Category Archives: Agenda 2030
from Viv Forbes
AS THE LATEST U.N. climate summit begins in New York, a new, high-level global network of 500 prominent climate scientists and professionals has submitted a declaration that there is no “climate emergency”.
The group has sent a European Climate Declaration with a registered letter to António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations.
Professor Guus Berkhout of The Netherlands, who organized the Declaration, said: “So popular is the Declaration with scientists and researchers worldwide that signatories are flooding in not only from within Europe but also from other countries such as the United States and Canada, Australia and New Zealand.”
The group’s letter warns the U.N. that “the general-circulation models of climate on which international policy is at present founded are unfit for their purpose”.
The Declaration adds that the models, which have predicted far more warming than they should (see diagram), “are not remotely plausible as policy tools”, in that “they … exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases such as CO2” and “ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial”.
The “climate emergency” that never was: Global warming predicted by climate models (purple and red cursors) is three times warming expected on the basis of officially-estimated manmade influences on climate (orange cursor) and four times observed warming (green cursor).
The letter invites the Secretary-General to work with the global network to organize a constructive, high-level meeting between world-class scientists on both sides of the climate debate in early 2020.
For further information, please contact Professor Guus Berkhout (firstname.lastname@example.org), +31 651 214 737,
or contact any of the National Ambassador listed in the Declaration
Australian and US universities the new Commissariat…ideological policing by academia
by Alex Bruce
Dr. Michael Rectenwald was a professor at New York University and he jokingly describes himself as having been a lifelong Communist, “to the Left of the Bolsheviks” before he ran afoul of his wokester peers in academe.
His story is very similar to my own, in that he was basically a professor of cultural criticism, which was my major. The analyses consisted largely of Marxist Deconstructivism. He could have been my professor. Like me, he was a Leftist until very recently, when his slight deviation from the party line revealed the shocking, totalitarian impulses hiding behind a thin veneer of egalitarian rhetoric.
Like me, he’s now swinging from the rafters and shouting from the rooftops about the pox of Leftism and his Twitter posts look exactly like mine!
His bestselling book, ‘The Google Archipelago: The Digital Gulag and the Simulation of Freedom’ is about how Big Tech, influenced by Marxist and Postmodernist thought increasingly enables a toxic mix of censorship, surveillance, social engineering and ‘social justice’ policies that, in effect create a digital equivalent of the Soviet gulag.
It is this climate that enabled the unprecedented collaboration between Big Tech, with the mass media and the intelligence agencies to saturate the infosphere with their chosen narrative and to ban all others.
As he says here, “We have a soft Cultural Revolution going on in the United States and the West, in general. We need people to stand up to this Cultural Revolution and just speak back to these new Red Guards.
“We’re being surveilled upon, our opinions are being monitored and dissidents are being disappeared, just as they were during the Soviet Union. They’re being digitally erased or deleted…”
He joins The Epoch Times’ Jan Jekielek for what I feel may be the most important interview that I have covered in 9 years of publishing FKTV. I’ve transcribed some of the highlights below.
Dr. Michael Rectenwald: There’s this exclusive domination [on college campuses] of a particular ideological Leftism which is called “Social Justice”. It’s a misnomer, if you ask me but it’s a very rigid creed of identity politics and a kind of adherence to sort of inverse hierarchy, in order to debunk the so-called “oppressors” from the top and put them on the bottom. It is instituted at NYU and universities all across the country; 230 universities at least have instituted what they call “bias reporting” hotlines, in which students are encouraged to report the bias infractions of their professors or fellow students.
So – very much like Communist Soviet Union and Communist China – this kind of ideological policing that was going and that I found very disturbing and everybody was going along for the ride. The no-platforming of speakers, the way that the Left shut down any ideological diversity from appearing on campus at all; burning campuses down, like in Berkeley, when speakers were invited that they didn’t approve of.
Then, of course other things like trigger warnings on syllabi…it’s a slippery slope toward ideological conformity…For example, ‘Dante’s Inferno’ has been stricken from curricula because it has a depiction of Muhammad in one of the circles of Hell. This is one of the greatest books and one of the greatest poems in the Western canon and it’s a shame that the Western canon is being eradicated. Also, for example at the University of Pennsylvania, they took down from the [web] portal the picture of Shakespeare, because he’s a white male… a university in London struck all white philosophers from the philosophy curriculum…
I thought it was censorship. I thought it was ideological conformity being forced on professors and students, I thought it was a…narrowbanding of our intellectual capacities and as kind of an indoctrination of students, rather than teaching; rather than exposing students to diverse perspectives it was…funneling them into a particular perspective and that really disturbed me.
Jan Jekielek: Fascinating. How did the faculty respond to your complaints?
Dr. Michael Rectenwald: Well, I did an interview for a reporter for the Washington Square News, which is the student newspaper at NYU. Within two days of this interview appearing in their online and print edition, I was denounced by a committee calling themselves the “Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Group”, which I’ve since dubbed the “Conformity, Inequity and Exclusion Group” because they demand ideological conformity. They attempt to exclude anyone who doesn’t conform and you’re certainly not considered a peer, if you have views that differ from theirs and then I was put on an immediate paid leave of absence, as well.
So I was basically banished from the University for a semester and punished with this ideological condemnation by an official committee of the university.
Jan Jekielek: So you were basically an early recipient of Cancel Culture.
Dr. Michael Rectenwald: Very much so. Before Cancel Culture existed, I was a victim of Cancel Culture…
The things I want to make clear is that these the Big Digital is not some politically neutral set of principles or companies Big Digital consists of a bunch of left-leaning authoritarians and they’re doing so they have the same ideological character in a softer sense of course as the CCP.
Jan Jekielek: OK, so that that’s a big thing to say. You’re gonna you’re gonna have to offer some pretty solid evidence here.
Dr. Michael Rectenwald: There’s a ton of evidence that shows that the Google stacks their search results in a Left-leaning way. All this has been shown by Dr. Robert Epstein and it was exposed by Project Veritas. Google has a worldview that’s reflected both in their algorithms; their outward-facing algorithms and their internal policies. Their internal policies show that they favor almost all kinds of Leftists views about identity. They’re very, very strong in encouraging transgenderism, they’re very strong in discouraging anything like traditional ideas about gender, they also have extremely Left-leaning views about the political economy. They have monopolistic ambitions, I think and they also have state functions. They are – first of all Google was started by funding from the CIA – and that’s not to prove that they have a state function but they also keep they continue to cooperate with the state… Read the rest of this entry
Banks, Mossad, CIA, MI6, GCHQ, Obama, Clintons, Jeffery Epstein, Prince Andrew, ASIS, Alexander Downer and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation ad infinitum enmeshed in the dark world of kiddie traffickers. These grubs are terrified Trump will finish draining the swamp if he gets another term in office.
by Alex Bruce
Mark Anthony Taylor joins Sean from the SGT Report for an eye-opening report that may be the most important in the history of Sean’s channel. We learn the relationships between the ongoing coup against Trump, international intelligence agencies, Jeffrey Epstein’s blackmail ring, the Clinton Foundation, how all of the major bank CEOs are controlled and how this affects what projects do and don’t get financed and basically, how the whole world is controlled. It is head-spinning and amazing to see it all more clearly than ever.
Taylor has long been litigating against JPMorgan, Deutsche Bank and others for manipulating the bullion markets. In the process, he’s made some unexpected discoveries, including a secret document that he received from the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), which is the UK’s equivalent of the NSA.
The letter, which is on GCHQ letterhead dated November 17, 2016 was emailed to him by his friend, Caroline Stevens, who was the manager for the Vote Leave campaign while Boris Johnson was Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs. This letter was not just secret, it was classified as Top Secret STRAP3 SIGINT UK EYES ONLY, which Taylor says, “is the highest you can secure a document in the UK.”
He says, “This letter was sent from [then-GCHQ Director] Robert Hannigan to Boris Johnson…I believe that this letter was leaked by Boris Johnson, which is why Johnson has a good relationship with Donald Trump…
“As I will show later on, British Intelligence, the British government is basically split in two; between the people exposing the pedophiles – and the pedophiles.”
The GCHQ letter reads as follows:
- On 28 August 2016, GCHQ/CSO filed for permission to execute Project FULSOME at the request of the US President, seeking intelligence gathering into the Trump Organization and Donald J Trump for President, Inc., both located at 725 5th Avenue, New York, NY USA. Activities include foreign and US domestic intelligence signals collection, in regards to communications with Russian hostile actors.
- IOCCO approved FULSOME on 15 September 2016, allowing 90 days of initial SIGINT gathering, with the potential for renewal, should the situation allow. This memo’s purpose is to request a 90 renewal of FULSOME’s original charter, with further potential for renewal, thereafter.
- Since FULSOME’s start, a clear pattern of actionable leads have accrued. Both from the Trump campaign itself, from former MI5 agent Michael Steele, and from there (see fig. 1-7 in attachment).
- US National Security Advisor Rice has requested that we continue surveillance, during the transition period, as internal US intelligence is potentially compromised by the incoming Trump administration.
- For these reasons, we are requesting that FULSOME’s charter be renewed for another 90 days.
Robert Hannigan, Director, GCHQ”
Taylor notes, “This letter is sent from Hannigan to Johnson to petition to have Trump spied on at the behest of Obama and [then-US National Security Advisor Susan] Rice and the evidence is just this general reference to the Trump campaign.
“So, this is clear political bias. So that the man who wrote this, Robert Hannigan from his writing appears to be acting from instincts and what he wants to do is not start this FULSOME operation but extend it for 90 days. Now, within two months of this letter being sent, Robert Hannigan quits his job as the head of GCHQ. This letter was leaked. It’s possible that the leaking led to Robert Hannigan’s resignation.
“Robert Hannigan told Johnson that he was quitting his post because of family problems. The National Crime Agency, [who] I presume, was sick and tired of the security services disclosed that Hannigan had sent a letter of recommendation in the trial of father Edmund Higgins, who was distributing James Alefantis-style baby pornography…
“We know that GCHQ spies on the US and then gives the information to the CIA and that is to circumvent the laws in the US prohibiting spying on domestic soil. But if Hannigan is in charge of GCHQ and he’s allowing these baby pornographers to get away with it, in an active role, then he would be the man to filter out incriminating data from the Podesta and Ping Pong scandals before it hit the CIA databases.
“So, people like Hannigan are instrumental in covering up Pizzagate and as you say, he has associates from this 77th Brigade, who are who were running Wikipedia, who call Comet Ping Pong a ‘Right-wing debunked conspiracy theory.'”
Taylor also found that the same Wikipedia contributor who has added to the Comet Ping Pong page had also edited a Wikipedia entry on Lula 3D, a video game about child sex trafficking, or as Taylor says, “Simulations for people who want to know what what it would be like to be a child trafficker. And [the same contributor] is editing the Comet Ping Pong and Pizza page.” You can’t make this stuff up.
Taylor cites several serious pedophilia cases in the British government and intelligence agencies and how this has received very little press coverage. He and Sean then exchange examples of corporations leaning on the Mainstream Media to protect their business interests.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN, BLACKMAIL & CONTROL OF BIG BANK CEOs
The Times recently alleged that Jeffrey Epstein emails were sent to the Parliament’s Treasury Select Committee, which the Committee then proceeded to leak to the Daily Mail. The emails show that Epstein was blackmailing Parliament into putting former JPMorgan honcho, Jes Staley in charge of Barclays Bank, where he is now CEO.
In a related story, it was disclosed that JP Morgan’s CEO of Asset Management, Mary Callahan Erdoes knew that Epstein was depositing illicit money at JPMorgan; her auditors had been warning her about it but Staley had told her to overrule the auditors.
It turns out that Staley has been on Epstein’s island and he visited Epstein when the latter was in jail. Taylor says, “We’ve seen the evidence trail that Jes Staley was groomed by Epstein from the very beginning. He owed everything to Epstein.”
Taylor says that from what he can see in the Daily Mail and from what his contacts have told him, the people leaking all of the exclusive articles on Prince Andrew are from MI5. He says, “My sources tell me that MI5 absolutely detest Prince Andrew. He was hated from his time in the Army…this blackmail ring was clearly set up by Epstein who, himself was probably a protégé of various Mossad agents, including Ghislaine Maxwell.”
After Ghislaine’s father, Robert Maxwell stole hundreds of millions of dollars from his employees’ pension funds, the UK set up three reporting councils to investigate the backgrounds of major business leaders before they’re approved in their positions. Taylor says, “All all three of these agencies know of the disclosures against Staley. They know that Staley is a rotten apple in charge of Barclays but the question is, if Epstein’s dead and his blackmail ring died with him, why is it he’s still CEO of Barclays? And I believe the answer is that the blackmail ring is still in operation, so MI5 are leaking this information, trying to destroy this blackmail ring.”
Taylor surmises this based on the recent interviews with John Mark Dougan, a former Palm Beach County cop who has claimed asylum in Russia. Dougan claims that it was MI5 who leaked the story that both he and the FBI have the Prince Andrew blackmail material.
Taylor says, “That suggests to me that MI5’s role wasn’t to facilitate the blackmail but to disarm it. So the question is, who is the intelligence operation keeping Staley in power? And I believe it to be Mossad. Robert Maxwell was a well-known Mossad operator and so you can guess his daughter would be that way inclined. And all of the people around Staley seemed to be – and
Epstein seemed to be – hardcore Zionists…
“Now, if Mossad are hand-picking Barclays executives, then one should suspect that Staley is not the only selection. Now, prior to Staley, you have Anthony Jenkins and you have Roger Jenkins. Roger Jenkins was alleged to be involved with child abuse parties; pedophile parties in the USA. I would strongly suspect that they were Epstein’s parties. And Anthony Jenkins and Roger Jenkins and Staley have all run venues for the Clinton Global Initiative, who were deeply involved with the Epstein’s pedophile rings.
“So, my impression is that if all of the directors of Barclays have been handpicked by Mossad…and they’ve got this blackmail ring, then why stop there? I believe that almost every executive of every bank has been picked out by Mossad.
“Once all of the banking executives are essentially Mossad puppets, then that means anything the banks finance, which is insurance companies and film projects, pension schemes, anything sponsored by a big business is basically under Mossad’s thumb.
PEDOPHILIA BLACKMAIL TOOK THE UK INTO THE EU
“So, the way I see it,” Taylor says, “it isn’t quite the British stealing everything from the Americans. I think the British are being blackmailed. I mean, here in Britain we have these private schools and they’re infamous for the homosexuality and the pedophilia. So, I think we have a serious pedophile problem at the top of society.
“People like Ted Heath were blackmailed to take us into the EU. [Edward Heath was named by his own offspring as being involved in the deaths of as many as 16 children] and Lord Peter Mandelson [who has been pictured with Jeffrey Epstein and is friends with Prince Andrew], who was the EU Commissioner, who went from near bankruptcy, then after ten years as EU commissioner had £100 million in the bank.
“And in the RAINS list, Joan Coleman’s [Ritual Abuse Information Network & Support] RAINS list, Peter Mandelson is alleged to have killed a rent boy called Kevin, chopped him into pieces and dumped the pieces into the sea. And the RAINS list also named…Ted Heath years before the mainstream media got hold onto it, so I have a great belief in that.”
DARK TO LIGHT
“I’m starting to believe that there may not be a single individual,” Taylor says, “there might not even be oligarchs behind this. The way it all functions is that people like Robert Hannigan, they operate on instinct and if you were to communicate to them, it’s not as if you’re communicating to an individual but a kind of collective/Gestalt, Satanic Evil, so that it has one mind with many tentacles.
“You have bank manipulation tentacles, you have the pedophile tentacles, the blackmail tentacles but we’re looking at one beast with many tentacles, almost in human form. It is an incarnation of Evil – and these people would have you believe there’s no such thing as Good or Evil.”
Indeed, the darkness being revealed in these times is causing a spiritual awakening in many. If such powerful Evil exists in this world, then surely, there is a powerful force of Good.
Dark to Light.
Economic oblivion is on the horizon for Queensland with the LNP appearing to have joined Labor in their ideological journey on energy policy, State KAP Leader and Traeger Robbie Katter has warned.
Mr Katter said in an unanticipated, but perhaps unsurprising, development the Queensland LNP had gone all in on the ideological energy debate.
He said it was clear in their submission made to the Federal Senate Enquiry into the “prerequisites for nuclear energy in Australia”, that the Queensland LNP party were more interested in ideology than looking at all options, both short and long-term, for delivering the cheapest and most reliable energy for Queensland households and businesses.
The Traeger MP said although the LNP was entitled to whatever opinion it wanted, it appeared the party was now “playing it safe” on energy and was prepared to go all in on renewables.
“I’m disappointed, but not really surprised, that the LNP are taking such a narrow view on energy,” Mr Katter said.
“I think the most important thing for delivering good energy policy is being willing to look at, and accept, any option that delivers the cheapest and most reliable power.
“It looks as though the LNP have lost their mettle and caved into the irrational ideological fear that now drives our energy debate.”
Mr Katter said the energy system was complex and having an uncompromising position on particular sources of generation was a waste of time and money.
“The electricity system is incredibly complex and it is stupid to think that a ‘one-size-fits-all’ renewable or coal position will bring down electricity prices,” he said.
“We need to look at all options for dealing with the short and long-term problems in the electricity system and nothing should be off the table.
“In some circumstances thermal generation is going to be the best option and in other circumstances renewables are going to be the best option, and if there is long term opportunity to use nuclear then that shouldn’t be off the table.
“The KAP is only focussed on ensuring prices are as low as possible and we will back any solution that delivers that outcome.
“For the North, that’s building CopperString to unlock the cheap renewable resources around Hughenden and connect the existing gas-fired generation in Mount Isa to the east coast grid.
“In central and south west Queensland the solution may be to commit to extending the life of existing coal-fired power stations, which will send the right market signals and give energy-intensive businesses the confidence to make longterm investments.”
Mr Katter said the KAP’s policy on energy was simply to ensure prices were as low as possible which included the removal of the regulatory asset pricing model approach that artificially inflates customer costs.
This will effectively take power bills back towards cost, removing the large tax that the government takes out of each bill.
by Viv Forbes, science writer
Bushfires are normal events in this season in tropical and sub-tropical latitudes of the southern hemisphere – in Australia, Africa and South America. Even Captain Cook noted many fires in Eastern Australia in 1770, long before the era of “global warming” hysteria.
What is unusual is the number and ferocity of recent Australian fires.
Destructive bushfires need three things – a big load of dry fuel, hot dry winds and a point of ignition.
A big load of dry fuel, close to towns and buildings, in this season, is a sign of gross mis-management (seen most commonly in public lands). That fuel should have been raked, dozed or burnt in safer weather conditions.
Hot dry winds are not unusual in this season in these latitudes – no use whinging.
But how do 100+ bushfires start suddenly? There have been no lightning storms so who are the arsonists or idiots starting these fires?
If you want to live among the trees then expect more destruction
Thousands of hectares of wallum scrub and once open forest in the Sunshine and Gold Coast hinterlands and seaside suburbs were razed this week in what was a preventable inferno.
Many homes and the historic Binna Burra Lodge in the Gold Coast hinterland were lost to wildfire. Where were the fire breaks? Where was the back burning in the days or weeks before?
The Labor state government’s poor management record of forest and national park reserves across the state will see more of these dangerous conflagrations especially during long periods of dry weather.
The Deputy Premier, comrade Jackie Trad, a Green tragic, was quick to blame ‘climate change’ but she is bereft of any intelligence to know the widespread hot ember storm was caused by her UN-inspired polices of no firebreaks, no heavy machinery, no hazard reduction burning and no cattle grazing on any land.
These fires simply are a repeat of the widespread destructive wildfires which burnt out nearly half a million hectares north of Bundaberg in 2018.
Until this state is rid of urban politicians who have no understanding of the garden bed next door let alone the vast uninhabited areas of Queensland we will continue to witness devastating environmental damage never before seen in the history of the ‘sunshine state.’
In the ample dramatic ‘never let the facts get in the way of a good story’ footage, televisions across the nation flashed bulletins of wildfires and ember storms which caused spot fires some 300 or more metres distant.
Climate change is the culprit, say the hopeless Greens, but the climate changes every day so this stupidity carries no water. The state is in drought, a continuous cycle of weather patterns caused by differing solar activity.
Wet sclerophyll or rainforest encroaches on open forest, and a succession of wet years followed by a drought can allow so-called rain forest to burn if sufficient detritus is on the forest floor.
Witness the wanton waste of taxpayer money near Lockhart River Aboriginal community in the electorate of the state member of parliament Cynthia Lui from Yam Island.
A fire, presumably lit by Aborigines, which got into the Iron Range ‘rain forest’ is being water bombed by aircraft. This area of Cape York Peninsula has an annual rainfall during the wet season of more than a metre and a half.
Meanwhile bushfire-fighting practices in the south east corner under the direction of the urban fire department were doomed to fail before they began.
Where were the experienced incident control officers from northern Rural Fire Services?
Thee urban brigades with well-paid staff won’t allow battle toughened rural firies near the control base. They want unpaid volunteers at the fire front.
More importantly nowhere in urbanised TV bulletins was a bulldozer or grader to be seen or were any worthwhile fire breaks.
In hinterland grazing country, when composted, dry kikuyu pastures and cow pats burn the fire can only be contained by graded firebreaks.
Reports of nearly metre-high piles of dry litter on forest floors interwoven with a lantana jungle are a result of an absence of hazard reduction burning over many years.
Because the national park service and the Labor state government generally won’t allow firebreaks to be constructed in its millions of hectares of wasteful parks estates, then without hazard reduction burns we have just experienced the result.
The Liberal Party fares little better having lost its way decades ago.
Time to take back the reins people(sheeple?).
Letter to the Editor
A bill has been presented to Parliament that is trying to deregulate some new genetic modification (GM) techniques and the genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) that are produced as a result, by classifying them as non-GMOs.
Do you know what that could mean for you?
Deregulation means that there is no requirement to tell you that the crop you are planting contains one of these new GMOs.
The genetic sequences developed using these techniques will be patented. This means that wherever these sequences land, they can be covered by patent rights.
One of these new genetic sequences, called dsRNA, can be sprayed. The patent can extend to the crop and the grain produced by the crop. Spray drift from your neighbour could result in your produce being affected by patent rights. If fruit trees or vines are sprayed with patented dsRNA, the patent could extend to the fruit or grapes produced, for the life of the plant.
The patent-holder can enforce their patent rights. In the USA and Canada, this has resulted in farmers who were contaminated with past versions of GM crops, being sued for growing GM crops without a licence.
The situation in Australia could be worse. Under our existing end-point royalty system, a positive test of the patented material in a farmer’s product gives the patent-holder the legal right to deduct their user fee from the farmer’s produce payments. Even a presence of as low as 0.01% could result in a positive test, and any subsequent action against the farmer is entirely at the patent-holder’s discretion. Farmers that object to this fee being deducted from their payments will need to take legal action against the patent-holder to try to recover their money.
If a GMO spreads to the fields of an organic farm, the farm could also lose its organic status.
If Australia deregulates these GM techniques, it does not mean that importing countries have also deregulated them. In many countries, these products will still be considered as either approved or unapproved GMOs.
If a contaminated export from Australia arrives at a country that has not approved that GMO, the import can be refused. There were 200 cases of trade disruption due to unapproved GMOs between 2002 and 2012, resulting in serious consequences for some exporting countries, including the permanent loss of export markets. Losses have been in the billions of dollars.
If the export is contaminated with a GMO that is actually allowed into the food supply of the importing country, most food will be required to be labelled as GM in that country and subject to major consumer and market rejection.
Take GM wheat as an example. Although varieties of GM wheat have been available for years, it has never been commercially grown anywhere in the world, due to massive market rejection. Any escapes of GM wheat varieties from old trial sites are quickly eradicated, but have still caused markets to cease trading with areas where contamination was found. Any introduction of GM wheat into Australia therefore risks losing an industry that is worth $7.1 billion per year (5-year average).
GMOs are living organisms. Once a GMO is released into Australia on a commercial scale, it will spread and it cannot be recalled. It will be like trying to recall cane toads, blackberries, lantana or rabbits. Therefore, any impact could be permanent.
How is it then possible to recall a GMO if it causes economic loss? Who will be liable for any losses? Will the Federal Government indemnify you against any losses, immediate and on-going?
How will your industry manage these new GM varieties, when they are not considered as GMOs in Australia, but will be considered either as approved or unapproved GMOs in countries that Australia exports to?
Given there have been numerous cases of GM wheat trials in America causing contamination and immediate cancellation of all wheat orders from the area concerned, who will be liable for any economic loss to Australia’s $7.1 billion per year wheat industry if it is contaminated with deregulated GM wheat varieties?
More information can be found in the attached scientific briefing paper, written in everyday English.
If you are concerned, please send an email to the following people expressing your concern and asking “for Gene Technology Amendment (2019 Measures No. 1) Regulations 2019;12 to be blocked, by, for example, withdrawing the legislation, voting against the legislation, or disallowing it”. Tell them that you want these new GMOs to be regulated. Tell them that you want them to be identified as GMOs through the supply chain so that you have a choice about whether to use them or not. Tell them how you and your industry could be impacted if they are deregulated.
Senator Simon Birmingham, Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment. Senator.email@example.com
Hon. Mark Colton, Minister for Regional Services, Decentralisation and Local Government, Assistant Minister for Trade and Investment. Mark.Colton.firstname.lastname@example.org
Hon. Madeleine King, MP, Shadow Minister for Trade. Madeleine.King.MP@aph.gov.au
Senator Rex Patrick, Spokesperson for Environment, Trade and Investment, Centre Alliance Party.
Senator Jordan Steele-John, Spokesperson for Trade, the Greens. Senator.email@example.com
Senator Bridget McKenzie, Minister for Agriculture, and Leader of the Nationals in the Senate. Senator.firstname.lastname@example.org
Hon. Joel Fitzgibbon MP, Shadow Minister for Agriculture and Resources. Joel.email@example.com
Hon. Rebekha Sharkie, Spokesperson for Agriculture, Centre Alliance Party. Rebekha.firstname.lastname@example.org
Senator Janet Rice, Spokesperson for Agriculture, the Greens. Senator.email@example.com
Please also feel free to look up your local member of Federal Parliament and any Senators from your State to send them a similar email. A list of Federal Government politicians can be found here:
Please feel free to send this email and the attached scientific document to other farmers.
Dr Judy Carman
Dr Judy Carman BSc (Hons) PhD MPH MPHAA
Epidemiologist and Biochemist
Institute of Health and Environmental Research
PO Box 155
Kensington Park, South Australia, 5068
State KAP Leader and Traeger MP Robbie Katter has labelled the State Government and the Queensland Greens hypocrites for posing as environmental champions while at the same time chronically ignoring of the wave of prickly acacia engulfing the state.
Mr Katter said it was outrageous that Labor, and the Greens who have so far been silent on the issue, were sitting idle and refusing to make more funds available while the African weed was destroying the north and mid-west plains.
The Traeger MP said he was at a loss to understand why the Palaszczuk State Government had refused to adhere to a supposed ‘agreement’ made with the Federal Government in March that would see a $10 million ‘war chest’ unlocked to fight the highly-invasive weed.
The funds were due to see action on the ground from last month, but the Palaszczuk Government has denied it agreed to provide the money.
It has made clear it will not allocate the $5 million share that a joint media release circulated by the two governments had promised it would.
Mr Katter said the anticipated $10 million in State and Federal funding was welcomed, but at the end of the day it was grossly insufficient to deal with the weeds crisis.
He said Queensland landholders desperately needed support in controlling prickly acacia on their properties, and there were many ways the State Government could assist with this.
This could include providing land rent rebates to those who proved they were successfully controlling the weed on their properties, Mr Katter said.
“The most current estimates we have say that prickly acacia is costing our agricultural industries more than $4 billion dollars a year in costs and lost productivity, with the most affected area the Mitchell Grass Downs region in central Queensland,” he said.
“You may not be able to see the problem from the cities, but believe me a large portion of our environment is in an unnatural and unhealthy state because of this weed.
“The problem is thrown into the laps of our graziers every year, and they fork our millions of dollars trying to contain prickly acacia with little assistance from government.
“Prickly acacia infestation has increased from around 6.6 million hectares 20 years ago to around 33 million hectares today – it’s a cancer in the bush.
“It is important also that we focus on the weed control activity in the Gulf where the problem is the worst.
“I have great concerns that the former Federal Minister for Agriculture wanted to pork barrel all the federal funds into just his electorate in the central west when the majority of the problem is in the Southern Gulf.
“Regardless, no one is interested in the particulars of what deal may or may not have been struck by the government, and this is not an issue that should be politicised by either levels of Government.”
Mr Katter said the north and mid-west was desperate to see some genuine leadership from the State Government on prickly acacia.
The Palaszczuk Government has only spent $2.7 million on dealing with the weed since it gained government in 2014.
In comparison, Labor has given $3.5 billion to the Great Barrier Reef Foundation for reef protection and preservation activities in the same amount of time.
Prickly acacia is a highly-invasive, thorny African weed that was brought to Australia as a shade and fodder tree.
It strips land productivity by causing erosion, decreasing pasture and out-competing other native vegetation for water, and is hugely problematic in that it can transform natural grasslands into desolate thorny scrub.
Burning forests to generate electricity is probably the worst green energy stupidity. It destroys forests, creates its own pollutants, is less efficient than coal to harvest, handle and burn and has a low heat value. If all factors are counted, it will take decades of forest regrowth to match the CO2 emissions of burning high-energy coal.
Most coal-fired power stations are built on a coal field with reserves to last the life of the power station. The coal is mined efficiently, the fuel is of known quality and sizing and efficient repetitive methods are used to extract and prepare the coal and convey it continuously into the power station.
The most infamous wood-burning power station in the world is DRAX in Britain. It burns more wood than UK produces and more than any other station in the world. It gets huge subsidies for felling forests as far away as America, then chipping and drying the wood and transporting pellets across the Atlantic. Every step on the way causes large emissions of CO2, but these are conveniently ignored in the mindless war on coal.
Australia’s greenie godfather, Bob Brown, became famous for stopping construction of green-energy dams in Tasmania. Then he helped the LNP win the recent federal election by opposing coal mining in Queensland’s Galilee Basin. And recently he revealed himself as just another NIMBY (not in my backyard) in opposing a proposed wind power project in his homeland, Tasmania. Why not oppose them everywhere, Bob?
Bob should also look into another green energy abomination – bio-fuels. Surely he does not support burning forest to generate electricity or growing huge cultivated tracts of corn, palm oil or sugar beet and calling them biofuel for motor cars?
If Greens want to reduce life-supporting CO2 (a foolish goal), they should be building houses out of old growth forest, not burning it. Then replant the mature milled trees with young trees that will grow much faster than old trees and burn the sawdust in power plants or use it to make compost.
by staff writers
In its generational, ideological war against agriculture the Queensland Labor Party has delivered a final blow to the farming and livestock industries by closing down the state’s two iconic agricultural and pastoral colleges.
Amid a loud hue and cry from farmers and former staff, the state government has removed or stacked boards of management to ensure a fait accompli.
Several weeks ago sources revealed the prized Central Queensland Emerald Agricultural College irrigation farm was leased to a former director of the college’s board of management.
This valuable 360ha (900 acre) farm, which is attached to the college, two kilometres from the Emerald CBD has trained several thousand students over 40 years in the irrigated production of fibre and grain crops ensuring the state can prosper and generate billions of dollars in farm production.
Recently prized horses from Longreach college were offered for sale on Auction Plus.
Former students, now successful farmers have gone on to run their own farms or manage others bringing the latest technology to agriculture and cattle production.
State Member for Traeger, Robbie Katter said the closure of these iconic institutions was a national tragedy, considering their decades-long contribution to the economy by training younger famers to stay on the land to produce food and fibre.
Mr Katter said he is preparing to move against the planned disposal of the two multi-million dollar facilities and with the help of the LNP, force the state government to keep funding them.
Longreach Pastoral College has an international reputation for research and development of rangelands management producing cattle, wool and sheep meat in a semi-arid environment.
The horse production and horsemanship course is managed by Chief Instructor John Arnold whose acclaimed international reputation has drawn students from across the world.
The state government claimed low student numbers this year proved the colleges were no longer relevant to industry, but the seven year drought across much of the state prevented potential students from leaving their family grazing properties to study.
Or did parents have the financial resources to pay for tuition.
The vast Longreach training establishment showcased its 50th anniversary last year when many hundreds of former students converged on the college for a reunion.
At a time when sheep, wool and cattle have broken all previous market indicators the state government should allow and in fact support these institutions for the next generation of farming, instead of portraying farmers as environmental vandals.
The colleges could have paid their way instead the state government siphoned off most of the hundreds of millions of dollars revenue from decades of produce sales into consolidated revenue according to a retired senior manager.
The former manager of student services at Longreach Mr Bill Angus said he had devoted a lifetime steering students into running their own sheep and cattle properties across Australia and without the knowledge imparted by the colleges the ‘brain drain’ from agriculture would have had a serious impact on continued food production.
“Now I fear for agriculture,” Mr Angus lamented.ends
Longreach Pastoral College
Emerald Agricultural College
from CEC, Melbourne
The fight against “bail-in” is on! The Morrison government has released for consultation a new law that bans cash transactions over $10,000. The pretext for this law is to crack down on money laundering and tax evasion in the “black economy”. This is a shameless lie! The formal recommendation to ban cash comes from “big four” global accounting firm KPMG, which is an accomplice of the world’s biggest money launderers and tax evaders. The real purpose for the cash ban is to trap Australians in the banking system, so they cannot escape negative interest rates or having their bank deposits “bailed in”.
Scott Morrison first announced this measure in the 2018 budget, originally to come into force this month, but now scheduled for January 2020. It was recommended in the October 2017 Black Economy Taskforce Report by Michael Andrew AO (who died last month), a former chief of global accounting giant KPMG. The report revealed that the strategy is to: “Move people and businesses out of cash and into the banking system, which makes economic activity more visible, auditable and efficient.” (Emphasis added.) It gives the game away by noting that it may benefit “financial stability and the effectiveness of monetary policy”—code for policies like bail-in and negative interest rates. To achieve this it recommended: “Moving to a near cash free economy. A $10,000 economy-wide cash limit should be introduced.” But $10,000 is just the beginning: in June 2018, just after Morrison announced it, KPMG was already lobbying Treasury to lower the limit to $5,000 or even $2,000.
Deception and stealth
When Morrison released the exposure draft of his bail-in law in 2017, he did so on a Friday afternoon when there would be no media attention. Only a sharp-eyed CEC staffer spotted it and recognised it as bail-in, enabling the CEC to mobilise a massive nationwide campaign against it which continues to this day. The government is being equally sneaky with this law. Treasurer Josh Frydenberg quietly released the exposure draft of the legislation, called the Currency (Restrictions on the Use of Cash) Bill 2019, last Friday afternoon, 26 July, and has allowed only two weeks for public comment.
The exposure draft of the bill has two notable features:
- It bans ALL cash transactions over $10,000, enforced with a penalty of two years jail;
- Division 2 is blank, containing only the words “To be inserted”.
What is the government hiding by releasing an incomplete draft, on a Friday afternoon, and allowing only two weeks for public consultation?
The deception doesn’t end there. In its explanation of the law, the government has sought to make it palatable by emphasising that there will be exemptions to the cash ban, including depositing and withdrawing cash in banks, and, curiously, most consumer-to-consumer transactions, such as for a second-hand car. However, the exemptions are not in the legislation. They are in a separate regulatory instrument to be issued by the Minister after the legislation is passed. This means that they are not permanent, but that in the future, the Minister will be able to scrap the exemptions without requiring new legislation. This is the “salami tactic”: first pass the law in a form that is politically palatable, and then slice off key changes. In a bail-in scenario, for instance, under the current regulation people fearing bail-in may withdraw all of their money from the bank, but the Minister will be able to issue a new regulation that suddenly stops people from withdrawing more than $10,000.
Not about money laundering
This law is emphatically not about controlling money laundering and the black economy. The vast majority of money laundering and tax evasion is done by banks and corporations, not individuals. And who helps banks and corporations do it? The big four global accounting firms, including KPMG, whose boss Michael Andrew recommended this cash ban! The big four literally write the tax laws that enable corporations to evade tax, and dominate the offshore tax havens like the Cayman Islands that exist for tax evasion and money laundering. When Michael Andrew was the global boss of KPMG—the only Australian ever to lead the worldwide operations of a big four firm—two of KPMG’s biggest clients, British banks HSBC and Standard Chartered, were caught in 2012 by US authorities in massive money laundering operations. In other words, KPMG assisted its clients to launder money, but is using money laundering as the excuse to take away the rights of Australians to use cash!
The real reason: bail-in and negative interest rates
Money laundering and tax evasion are nothing new, that they would suddenly require this “solution”. What is new is the plunge in the public’s confidence in the banks, especially since the global financial crisis. But instead of properly reforming the banks to restore the public’s confidence, through policies such as Glass-Steagall, which separates normal banking from the financial gambling that causes crises, authorities around the world have resorted to insane and in fact criminal measures that further destroy confidence in the banks.
The two most egregious measures are the criminal bail-in policy and the insane move to negative interest rates; bail-in steals deposits to prop up failing banks, while negative interest rates force customers to pay to keep their money in the bank. Both are coming to Australia. Morrison snuck his bail-in law through the Senate in February 2018 with only eight senators present in the chamber and no recorded vote. The Reserve Bank of Australia has aggressively slashed interest rates to 1 per cent, and in the banking crisis that is brewing right now they will feel compelled to follow countries like Japan and Switzerland down past zero and into negative territory, as the International Monetary Fund is recommending.
Both bail-in and negative interest rates destroy confidence in the security of bank deposits, which motivates people to take their money out of the bank and hold it in cash. This is the experience in Japan and Europe. So like some European countries, Australia is banning cash to force people to use the banking system so they cannot escape these policies, under threat of two years jail.
Fascism is the use of state power to benefit private corporations; by definition, this is a fascist assault on the freedom of Australians to use cash and not private banks. The CEC is calling on all concerned Australians to demand the government scrap this law and reform the banking system instead!
What you can do
The government has allowed only two weeks for submissions, in order to avoid scrutiny. Don’t let them get away with it! We have until 12 August to swamp Treasury with letters and emails, demanding they drop this law. Write an email or letter today to the Treasury: state your objection to any law that removes your right to use cash, and demand the government restore confidence in the banking system by properly reforming the system, not by trapping people in the system so they can’t escape policies like bail-in.
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org with the subject line:
Submission: Exposure Draft—Currency (Restrictions on the Use of Cash) Bill 2019
Address written submissions to:
Black Economy Division
Parkes ACT 2600