Feb
06

Australia to Ban Travelers who Refuse Naked Body Scanners

from: Activist Post

Australia continues trying to outdo America’s march toward authoritarian control over its population.  The two countries seem to be trading salvos to see which can eradicate the rights of their citizens faster.

Australia appears to have taken the lead with their latest proposal to ban travelers who refuse being subjected to the full body microwave radiation scans that have proven to be a horrible invasion of privacy, as well as a legitimate threat to one’s health.

The list of assurances from the Australian government via its Orwellian-named Privacy Commission echo similar false guarantees issued by America’s TSA: passengers will not appear nude, and the images will be discarded.  However, there is no mention of the cumulative negative health effects(particularly to children) of receiving a mandatory mega dose of radiation each time one exercises their right to travel by plane.

Australia’s transport minister, Anthony Albanese, cites the unsubstantiated claim that,

…the public understands that we live in a world where there are threats to our security and experience shows they want the peace of mind that comes with knowing government is doing all it can.

Adding for good measure that,

For this technology to work effectively, obviously there can’t be an option to refuse screening.

Obviously.

What is more obvious is the blatant disregard of a public which wants very little to do with this technology.  The website Airport Body Scanner Truth, reveals the flawed polling techniques that have been used and manipulated by the corporate media and the tyrannical powers they serve.

In one CBS poll that revealed 81% of people approved of full body X-ray machines, their simplistic methods demonstrated that:

  1. They asked a random sampling of Americans — not American flyers, or American frequent flyers.
  2. They did not follow up with questions regarding the likeliness of approval if the subject knew that the machines were potentially harmful, that graphic images were being stored, that they violated child pornography laws, that security experts believe they are ineffective and wasteful, that you may be subjected to sexual molestation even after using the machines, or that pilots and flight attendants recommend not to use them. (Source)

The devil is in the details once again.

When people are properly informed, instead of being subjected to fear mongering and hyperbole of an exceedingly rare event like a terror threat to airline travel, the results are far different, as seen in an Infowars.com poll, which revealed:

“…that over 90 percent of respondents will not use commercial airlines if airports continue to subject travelers to deadly radiation emitting naked body scanners. 92% said they would avoid airports while 8% said use of the devices would not stop them from flying.”  (Source)

These results from an educated alternative media source with a global readership (and nearly 14 times the number of respondents as the CBS poll cited above, incidentally) is evidence that people the world over can see through the scam of the decade known as the global war on terror if they are permitted to properly evaluate available information that can lead them to a more rational conclusion.

Australia’s attempt at a “no scan, no fly” policy is surely to be cited as a precedent for global travel, including the United States, as the journey from “opt-out” to “mandatory” continues unimpeded.

We must continue to expose the corrupt authoritarians that are forcing this dangerous technology upon us even as we make our voices heard that we see through their lies and distortions.  We must also reach out to airport workers who are being affected the most by these X-ray machines.

The corporatist political structure will never stop without mass outrage, mass non-cooperation, and a mass stand-down by those on the front lines of the war against human dignity and human rights.

Share and Inform:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • MisterWong.DE
  • MySpace
  • Twitter
  • Add to favorites
  • Live
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Sep
16

Nobel Prize Winning Physicist Takes A Stand

The global warming theory left him out in the cold.

Dr. Ivar Giaever, a former professor with Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and the 1973 winner of the Nobel Prize in physics, abruptly announced his resignation Tuesday, Sept. 13, from the premier physics society in disgust over its officially stated policy that “global warming is occurring.”

The official position of the American Physical Society (APS) supports the theory that man’s actions have inexorably led to the warming of the planet, through increased emissions of carbon dioxide.
Giaever does not agree — and put it bluntly and succinctly in the subject line of his email, reprinted at Climate Depot, a website devoted to debunking the theory of man-made climate change.

“I resign from APS,” Giaever wrote.

Giaever was cooled to the statement on warming theory by a line claiming that “the evidence is incontrovertible.”
“In the APS it is ok to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible?” he wrote in an email to Kate Kirby, executive officer of the physics society.

“The claim … is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degree Kelvin in about 150 years, which (if true) means to me is that the temperature has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this ‘warming’ period,” his email message said.
A spokesman for the APS confirmed to FoxNews.com that the Nobel Laureate had declined to pay his annual dues in the society and had resigned. He also noted that the society had no plans to revise its statement.

The use of the word “incontrovertible” had already caused debate within the group, so much so that an addendum was added to the statement discussing its use in April, 2010.
“The word ‘incontrovertible’ … is rarely used in science because by its very nature, science questions prevailing ideas. The observational data indicate a global surface warming of 0.74 °C (+/- 0.18 °C) since the late 19th century.”

Giaever earned his Nobel for his experimental discoveries regarding tunneling phenomena in superconductors. He has since become a vocal dissenter from the alleged “consensus” regarding man-made climate fears, Climate Depot reported, noting that he was one of more than 100 co-signers of a 2009 letter to President Obama critical of his position on climate change.

Public perception of climate change has steadily fallen since late 2009. A Rasmussen Reports public opinion poll from August noted that 57 percent of adults believe there is significant disagreement within the scientific community on global warming, up five points from late 2009.

The same study showed that 69 percent of those polled believe it’s at least somewhat likely that some scientists have falsified research data in order to support their own theories and beliefs. Just 6 percent felt confident enough to report that such falsification was “not at all likely.”

Share and Inform:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • MisterWong.DE
  • MySpace
  • Twitter
  • Add to favorites
  • Live
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Aug
30

Carbon Tax and the Role of Government

Amidst a sea of debate surrounding the Australian government’s proposed Carbon Tax, it seems that a central key issue is being overlooked. The issue is not one that has ever been a focal point of public discourse in Australia since at least the post-war period, and arguably as far back as the early days of Federation. Namely, what ought to be the defined role of government in Australia, and to what extent should its reach be limited?

The Gillard Labor government is the first minority government in Australia since the second World War. It holds power in the lower house only with the backing of two independent MP’s. At time of writing, this government is now looking to introduce a major new tax with far-reaching implications.

The significance of this move and the root of subsequent controversy, public rallies and demonstrations can be surmised in four historically anomalous points:

1) The proposed Carbon Tax is an initiative of a small country with relatively minimal contributions to global carbon emissions, which is not being followed by any major developed nation or any of Australia’s neighbours in the Pacific region.

2) The tax does not have popular public support behind it.

3) The governing party promised during the previous election, prior to forming a minority government, that it would not introduce this tax.

4) The proposed tax has a very clear prescriptive or ‘paternalistic’ nature, designed to disincentivise certain economic activities that run contrary to ideological aims.

The last major tax imposed on Australia, the Goods and Services Tax (GST), was preceded by a similar assurance that it would “never ever” be introduced. However, when the Prime Minister of the day made an about-face on that position, he did subsequently take it to the following election as part of his platform and was narrowly re-elected, providing a mandate of sorts. The significant difference this time around is that Australia has a minority coalition government attempting to introduce major legislation in its first term of office, which it was elected under the assurance that it would not do.

The public demonstrations that have followed included a massive truck convoy that descended upon the nation’s capital, Canberra, calling for a new election. Legal experts soon responded that such a move would not be possible under the country’s constitution. It would seem that there is in fact little recourse that the Australian public can take, politically, under such circumstances.

In Australia, the people hold absolute power over their government for one day approximately once every four years, and extremely little during the interim. Could the Carbon Tax draw the public’s attention to this matter, and finally call into question the size and scope of government in Australia?

Unlike in the United States and certain other democracies, where the Constitution clearly delineates the rights of the people from the encroachment of their government, Australia, from the time that it emerged from a collection of British colonies to become a Federated nation in its own right, has never had a thorough public discussion as to where the rights and opinions of the people end and the legislative power of government begins. Unless it should require more drastic political circumstances before confronting this question, perhaps now is the time.



This article was written for http://www.WongIsWrong.com, a site dedicated to providing a voice for the majority of Australians opposed to the more extreme elements of their minority government’s tax agenda.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/6514435
Share and Inform:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • MisterWong.DE
  • MySpace
  • Twitter
  • Add to favorites
  • Live
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Aug
29

Liars Seek To Silence Their Critics

Veteran blogger Texas Arcane summarises the irrationality of Anthropogenic Global Warming theory:

Gore Concedes Man-Bear-Pig Cannot Withstand Rational Inquiry

That’s because “Man-Bear-Pig” doesn’t exist. If he existed, Al Gore would not have to suggest we use social engineering in order to force people to stop denying his existence.

Globowarmthinkery. Doesn’t. Make. Any. Sense. Whatsoever. Not a single tenet of this religion can stand up to examination. The corollaries (like “carbon emissions”) are even more tenuous as assertions built upon errors.

Water vapor is what traps the earth’s heat, not CO2. CO2 doesn’t affect the ability of water vapor to trap heat in any way. CO2 in fact, has no effect on global temperatures whatsoever, rather the reverse. CO2 is something that changes in response to climate, not the other way around. Ice cores show that right before a new Ice Age, there is always a heat spike that results in minutely increased CO2 for a very short period of less than ten years.

Share and Inform:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • MisterWong.DE
  • MySpace
  • Twitter
  • Add to favorites
  • Live
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Aug
22

How Much Global CO2 Emissions Will Australia’s Carbon Tax Reduce?

From ClimateChangeDenier.com.au:

What percentage of global emissions will Australia’s carbon tax reduce?

Labor/Greens alliance Prime Minister Julia Gillard does not like to answer this question, because it is such a small number.

The Carbon Tax aims to reduce Australia’s CO2 output by 160 million tonnes. World CO2 emissions in 2008 were 29,888,121 million tonnes.

So that makes Australia’s CO2 reduction 0.00053533% . That is such a small number its hard to comprehend. Think of it as approximately 5/10,000 or 5 divided by ten thousand percent.

However that is based on 2008 CO2 output, and the 160 million tonnes saving is aimed to happen in 2020. What is the percentage saving of the worlds CO2 output by Australia in 2020?

Well its predicted that CO2 output will rise by 1.2% per annum. That means in 2020 world carbon dioxide emissions will be 34,487,742 million tonnes.

So Australia’s carbon tax saves 0.000463933% of the worlds CO2 output. It’s even less than 5 divided by ten thousand percent.

Billions of dollars of taxes on Australia people and businesses. Extra federal government agencies with thousands more bureaucrats. Businesses closing and businesses moving off-shore.

All to save 0.000463933% of the world’s CO2 output.

Share and Inform:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • MisterWong.DE
  • MySpace
  • Twitter
  • Add to favorites
  • Live
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Aug
17

Cash Offered to Prove CO2 Effect

From the Gladstone Oserver:

BELIEVERS in the science of global warming, you now have the chance to spread the word and at the same time make yourself $10,000 richer.

This has to be really simple, as almost everyone from PM Julia Gillard down, including much of our mainstream media, has been telling us it’s a fact – the science says so, anybody who thinks otherwise is a fringe-dwelling extremist, a denier who won’t accept the evidence and doesn’t deserve to be heard.

According to Ms Gillard, climate change is happening and the time is right for a carbon tax.

This could cost Australian families $863 a year, according to a Treasury forecast, but then you might still end up making a profit.

It’s pretty much a moving target, so it depends who you believe and what they are saying this week.

The Treasury forecast was based on a moderate carbon price of $30 a tonne, but chief climate advisor Professor Ross Garnaut (an economist, not a climate scientist, certainly not a rocket scientist) seems to think we will get it all back at the end of a merry money-go-round where the “big polluters” pay, but you won’t; or not a lot, providing you are a low to middle-income earner.

The PM originally said it won’t lighten your wallet because all the tax proceeds would be paid back in compensation, but now Climate Change Minister Greg Combet says we will only get about half back, yet millions of us will actually end up with more in our wallet.

The other half will go to compensating the big polluters but ours will be permanent, theirs will be “transitional”, which probably means at least until the next election.

They haven’t quite figured how the compensation will apply equitably to pensioners, the unemployed, self-funded retirees or mature-aged workers who now pay little or no tax, but we can trust them to sort all that out by about July. And they are not saying how many will still be worse off.

Treasurer Wayne Swan initially claimed the new tax wouldn’t really be a tax because it won’t show on your payslip. But when electricity generators, oil companies, transport operators, food suppliers and major manufacturers pass on their costs, try telling that to your mortgage holder or landlord while you wait for your compensation package.

If all this sounds too confusing, that’s when the lazy $10k prize on offer could really come in handy. All you have to do is come up with empirical evidence that “increasing atmospheric CO2 from fossil fuel burning drives global warming”.

Victorian locomotive engineman Peter Laux has pledged the prize in a statutory declaration witnessed by a police officer, and the challenge is open for 20 years .

Ms Gillard says the overwhelming evidence of “climate change” (I think she means the human-caused variety) is “accepted by every reputable climate scientist in the world”, so just hop on to Google and track that evidence down.

But wait, there are just a few apparent “disreputables” who don’t accept it, so perhaps you should check them out too: international scientists Prof. Richard Lindzen, Henrik Svensmark, John Christy, Dr Ferenc Miskolczi, Dr Miklos Zagoni, our own Prof. Bob Carter, Ian Plimer, Dr David Evans and many others including more than 30,000 scientists who signed a petition in the US stating that CO2 was not causing dangerous climate change.

Prof. Carter and Dr Evans have written numerous articles on the topic, including one in Quadrant Online co-authored by Alan Moran, an economist specialising in energy policy. They debunk the government’s case for human-induced climate change and a carbon tax, point by point.

But don’t be put off, surely with the overwhelming scientific consensus we keep hearing about, the truth really is out there? Peter Laux just wants you to find it.

He describes himself as a “militant trade unionist” – a member of the oldest rail union in the world, the Locomotive Division of the Rail Tram and Bus Union (RTBU), and vice-president of his local branch. He says:

“I have watched over the past couple of decades as the so-called left side of politics has been easily duped, co-opted and corralled by the Northern Hemisphere elite over the issue of the Greenhouse Effect or Global warming or Climate Change or Climate Chaos or whatever new slick PR advertising spin they need to use today.”

AGW proponents constantly claim “overwhelming evidence” and yet incredibly never show any…

“For those who despise the source of their prosperous lives and wish to burden those who can least afford it with carbon taxes and cripple the development in the Third World, I offer you $10,000 (Australian Dollars) for a conclusive argument based on empirical facts that increasing atmospheric CO2 from fossil fuel burning drives global climate warming.”

That won’t be as easy as we first thought, but are you up to the challenge?

Share and Inform:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • MisterWong.DE
  • MySpace
  • Twitter
  • Add to favorites
  • Live
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Jul
12

Global Warming: The Myth


It is astonishing that so few journalists have challenged the barrage of global warming stories. It may well now be an impossibility to convince anyone that the earth getting warmer has nothing to do with man’s burning of fossil fuels. Lord Christopher Monckton of Brenchly is a lone voice who has researched thoroughly the global warming theory and has found that we’ve all been fed lie upon lie.

Research by scientists not in the employ of the UN or NASA take a completely different view from the official line. Yes, the earth is warming up (at the moment), but so is Mars and Jupiter. In fact, the sun is burning brighter now than at any time during the past 1000 years. The correct information about our earth’s climate comes from a most revered organisation; no less than Germany’s Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research. This Institute is well able to uncover a global warming myth if there is one.

Sun spots are the main culprit, says the MPI, not man burning fuel. These sun spots, however, are vanishing rapidly and will inevitably cause the earth to cool. The official ‘Global Warming’ line seems to have ignored this altogether. There was a little ice age some 400 years ago where a similar pattern occurred. The Thames froze over. Already – right now – China has had its coldest winter for 100 years and even in USA’s Wisconsin, the State has had more snow cover since records began there. This is not apocryphal stuff. All four major global temperature tracking facilities [NASA, GISS, UAH, RSS] show that the earth’s temperature has dropped dramatically.

Recent satellite observations from the Arctic indicate that spring ice melting is beginning at a lower rate than normal in 2009. According to the National Snow and Ice Data Centre, the area of ice-covered ocean has decreased only about 750,000 km2 from its peak value at the end of February, compared to a normal decline of 1.1 million km2 by late April. If this trend continues, the annual ice melt in 2009 may be less than in recent years, and the late summer Arctic ice extent may rebound from its well-publicised downtrend.

The global warming myth has even been exposed by NASA’s own policing system, claiming, astonishingly that NASA’s findings are being tampered with politically. A bold statement, indeed, when this watchdog is pointing a finger at its own politically appointed press officers.

Water vapour is the single most potent greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, trapping more heat than carbon dioxide and methane put together; the greenhouse effect is not a bad thing. Estimates of the impact of water vapour on global warming vary widely from a minimum of 60% of all greenhouse effect to 98% of all greenhouse effect, but even at the minimum of 60%, that leaves 40% of greenhouse effect to be shared by all other chemicals combined, including carbon dioxide and methane (which has ten times the greenhouse capacity pound for pound as carbon dioxide). But the myth marches blindly on.

Put simply, Michael Mann’s ‘hockey stick’ graph which has been embraced with everlasting glue by the politicians, has been proven wrong by every single free-thinking scientist. This graph shows a link between carbon dioxide emission and global warming. But the truth is, that the warming trend of the earth ignores completely carbon dioxide emissions. As man’s combustion accelerates, the atmosphere’s gentle upward trend carries on steadily. And the upward trend started way before man had designed a car, far less, driven one.

Nobody knows for sure what the future holds for our earth. But one thing is certain. God’s planet is not the fragile entity it’s been made out to be. Lord Monckton has challenged Al Gore to a public debate so that the 30 plus lies in Mr. Gore’s film ‘ An Inconvenient Truth’ can be exposed. Mr. Gore has consistently turned down such a debate. The inconvenient truth for our politicians is the fact that in the last 1000 years the planet has gone from very warm to very cold without any help from humans.

Arthur C. Throovest is regarded as one of England’s eccentrics with a successful history in the avant garde. He is a prolific writer of original songs, jingles and adverts for commercial radio and has written for dozens of diverse publications from Plastics and Rubber Weekly to Homes and Gardens. Throovest Limited Edition prints have increased in value by more than 1000% in 4 years. To learn more about Global Warming go to http://www.globalwarmingsite.biz

Share and Inform:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • MisterWong.DE
  • MySpace
  • Twitter
  • Add to favorites
  • Live
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Jul
12

The Great Scam – Global Warming


Never a day passes without another scare story about the imminent extinction of some form of wildlife due to global warming. First it was polar bears, now it is penguins. We have all seen the films and photographs depicting the plight of wildlife and potentially mankind. How convenient that it was never mentioned that most of the films and pictures were taken in the summertime when the ice melts naturally. The films of glaciers crashing into the sea is another scare story. I remember seeing films of this sort many years ago.It is a natural phenomena that the moving glaciers meet the unfrozen sea and huge pieces fall off because the sea melts the glacier from below the surface.

In the UK the government decreed that Al Gore’s highly political and wildly inaccurate film should be shown in every school without any genuine proof against climate change. A perfect method of brainwashing our children into believing that it is happening and therefore pass the message on to their parents.

The world was warmer in the fifteenth century and what we are experiencing is a natural cycle. Yes CO2 emissions are higher now than several hundreds years ago but there is still no scientific evidence to prove that CO2 emissions are the cause. We are well aware that the rain forests absorb vast quantities of CO2 gas but they can’t keep absorbing it for ever. Like everything else you can get too much of a good thing and something has to give. It was discovered by a French scientist that the rain forests release vast quantities of CO2 when they have had their fill.I am totally against de-forestation and the best way to protect them is to pay off the farmers, give them enough to keep them and their villages in comfort.

Instead we are conned into paying more taxes for something that is not happening. Here in the UK we are the highest taxed nation in the western world, in particular road and fuel taxes. The government wants us out of our cars and into public transport but public transport is more expensive than using our cars, for example: If I take four people in my car on a 30 mile round trip it will cost me £3 or £4, but if I take the same amount of people on a bus for the same distance it will cost over £12. We all have to sit in traffic jams, even with the vast tax revenue the government fails to provide adequate road links to keep traffic moving. They are happy to see us burning gallons of fuel and going nowhere it means we have to fill up our fuel tanks more often. Now they want to build another air terminal at Heathrow which will double the amount of air traffic and get double green tax revenue from the passengers.

The latest scam is the carbon trading companies which are growing at a tremendous rate. I will bet my last penny that 95% of the revenue they receive goes on salaries and administration and the remaining 5% on planting trees or some other form of so called saving the planet.

To finalise, do you honestly believe that China, India and other developing nations give a damn about climate change. Their motto is to live for today and worry about tomorrow later and global warming is a myth.

original article by George Bain

http://www.thegrafter.com

Share and Inform:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • MisterWong.DE
  • MySpace
  • Twitter
  • Add to favorites
  • Live
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz