the EU parliment:
Facts suggest that the Rothschild’s & Rockefeller’s are behind the EU, Federal Reserve and UN, while many argue that they’re also behind the origins of Communism.
Leftists Noam Chomsky & John Pilger have argued for many years that the Cold War was just a phony scheme perpetrated by both sides to justify taking over the world. I mean, obviously each side did do this, but the jist I’ve gotten from both of them implies what could be described as a sort of collaboration, much like the Democrats & Republicans.
The elitist families I named were and are key figures behind the UN. So even if they didn’t encourage Communism, it could be said that the elites from both sides eventually came to have a meeting of the minds. Why wouldnt they? The elites from each side both seek to dominate the entire world, yet couldnt defeat each other. At the same time, the ethics of each side are consumed in control freak domination. Considering that, the idea of them having a meeting of the minds later on is perfectly plausible.
Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose. The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history.– David Rockefeller
In any case, no matter how you slice it, we’re on the verge of a communistic global dictatorship and the time to act is now.
*Copenhagen Treaty is blueprint for a communistic global government.
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/copenhagen_climatetreaty_draft.pdf
Monckton: Secretive Copenhagen Treaty Creates Larcenous Global Government Tax
Text of agreement outlines plan for tax on all transactions in addition to 2 percent GDP tax, mandates globalist power grab on an “unimaginable scale,” by a “sinister dictatorship,” warns Monckton
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Lord Christopher Monckton warns that the secretive draft version of the Copenhagen climate change treaty represents a global government power grab on an “unimaginable scale,” and mandates the creation of 700 new bureaucracies as well as a colossal raft of new taxes including 2 percent levies on both GDP and every international financial transaction.
Speaking with The Alex Jones Show, Monckton, who is in Copenhagen attending the UN climate summit, said that when he attempted to obtain a copy of the current draft of the negotiating text agreement, he was initially rebuffed before he threatened an international diplomatic incident unless the document was forthcoming.
“I insisted and it took about 10 minutes and they consulted each other with three or four of them arguing over it – none of them would produce the document….I said I know this treaty exists because this is what the conference is all about,” said Monckton.
Only after Monckton threatened repercussions was he handed the the current draft of the treaty, and the details it contained are perhaps a clue as to why the UN officials were so keen to keep it under wraps.
“Once again they are desperately trying to conceal from everybody here the magnitude of what they’re attempting to do – they really are attempting to set up a world government,” said Monckton, adding that the word “government” was no longer used but the process of further centralization of power into global hands was clearly spelled out in the treaty.
Monckton said that the new world government outlined in the treaty would be handed powers to, “Tax the American economy to the extent of 2 percent GDP, to impose a further tax of 2 percent on every financial transaction….and to close down effectively the economies of the west, transfer your jobs to third world countries – all of that is still in the treaty draft.”
As the leaked document out of Copenhagen reported on by the London Guardian revealed yesterday, this massive new system of global taxation will be paid not to the UN, but directly into the coffers of the World Bank.
“The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank; would abandon the Kyoto protocol – the only legally binding treaty that the world has on emissions reductions; and would make any money to help poor countries adapt to climate change dependent on them taking a range of actions,” reported the Guardian.
Monckton illustrated the size of the new taxes being proposed by noting they amounted to at least half of the entire US defense budget.
“This is how they are going to fund this vast new government they’re setting up,” said Monckton, adding that he counted around 700 new bureaucracies that would be created as a result of the treaty, which would be bankrolled by taxpayers even outside of the raft of new taxes the treaty would create.
Monckton outlined how the new taxes would be enforced, stating, “They’re going to auction allowances to emit greenhouse gases and if you don’t buy an allowance to emit greenhouse gases, you won’t be allowed to emit them,” adding that the text contained a provision for a “uniform global levy of $2 dollars per ton of CO2 for all fossil fuel emissions,” as well as an additional tax on every commercial plane journey, except ones that go in or out of poorer countries.
There would also be a “global levy on international monetary transactions – that means every transfer of money across borders will be taxed,” said Monckton, adding that this would be on top of the GDP tax.
The treaty outlines, “Penalties or fines for non-compliance,” in developed countries and the creation of an international police force to “enforce its will by imposing unlimited financial penalties on any countries whose performance under this treaty they don’t like,” added Monckton, saying that it amounted to a total global government takeover on an “unimaginable scale”.
“We’re looking at a grab for absolute power and absolute financial control worldwide by the UN and its associated bureaucracies and 700 new bureaucratic bodies,” said Monckton.
Speaking about how such draconian measures were being forced through despite the recent scandal surrounding how key IPCC-affiliated scientists conspired to “hide the decline” in global warming, Monckton emphasized how the climate change establishment were still ludicrously attempting to downplay the significance of the climategate emails by merely repeating their already discredited propaganda about global warming.
“What has happened is that the mainstream media has done themselves terrible damage by signing up to this climate nonsense and then by servilely refusing to admit that climategate was happening, admit how serious it was and simply inform their readers of what was actually in these emails,” said Monckton, “Admissions that while they’re telling us, as the Met Office did just today, that today is the warmest decade since records began 150 years ago, privately what they’re saying in the climategate emails is ‘hey look we’ve got a temperature which has been falling and we can’t explain why and it’s a travesty that we can’t explain why’ – so they’re saying one thing to us publicly to maintain the scare that’s making them rich, and that’s what’s called fraud, it’s criminal fraud, and on the other hand they’re saying privately ‘oh dear oh dear we can’t account for the fact that there’s been no warming for the last 15 years’”.
Monckton said that the Copenhagen treaty meant America was in “immediate peril” of losing its freedom to a “sinister dictatorship” being formed under the contrived pretext of global warming.// <![CDATA[
/* // <![CDATA[
/*
<!–
–>
-Copenhagen conference in crisis after leak of draft Danish text.
Developing countries react furiously to leaked draft agreement that would hand more power to rich nations, sideline the UN’s negotiating role and abandon the Kyoto protocol
• Read the ‘Danish text’
• In pictures: Copenhagen day two
The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN’s role in all future climate change negotiations.
The document is also being interpreted by developing countries as setting unequal limits on per capita carbon emissions for developed and developing countries in 2050; meaning that people in rich countries would be permitted to emit nearly twice as much under the proposals.
The so-called Danish text, a secret draft agreement worked on by a group of individuals known as “the circle of commitment” – but understood to include the UK, US and Denmark – has only been shown to a handful of countries since it was finalised this week.
The agreement, leaked to the Guardian, is a departure from the Kyoto protocol’s principle that rich nations, which have emitted the bulk of the CO2, should take on firm and binding commitments to reduce greenhouse gases, while poorer nations were not compelled to act. The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank; would abandon the Kyoto protocol – the only legally binding treaty that the world has on emissions reductions; and would make any money to help poor countries adapt to climate change dependent on them taking a range of actions.
The document was described last night by one senior diplomat as “a very dangerous document for developing countries. It is a fundamental reworking of the UN balance of obligations. It is to be superimposed without discussion on the talks”.
A confidential analysis of the text by developing countries also seen by the Guardian shows deep unease over details of the text. In particular, it is understood to:
• Force developing countries to agree to specific emission cuts and measures that were not part of the original UN agreement;
• Divide poor countries further by creating a new category of developing countries called “the most vulnerable”;
• Weaken the UN’s role in handling climate finance;
• Not allow poor countries to emit more than 1.44 tonnes of carbon per person by 2050, while allowing rich countries to emit 2.67 tonnes.
Developing countries that have seen the text are understood to be furious that it is being promoted by rich countries without their knowledge and without discussion in the negotiations.
“It is being done in secret. Clearly the intention is to get [Barack] Obama and the leaders of other rich countries to muscle it through when they arrive next week. It effectively is the end of the UN process,” said one diplomat, who asked to remain nameless.
Antonio Hill, climate policy adviser for Oxfam International, said: “This is only a draft but it highlights the risk that when the big countries come together, the small ones get hurting. On every count the emission cuts need to be scaled up. It allows too many loopholes and does not suggest anything like the 40% cuts that science is saying is needed.”
Hill continued: “It proposes a green fund to be run by a board but the big risk is that it will run by the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility [a partnership of 10 agencies including the World Bank and the UN Environment Programme] and not the UN. That would be a step backwards, and it tries to put constraints on developing countries when none were negotiated in earlier UN climate talks.”
The text was intended by Denmark and rich countries to be a working framework, which would be adapted by countries over the next week. It is particularly inflammatory because it sidelines the UN negotiating process and suggests that rich countries are desperate for world leaders to have a text to work from when they arrive next week.
Few numbers or figures are included in the text because these would be filled in later by world leaders. However, it seeks to hold temperature rises to 2C and mentions the sum of $10bn a year to help poor countries adapt to climate change from 2012-15.
Footnote: This article was amended on 9th December 2009. The photograph caption was changed to state that the delegate was resting before the start of the second day talks.
CLIMATE Change Minister Penny Wong has flown into a storm at the Copenhagen summit – and she’s ready for the turbulence.
Tempers are flaring at the landmark UN conference, which is entering its fourth day, as countries bicker over who should do what on climate change.
“Certainly it has been a difficult start, in many ways it’s unsurprising because it’s a difficult negotiation,” she told reporters in the summit venue.
The language some official delegates had used was “disappointing” and “unhelpful”.
…
“It is often good in politics to think of how you will look in five or 10 or 15 or more years, how a particular time will look. And I think if we do not take this opportunity we will regret it,” said Senator Wong, who usually uses more understated language.
Most climate ministers have not yet arrived at the 11-day talks but Senator Wong came early to help the Danes, who are running the conference. It is expected she will play a significant role.
Countries are supposed to agree on a new deal to tackle global warming at the summit but a bitter split has formed between rich and poor countries, threatening to derail the process.
…
-Scientist ‘Pressured’ to Defend Climate Research.
Britain’s Met Office has embarked on an urgent exercise to bolster the reputation of climate-change science after the furor over leaked e-mails, referred to as “Climate-gate.”
More than 1,700 scientists have agreed to sign a statement defending the “professional integrity” of global warming research. They were responding to a round-robin request from the Met Office, which has spent four days collecting signatures. The initiative is a sign of how worried it is that e-mails stolen from the University of East Anglia are fueling skepticism about man-made global warming at a critical moment in talks on carbon emissions.
One scientist said that he felt under pressure to sign the circular or risk losing work. The Met Office admitted that many of the signatories did not work on climate change.
John Hirst, the Met Office chief executive, and Julia Slingo, its chief scientist, wrote to 70 colleagues on Sunday asking them to sign “to defend our profession against this unprecedented attack to discredit us and the science of climate change.” They asked them to forward the petition to colleagues to generate support “for a simple statement that we … have the utmost confidence in the science base that underpins the evidence for global warming.”
Met Office reports on temperature changes draw on the work of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit, from which the e-mails were hacked. Phil Jones, unit director, has agreed to stand down while an investigation takes place into claims that he manipulated data to exaggerate the warming trend and tried to block publication of alternative views.
One scientist told The Times of London he felt pressure to sign. “The Met Office is a major employer of scientists and has long had a policy of only appointing and working with those who subscribe to their views on man-made global warming,” he said.
Professor Slingo denied that the Met Office had put anyone under pressure. “The response has been absolutely spontaneous. As a scientist you sign things you agree with, not because you are worried about what the Met Office might think of you,” she said.
*When all major world leaders openly call for global government.
In doing an exhaustive review of this years NWO type comments from world ‘leaders’, that I had missed, the list is overwhelming! With Copenhagen and everything else going on, this is an important backdrop.
A reverse chronology:
November 2009 (UN): Copenhagen Treaty leaked, exposes global government blueprint.
Nov. 19, 2009 (EU): New EU president announces global governance.
Nov. 9, 2009 (WTO): WTO chief hails “new architecture of global governance”
Oct. 25, 2009 (UN): UN chief calls for ‘global governance structure’ to oversee greenhouse gasses
Oct. 5, 2009 (IMF): IMF seeks role as “global central bank”
Oct. 4, 2009 (World Bank): World Bank welcomes New Economic Order from the ashes of crisis
Sept. 24, 2009 (Austrailia): Rudd push for global power shift as PM praises China on climate
Sept. 20, 2009 (UN): UN plans ’shock therapy’ for world leaders on environment
Sept. 19, 2009 (Hillary Clinton): Clinton Sees Need For ‘Global Architecture Of Cooperation’
Sept. 9, 2009 (UN): United Nations conference calls for new global currency
Sept. 1, 2009 (UN): UN suggests “global tax” to deal with climate change
Aug. 11, 2009 (UN): “We must seal the deal in Copenhagen for the future of humanity”
July 21, 2009 (Obama’s Science Czar): Formulate a ‘world planetary regime’ to manage the earths resources
Note: He said this a long time ago, but the revelation came out about this time.
July 12, 2009 (Egypt): Egypt calls for establishing new world order to overcome crises
July 10, 2009 (Russia):
July 10, 2009 (Canada): Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper: “There Is Going To Have To Be Global Governance”
July 9, 2009 (the Pope): Pope calls for a New World Order, “with teeth”
July 7, 2009:
April 10, 2009 (Russia & Iraq):
Russia, Iraq call for fair new world order
April 3, 2009 (UK-EU): British military preparing to ‘police the world’ under EU flag
April 2, 2009 (UK):
March 26, 2009 (UN): UN panel touts new global currency reserve system
March 25, 2009 (China): China Calls For Global Currency
March 25, 2009 (US):
March 25, 2009 (Brazil): Brazil proposes South American police force
March 2, 2009 (the ‘Orient’): Asean leaders call for EU-style union
March 1, 2009 (UK-US): Brown seeks ‘Global New Deal’ with Obama
Feb. 19, 2009 (UN-US): UN Security Council Expansion Gets New Boost From Obama
Jan. 30, 2009 (Germany): Merkel calls for a “Global Economic Charter” and a UN Economic Council
Jan. 12, 2009 (US): Kissenger: The chance for a new world order
Jan. 8, 2009 (France, Germany, UK): Sarkozy, Merkel, Blair call for a “New World Capitalism”
Jan. 5, 2009 (UK-US): Blair calls on Obama to use his presidency to unify the world
2008 In Review:
Dec. 20, 2008 (Iraq): Iraq plans EU-style Middle East union
Nov. 14, 2008 G20): G-20: Shaping a new world order
Nov. 10, 2008 (UK): Gordon Brown calls for new world order to beat recession
Nov. 6, 2008 (Lord Rothschild): Baron David de Rothschild sees a New World Order in global banking governance
Oct. 22, 2008 (UN): UN announces green ‘New Deal’ plan to rescue world economies
Oct. 21, 2008 (EU): Europe wants new global financial order
Oct. 17, 2008 (Canada-EU): Canada, EU working towards ‘historic’ economic integration
Oct. 17, 2008 (South America): South American nations to establish integrated parliament
Oct. 16, 2008 (Russia-EU): Berlusconi calls for Russia to join the EU
August 8, 2008 (US-EU): EU and US to set up Euro-Atlantic police force
July 24, 2008 (US):
July 13, 2008 (Mediterranian-EU): Mediterranean, EU nations to boost ties with grand new union
June 26, 2008 (EU): EU Constitution author says referendums can be ignored
June 13, 2008 (Asia): Presidential candidate John McCain backs Asia union
June 11 2008 (Russia-EU): Russian president Medvedev eyes New European Order
June 7, 2008 (EU): France is plotting to create a Euro Army
June 9, 2008: The Official 2008 Bilderberg Participant List
June 6, 2008 (Asia-Austrailia-US):Australia Proposes Asia-Pacific Union, United States Included
May 28, 2008 (North America): ‘North American Parliament’ under way
Jan. 21, 2008 (UN-UK): UN transformation proposed to create ‘New World Order’
2007 In Review:
Dec. 5, 2007: Australian Prime Minister unveils grand plan to unite world under banner of climate change
Nov. 15, 2007 (UK): EU superstate “should expand beyond Europe” into Russia, Africa and the Middle East
Nov. 14, 2007 (UK):
Prime Minister Gordon Brown wants the New World Order
Reported Nov. 12, 2007:
Giuliani Gave David Rockefeller U.N. Award
Nov. 6, 2007 (Russia-China): China, Russia pledge to step up closer partnership
Nov. 4, 2007: Communist world converges in Belarus to revive Marxism
Nov. 1, 2007 (UN): United Nations plans unprecedented expansion of police missions worldwide
Oct. 9, 2007 (North America):
Sept. 27, 2007 (US): Condoleezza Rice urges UN climate change consensus
Sept. 25, 2007 (France): Sarkozy calls for UN-led ‘new world order’
Sept. 25, 2007 (US): Arnie and Al push for climate action at UN
Sept. 19, 2007 (US): Giuliani says NATO should admit Israel, Japan, India and Singapore
Sept. 6, 2007 (North America): North American Union driver’s license created
Aug. 18, 2007: Bilderberg Pushes American Superstate
washingtontimes.com…
Aug. 18, 2007 (Russia-China): Sino-Russian Coalition flexes military muscle
August 18, 2007 (APEC): China to install sensors along NAFTA highway
July 27, 2007 (US-UN): Schwarzenegger invited to UN meeting on global warming
July 25, 2007 (North America): US Army Used To Crackdown On North American Union Protesters in Canada
July 17, 2007 (US-EU): 14 European states assisted CIA to establish secret jails
July 12, 2007 (EU): EU Chief Hails European ‘Empire’
July 3, 2007 (NAU): Oklahoma City Mayor Calls for North American Union
June 17, 2007 (Italy): Italian head of state told a news conference in Siena last week that “those who are anti EU are terrorists”.
June 13, 2007 (Brazil-India): Brazil and India shaping a new global economic and political order
May 17, 2007 (UK):
March 12, 2007 (UK): Future British Prime Minister Demands ‘New World Order’ Out of Climate Change Chaos
Jan. 13, 2007 (Asia): ASEAN nations agree to form Asian Union bloc
Jan. 2, 2007 (EU): EU expands to 27 countries
Jan. 1, 2007: Global super-union within a decade, says Amicus chief
-EPA declares CO2 (your breath) a “pollutant”.
http://world.globaltimes.cn/americas/2009-12/490477.html
The US government plans to start regulating carbon dioxide as a dangerous pollutant, sidestepping a divided Congress to give momentum to global climate summit in Copenhagen.
The decision paves the way for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to issue standards on how much carbon dioxide US factories, buildings and cars can emit, even without legislation in Congress.
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson signed orders declaring that six greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, are to blame for global warming, as pollutants subject to government regulation.
The EPA “is now authorized and obligated to make reasonable efforts to reduce greenhouse pollutants,” Jackson said at a news conference.
It gives US President Barack Obama, who heads to the 192-nation summit in Copenhagen next week, powerful new leverage to meet US pledges on emission cuts even if his critics in Congress derail legislation.
Yang Ailun, climate and energy manager for Greenpeace China, told the Global Times that the release of these research findings might clear the biggest obstacle concerning greenhouse-gas reduction in the US – as Obama was previously thought not to be able to do anything without the approval of Congress.
“Most of the participants in the UN climate talks take it as a positive signal,” said Yang, who is in Copenhagen. “But they are also waiting for real action from Obama after the floor is open to bypass Congress.”
John Hickenlooper, the mayor of Denver, who is attending the summit, didn’t think it was a coincidence for the EPA announcement to come out at this moment.
“It’s a way of the president (Obama) to demonstrate he takes climate change very seriously. If the Congress is going to slow things down, maybe forever, he’s not going to wait for it,” Hickenlooper told the Global Times.
However, the move has already faced fierce resistance from business leaders and many lawmakers of the rival Republican Party.
The US Chamber of Commerce, the nation’s top business lobby, feared that businesses would be subject to a host of new regulations at a time of economic uncertainty, AFP reported.
Key Republicans have also pointed to recent leaked e-mails from prominent climate scientists that they say call into question the basis behind action on global warming.
“It is unconscionable that unelected bureaucrats at the EPA have declared carbon dioxide a public danger despite a lack of scientific evidence to support their ruling,” Texas Governor Rick Perry said, according to AFP.
-Obama threatens Congress, EPA ‘Command-and-Control’ Regulation Over Emissions.
Faux:
The Obama administration is warning Congress that if it doesn’t move to regulate greenhouse gases, the Environmental Protection Agency will take a “command-and-control” role over the process in a way that could hurt business.
The warning, from a top White House economic official who spoke Tuesday on condition of anonymity, came on the eve of EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson’s address to the international conference on climate change in Copenhagen, Denmark.
Jackson, however, tried to strike a tone of cooperation in her address Wednesday, explaining that the EPA’s new powers to regulate greenhouse gases will be used to complement legislation pending in Congress, not replace it.
“This is not an ‘either-or’ moment. It’s a ‘both-and’ moment,” she said.
But while administration officials have long said they prefer Congress take action on climate change, the economic official who spoke with reporters Tuesday night made clear that the EPA will not wait and is prepared to act on its own.
And it won’t be pretty.
“If you don’t pass this legislation, then … the EPA is going to have to regulate in this area,” the official said. “And it is not going to be able to regulate on a market-based way, so it’s going to have to regulate in a command-and-control way, which will probably generate even more uncertainty.”
Climate change legislation that passed the House is stuck in the Senate, but the EPA finding Monday was seen as a boost to the U.S. delegation in Denmark trying to convince other countries that Washington is capable of taking action to follow through with any global commitments.
The economic official explained that congressional action could be better for the economy, since it would provide “compensation” for higher energy prices, especially for small businesses dealing with those higher energy costs. Otherwise, the official warned that the kind of “uncertainty” generated by unilateral EPA action would be a huge “deterrent to investment,” in an economy already desperate for jobs.
“So, passing the right kind of legislation with the right kind of compensations seems to us to be the best way to reduce uncertainty and actually to encourage investment,” the official said.
Republicans fear that the EPA will ultimately end up stepping in to regulate emissions — though many oppose the congressional legislation as well. They had urged Jackson to withdraw the finding in light of leaked e-mails from a British research center that appeared to show scientists discussing the manipulation of climate data.
Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., ranking Republican on the House Select Committee for Energy Independence and Global Warming, said Tuesday he is going to attend the Copenhagen conference to inform world leaders that despite any promises made by President Obama, no new laws will be passed in the United States until the “scientific fascism” ends.
“I call it ’scientific fascism,’” Sensenbrenner said during a press conference with fellow climate change skeptics. Sensenbrenner said, “The U.N. should throw a red flag” on scientists who support global warming to the exclusion of dissent.
Administration officials, though, said the e-mails do not change the debate.
Former Vice President Al Gore, a leader in the movement on man-caused climate change, told CNN on Wednesday that the e-mails in questions were 10 years old and taken “out of context.”
IIBFilms: “Climategate Explained by JFK & Eisenhower”
FOIA
Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re (IPCC)? Keith will do likewise. Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same?
1228330629
826209667
; plot past 1960 because these will be artificially adjusted to look closer to
; the real temperatures.
; the decline
; the decline
; version has already been artificially adjusted to reproduce the largest
; scales of observed temperature over recent decades
; since they won’t be used due to the decline/correction problem.
; plot past 1960 because these will be artificially adjusted to look closer to
; the real temperatures.
; artificially removed (i.e. corrected) the decline in this calibrated
; data set.
; Apply a VERY ARTIFICAL correction for decline!!
;
yrloc=[1400,findgen(19)*5.+1904]
valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,-0.1,0.3,0.8, 1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ; fudge factor
if n_elements(yrloc) ne n_elements(valadj) then message,’Oooops!’
;
yearlyadj=interpol(valadj,yrloc,timey)
-The Bill of Non-Rights.
EDIT: I decided to edit some of this. Originally I decided to post it as written by the author where I found it, but there’s some things in it that annoy me in the original piece.
“We the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior, and secure the blessings of debt free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great-grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines….
We hold these truths to be self evident: that a whole lot of people are so confused by the Bill of Rights that they require a Bill of NON-Rights.”
ARTICLE I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV, or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.
ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone — not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc.; but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.
ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful, do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.
ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes.
ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we’re just not interested in public health care.
ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don’t be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.
ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don’t be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won’t have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.
ARTICLE VIII: You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.
ARTICLE IX: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness, which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.
ARTICLE X: This is an English speaking country. We don’t care where you are from, English is our language. Learn it or go back to wherever you came from! (lastly….) NOW..
ARTICLE XI: You do not have the right to change our country’s history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in one true God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all; with no fear of persecution.
ARTICLE XII: You do not have the right to harm the rights or property of others. The freedom to exploit others freedoms is uncivilized. Therefore, you don’t have the right to the work of others.
About
IGNORANCE IS FUTILE!
By “Ignorance Isn’t Bliss” (IIB)
THE BLEEDING EDGE OF THE MERGER OF TYRANNY AND TECHNOLOGY.
Subscribe to daily email updates.
IIB Films Lab Releases:
Eisenhower & JFK expose the undeclared war, by the ‘communist’ ‘technological elite’, while the others admit that the agenda is a UN ‘New World Order’. Obama, along with a few other key world heads of state (Canada, Russia, EU) are also included in the end-climax segment confirming the ‘ideals’ of their related contemporaries.
Final Version on ATS
Draft Version on Youtube
Climategate References
“iXo A.I. Control Grid”
My exclusive film constructed entirely of quotes from government / military websites and documents. Presented as if from the war machine’s own ‘minds eye’. This video goes where no other film in existence does with the subject of the US military’s dream for engineered super-soldiers and a god-like cognitive self-aware artificial intelligence global computer grid. The animations and graphical images are also directly from military sources.
Research Guide: LINK
Google Video: LINK
“Road to Terrorstorm”
A project I started in 2006, got carried away with, then finally scaled it back down to the original ’simple’ concept and finished recently. A condensed compilation film of several older Infowars films mainly focusing on Police State & False Flag type tyranny pre-9/11. See them all in one package.
About Page: LINK
Google Video: LINK
“Neocon Wars”
An entertaining Ron Paul Star Wars parody that features intense style debate on US foreign policy which debunks the occupation of Iraq, and the “War on Terror” in particular.
Google Video: LINK
“They Want Your Soul”
My first short video, from 2006. The first film in history to ever discuss US military (DARPA) “AI” (AGI) ambitions. Begins with a cynical look at “American” culture, with a touch of conspiracy and concludes with potential religious implications.
About Page / Research Guide: LINK
Google Video: LINK
Key Exclusives:
Comms:
Myspace
Youtube
Email: ignoranceisntbliss AT hotmail.com
Wired: Danger Room- Secrecy News
- Infowars
- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
- Dandelion Salad
- Why oppose the Vancouver 2010 Olympics?
- Dennis Kucinich: Don’t Subsidize Childhood Obesity – Revoke tax breaks for junk food advertising
- Chris Hedges: Democrats and Republicans watched over corporate rape of US
- Time to ban this health threat: Leaf blowers By Shepherd Bliss
- Michael Hudson: Obama’s Republican Class War Presidency
- Global Research
- The Memory Hole
- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
- Empire Burlesque
- The Carp of Truth: Jack Straw, Colin Powell and the Smoking Guns of War Crime
- Annals of Liberation: Obama Surge Driving Thousands From Their Homes
- No Direction Home: Pakistan and the Imperial Principle
- Budgets, War and Blind Ambition: The Limited Minds of the American Elite
- Obama's Wild Weekend: A Worldwide Surge in Warmongering
- Climate Audit
- Defense Tech
- Fact Check
- Advertising Lab
